@LUIGITORNADO If that's true, they'd have done it already instead of delaying it for so long. Getting their project 100% financially covered in exchange for exclusivity probably sounds like a very nice wind-fall for a small asking price to Ubisoft, especially given how long they've delayed it up to this point, so I don't see why they wouldn't take that bait. Especially since the NX gaining better sales momentum off of one of their titles would only help them in the long run, financially, because it opens the door for other games from Ubisoft being more readily accepted.
There's also the fact that, thanks to the GC version, this game already has a pre-established Nintendo audience, unlike Bayonetta 2.
As for profit potential arguments behind it going multiplat instead, well, Ubisoft already has other multiplats that they can rely upon for profit; having one single game become exclusive to the NX wouldn't adversely affect their future so long as they're making other multiplats, so it's an acceptable risk, especially if they don't have to spend a cent on getting it made.
So really, there's good reasons why Ubisoft would take this deal.
@Einherjar There's a difference here; if what the report's saying is true, and Nintendo is FULLY FUNDING this like they did Bayonetta 2, then Ubisoft would be legally incapable of breaking contract on it.
@LegendOfPokemon That reminds me of something... Pandora's Tower is on the Eshop now. Did the digital version ever get a work-around for that freezing glitch in the latter half of the game? I never got to finish it because of that, and it's very upsetting...
They're obviously going to spend some time talking about TP HD, but what I want most is a solid release date for both Star Fox and Zelda U. I'm expecting a summer release this year for Zelda U, at the latest.
@Dankykong Nah, not even the Wii audience is on mobile, these days. The Wii audience would sit down for a while and play something for a long longer than the average phone gamer's Angry Birds session, even with games as casual as Wii Sports.XD
Plus, can you imagine the extra data charges that phone gamers would have to put up with if they played a Nintendo game on their phone that required online to get any sort of replay value out of it, like Mario Kart likely would?
And that's not even mentioning battery drain.
Yeah, phone gamers aren't going to be Nintendo's audience any year soon, and Wii gamers have either moved on to something less intense [like puzzle games on phones], upgraded to a different system, or stopped gaming altogether.
Nintendo's core audience is not phone gamers. Only an idiot who knows nothing about Nintendo and thinks a slap-dash console game on phones would be an instant seller, would say otherwise.
You can't just plop a big brand like MK onto phones and call it good; phone gamers don't spend the kind of time that a typical Mario Kart gamer would on games like that. They'd be left in the dust in no time just trying to get a grip on the controls and tracks, especially on a day outside where you're walking around and your attention is divided.
No, phone games aren't going to be Nintendo's main audience any year soon. They'll be a nice profit source for games like Pokemon Go and Miitomo, but Nintendo will never look to phones as their main source of profits. Analysts need to put away their crystal balls and shut their flapping lips.XD
I'm actually okay with this; I hate having one of my choices in something as crucial to the game as that being blocked off by a negative consequence that I don't want to suffer through despite wanting the class.
Of course, it helps that I can get all the classes, eventually, including the ones I skip the first time, but I'd hate having to skip on a class that's more useful early on because of a bad end attached to it.
@LegendOfPokemon Pfft, no. The theme park deal alone is going to make them so much cash that they'll be able to make another console regardless of how the NX does.
I wish the Wii U version had that "Switch between various warriors" function. There would have been so many other missions that I could have made it through with less hassle with that feature.XD
Also, the "my fairy" stuff looks like a blast, and I wish that was cross-version content as well...
Oooo, that's kinda neat! Not sure I'm a fan of the control method being the same as the rocket barrel sections from DKTF, but hey, if you want a challenge then that's one way to get it in a shooter like this. I'll look into it once it launches, if I've got the spare cash.^_^ Certainly better than anything EA has done for us lately...
@electrolite77
"I really should have stopped reading there. I mistakenly thought this could be a serious discussion."
This coming from the guy who tried using the rehash argument?
I'm sorry, but no. At this point you're practically taking the words right out of my mouth.
Before EA can even think of making big money with their sports titles on the NX, they've got to present games that would make Nintendo gamers want to support them.
FIFA isn't going to cut it.
They need to present games that will generate a huge positive critical reception, games that will boost interest in both the games and the system itself, before they can expect lesser-known or less popular titles to gain any sort of ground, let alone anything that doesn't match the audience they've been screwing over for the past few gens.
The same goes for Capcom; Zack and Wiki had almost no chance of getting anyone's attention on Wii U when Capcom's been basically shoving their middle finger at everyone, not just Wii U owners, lately.
They'd have to come up with something much better than that to regain attention.
Point blank: No one is going to buy an NX for the next FIFA roster upgrade.
Anyone thinking that's the kinds of games it'll take for EA to matter on NX, is delusional to the point of laughable.
Full stop.
@Gorlokk Yeah, but this article is coming from a two-bit dev that's done, like, ONE successful game on an X-Box console and is suddenly getting a big head, as if he's entitled to an early dev kit when they may be in short supply and reserved for bigger, more important names until the system is officially announced.
He just sounds salty that he's not getting preferential treatment, despite never having done anything for Nintendo to deserve it. Yacht Club Games deserves a dev kit before this guy, honestly. We really shouldn't be taking his side on this one, Wii U or no Wii U.[which, honestly, isn't that big a point, considering Wii U is why there are so many more indies with Nintendo now in the first place]
This guy sounds so salty and thirsty that it's actually kinda embarrassing. I mean, what has this guy done for Nintendo that makes him think he's entitled to early dev kits, which are probably in short supply as it is?
@electrolite77
Oh please. Don't start telling me not to go there when I was just calling you out on the statement you started with, which basically amounted to the same "ner, ner".
The "numbers" are the least important thing when compared to its critical reception from fans.
You don't have to purchase a game to recognize whether or not it's great and deserves praise, and even those that haven't gotten Bay 2 on Wii U frequently recommend it.
But if you really want to play the numbers game, less than 5% of the total available console base [PS3 and 360] for the first game even gave the first Bayonetta game the time of day.
Hell, more than a few just called it "discount Devil May Cry" and passed it off as worthless.
That was not the case with Bay 2 on Wii U, and her popularity has only grown with her inclusion in Smash.
It's a fact at this point that Nintendo gamers value Bayonetta as a franchise much more than you're giving credit for, and that on the whole, they're willing to recommend a game so long as it's done right, even if they're wary of third parties and won't always buy them right off.
But all of that is really beside the point; EA's got a lot more to prove to Nintendo gamers than Platinum does at this point.
I fully agree with the article on this one; it isn't business smart of EA to try relying on easy ports with the NX.
Not if they want to launch into big sales from the get-go with the system.
The attach rate for Bay 2 compared to that of the PS3 and 360 is miles better, even below that 1M mark. The reason it didn't sell better is because of console war soldiers and their loyalties. Many of them weren't so much fans of Bayonetta as they were fans of the systems Bayonetta appeared on, which was evident by the way they automatically assumed it would be a sucky game just because it was on Wii U instead of on their systems of choice. I'm fairly confident that, at this point, there's more love for Bayonetta amongst Nintendo fans than anywhere else. It's that confidence and fan appreciation that will make future games starring her appearing on Nintendo systems all the more likely.
"There was really nothing wrong with the quality of Mass Effect 3. They just released a compilation on another system so that shouldn't stop your enjoyment of Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U."
That's dumb and you know it.
It didn't release with all of its DLC content, for one, and the comic book used at the beginning doesn't convey the same sense of bonds and intimacy that playing through the original two and carrying over your data does, plus it made figuring out certain scenarios to enable certain outcomes in the storyline much more complicated.
It was an inferior port.
Full stop.
Don't even TRY to defend it.
"Dare I say it benefited EA when the Wii U failed because they didn't have to invest resources in a third platform and split their market?"
You can dare as much as you like, but it'd be stupid to believe it.
It wouldn't be splitting their market, it would be growing it.
The loyalists are so used to EA by now that they'd come back with just a little bit of catering, but it takes more than that to win over a new fanbase on a new console.
There shouldn't be an excuse for not trying harder.
"Here's the thing. If you want EA to be the hardware mover for the NX then you need to pay them to invest the resources in it and make sure they make a profit. EA isn't a charity and they shouldn't be expected to be one."
Here's the thing; even a charity knows that you shouldn't try giving away tank tops to Eskimos, let alone tank tops with holes in them.
Nintendo's no more a charity than EA is, and EA should be held responsible for the mistakes in their own games.
Nintendo has every right to demand better of EA, just as Nintendo's fans, and hell even EA's own fans, do.
