Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Adrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 306
Despite not finishing Paper Mario, I started Twilight Princess last night. It took me a little over two and a half hours to get to the first dungeon. That was painful. If I remember correctly, the best part of the game is right after the first dungeon to right before Snowpeak Ruins. I forgot how dour the game is. Despite Midna's general levity, everything is so excessively gloomy. Nintendo did a complete about face from The Wind Waker. "Oh, you thought the last game was too colorful. Check out how dark and gritty we can be."

I don't remember Epona and Wolf Link being so unwieldy. The controls just feel so weird. Based on these early impressions, I think I'll always like but not love Twilight Princess. It reminds me of why I wanted the series to go in a different direction and why I welcome Breath of the Wild. Twilight Princess stalls a lot in the beginning; there's so much waiting. It doesn't trust players with even basic game mechanics. If anything, I think that's its greatest sin. Yes, even more than its insistence to latch onto series tropes such as keeping Ganondorf (or a Ganondorf-like character the main villain) even when the game would be fine or even work better without ramming him in players' faces. A Twilight possessed Zelda could have easily been the final boss. The last true Zelda game was A Link Between Worlds, and it did the same exact thing in addition to shitting all over series lore (why you don't just use the Lorule equivalent of the Master Sword is beyond me). Hilda could and should have been the final boss thematically and narratively. A Link Between Worlds is a fantastic game otherwise.

What's encouraging about Breath of the Wild so far is that it seems to be taking the best part of A Link Between Worlds and trying the fulfill the promise of the original Legend of Zelda. You're given complete freedom to explore even at your own peril. Stray too far into an area you're not ready to be in, and the game gets harder rather than artificially preventing you from going there. Sure, the main villain is this "Calamity Ganon." However, I'm hoping that he's defeated mid-way through the game. What better way to throw long-time series fans for a loop than to say "Ganon is the villain. Just kidding, now you really don't know what's going to happen. Good luck."

But I digress. To me, Twilight Princess tried too hard to be Ocarina of Time when what I wanted was for it to be more like The Wind Waker which at least had the illusion of freedom. It also was lighthearted yet serious when it had to be. Twilight Princess has been a Debbie Downer from the beginning. I just want to give it a hug. From what little I saw of Breath of the Wild, there's a sadness to the world but that sadness doesn't permeate the tone of the world if that makes sense. The world seems like it's in ruins. The game doesn't dwell on the fact; it encourages you to find out why. Twilight Princess didn't get that. It feels like the moody, emo teenager of the series.

General Gaming / Re: What are you playing?
« on: June 23, 2016, 07:24:42 PM »
I have a Bloodstained demo code that I'll probably give to my brother since I have a six year old Macbook and it wouldn't be powerful enough to run the demo.

I'm also okay with broodwars' description. We haven't had an IGA Castlevania in almost a decade. If Bloodstained sticks close to the formula, that's pretty much all I wanted and the entire reason I pledged to the campaign. I wish there was an NX version with a way to transfer my Kickstarter bonuses.

I doubt they'll bother with the "reboot with explanation", when like you and others have noted, they don't really care about making things work perfectly, because the timeline is a mess and the loose coupling is good enough.  So they might come up with a new story, that "reboots" things, but I wouldn't expect them to tie it back into the existing timeline(s).
The fact that Nintendo even bothered to retroactively install a timeline is the entire reason I think it'll try to explain a reboot (if that comes to pass). Nintendo didn't do a good job of creating the timeline, and it may not do a good job of explaining a reboot, but I think it'll try.
At least that's what I would do if I was in their shoes.  I think the fans would be fine with it too if you just told them "hey, this has no connections to past stories" (or maybe I'm wrong and imagination is dead ;) )
Depends on the fan. Demand of a timeline was so great that Nintendo finally relented. No timeline or "same legend retold" theory were easier explanations, but fans insisted on an actual timeline so here we are.

The Zelda timeline doesn't matter to me because it's obvious that Nintendo didn't plan one, and by the time it bothered to put the games in a continuity, Zelda's canon was just a jumbled mess. The plots of Zelda games have never been that engaging either (or don't make sense like Skyward Sword) so I'm fine with ignoring them.

