User Profile



United Kingdom

Sun 20th January, 2008

Recent Comments



Kirk commented on Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable...:

Well I'm not sure what Nintendo has planned that would make releasing an all new system in mid-late 2016 a smart move, as I see it, but you mostly all know by now what type of approach I think could make that kind of idea work:

Unless Nintendo really has something pretty different up its sleeve I'm not convinced just another new home console would be the right way to go, especially releasing it as early as mid-late 2016, but something along the lines of what I'm saying I could at least see working.



Kirk commented on We Can't Release Virtual Console Games Any Fas...:

Figure it the f**k out! Is what I say.

You basically promised us before the original Wii came out, ten years ago at E3 2005, that we'd be able to play virtually all of Nintendo's games from its past consoles and we still aren't there yet.

I can frikin play virtually even single past Nintendo game from all of it's consoles, from Wii backwards, on my PC—and the tend to run pretty much flawlessly for the most part in my experience, certainly almost anything from the NES to N64 catalogs, even with additional options and various enhancements and stuff in most cases.

I mean come on already!



Kirk commented on Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Ye...:

@Quorthon Oops! My bad on the maths :-o

"It doesn't matter if Nintendo angers a few core fanboys with this new release. It's more important that they try to get back the fans they've lost over the past 25 years."

Well like I say; I think that's the last thing that will happen if it doesn't show that it's fully committed to its consoles; through the good and the bad. The same thing happened with Sega, where consumers simply lost any trust that it would properly support whatever new consoles it released—they simply didn't trust that it would support them for very long before dumping them and moving on again—so basically nobody bought them. So Nintendo could potentially lose a large chunk of it's still loyal but wavering fans and it probably wouldn't make any lapsed fans feel good about buying its new console; if they see that it just totally messed up with the Wii U and then dumped it like a bad smell the first chance it got.

The NX might get some new gamers, if the idea is unique and compelling enough and I guess we'll have to see on that one, but if Nintendo doesn't handle this right then it might ultimately just do more damage than good. I mean the Wii was a massive hit with the casuals but I'd argue it ultimately did more damage than good in many ways—losing a lot of once loyal fans, core gamers and potential customers by the time it released the Wii U—and God help Nintendo if it's going for the same approach with NX.



Kirk commented on Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Ye...:


"This belief that Nintendo is going to sit for a year with no hardware sales in order to kindly wait until 2017 to appease a grumpy fanbase who buys anything with their logo on it anyway is just absurd and silly."

Well that's if one assumes Nintendo only has the currently one or two announced games in the pipeline for Wii U in the next year and pretty much absolutely nothing else at all, imo. Then it would be silly to sit for a whole year on basically nothing. I however am certainly not making that assumption, because I believe at the very least that Nintendo has more games in store than we've already seen, at least a couple more big titles for Wii U in 2017 and probably a price drop too, which should be enough to keep it selling in bearable numbers until 2017.

Whatever the situation; I certainly wouldn't rush something out as some "duct tape" measure to try and half-*ssedly patch a hole in a sinking ship—because ultimately that's no real solution to the bigger problem at all, imo. It's just a badly considered short term fix for a much bigger longer term problem, as I see it. One that might even make the long terms issues even bigger, ultimately—because however you look at it; a 3 year or even less lifespan for a home console is just f'n absurd and would be far more telling of where Nintendo is right now as a business than anything else, imo.

It really depends on what Nintendo has planned imo...

If all Nintendo has planned is releasing a brand new games console in the next year and there's absolutely nothing in the pipeline for Wii U, via new games or even minor hardware variations and price drops, etc.; then I think releasing this new console in 2016 might as well happen—it would have already done irrefutable damage at that point anyway; so why not just pour vinegar into the wound. If however, Nintendo isn't that terrible at managing it's business, such that is would basically have a year of total drought for the Wii U and then just compound the issue by dropping it like a rock—basically sh*tting on and p*ssing off absolutely everyone possible—then I think it would be better to wait out the year, get everything with its next-gen plan properly sorted and then really go for it, all-out, when everything is better ready.

UNLESS of course, it has the kind of system strategy I've suggested multiple times now, which would totally work with a 2016 release and has actually considered the full implications of such a move. In fact, it would only show how smart a company Nintendo is, and that it knows how to both fix a pretty huge problem and still please its most loyal fans and customers, as well as developers, all at the same time.

