Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

@Socar: Seconded, heartily. The Digital Events have been driving Nintendo's E3 presence to a more flexible place, and that flexibility also affords them the option of not attending at all, when attending isn't the best choice. And more than that, E3 ain't what it used to be; let's not forget that EA, Activision, and Disney are also passing it up this year. It's a bit disturbing to see how angry and alarmist video game fans get over their favorite corporation not showing up at a trade show; it's like getting upset that your favorite car company isn't airing a Super Bowl commercial.

Thinking of Nintendo's nontraditional approach to E3 as a contrast to Sony and Microsoft's more homogenized approach (i.e. sticking to the annually expected, big-budget live presser) got me thinking about an unpopular gaming opinion of my own: I cringe every single time I see the forever-parroted "Nintendo needs third parties" argument. It's a plea for homogeneity that I just don't understand.

From an enthusiast standpoint, I don't understand why anyone would want that when you already have two perfectly fine consoles with a nearly identical third-party line up to choose from. Unless you are a Nintendo-only gamer who loves big-budget, Western third-party games (in which case, your patience is both admirable and bizarre, since Nintendo's third party relations haven't been entirely up to par for a decade or two), how does it benefit you to have three platforms with extremely similar software lineups on the market at once? Same goes for the crowd that's constantly crowing for a "traditional" console rather than — gasp — a "gimmick" (i.e. something that actually differentiates the console from its peers). I'm reminded of the American GOP turgidly droning on about "traditional family values." But I digress.

From a business standpoint, homogeneity would also be a disaster for Nintendo. Especially with the off-pattern platform release schedule they've locked themselves into since the Wii U, how would releasing a box similar to a PlayStation or an Xbox in terms of both hardware and software — years after those two machines have cemented themselves as market leaders, no less — do the company any favors?

As the conversation once again becomes inevitable now that NX is in the air, I think folks pining for Nintendo to start catering to third parties are in for another big disappointment. Both Iwata and Kimishima have clearly stated that the platform will be "something new"; so third-party warriors might as well get ready for one of those spooky ol' boogey-man "gimmicks," which are always a third-party hurdle. And Iwata clearly emphasized the NX platform's focus on consolidating Nintendo's first-party development from two platforms into a single (or at least significantly more unified) pipeline. Personally, I think that's absolutely the way to go.

In 2015, Nintendo published 38 titles across the Wii U, 3DS, and their respective eShops. That's three games per month. If a number close to that is funneled onto one platform and bolstered by indies, classics, and the occasional Japanese third-party title, I think we're talking about an incredibly substantial software library. Nintendo wants to be able, in the worst-case scenario, to float a distinct platform entirely on its own. Just as was the case with the Wii (you know, that non-sequitur console that sold over 100 million units) if the install base is there — a base theoretically driven by a steady stream of Nintendo content — the third parties will sniff out the money and show up. That's what they do.

@VelvetElvis: Not only that but truthfully, Nintendo DOES have good third party support in the HANDHELD department. Its just the HOME consoles that are treated the opposite.

Look at every handheld device that Nintendo has made as of now (besides Virtual Boy for obvious reasons) and you'll see that Third Parties are really big in all of them. I can't recall when I have not seen a handheld with least third party support one bit. Heck, even the Dsi Ware had support.

Then there's that problem that even if Nintendo does make their system powerful, Its most likely going to end up like the Vita where the thing is too damn expensive and well nobody is going to go for something like that.

@DarthNocturnal: Honestly, it really comes down to First Party vs Third Party. You have these IPs from Nintendo that are guaranteed to sell like hotcakes, whereas if you look at third parties, its a mere gamble and while this doesn't happen often, it does come with a price in mind and that price can be something like......oh idk, SFV?

@DarthNocturnal, it comes down to personal taste, but I really jell with that Nintendo bubble. I'm not too interested in what the other platform holders have to offer, minus the occasional oddball like the Souls series, Scalebound, or No Man's Sky.

