Answer my please, pleas.

If what you said would have some slight truth, you wouldn't rush to dismiss my (and countless other) opinions. You said that you think your taste is better than mine, that's not taking the time to understand something. That's the complete opposite.

You do not want to hear me out either, hell, you don't want to hear anything that doesn't agree with you. You nitpick the hell out of something to prove your point, while in truth, you only descredit it further.

What kind of outcome? As if disliking a random internet person in a site filled with with very intelligent posters will affect me in some way.

The 3DS doesn't have high tech features like Steam. I'm pretty sure you can't gift anything to anyone.

1. I said that if you don't care about presentation in a game, then your opinion holds less weight than mine and I gave reasons for that. That's not just dismissing an opinion, that's giving reason to explain why an opinion may be more weighty than another and that is being realistic and not sugar-coating. Unless you tell me that you do pay attention to presentation while playing Mario bros, there is nothing in this argument you can refute.

2. I can guarantee you that I listen and hear out a lot of people here, yes even you. If I don't answer it's because I just don't want to. It doesn't mean I didn't hear you out, it just means I didn't want to get into a long-winded debate with you when I felt like you were being hostile and were just going to argue for the sake of argument, I have no patience for that.

I nitpick the hell out of things because that is my nature, I want to get to the bottom of things. There's a reason for that, it's because it's my personality. It doesn't make me less correct, just more critical and picky of the points people raise. That's not a bad thing.

3. I said outcome, what I described in the paragraph that contained that word. Your attitude (outcome) is different from my attitude (outcome). The rest of your sentence has nothing to do with what I said. Nothing. I never said it would affect you, I simply stated and compared the outcomes of both our hates for each other. The rest of what you wrote about people on the internet affecting you came from your mind alone.

You could do it on the Wii (if I remember correctly).

OT -

I will say that I did enjoy Gunman Clive very much, but I see little reason to not have a fourth difficulty option, the no-damage diffuclty. 

It has taken me about 4-5 hours to complete the game in hard mode, no damage in all stages and with all the characters. I did find the soundtrack lackluster, bar the boss theme. I did like the art style though, as it fits the game well.

You can't gift on 3DS or Wii U yet... Only Wii shop and you can't even gift in Wii mode on Wii U. So only Wii...

Gunman Clive is a pretty decent game for $2. While it reminded me of mega-man when I played it, it's no mega-man in terms of quality of game. But the mechanics are good enough and the music is pretty good also (and I value music highly in games) for a $2 game. The game is short in terms of contra short and metal slug short, yeah you can probably beat in one or two sittings but you will enjoy it though and will probably replay it on harder difficulties.

All in all I would recommend this game to anyone who likes mega-man/metal slug/contra style games but it is slower and remember it is only $2.

edit- Anyone looking for a challenging game should get Fractured Soul its worth the $12 and it has a very unique gameplay and some great music.

Dang it. Hope they add that feature soon.

See... this is your problem.  Right here.  Not every single video game has to have a story, or even a good one.  Stories don't matter in certain genres of games.  In those cases, typically in platformers, it is ridiculous to criticize a game like Super Mario for not having a good story, as the game isn't about the story at all, it's about running through levels and collecting things.

It's not Tomb Raider, or Mass Effect.  Those games need good stories, and should be criticized or praised accordingly.  But to bash a platformer and complain that the story wasn't good... I just do not understand where you're coming from at all.  Seems ridiculous to me.

You don't know where I'm coming from because you're not reading my posts. In the "Hypocrisy" thread, I mentioned that 

'Whether Nintendo applies this to NSMB or not, what mostly matters to me is that they at least are aware of the direction they took for NSMB to the detriment of style, consciously, at least it gives me piece of mind that they could pull it off if they wanted to, but simply opted not to in favor of a more sound business direction to them. But in the long run it's my opinion that money and safe business directions would only take them so far in face of emerging competition. (this kind of answers your question the_dengle).'

Ultimately, if Nintendo _chooses_ to have a lame story, at least it was intentional. I was wondering if it was something they simply couldn't help but doing, and if they couldn't have the same success for NSMB with something better, period. And Gunman Clive I thought was a good example of a decent "story". Actually there is no story, and if a dev can't make a proper story, that's how it should be. Cut the fat and keep it simple.