EA is no more of a super special snowflake than Nintendo; they need to pull their own weight by putting out the right games, the right way, and if they can't do that then they shouldn't claim to be a AAA that carries consoles.
"Separate quote just because I think this attitude ignores the difficulties of supporting a new platform. Certainly I think the EA employees worked as hard as they could to deliver the best experience they could on these games. If you choose not to buy them, that's fine but there's no need for a boycott because you think a game should be better. It's that kind of thinking that will make EA think twice about supporting Nintendo in the future."
See, here's the thing about that; making your own games with CONTENT PARITY should be a priority that development difficulties shouldn't be holding back.
ESPECIALLY ON LAST GEN PORTS.
I'm not ignoring anything on this issue; I'm calling it how it is.
EA has made a ton of really stupid mistakes that no amount of "development difficulties" covers for.
Quit excusing them. They did not "try their best".
If they had, the ports of last gen games would have been equal in content, at the very least.
At best, they would have foregone ME3 and put out the collection for all consoles at once, instead.
THAT would have been a best effort, a CONSOLE SELLING effort, an effort that shows EA actually gave a damn about making their name KNOWN AND WELL BOUGHT on the Wii U.
They didn't do that.
And if they can't do it on the NX, THEY DESERVE TO FAIL.
Nintendo gamers shouldn't have to accept mediocrity in multiplats from EA just because EA's defenders and sheeple do so on every other console.
It's a frankly stupid expectation to make of any new fanbase that you're trying to appeal to and make money off of.
" Long spiel about dev budgets
What you are asking is impossible."
No, it really isn't, because times have changed, and asking a well-known and very rich publisher to DO THEIR OWN GAMES THE RIGHT WAY REGARDLESS OF SYSTEM, in a time when all systems are HD, isn't impossible.
Especially now, if the NX does turn out to be built similarly enough to others for EA to put their games on it with literally no effort.
Hell, last gen with the Wii U, the developers behind Need for Speed: Most Wanted put out a quote stating specifically that they were able to get their PC port of the game running on the Wii U, quote, "with the flick of a switch".
Now, keep in mind, this was near the beginning of the console's life span, when the system was still supposedly "harder" to develop for.
Things have changed DRASTICALLY since then; people have figured the system out, and there is no longer any excuse for not including content that other versions also get.
This holds doubly true for the NX, since it is basically guaranteed to be more powerful than the Wii U.
If EA isn't willing to put out their games in a form that shows they are trying their best to make their games system sellers, then they shouldn't be trying to sell on Wii U.
There are other third parties out there that will try much harder than EA, so if EA can't step up, they should step off.
And they should take their apologists with them.
@cleveland124
You'd be wrong, because I love the Mass Effect series to death, and I expect EA to do better.
The amount of players they already have supporting their livelihood on other consoles doesn't change the fact that they are one of the parties responsible, alongside the rest of the big name AAA's and Nintendo themselves, for influencing public perception of the quality of the games library on the Wii U, and the same will go for the NX once its released, if EA does jump in and try anything.
For the sake of their own reputation [which directly influences their own sales] if nothing else, they NEED to stop making the same mistakes on Nintendo consoles, because they CAN drive sales when they do things right.
And when they do things wrong, they contribute to the hardware failing to sell.
It's in EA's best interest to be a hardware unit mover, because that equates to more players playing their games across more consoles than before, meaning they get to continue profiting bigger and bigger with each new success.
They shouldn't use the past as an excuse; if they can make other systems sell off of their games, they could do the same with Nintendo.
As for the quality of EA's beginning games on other systems?
Just because "The first Madden is ALWAYS gimped and other userbases buy it anyways." doesn't mean that Nintendo fans should be the same kinds of mindless sheep that support that kind of BS.
Let the people who are used to it continue to fall for it; it isn't wrong to expect better of EA before sales are given.
Just like people are going to expect better of Nintendo, before the NX is given sales.
Players on other consoles are just as guilty of focusing on the same games over and over every single gen.
Or have you ignored CoD's place atop charts?
As for games that deserve sales not getting them from the fanbase, it was the same thing back when Bayonetta 1 launched as well; they had close to a hundred million consumers to sell that game to between the PS3 and 360.
It sold less than 3M between them.
That's a sad and sorry attach rate that made none of the console makers want to support a sequel.
Except for Nintendo, who swooped in and gave them 100% of the funds needed to make it a reality when no one else wanted to.
@Ichiban No we wouldn't, because in case you hadn't noticed, many Nintendo gamers these days are also multi-console owners who have played Bayonetta on PS3 or 360, and were excited by the prospect of her game hitting the Wii U primarily because they were fans of the first. On a side note, I'd be giddy as all heck to see DMC hit the NX.
@cleveland124 It's their job to make games that will sell consoles, because its those consoles that will provide them with their livelihood in the gaming industry. It's ridiculous to absolve them of all blame when it's the low quality of their games that makes people not want a system, especially when third parties are KNOWN for making games that drive console sales. And to the latter point, you're kidding right? The first Madden should NOT BE GIMPED. The first FIFA should NOT BE GIMPED. I cannot believe you're actually trying to use that as an excuse. If that's EA's norm, then EA needs to BREAK THAT NORM WITH THE NX. Full stop, no exceptions, no excuses.
@arnoldlayne83 That doesn't hold up as an excuse when the XBone started out with similarly low sales yet third parties still made games for it in scores. Similarly, the differences in architecture didn't make them abandon the PS3 despite the higher resource requirements.
Either way you slice it, third parties didn't have a valid excuse for not doing their own games better on Wii U.
@cleveland124 I won't disagree with terrible marketing, but I don't believe for an instant that the Wii U's architecture was so horribly different and difficult to work with, that EA, with all of its experienced developers and the time they had, couldn't make ports of LAST GEN GAMES games the right way on Wii U if they had actually put serious effort into it.
And it's foolish to claim that those bad ports from various developers had no hand in lowering Wii U sales; who's going to go out for Black Ops 2 on Wii U, when it didn't even get its own DLC content, let alone all the patches?
Who was going to choose ME3 over the Trilogy that hit other consoles?
And need I even mention FIFA or Sniper Elite V2?
These were not "first games in a series" that EA was doing; these were ports that should have been worked on better, or not made at all and replaced with something worth-while.
I'm sorry, but only a blind apologist is going to absolve third parties of all responsibility for the Wii U's poor sales during its first year.
If third parties drive console sales with their software, as so many fans of third parties claim, then it's obvious that they can also have the reverse effect when the games they bring to a new console are designed poorly.
No one was going to go out to get a port of a last gen game, especially with content missing and poor optimization, on a whole new $300+ system.
I'm not over-estimating anything; I'm calling it as it is.
EA sucked during year 1 of Wii U development, and that's something they could have avoided.
Other developers could do it, and many of them have less staff and funding than EA.
Don't pin blame on Nintendo for everything EA did wrong.
Put credit where it's due, regardless of who it belongs to.
@Mr_Diabolical Speak for yourself; most Nintendo players love third parties when said third parties do their games right.
Have you not seen how much Nintendo gamers love Bayonetta, despite her not originally starting out on Nintendo consoles?
They're VERY open-minded; even if they don't sell crap-tons, they still get lots of love and verbal support from the Nintendo fanbase when those third parties do their thing the right way.
The reason it seems like they don't like third parties in the here and now, is because so many third parties screwed up their chance to appeal to core Nintendo gamers on the Wii U by releasing crap ports, which by extension made a lot of Nintendo gamers lose faith in third parties in general.
I shouldn't even need to mention how they basically abandoned Nintendo during the Wii and GC eras, far as AAA multiplats go.
@Dezzy It wouldn't guarantee proper optimization or content parity, though. As the article says, we need more than lazy ports. We need EFFORT from third parties, or it's just going to be another bubble-burster. AAA third parties did more harm than good to the Wii U in the early run with such titles; the NX needs to avoid that kind of self-defeatist line-up.
Three questions come to mind concerning the poe lantern: #1 does it replace the original lantern once acquired? #2 does it require fuel? #3 does it light up the area as well as the original lantern?
I'm hoping the answers are yes - no - yes, in that order. XD
@Oscarsome No, Nintendo needs other third parties. EA is just one, and given the things they tried to demand of Nintendo with the Wii U, I don't think Nintendo "needs" them at all.
Others, yes. But EA can go rot in a hole if they can't make content parity a goal for all NX games.