That said, I think that (in theory) you get some of that parity if third parties naturally jump on board simply due to the platform's earning potential (a la Wii). I mentioned that the worst-case scenario (which Nintendo is smartly prepping for) is that Nintendo can float their platform ecosystem entirely solo; the best-case scenario is that you have a platform with a whole lot of Nintendo content, indies, classics, Japanese third parties, and Western third parties drawn in by the install base (more so than Nintendo's efforts to cater or pander). I think that's the ideal that they're shooting for with NX.

@Socar, and that's true, too. Imagine if all (or even some) of those handheld releases had been accessible to console owners during the Wii U and 3DS years, and what sort of effect that would've had on the Wii U's public perception and sales figures.

@DarthNocturnal: The only genre that Nintendo doesn't do a lot of is RPGs. Other than that, they DO what others do.

Monster Hunter = Xenoblade Chronicles
Street Fighter = Pokken Tournament
Sports games = Wii Sports
and so on.

Its like you said though, it could be for better or for worse.

@Socar:
1. Monster Hunter is more of a mix of Xenoblade and Pokemon
2. Pokken Tournament is more of a Tekken-style game. It was even developed by Namco Bandai as a Tekken / Pokemon crossover.
3. Surprised you didn't put the Mario Sports franchise here.

Yes please! After all, Fire Emblem is catching on in the west, and Xenoblade seems to have a decent sized following. Perhaps we could get some characters from those IP alongside some Zelda characters in Soulcalibur VI? Just a thought.

I think I'd compare MH to Easy Dark Souls boss rush Edition.
And Pokken more like Naruto Shippu Storm.

Ninty's biggest problem this gen imo was producing games that actually feel big rather than from which genre they are, 2d platformers and mini-games collections are fine but aside from Xenoblade which I'm not hugely keen on and 10+ year old Zelda games everything feels confined and linear, even the Lego games feel bigger than the mast majority Ninty games that have come out on the Wii U.

You can't really blame gamers for a lack of intrest in Ninty games/Wii U when it feels like a step backwards from the company that wowed people with 3d games like OOT and Mario 64 to being miles behind the likes of 3rd party offering such as GTA and Minecraft.

@jump: What do you mean by big? As in Open worlds or big as in lack of AAA games that Sony and Microsoft have? If that is so, then I don't think I can agree with you there since even last gen also lacked AAA games from Nintendo with only a few of them standing out.

@DarthNocturnal: I don't think Star Fox being developed by Factor 5 would have made any huge difference in development since Miyamoto-san was still into focusing a game that makes use of the gamepad.

3D Land actually felt unique. Thing about it was that it didn't have more levels. Honestly, I think you're blaming him too much.

And Sticker Star wasn't his doing either. He simply made a suggestion that's it.

The Wii had more big feeling games than the Wii U, the Operation Rainfall trio, Prime 3, 2 new Zeldas etc and I struggle to think past the Zelda remakes on the Wii U.

Despite Platinum being behind Star Fox Zero I'd be happy for anyone else but especially Factor 5 making Zero instead, the controls don't bother me it's just silly design decisions like an inaccurate cursor, no map, gimmick vehicles that ruins it for me where as I still go back and play Rogue Squadron.

Well considering Wii U's current success, it might be a good thing we didn't get as many of those types of games. And tbh, I don't think any game (barring some 3rd party exclusivity that would never happen because the franchises are too big) would've made Wii U much of a success.

I actually entirely disagree about bigness. Having a game that is large is far from being some inherently good thing and have started to become overused. And tbh, more often than not it's practically an excuse to throw away good game and level design, which almost always leads to a worse video game. Also I don't need more massive games for me to never be able to fully experience. NSMBWii and Mario Kart Wii were not huge games but made more money than any of us ever will. And more often than not the continuations of main series worked out how they should have (even 3D World, a game I was really worried about before release). I think the only problem in that regard is that Nintendo realized after a while that putting main versions of Animal Crossing or Metroid weren't going to do anything but make those franchises sell less, so they just weren't gonna put them on the console.

