Not all cartoons are for kids. There exist Japanese animated films and series that if dubbed and released stateside would be related PG-13/TV-14 or R/TV-MA.
I am well aware of this, as I own a few anime videos myself. However, that doesn't change the fact that this sort of thing is percieved as being for kids.
So your anecdotal evidence determines mythology? I can counter that with my own anecdotes. I'm 33, love my GameCube, and personally know far more people my age who prefer Nintendo's games over PS2 or XBox. And we do watch a lot of cartoons, too. I also really like to play with Legos. Thus are your arguments refuted with your own "logic."
So please tell me - how are cartoons and videogames in general percieved by most people? As 'mature' or 'kiddy'? What you are doing is not what the adult population in general do.
The fact of the matter is that the only people concerned with how mature they look are the immature. Anyone who tells you otherwise is probably some punk kid who also keeps track of how many beers he drinks at a time like underage drinking is some kind of contest. I know plenty of guys like that.
Incorrect. For instance, how many adults would class playing those dancing/rhythm arcade games as immature?
Oh, puu-leeze. The only people concerned with "looking adult" are teens who are so worried about looking like a kid that they deny themselves fun things because a kid might enjoy them too. Real adults have stopped caring about whether or not we look like kids and will do fun things because they are fun.
This is a total myth. I know plenty of people who regard Nintendo consoles as being for kids, and they are in their late 20's or 30's.
You may as well try and argue that most adults sit down and watch cartoons all the time.
Too sad those M$ idiots didn't realize that all games RARE produced so successfully for the N64 did contain concepts that are Nintendo ONLY. $375 Million for a few programmers without concept is a little much isn't it?
Yes, I am sure that Nintendo had a great deal of input on the games that Rare made for the Spectrum.
We all know that no matter how good a console FPS is, they pale in comparison to FPS on PCs.
They certainly do not. If the game is designed around a control pad then it is fine.
While Starfox Adventures (Nintendo GameCube) is one of the most fantastic looking games, the gameplay is uninspired and the story is dull. The game has no soul. Color me jade, Rare does not impress me.
For me, the games that Rare put out were the best for the system.
Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were fantastic, I preferred Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64 to Mario 64, Diddy Kong Racing had a much better single player than Mario Kart and Jet Force Gemini was sublime stuff.
Also, much of the focus for newer games go into graphics and textures, rather than the actual gameplay itself. Back before graphics mattered, games just had to be fun to become popular. Now without professional artists and designers, it is almost impossible for a game to even make it to the shelf. I remember back when games were made by one or two guys in their basement and were just made to maximize fun. Back then the only concern for graphics was that the player could see and understand what was going on. Even now with all our hot new games, many of those old classics are still fun to go back and play.
Please, can we kill this myth off? It's becoming an urban legend, and should be on Snopes.
JFG on the N64 was superb, but hardly sold at all.
Whilst the control system was tricky at first, once you got used to it the game was superb. Some of the big battles that you got into predate Halo in a sense - sometimes it really felt like you were in a war.
The game had an excellent atmosphere, and even the cutscenes were very well done. It even some had some funky mini-games with that little flying robot.
Ah well. At least your comments start at 0 now instead of 1
Er... and? You seem to be equating Karma to actually meaning something.
I think you'll have better luck in debates if you attempt to debate individual viewpoints instead of trying to debate the whole of Nintendo fans at once. See, Nintendo fans are people, and...
Thats funny - all I ever hear most of them say is the same things over and over again. Now, why on EARTH would I think that they are possibly contradicting themselves in this instance...?
Wait a minute, why am I feeding the trolls?
I suggest that you get out of the 'Critisise Nintendo!=troll' line of thinking. When I see someone say something that I disagree with, I don't label them a troll as it is extremely boring.
You didn't already pay for those features, because you didn't buy the stuff to access them yet - you don't own the data in the ROM, Nintendo does.
If I buy the cart and the GBA, then I have paid to play what is on the cart. Having to pay an extra few quid to access it all is a bit of a con.
That's like complaining you can't use your modem because you didn't pay for internet access.
No it isn't, as there are real technical reasons behind that. It is more like buying a car, filling it with petrol and then having to pay extra to the car company just to drive it.