@Technosphile I would hate to see Nintendo sell out to raving sports fans instead of trying to provide something different, regardless of the money. Besides, I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that sports fans equate Nintendo to kiddy stuff at this point, and wouldn't buy an NX for those games even if they did arrive on it.
What Nintendo needs is exciting exclusives from third parties alongside the newest of multiplats. Not FIFA without content parity and sports apps no one is going to use when they've got a TV or computer.
@liveswired "Didn't help"?
At that point, Origin was trash that would have done more to harm than help. Let's not even kid ourselves on that point; EA wanted to basically take over all of Nintendo's online-related aspects, and Origin would have been the first step towards that.
It's a good thing that Nintendo didn't allow Origin.
As to indies, even though they weren't really in favor of them back on the Wii as much as they are now on the Wii U, that's not an indication that they turned to them in lieu of AAA third parties, because third parties did more harm than good to the Wii U in the early run in the first place.
Nintendo put more focus on indies because they were the better choice for Wii U, after third parties messed up so bad that no one wanted to get a Wii U for them despite the fact that they've been proven to be capable of carrying systems through their work on PS3 and 360.
The Wii was just the starting point for indies and Nintendo, and given how much shovelware Nintendo has had to deal with from outside parties, it's obvious they'd be against garage developers at first.
@IceClimbers Hence why exclusives can balance that gap. Get enough exclusives that core gamers want, alongside the latest multiplats, and people might just go to the NX for both.
Sadly, I think it'll take better partners than EA and their lousy sports titles to make that happen.
@liveswired
"EA aided Nintendo greatly in the Nintendo Network infrastructure, before their unprecedented relationship collapsed. We all forget that Nintendo Network wasn't finished until well after launch, prior to this Nintendo couldn't support DLC or patches, EA and all 3rd parties were working with incomplete and ever changing dev kits that weren't finalised until shortly before launch day."
I sincerely doubt EA had ANYTHING to do with Nintendo's internal development of the Wii U.
In fact, there was one point where Nintendo forcefully had to halt EA because they wanted Origin to be a major part of the console.
Let's face facts here; Nintendo did a lot wrong with the Wii U, especially in advertising.
But they are not the core parties responsible for the mistakes made in third party games.
Plenty of other developers made excellent games on it without all the issues that the AAA's were whining about, and indies haven't hated Nintendo for a long while now because Nintendo stepped up with them even before the AAA's started leaving the system, because they gave them a home on Wii that was only destined to expand as things went onto the Wii U.
Nintendo courted indies because indies have proven their value, not because the AAA third parties ditched them for more familiar architecture.
Nintendo doesn't have any sucking up to do; They just need to get their act together and design/advertise the NX far better than they did the Wii U.
Third parties, however, have lost the majority of their trust from Nintendo gamers, and that is entirely due to their own mistakes when creating and delivering old ports instead of new games and exclusives.
And if they want the money that comes with regaining those fans, which will help soften the blow of their ever-increasing development costs across all consoles, they need to make a better commitment to the NX than they did with the Wii U.
Nintendo shouldn't have to grease their greedy palms just to get content parity.
That should be a business-ethical standard.
Okay, this part right here pisses me off if it's true:
"Traditionally, Nintendo doesn't bundle EA games with its consoles - unlike Microsoft and Sony. According to sources within EA, this is actually seen as something of an insult, and the company will be asking Nintendo to consider shipping NX consoles with leading EA Sports titles, such as FIFA and Madden. While this might smack of arrogance, it's a tactic which has worked well on rival hardware, so there's definitely logic to EA's reasoning."
So, you're upset that Nintendo didn't feature your games in hardware bundles?
Gee, EA, I wonder why they would ever do that? I mean, it's not like you've ever delivered the tail end game of one of your game trilogies, with missing DLC content, while simultaneously giving every other console the full trilogy and content parity.
Oh wait....
EA needs to get its head out of its arrogant ass; if they want Nintendo fans to start taking them seriously, then they need to start delivering something other than sports titles, in complete forms, WITH THEIR OWN ADVERTISEMENT DOLLARS. Stop trying to rely on Nintendo to foot every bill you've got on their console and start making games that are going to attract Nintendo fans, instead of relying on SPORTS AND DUDE BROS to sell yourself on the NX.
@gatorboi352 I put Majora's Mask, or heck even Wind Waker, above TP in quality, honestly. Compared to even the Great Sea, which had items, enemies, and events popping up left and right as you traveled, TP's vast, open fields just felt uninspired and bland, for the most part. There was a bit of horseback combat here and there, but outside of that, all you did was ride through those areas, stopping occasionally to catch a bug or to investigate a side area away from your steed.
The overworlds in WW and Majora just felt much more fleshed-out and event-filled.
@blackbox64 I just want to point out, that the entire concept of gens for home consoles started out focused around the NES. If anything, it's Sony and Microsoft that release mid-gen each time.
Release timing has nothing to do with why the Wii U didn't sell. That's down to marketing, system features, and lack of AAA multiplats.
@MajinCubyan I just put up the first three that came to mind, then put up a ball-park figure of the others rather than listing all the names. Got me through it a lot quicker.
@ZAZX Thanks for that; I didn't really realize how important FoV was in games until I saw that gif showcasing the various amounts of it, from 55 all the way up to 200.
If it's an enhanced version that combines all the features of both the 3DS and Wii U version all in one, I'm SOLD. I've been wanting to play Smash Run in HD for SO LONG, you have no effing clue.
I wish this was satire, because I find it hard to believe that anyone sane could possibly be attempting to preemptively blame Nintendo for the possible failure of VR headsets.
If VR fails, it won't be in any part due to Nintendo's Virtual Boy. It will be because it's an overhyped gimmick.
"It doesn't affect you at all if they give the option to play as a female Link. Keep playing as the boy. You keep talking about this as if boy Link will go away, even though the argument is that players want the option to choose Link's gender. One day you're going to roll-out of bed and realize how silly it is to be upset over such a thing."
It isn't silly; it's perfectly logical to be upset when someone suggests that a character that has long ago transcended being a "Mass Effect Avatar" should be turned into an androgynous and easily-replaced doll with no real impact or importance to the story. The moment you give the player a choice in this particular matter, that's the same as saying that Link, as an established character, doesn't matter at all. And that's not true, because Link is a male character, and he matters as an established persona in the series.
"And if your entire argument hinges on the use of "hero" instead of "heroine.." well...women are often called heroes in literature. And if all Links have the "spirit" of the hero, all that really means is that the original hero was a male >_>"
That entire argument falls under the "If blank said it then it has to be true!" trope. Novelists and literature are just as prone to inaccuracies as any other medium, and the constant misuse of the term Hero is a perfect example of this. Link is a hero, his spirit and form have always been, and should always be, male, because he is an established character. We should not strip him of that part of his identity in order to pander to gender politics.
"Listen. Uptight feminists get under my skin to. I don't listen to them. I don't know what they're arguing for or against. They probably would rather want a Zelda game ONLY staring a female protagonist, and that's crazy."
Agreed; Link should always be there in some capacity. Even as just a friend in the village while the player chooses to play as a different character would be fine, but Link should always be there. He's an established part of this series and shouldn't be treated as a throw-away asset that can be freely re-created without some sort of boundaries.
"Ever hear about that story of the father who reprogrammed Donkey Kong to allow his daughter to play as Pauline and rescue Mario instead? He didn't do that because he's some sort of fem-nazi, he did it for his daughter, so she would be more interested in playing. He wanted to share gaming with her; and fact is, gaming is dominated by male characters, and even though some women don't mind that, there is an opportunity to reach a broader audience by making more relate-able characters, and at a basic level we relate to what we are: boy, girl. Giving players the option to play as a female Link could very well make some little girl interested in Zelda, create new fans. Is that so bad? Is it really THAT bad that some Zelda-fan father out there might have a better chance to share Zelda with his daughter if they simply had the option to play as female Link? I don't want to go on a pulpit and preach how empowering it would be, but think of the alternative media for a little girl, and tell me that Zelda isn't better than that shit."
No offense, but that is a TERRIBLE example. The father/daughter story was about swapping roles, not swapping genders. It let her play as the Heroine of the game rather than the Hero, and in that context, it is NOTHING like what you're proposing, I.E., changing Link's entire gender around for the sake of gender politics pandering.
"It's clear that you feel connected to Link, that you've spent probably thousands of hours adventuring through him. No one is taking that away from you, all we want is for more people to love Zelda."
Proposing that you give anyone the opportunity to change Link into something he is not, I.E., a woman, IS taking something away. If you want more people to love the Zelda series, via gender roles, then encourage the use or creation of more playable females in Zelda games. NOT the replacement or degrading of an established male character.
