Topic: It's fun to be IGNorant! (aka NSMBW trolling thread)

[broodwars]

I wrote a review for you, it's up higher on this page.  You'll love it, probably.

I did, and found the satire lacking.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Players and reviewers intentionally skip fun content and don't play for fun anymore.  It's like they've got 24 hours to be an honorary beta tester, and spit out some findings.  I can't listen to these people.

There just isn't enough FACE for my PALM.

[that Baby guy]

I wrote a review for you, it's up higher on this page.  You'll love it, probably.

I did, and found the satire lacking.

What satire?  It's literally for you.  Indeed.

Why haven't they mapped fireballs to something other than the run button, anyways?

[BeautifulShy]

As already noted Game length is subjective for each individual that plays the game. Some people play the game and rushes through it and some others take their time checking and exploring the game world. For example Pokemon Platinum I beat the elite 4 a few days ago after getting it in August. Some people it takes a week.

If we are taking about the time/value aspect then that basically falls into the game development costs associated with games these days. You guys think games are to short? Well try your hand at making a game and see if you can do better.

[broodwars]

If we are taking about the time/value aspect then that basically falls into the game development costs associated with games these days. You guys think games are to short? Well try your hand at making a game and see if you can do better.

Ah, the old straw man argument: "well, you think you can do better?!  Well, then your opinion doesn't matter, then!"  Dude, I've worked for a game developer and seen the process, so I know full well about resource allocation within a project and how at the end of the day you just have to put out a product.  And the developer I worked for was an especially penny-pinching studio.  I also have heavy modding experience working on a pet project with WarCraft III, so don't come to me whining that "well, you don't know how hard it is!"  I probably know better than you do.

[Stratos]

Honestly, it doesn't matter if I or anyone else can do better at making a game. We are people who play games and if a game does not satisfy our expectations then that is tough luck for the makers of said game. They are making a product for us so they have to try and satisfy us.

If I go to a restaurant and find the food lacking, does the waitress say 'well, you try to make a better meal'? No. You satisfy the customer. If I buy a large pizza, but they give me a medium pizza in a large box, there is a problem.

[that Baby guy]

If you want hours and hours of extremely tough Super Mario Bros., just go download and play hacks and patches.  That's all you need to do.  Since you're such an experienced game designer, why not make your own stages?

Nintendo has made a game that is a traditional Super Mario Bros. platformer.  They've revisited just about EVERYTHING we loved about SMB 3 and SMW.  Held items, increased difficulty, themed stages with unique properties, Yoshi, and more.  They've added in simultaneous multi-player.  Yes, it is about as long as those former titles have been, traditionally.  Deal with it.  That's the reality.  If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it, and send a letter to Nintendo about it.

Seriously, I'm glad Mario's 2D platforming adventures are back.  I'll be buying the game and playing it with my roommate.  I'll play the multi-player happily.  And when I've beaten and completed it?  I'll play it again.  Because unlike other games, I've found I can revisit Mario titles more than once, partly because they aren't epic in length, partly because their stage design is refreshing, unique, and stays fun for years and years.

If you're not happy with that, I really think the genre isn't for you, and you want the game to be something it never will be.  That's totally cool and all, but if you keep wanting that, you're not going to be happy, because it's not going to happen.

[EasyCure]

HOLY ****, NEW VOCAB

can't take credit for it, Bloodhound Gang's been using it since 2004

I think...I think EC was joking....

So, what you're hearing is that this game is "short" if you regularly play Super Mario Bros. and rush through it as fast as possible to beat it to play a review. Stop being stupid.  Seriously.  Stop. Being. Stupid. STOOOOOOOP.

Quotes from http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=12629

Alright, first off: Stop being a forum flamer.  Seriously.  Stop.  Being.  Forum.  FLAAAAAMER.

Now then, generally I've found that my finishing time for games is roughly 2-3 hours shorter than what reviews estimate it as.  The content they skipped through usually adds 2-3 hours of playtime onto a game experience, so in the end we're right back where we started: it's still short for a modern game, especially a console game.

This dude on the other hand....

Somewhat.

I read a snippet from the article on a video game news widget i have on my phone (from the toilet) and the "100 hour epic" remark pissed me off because i assumed it was being serious. The thought of anyone expecting a side scrolling mario platformer to be "epic" or anywhere near that length is so stupid it makes my head hurt.