Also, those extra levels are not on the cart - they're on the cards.
I have trouble believing that all these extras that are available with the eReader in these games are all actually on the cards.
You're looking at it backwards: the card features are a reward for those who choose to invest in buying everything, not a punishment for those who don't want to buy them.
Don't make me laugh. How is forcing people to buy an extra peripheral to play content that they already own a 'reward'? That's like saying the need for a headphone adapter on the GBA SP is a 'reward'.
Microsoft especially has never innovated a damn thing in their life, and Xbox is no exception, they just milk some done-to-death idea over and over, only with a bigger budget and a bigger hype machine.
Like what?
Meanwhile Nintendo is the only company still around that's willing to take risks.
Hold on. Everyone keeps saying that Nintendo are very conservative, and that is why they didn't jump on the Online Gaming bandwagon. They are either conservative, or they take risks - which is it?
just wait for Halo XP, killer title in 2007).
Right, whereas it is my dream to play Mario Starscope and Pokemon Light Brown in the next few years.
You did not need to say the exact same thing about Super Mario Sunshine in four different posts.
Well, if I am replying to four different people about the same point...
You're remarkably quick to label anyone who likes Nintendo games a Nintendo fanboy,
No, just those who trot out the usual "you haven't played it" or "You don't know what you are talking about".
And yet you get surprisingly defensive when anyone suggests that you're a troll - which is interesting, considering that your cumulative moderation in this thread, at this point, is -9, with an amazing total of -8 for trolling. (-4 for redundant, and one +3 for an insightful for your first contribution.)
Or are the mods just Nintendo fanbois too?
Thats typical Slashdot moderation. If you look carefully, I had posts modded down where I was actually describing Metroid Prime - even the one where all I mentioned was the lack of a proper strafe was modded down as flamebait.
On the other hand, if I were hellbent on hating the game anyway, I'm not sure there's much it could do to convince me. I'm that way with Matrix Reloaded.
Funnily enough, I did not buy a GC just to hate all the games on it.
Funny, I went skimming around the reviews. I found one that supported your statement, and a handful of others that had lots of good things to say about the evolutions of the game.
I am not going to sit here Googling for reviews, but I did dig out the Edge review of it (UK based mag), and they said that it wasn't as good as Mario 64, and is more of an expansion pack than a sequel.
You may be after sunshine sprites or whatever, the road getting there is very different. You have to think about the world in a much different way than you had to in Mario 64.
No, you do not.
They're talking about their sales numbers. Yes, Nintendo has taken a very significant hit in popularity.
They certainly were NOT talking about sales numbers in this instance. They said that the next Mario game was the true sequel.
Riiiight. Never mind the FLUDD pack with all that brings, the much broader variety in how challenges are solved, and the different state of mind you have to be in to play this game, it's the same because you run and jump and the guy wears a little red hat.
The FLUDD pack does NOT add all that much to the game, and it is blindingly obvious to anyone who can actually open their eyes. This isn't just me saying this either, as plenty of people who have gone on to get every single shine have repeated the same thing.
In general, that may or may not be true. In this case, though, you made a really stupid comment. If I were you, I'd own up to that instead of trying to pass the blame off on Nintendo enthusiasm.
I have nothing to actually own up to in the slightest.
AnonV was absolutely correct that your comment likening Super Mario Sunshine to Mario 64 was disputable. One would really have to oversimplify to say they're the same. I have a feeling that's how you hit is hot button. I don't think he's bothered that you're criticizing Nintendo, I think he's bothered that you got modded as insightful/interesting over a comment that'd only ring true with people who haven't played the game.
Incorrect, SMS is painfully similar to Mario 64 - many reviews have stated it, and even Nintendo themselves admitted that SMS was not up to scratch.
One could launch reason after reason after reason why SMS is different from Mario 64
Oh? Like WHAT?
Just own up. Blaming everybody else for your flamebait comment isn't going to end in a positive resolution.
If you think that stating SMS is similar to Mario 64 is flamebait, then you do not actually know what flamebait is. Are you saying that everyone who stated so in a review is a troll, didn't understand the game or doesn't know what they are talking about?
This alone disproves your point. If you don't see the difference between SMS and Mario 64, then how can anybody take you seriously?