"I hear you with wanting a game staring Zelda, but that's not excluded JUST because Nintendo decides to give players the option to play as a female Link.
I hope you can at least be open minded about what I said.
Less Anita Sarkeesian, more daughters."
And that's just it; allowing a traditionally male character to be rewritten as a gender-bendable androgynous avatar doll, degrades the character for the sake of pandering to the kind of "males mean less than females" mind-set that Anita frequently supports.
The reason I'm against this is not because I'm not open-minded; it's because I recognize how WRONG it is to completely rewrite a character into something they are not, for the sake of pandering to gender politics.
Link is a man. Let him STAY a man, and give us new options. We shouldn't allow players the choice to make Link inconsequential just because they want to play as a woman; that's disrespectful to the lore, its creators, and to Link as an established part of The Legend of Zelda.
I haven't had many issues with it since I sit relatively close to the screen as it is, but having it bigger would definitely be helpful. Know what would be even more helpful, though? A way of checking the descriptions of the effects that are on our gear pieces for both humans and skells. There are some buffs and stuff in there that I've had to search the internet for because the game doesn't outright tell me what they do. Also, the first Xenoblade had a function where if you got or inflicted something, you could press the + button to check out what it was and how it affected whoever had it. Why isn't that a thing here? Seriously?
It's an awesome game and these issues don't take it down from that 10 out of 10 I've already given it, but they would definitely be welcome improvements.
@jibaycay
That's just it; it's not making Link "better greater and more inclusive than ever" to completely transform him into someone he is not.
You think that's the case, but it would be just as disrespectful as gender-swapping Zelda for the sake of getting rid of the damsel in distress.
If you want Link to change, then encourage Nintendo to deepen his characterization like they did in Skyward Sword.
Show him laughing, crying, getting angry, growing emotionally.
Changing him into a woman for the sake of pandering to gender equality doesn't show respect to Link or the world he is a part of, and in particular it ignores the chance that Zelda and other female characters should be given to have a turn in the lime-light.
I'm not being aggressive for the sake of putting you down; I'm being aggressive because I'm sick and tired of gender politicians trying to screw up a series that would benefit from those kinds of politics leaving it alone and never coming back.
Link is just fine as he is.
If we really want to be inclusive of both genders in a Zelda game, the way to do that is NOT to go out of our way to let players gender-swap a traditionally and CANONICALLY male character.
The way to do that, is to let separate defined characters, which do NOT remove their opposite sex counterparts from the equation of their stories when selected by the player, have a turn at saving the world.
Linkle, Zelda, Malon, Midna, Lana, and so many other LoZ characters are available to revisit in later Zelda games in some shape or form, on top of new ladies that we haven't been introduced to yet.
Ignoring them for the sake of taking Male Link out of the story, to pander to extreme feministic ideals of gender equality, would do nothing more than insult the series, and [most of] its long-time fans who have been waiting to see an already-established female or a new female get her own shot at adventuring.
Gender-swapping Link is lazy and insulting, and if I seem irate to you, it's not because I'm ticked at you personally.
It's because I'm done being nice with people that have issues with the Spirit of the Hero staying the male that the lore has designed him to be time and time again.
Free Zelda, or another female who deserves a chance.
Don't delete Link for the sake of letting a gender-swap of him take his place.
I'm not dissecting or warping anything: Link has been regarded as the "spirit of the HERO" in multiple Zelda lore stories.
And in case you don't know BASIC ENGLISH, a HERO, denotes a MALE, and a HEROINE, denotes a FEMALE.
If anyone's acting like any sort of wank here, it's you for wanting to screw with lore when there are BETTER OPTIONS.
And yes, it IS pandering.
NEGATIVE pandering, to a bunch of DA fantards with female Link fantasies.
Maybe you don't understand this, but it doesn't matter if you do or not; completely replacing a male lead that has formed his own characterization and who has deep ties to the lore, with an androgynous DOLL that can freely be either sex, is NOT RESPECTFUL TO THE SERIES.
It's downright selfish to ask Link to become a woman when we've GOT women that deserve some lime-light.
This is not Mass Effect.
We need to quit pretending it is, and give an ACTUAL woman her shot, rather than a lazy gender swap.
In the Hyrule Warriors art collection book, Linkle is described as "a sister figure to Link."
In other words, there's a perfectly valid explanation as to why she looks like Link; by her own back-story, she was intended as a sibling.
And many siblings look similar to one-another, hence here as well.
She is NOT Link, nor was she ever intended to be.
And this is a GOOD thing, because that gives her her own lore, her own story, and makes her an exciting new prospect separate from Link that we might have a chance to play as in other games going forward, if Nintendo allows it.
As I've said in the past two posts; a gender-swapped Link is too lazy to be respectful to fans, and too nonsensical to be respectful to series lore.
We need Zelda, or Linkle, or a new female to play as.
We need to LEAVE! LINK! ALONE!
He's not just a name or an empty avatar anymore.
That was back when there wasn't enough power in the tech of consoles to do expression of character well enough for Link to have any.
Link is an icon, now. He's his own man.
NOT a blank slate that makes sense to gender-swap to please people who preach "equality" without giving Zelda or other female options their fair shot.
@MaverickHunterX They take it literally because the lore proves it is MEANT literally.
His spirit is as much a male as Link's body ends up being time and time again.
That's not a coincidence; that's because he's a HERO, not a HEROINE.
We have these terms for good reasons; to denote roles.
There is no reason to change Link into a heroine.
It's lazy and insulting to established lore, on top of being a far worse choice than giving Zelda her own chance to shine through a playable second story path campaign, or Linkle, or literally any newcomer woman with her own personality and background would be.
If you actually respect the series, you don't ask for a lazy gender-swap to pander to SJW standards of needing a female to play as in literally everything popular.
Leave Link's in-game fate out of the hands of the people who write those stupid fan-tard gender-swapped comic fanfiction fantasies.
Give us a real woman. Not a gender-swapped failure.
Comments 537
Re: Rumour: Beyond Good And Evil 2 Is Being Developed As A Nintendo NX Exclusive
@LUIGITORNADO If that's true, they'd have done it already instead of delaying it for so long.
Getting their project 100% financially covered in exchange for exclusivity probably sounds like a very nice wind-fall for a small asking price to Ubisoft, especially given how long they've delayed it up to this point, so I don't see why they wouldn't take that bait.
Especially since the NX gaining better sales momentum off of one of their titles would only help them in the long run, financially, because it opens the door for other games from Ubisoft being more readily accepted.
There's also the fact that, thanks to the GC version, this game already has a pre-established Nintendo audience, unlike Bayonetta 2.
As for profit potential arguments behind it going multiplat instead, well, Ubisoft already has other multiplats that they can rely upon for profit; having one single game become exclusive to the NX wouldn't adversely affect their future so long as they're making other multiplats, so it's an acceptable risk, especially if they don't have to spend a cent on getting it made.
So really, there's good reasons why Ubisoft would take this deal.
Re: Rumour: Beyond Good And Evil 2 Is Being Developed As A Nintendo NX Exclusive
@Einherjar There's a difference here; if what the report's saying is true, and Nintendo is FULLY FUNDING this like they did Bayonetta 2, then Ubisoft would be legally incapable of breaking contract on it.
Re: Talking Point: It's Catch-Up Time for Nintendo Direct, With North America and Europe Having Different Priorities
@LegendOfPokemon That reminds me of something...
Pandora's Tower is on the Eshop now.
Did the digital version ever get a work-around for that freezing glitch in the latter half of the game?
I never got to finish it because of that, and it's very upsetting...
Re: Talking Point: It's Catch-Up Time for Nintendo Direct, With North America and Europe Having Different Priorities
They're obviously going to spend some time talking about TP HD, but what I want most is a solid release date for both Star Fox and Zelda U.
I'm expecting a summer release this year for Zelda U, at the latest.
Re: Nintendo Will Do Well On Mobile Because That's Where Its Core Audience Is Now, Claims Analyst
@Dankykong Nah, not even the Wii audience is on mobile, these days.
The Wii audience would sit down for a while and play something for a long longer than the average phone gamer's Angry Birds session, even with games as casual as Wii Sports.XD
Plus, can you imagine the extra data charges that phone gamers would have to put up with if they played a Nintendo game on their phone that required online to get any sort of replay value out of it, like Mario Kart likely would?
And that's not even mentioning battery drain.