PS. That fanbase that "buys anything with their logo on it' is dwindling by the day and the last thing Nintendo needs to do is to p*ss off and push away even more of its once biggest fans, supporters and most loyal customers.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@Quorthon Well in terms of looking at it from a Shareholder point of view it's probably best for Nintendo to get the NX out as soon as possible. From a loyal customer, hardcore fan and just gamer in general point of view; I personally feel this would be insulting in very much the same way it was when Sega started releasing and then dumping one console after another in very short timespans, or so it seemed at the time, and to me that's about the worst long term move Nintendo could make in its current situation.

Look at where Sega is right now because of such thinking...

The last thing Nintendo needs to do right now is foster more disappointment, frustration, anger and maybe even hate among its current and ever shrinking base of consumers. I mean if Nintendo drops the Wii U and moves onto the NX in 2016 then I think a lot of its most loyal fans are going to be utterly outraged and that's not a good business strategy imo. There's a lot of people already saying they've decided not to buy future Nintendo consoles simply because of its attitude regarding the recent E3 and the mostly disappointing half-*ssed filler titles it showed; so just imagine how much of a fallout there's going to be if it dumps all those loyal Wii U owners, somewhat early, in order to move onto the next thing.

I'd rather Nintendo thought of a smart way around this problem and out of its current situation, like I believe I am doing with my own proposed idea for NX, rather than just sh*tting on loyal customers in the hope of maybe turning a quick and easy flash-in-the-pan buck by jumping ship and starting with something new in the middle of a generation.

There's lots of reasons why the NX could come in 2016, as well as many why it probably won't, but in a perfect world I don't want it to and I really hope Nintendo knows better too.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos Christ; I def read that guy's book all wrong lol

It's obvious he is an actual man all the way through until the end—I mean he mentions 'man' and 'earth' multiple times—so the only conclusion is that he must have been a man from Earth originally, who was changed by the Mars base thing.

How totally slow of me :-o

I read it a tiny bit rushed rather than fully focussed, so when it came to the end I just thought "Oh, ok. I actually thought he was a man all along but he's some kind of alien. How presumptuous of me." then I quickly went back to double check how I could have missed the fact he was an alien—to see if it was really well written in such a way that it never quite said to the reader either way what he was—and saw the bit(s) where he used the word 'man' at the start and just thought that was the writer being a bit lazy.

Turns out I was the one being a bit lazy.


No: What's the shortest horror story in the world?



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos Yeah, I tend to have a very short fuse when it comes to people questioning something I say or do. lol

God knows where it comes from but it surely has something to do with my childhood and/or things that I've experienced while going from my formative teen years or something.

So wait...

Then I read the story differently to you I think.

My take was that he was this weird alien creature all along but it was just that we as the readers were/are supposed to be reach the end and think "Oh dang! I assumed he was a human right at the start but it turns out he was actually an alien all along". You know, like the human condition, where we always think of ourselves as the centre of the Universe and all that; so we just presume the protagonist must be human—because we're arrogant like that.

I thought the point was the author was playing with our assumption. This is why I had a wee issue with him saying the guy is a man at the start only to then say, No, he's actually an alien at the end; which I think would be unfair to us as readers. If however he was changed into an alien by the Mars creature/base thing then that's a different take, and I actually missed that completely.

Link me the story again...



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos Well let's be very clear and careful here, because this is starting to get into territory where you're basically implying—even if it's not your specific intention—that I can't have an opinion that's as valid as this guy because he's some kind of "acclaimed writer" and I'm not. This is done indirectly, whether it's intentional or not, by using yourself as the comparison to the writer but in response to a conversation with me where I am specifically questioning one aspect of his writing in this particular story.

I reject the very notion that his writing can't be questioned or challenged, by either you or me, right out the gate.

So, just to be absolutely clear: If the guy is going to reveal the main character is an alien at the end of the story then it's bad writing imo to tell the reader the main character is a human at the start of the story. He specifically calls the main character a 'man' at the start of the story when describing him—his height I think it is, where he says something like "He was a tall scarecrow of a man". He might even do it more than once but I didn't dig in that much detail.

So, to me, it's a little bit of sloppy writing and the main niggle I had with the story, and just because I haven't won a writing award I don't think that makes my opinion/assertion any less valid regarding this particular example.

Like I said though; other than that little niggle I enjoyed it and found the premise quite interesting.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos Yeah but you can't basically explicitly say the character is one thing at the start of the story, only to pull a fast one on the reader at the end.

I think it would have worked better if he'd only implied he was that thing at the start, instead of explicitly saying it, and then when the end came I would be laughing at myself for not seeing it coming.