Because it is totally true, and is something that has been stated in numerous reviews. There is far more than mere 'fundamentals' that are similar - the main crux of the game is the same.
For Gods sake, even Nintendo themselves owned up that SMS didn't live up to expectations.
That's why nobody is taking you seriously. It's got nothing to do with Nintendo zealousy, it has to do with you not opening your eyes. Nintendo did a fine job, the defect is with you. If you don't enjoy that style of game, fine, perfectly okay, no problem here. Just don't go around saying Mario Sunshine is just like Mario64. That's what's getting people to argue with you.
Incorrect - it is mere zealotry to say that SMS is all that different to Mario 64.
Sorry, but you are incorrect. It is a commom complaint made against Nintendo.
Nice try, but no. This isn't Nintendo zealousy talking, it's somebody who's arguing with your details that sound an awful lot like frequent complaints made by the people who haven't played these games.
Nintendo zealotry is all it is. "You haven't played it" is what is always blurted out in response to critisism to Nintendo games.
If you cannot see the glaring differences between the two games, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews.
Completely and utterly false. The reviews were full of comments about the similarities. What you are saying is like someone trying to claim that GTA2 is vastly different to GTA.
In this case, the problem is that you presented yourself badly.
No, the case is that as usual Nintendo fans cannot bear the critisism.
Oh I'm sure you picked it up, made Mario run around and jump a bit, and then said "this is just like Mario 64! Dammit!" Yep, the problem must be with you.
This is precisly what I am talking about. You cannot accept that someone will actually play the game and then make their mind up about it - the only scenario you can deal with is if the person has not actually played it.
As I've said, and you've pointed out, you brought it on yourself.
No, I did not say that I brought it upon myself - I said that I expected the usual response from Nintendo fans.
You came in and said something that's easily disputable.
No, it is NOT easily disputable at all.
Instead of listening to the disputes, you just sit there like "Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption. It must be all that Nintendo zealousy! It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't. Oh well, my dissatisfaction must be Nintendo's fault."
Listening to the disputes? What, like the usual "You haven't played the games!" and "You don't know what you are talking about!".
"Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption.
Half arsed assumption is believing that SMS is significantly different to Mario 64
It must be all that Nintendo zealousy!
That pretty much sums it all up. Nintendo fans got their 'passionate' label for a reason.
It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't.
Such as?
You should re-examine how you sound to people informed on the topic of which you speak instead of trying to blame them for having a rebuttal.
Oh good grief. The standard line once again - "You don't know what you are talking about".
So, despite having a NES, SNES, N64 and GC... I don't know what I am talking about. Amazing logic that you lot can come up with.
I think you're amazed because you think you know what you're talking about, but you don't.
Yawn.
Having familiar characters in a game does not a rehash make. Is What Dreams May Come just like Death to Smoochy?
I didn't say that JUST having the same characters makes it a rehash. But many of their games are rehashes, and using the same characters for nearly twenty years reinforces that view.
I think his point is that you've got your head up your ass.
No, it is the usual GC-owner response that signifies that they cannot understand why not everyone finds Nintendo games fun.
You're too busy saying "it's the same" and not looking at it more closely. Take it as an insult, or take it as an honest reflection of how you sound. I've seen so many people looking for ways to poo poo something, they miss it. Having played all of the games that NG's mentioned, I can say without question that we're not talking about rehashes here.
I have also played all the games that I am critisising, and my assertion and opinion is correct. The sad thing is, Nintendo fans just cannot accept people being like that - and it is pathetic.
To which my response would be "no you didn't do this in Mario 64 because it's not much like Sunshine at all really."
If you cannot see that SMS is very similar to Mario 64, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews, and is one critisism that many people have said about the game.
That isn't the issue here. The issue is that you're talking out of your ass. It doesn't affect my world at all if you don't like Nintendo, but if you're going to not like them then at least have a good reason. Just say "My tastes have changed.",
Once again, it is allways a case of "No, the problem is definetly NOT Nintendo! The problem is YOU!" from the Nintendo camp.
not "Uh they're the same , at least that's the way it looks in the screenshots."
You are talking out of your arse, as I do own a Gc and have played those games. But hey, I must be lying, right? The problem MUST be with me, right?
