@SuperWiiU
I just looked up that Killswitch game, and it looks about, if not a bit worse than Ironfall. At least we can say Gears of War beats both of them, which is my point here. There are going to be better games to play than others, period. The new Gears of War game will make The Order look like a joke for sure, for example.
For the record, I actually think PS Battle Royale was a bit more fun to play than Super Smash Bros. Brawl. It was newer, had different characters, and was more modern in general, but now Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and 3DS is out, and now it really doesn't matter that much anymore. Sony just dropped the ball on that sort of thing, which is why I continue not to care, because I truly feel like I can get better experiences on Xbox One and Wii U, with PS4 excluded entirely. I wouldn't mind trying out Bloodbourne, but I'm pretty sure people were already saying Dark Souls 2 was better even before it came out.
I have real reasons to decide against buying PS4, and it's not bias.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
Assymetrical multiplayer, Co-op or competitive, has been this generation's major step forward. Nintendo is one if the ones taking this step. With the exception of massively competitive titles like Smash and Mario Kart, you can see a clear attempt at making gameplay less symetrical. Nintendoland, New Super Mario Bros. U and even ZombiU all experimented with this type of coarse asymmetric gameplay. Sometimes even pushing the players to be playing what is essentially two completely different games. 3D Workd also plays with a more fine asymmetric pseudo-competitive co-op style that encourages certain characters to use their advantages to ensure they get the most points each level. Since two people can't play the same character, you force an asymmetric situation in which Mario will take longer to reach this star than Luigi, but he can't get this stamp that's been placed in a Luigi-biased course to give Mario a fighting chance.
I'd hardly call asymmetric multiplayer a "massive step forward", since it doesn't affect all aspects of the gameplay, just the multiplayer. I mainly play single player, so why would I care if they're doing something new with the multiplayer? Also, it doesn't even really change that much about the gameplay or do anything that couldn't have been done before.
Meanwhile, other games experiment with Nintendo's vastly improved online to bring experiences and capabilities other than online multiplayer, such as online replays to help you learn better and faster ways to play a level. (And considering the game encourages use of this function and this mode, you can't say nobody cares about that.) Rayman Legends and DKCTF both do this. On top of that, Nintendoms been experimenting with DLC, this generation and bloody well been knocking it iut of the park, thus far. Content is rarely available at launch, as Nintendo still focuses on making complete games and their DLC, rather than shaking players down for more money legitimately seems to extend the life of a game. And free-to-start games (aside from Poke'mon Shuffle) have mostly been a non-intrusive deal. Even just having that second screen for inventory or a map does an insane amount to improve gameplay. Game & Wario is nothing if not a game full of experimentation and the ability to connect up to eight controllers at a time hasn't exactly been predominantly featured on any other systems (and no, that's not just Smash. Runbow coming out on the eShop will also feature up to nine-player games. And have you seen the Amiibo? NFC may not be new, nor is the idea of Toys-to-Life, but the idea of owning a figurine that nit only looks cool, but unlocks cool stuff in the games you also own! Now that's something. They're making the Amiibo to work with more than just one game each. They're even making them more than just statues.
This is basically just them catching up with the competition, that's nothing new.
Meanwhile, the N64 added 3D and... Ummm... Uhhhhh.......... See what I mean? The games may have looked and played differently, but at the end of the day, they were mostly doing what they had to in irder to make those IP work in 3D. Nintendo had much better success at this than just about anyone else, but that's more cleverness than creativity. Heck, do you know how ofteb an idea fir a game was too ambitious for the system and they had to scale it back? The N64 didn't really allow for the creative freedom the Wii U does. To the point that they upgraded it twice (Memory Pak and 64DD) amd still came up with ideas too big for the system. (Animal Crossing had to he remade for the Wii U, and Ura Zelda STILL never happened.)
So? Who cares that it needed to be done, in the end we got new gameplay.
I'd hardly call asymmetric multiplayer a "massive step forward", since it doesn't affect all aspects of the gameplay, just the multiplayer. I mainly play single player, so why would I care if they're doing something new with the multiplayer? Also, it doesn't even really change that much about the gameplay or do anything that couldn't have been done before.
You don't enjoy online multiplayer, therefore no one else on the planet does.
Oh, and yawn. We've covered this time and time again.
Can someone please think of something interesting to discuss for once? lol
Just for you. "I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury
You don't enjoy online multiplayer, therefore no one else on the planet does.
Not the point. It's not really a major change if it only affects one type of gameplay.
Ya, but it still matters to people who care about multiplayer, and sometimes it does change the single player, as seen in Rayman Legends with the Murphy levels. If a second player is there, it is asymmetric, but otherwise you are doing it yourself in single player mode.
Yeah, I skipped the N64 entirely and didn't play many games from that era. My brother had a Playstation, I had a SNES and then around 2000 I moved on to PC. But I distinctly remember going to the shops in the mid-90s as a massive fan of Super Mario Kart. Seeing Mario Kart 64 and being blown away by the fact that there were actually proper jumps, tunnels and shortcuts in Mario Kart....
