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 - heinous_anus

Pages: 1 [2]
26
Nintendo Gaming / RE: What's wrong with number 3?
« on: May 23, 2005, 12:02:16 AM »
One example of Nintendo's market share "negatively" affecting gamers: multi-console games are NOT fully multi-console.  In other words, you see games released, or being prepped for release, on the PS2 and the Xbox that never reach Nintendo's home console.  The Godfather, Episode III, and the entire GTA series, to name a few, are on every console but 1: the one that I own.  Don't give me flak about those games not meeting anyone's superior standards for gaming, either - you may not like games that have been released for the other systems, but I'm pretty sure a good number of Gamecube owners do...or would, given the chance.  The non-inclusion of games like those in the GC library only serves to hurt, not help.  

27
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Is the GameCube Dead?
« on: May 22, 2005, 11:11:16 PM »
"I guess to each his own, but I'm just not interested in racing games or the bi-annual prostitute shooting sim. I played GTA:SA already... it was a decent take on the series (certainly better than Vice City)..."

Then that list above is completely subjective; going on that, there are arguably some good/great games still coming out for the box, SA included.  Does it not count that MS is now undoubtedly "winding down" the Xbox's life in preparation for the soon-to-be-released 360?

Honestly, if they kept nearly the same engine for GTA4 with (undoubtedly) spiffier graphics, and, of course, a setting/story change, I'd be right there to lap it up.  Somehow, playing through a different iteration of "Goodfellas" every couple of years doesn't get old...particularly when that spin is immersed in trash 80s pop culture.

28
Nintendo Gaming / RE: PSP vs. DS - IGN's take
« on: March 29, 2005, 04:14:40 AM »
You guys need to really get off of Matt's nuts.  If you hate IGN so much, stop going there.

As far as the Mailbag is concerned, Matt tends to answer questions from various fields having absolutely nothing to do with the Gamecube; in the same "issue" you guys are ragging on, he talks about the new car that he's getting.  Are you going to get upset about that, too?

He's not the DS editor, and that's not the DS section of IGN, so why does Matt need to be head-over-heels about the system?  If he likes the PSP, that's fine, what's the big deal?

"Perhaps if there was more software out on DS better taking advantage of the touch screen we'd see a tie or a win for the DS."

Well, that's part of the problem, isn't it?  You can't really rate controls on software that isn't available for a system.  And perhaps it ended up being a tie because the editors *BIG GASP* like both systems?

29
Nintendo Gaming / RE: What gamers want in the next Nintendo system
« on: March 21, 2005, 06:19:28 PM »
Ian and Perm basically covered everything that needs to be done by Nintendo, if they ever intend to shine again.

Someone said that the SNES and Genesis days weren't as ferocious as they are now?  Give me a break.  Does no one remember the "SEGA does...what Ninten DON'T!" commercials?  I think I remember SNES commercials being pretty "competitive" as well.  I think if you asked Nintendo executives 15 years ago "would you like for Sega to simply disappear?" you'd hear some resounding "yes"s.  And Ian is spot-on with that observation about "matching" games.  Nintendo gave up on that a long, long time ago.

Someone else mentioned that "problems don't get fixed overnight."  Your definition of overnight must be much different than mine - they've had almost a decade to fix the problems that occured in the late 90s with the N64.  You know what N should do?  Go out and buy Square.  If that's not feasible, go and capture as much of the development team for Chrono Trigger that you possibly can.  Put out a spectacular first-party RPG at launch.

And right now, Sony does have "franchises"...or they're trying to start some; occasionally they just get drowned in the SEA of games available for the system - i'd consider Dark Cloud, Jak and Daxter, Gran Turismo, and Final Fantasy "franchise" games for the PS2.

If Nintendo reiterates the attitude and practices it had during the 8/16-bit days, the Revolution will be the best console ever, regardless of sales numbers and financial figures.

30
Nintendo Gaming / RE:Where did all the Gamers Go?
« on: March 12, 2005, 06:27:52 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
The only reason they don't sell well is because of Nintendo's own compassion for quality. It has been proven that third party games do sell well as along as they meet a Nintendo like standard in gaming. TOS had this as well as Viewtiful Joe. The only reason why Xbox gamers gobble it up is because to them, all-around OK games are better than what they usually get. Third Parties don't like releasing games for Nintendo because compared to Nintendo, there just Ok and not worth a whopping $50. Burnout 3 would of sold really well on Nintendo, probably even better than Xbox. Hell, my brother owns an Xbox and I told him to buy burnout 3. If it were released for the cube, I would of bought it instead.


I could think of a few examples to the contrary - Burnout 3 has already been mentioned, and let's not forget about everything that Rockstar puts out.  The bottom line is that the GC is the only "major" competitor of the 3 that doesn't receive said ports.  If a game goes multiplatform, there needs to be a GC version, I don't care how "crappy" it is.  And is this a pretty recent rule (rule= 3rd parties don't match the "quality" of Nintendo games)?  I remember 3rd parties making tons and tons of games for the SNES, and I think we'd agree that Nintendo-made games for that system were, on the whole, superior to 3rd part products.


