Please stop using that buzzword "innovative". I'm allergic to bees. Also, you misuse that word terribly. I take it you're a product of the early 2000's. That word was misused back then about as frequently as reverse psychology and irony. Most games are "innovative" by the very definition of the word. Though the 2000's definition is some Shangri-La nonsense.
I'm not misusing it at all. An innovation by nature is a large scale change, it's something that makes you think about an entire game differently. To say that all games fit that definition of innovation is completely ridiculous.
Someone with a Pokemon avatar should really not be bashing SM3DW for lacking this "Shangri-La" innovation you so desperately seek. The "Shangri-La" that is usually just a blanket excuse for a larger more personal problem.
Pokemon is not as formulaic as Mario. Sure, the general game structure (the 8 gyms + Pokemon League + evil team setup) is recycled between games, but they actually do change up the gameplay between games, they create new battle mechanics each generation (unless you're looking at third versions, which are even worse than Mario).
Also, having a Pokemon avatar does not necessarily mean that I like where the series is going now.
A Virtual Console on day 1 that has all Wii U VC games and picks up from there. At the very least, the ability to play Wii U eshop and Wii U VC games natively, no more Wii mode nonsense. And while I don't think it will happen, if I could transfer my Wii VC and Wiiware games again, I would camp outside to get a NX at launch.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
To save you clicking the link:
Innovation:
1. The introduction of something new
2. A new idea, method, or device
By the Merriam-Webster definition then yes, all games that aren't clones or straight flat remakes are indeed innovative.
Every Mario game by having new levels is by definition innovative. Also, arguing that a formulaic game like Pokemon is a less formulaic game than Mario doesn't stop both games from being formulaic. If your bug bear is derivative gameplay mechanics then you've got the wrong hobby for that. Gaming is inherently derivative with this game using a mechanic from that game and that game using a mechanic from that other game. It's how the industry grows. It's easy to say Nintendo needs to "innovate", but telling someone to make something "innovative" is like saying to your friend, "invent something that hasn't been invented yet."
P.S. Selfie sticks really!? Someone made bank off of that.........
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
To save you clicking the link:
Innovation:
1. The introduction of something new
2. A new idea, method, or device
By the Merriam-Webster definition then yes, all games that aren't clones or straight flat remakes are indeed innovative.
Every Mario game by having new levels is by definition innovative.
Innovation has much bigger implications than that, innovation usually refers to something groundbreaking that changes your perspective on something. To refer to new levels as innovative is stretching the definition.
Also, arguing that a formulaic game like Pokemon is a less formulaic game than Mario doesn't stop both games from being formulaic.
Except there's still fun to be had when Pokemon's gameplay changes over time, it creates a new experience in spite of having a formulaic game structure. Mario on the other hand faithfully follows its formula in all aspects which makes each game feel like a complete borefest.
If your bug bear is derivative gameplay mechanics then you've got the wrong hobby for that. Gaming is inherently derivative with this game using a mechanic from that game and that game using a mechanic from that other game. It's how the industry grows. It's easy to say Nintendo needs to "innovate", but telling someone to make something "innovative" is like saying to your friend, "invent something that hasn't been invented yet."
You've got things completely backwards. Gaming is a form of entertainment, and entertainment by nature diminishes with repetition. So derivative games fail to serve their purpose as games. And no, repeating past successes repeatedly does not cause gaming to grow, it causes gaming to stagnate. The only way for gaming to grow is with new ideas.
If it says Nintendo on the box I'll buy it. I just hope they either don't ditch the wii remote/Game Pad or come up with something new that is also just as brilliant.
Sunshine and Galaxy have unique themes and gameplay mechanics that build on 64's formula in interesting ways and create new experiences. 3D World, on the other hand, sticks with a generic Mushroom Kingdom theme (which technically isn't the Mushroom Kingdom but it is an expy with the same kinds of environments), and recycles 3D Land's gameplay,
Never played Sunshine, and I agree that the Galaxies were better than SM3DWorld, but the game did add the Cat mechanism which was pretty huge. And it added Plessie. Even though the game looked like a rehash in the initial reveals, it's actually a magnificent game that also did multiplayer right in 3D for the first time, so it was a great success in every way. Not as good as Galaxy and especially Galaxy 2, but... nothing is.
it's actually a magnificent game that also did multiplayer right in 3D for the first time, so it was a great success in every way.
Doing multiplayer right in 3D isn't a huge accomplishment, especially when the game itself isn't terribly different from the 2D games. It doesn't really add anything that it didn't already add to NSMB Wii and NSMBU.
Not as good as Galaxy and especially Galaxy 2, but... nothing is.
You are the only person I've met who likes Galaxy 2 more than Galaxy. Pretty sure the general consensus is that Galaxy 2 stripped things down and made things too much like the 2D games.
Either a cheaper price than the Wii U or a lot of good games that release at launch. Gamecube VC would be fine too if they do a better job at updating the library.
Being a portable. That'll be the only reason for me to pre-order. If it was a console, I'll have to wait at least 2 years after getting burned on the Wii U (I believe I was a stoic supporter of Wii U for the first year and half before becoming almost fully disillusioned by Nintendo's handling of...everything).
The Wii U was the first console I ever bought at launch. I have no idea what would induce me to do that with the NX. Wii U was a zero-risk proposition for me: backwards compatible with Wii, so I keep my software library with many enhancements over that platform.
Even if that's true of the NX, I don't feel the Wii U is limited enough for me to automatically upgrade. Since I rather doubt this new machine will be backwards-compatible with anything that came before (though I'm prepared to be surprised) I don't know why I'd need a new machine since I have such a backlog on the Wii U I could have no new software from tomorrow and be sorted for the next year. Not to mention the evergreen titles on the Wii U are such it's unlikely my household will feel game poor - I expect having a go on something or replaying something else would do nicely until I can't play games any more.
A new Earthbound would top the list. Also an exclusive new Bioshock, Crazy Taxi, Batman Arkham, Marvel vs Capcom, Psychonauts, Beyond Good and Evil or Jet Set Radio would do it too.
Forums
Topic: What is one thing that would make you instantly pre-order an NX?
Posts 41 to 60 of 90
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.