And even stuff like Pokken I don't think would've done any better had it been some RPG, as they were never gonna make an actual great, epic RPG after the complete lie that was Pokemon Colosseum, telling people it was remotely darker, **** off Nintendo Power. ....sorry just reminded of that...

of course the real issue is that there were no 3rd party games after a bit, which would've been a great contrast to Nintendo's games and both, if promoted right, would help each other in that regard imo. But even ignoring botched marketing and ideas from both Nintendo and 3rd parties, it seems like stores were sabotaging any attempt to actually sell M rated Wii U games, so at some point I question how any of this was supposed to work in the first place if the places where you buy games don't want you to buy the games.

@jump: Um....those two Zelda games were also "linear" as you said.

Again, there's only few of them even in the past. Look at DS. It has a lot of those linear games that you have mentioned. There aren't that many big games out there.

@kkslider5552000: I wouln't say it's over used if Ninty aren't doing it all and let's face it, they are probably not doing it because they are cheap rather than they are worried about level design. Don't get me wrong 3D World, Captain Toad, Tropical Freeze are fantastic games but I have literally seen kids be more impressed with the scale of the Lego games which have banged out 2-3 times a year, it's even getting to the point where Nintendo are now turning 3d franchises like ChibiRobo into 2d platformers.

SPOILERS FOR JOURNEY AHEAD!
I kind of feel as if the video game industry lacks enough respect for linearity in game design. Although open-ended games can still be amazing, not enough game designers respect the idea of a game being linear for the benefit of the game. Linearity allows designers to focus on making one route truly stellar, rather than making a million routes that are just okay. Journey is the perfect example of this. The game has very little deviation from the set path of the Journey, which plays in the game's favor, as you experience all of the beauty of the Journey, from the joy of the sand-surfing scene to, the fear of the underground, to the somberness of the mountain climb.

Whilst they were linear they weren't confined, well Skyward Sword was to a degree and it got slated for it.

If Nintendo were looking at the DS for it's inspiration for the Wii U then no wonder it flopped.

Forget linear, open world and AAA and let me put it another way. Nintendo are now simplifying all of their games which one of the results are the games are smaller in scale but by doing so become less relevant to the modern gamers who are use to big to the point even a mid-tier budget game from 3rd parties are ALOT bigger than what Ninty are putting out there.

UNDERTALE SPOILERS AHEAD! PROCEED WITH CAUTION!
Alphys' conflicts in Undertale weren't very well resolved. Allow me to go over them one by one:
Alphys' manipulation of the events in Hotland:
This particular conflict wasn't resolved at all. Everyone just sort of brushes aside how Frisk's adventures in Hotland were an elaborate game for Alphys so she could feel important to Frisk's journey.
Alphys' feelings for Undyne:
This particular conflict was actually resolved pretty well. Alphys makes a commitment to better herself for the sake of Undyne and everyone else she cares about. It's not a perfectly happy ending, and that's why it's a good resolution to her character arc.
Alphys and the True Lab:
If I were behind Undertale, here's how I would overhaul this segment of the game:
1. This would not be part of Alphys' story. Instead, the experiments would have been conducted by the late W.D. Gaster, who quit afterward, as he couldn't live with the guilt.
2. This part of the game would be an Easter egg you unlock after the fight with Asriel.

Also, I kind of like the new Pokemon Water starter Popplio. Not my favorite, but it's grown on me.

I like Popplio. I don't get the hate for it I'm seeing around. I'm more surprised the boring owl is getting the attention. I guess dual type makes up for it being Hoothoot 2.

To be fair:
Litten = Litleo 2
Popplio = Seal 2

The difference being that Rowlet doesn't have the same type as Hoothoot. I'll be getting all 3 anyways