My hope for Breath of the Wild (based on the bits of Treehouse Live I've seen) is that it's a soft-reboot of the series. So everything that happened happened, but through some plot device, it's essentially starting over (similar to Star Trek or X-Men: Days of Future Past). Maybe the plot involves converging the timelines into one then moving forward, Nintendo just follows this continuity and it actually maps out a coherent storyline from here on out.

NX. I won't act like I'm not buying one at launch.

General Gaming / Re: E3 2016
« on: June 13, 2016, 08:25:36 PM »
The Resident Evil VII trailer did nothing for me. I still want to see more of it.

God of War doesn't do anything for me either. Kratos got his revenge. How is there more story? I would've preferred a full reboot if Sony was going to bother at all.

I'm not understanding what's so new about the new Xbox One controllers. I read about new control sticks and the customization stuff. I guess that's cool. I still don't know why Microsoft wants to make its consoles annoying to clean. What's with all the indentations in the S model?

Gritty reboot. Link dies in the first hour. Zelda goes on path of vengeance, doesn't use weapons or items just her bare hands. Amiibo required for true ending. March 2017.

TalkBack / Re: Yooka-Laylee Now Releasing In Early 2017: New Trailer
« on: June 07, 2016, 07:47:16 PM »
Looks good. I'm still not fond of Laylee's design. I think it's the nose.

Nintendo Console Discussion / Re: E3 2016 thread. Predictions. News
« on: June 06, 2016, 09:17:12 PM »
I've resigned myself to buying Nintendo hardware. I know I'm going to so no need to pretend I won't.

I'm looking forward to more Zelda news. I expect Nintendo to sneak some NX news into the show. Not a lot, just enough to get people talking.

I don't regret supporting the Kickstarter, but man, I want that retail version. I think I can justify double dipping if there's a physical NX version.

Nintendo Console Discussion / Re: NX Launch Lineup
« on: May 31, 2016, 11:32:24 AM »
I have doubts Nintendo launches with a new Zelda and Mario even if the former is a port. If Retro Studios' apparently non-Metroid game is ready (and after over three year since Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, it damn well better be), I think that's a better launch title than a brand new game in an established franchise. A completely new IP from one of the industry's most revered teams will do more favors than 3D Mario will at launch. Nintendo is already preaching to the choir with Zelda (and the rumored ports of Super Mario Maker and Super Smash Bros. for Wii U). Nintendo fans already have NX on their mind. They need less convincing than everyone else. Having a non-established launch release further separates Nintendo from the Wii brand.

Nintendo is already going against tradition by launching a console in March which I think is okay because it's better than launching in November with no games. That said, it may not be bad idea to launch a new 3D Mario in the summer. Mario is an evergreen title; it'll sell no matter what so Using it to keep the release momentum going is something I'd like to see Nintendo try. Then, it can cap the year off with Mario Kart 9.

Nintendo Console Discussion / Re: NX Launch Lineup
« on: May 29, 2016, 05:32:39 AM »
F-Zero is definitely coming back considering, as Luigi Dude mentioned, Nintendo has already tried to bring it back. And with the Mario Kart 8 DLC, the series is obviously still on Nintendo's mind. Maybe with a shared library on NX, having to develop one Mario Kart then DLC will free up the team to take on F-Zero.

The shared library thing is also one of the reasons I can't see Diddy Kong Racing coming back. There's a reason Nintendo only releases one Mario Kart per generation per platform (e.g. evergreen status). With how successful DLC has been for the series (being a good deal if you bought them bundled certainly helped), I can't see Nintendo green lighting a Diddy Kong Racing sequel that may cannibalize DLC sales. Bank rolling DLC is cheaper than developing a new game. There was a DS port developed by Rare that stripped all the Rare characters out. To me, the game was more Rareware Racing featuring Diddy Kong that used the character because he was more recognizable than Rare's character as Conker and Banjo hadn't even been in a game yet. A sequel without Rare characters probably not developed by Rare starring a character that is a regular in a more popular racing game doesn't seem worthwhile to me. Mario Kart has taken to the skies and seas for some reason albeit in a different way while Sonic and Allstars Racing Transformed totally ganked Diddy Kong Racing's entire schtick. With so many things stacked against it, I don't see Nintendo seeing a point. At least F-Zero is a different kind of racing game.

