Trying to get 100% in donkey kong country 2 is harder. Im not even fucking joking. Some people have never even seen the hidden levels in this game. Fire Emblem series might be nintendo’s hardest game series
some hot smell of retard in this thread, zelda’s combat should of been like demon souls? demons souls is about conserving stamina and trying to survive while zelda is about having the courage to explore and defeat evil.
the people making critques about these games are not qualified to do so.
also, its overworld gave a sense of sparseness and created a huge gap between towns, its size created a sense of loneliness (medieval times) an urgency to arrive before sundown.
so much lack of knowledge here its a crime
But you don’t need to get 100% to beat the game, nintendo games have the difficulty carefully hidden away for the people who want to find it, meanwhile getting to the end isn’t that difficult so all the target audience that doesn’t want a hard game is perfectly content thinking they’re having fun.
What?
You don’t have knowledge or qualifications, you just have tiny barely-coherent excuses. Come back when you can support a logically-consistent, well-structured argument.
Pot, meet kettle…
This Nintendo-hate circle jerk is too much… Do you guys get a Killer Instinct free download for these tired talking points or what?
It doesnt mean it isnt there, a lot of people try to get 100% in nintendo games, because that is were the real challenge is at. Even getting 100% in new donkey kong country returns is pretty hard. Fire Emblem series is pretty hard, since if your characters die you no not get them back. Advance Wars games were pretty hard also
Your statement doesnt make much sense, should game developers take out extra challenges because casual gamers dont use them? The extra challenges are there for people who want a extra challenge
judging by your statements about games you seem to be the one who lacks knowledge
qualifications? what does qualifications have to do with anything? I think maybe you’ve been listening to too much epic rap battles. im not trying to battle with you im trying to tell you you’re an idiot.
I just read my original quote I mentioned qualifications so I’m the culprit, but if you weren’t so loose minded you realise I said “qualified” not “lack of qualifications” and I apologize if I hit a soft spot there
Just like Ki Shima you’ve never managed to make any substantive rebuttal of any of the points made here, so any attempt to argue via 1 sentence nothings is pretty much akin to monkeys flinging turds when someone accidentally steps too close their favorite banana tree.
Believe it or not, as generations of kids raised on games have grown into intelligent adults with degrees and an understanding of art, design, entertainment, storytelling, and game mechanics, the world of game criticism has grown beyond the “THEE GRAFIX R GUUD, THE CONTROL IS RAD” shit you’re used to reading in Gamepro and EGM. If you really can’t conceive of any other way Nintendo could have executed their franchises in 3D, and are content to merely swallow whatever crap they throw out, why are you even trying to participate in the discussion?
Personally, as a kid I was already imagining what 3D Nintendo games would be like years before N64 was even announced, so the idea that games like SM64 and Ocarina were the end-all-be-all of Mario or Zelda in 3D never even crossed my mind. I’ve always just thought of them as single possibilities in an endless pool of possibilities, which barely scratch the surface in terms of the full potential of these franchises. If you really don’t have the imagination to see this, why do you even bother going on a forum to talk about games?
Pachter shitted on Nintendo pretty hard on his latest video. That man really has it out for Iwata
this right here is proof that you are a lost puppy. I have explained to you why the controls in these games suited the platform and all you’ve said is how to make this game more like another game
nintendo are doing what they want to do, I can look at it, try it out and then decide if I want to spend more time with it. if you feel you can do better then do it. but it sounds like your game will be a soulless mess of other peoples ideas. go and make your games
http://unity3d.com/pages/create-games?gclid=CKbd0q2S2boCFQjKtAodjGgAZw
Super Mario 64 was amazing. I can’t even describe the feels without going into trite, hyperbole-sounding bullshit.
How does my statement “Darksouls is too hard to be zelda” not make sense? You countered that additional goals and challenges in nintendo games can be difficult, however I’m saying that side objectives aren’t the core game. First party nintendo games aim to be playable and beatable from ages 8-80(perhaps a slight exaggeration), male or female.
I’m saying that darksouls’ target audience was “hardcore” gamers who want games to tell them “YOU HAVE DIED” and they want to feel like they achieved something when they finally progress. If you think an 8 year old picks up Zelda and wants to see “YOU HAVE DIED” then you’re sorely mistaken.
First off, given that you can’t even keep track of your own statements made 1 post back, you might be careful about who you’re calling the idiot.