Yeah, phone gamers aren't going to be Nintendo's audience any year soon, and Wii gamers have either moved on to something less intense [like puzzle games on phones], upgraded to a different system, or stopped gaming altogether.
Re: Nintendo Will Do Well On Mobile Because That's Where Its Core Audience Is Now, Claims Analyst
@NintendoFan64
Precisely that picture.
Nintendo's core audience is not phone gamers.
Only an idiot who knows nothing about Nintendo and thinks a slap-dash console game on phones would be an instant seller, would say otherwise.
You can't just plop a big brand like MK onto phones and call it good; phone gamers don't spend the kind of time that a typical Mario Kart gamer would on games like that. They'd be left in the dust in no time just trying to get a grip on the controls and tracks, especially on a day outside where you're walking around and your attention is divided.
No, phone games aren't going to be Nintendo's main audience any year soon.
They'll be a nice profit source for games like Pokemon Go and Miitomo, but Nintendo will never look to phones as their main source of profits.
Analysts need to put away their crystal balls and shut their flapping lips.XD
Re: Ubisoft Discounts Galore in 2-Week North American eShop Sale
Is Watch Dogs worth that $15?
Re: Rumour: The European Version of Bravely Second Only Has "Good" Sidequest Endings
I'm actually okay with this; I hate having one of my choices in something as crucial to the game as that being blocked off by a negative consequence that I don't want to suffer through despite wanting the class.
Of course, it helps that I can get all the classes, eventually, including the ones I skip the first time, but I'd hate having to skip on a class that's more useful early on because of a bad end attached to it.
Re: Rumour Buster: Let's Clarify Some Issues With Those Recent Nintendo NX Predictions
@LegendOfPokemon
Pfft, no.
The theme park deal alone is going to make them so much cash that they'll be able to make another console regardless of how the NX does.
Re: Ubisoft Battling To Resist Hostile Takeover From Media Giant Vivendi
@kensredemption Pfft. Ubisoft is hardly the most important third party asset for Nintendo to rely upon.
Especially after debacles like Watch Dogs.
"There's always a bigger fish".
Nintendo can find others to supplement whatever they'd lose in yearly tower-climbing simulators from Ubisoft.XD
Re: Preview: Hyrule Warriors Legends Takes The Battle On The Road
I wish the Wii U version had that "Switch between various warriors" function. There would have been so many other missions that I could have made it through with less hassle with that feature.XD
Also, the "my fairy" stuff looks like a blast, and I wish that was cross-version content as well...
Re: Former Rare And Retro Staffer Rhys Lewis Is Bringing Procedurally Generated Shmup Action To The Wii U
Oooo, that's kinda neat!
Not sure I'm a fan of the control method being the same as the rocket barrel sections from DKTF, but hey, if you want a challenge then that's one way to get it in a shooter like this.
I'll look into it once it launches, if I've got the spare cash.^_^
Certainly better than anything EA has done for us lately...
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@electrolite77
"I really should have stopped reading there. I mistakenly thought this could be a serious discussion."
This coming from the guy who tried using the rehash argument?
I'm sorry, but no. At this point you're practically taking the words right out of my mouth.
Before EA can even think of making big money with their sports titles on the NX, they've got to present games that would make Nintendo gamers want to support them.
FIFA isn't going to cut it.
They need to present games that will generate a huge positive critical reception, games that will boost interest in both the games and the system itself, before they can expect lesser-known or less popular titles to gain any sort of ground, let alone anything that doesn't match the audience they've been screwing over for the past few gens.
The same goes for Capcom; Zack and Wiki had almost no chance of getting anyone's attention on Wii U when Capcom's been basically shoving their middle finger at everyone, not just Wii U owners, lately.
They'd have to come up with something much better than that to regain attention.
Point blank: No one is going to buy an NX for the next FIFA roster upgrade.
Anyone thinking that's the kinds of games it'll take for EA to matter on NX, is delusional to the point of laughable.
Full stop.
Re: Ori and the Blind Forest Director Criticises Secrecy and Lack of Access to NX Devkits
@Gorlokk Yeah, but this article is coming from a two-bit dev that's done, like, ONE successful game on an X-Box console and is suddenly getting a big head, as if he's entitled to an early dev kit when they may be in short supply and reserved for bigger, more important names until the system is officially announced.
He just sounds salty that he's not getting preferential treatment, despite never having done anything for Nintendo to deserve it.
Yacht Club Games deserves a dev kit before this guy, honestly.
We really shouldn't be taking his side on this one, Wii U or no Wii U.[which, honestly, isn't that big a point, considering Wii U is why there are so many more indies with Nintendo now in the first place]
Re: Ori and the Blind Forest Director Criticises Secrecy and Lack of Access to NX Devkits
This guy sounds so salty and thirsty that it's actually kinda embarrassing.
I mean, what has this guy done for Nintendo that makes him think he's entitled to early dev kits, which are probably in short supply as it is?
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@electrolite77
Oh please. Don't start telling me not to go there when I was just calling you out on the statement you started with, which basically amounted to the same "ner, ner".
The "numbers" are the least important thing when compared to its critical reception from fans.
You don't have to purchase a game to recognize whether or not it's great and deserves praise, and even those that haven't gotten Bay 2 on Wii U frequently recommend it.
But if you really want to play the numbers game, less than 5% of the total available console base [PS3 and 360] for the first game even gave the first Bayonetta game the time of day.
Hell, more than a few just called it "discount Devil May Cry" and passed it off as worthless.
That was not the case with Bay 2 on Wii U, and her popularity has only grown with her inclusion in Smash.
It's a fact at this point that Nintendo gamers value Bayonetta as a franchise much more than you're giving credit for, and that on the whole, they're willing to recommend a game so long as it's done right, even if they're wary of third parties and won't always buy them right off.
But all of that is really beside the point; EA's got a lot more to prove to Nintendo gamers than Platinum does at this point.
I fully agree with the article on this one; it isn't business smart of EA to try relying on easy ports with the NX.
Not if they want to launch into big sales from the get-go with the system.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@Mr_Diabolical
The attach rate for Bay 2 compared to that of the PS3 and 360 is miles better, even below that 1M mark.
The reason it didn't sell better is because of console war soldiers and their loyalties.
Many of them weren't so much fans of Bayonetta as they were fans of the systems Bayonetta appeared on, which was evident by the way they automatically assumed it would be a sucky game just because it was on Wii U instead of on their systems of choice.
I'm fairly confident that, at this point, there's more love for Bayonetta amongst Nintendo fans than anywhere else.
It's that confidence and fan appreciation that will make future games starring her appearing on Nintendo systems all the more likely.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@cleveland124
"There was really nothing wrong with the quality of Mass Effect 3. They just released a compilation on another system so that shouldn't stop your enjoyment of Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U."
That's dumb and you know it.
It didn't release with all of its DLC content, for one, and the comic book used at the beginning doesn't convey the same sense of bonds and intimacy that playing through the original two and carrying over your data does, plus it made figuring out certain scenarios to enable certain outcomes in the storyline much more complicated.
It was an inferior port.
Full stop.
Don't even TRY to defend it.
"Dare I say it benefited EA when the Wii U failed because they didn't have to invest resources in a third platform and split their market?"
You can dare as much as you like, but it'd be stupid to believe it.
It wouldn't be splitting their market, it would be growing it.
The loyalists are so used to EA by now that they'd come back with just a little bit of catering, but it takes more than that to win over a new fanbase on a new console.
There shouldn't be an excuse for not trying harder.
"Here's the thing. If you want EA to be the hardware mover for the NX then you need to pay them to invest the resources in it and make sure they make a profit. EA isn't a charity and they shouldn't be expected to be one."
Here's the thing; even a charity knows that you shouldn't try giving away tank tops to Eskimos, let alone tank tops with holes in them.
Nintendo's no more a charity than EA is, and EA should be held responsible for the mistakes in their own games.
Nintendo has every right to demand better of EA, just as Nintendo's fans, and hell even EA's own fans, do.
EA is no more of a super special snowflake than Nintendo; they need to pull their own weight by putting out the right games, the right way, and if they can't do that then they shouldn't claim to be a AAA that carries consoles.
"Separate quote just because I think this attitude ignores the difficulties of supporting a new platform. Certainly I think the EA employees worked as hard as they could to deliver the best experience they could on these games. If you choose not to buy them, that's fine but there's no need for a boycott because you think a game should be better. It's that kind of thinking that will make EA think twice about supporting Nintendo in the future."
See, here's the thing about that; making your own games with CONTENT PARITY should be a priority that development difficulties shouldn't be holding back.