Nintendo Console Discussion / Re: NX Launch Lineup
« on: May 27, 2016, 02:27:08 AM »
The Legend of Zelda Wii U/NX
Retro Studios' not-Metroid game
Super Smash Bros. for Wii U for NX
A straight port of Super Mario Maker (as a pack-in game)

I haven't been paying enough attention to third party games to know what's coming out around then. I think most of them know better than to try late 2016 ports so no Madden or Call of Duty. It isn't worth trying because the vast majority of those ports won't sell well enough to make it worthwhile. Maybe Final Fantasy XV. Maybe. And that's only because Nintendo hardware has a decent sized audience for J-RPGs even if Square Enix is admittedly trying to revamp the series to have a more global feel.

No reason why we can't have both. The components for Motion Plus are super cheap now that it can be sold on the side with little to no fanfare just for Virtual Console support. If it's appropriate for a game, I'd rather it be there than not. Motion controls have played such a big part in Nintendo's history that they'll always be a thing though I wouldn't shocked if certain games were retro-fitted with a traditional controls option just so Nintendo can sell more Virtual Console games. Super Mario Galaxy comes to mind.

I'd probably buy an NX Remote/Nunchuk just to have it.

(This ended up being longer than I expected so I went back and bolded the key points for skimming purposes.)

If you read around the internet (and not just Neogaf though forum members there have been good about culling rumors and quotes from Nintendo, and putting the tech stuff in context), I think there's enough to formulate a reasonable conclusion. There will be a console and a handheld. Reading over Iwata's interviews over the past few years, a shared library seemed like an obvious verdict. Once I started lurking Neogaf more frequently, I noticed the idea was gaining traction. I doubt I'm the first one to think of it, but I felt a little vindicated that others were arriving at the same conclusion.

The library will NOT be 100% shared because third parties will decide which of their games will and will not play on both though Japanese third parties that released successful 3DS software will likely have their games shared if only because it makes more sense to do so. It allows them to sell to a wider audience. Very rarely will we see PC/console games scaled down since that may affect the integrity of the product.

More often than not, first party games will be shared. If a game is too intensive for a handheld (probably anything Monolith Soft pitches), Nintendo will likely greenlight a console exclusive because it's been very good lately about not compromising a creator's vision (e.g. Bayonetta 2). I'm sure some are going to complain about Nintendo holding its first party output back by making games compatible on weaker handheld hardware, but those people are silly and they don't know what they're talking about. Nintendo has been making console-level games on handhelds for at least a generation. It has always valued gameplay over graphics. More to the point, it has always valued art direction and design over graphics. As Nintendo transitions to more powerful handheld hardware, the only difference in terms of its handheld and console output will be resolution. A shared library makes more sense now than ever.

Nintendo is abandoning optical media as it's no longer a viable storage solution for video games. The sheer amount of data of most modern games cannot be read fast enough from an optical disc to display on a screen. This solves a couple of issues. No disc drive cuts cost and no discs mean no installations. Shared library games can be scaled up, but a better solution would be to have the higher resolution textures on the game card and the hardware detects which to display. 540p scales to 1080p easier so expect the handheld screen(s) to be 540p. I suspect digital versions will simply include the texture pack you need depending on the hardware you're playing on. No need to have the larger, higher resolution textures on the handheld.

Nintendo would prefer people buy both console and handheld, but it's a software company first. The point of a shared library is to alleviate droughts and to ultimately release a greater volume of software. Nintendo's thinking is possibly that console owners will have access to all games, but handheld owners will have access to more games than they have before. If a console exclusive game is so desired that a handheld owner buys the console, that's just a win for Nintendo.