Instead I was like "But wait...he specifically told me he was something else at the start of the story".

Was still interesting, with some cool ideas, and a pretty enjoyable read though.

I'm signed up to Gamasutra but I rarely go there.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos I tend to just post it when there's an article that pops up in relation to NX on one of the sites I visit, or when these sites maybe touch upon what Nintendo could do going forwards—where it basically makes sense for people to put forward their own ideas.

The only thing with the story was that I went back over the early parts, after the ending was revealed, and noticed that some of the wording could be construed as a little misleading; such that you couldn't really guess the end coming because the author had kind of removed the chance you'd come to that conclusion with his specific wording, which was a wee bit unfair imo (not that I even remotely saw the end coming anyway). Other than that though it was quite entertaining.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@TheRealThanos I'm posting it anywhere there's a chance someone at Nintendo might see it. lol

Nintendo almost certainly won't go that way, and I personally bemoan that decision; unless whatever it's coming out with next is some kind of revolution and/or paradigm shift in the industry.

I read that story you suggested to me. Was pretty good.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@Quorthon I'd be willing to bet you that NX won't be out in 2016.

A sportsman's bet—since I'm too poor to bet anything else.

If NX does release in 2016 and it is just another new home console, of the standard type we'd expect, then I think Nintendo will have made a very bad move...

...Sega level of bad, imo.



Kirk commented on Blast Ball is Actually the Tutorial in Metroid...:

So; the flaw here is showing us Blast Ball first, followed by a tiny snippet of kinda hard to grasp footage of the main Federation Force game a day later, then finally slapping the Metroid label on the screen while we're still slightly bemused and confused at what we saw, and expecting us to not be worried.

Who's to blame here; Nintendo's worried and angry Metroid fans or Nintendo.

Have you done the same with the new Animal Crossing board game too?

Is that really a proper awesome new Animal Crossing game, the one we've all been waiting for, but you've just communicated the message to us terribly here as well?

Or, is there maybe some justification in us being slightly worried and even p*ssed off by what we've seen, in both cases?



Kirk commented on Reggie Fils-Aime Asks for Fan Trust With Metro...:

The fault here, Reggie, is that you've created and showed something that even requires such statements in the first place.

You think Sony is having to assuage fan worries with statements to trust that Uncharted 4 is going to be fine. I think not, because that game looks like it's giving fans absolutely everything they could have wished for from a sequel in 2015, and possibly even more.

I think that's all fans of Metroid wanted—to not have to worry and have major doubts based on what they saw.



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

@Quorthon I don't think the NX is coming in 2016 in the slightest—certainly not if it's just another traditional type of console like the idea in the video. The NX probably won't even be fully revealed at E3 2016 imo, and even if it is then it's still unlikely to make it in 2016. I'm thinking 2017 is the earliest you'll see this thing.

UNLESS...'s basically the idea I have already proposed and then it probably wouldn't be too much of a problem to release it in [late] 2016. In fact, it would probably be to its advantage to get it out as early as possible:



Kirk commented on Weirdness: In Some Parallel Dimension, This Ni...:

If this were NX then once again it would be completely pointless as far as I'm concerned. It is basically just a current-gen system again, but it would be coming out closer to next-gen than this gen, which would once again put Nintendo in a position of having a "next-gen" console that would be a generation out of date compared to the competition, once they release their true next-gen systems. If Nintendo were just to make the same kind of machine as the competition again and go for these specs with NX then it would be another fail imo. Same goes for just shoehorning current Nintendo games onto touchscreen platforms with virtual touchscreen controls. If Nintendo did that it would be one of the worst possible decisions it could make imo.

This is about as bad an idea for NX as I could imagine—just another underpowered home console, that adds a stupid gimmick in being able to play Nintendo console games [badly] on mobile devices and basically nothing about it that is genuinely exciting, unique or cool in any way, shape or form. Getting those three AAA first party titles at launch would be sweet but that's about it and that's kinda just stating the obvious.

Some people simply don't get it.

Also; there actually really is no need for another Nintendo box under your TV at all if Nintendo does this thing right, imo.

I think I've already provided a much better idea for what NX could be (and while you might not get, or even like it; it's at least a trillion times better than the idea in the video above):



Kirk commented on ​Shigeru Miyamoto Defends Star Fox Zero's Co...:

Miyamoto has lost his way a bit it seems. There was a time where he'd be the one saying that controls need to be easy to pick up play but hard to master*—as well as intuitive and fun—not clunky and gimmicky, unintuitive and not particularly suited to the game they've been added to.

