That's not the level design's fault but rather the difficulty being rather easy. Again, the puzzles were creative, certainly not as cryptic as most Zelda games. Also, you don't seem to understand the point that Link Between Worlds does.
It removes the linear pathway that nearly all except the first game have
Specific items were no longer in a specific part of a dungeon allowing players to access a dungeon using the specific item from the start.
With that, it doesn't play safe. But honestly, even if it plays safe, does that term "safe" ruin the enjoyment of the game? Just curious..... because from the looks of it, you're being a bit naive here.
We, I dunno, I think you're being naive because you don't agree with me.
And, with that, let us depart from basic ethos arguments with no actual meaning or point.
To start, you do not understand my point. I do not care about nonlinearity, it does not matter what order I explore A Link to the Past in because I have already done so. Creating a 1.5 sequel using the same world does inhibit everyone who has played the previous game from enjoying it totally because they have all already been there / done that. It obviously spoils an explorative game if the players already know where the landmarks are at!
@Bolt_Strike: So then how 3D Land is considered safe when it does something different. I can understand New Super Mario Bros 2 being safe but I don't think 3D Land is safe as it does its own thing.
I thought we already went over this, but whatever. It's not so much doing its own thing as it is doing the same thing in a different dimension (and the change in dimension doesn't really change much about the formula). It especially feels safe by comparison to the older 3D games like 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy, those games are bold innovations compared to anything Nintendo's done with their old IPs this gen.
Those games had innovation because of them being in their own hardware. The 3DS's main feature whether you like it or not comes from the 3D effect because its actually the only game that makes a good function for the 3D effect. There were times that I wanted to use 3D simply because of how some cases were required for 3D to me atleast.
Those games had innovation because of them being in their own hardware.
Not Sunshine. The Gamecube didn't have any notable hardware improvements beyond the usual increase in specs, Sunshine's innovation came entirely from its own merits. And Galaxy may have used the Wii Remote, but most of its usage was fairly gimmicky, the real innovation came from the gravity mechanics that they could've implemented at any time. Meanwhile, the Wii U completely failed to innovate despite having a unique hardware gimmick behind it. Hardware is not the end all be all of what makes an innovation, you need a good idea to take advantage of it.
The 3DS's main feature whether you like it or not comes from the 3D effect because its actually the only game that makes a good function for the 3D effect. There were times that I wanted to use 3D simply because of how some cases were required for 3D to me atleast.
The thing is that the 3D effect is near useless for the gameplay, it's little more than a graphical gimmick that makes the games look prettier.
Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon wasn't a particularly 'safe' game. Not typical to give a sequel to a game made 12 years ago. Same deal with Kid Icarus Uprising.
But are the games more safe in general? Hard to say. To be honest, it's probably that Nintendo has simply made LESS first party games for the 3DS than they did for the DS. We still got experimental titles, we just got less of them while the amount of 'known brand' first party games stayed mostly constant.
Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon wasn't a particularly 'safe' game. Not typical to give a sequel to a game made 12 years ago. Same deal with Kid Icarus Uprising.
Safe =/= typical. Safe means that you're not really taking risks with gameplay, especially in terms of mechanics. Reviving an old IP can still be a safe move if you don't do anything new with it.
I'd have to agree. There certainly are games that are different, but I can't say I can think of any game that is really trying anything new or pushing the boundaries on the 3DS. A Link Between Worlds had some really cool ideas and actually changed up the Zelda formula, but I'd say Majora's Mask was much more risky at the time (and no, I'm not saying a remake counts as a risky game, I'm talking about the original at time of release).
Perhaps Nintendo's most unsafe titles were Sticker Star and STEAM, both of which were just not very appealing games. Sticker Star essentially ruined a great formula, and STEAM was just not very fun to me despite being developed by my favorite developer in my favorite genre. Federation Force could be interesting, but I'd be really surprised to see it perform well in reviews or sales. I'd bring up FE: Awakening, but it really didn't make a whole lot of changes that would be controversial to a mainstream audience and there's the whole "this could be the last one so let's put everything in it" thing.
Outside of those, most games have been straight sequels or remakes. 3D Land was about as safe of a Mario game as there could have been; MM, OoT, and Star Fox were remakes; MK, Pokemon, and Animal Crossing never change.
I'd like to say that the eShop has been the place for more unique or different titles, but even those haven't done much. Pushmo is awesome, but it's a new IP and wasn't really going to push any boundaries anyway. And aside from that, has Nintendo put much out on the 3DS eShop anyway? 3rd parties have done a good job of making new games for the eShop, but nothing that really changed or improved a genre.
TL;DR - I agree with the OP
nf_2
3DS Friend Code: 0774-4745-0158 | Nintendo Network ID: Sajak19
@Bolt_Strike@nf_2: By that logic, Uprising doesn't do anything new simply because everything plays safe in that regard. The intensity meter is something like a difficulty level only with each level. The main gameplay is short so to those who can't get used to the controls can atleast beat the main game.
Look, the 3DS is technically like the GBA but not reaching to that level of quantity like the GBA. the 3DS still needs more games whether you like it or not. Both the Fire Emblem games for the 3DS are far better than the DS counterparts from what I've heard and they aren't even sequels. 5th Cell haven't made any games for the 3DS like how they did for the DS with scribblenauts and whatnot. We still haven't gotten advance wars, Golden Sun, Warioware and whatnot.
Awakening did have casual mode which appeals to new audiences. While I do admit that the 3DS library seems a bit underwhelming compared to the DS, Safe doesn't ruin quality and that's all that matters. GBA didn't do much and for the most part were ports of SNES games but that doesn't mean quality is ruined. I think there needs to be an understanding between safe and quality. I'd say safe is something that is done to encourage sales of the product like Awakening rather than doing something drastic like Sticker Star. If 3D Land is considered safe, then that would mean that its done intentionally to encourage sales.
Forums
Topic: Compared to the DS, Nintendo's 3DS games are kind of safe
Posts 41 to 48 of 48
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.