Gnizmo said:
I can give concrete evidence for many of my opinions. I have cited new mechanics that make MKWii require skill to excell at. I can also cite examples of why SMG was more "casual" than Mario 64 and a good example of what you are talking about. I just wanted to see if you were going with the majority opinion for a real reason or not. OoT is a 3D remake of Link to the Past. To call it much more complex is absurd. Many of the puzzles were far easier. Nothing has ever come close to being as hard as the NES Zeldas. They were the most hardcore of the hardcore games in the series, but also amongst the worst imo. |
OoT was even made easier on purpose for the "casuals" outside of Japan which is why we have a master quest now.
As far as MK goes, skill still goes a long way, you can get annoyed by the items, I do myself and the game suffers in my eyes but look at the MK league you see Rol at the top he just plain knows the game and is better. And Selnor my friend I'm not sure if you know this or not but being able to be flat out better then someone at a game means there has to be a skill to it, fact not opinion.
SMG is by far better than SMS, and I'd say better than SM64, while it may seem easier I have went back and beat SM64 with 120 stars in less than a couple of days, that first time you play a 3D platformer which was likely SM64 then yes it will be harder, once you've aquired the skill it stays and transfers to newer games, only issue Nintendo wants to avoid what happened with the NES where games progressively got harder and harder until you've only started to market to a select few and that has been how the industry has always been and where it has fell flat on its face before.
In the debate of SSBB vs SSBM, I've noticed a majority of people that say SSBM was the better game was the people that played SSBM competitvely and these players played abusing exploits that were taken out of Brawl, yes the expolit itself takes a certain amount of skill to do and do it proficiently, but the whiners are complaining cause they have to learn a whole new system for a whole new game, if you're one of those then yes it would be a worse game to you, if you're not then there must be something seriously wrong since Brawl improved on everything Melee did, Melee was one of the worst looking Gamecube games while Brawl is one of the best looking Wii games, Melee had a random way of getting trophies, while Brawl lets you play a game to get them and know which trophies you're getting, Melee had a really basic single player adventure mode, while Brawl actually creates a story for all the characters, Melee had no custom levels, Brawl does, Brawl also has more levels and characters in general, and finally Brawl also has more options on gameplay. In short every way you can think of Brawl does it better.
MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"
Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000