Also; check out this quote from the developer of the new Animal Crossing game:

"I wouldn’t want to add a feature where people thought it was about time or expected the next iteration would have."

That right there sums up perfectly why many gamers and once loyal fans are leaving Nintendo left, right and centre.

*'Master' in terms of using them in tricky situations that test your true gamer skills but not in terms of having to faff around for a day just to even get used to them a be able to use them half competently in the first place.



Kirk commented on Veterans Of 3DS Title Xeodrifter Will Get The ...:

I know it seems expensive to some people, especially relative to all the free and $1 mobile games we get these days (usually laden with ads and micro-transactions), but it is in fact a full new game in the vain of Metroid, and asking for less than a tenner isn't exactly overpriced for what you are getting. I mean the developer does actually have to make money.

This isn't some 20 year old Virtual Console game, where the developers have already made all their money on the title and so can afford to now just sell however many more digital copies for a few bucks, and even then your still paying pretty much the same amount for all those ancient VC titles.



Kirk commented on Veterans Of 3DS Title Xeodrifter Will Get The ...:

To be honest; I didn't think it would do particularly well—even though it looks cool enough for what it is. It's just in amongst a bunch of other games that I think people would go for first.

It's very cool to hear that if you own the 3DS version then you can get the Wii U version for free though.



Kirk commented on Review: EarthBound Beginnings (Wii U eShop / NES):

In order of greatness this franchise absolutely goes:

1. Mother 3
2. Earthbound
3. Mother

Mother is to be respected for what it started but it's very rough around the edges now.

I know some people love Earthbound but if we're actually being objective and considering every single aspect of the game design here then Mother 3 basically trounces it in pretty much ever area and certainly all the most important ways.

Mother 3 is one of the best game experiences I've had in recent times. I only played it about a month ago for the first time, the English fan translation, and it is just stunning. A proper gaming masterpiece and true classic, as far as I'm concerned.



Kirk commented on Talking Point: The Mystery of Devil's Third an...:

To me; it just looks like there's too much stuff all thrown in together into this game. It might just end up being a bit of a mess, with lots of options and stuff to do but ultimately may not really be satisfying. It's hard to really grasp exactly what it's going to be like. It's also looking quite rough around the edges. I'm not feeling it.



Kirk commented on Shigeru Miyamoto Suggests Low Key and Accessib...:

@MadAdam81 It wouldn't be so stupid if you just used the tilt to both fly the ship and aim the cursor directly on the TV screen, without having to look at the GamePad, but having to keep switching back and forth between looking at the TV and the GamePad, steering the ship on the TV while aiming its shot on the GamePad at the same time, is just bad imo. It's like trying to rub your stomache and pat your head at the same time--unnatural--and while I'm sure people will get more used to it over time, it will never be more intuitive or make more sense in the premise of the game, which is traditionally a 3D scrolling shoot 'em up, than just flying and aiming on the main screen.

I'm sure it will actually be more accurate for aiming by moving the GamePad around and looking at your targets on its screen but that's beside the point. It's at the cost of the normal, pure and fun Star Fox experience imo and that is the problem I have with it. It's no longer a 3D scrolling shoot 'em up and is more like playing a gimmicky motion controlled on-rails arcade gun game in terms of the core aiming--a totally seperate genre--while also having to play and control a scrolling flying game at the same time. I just want the brilliant scrolling shoot 'em up that Star Fox originally was.

If there is an option to turn it off, which based on how it's done I'm thinking there probably won't be, then it wouldn't be such a big deal. Right now however, I'm thinking Miyamoto has just ruined Star Fox in its natural state, which was basically already perfect in terms of controls--being a great example of the scrolling shoot 'em up genre--and didn't need to be messed with in this particular area.

Miyamoto has kinda "fixed"--see broken--an element of the game design that was basically perfect in the first place.



Kirk commented on Shigeru Miyamoto Suggests Low Key and Accessib...:

In terms of using the amiibos; I think it would be cool to have a couple of Star Fox Zero specific ones and also be able to use most of the other ones too.

I've not really thought about any particularly good ways to reward the player for using the amiibos but...

With the general ones I'd maybe have something like changing the main character to look like the one of the scanned amiibos, including their model inside the ship and in cutscenes and headshots. They could probably just take the models from Smash Bros. Some simple variations on the ship designs and skins would also be nice. I think that would be cool.

