| Khuutra said: 1. The last two Mario Parties were the highest-selling titles in the franchise by staggering margins. Staleness does not seem to be a problem here so much as frequency. 2. It's not a "theory" without actual evidence. It's not on me to provide negative proof; conjecture, in order to be taken as part of a conversation, has to have some proof in the first place. Yes, as a theory it is invalid; it is not invalid as an idea, but you did not present it as merely an idea.
Skipping tectonic plate stuff
3. There is no question that Majora's Mask had many things going against it, but its sales are what they are. Phantom Hourglass is the biggest change in the series since 1998, but it has similarly failed to light things up the way Ocarina or Twilight did. I am pointedly ignoring the ranting about Nintendo fans, except to say this: 4. If Nintendo fans "turn their noses up" at change, then staleness by definition cannot be the problem in Japan. 5. You didn't use "false dichotomy" correctly. 6. What you personally buy has nothing to do with this topic. 7. In spite of what you would like to pretend in terms of the absolute impenetrability of text, it's possible to communicate tone. Wen you talk about "nintendo die-hards turning up their nose at change" and claim that that has no inherent tone, you either have a tin ear or pretend to be an extremely bad communicator. 8. In talking about refraining from making a joke about the Zelda series, you effectively make a joke about the Zelda series. 9. You are not constructively contributing to the topic; you're just arguing. I'm asking you nicely to either contribute in a constructive way or leave. |
The last two Mario Party games were on the Wii and DS wherein they both found some appeal to their stale formula by literally shaking things up on the Wii (using the Wiimote). Besides that, they are both on systems that are leagues more successful in sales than the GameCube. Obviously they're likely to see some kind of boost. Prior to MP8, the games were in decline, and the unevolving gameplay (staleness) likely had a lot to do with it.
Yes, actually, if you just want to jump in and disagree with me, without some kind of compelling argument or any kind of thought, all you're doing is flaming. "You're wrong because I sense a tone in your post and disagree," despite what you think, is not a thought-provoking argument. And it seems you responded to quite a few of my posts in the exact same manner in the past couple weeks.
I used false dichotomy in the same sense you did.
I am not arguing, I am providing a point of view. But as has been the case too much on teh intarwebs, people can't handle different points of view especially againt Nintendo.
Now, I didn't say my theory is perfect. No theory is. Scientists still argue some of the finer details of evolution* (which is one of the things that causes ID assholes to jump in and dismiss the theory outright), but that doesn't mean evolution is wrong. I am theorizing that Zelda sales have been decreasing in Japan, and that two issues that may play a part is the overall lack of growth in the series and the fact that gaming is in a decline in that region. That's, we'll say, pertains to general gaming. Nintendo fans, on the other hand--while they may be both bored with staleness as sales of the Mario Party series illustrated prior to the Wii and DS versions--they also tend to dismiss change. After all, the change in graphics of Wind Waker turned off many fans--I personally know people who dismissed the game due to the graphics (personally, I loved the graphics--I had a million other issues with the game, foremost among them being that it was predictable and stale in the gameplay, and way too easy). Major changes to a formula or series are dismissed. I myself am not totally immune to this despite how much I look forward to new ideas, because the negative growth and unwarranted changes in the Metroid series with Other M irritates me.
It's kind of a catch-22, gamers are tired of repetition and increasingly stale design, but at the same time, tend not to support change or newness. Again, the Wii fans I've encountered who don't understand the system's original intention to be different. They love that Nintendo was daring enough to be different, but want all the same old games the same old way. In essence, they want Call of Duty on the Wii identical to the Xbox360 version--and any change to the game for the Wii is hated.
I have little doubt that Xbox360 and PS3 fans (who are adopters of Kinect and Move) will show up over the next year expressing the same sentiment. "Yay, Killzone 3 will be different." Then it's released and they'll say, "boo, Killzone 3 is different." So this will no longer be a Nintendo-fan specific thing. The difference is that Nintendo fans should've expected drastic change from the start, and we never should've expected the Wii to be flooded with identical 3rd party titles as the other two.
*My theory works mostly on circumstantial evidence and the theory does fit unless disproven. Unlike evolution, I don't have 150 years of solid science backing me.