Don't believe me? Read the other comments in this thread. You flamingo'd up big time
Oh, I have read them. I have had people saying that Metroid Prime is innovative because the transition from 2D to 3D was done well. I have had you say that SMS is nothing like Mario 64. I have had someone say that Smash Bros Melee is the best beat em up. I have had people saying that F-Zero is the best racer.
And you say that I talk out of my arse? Hoo boy!
I knew that I would get this type of response, though - it happens every time I see someone start critisising Nintendo games. Within 3 or 4 posts, the Nintendo camp starts saying that the other person doesn't know what they are talking about. I got a post modded down, and all I said was that taking Metroid into 3D was not innovative.
The GameCube is not known for 'rehashes'. Now if you want to have a peek over at Sony and Microsoft's camp...
Nintendo have a habit for reusing the same things over and over. I find it amazing that you can point the finger at MS and Sony for it, yet not Nintendo.
Frankly, I think this guy's just forgotten what fun gameplay is about.
Strange as it may seem, what is fun to you may not be fun to other people.
You can look at Mario Sunshine and say "yep, he's running around jumping like in Mario 64" and then put it down, or you can say "Oh cool, now that he's got this water pack, I've got a whole new toolbox of snazzy things to do in order to reach those high places."
Either that or I could say "I did this all six years ago in Mario 64, and it is not fun anymore".
Is it really that hard to accept that some people may not like Nintendo games?
The innovative thing is that Nintendo took something old and infused it with something new without fucking destroying it. This is extremely difficult to do with anything, including video games. It's like trying to translate literature. A truly great translation not only preserves the meaning of the original, but must also maintain the subtlest distinctions found in the original text. You have to keep the imagery and flow of the original.
If you think that doing that is innovative, then you are totally and utterly wrong.
Tell me, do you think that GTA3 is innovative? Lemmings 3D?
Mario's simply a character to Nintendo, not a game formula. It's kind of like saying you're sick of movies that have Edward Norton in them. Could be worse, Mario could be like Jean Claude Van Damme.
When it comes to films, you hear people saying that they are sick of seeing the same actors all the time - and I am sick of Mario.
So in your case "Mario" means "any Nintendo property that has had another game come out in the series"? That's an interesting definition.
I suppose my question would be why reinvent the wheel with new characters? Yes, they could have made Mario Golf with characters who weren't Mario characters... but why? Mario is a perfectly good franchise to use for a cartoony golf game.
Because it is incredibly dull seeing the same characters from the same company all the time.
I'd say Eternal Darkness is, on the whole, less inventive than Metroid Prime. Eternal Darkness is a Zelda-esque dungeon hack with some shiny insanity effects. It does a great job on them, and so is still a great game, but Metroid Prime takes the first-person-shooter in a direction it had never been taken before. More to the point, it did things with the first person shooter that people said couldn't be done - platforming sections that didn't suck, exploration based gameplay, etc.
MP isn't inventive at all - all the elements from it have been around in all the previous Metroid games for years. All they did was put it in 3D. I don't see GTA3 is being very invenive, as that is just GTA in 3D.
And, I mean, what were you hoping for from Metroid Prime? Something that wasn't Metroid?
No idea, really. Something better than how it turned out.
Second party development studios that, with heavy input and control from Nintendo. I do not consider the fact that Nintendo has begun to expand and take in some other development studios to mean that those games are not Nintendo games.
It isn't really Nintendo, though. Halo isn't actually from Microsoft either.
Nintendo continues to do what it's always done - perfect styles of games, and invent new styles of games. Even their new styles of games, though, have a certain... Nintendoness to them. They display elegance of control, and are typically very easy to pick up and play, but not nearly so easy to beat, and harder still to "fully" beat (i.e. unlock everything, get 100% completion, etc).
They haven't come up with a new style for years - merely taken something that exists and make it smaller.
Regardless, in every genre and style Nintendo has attempted, they are reliably among the best at it.
That seems an edge to me.
Erm, what genres are these? They have done platforming and... more platforming. Not much else.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all cartoons are for kids. There exist Japanese animated films and series that if dubbed and released stateside would be related PG-13/TV-14 or R/TV-MA.
I am well aware of this, as I own a few anime videos myself. However, that doesn't change the fact that this sort of thing is percieved as being for kids.