In terms of scanning in the Star Fox Zero specific amiibos; I think it could maybe just be a unique costume for fox and a unique looking version of the airwing, or something like that. I dunno.



Kirk commented on Shigeru Miyamoto Suggests Low Key and Accessib...:

You know, Miyamoto, I'm not so much worried about the amiibo support as I am the gimmicky GamePad controller aiming that you've forced into the game, which has basically ruined it for me personally.

People can defend it and try to rationalise it all they want but if I don't want to have to concentrate on two screens, or twist and rotate my wrists around to aim, then this game basically isn't going to make me happy. It's gimmicky, convoluted and unnecessary in creating a worthy modern Star Fox game.

Ignoring all the issues with the lacklustre graphics and underwhelming presentation for now--this simply isn't the current-gen Star Fox experience I want.

Unless there's at least an option to turn the gimmicky GamePad aiming stuff off and just play Star Fox normally, in the classic way that feels natural, intuitive and just right, then I'm out.



Kirk commented on Talking Point: Nintendo's Approach to Transfor...:

@Inkling "Problem is that the fans just aren't grateful."

To me that's just a load of bull and a kind of cop-out response, from both Nintendo PR and defensive fanboys, to not giving long time fans what they want and expect from the company, and actually satisfying those loyal customers.

When Nintendo gave us games like Super Mario World, Super Metroid, Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Donkey Kong Country and Earthbound—all brilliant new games in beloved franchises—fans absolutely celebrated the company because it thoroughly delivered and did everything it needed to do to move those franchises forward in a positive and meaningful way that also fully satisfied all the desires of the fans. In some ways it just totally and utterly blew them away. The same thing happened when Nintendo delivered sequels like Super Mario 64, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, F-Zero X and Star Fox 64—the fans cheered Nintendo's name from the rafters.

When Nintendo chucks out half-*ssed spin of crap, like 'Animal Crossing Board Game', 'Metroid Football' and 'Zelda Totems', or a clearly lazy and hastily put together effort like 'Star Fox 64.5 plus clunky gimmick', it's not the fans who are in the wrong for being disappointed or even enraged—it's Nintendo. Nintendo knows it; many of the fans know it; and even some of the 'defenders' know it.



Kirk commented on Talking Point: Nintendo's Approach to Transfor...:

Consider this: Two of the best positive jumps ever in Nintendo game franchise generations were from the 8bit versions of games like Super Mario Bros, Metroid, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Mother and Punch-Out!!, to their 16bit versions, and from the 16bit versions of games like Super Mario World, Metroid, Zelda, Donkey Kong, F-Zero and Star Fox, to their 64bit versions.

Both times it was brilliantly executed evolution and noticeable but natural jumps forward in the underlying technology and gameplay design that kept the new games genuinely fresh, exciting and ultimately satisfying for the fans of those series and just gamers in general. Nintendo just built upon and improved everything that had come before in the previous game(s) in the franchise when it created the latest game in the franchise.

It's when Nintendo decides to almost throw away a lot of what it improved upon and honed to near perfection across multiple generations, or just half-*sses it, that I think it all starts to go wrong, and more so when a game has been around for multiple generations in a slowly but ever evolving and improving form; when there are things that fans have come to love and absolutely expect to basically just work perfectly.

You've got to keep moving with the times but you can't just throw away all the things that made fans fall in love with these games in the first place—or sh*t on the fan expectations, just for the sake of trying out silly gimmicks or even quickly throwing together new games in franchise in the hopes of making a quick and easy buck when times are bad.

If you're going to try weird random stuff and half-*ss certain elements then do it with new games that fans don't deeply care about. Or at the very least, make those cheap spin-off titles alongside the proper and lovingly crafted new games in the franchise, which evolve and expand upon everything that made the fans love them in the first place—but certainly not instead of them.

PS. I think Star Fox Zero is one of the weird examples, where on the surface it might appear to have given fans more of exactly what they want but in reality I think most of the changes fundamentally alter the core experience in such a way that it's not actually the same game anymore; such as the really convoluted and divisive and forced gimmicky GamePad aiming. It also hasn't done anything to really bring the game into the modern era in terms of things like presentation, graphics, a sense of scale and production value, or the truly epic and cinematic "Star Wars" like experience that Star Fox is worthy of imo. From what I can see, it's a half-*ssed retread of an old game but with a stupid gimmick added to try and convince people it's "fresh", "new" and exciting again, but that's about the only way it is "fresh" and "new", and not in a good way. It isn't however quite as much of a blatant kick in the teeth as something like the new Animal Crossing game :-o



Kirk commented on Splatoon Version 1.3.0 Update Due on 30th June...:

@TeslaChippie Yeah, that's probably true for most people.

