Aielyn said:
Sorry, but you're wrong. Nintendo was quite clear, saying that they'd be making both types of games, NOT that they'd be making a game that is both. And that was in 2010, well before the 3DS even released. I never said that they announced the 2D Mario game, I said that they announced that one is on the way. Miyamoto himself said "When asked 'what will we do on 3DS,' the answer is, of course, we'll make both. They both have their own appeal." - there is NO way to validly interpret that as "We will make a Mario game that is 3D Mario, but also 2D Mario at the same time". But hey, Malstrom can't be wrong, can he? 2. He wasn't vocal about them, he was obsessed. Every time Nintendo announced a new title, he would try to twist it to show why it proves that Nintendo is focusing on user-generated content. And pretty much every time, he was wrong. It's very easy to point at games that perform poorly, and shout "User-generated content"... which is precisely what he did. Too bad there wasn't user-generated content in those games. And no, the wait period for 3D Mario fans wasn't hyperbole. How do I know? Because he said it repeatedly, in a variety of contexts, and never once suggested anything more reasonable. It's easy to dismiss extreme statements as hyperbole when they occur once and make sense in context. 3. Oh, I'm shocked he even referred to them. Now for the fun part, though. How do you think he would respond if there was a rumour that there would be a 3D Mario at the WiiU launch? I can tell you right now - he'd say that it proves that Nintendo is on the wrong track. Rumour says 2D Mario = not substantial. Rumour says 3D Mario = proof Nintendo is going to die. This is his general pattern since late 2008 - if it's what he wants Nintendo to do, then it must be unsubstantiated rumour, but if it's what he doesn't want Nintendo to do, then it's proof that Nintendo will die. 4. Actually, the only thing that 3D Land didn't address was being 3D. When it comes down to it, Malstrom hates 3D gaming with a passion. It shows through EVERY single thing he has to say that even remotely touches on the topic. He hates 3D Zelda. He hates 3D Mario. The only reason he still likes the Wii Sports/Play/etc games is because you don't actually control 3D movement. Think I'm wrong? Name a game he has expressed happiness with that has had 3D gameplay. Meanwhile, he abandoned Disruption and Blue Ocean Strategy because he didn't like where it was taking Nintendo, anymore. His complaints shifted - it all became "they're not arcade anymore" and "they focus too much on 3D gaming". If Nintendo were the ones to shift away from Disruption and Blue Ocean, Malstrom would have criticised THAT, and spoken about what Nintendo *should* have done in terms of disruption and blue ocean. He didn't. He ranted constantly about "arcade gameplay" and "3D Mario must die" and "user-generated content"... and when I pointed this shift out to Malstrom's supporters (I had been one, up to that point), I was derided and called all sorts of things. Malstrom himself has said, in the past, that he pays attention to Nintendo because of what he can learn from them. So why is he still paying attention to them, if they're no longer doing the stuff he wants to learn? Because when it comes down to it, it was never truly disruption or blue ocean strategy that attracted his attention to Nintendo. It was that Nintendo had put more focus into games like Wii Sports, which make him think of the "old" games that he used to like. Now, I loved Wii Sports, but I also loved Super Mario Galaxy. It is healthy to have diverse interests and to see value in variety. Malstrom doesn't. He takes every game that isn't "arcade" to be an affront, and it shines through in all of his writing, once he stopped talking about disruption and blue ocean. But somehow, I'm not surprised that you couldn't accept a single criticism of Malstrom. And for the record, when I started criticising Malstrom, I also pointed out the few points he was right on, and I also pointed out what I think the real issues with Nintendo are... Malstrom's fervent supporters proclaimed me a Nintendo fanboy for not agreeing with Malstrom now. I eventually started to refer to those supporters (and I suspect you to be one) as "Anti-hardcore"... in the sense that they are hardcore, just in the opposite way. Just as the hardcore condemn "casual gaming", etc, so too do the anti-hardcore condemn "hardcore gaming". And Malstrom is the king of the anti-hardcore. And as I've said before, it's too bad, because he used to actually make a lot of sense, until he decided that arcade gameplay was more important than anything else. |
This may be one of the best posts I've ever read on this forum. Thank you.