ESPECIALLY ON LAST GEN PORTS.
I'm not ignoring anything on this issue; I'm calling it how it is.
EA has made a ton of really stupid mistakes that no amount of "development difficulties" covers for.
Quit excusing them. They did not "try their best".
If they had, the ports of last gen games would have been equal in content, at the very least.
At best, they would have foregone ME3 and put out the collection for all consoles at once, instead.
THAT would have been a best effort, a CONSOLE SELLING effort, an effort that shows EA actually gave a damn about making their name KNOWN AND WELL BOUGHT on the Wii U.
They didn't do that.
And if they can't do it on the NX, THEY DESERVE TO FAIL.
Nintendo gamers shouldn't have to accept mediocrity in multiplats from EA just because EA's defenders and sheeple do so on every other console.
It's a frankly stupid expectation to make of any new fanbase that you're trying to appeal to and make money off of.
" Long spiel about dev budgets
What you are asking is impossible."
No, it really isn't, because times have changed, and asking a well-known and very rich publisher to DO THEIR OWN GAMES THE RIGHT WAY REGARDLESS OF SYSTEM, in a time when all systems are HD, isn't impossible.
Especially now, if the NX does turn out to be built similarly enough to others for EA to put their games on it with literally no effort.
Hell, last gen with the Wii U, the developers behind Need for Speed: Most Wanted put out a quote stating specifically that they were able to get their PC port of the game running on the Wii U, quote, "with the flick of a switch".
Now, keep in mind, this was near the beginning of the console's life span, when the system was still supposedly "harder" to develop for.
Things have changed DRASTICALLY since then; people have figured the system out, and there is no longer any excuse for not including content that other versions also get.
This holds doubly true for the NX, since it is basically guaranteed to be more powerful than the Wii U.
If EA isn't willing to put out their games in a form that shows they are trying their best to make their games system sellers, then they shouldn't be trying to sell on Wii U.
There are other third parties out there that will try much harder than EA, so if EA can't step up, they should step off.
And they should take their apologists with them.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@cleveland124
You'd be wrong, because I love the Mass Effect series to death, and I expect EA to do better.
The amount of players they already have supporting their livelihood on other consoles doesn't change the fact that they are one of the parties responsible, alongside the rest of the big name AAA's and Nintendo themselves, for influencing public perception of the quality of the games library on the Wii U, and the same will go for the NX once its released, if EA does jump in and try anything.
For the sake of their own reputation [which directly influences their own sales] if nothing else, they NEED to stop making the same mistakes on Nintendo consoles, because they CAN drive sales when they do things right.
And when they do things wrong, they contribute to the hardware failing to sell.
It's in EA's best interest to be a hardware unit mover, because that equates to more players playing their games across more consoles than before, meaning they get to continue profiting bigger and bigger with each new success.
They shouldn't use the past as an excuse; if they can make other systems sell off of their games, they could do the same with Nintendo.
As for the quality of EA's beginning games on other systems?
Just because "The first Madden is ALWAYS gimped and other userbases buy it anyways." doesn't mean that Nintendo fans should be the same kinds of mindless sheep that support that kind of BS.
Let the people who are used to it continue to fall for it; it isn't wrong to expect better of EA before sales are given.
Just like people are going to expect better of Nintendo, before the NX is given sales.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@electrolite77 Wait, are you really trying to use the rehash argument?
Don't even go there.
https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/10599539_741015199299996_8107918946113821666_n.jpg?oh=6804b57876da9f2bbbc8eb2c7c142629&oe=577006E9
Players on other consoles are just as guilty of focusing on the same games over and over every single gen.
Or have you ignored CoD's place atop charts?
As for games that deserve sales not getting them from the fanbase, it was the same thing back when Bayonetta 1 launched as well; they had close to a hundred million consumers to sell that game to between the PS3 and 360.
It sold less than 3M between them.
That's a sad and sorry attach rate that made none of the console makers want to support a sequel.
Except for Nintendo, who swooped in and gave them 100% of the funds needed to make it a reality when no one else wanted to.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@Ichiban No we wouldn't, because in case you hadn't noticed, many Nintendo gamers these days are also multi-console owners who have played Bayonetta on PS3 or 360, and were excited by the prospect of her game hitting the Wii U primarily because they were fans of the first.
On a side note, I'd be giddy as all heck to see DMC hit the NX.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@cleveland124 It's their job to make games that will sell consoles, because its those consoles that will provide them with their livelihood in the gaming industry.
It's ridiculous to absolve them of all blame when it's the low quality of their games that makes people not want a system, especially when third parties are KNOWN for making games that drive console sales.
And to the latter point, you're kidding right?
The first Madden should NOT BE GIMPED.
The first FIFA should NOT BE GIMPED.
I cannot believe you're actually trying to use that as an excuse.
If that's EA's norm, then EA needs to BREAK THAT NORM WITH THE NX.
Full stop, no exceptions, no excuses.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@arnoldlayne83 That doesn't hold up as an excuse when the XBone started out with similarly low sales yet third parties still made games for it in scores.
Similarly, the differences in architecture didn't make them abandon the PS3 despite the higher resource requirements.
Either way you slice it, third parties didn't have a valid excuse for not doing their own games better on Wii U.
Re: Random: New 3DS Owner Replaces the C-Stick With a PSP Stick
He'd have been better off replacing it with another circle pad nub, TBH.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@cleveland124 I won't disagree with terrible marketing, but I don't believe for an instant that the Wii U's architecture was so horribly different and difficult to work with, that EA, with all of its experienced developers and the time they had, couldn't make ports of LAST GEN GAMES games the right way on Wii U if they had actually put serious effort into it.
And it's foolish to claim that those bad ports from various developers had no hand in lowering Wii U sales; who's going to go out for Black Ops 2 on Wii U, when it didn't even get its own DLC content, let alone all the patches?
Who was going to choose ME3 over the Trilogy that hit other consoles?
And need I even mention FIFA or Sniper Elite V2?
These were not "first games in a series" that EA was doing; these were ports that should have been worked on better, or not made at all and replaced with something worth-while.
I'm sorry, but only a blind apologist is going to absolve third parties of all responsibility for the Wii U's poor sales during its first year.
If third parties drive console sales with their software, as so many fans of third parties claim, then it's obvious that they can also have the reverse effect when the games they bring to a new console are designed poorly.
No one was going to go out to get a port of a last gen game, especially with content missing and poor optimization, on a whole new $300+ system.
I'm not over-estimating anything; I'm calling it as it is.
EA sucked during year 1 of Wii U development, and that's something they could have avoided.
Other developers could do it, and many of them have less staff and funding than EA.
Don't pin blame on Nintendo for everything EA did wrong.
Put credit where it's due, regardless of who it belongs to.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@Mr_Diabolical Speak for yourself; most Nintendo players love third parties when said third parties do their games right.
Have you not seen how much Nintendo gamers love Bayonetta, despite her not originally starting out on Nintendo consoles?
They're VERY open-minded; even if they don't sell crap-tons, they still get lots of love and verbal support from the Nintendo fanbase when those third parties do their thing the right way.
The reason it seems like they don't like third parties in the here and now, is because so many third parties screwed up their chance to appeal to core Nintendo gamers on the Wii U by releasing crap ports, which by extension made a lot of Nintendo gamers lose faith in third parties in general.
I shouldn't even need to mention how they basically abandoned Nintendo during the Wii and GC eras, far as AAA multiplats go.
Re: Editorial: Triple-A Third Party Games Will Need Creativity as Well as Marketing for NX Success
@Dezzy It wouldn't guarantee proper optimization or content parity, though.
As the article says, we need more than lazy ports.
We need EFFORT from third parties, or it's just going to be another bubble-burster.
AAA third parties did more harm than good to the Wii U in the early run with such titles; the NX needs to avoid that kind of self-defeatist line-up.
Re: 'Malo' Talks About the New Poe Lantern in Twilight Princess HD
@TourianTourist If the Poe Lantern doesn't use fuel and still lights up areas as well as the original lantern, then it won't be a useless item.
Re: 'Malo' Talks About the New Poe Lantern in Twilight Princess HD
Three questions come to mind concerning the poe lantern:
#1 does it replace the original lantern once acquired?
#2 does it require fuel?
#3 does it light up the area as well as the original lantern?
I'm hoping the answers are yes - no - yes, in that order. XD
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
@Oscarsome No, Nintendo needs other third parties.
EA is just one, and given the things they tried to demand of Nintendo with the Wii U, I don't think Nintendo "needs" them at all.
Others, yes.