5-6 hours for a game like that does seem right, because i could probably get through SMB1, 3, or SMW in less time than that at a regular pace since i'm familiar with the games now but a lil rusty. Blitzing thru them in less time that than is expected because once people get familiar with the game you'll be seeing speed runs on youtube just like there are for every other mario platformer.

I don't give a **** what you think a modern game should be either because this isn't a modern game. This is an oldschool game being released in the modern day with a more modern look, yes, but side scrolling platformers are no longer the norm of the video game industry so expecting them to be a "100 hour epic" is FUCKING RETARDED. If this game had 1 million levels and each had a time limit of 1hr because they were so fucking long, i'd never even pick it up because of how stupid the thought of it is.

love how this funhouse thread turned serious

[Stratos]

love how this funhouse thread turned serious

I think this thread is going to usurp the 'real' thread. A real coup.

[that Baby guy]

Nope, this thread is about how terrible people's reactions to something awesome can be, through and through, Stratos.

[NWR_insanolord]

I'm not going to say the people complaining about length are wrong, but I am going to say it's their fault that there is such a thing as a Werehog.

[EasyCure]

love how this funhouse thread turned serious

I think this thread is going to usurp the 'real' thread. A real coup.

While i would love to have that victory for the Funhouse, i'm afraid it won't happen since SOMEONE decided to throw around bannable (is that even a word?) language...

So, what you're hearing is that this game is "short" if you regularly play Super Mario Bros. and rush through it as fast as possible to beat it to play a review. Stop being stupid.  Seriously.  Stop. Being. Stupid. STOOOOOOOP.

Quotes from http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=12629

Alright, first off: Stop being a forum flamer.  Seriously.  Stop.  Being.  Forum.  FLAAAAMER.

[broodwars]

I'm not going to say the people complaining about length are wrong, but I am going to say it's their fault that there is such a thing as a Werehog.

Now that's a low blow.   

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

C'mon guys, serious thread.

[Stratos]

Serious thread for a serious board.

[Mop it up]

People paid $50 for Super Mario Brothers 3 back in the day, and if you factor in inflation that's over $80. Why have we now reached a point where games are cheaper than they've ever been on technically superior systems and a game of this type is no longer acceptable as being full price?

[Stratos]

Just to clarify, I'm fine with getting this game @ $50. I just thought it would be longer.

[broodwars]

People paid $50 for Super Mario Brothers 3 back in the day, and if you factor in inflation that's over $80. Why have we now reached a point where games are cheaper than they've ever been on technically superior systems and a game of this type is no longer acceptable as being full price?

Because Nintendo's competitors and even Nintendo's own projects (like the Zelda and Metroid series) have shown that you can get more bang for your buck than this without making the experience any less fun.

[Mop it up]

I'd recommend playing the game before making that conclusion. Besides, even the Zelda and Metroid games on the NES and SNES took a lot longer to complete than Mario.

[D_Average]

People paid $50 for Super Mario Brothers 3 back in the day, and if you factor in inflation that's over $80. Why have we now reached a point where games are cheaper than they've ever been on technically superior systems and a game of this type is no longer acceptable as being full price?

Creating a game like Mario 3 is far cheaper for the games industry today than it was in the 80's, while a game like Mario Galaxy is far more expensive.  Its harder to justify paying the same amount for both games.

[that Baby guy]

If it were so much easier to make, you'd think we'd see more AAA platforming titles, eh?

[broodwars]

If it were so much easier to make, you'd think we'd see more AAA platforming titles, eh?

I'm sure the complete market over-saturation of the mascot platformer over the last decade or so and the subsequent death of the genre has absolutely nothing to do with that, nor the general market abandonment of 2D as a console gaming format until fairly recently.

Incidentally, I suggest this conversation carry on elsewhere.  I have to agree with several of the other posters: this is too serious to be in the funhouse.

[Stogi]

Why don't you guys play the game first before you **** all over it? Just a thought.

[Stratos]

Why don't you guys play the game first before you **** all over it? Just a thought.

But we're Nintendo fans. What else are we supposed to do with upcoming games?

[NWR_insanolord]

Just because it's longer doesn't mean it's better.