Weird, I felt the opposite. I sank hundreds of hours into Super Mario Kart. It's one of my favorite games of all time. Mario Kart 64 though... just did nothing for me, for whatever reason. I didn't enjoy it half as much as SMK. Double Dash was a huge improvement.
Which can be said about most of the N64's library, really. Almost every "good" game has a better sequel on Gamecube, and yet the SNES library is still upheld as one of, if not the best of all time.
Obviously now when I look at N64 games I agree. For example, I think it's clear which of these two have aged better:
But back when I was a kid looking at this stuff? When in my head Donkey Kong Country 2 was the best looking game ever made and "3D" was either something done with the Super FX chip or Doom on my brother's PC? Mario Kart 64 was pretty cool at the time. I mean you went into a tunnel, the carts dipped down, there was different lighting and there were actually bricks in the walls. Insane.
Mario Kart 64's gameplay didn't hold up as well, though, IMO. I never really cared for Super Mario Kart, honestly. Even Mario Kart: Super Circuit was better than the SNES game, because it had new stages, all the SNES stages after you beat the GBA stages, and had the N64 sprites with a bit better graphics. That's what I think, anyway.
EDIT: Sometimes nostalgia wins for some people, I guess.
On the point of the Mario Kart argument, I find that each game more or less just hets better amd better with a few notable exceptions. Super Circuit was always my least favorite and SMK, aside from the computers hardcore cheating (as if they don't in any other Mario Kart, I mean geez, TVTropes has an entire page dedicated to how Mario Kart's CPUs cheat!) the maps are all flat, boring and repetitive to me. Literally. Mode 7 just didnt do it justice. After that, it's just personal preference that I liked 64 more than Double Dash. I feel like this may be due to the fact that I was mire or less constantly grounded during the Gamecube era, but I just really like 64's tracks better and still do. Then I feel like Wii is the worst of the four most recent ones, but basically blows the original four out of the water, and from there, it only gets better with time.
Back onto my previous point, to me, doing what needs to be done to make a genre work is not creativity. Collectathons weren't entirely new, Mario 64 just kinda set the standard. Zelda did even less that felt creative, and what's even worse is how much they had to sacrifice to make the game work on the 64. I consider the N64 a low point in Nintendo's creativity because it was one of the only times the company's ambition was stifled by the console's limits. Now if you'd said "original," I'd agree with you, but then point out the fact that the most recent console being the least original is to be expected.
As for hype, I thunk the low point easily goes to 2011 and 2012. The end if the Wii, failure of the 3DS, and beginning of the Wii U. Nintendo just flat out failed to garner any real hype fir their new handheld OR their new gaming console! Lately, between Smash, Splatoon, Kart, and Zelda U, Nintendo's been managing their hype levels, but as someone else said, I really think 2011 amd 2012 were what ultimately did the Wii U in. Doomed before it even launched. How sad.
Honestly, Wii U feels about as "core" as GCN did, minus more 3rd party support. N64 was mostly just translating games to 3D. Even today, whenever I play a 2D game like Giana Sisters, it's pretty easy to imagine that the background could actually be translated to 3D in some way. You never see anyone ask for a 3D Giana Sisters, but maybe they could make it happen. That's only if anyone cares, because we could really get another 3D Donkey Kong game if Nintendo ever randomly decides it and it matters.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
Now if you'd said "original," I'd agree with you, but then point out the fact that the most recent console being the least original is to be expected.
Yeah, that's more along the lines of what I meant. And no, not necessarily, the originality hasn't been steadily decreasing. The N64 and Wii were noticeable more original than their predecessors.
@Bolt_Strike Many of those things are subjective, leaving their low point up to interpretation, but tackling the one thing in that list there can be no arguing about, if you were going to list any generation as Nintendo's weakest in sales, this would be it.
Of course, you're once again making a crack at games you haven't played, so once again, as someone who HAS played the games you're speaking of, this isn't Nintendo's lowest point in creativity. That one's actually probably the hardest to pin down, as nearly any generation you list is going to have some kind of rebuttal. Now, personally, I think the N64 was a low point in creativity, but people are bound to say new hardware, 3D gaming, SM64 and OoT and Mario Party and and and...
My point is, Nintendo's lowestpoint in creativity is still pretty high when compared with the rest of the industry, and if you'd take a moment to actually play a game instead of looking at the most basic of base mechanics, you'd know that.
@skywake Judging by those two screenshots alone, I'd say the karting game looks better today... but that's because I find the pre-rendered graphics in DKC whichever hideous, a mess of pixels making a mosaic I have to think about before understanding what it is supposed to be. Just to be clear, this opinion applies to just about all games using pre-rendered sprites on a severely limited palette and no aliasing at the edges of the sprites.
I actually agree. To me, DKC was never the best looking game out there. I actually remember telling my friend when it came out that I wasn't impressed, and he was mad at me. He said something like "if you don't like the way this game looks, then I guess you hate Terminator!" because apparently, the way the pre-rendered graphics were made for the game were copied from the techniques that they used to make Terminator 2, or something like that ... it was decades ago, I don't remember.