But EA can go rot in a hole if they can't make content parity a goal for all NX games.
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
@Technosphile I would hate to see Nintendo sell out to raving sports fans instead of trying to provide something different, regardless of the money.
Besides, I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that sports fans equate Nintendo to kiddy stuff at this point, and wouldn't buy an NX for those games even if they did arrive on it.
What Nintendo needs is exciting exclusives from third parties alongside the newest of multiplats.
Not FIFA without content parity and sports apps no one is going to use when they've got a TV or computer.
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
@liveswired "Didn't help"?
At that point, Origin was trash that would have done more to harm than help. Let's not even kid ourselves on that point; EA wanted to basically take over all of Nintendo's online-related aspects, and Origin would have been the first step towards that.
It's a good thing that Nintendo didn't allow Origin.
As to indies, even though they weren't really in favor of them back on the Wii as much as they are now on the Wii U, that's not an indication that they turned to them in lieu of AAA third parties, because third parties did more harm than good to the Wii U in the early run in the first place.
Nintendo put more focus on indies because they were the better choice for Wii U, after third parties messed up so bad that no one wanted to get a Wii U for them despite the fact that they've been proven to be capable of carrying systems through their work on PS3 and 360.
The Wii was just the starting point for indies and Nintendo, and given how much shovelware Nintendo has had to deal with from outside parties, it's obvious they'd be against garage developers at first.
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
@IceClimbers Hence why exclusives can balance that gap.
Get enough exclusives that core gamers want, alongside the latest multiplats, and people might just go to the NX for both.
Sadly, I think it'll take better partners than EA and their lousy sports titles to make that happen.
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
@liveswired
"EA aided Nintendo greatly in the Nintendo Network infrastructure, before their unprecedented relationship collapsed. We all forget that Nintendo Network wasn't finished until well after launch, prior to this Nintendo couldn't support DLC or patches, EA and all 3rd parties were working with incomplete and ever changing dev kits that weren't finalised until shortly before launch day."
I sincerely doubt EA had ANYTHING to do with Nintendo's internal development of the Wii U.
In fact, there was one point where Nintendo forcefully had to halt EA because they wanted Origin to be a major part of the console.
Let's face facts here; Nintendo did a lot wrong with the Wii U, especially in advertising.
But they are not the core parties responsible for the mistakes made in third party games.
Plenty of other developers made excellent games on it without all the issues that the AAA's were whining about, and indies haven't hated Nintendo for a long while now because Nintendo stepped up with them even before the AAA's started leaving the system, because they gave them a home on Wii that was only destined to expand as things went onto the Wii U.
Nintendo courted indies because indies have proven their value, not because the AAA third parties ditched them for more familiar architecture.
Nintendo doesn't have any sucking up to do; They just need to get their act together and design/advertise the NX far better than they did the Wii U.
Third parties, however, have lost the majority of their trust from Nintendo gamers, and that is entirely due to their own mistakes when creating and delivering old ports instead of new games and exclusives.
And if they want the money that comes with regaining those fans, which will help soften the blow of their ever-increasing development costs across all consoles, they need to make a better commitment to the NX than they did with the Wii U.
Nintendo shouldn't have to grease their greedy palms just to get content parity.
That should be a business-ethical standard.
Re: Rumour: EA And Nintendo Looking To Rekindle "Unprecedented Partnership" On NX
Okay, this part right here pisses me off if it's true:
"Traditionally, Nintendo doesn't bundle EA games with its consoles - unlike Microsoft and Sony. According to sources within EA, this is actually seen as something of an insult, and the company will be asking Nintendo to consider shipping NX consoles with leading EA Sports titles, such as FIFA and Madden. While this might smack of arrogance, it's a tactic which has worked well on rival hardware, so there's definitely logic to EA's reasoning."
So, you're upset that Nintendo didn't feature your games in hardware bundles?
Gee, EA, I wonder why they would ever do that?
I mean, it's not like you've ever delivered the tail end game of one of your game trilogies, with missing DLC content, while simultaneously giving every other console the full trilogy and content parity.
Oh wait....
EA needs to get its head out of its arrogant ass; if they want Nintendo fans to start taking them seriously, then they need to start delivering something other than sports titles, in complete forms, WITH THEIR OWN ADVERTISEMENT DOLLARS.
Stop trying to rely on Nintendo to foot every bill you've got on their console and start making games that are going to attract Nintendo fans, instead of relying on SPORTS AND DUDE BROS to sell yourself on the NX.
Re: Editorial: The Legend of Zelda Offers Youthful, Optimistic Adventures in a Generation of Mature Quests
@gatorboi352
I put Majora's Mask, or heck even Wind Waker, above TP in quality, honestly.
Compared to even the Great Sea, which had items, enemies, and events popping up left and right as you traveled, TP's vast, open fields just felt uninspired and bland, for the most part.
There was a bit of horseback combat here and there, but outside of that, all you did was ride through those areas, stopping occasionally to catch a bug or to investigate a side area away from your steed.
The overworlds in WW and Majora just felt much more fleshed-out and event-filled.
Re: Analyst Firm DFC Believes a 2016 Nintendo NX Launch "Would Be a Mistake"
@blackbox64
I just want to point out, that the entire concept of gens for home consoles started out focused around the NES.
If anything, it's Sony and Microsoft that release mid-gen each time.
Release timing has nothing to do with why the Wii U didn't sell.
That's down to marketing, system features, and lack of AAA multiplats.
Re: Sound Your Survey Klaxon, Nintendo of America Wants Your Feedback
I made sure to tell them that I didn't want to see anything focused towards kids at this year's E3.
Hope you all did the same.
Re: Sound Your Survey Klaxon, Nintendo of America Wants Your Feedback
@MajinCubyan I just put up the first three that came to mind, then put up a ball-park figure of the others rather than listing all the names.
Got me through it a lot quicker.
Re: Video: Digital Foundry Tackles the Native Resolution and Framerate in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD
@ZAZX Thanks for that; I didn't really realize how important FoV was in games until I saw that gif showcasing the various amounts of it, from 55 all the way up to 200.
Re: Video: Digital Foundry Tackles the Native Resolution and Framerate in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD
@ZAZX This is the first time in my life I've ever heard of such a thing as simulation sickness, let alone low FoV sickness.
Got any in-depth info on those? You've piqued my curiosity...
Re: Rumour: Super Smash Bros. Planned as NX Launch Title, Bandai Namco Working on "Several" Games
If it's an enhanced version that combines all the features of both the 3DS and Wii U version all in one, I'm SOLD.
I've been wanting to play Smash Run in HD for SO LONG, you have no effing clue.
Re: Oculus Founder Palmer Luckey Believes Virtual Boy "Hurt" the VR Industry, But It's Not All Bad
I wish this was satire, because I find it hard to believe that anyone sane could possibly be attempting to preemptively blame Nintendo for the possible failure of VR headsets.
If VR fails, it won't be in any part due to Nintendo's Virtual Boy.
It will be because it's an overhyped gimmick.
Re: Editorial: Linkle May be a Clunky Introduction For a 'Female Link', But Opens Up Interesting Possibilities
@LUIGITORNADO
"It doesn't affect you at all if they give the option to play as a female Link. Keep playing as the boy. You keep talking about this as if boy Link will go away, even though the argument is that players want the option to choose Link's gender. One day you're going to roll-out of bed and realize how silly it is to be upset over such a thing."
It isn't silly; it's perfectly logical to be upset when someone suggests that a character that has long ago transcended being a "Mass Effect Avatar" should be turned into an androgynous and easily-replaced doll with no real impact or importance to the story.
The moment you give the player a choice in this particular matter, that's the same as saying that Link, as an established character, doesn't matter at all.
And that's not true, because Link is a male character, and he matters as an established persona in the series.
"And if your entire argument hinges on the use of "hero" instead of "heroine.." well...women are often called heroes in literature. And if all Links have the "spirit" of the hero, all that really means is that the original hero was a male >_>"
That entire argument falls under the "If blank said it then it has to be true!" trope.
Novelists and literature are just as prone to inaccuracies as any other medium, and the constant misuse of the term Hero is a perfect example of this.
Link is a hero, his spirit and form have always been, and should always be, male, because he is an established character.
We should not strip him of that part of his identity in order to pander to gender politics.
"Listen. Uptight feminists get under my skin to. I don't listen to them. I don't know what they're arguing for or against. They probably would rather want a Zelda game ONLY staring a female protagonist, and that's crazy."
Agreed; Link should always be there in some capacity. Even as just a friend in the village while the player chooses to play as a different character would be fine, but Link should always be there.
