Topic: Is Zelda's delay the writing on the wall for the Wii U?

pfft. Lord of the rings...is dudebro? When you have one the greatest rock bands of all time reference LoR (specifically gollum) in one of their songs, you know it's anything but dudebro. Try Legendary, timeless, mind blowing. Anything but dudebro.

On Topic: Wii U will continue to struggle probably for the rest of its lifecycle. All games will get repetitive no matter the franchise. The world will still keep spinning and the games will still keep coming regardless of what we say(unless they go bankrupt...then they will stop coming)

@CaviarMeths. No, you're not getting it. You guys are arguing about things that don't matter to my arguments. They don't affect the elements of a video game that I enjoy. It's not a matter of being uninformed, I do as much research on that element as I need to before I form an opinion on it. It's a matter of you guys arguing about things that I don't look for in a video game.

So.....what do you look for in a video game good sir?

I said that about 5 times this entire time: new gameplay mechanics that keep things interesting. For example: FLUDD in Mario Sunshine, the antigravity in Mario Galaxy, new abilities in Metroid, the ink mechanics in Splatoon. There's been a lack of those things this gen because they mainly just repeat gameplay mechanics.

Thanks.I didn't pay attention to this thread until just recently. So going through 12 pages and 227 posts to look up what you look for in a game is time consuming. A finite resource of mine. Hence why I asked. Now that I know, cool. A fresh perspective is nice.

The "logic" you are trying to spew seems to be "It looks the same, therefore it is."

That logic applies to Metroid in my view.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying it functions the same, not simply that it looks the same.

And we're saying it doesn't function the same, and considering we've actually PLAYED the game, I'm pretty sure we've done more research on the subject than you.

Then you have a different definition of "function".

No, you're just over simplifying the game like I did elsewhere with Metroid.

They're not the same. Changing the feel of a platformer doesn't change the effect, it's still a jump either way. But shooting a door to open it and shooting an enemy have entirely different effects and purposes.

To you. To you, it's the same, but to me and apparently everyone else that has played the game, one jump is not the same as another. O. The other hand, shooting one beam and shooting another beam function exactly the same and just have a different effect. What I'm putting in the controller on my end in a platformer is far more complex than "A to jump" bug in Metroid Prime, the combat boils down to point and shoot, if you want to get that basic. The effext is unimportant, as the overall effect is that you get to continue the game.

3 people =/= anyone else who's played the game. Go ahead and ask the 10 year olds or casuals or anyone else that doesn't speed run or are finicky about the technical aspects of their games if they care if one jump is different from another. I guarantee you most of them will say no.

The effect is important though. The goal of the game is more complex than just get to the end because there's exploring levels, defeating enemies, and collecting items. But in a basic platformer like Mario or DK your only real goal is to jump through the levels to reach the goal. You're trying to bring a complex game down to the level of a simple game, that's why the two situations aren't comparable.

You keep saying that and every time I laugh because in reality, you're taking a simple game and trying to paint it as complex. The difference here, though, is that I've actually played the very same game you're talking about and at the end of the day, it can be boiled down to being just as simple as what you're claiming platformers to be.

However, I can assure you of one thing: not every jump is the same. Not even to casuals. A player will inevitably reach that one part. That one obtacle. That gap that just stops them in their tracks. It will always be that one jump that gets them killed and they will learn through trial and error how to conquer it when the normal method doesn't work.

what are you even arguing about?

@UGXWolf You act as if I've never played a Mario or DK game before, I have. And they are very simple, it is rare that I ever had to think about what I was doing to complete a level in those games or plan out my jumps as you claim. And even so, that's not complexity, that's just taking advantage of the technical aspects of the game's mechanics. The actual mechanics have no depth to them. In Metroid, you have a lot more actions you can use and a lot more to process, you're not just mindlessly running and gunning through the level, you have to think about how to get from A to B and what abilities would be useful in doing so. There's a lot more in the mechanics to work with, which is what makes it a complex game.

I bet you have never completed a Mario or Donkey Kong game

You say that as if it's difficult or even at all mentally active to shoot the enemy that you usually shoot with the purple beam with the purple beam. Or the glowing white door with the white beam. Or the glowing red spot with the item that you notmally use on glowy red spots.

I've beaten:

DKC1
DKC3
Super Mario World
NSMB
Super Mario 3D Land
All of the collectathons

I almost finished DKC2, and I got bored of NSMB Wii and DKCR midway through. I'm not bothering with anything else in the series except the collectathons.

@UGXWolf More difficult and complex than running and jumping through the level. It's not even that simple, some of the enemies have specific weak spots and tactics, and the obstacles aren't usually as mindless as opening doors.

Anyway, this argument is going in circles now, so there's no point in continuing. Back on topic, I think the Wii U still has quite a few games left up its sleeve even after Zelda. There's probably going to be quite a few in 2016, and I could see a few happening in 2017. For instance, we don't have a main series Kirby game yet, and I'm expecting that to be a 2017 game since we just got Rainbow Curse this year.

Dude, your argument has no logic. Why are you even using the word logic in your argument? There is no real way to know what a game is like without playing it, period.

I think we've had this discussion before. I don't remember if it was you or someone else that was using the same insane type of argument. You don't know what something is like without trying it.

You can know something is "spicy" but you don't know what "spicy" is until you taste it.
You can know something is "blue", but you don't know what "blue" is until you see it.
You can know x about a game, but you don't really know what x is until you play it. It's ... LITERALLY impossible.