Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

@Tobias95: I had no idea what this was, but I looked it up and I'd like to make that opinion just a little bit less unpopular.

Splatoon is one exception that goes against a general trend.

It's generic in the sense that it's the same fighting mechanics from game to game and little more than a multiplayer mode. Although to be fair, there's not much else they can add to it anyway, hence why I don't rag on that IP as much.

No they don't. None of the changes they've brought to the table are really meaningful. The changes are either gimmicks that only show up a handful of times throughout the game (as opposed to gameplay elements that affect the entire game, which is what I want to see more of), not utilized in the level design well to make an impact, or are minor changes that don't really deviate far from the main formula.

This requires a whole lot of...

I've seen it before... Eleven times as a matter of fact. The guy with the Kyurem-Black avatar's opinions have us going down a violent road to nowhere, a road I call- violence road. I say we draw a line under the matter as far as his/her opinions are concerned. They're no different/more elaborate/better put than the other eleven times I've seen those thoughts. Today. I'll say that there definitely is an arguement to be had in this area, but in my humble opinion, whilst certain Nintendo games I've played this gen have been 'repetitive, nostalgia driven and heavily simplified' I have also played many others that have not been so, the exact opposite in fact. But I for one am willing to let Zelda U decide my opinion of Nintendo and the Wii U, it will be a massive game (both in scale and importance) to be sure, and if it follows your description of Nintendo rather than most other people's, then you may win this one. But I doubt it. Game's gonna be dope.

Oh and I just KNEW I was forgetting another buzzword that the game industry has destroyed beyond meaning yet you used it in the perfect way and reminded me of what it was- gimmick A.K.A 'something new that I don't like' according to gamers who use it. It was bugging me which one I forgot, so thanks for that

Drugs are bad, mmmkay.

@Bolt_Strike: I never said you were being unreasonable. I said your opinions are really unpopular. Same goes for Haru.

Sure, let's let one game define your entire experience with a console, that's very open minded. Look, I'm not saying that every single game Nintendo's put out this generation fits that description, in fact I acknowledged an exception. I'm saying that this is a general trend that appears in many of its most prominent games. One game defying that pattern doesn't disprove that.

I've never used the word gimmick in that context. I define gimmicks as gameplay elements that aren't integrated into the core formula that only show up in certain situations. Things like mini games, level specific gameplay elements, etc.

At the same time, repetition can be good. If you are too ambitious (SEGA), then you may walk down a disastrous path.

Too much change can lead to games alienating fans that have fallen in love with the series for a specific reason. Noticed how successful Super Mario Bros core series is. It is essentially the same gameplay but with changes that make the core gameplay fresh.

The key is balance. Nintendo and SEGA are at opposite extremes, Nintendo refuses to change up their core gameplay and it's become stale whereas SEGA never keeps the same core gameplay and removes what made the gameplay popular in the first place. Nintendo shouldn't remove their core gameplay, but they need to come up with a new take on it.

That's the thing though, I disagree with the notion that the changes make the core gameplay fresh. The older 3D games did, they had actual gameplay elements that changed the experience. But I don't think any of the NSMB or 3D series games accomplish this, they've been running with the same formula the entire time (heck, they use basically the same formula for both games, there's not a lot of difference between the two series beyond one being 2D and one being 3D) and they just don't make big enough changes to justify another game. They all just feel like DLC packs instead of unique games.

So taking a 2D formula into 3D is not enough change? Wut?

Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, Super Mario Galaxy, and Super Mario 3D World are all about as different as you can possibly get while still being:

1) 3D platformers
2) Mario games
3) Good

Every single game keeps the same core gameplay while having a new, unique take on the mechanics and level design. With the exception of SM3DL/W, any two games in the 3D Mario series are different enough that they could pass for different IPs.

Like, this isn't even debatable. There's a reason why Super Mario is consistently, year after year for the last 30 years, been the most critically acclaimed and commercially successful series of platformers in the world. It's a series with endlessly inventive level design, fresh and polished mechanics in every game, and never losing sight of what made Mario games popular in the first place.

NSMB sequels are the only misfires, and their biggest sin is being too similar to the first NSMB. NSMBU still has brilliant level design though. Arguably some of the best since SMW.

People go on and on about games needing to be more open and player-determined, but frankly I'd take a linear, story-driven experience any day, even if it means it's on rails.

You obviously have not reached the final boss yet. You will understand why the game is terrible. Imagine having to walk away from the final boss multiple times for not using the right sticker in a situation

The battle system is awful in Sticker Star. While the boss fights can be done, there are some situations that give you no hints, and if you use the wrong sticker, well...you have to backtrack and get it again

Well obviously Mario needs to be dual-wielding pistols

Dual-wielding? Why not quad-wielding?

Probably not a good idea, both ideas have already been done... so obviously Mario needs to be made out of guns:

Basically then if Mario is collecting stars or going through a level to reach the flag at the end then nuh-uh that's a paddlin' in Bolt Strike's eyes. I agree with others who've already said similar, it's a shame that Mario gets this flack from these people, he's going on and on and on about how Mario games are stale or not fresh or repetitive and I just fail to understand even that basic point. I've played almost all the Mario games at least once and they're all brilliantly fun and that's all that matters. And yes Zelda U will be the game to decide things, it seems you're reluctant to diverge away from one series to extrapolate your arguement, so I don't see why you're then judging me for relying on one series as well. Pot meet kettle etc.