Let me spell this kindergarten shit out for you, since you can’t seem to figure it out.
Since videogames are a subjective topic, any time you or anyone else on SRK attempts to classify someone as “unknowledgeable” or “unqualified” simply because they don’t share the same tastes, they’re engaging in what is known as “attempting to pass off one’s opinion as fact” and failing entirely to say anything meaningful. No one gives a fuck about your tastes. Your tastes are not universal fact. The only way you can say anything in a game discussion that means anything to anyone is if you can structure statements in terms of what objectively makes a better game; speaking to how the game functions.
The easiest way to spell out the problem with modern Nintendo games is that they’re not games, they’re asset galleries. What fundamentally sets games apart from other mediums is interaction, and practically the only type of interaction game designers have been able to create in games is challenge. Since there is very little challenge in modern Nintendo games, there is a very low level of interaction. If the environment and enemies aren’t doing much to beat you, then winning will involve doing very little, and very little interaction will take place between the player, the environment, and characters (environment and characters = the game).
Consequently the majority of potential enjoyment is merely witnessing the quality of the assets; the characters, music, the environment, etc. That is not interaction; instead it’s the kind of enjoyment you would get from viewing an art gallery, listening to a piece of music, or watching a movie. Walking through the game environment to oggle at it is fundamentally the same as navigating it in a 3D application, or navigating the OS to view photos on a computer. We could say Nintendo’s 3D titles are like theme parks, instead of games. You stroll through and marvel at Cinderella castle, and go on a thrilling roller coaster ride, but it’s not a game, because your interaction isn’t part of it. Note that at a theme park, you do have to pick up a map and navigate to the areas with the rides you want to go on - but it’s STILL not considered a game.
Therefore, objectively, we can say that Nintendo’s modern 3D games don’t contain much GAME content. Sure, there might be a million levels and a million colorful characters, but if there’s no challenge, nor any other type of interaction, then it’s not game content, it’s just art assets, and what you’re playing is more akin to a virtual art gallery or virtual theme park than the challenging interactive games represented by Super Mario Bros. or Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link.
If you can’t understand these basics on your own, then objectively your fundamental understanding of what games are must be very low, and you aren’t very qualified to discuss or debate them.
No, you made an incoherent reference to “transportation” which is entirely meaningless. Go back and read till you understand.
Yes, because making dysfunctional control schemes with shortsighted controller designs required a lot of “soul” on the part of Nintendo, and doing anything different from the leader in a genre automatically makes it like everyone else. :rolleyes:
you know that people actually like to do 100% in nintendo games, since that is were most of the challenge is at.
You’re not even reading what I’m saying, I could type out “flah floo flee flah” and you would spout “I 100% CLEAR NINTENDO GAMES GG”
You’ve done this multiple times, but I’ll repeat myself because maybe this time you will read.
THE TARGET AUDIENCE NINTENDO IS MAKING GAMES FOR IS THE PEOPLE WHO DON’T 100% CLEAR GAMES, THE PEOPLE WHO DON’T CARE ABOUT ACHIEVEMENTS OR TROPHIES, NINTENDO WANTS PEOPLE AGES 8-80 WHO DON’T PLAY VIDEO GAMES TO PLAY NINTENDO GAMES. THEY WANT PEOPLE TO MAKE MARIO JUMP OVER GOOMBAS THEN GET TO A SCREEN THAT SAYS “YOU WIN”.
Just because SOME people do 100% clear video games doesn’t mean that’s who they target, they don’t even aim for fans anymore because if you own every single LoZ title chances are you’re going to buy the next one ad infinitum.
If the target audience was only casual gamers, they wouldnt add all the extra missions, and side quest, and secret levels.
Man you know its bad Alans the one talking sense.
Little Gameplay? I’d love to play your games. Also, You do realise YOU have a lot more need to back track statements, seriously you’re lost.
I was tired last night so you got away from a real roasting but now that I took time away there’s no interest left. You will never learn till you make you’re first successful game. I’ll just accept that you’re a loser that wasted an expensive degree. There’s no fucking way YOU got a scholarship that’s for sure. Good luck
I’d LOVE to explain. The target audience for Nintendo are people who are either too young or passive to video games. We have enough hardcore even navigating the start up screen can be a chore for most people. Without Nintendo’s approach there’s a GIGANTIC amount of players who wouldn’t touch a console, one of the main successes of the Wii is the ease of navigation look this debate is pretty retarded