SpartenOmega117 said:
lewisgerm said:
SpartenOmega117 said:
lewisgerm said:
i bought my 3ds day one, stood in line, and all that bullshit. im not one bit disappointed and the fact that they are giving away 20 games for us is just icing. who the hell else would do that?
and for naysayers who say: 'well nintendo only has luigis mansion 2 and kid icarus and some mutant cross of smg and nsmb wii blah blahbababab blah bal.' even if youre not interested in these games its not like those are the only games that are going to come out in the entire systems life. come on now, these games wont even be relevant in less than a year. people are so short sighted these days.
and to address the mutant cross that is mario 3d.. i dont even know where to begin with this. first of all, its going to be a bit stale if they keep the two separated. and second, what is so wrong about taking classic elements of mario and putting them in a 3d environment? personally, ive been waiting for this for quite some time and finally glad nintendo decided to do it.
heres the thing, nintendo takes risks with things, and they come up with new ideas.
nintendo isnt like call of duty, ok?
nintendo, for better or for worse, are makers of their own destiny, and you have to at least give them that. theyre not like microsoft or sony; theyre leaders and a serious force in this industry.
|
lol
wait...you were being serious? You do realize nintendo's biggest system seller will probably be Mario Kart 7. The only reason worth buying a 3ds up to this point was because of a 1998 port. Seems like the new mario land will be based on super maario 64. dont forget about the star fox 64 remake that is coming. Oh and what about Pokemon? Nintendo't trump card that has been recycled for generations.
If anything Nintendo is the prime example why Call of Duty is soo successful. Brand Name + Simple casual fun that hasn't changed
|
wow ok, so YOURE being serious. interesting opinions you got there. ok there are two reasons why this is amusing. first is this: you are trying to compare seven mario karts in a span of 19 years to seven call of dutys in... 7 years. dont get me wrong, both have seven games but.. 7 years vs 19 years. yeah, you know im not exactly sure where they learned to do that, but it definitely wasn't from nintendo. second: by comparing the two you are implying that the differences in how mario kart games are played are THE SAME as the way call of duty games are played. ok, im sorry but the simple fact that call of duty has 7 games in 7 years doesnt allow much change from game to game. its similar to the change in each sequential madden game.
as for mario kart. mario kart 64 played much much differently from its super nintendo predecessor. you know why? its because they took their time with it and released it five years later. same with double dash, they released it five years later. mario kart wii has freakin motion sensing that works better than any motion sensing in racing to this day. thats a HUGE step up from the first one. sorry, but i cant say the same for call of duty. so your comparison pretty much fails.
|
Well your argument was "nintendo takes risks with things, and they come up with new ideas." Just because a game does not get released as often doesn't mean there is a significant change between each entry. So honestly what was the difference between mario kart ds and mario kart 64? last I heard playing Mario kart on the wii is better with motion sensing turned off. A game like mario kart probably does not need more than a 2 year dev development time with maybe 10-20 million dollars on screen that is not even HD. So in terms of taking "their time with it" Mario Kart dev time is likely not too different from COD which probably has more employees working on it for what 3 consoles, handheld, PC, etc.? Im not really trying to defend COD but honestly its foolish to say "nintendo takes risks with things, and they come up with new ideas." Maybe on the hardware side but games definately not! But that is not a bad thing. Obviously Nintendo knows thay have a good thing going here so why ruin it
|
nintendo takes risks all fucking day. but ill get to that later. first of all, i didnt say that just because there is a long time between release dates doesnt mean there are significant changes. what i said was that the simple fact that you have only have a year between realeases doesnt allow for much change (i bolded and underlined that statement above) for each sequential game. do you want to know what the main reason for this is? its because they release call of duty on the same hardware year after year. there is only so much you can do after 5 of the same exact game on one platform. not to mention they dont even BOTHER to put any new ideas in there.
and yes nintendo takes risks. let me first point out that the fact of having made a console that is focused around motion controls, thats going to have an effect on the kind of game you make depending on the genre. so the system forces you to be creative. that is taking a risk in the games youre making. so thats a huge risk that they took on the software side. zelda 2 was an obvious risk. wind waker was an obvious risk. making metroid third person was a risk. changing metroid from first person to third person was a huge risk. im personally very glad that they did that. changing the way super paper mario was played was a risk. it turned out not so good because people prefer the old way better, but theres a handful off the top of my head.
the only thing that nintendo has done that is comparable to what we are talking about here was them spewing out mario party 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. i do not condone that in any way, and it really pissed me off. i wrote to them and said, "nintendo, youre better than that." then they stopped. and now theyre making 9, and im hoping they bring something worthwhile to the table this time. but do you see what im saying here? the call of duty games are being conducted just as nintendo conducted their mario parties. and this is the type of behavior im attacking.