So your anecdotal evidence determines mythology? I can counter that with my own anecdotes. I'm 33, love my GameCube, and personally know far more people my age who prefer Nintendo's games over PS2 or XBox. And we do watch a lot of cartoons, too. I also really like to play with Legos. Thus are your arguments refuted with your own "logic."
So please tell me - how are cartoons and videogames in general percieved by most people? As 'mature' or 'kiddy'? What you are doing is not what the adult population in general do.
The fact of the matter is that the only people concerned with how mature they look are the immature. Anyone who tells you otherwise is probably some punk kid who also keeps track of how many beers he drinks at a time like underage drinking is some kind of contest. I know plenty of guys like that.
Incorrect. For instance, how many adults would class playing those dancing/rhythm arcade games as immature?
Oh, puu-leeze. The only people concerned with "looking adult" are teens who are so worried about looking like a kid that they deny themselves fun things because a kid might enjoy them too. Real adults have stopped caring about whether or not we look like kids and will do fun things because they are fun.
This is a total myth. I know plenty of people who regard Nintendo consoles as being for kids, and they are in their late 20's or 30's.
You may as well try and argue that most adults sit down and watch cartoons all the time.
Too sad those M$ idiots didn't realize that all games RARE produced so successfully for the N64 did contain concepts that are Nintendo ONLY. $375 Million for a few programmers without concept is a little much isn't it?
Yes, I am sure that Nintendo had a great deal of input on the games that Rare made for the Spectrum.
We all know that no matter how good a console FPS is, they pale in comparison to FPS on PCs.
They certainly do not. If the game is designed around a control pad then it is fine.
While Starfox Adventures (Nintendo GameCube) is one of the most fantastic looking games, the gameplay is uninspired and the story is dull. The game has no soul. Color me jade, Rare does not impress me.
For me, the games that Rare put out were the best for the system.
Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were fantastic, I preferred Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64 to Mario 64, Diddy Kong Racing had a much better single player than Mario Kart and Jet Force Gemini was sublime stuff.
He was being sarcastic.
I have two things to say:
1) You are British
2) You read GamesTM
UGA is one of the more creative studios and has been made to merge with Sonic Team, possibly the most stagnant studio of the lot.
I am not surprised he is leaving.
Also, much of the focus for newer games go into graphics and textures, rather than the actual gameplay itself. Back before graphics mattered, games just had to be fun to become popular. Now without professional artists and designers, it is almost impossible for a game to even make it to the shelf. I remember back when games were made by one or two guys in their basement and were just made to maximize fun. Back then the only concern for graphics was that the player could see and understand what was going on. Even now with all our hot new games, many of those old classics are still fun to go back and play.
Please, can we kill this myth off? It's becoming an urban legend, and should be on Snopes.
JFG on the N64 was superb, but hardly sold at all.
Whilst the control system was tricky at first, once you got used to it the game was superb. Some of the big battles that you got into predate Halo in a sense - sometimes it really felt like you were in a war.
The game had an excellent atmosphere, and even the cutscenes were very well done. It even some had some funky mini-games with that little flying robot.
Oh. You're back.
Excuse me?
Ah well. At least your comments start at 0 now instead of 1
Er... and? You seem to be equating Karma to actually meaning something.
I think you'll have better luck in debates if you attempt to debate individual viewpoints instead of trying to debate the whole of Nintendo fans at once. See, Nintendo fans are people, and...
Thats funny - all I ever hear most of them say is the same things over and over again. Now, why on EARTH would I think that they are possibly contradicting themselves in this instance...?
Wait a minute, why am I feeding the trolls?
I suggest that you get out of the 'Critisise Nintendo!=troll' line of thinking. When I see someone say something that I disagree with, I don't label them a troll as it is extremely boring.
You didn't already pay for those features, because you didn't buy the stuff to access them yet - you don't own the data in the ROM, Nintendo does.
If I buy the cart and the GBA, then I have paid to play what is on the cart. Having to pay an extra few quid to access it all is a bit of a con.
That's like complaining you can't use your modem because you didn't pay for internet access.
No it isn't, as there are real technical reasons behind that. It is more like buying a car, filling it with petrol and then having to pay extra to the car company just to drive it.
