I'm sure he'll come around when they release a trailer that's focused on the combat and the combat-centric item usage, full of neat ways to blow things up and also fights that seem tough and hearts getting knocked off all willy nilly.

....no, wait.

Yes, but my point is I don't find his logic convincing, not that there isn't a grounding for his argument.

Anything "surmised" about his probable position can't be discussed seriously in regards to his actual viewpoint.

He hasn't outright said it, but so far his tone is worried, not just passing judgement.

Plus the trailers just show a few areas. It would take a lot more to show him that the game is going back to the action spirit of the first games.

The man has rejected the only actual footage of the game in favor of fears based on quotes that are admitted to be referring to outdated ideas.

Worried my ass, I think Mr Khan is driving at the real point here: it's widely acknowledged that the man is a confessed troll, it might as well be acknowledged that he's also a spectacular hater.

Um, you're acting like his analysis hasn't been working. You don't have to agree, but don't pretend he's just pullint stuff out of anywhere for attention.

I mean, you had a point when stating that Aonuma's comment no longer applies. That was a logical counter argument. But then just going after him personally looked more like the hating you accuse him of.

Finally, you forget you were just as dismissive of his points about Other M. Again, this might not be a repeat, since Sakamoto followed through with those comments, but you still acted like Malstrom was totally wrong... and your comments about the game matches what he claimed Sakamoto would make it like.

Now once again, that isn't likely to happen with this game, but analysis is not meant to be a crystal ball, just noting the likely outcome from the apparent factors. The apparent factors did not change with Other M. What will make this game work is if the apparent factors are non-indicitive (which even Malstrom has noted before), and that what isn't shown will make this game great.

So don't try to make Malstrom wrong for this game to be awesome. Hope that Nintendo does the game right.

The man is a hater. That's kind of objective; he hates on a lot of modern gaming conventions. He could be one of the leads in the Player Hater's Ball. Skyward Sword's (and Other M's) quality have nothing to do with the fact that the man is an unabashed hater.

He's not actually doing an analysis. The only analysis he's leveled is in reference to the character design, and only that in reference to the brightly colored goblinoids having short loincloths and leopard-print underwear. That's the only thing rooted in actual footage so far.

That ian't anlaysis! That be hatin'.

I don't think you've read all the things he's written about them. When asked point blank, he says that kind of gaming isn't bad, just not something that appeals to the mainstream.

And just because he referenced the design does not mean that's the only thing he's written. He's stated that can make the game look weird and therefore turn people off. He's also stated that it's a sign of Aonuma trying to do weird things with the Zelda games.

Even if that isn't what happens, that is surmising, not hating.

What is with this "he's a hater" thing I now see on so many sites? Is that the new "we need to discredit this guy" tactic?

Why do you need to discredit him? The public decides what makes a hit game, developers decide what games to make. He didn't make that happen. His biggest sin as far as I can tell is not acting like the games the vocal minority likes are great.

To the bolded: the two are not mutually exclusive; the former often leads to the latter!

To everything after: calling him a hater is about equal to calling him a troll; it's an observable behavior pattern, and the two are even linked. Hatin' is one of the most effective trolling techniques, almost as good as baitin'.

I don't care anything about discrediting him; I fully acknowledge that his ideas and game values are a valid metric for a certain subset. THat doesn't mean he's not a hater. He's free to say whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean that he's free from the risk of people examining his style and behavior, which is often egregiously ascerbic.

First of all, I didn't realize you meant "hating" as some sort of style of writing. I thought you meant he was actually full of hate for something, because I've seen many elsewhere use that term to mean the latter (especially to try to discredit his writing). Plus he admits to trolling, but for attention to his analysis, not to himself.

As for calling his ideas just for a certain subset shows you still don't get that he's talking about the mainstream (for his values, those are just his own, which is why he tries to be analytical for the most part). He's telling us why they go for some games and not for others.

First of all, I'd like to ask you to make a new topic if only because being taken to the wrong page when I click the "you've been quoted!" orange on my Recent Topics List is a pain in the ass.

Second of all, this is a pattern in our conversations: stop being so damn defensive. I have proven myself repeatedly to be on the level and (from time to time) different from the norm when it comes to my analyses or assumptions. If I'm unclear about thigns I apologize, but your defensiveness goes beyond htings I'm willing to take responsibility for.

Thirdly: the "mainstream" referred to by you and Malstrom is not the same thing as "lapsed gamers", an entirely different subset to which Malstrom describes himself as belonging to. When it comes to Zelda, he speaks for lapsed gamers, and he's been clear in that regard on several occassions. When he talks about the goofy-looking goblins in Skyward Sword, particularly the way their underwear shows, he's tlaking about his personal reaction to it to illustrate the point of silliness running counter to the tastes of lapsed Zelda fans (which may or may not be based in reality).