Since Nintendo is moving to game cards across the board, physical backwards compatibility is out of the questions, and I doubt Nintendo will bother with an external disc drive. People can still keep their Wii U and Wii, and they'll get over it in time anyway. Still, I expect Nintendo to strive for Virtual Console to include every past generation including Wii U, and be playable on the handheld. Speaking of, for Virtual Console purposes, I fully expect a rebranded Remote/Nunchuk. For simplicity's sake, I think NX's have the standard two sticks, four face buttons, four shoulder buttons, D-Pad, and start/select/home. I'm undecided if the console's main controller includes a screen, but a screen controller is definitely returning.

As far as hardware, specs are not the same as performance, and without proper context, it's hard to tell what Emily Rogers' source means. Still, I expect the console to be in the ballpark of Xbox One and PS4. Unless there's a noticeable jump in performance (which there likely will not be consider NX will not be sold at a launch and releasing over $300 is practically marching it out to die), it doesn't matter if NX is more powerful than PS4. As long as games can be ported, it's ultimately just a business decision whether NX gets support. I expect the handheld to have better performance than Wii U which won't be very difficult in 2017, and only displaying in native 540p would allow the hardware to allocate its power to other things.

I think it's in Nintendo's best interest in the long-run to transition to ARM on the console now, but x86-64 is still a very reasonable expectation. Most modern engines support ARM. The proprietary engines of a few major third party games currently do not. Compiling code for those engines probably isn't especially difficult though it is an extra step. However, the chances of Nintendo getting those games at/around launch or even ever were not very high to begin with. Since regaining support is going to be a long process, this isn't something Nintendo needs to concern itself with right now. And with ARM gaining more and more traction, those proprietary engines or their successors may eventually support ARM. Right now, Nintendo seems to be making all the right moves to create the anti-Wii U. If it has learned anything, I hope it learned that there are no quick fixes, no shortcuts. To improve its market position, Nintendo has to work with what it already has (excellent first party output and key third party output on its handheld) and build from there.

One bit I'm really looking forward to is where My Nintendo fits into puzzle. Right now, it's only compatible with Miitomo (which is weirdly addicting). Players are given "Missions" and completing them Platinum Coins which can be exchanged for discounts or even games. I doubt Nintendo opens up "Missions" to non-mobile games until NX.

I hate dried grapes. I'm sorry if that makes me raisinist.

You're the one making these assumptions about Nintendo charging $100 more.
The only assumption I've made about Nintendo charging more is that it'd be a bad idea. Nintendo isn't in a good enough market position to do so.
If the PS4 if $300 by the time the NX launches then why can't Nintendo make something on par with that and charge the same price?
Come on, man. That's what I've been saying. Again, Kimishima has already stated that NX will not sell at a loss so no razor and blade business mode. And again, Emily Rogers' sources put NX between Xbox One and PS4 which are generally on par with each other. PS4 is a little more powerful and the games have slightly better frame rates and textures, but the differences are negligible for most games unless you're looking at a Digital Foundry comparison. That said, I expect a NX to be priced similarly to PS4 and Xbox One when it launches unless Sony and Microsoft decide to undercut Nintendo at the last minute. They can slash the price, and Nintendo really can't.
And if the NX is $300 and so is the PS4 and the NX is LESS powerful despite costing the exact same price how is that going to go over?
Depends on how much less powerful. Better than Xbox One but worse than PS4? I don't think it'd matter. Obviously, NX would be able to handle multiplatform games then the question is a matter of whether Nintendo can convince publishers to support NX which is the same exact problem as if NX was more powerful than PS4.

Your consumer-focused mentality is understandable, just obscenely unreasonable.
Why is it unreasonable to expect that if company B wants to compete with company A they have to at the very least match company A's product?
You know goddamn well that isn't what I meant. You quoted one line in that entire post, cutting out the surrounding content that put it into context. Get the **** out of here with your straw man bullshit.

