Nintendo is living in the past

[infamous23]

tarheel91 said:

infamous23 said:

blaydcor said:

infamous23 said:

blaydcor said:

infamous23 said:

amp316 said:

i

Well, if they could make a game like Eternal Darkness, it would seem that they're much more interested in making Party and Wii Series games and some of the new games like that they didn't bring to America like Fatal Frame IV and Disaster:  Day of Crisis.

They did make a more controversial game this gen, but they didn't bring it to America.  Captain Birdo or something?

HOTD, Manhunter 2, and Madworld weren't made by Nintendo.

If Nintendo really wanted to be edgy there would be sex, nudity, and gore in Other M, but I would say there will be very little of that in Other M in comparison to the typical games on the other systems.

I know about GTA IV because I played it.

 

The underlined part. HAhahahahahahahahahahahaha. Sex, nudity and gore are only "edgy" if you're a 15 year guy or have the mindset of one. There is nothing remotely edgy OR mature gained by including any of those in a game.

In fact, the inclusion of them, especially in the gratuitous capacity that's so pervasive these days, belies more  a lack of maturity than the other way around. 

If anything, making 2D "family friendly" side-scrollers is edgy, since it's not in vogue and is in that sense working against market trends. 

Oh well, I guess you don't consider books by Henry Miller, Brett Easton Ellis, or William S.  Burroughs to be very mature although many critics of literature would tend to disagree.

The edgiest games on Wii this gen remain Suda 51's because his are the only ones that really book the pervasive trend of all Wii games including the 2d platformers that they must all be palatable by all gamers and conducive to Wii sales to the casuals.

If you really want to talk about the edgy 2d platformers that were at this year's E3 they're not NSMWii, KEY, or DKCR, but Blade Kitten on PSN, Limbo on 360 and Rayman Origins.

Is that really how you're going to argue this?

The book part I mean. 

Find me a critic that acclaims a story or book by any of those authors and (a) says it's mature and (b) calls it so because of the inclusion of sex, violence, and gore.

Know what they say? Pulp is sex and violence, literature is love and death. Not that I fully agree with that, but it certainly embodies the critical spirit of the literary community. 

I mean, if you want to argue illogically, don't do it with books. Books are my thing. I read way more than I game. Hell, I write more than I game. 

I argued it very logically.  If you're talking about pulp, then you're talking about Kirby's Epic Yarn and Donkey Kong Country Returns, because Nintendo had a game in the same genre last year that sold 14 million copies and both DKCR and KEY are just attempts to replicate that past games' success which is what pulp does.

About those authors, they're considered artists not pulp writers because their depiction of sex and violence was unlike any depictions of sex and violence in literature before their time.  Something Nintendo rarely innovates upon because it's easier for them to keep putting out their equivalents of Disney movies each year than to try to tell new and compelling stories in their games. 

Just one example about those writers, William S.  Burroughs was inducted into the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters in 1983, what about you?

Seriously? Do you understand what pulp fiction is?

"...the magazines are best remembered for their lurid and exploitative stories and sensational cover art."  Go ahead and click on that link to exploitative stories, because I'm fairly confident you don't know what they are.  Here, I'll do it for you:

"Exploitation fiction is a type of literature that includes novels and magazines that exploit sex, violence, drugs, or other elements meant to attract readers primarily by arousing prurient interest without being labeled as obscene or pornographic."

For the life of me, I can't figure out what that sounds like.  Kirby and Donkey Kong Country, two series known for their excellent platforming gameplay, or all these new HD games that exploit sex, violence, drugs, or other elements meant to attract gamers primarily by arousing prurient interest without being labeled as obscene or pornographic.

Oh, and it also sounds like your fancy pants authors are far closer to pulp fiction than literature.  For me, I'll stick to the likes of Faulkner, Shakespeare, Fitzgerald, etc.

 

OT: Amp you picked a perfect time for one of these threads: right after E3 with all the new members and visitors to the site who came to discuss E3.  This thread was about eleventy billion times more obvious than mine, and you raked in more people even so, I believe.

That's traditionally what the pulp fiction of the twenties and thirties was referred to, however, many of the leading proponents of that type of fiction are now recognized as leading literary lights of their day.

Jim Thompson, Cornell Woolrich, Raymond Chandler are each considered to have been better literary writers now than some of the popular fiction writers of their day.  Case in point, H. P. Lovecraft was considered by the leading literary critic of his day to be simply a purveyor of lurid fiction.  And now Lovecraft is being published by
Penguin Classics.

However, true pulp literature would have to be considered something like the romance or fantasy fiction genres where you just awlk into a store and see a thousand books with basically the same stories and characters in them but unable to really evolve the genre like Robert E. Howard did.

Meanwhile are the two companies that Nintendo's policies throw them in with ever considered to have really done anything that excellent?  McDonald's and Disney.

Hey, McDonald's is still popular because people know what to expect from them.  You know what you're getting when you buy a Wii Series game or a Big Mac but no one could really seriously lump them in with Fallout or Filet Mignon as far as quality goes.

And, Nintendo like Disney has done a good job putting out product for the kids over the years.  But it took Pixar and some of the anime studios to make animation into a more serious medium for modern viewers.