He's an established part of this series and shouldn't be treated as a throw-away asset that can be freely re-created without some sort of boundaries.
"Ever hear about that story of the father who reprogrammed Donkey Kong to allow his daughter to play as Pauline and rescue Mario instead? He didn't do that because he's some sort of fem-nazi, he did it for his daughter, so she would be more interested in playing. He wanted to share gaming with her; and fact is, gaming is dominated by male characters, and even though some women don't mind that, there is an opportunity to reach a broader audience by making more relate-able characters, and at a basic level we relate to what we are: boy, girl. Giving players the option to play as a female Link could very well make some little girl interested in Zelda, create new fans.
Is that so bad? Is it really THAT bad that some Zelda-fan father out there might have a better chance to share Zelda with his daughter if they simply had the option to play as female Link? I don't want to go on a pulpit and preach how empowering it would be, but think of the alternative media for a little girl, and tell me that Zelda isn't better than that shit."
No offense, but that is a TERRIBLE example.
The father/daughter story was about swapping roles, not swapping genders.
It let her play as the Heroine of the game rather than the Hero, and in that context, it is NOTHING like what you're proposing, I.E., changing Link's entire gender around for the sake of gender politics pandering.
"It's clear that you feel connected to Link, that you've spent probably thousands of hours adventuring through him. No one is taking that away from you, all we want is for more people to love Zelda."
Proposing that you give anyone the opportunity to change Link into something he is not, I.E., a woman, IS taking something away.
If you want more people to love the Zelda series, via gender roles, then encourage the use or creation of more playable females in Zelda games.
NOT the replacement or degrading of an established male character.
"I hear you with wanting a game staring Zelda, but that's not excluded JUST because Nintendo decides to give players the option to play as a female Link.
I hope you can at least be open minded about what I said.
Less Anita Sarkeesian, more daughters."
And that's just it; allowing a traditionally male character to be rewritten as a gender-bendable androgynous avatar doll, degrades the character for the sake of pandering to the kind of "males mean less than females" mind-set that Anita frequently supports.
The reason I'm against this is not because I'm not open-minded; it's because I recognize how WRONG it is to completely rewrite a character into something they are not, for the sake of pandering to gender politics.
Link is a man.
Let him STAY a man, and give us new options.
We shouldn't allow players the choice to make Link inconsequential just because they want to play as a woman; that's disrespectful to the lore, its creators, and to Link as an established part of The Legend of Zelda.
Re: Editorial: Xenoblade Chronicles X Has Tiny Text - Time for an Update?
I haven't had many issues with it since I sit relatively close to the screen as it is, but having it bigger would definitely be helpful.
Know what would be even more helpful, though?
A way of checking the descriptions of the effects that are on our gear pieces for both humans and skells.
There are some buffs and stuff in there that I've had to search the internet for because the game doesn't outright tell me what they do.
Also, the first Xenoblade had a function where if you got or inflicted something, you could press the + button to check out what it was and how it affected whoever had it.
Why isn't that a thing here?
Seriously?
It's an awesome game and these issues don't take it down from that 10 out of 10 I've already given it, but they would definitely be welcome improvements.
Re: Gallery: There's Loads Of Awesome Linkle Fan Art Available Already
Know what I like best about her?
She's got a character, a background.
She was originally designed as a sister figure to Link.
The fact that she's not a stupid gender swap makes her much more interesting and appealing as a character, and I can't wait to play as her in HWL.
Re: Editorial: Linkle May be a Clunky Introduction For a 'Female Link', But Opens Up Interesting Possibilities
@jibaycay
That's just it; it's not making Link "better greater and more inclusive than ever" to completely transform him into someone he is not.
You think that's the case, but it would be just as disrespectful as gender-swapping Zelda for the sake of getting rid of the damsel in distress.
If you want Link to change, then encourage Nintendo to deepen his characterization like they did in Skyward Sword.
Show him laughing, crying, getting angry, growing emotionally.
Changing him into a woman for the sake of pandering to gender equality doesn't show respect to Link or the world he is a part of, and in particular it ignores the chance that Zelda and other female characters should be given to have a turn in the lime-light.
I'm not being aggressive for the sake of putting you down; I'm being aggressive because I'm sick and tired of gender politicians trying to screw up a series that would benefit from those kinds of politics leaving it alone and never coming back.
Link is just fine as he is.
If we really want to be inclusive of both genders in a Zelda game, the way to do that is NOT to go out of our way to let players gender-swap a traditionally and CANONICALLY male character.
The way to do that, is to let separate defined characters, which do NOT remove their opposite sex counterparts from the equation of their stories when selected by the player, have a turn at saving the world.
Linkle, Zelda, Malon, Midna, Lana, and so many other LoZ characters are available to revisit in later Zelda games in some shape or form, on top of new ladies that we haven't been introduced to yet.
Ignoring them for the sake of taking Male Link out of the story, to pander to extreme feministic ideals of gender equality, would do nothing more than insult the series, and [most of] its long-time fans who have been waiting to see an already-established female or a new female get her own shot at adventuring.
Gender-swapping Link is lazy and insulting, and if I seem irate to you, it's not because I'm ticked at you personally.
It's because I'm done being nice with people that have issues with the Spirit of the Hero staying the male that the lore has designed him to be time and time again.
Free Zelda, or another female who deserves a chance.
Don't delete Link for the sake of letting a gender-swap of him take his place.
Re: Editorial: Linkle May be a Clunky Introduction For a 'Female Link', But Opens Up Interesting Possibilities
@LUIGITORNADO
I'm not dissecting or warping anything: Link has been regarded as the "spirit of the HERO" in multiple Zelda lore stories.
And in case you don't know BASIC ENGLISH, a HERO, denotes a MALE, and a HEROINE, denotes a FEMALE.
If anyone's acting like any sort of wank here, it's you for wanting to screw with lore when there are BETTER OPTIONS.
And yes, it IS pandering.
NEGATIVE pandering, to a bunch of DA fantards with female Link fantasies.
Maybe you don't understand this, but it doesn't matter if you do or not; completely replacing a male lead that has formed his own characterization and who has deep ties to the lore, with an androgynous DOLL that can freely be either sex, is NOT RESPECTFUL TO THE SERIES.
It's downright selfish to ask Link to become a woman when we've GOT women that deserve some lime-light.
This is not Mass Effect.
We need to quit pretending it is, and give an ACTUAL woman her shot, rather than a lazy gender swap.
Re: Editorial: Linkle May be a Clunky Introduction For a 'Female Link', But Opens Up Interesting Possibilities
@jibaycay Actually, you're completely wrong.
In the Hyrule Warriors art collection book, Linkle is described as "a sister figure to Link."
In other words, there's a perfectly valid explanation as to why she looks like Link; by her own back-story, she was intended as a sibling.
And many siblings look similar to one-another, hence here as well.
She is NOT Link, nor was she ever intended to be.
And this is a GOOD thing, because that gives her her own lore, her own story, and makes her an exciting new prospect separate from Link that we might have a chance to play as in other games going forward, if Nintendo allows it.
As I've said in the past two posts; a gender-swapped Link is too lazy to be respectful to fans, and too nonsensical to be respectful to series lore.
We need Zelda, or Linkle, or a new female to play as.
We need to LEAVE! LINK! ALONE!
He's not just a name or an empty avatar anymore.
That was back when there wasn't enough power in the tech of consoles to do expression of character well enough for Link to have any.
Link is an icon, now. He's his own man.
NOT a blank slate that makes sense to gender-swap to please people who preach "equality" without giving Zelda or other female options their fair shot.
Re: Editorial: Linkle May be a Clunky Introduction For a 'Female Link', But Opens Up Interesting Possibilities
@MaverickHunterX They take it literally because the lore proves it is MEANT literally.
His spirit is as much a male as Link's body ends up being time and time again.
That's not a coincidence; that's because he's a HERO, not a HEROINE.
We have these terms for good reasons; to denote roles.
There is no reason to change Link into a heroine.
It's lazy and insulting to established lore, on top of being a far worse choice than giving Zelda her own chance to shine through a playable second story path campaign, or Linkle, or literally any newcomer woman with her own personality and background would be.
If you actually respect the series, you don't ask for a lazy gender-swap to pander to SJW standards of needing a female to play as in literally everything popular.
Leave Link's in-game fate out of the hands of the people who write those stupid fan-tard gender-swapped comic fanfiction fantasies.
Give us a real woman. Not a gender-swapped failure.
@bobbypaycheque
Well said.