It is unreasonable to expect and demand powerful hardware without accepting the responsibility of having to pay a premium for said hardware.
Nintendo should at the very least offer a PS4 comparable product at the same price point.
Jebus, man... Emily Rogers' sources put NX right between PS4 and Xbox One which is exactly what you're stating here. I merely added that Nintendo really should not try to market a $400 console. $300 is the bar (if Rogers' sources are correct, $300 is probably NX's MSRP), and that's pushing it because PS4 will likely be $300 or less by the time NX launches. Do you really want to see how ugly it will get if Nintendo launches $100 or more above the competition mid-generation?
You might not think it is fair or that Nintendo has no other option but that's just how it is.  If Sony was selling supercomputers for 10 cents then that becomes the consumer expectation: 1 supercomputer for 10 cents and anyone that can't compete with that is left out in the cold.
That's a terrible analogy. That isn't a sustainable business model which was my first point. Had Sony continued on the path PS3 was originally on, Nintendo could have just waited until Sony put itself out of business. And NX at $400 like PS4 was at launch isn't going to work either because no one is going to buy it at that price for reasons that have been stated so many times before.

"Cheaping out" means not matching the industry standard expectations of hardware specifications.  It means Nintendo going with something that doesn't match up because it will cost them less money and they're usually hoping they can create a larger profit margin for themselves on the hardware.
1. Selling hardware at a small profit was the norm until Sony stupidly started selling at a significant loss (fun fact: even GameCube was sold at a loss at launch). The razor and blade business model is a bad idea for hardware because hardware costs hundreds of dollars. It easy to talk yourself into a razor especially since you probably need one. This worked out so poorly for Sony that it minimized losses with PS4 but ended up with a comparatively sub-par CPU. You can't have it all. Your consumer-focused mentality is understandable, just obscenely unreasonable. Someone has to pay for it yet you don't want that responsibility. In two generations, Sony went so high end that it barely sustained itself then it went middle-of-the-pack yet still sold at $400. I don't see either scenario as ideal, particularly for Nintendo.

2. PS4 was like a mid-tier PC at launch which is where Nintendo would have to be to meet your lofty expectations of what kind of specs NX should have in 2017. I'm still waiting for you to explain how you expect Nintendo to sell a $400 console. Kimishima has already stated NX won't be sold at a loss which is smart (even Sony didn't really want to **** with that anymore), and Nintendo really isn't in a position to retail NX at $100 or more than PS4 and One.

If Nintendo goes with ARM like the most recent run of rumors suggest, it'll be the most forward thinking Nintendo has been in a while. It may cost Nintendo some power now, but it's a better long term move.

That's like every IanSane post boiled down to its purist essence. Can a mod make a script that just replaces every future post of his with that one?
It's like he doesn't understand that a company doesn't "cheap out on specs." A custom chipset is still millions of dollars (billions of yen?) in research and development. Nintendo could dump high spec off-the-shelf parts in there and save a ton. Custom hardware is meant to optimize performance so the power it has isn't wasted through inefficiency and/or bottlenecks. Nintendo can't go too high because it still has to sell the thing. I can convince myself to buy a $400 Nintendo console, but I'm an outlier.
On topic, there's a dude on the Neogaf thread who seems to be respected as a source, who says that PS4 Xbone ports will be easy and that any barriers will just be business related. Pretty much what was expected.
Exactly. NX has to be in the ballpark of PS4 and One. Modern engines are highly scalable. If a game plays like ****, the publisher didn't care what it played like when it released the game.

Ultimately, Nintendo isn't getting Western support until it can prove its platform is worth supporting. Big Western publishers generally don't care about dedicated handheld gaming or, you know, the only thing has consistently done well in the last 25 years. Personally, I'd love to see Nintendo release a higher spec machine, but I know it won't be the difference maker. Nintendo has a long road ahead of it, and regaining support is going to be a process. Rumors point to Nintendo battling software droughts with a shared library and focus on Japanese third parties that still see at least Nintendo's handheld as a viable platform. It's a start. Getting multiplatform Western games like Madden and Call of Duty is also important. If you think higher specs are going to blow the doors wide open, you need to manage your expectations.
Thoughts? I'd this not a successor in the sense that the original DS wasn't a successor to the Gameboy?
I took that to mean that NX is the successor to both Wii U and 3DS due to the shared library rumor. It could also mean a stronger focus on the core audience which is also something Nintendo has talked about in the last year or two.