It's just something that bugs me personally, it feels weird and off, and I think it would be great to at least have an option in the game that let people use a more traditional type of aiming setup too. To me it's kind of like having the vertical aiming in an fps set to inverted and not having an option to set it to the normal way. Personally, that would actually be pretty much a deal breaker for me, and although I can just casually mess around in Splatoon it's the same thing here imo.

It's not technically broken. It's just not the idea solution imo, and if it's going to break the norm then I think it would at least be nice to have the norm as an option for those people who prefer it. Like it has an option to turn off motion controls and just use analog sticks for those people who simply don't want to use motion controls.



Kirk commented on Splatoon Version 1.3.0 Update Due on 30th June...:

@beazlen1 None of this really matters, imo, if I can't simply and intuitively tell where the aim cursor itself is going to go or end up when enemies move around in front of it and then out of the way again. I'd rather the cursor was alway fixed relative to where I am pointing the screen and then the only thing I have to worry about is judging the arc of the ink I'm shooting; which would be pretty easy if everything else stays consistent. Or, if the cursor is going to try to indicate it's moving in relation to the arc of the weapon then actually indicate the arc too, for reference.

This isn't a first person shooter either: but I don't see the cursor jumping around in this game beyond what the player is doing.



Kirk commented on Splatoon Version 1.3.0 Update Due on 30th June...:

@TeslaChippie How can I make this simple in terms of describing what the problem is...

Ok: Let's say you are standing still but moving your aim smoothly from left to right in one nice clean horizontal motion. So you're basically scanning the landscape, using your cursor as a point of reference of where you are currently aiming. Lets say you notice a bit of graffiti on the wall in front you, during this horizontal scanning motion, and you want to stop your aim precisely when its over the graffiti, in a second or so. It's going to be pretty easy to do so, right?

Now, let's say you're doing the exact same thing; only this time an enemy runs in front you while you're scanning across the landscape, and for maybe a second the cursor visibly jumps slightly downwards and inwards onscreen to show your ink trajectory is now going to hit the enemy—remember, you're still continuing your smooth horizontal motion during this—and once the enemy moves out of the way the cursor jumps back to where it was previously indicating, it's correct trajectory, but slightly further across the screen because you've still been continuing to move it horizontally during this time...

How hard is it going to be to know where that cursor is going to jump back to after the enemy moves out of the way and what's the likelihood you will have overshot the graffiti you were actually trying to aim for and stop on? How would you know when to stop moving the aim, if the cursor is showing its position relative to the enemy in front of you instead of just relative to where you yourself were aiming it in initially?

I mean watch this clip at the point I've marked, set it to 0.25 speed, and just look how much it's visually changing position on screen: How are you supposed to track it's motion accurately when it's changing so dramatically any time it moves roughly near an enemy?

Now, imagine that same scenario where the cursor doesn't visibly change position onscreen every time an enemy moves in front of you and then out of the way again... How much easier and more intuitive do you think it's going to be to track your position and stop on the graffiti, even if an enemy moves in front of you for a second or so?

Now, what if that graffiti is actually another enemy too, and it's this enemy specifically you're trying to aim for and shoot at, but the cursor keeps jumping relative to the trajectory of your ink that's affected as the other enemy passes closer in front of you.

Do you really want to be in a situation where you're potentially constantly over aiming or under aiming your shot because you can't track it smoothly and intuitively because of this visual jumping that it does on screen whenever an enemy moves in front of it?

How is this better than any other shooter where the cursor can be used as an accurate fixed point of reference, which doesn't jump around on screen based on what's moving in front of the player?

Like this (random example).

Surely just having a smooth and consistent cursor, which isn't jumping around all over the place, is far more intuitive and easy to follow visually and control, especially during hectic battle. The fact that in Splatoon it's ink, with a trajectory arc, makes no difference to how effective and intuitive the aiming cursor can/should be. I mean in the original Halo: CE the devs even accounted for this trajectory with their grenades, yet still used the same fixed point cursor, and it actually worked great.

THIS is the issue I have with Splatoon, and that's me even accepting for now that the cursor is actually doing what you think it is, and I think there should at least be the option to turn this off in the settings and use a more traditional type of cursor motion.