Also, those extra levels are not on the cart - they're on the cards.
I have trouble believing that all these extras that are available with the eReader in these games are all actually on the cards.
You're looking at it backwards: the card features are a reward for those who choose to invest in buying everything, not a punishment for those who don't want to buy them.
Don't make me laugh. How is forcing people to buy an extra peripheral to play content that they already own a 'reward'? That's like saying the need for a headphone adapter on the GBA SP is a 'reward'.
Microsoft especially has never innovated a damn thing in their life, and Xbox is no exception, they just milk some done-to-death idea over and over, only with a bigger budget and a bigger hype machine.
Like what?
Meanwhile Nintendo is the only company still around that's willing to take risks.
Hold on. Everyone keeps saying that Nintendo are very conservative, and that is why they didn't jump on the Online Gaming bandwagon. They are either conservative, or they take risks - which is it?
just wait for Halo XP, killer title in 2007).
Right, whereas it is my dream to play Mario Starscope and Pokemon Light Brown in the next few years.
You did not need to say the exact same thing about Super Mario Sunshine in four different posts.
Well, if I am replying to four different people about the same point...
You're remarkably quick to label anyone who likes Nintendo games a Nintendo fanboy,
No, just those who trot out the usual "you haven't played it" or "You don't know what you are talking about".
And yet you get surprisingly defensive when anyone suggests that you're a troll - which is interesting, considering that your cumulative moderation in this thread, at this point, is -9, with an amazing total of -8 for trolling. (-4 for redundant, and one +3 for an insightful for your first contribution.)
Or are the mods just Nintendo fanbois too?
Thats typical Slashdot moderation. If you look carefully, I had posts modded down where I was actually describing Metroid Prime - even the one where all I mentioned was the lack of a proper strafe was modded down as flamebait.
On the other hand, if I were hellbent on hating the game anyway, I'm not sure there's much it could do to convince me. I'm that way with Matrix Reloaded.
Funnily enough, I did not buy a GC just to hate all the games on it.
Funny, I went skimming around the reviews. I found one that supported your statement, and a handful of others that had lots of good things to say about the evolutions of the game.
I am not going to sit here Googling for reviews, but I did dig out the Edge review of it (UK based mag), and they said that it wasn't as good as Mario 64, and is more of an expansion pack than a sequel.
You may be after sunshine sprites or whatever, the road getting there is very different. You have to think about the world in a much different way than you had to in Mario 64.
No, you do not.
They're talking about their sales numbers. Yes, Nintendo has taken a very significant hit in popularity.
They certainly were NOT talking about sales numbers in this instance. They said that the next Mario game was the true sequel.
Riiiight. Never mind the FLUDD pack with all that brings, the much broader variety in how challenges are solved, and the different state of mind you have to be in to play this game, it's the same because you run and jump and the guy wears a little red hat.
The FLUDD pack does NOT add all that much to the game, and it is blindingly obvious to anyone who can actually open their eyes. This isn't just me saying this either, as plenty of people who have gone on to get every single shine have repeated the same thing.
In general, that may or may not be true. In this case, though, you made a really stupid comment. If I were you, I'd own up to that instead of trying to pass the blame off on Nintendo enthusiasm.
I have nothing to actually own up to in the slightest.
AnonV was absolutely correct that your comment likening Super Mario Sunshine to Mario 64 was disputable. One would really have to oversimplify to say they're the same. I have a feeling that's how you hit is hot button. I don't think he's bothered that you're criticizing Nintendo, I think he's bothered that you got modded as insightful/interesting over a comment that'd only ring true with people who haven't played the game.
Incorrect, SMS is painfully similar to Mario 64 - many reviews have stated it, and even Nintendo themselves admitted that SMS was not up to scratch.
One could launch reason after reason after reason why SMS is different from Mario 64
Oh? Like WHAT?
Just own up. Blaming everybody else for your flamebait comment isn't going to end in a positive resolution.
If you think that stating SMS is similar to Mario 64 is flamebait, then you do not actually know what flamebait is. Are you saying that everyone who stated so in a review is a troll, didn't understand the game or doesn't know what they are talking about?
This alone disproves your point. If you don't see the difference between SMS and Mario 64, then how can anybody take you seriously?
