Mr Khan said:
Smashchu2 said:
SaviorX said:
RolStoppable said:
I don't know about that. I would assume that many Metroid fans still bought it anyway, even if they just did it out of curiosity of how bad of a game it really is or to add it to their collection.
I also find it hard to call this game's sales good, it was a fairly big game with a well known brand name and treated as such by Nintendo with their marketing efforts. Besides, the first "bad" game launching after a series of stellar titles usually doesn't show how much the reputation of the brand was damaged. It's the game that comes out afterwards. MOM wasn't that tough of a sale for Nintendo, because fans trusted the name. That is gone now and people will take more of a wait and see approach when it comes to the next installment in the Metroid series.
|
Yea, they spent 3 years working on it and didn't even have a million yet to show for it. Expectations from Nintendo were above Prime 3 levels.
They need to focus their efforts on another series for now.
|
Or just focus their efforts on firing Sakamoto.
|
Sakamoto's similar to many of their other guys, give him a shoestring budget and a specific mandate, and he'll hand you Tomodachi Collection (which probably cost a fraction of Other M to develop and pissed all over Other M's worldwide sales just in Japan because it was never released anywhere else!), but his "vision" includes a fair amount of bloat (though i would argue that if he had hired good writers instead of doing it himself, the whole game would've been received well)
Calling for his head is just petulant. A short-sighted approach when he's shown to be an excellent performer if management keeps a leash on him
|
I think that applies for many talented people in many media. Give them too much freedom, and you actually take out the bad idea filters.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs