The truth about Nintendo

[cannonballZ]

Zod95 said:

mysteryman said:

So your complaint is that a Turn-Based Strategy game is not real-time? How does that even make sense to you?

It's also interesting that you use pokemon as an example that Nintendo puts no effort into their games when it is the exact opposite. Over 700 unique pokemon 3D character models were created for Pokemon X/Y. Each with 2 (or 3, I believe) attack animations, to be used with various attacks. This would align well with your cherry-picked criteria for a good game being one with a very large number of unique characters.

One problem with your assertion that only photo-realistic graphics require effort: they require no artistic skill. To say that artistic creation is not valuable, difficult, requiring 'eagle-eye' or thorough work is ludicrous. Conversely, one could argue that photo-realism is easier, because it requires no creativity, only pure technical effort.

My complaint is that Nintendo made Pokémon a turn-based fighting game within a primitive RPG architecture. Pokémons randomly appear after the character going around in circles in the grass? Wtf? The player cannot throw a pokeball at any time and how he/she wants? The battles are only about selecting attacks? How sad. The fans deserved more.

With such a primitive architecture and gameplay, it's easy to put in there 700 characters.

I have never said that only photo-realism require effort and that artistic creation is not valuable. Please post here the sentences where I said such things.

Well, you sure did talk a lot about Nintendo's cartoony characters , I refer you back to rant 1.2. You spoke of how they lack in visual fidelity/realism. 

 

But I see now what you really meant after your Pokemon comment there..... Only Nintendo games that are cartoony are not valuable to you. 

 

This thread is a joke.