Because it is totally true, and is something that has been stated in numerous reviews. There is far more than mere 'fundamentals' that are similar - the main crux of the game is the same.
For Gods sake, even Nintendo themselves owned up that SMS didn't live up to expectations.
That's why nobody is taking you seriously. It's got nothing to do with Nintendo zealousy, it has to do with you not opening your eyes. Nintendo did a fine job, the defect is with you. If you don't enjoy that style of game, fine, perfectly okay, no problem here. Just don't go around saying Mario Sunshine is just like Mario64. That's what's getting people to argue with you.
Incorrect - it is mere zealotry to say that SMS is all that different to Mario 64.
Heh, no, it doesn't.
Sorry, but you are incorrect. It is a commom complaint made against Nintendo.
Nice try, but no. This isn't Nintendo zealousy talking, it's somebody who's arguing with your details that sound an awful lot like frequent complaints made by the people who haven't played these games.
Nintendo zealotry is all it is. "You haven't played it" is what is always blurted out in response to critisism to Nintendo games.
If you cannot see the glaring differences between the two games, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews.
Completely and utterly false. The reviews were full of comments about the similarities. What you are saying is like someone trying to claim that GTA2 is vastly different to GTA.
In this case, the problem is that you presented yourself badly.
No, the case is that as usual Nintendo fans cannot bear the critisism.
Oh I'm sure you picked it up, made Mario run around and jump a bit, and then said "this is just like Mario 64! Dammit!" Yep, the problem must be with you.
This is precisly what I am talking about. You cannot accept that someone will actually play the game and then make their mind up about it - the only scenario you can deal with is if the person has not actually played it.
As I've said, and you've pointed out, you brought it on yourself.
No, I did not say that I brought it upon myself - I said that I expected the usual response from Nintendo fans.
You came in and said something that's easily disputable.
No, it is NOT easily disputable at all.
Instead of listening to the disputes, you just sit there like "Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption. It must be all that Nintendo zealousy! It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't. Oh well, my dissatisfaction must be Nintendo's fault."
Listening to the disputes? What, like the usual "You haven't played the games!" and "You don't know what you are talking about!".
"Man, everybody must be crazy for not agreeing with my half-assed assumption.
Half arsed assumption is believing that SMS is significantly different to Mario 64
It must be all that Nintendo zealousy!
That pretty much sums it all up. Nintendo fans got their 'passionate' label for a reason.
It couldn't possible be that people here see something rather obvious that I don't.
Such as?
You should re-examine how you sound to people informed on the topic of which you speak instead of trying to blame them for having a rebuttal.
Oh good grief. The standard line once again - "You don't know what you are talking about".
So, despite having a NES, SNES, N64 and GC... I don't know what I am talking about. Amazing logic that you lot can come up with.
I think you're amazed because you think you know what you're talking about, but you don't.
Yawn.
Having familiar characters in a game does not a rehash make. Is What Dreams May Come just like Death to Smoochy?
I didn't say that JUST having the same characters makes it a rehash. But many of their games are rehashes, and using the same characters for nearly twenty years reinforces that view.
I think his point is that you've got your head up your ass.
No, it is the usual GC-owner response that signifies that they cannot understand why not everyone finds Nintendo games fun.
You're too busy saying "it's the same" and not looking at it more closely. Take it as an insult, or take it as an honest reflection of how you sound. I've seen so many people looking for ways to poo poo something, they miss it. Having played all of the games that NG's mentioned, I can say without question that we're not talking about rehashes here.
I have also played all the games that I am critisising, and my assertion and opinion is correct. The sad thing is, Nintendo fans just cannot accept people being like that - and it is pathetic.
To which my response would be "no you didn't do this in Mario 64 because it's not much like Sunshine at all really."
If you cannot see that SMS is very similar to Mario 64, then you are totally blind. It's been mentioned in countless reviews, and is one critisism that many people have said about the game.
That isn't the issue here. The issue is that you're talking out of your ass. It doesn't affect my world at all if you don't like Nintendo, but if you're going to not like them then at least have a good reason. Just say "My tastes have changed.",
Once again, it is allways a case of "No, the problem is definetly NOT Nintendo! The problem is YOU!" from the Nintendo camp.
not "Uh they're the same , at least that's the way it looks in the screenshots."