Point being, yeah, I was never and still am not, impressed with DKC's visual offerings...
On topic of the N64 and PSO, I agree that it was my least favorite generation in terms of amount of quality gaming. I have less games for my N64 than any other system I have (well, I only have 3 games for PSO, but I only recently got it). However, in terms of games that made a huge impact, the N64/PSO era may have the most important games ever. Besides Mario 64 and OoT, that generation gave us Final Fantasy 7, Smash Bros, Xenogears, ChronoCross, Resident Evil, and Golden Eye. No, many of those games did not age well, but goodness, were they not the most important games, maybe ever? Some of the most influential, to be sure.
As a side note, DKC64 is one of my least favorite games of all time.
As far as games libraries go, I have a Wii U and a 360, I don't play Nintendo exclusive stuff cos they're just not to my tastes. If you include Wi games this means I have access to a wealth of "mature" titles (cos I'm an oldie) at a bargain price. The console I use the most is the Wii U which means Next Gen gaming at Last Gen prices........ happy days.
As far as games libraries go, I have a Wii U and a 360, I don't play Nintendo exclusive stuff cos they're just not to my tastes. If you include Wi games this means I have access to a wealth of "mature" titles (cos I'm an oldie) at a bargain price. The console I use the most is the Wii U which means Next Gen gaming at Last Gen prices........ happy days.
Out of curiosity, if you don't like the Nintendo exclusives, why do you own a Wii U?
I have 3 kids age 10 to 14 and they love playing the Nintendo exclusive stuff. If I'm honest I enjoy playing Mario Kart with them. For the 360 games that are also available for my Nintendo console I reckon the Wii U is better by a country mile.
The WiiU's library is amazing, but it teeters on the brink of disaster just because it lacks massive third party support (duh). Everyone who use to buy Nintendo systems for only Nintendo games backed us into this corner. Sooo... they got what they wanted? A Nintendo only system. Almost literally. Ninty makes the games ninty makes the system. Kinda working out for a little bit right now in some senses, but if and when the XB1 or PS4 library takes off like a rocket then the last people talking about the WiiU are really going to jump ship.
But also maybe not?
Yeah there's a lot of disastrous news related to the WiiU, I doubt what Iwata says about 1 game turning the sales around massively at this point. But perhaps Nintendo will just go along with their own plans and pretend this isn't happening, run the WiiU to the end of it's natural cycle and move on. Sales will be mediocre but it'll sell throughout the gen at a slightly distant 3rd place in comparison to it's rivals the XB1 and PS4. If it's any proof they'll keep with the WiiU and love it and nurture it until the end just look at their history. Both the DS & 3DS were panned immediately, but the DS sold more than any of their other handhelds and the 3DS has sold the most units for any gaming system this gen (for now). Need we mention the hate on the Wii again? GameCube sales slacked and they went on with it anyway. Only time they trash anything is when it's just dead in the water. The VB is pretty much the only standalone disaster. You all love bringing up the N64DD, yeah that was a mess too, but was the original N64? Not exactly. I'm sure even though it makes no sense, they're thinking it'll blow up again like the other times it happened.
All anyone can do anywhere when this gets brought up is go yelling OMG THE WIIU IS EXACTLY LIKE N64DD, DREAMCAST AND VIRTUAL BOY!?!?!?! HEELLLLPPP IM ON FIRE!!!!!
I took the plunge with the Xbone. I love racing games, so for Forza it was worth it for me. Throw in Halo and Sunset Overdrive and I'm okay with the purchase (I got it for Madden and other multiplats like diablo, dragon age etc. too).
That said, my Wii U gets way more playing time. I like the Xbone, but I have to be in a certain mood to play it, whereas I'm always up for Nintendo.
Does anyone else think the Zelda delay is a result of another "Miyamoto tea table upending"? We know Aonuma is mostly in charge of the series now, and Miyamoto checks in from time to time (atleast this is my understanding of how it is, I remember Aonuma saying in an interview that Miyamoto wasn't even aware of the art style he was using until the middle of development or something. I believe it might've been Wind Waker.
Even during the video from the 2014 Game Awards, I remember thinking that Miyamoto was playing it as if he was studying it. He did have a pretty good handle on the controls so it obviously wasn't the very first time he sat down with it, but he definitely seemed to be analyzing as he played.
He even at one point questioned Aonuma "This will be ready for 2015?" of which Aonuma assured him. It really causes me to think he possibly took it home and played through everything they had up until that point and just said "This isn't good enough for the next Zelda, it needs something different". It's an explanation that both explains the sudden about-face on the release date, and gives us an explanation that we know has happened at Nintendo many times before.
Whether or not this causes it to go back to the NX, or stay with the Wii U, or be a Twilight Princess-esque double release for both systems is anyone's guess at this point, and it doesn't really matter what any of us think. But I do think this is another Miyamoto "tea table" situation
Forums
Topic: Why is the Wii U's library so lauded?
Posts 221 to 240 of 308
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.