What I mean to say is that just because Nintendo might be saying "modern" doesn't mean I'm ready to speculate that they're picking up some cutting-edge tech... like Polaris for example.
Except Nintendo didn't say that, at least not publicly. Emily Rogers said she spoke to seven different people, and all, some, or none may work for Nintendo.

To expand on what I said earlier (not necessarily as a response to you), I believe the biggest clue to what modern means within the context of Rogers' info is Nintendo joining the Khronos group and likely using the Vulkan API. That's as far as I want to speculate without more info on this since Nintendo has never valued raw hardware power. It has, however, made some really smart design choices such as Sony's sound chip in SNES or MoSyS's 1T-SRAM in GameCube.

Speaking of GameCube, this is a console with clear hardware advantages albeit launched a year later yet Nintendo trotted out real-world performance numbers versus Sony boasting theoretical peak performance outside of an actual game environment. That said, when I hear "very modern hardware" or "industry leading chips," I think about ways Nintendo can improve performance through efficiency rather than pushing more powerful hardware.

Number 3 though tells me frankly nothing. "Modern" hardware to me is just marketing talk about how they're not off-the-shelf and they're doing some custom work on it.
Taken in context, I don't think it's marketing talk. "Modern hardware" refers to more recent feature sets and newer technology. Nintendo joining the Khronos group was an under-the-radar announcement that said a lot about Nintendo's seriousness with keeping up industry standards.

Hot hot hot rumors floating around today...
Recap of Emily Rogers' sources regarding NX:
1. No x86. She didn't say ARM, but that's the only other viable option because Nintendo sure as **** isn't sticking with PowerPC.
2. Polaris rumors are "wacky."
3. Uses "special, custom made chips," hardware design is very modern.
4. Closer to Xbox One than PS4. Cue Ian freaking the **** out.

Recap of Adrock's thoughts:
1. I started leaning toward the ARM camp about a month or two ago once I actually read up on it. ARM makes the most sense for what it seems Nintendo wants to do and where the industry is heading moving forward.
2. Polaris would have been nice, but the timing was off. It seemed more feasible with a March 2017 launch but still iffy.
3. No surprises there. Nintendo always uses custom chips. The modern hardware design is the most important bit. NX needs to be able to run current engines. It's more important to be powerful enough to run these than more powerful than PS4 let alone PS4K/Neo.
4. This is the part I suspect will get the most attention, and it shouldn't. For how Nintendo has to approach NX, its place in the market, and consumers, price is more important than hardware power. Nintendo cannot launch NX for more than $300 and expect anyone besides its own fanbase to give a ****. In fact, $300 might be pushing it since that's around where PS4 and One are now. If NX hardware could outperform PS4 at $300, great, but that gets into economics I'm not privy to. There are ARM chips that outperform PS4's Jaguar-based CPU, but it wouldn't come cheap.

I'm not sure how my suggestion that Nintendo find a small team to develop a near-straight Ocarina of Time 3D-style remake of Super Metroid (graphics update and item switching overhaul being just about it) devolved into a discussion regarding fears that Nintendo would allow another developer to practically change the entire game. Are we talking about the same Nintendo? I don't think it has ever greenlit a complete overhaul of one of its most beloved games so I don't know where this concern is coming from. At that point, the developer would be making an entirely new Metroid game. There is no point of a Super Metroid remake if the team wasn't making Super Metroid anymore. This entire discussion started because I doubted Nintendo trusting just anyone with one of its properties. Any team that gets its hands on a Nintendo IP is under strict supervision. You either make the game Nintendo wants or you don't get to make that game. Any concerns that a team handling a Super Metroid remake overdoing it seem unfounded to me.

I think you're downplaying how great a game Super Metroid is.
I have stated on numerous occasions for nearly ten years on this forum that Super Metroid is my absolute favorite game, and it's not even really close. In the paragraph you didn't quote, I even call it "one of the best and most influential games of all time." So no, I don't think I'm downplaying how great a game it is.
I read that same post today. It's not just carts vs discs, or the cost of an optical drive. Smaller cases means you can fit more of them on boxes when you ship. You don't have to order two different kinds of boxes, print two different kinds of paper, etc. The savings would ultimately extend beyond the more cost difference of where you put the game.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 306