You are talking out of your arse, as I do own a Gc and have played those games. But hey, I must be lying, right? The problem MUST be with me, right?
Don't believe me? Read the other comments in this thread. You flamingo'd up big time
Oh, I have read them. I have had people saying that Metroid Prime is innovative because the transition from 2D to 3D was done well. I have had you say that SMS is nothing like Mario 64. I have had someone say that Smash Bros Melee is the best beat em up. I have had people saying that F-Zero is the best racer.
And you say that I talk out of my arse? Hoo boy!
I knew that I would get this type of response, though - it happens every time I see someone start critisising Nintendo games. Within 3 or 4 posts, the Nintendo camp starts saying that the other person doesn't know what they are talking about. I got a post modded down, and all I said was that taking Metroid into 3D was not innovative.
The GameCube is not known for 'rehashes'. Now if you want to have a peek over at Sony and Microsoft's camp...
Nintendo have a habit for reusing the same things over and over. I find it amazing that you can point the finger at MS and Sony for it, yet not Nintendo.
Frankly, I think this guy's just forgotten what fun gameplay is about.
Strange as it may seem, what is fun to you may not be fun to other people.
You can look at Mario Sunshine and say "yep, he's running around jumping like in Mario 64" and then put it down, or you can say "Oh cool, now that he's got this water pack, I've got a whole new toolbox of snazzy things to do in order to reach those high places."
Either that or I could say "I did this all six years ago in Mario 64, and it is not fun anymore".
Is it really that hard to accept that some people may not like Nintendo games?
The innovative thing is that Nintendo took something old and infused it with something new without fucking destroying it. This is extremely difficult to do with anything, including video games. It's like trying to translate literature. A truly great translation not only preserves the meaning of the original, but must also maintain the subtlest distinctions found in the original text. You have to keep the imagery and flow of the original.
If you think that doing that is innovative, then you are totally and utterly wrong.
Tell me, do you think that GTA3 is innovative? Lemmings 3D?
Mario's simply a character to Nintendo, not a game formula. It's kind of like saying you're sick of movies that have Edward Norton in them. Could be worse, Mario could be like Jean Claude Van Damme.
When it comes to films, you hear people saying that they are sick of seeing the same actors all the time - and I am sick of Mario.
So in your case "Mario" means "any Nintendo property that has had another game come out in the series"? That's an interesting definition.
I suppose my question would be why reinvent the wheel with new characters? Yes, they could have made Mario Golf with characters who weren't Mario characters... but why? Mario is a perfectly good franchise to use for a cartoony golf game.
Because it is incredibly dull seeing the same characters from the same company all the time.
I'd say Eternal Darkness is, on the whole, less inventive than Metroid Prime. Eternal Darkness is a Zelda-esque dungeon hack with some shiny insanity effects. It does a great job on them, and so is still a great game, but Metroid Prime takes the first-person-shooter in a direction it had never been taken before. More to the point, it did things with the first person shooter that people said couldn't be done - platforming sections that didn't suck, exploration based gameplay, etc.
MP isn't inventive at all - all the elements from it have been around in all the previous Metroid games for years. All they did was put it in 3D. I don't see GTA3 is being very invenive, as that is just GTA in 3D.
And, I mean, what were you hoping for from Metroid Prime? Something that wasn't Metroid?
No idea, really. Something better than how it turned out.
Second party development studios that, with heavy input and control from Nintendo. I do not consider the fact that Nintendo has begun to expand and take in some other development studios to mean that those games are not Nintendo games.
It isn't really Nintendo, though. Halo isn't actually from Microsoft either.
Nintendo continues to do what it's always done - perfect styles of games, and invent new styles of games. Even their new styles of games, though, have a certain... Nintendoness to them. They display elegance of control, and are typically very easy to pick up and play, but not nearly so easy to beat, and harder still to "fully" beat (i.e. unlock everything, get 100% completion, etc).
They haven't come up with a new style for years - merely taken something that exists and make it smaller.
Regardless, in every genre and style Nintendo has attempted, they are reliably among the best at it.
That seems an edge to me.
Erm, what genres are these? They have done platforming and... more platforming. Not much else.