starcraft said:
exindguy said:
I think there's a few problems with the calculus you employed to come to this conclusion/belief:
1. Rare's track record has been spotty at best since the sale to Microsoft (I don't think *anyone* can argue this point, at least not successfully).
2. Most fans of the series are fans of it because it was a very good 3D platformer (at least the first one; personally I wasn't so big on the second) and emphasizing all-new elements that might detract from that is going to be viewed with a jaundiced/skeptical eye if you are the least bit critical--and everyone should be of videos.
3. You are projecting your biases onto the rest of the users here: just because the majority of visitors to this site are Nintendo fans first does not mean they are genetically incapable of appreciating a good game on 360.
4. Essentially you are accusing the people that don't appreciate videos of a game as being blind fanboys that will denigrate anything that doesn't appear on their platform of choice while, at the same time, you are being a blind fanboy for dropping to your knees and worshipping a game that nobody has actually played as of yet and, for all you know, is mediocre or even marginal (given Rare's recent rack record, this is a distinct possibility).
Now, once some impressions start coming back I'll re-evaluate my stance on it (and I'm sure others will, too), but let's not pretend that just because some of us aren't sold on the game as-is (again, all we've seen are videos), does not make anyone unreasonable or unwilling to give credit (or "repect" in your parlance) where it is due.
|
Dealing with you're issues in numbered order:
1. The average metacritic score of Rare's games is very similar on the Xbox 360 to what it was on the N64.
2. On this site, the advent of spherical worlds in SMG taking that series in an optomistic and innovative direction (not to mention the Wii itself) was met with an overwhelmingly positive response. The same cannot be said for the same optomism and innovation from Banjo, but the only difference in scenario's are the platform and manufacturer in question.
3. At no point did I say that every Wii owner on this site has been cynical as to the chances of BK3 being a good game. I simply pointed out that the overall aggregate response from Wii owners on VGC has been largely negative. Would you honestly argue to the contrary?
4. I don't think I said anything that indicates I am being blind, letalone getting down on my knees and worshipping BK3. The only past evidence of any real relevance (given you seem to thing past trends are a reasonable standard by which to judge an unreleased game) is the quality of the first two Banjo's, which were each made by the same team as BK3.
As for you're last, unnumbered comment. Are you honestly suggesting that there isn't a large number of posters on this site that have been unreasonably harsh to BK3 given its platform? As you yourself have said, all we have to go on are videos and handson impressions (that have been largely positive). Given this, is it not better to ere on the side of optomism rather than cynicism?
|
1. You conveniently ignored all of their Xbox1 titles: Taking two games and pitting them against their entire N64 output is a bit dubious, don't you think?
2. Mario Galaxy is still 100% a platforming game, regardless of how the levels are structured (the emphasis is on running, jumping, collecting, and finding secrets, all staples of mainline Mario games). Banjo is some odd hybrid between a platformer (we think?) and a sorta-car combat game (maybe?). The point is we don't really know very much about it because all we have to go on is some videos and scant few details from Rare (who themselves--or was it someone at MS--said is quite different from previous games).
3.Yes, I would: and this thread is proof. Again: people aren't down on Banjo because it's 360 or Rare or whatever--it's because it's something quite different from past games in the series which (only naturally) is going to lead to concern, suspicion, etc. There are lots of bad apples shilling for their chosen platform on VGC, but the vast majority are not a bunch of reactionary fanboys, and you do the site and most of the posters here a disservice by insinuating it.
4. You are saying, as per the post title, that we should all start getting worked up about the game based on videos and the sprinkling of other info released thus far and, when it isn't getting the reception you think it deserves, turn around and insinuate it's because most of the people here are too biased towards Nintendo to it a fair shake. You've now said that twice: in the post I originally quoted and in your rebuttle to point 2.
I'm not saying there aren't people that haven't been unreasonably harsh (as is the case for fanboys of any platform), but that doesn't mean:
A. That they're all Nintendo fanboys (Not every 360-owner/fan (as evidenced by this thread!) is even on-board with this game--does that make them Nintendo fanboys, too?)
B. That they should start getting hyped about a game they don't know very much about and, if they fail to do so, they are accused of 'A'.
One more time: if this game was, essentially, a true sequel to Banjo-Kazooie (not an odd hybrid of vehicles, platforming and whatever else Rare has come up with) I am absolutely certain that a lot of the people that aren't interested would be much more so (I know I would). Do you honestly believe the response would be as wholly negative as it has been if it was?
The problem boils down to this: you think people aren't excited/hyping/etc. because they are unreconstructed Nintendo fanboys that wouldn't give this game its due if it was discovered that Miyamoto had secretly designed this simply because it's on 360. This is false, period, and you do yourself and everyone else on this board a dis-service in insinuating it.