31
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Where did all the Gamers Go?
« on: March 11, 2005, 09:43:39 PM »
While I completely agree that Nintendo has plenty of "older games," particularly the RE series, there should be no reason why games made for the PS2 end up on the Xbox but not the GC.  There are far too many "adult" titles that get released on those two systems but never get released on GC, and that has always confounded me, particularly with the "2nd place" spot historically being neck and neck between MS and Nintendo.

32
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Will the DS get a chance to live?
« on: March 09, 2005, 07:41:21 PM »
Paladin, I understand your point of view, let me explain mine.

The Gamecube version of Zelda shown in 2000 was a farse.  The way that I look at it, the problem was that Nintendo didn't stick to the more "adult" style featured in that trailer.  Is Wind Waker a bad game?  No.  Was public perception hurt because Nintendo decided to go in a completely different direction than what they had led the public to believe was going to be the next Zelda game?  Yes.  I tend to think that that doesn't happen too often - that when you release trailers and screen shots, or when "Company X" releases those things, they tend to reflect how the final product will look and play.  Wind Waker should have been the 2nd Zelda out on GC.  If they had any doubts about the direction that they wanted to go with Zelda back in 2000, then yes, it was a huge mistake putting out that trailer.

Generally speaking, though, would you not agree that previews, "leaked" information, trailers and the like generally help a game, as far as hype is concerned?

33
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Will the DS get a chance to live?
« on: March 08, 2005, 08:17:53 PM »
I really don't see how you can compare the Wind Waker situation to the DS, or ANY other Nintendo game.  Do you really think that by keeping quiet (not having any ads, screens, trailers) it would have helped in terms of GC and WW sales?  Weren't people disappointed because the game that ultimately came out was not the Zelda game originally touted for the Gamecube?  If that's the case, and people were disappointed for that reason, I don't think that being secretive would've helped anything at all.

34
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Will the DS get a chance to live?
« on: March 07, 2005, 08:57:36 PM »
I'm inclined more and more to think (I don't spend too much...er..ANY...time on handhelds anymore) that the DS was more reactionary than anything to the possibility/likelihood/definite that Sony was eventually going to put out a handheld.  I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing, that's just my sense of it all.  It really is the "third pillar" comment that makes me think that way; to me, "third pillar" means, "well, if it doesn't work out we've always got GBA...and then 'GBE'."

Honestly, the GBE's release will depend on the continued success (or unsuccess) of the other handhelds.  If PSP fails miserably in the US, and continues to perform not-so-well in Japan, Nintendo won't have to update diddly squat.  Look how long the original Game Boy lasted - grey, then colors, then pocket, then GBC.

Bingbang, I hear you on the games problem, with regards to the non-hype of Nintendo.  If DS and Revolution are so revolutionary, and are going to be ridiculously impossible to copy in terms of gameplay innovation, why not tout everything, all day long?  New Super Mario Bros. for DS, you say?  "Oh, by the way, here's 20,000 new screens of that game, a super cool commercial, and some other info that we've given to online sites/game mags"...is what Nintendo should be doing.

35
Nintendo Gaming / RE:psp is online now wheres nintendos plan
« on: March 01, 2005, 05:38:11 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
"Who cares if the Xbox is losing MS money?"

The people who want Nintendo to do the same thing as Microsoft.


If you think that by establishing a solid online presence at all is "doing the same thing as Microsoft," then I have to disagree.  Of course Nintendo shouldn't delve into an online plan that's going to end up costing them out the rear.  That doesn't mean that they should continue to avoid recognizing online gaming.  There has to be an alternative to what Microsoft does online.  Does Sony lose a ton of money off of their online service?

36
Nintendo Gaming / RE: psp is online now wheres nintendos plan
« on: February 28, 2005, 07:29:53 PM »
Why so many posts about this?  Who cares if the Xbox is losing MS money?  Unlike Microsoft, Nintendo's sole financial source is entertainment.  MS can afford to throw billions into the gutter in this generation in order to establish a presence, which they most certainly have, at least here in the US.  From what I remember prior to the Xbox launch, MS wasn't expecting to come out way ahead with the Xbox, or make a profit...on the console or on Xbox Live.  

37
Nintendo Gaming / RE: LOZ: 2005
« on: February 14, 2005, 04:18:49 PM »
Why should I?  If that's what it is being used for - to play games like Four Swords, Crystal Chronicles, or "unlocking cool stuff in any other Nintendo-made game" -  an accessory is exactly what it is.  It's a standalone system, yes, but so was the original GameBoy.  Now, if Nintendo had had that hook up to the SNES (thank god they never did anything crazy like that back then), I'd call it an "accessory" for that purpose, as well.

38
Nintendo Gaming / RE: LOZ: 2005
« on: February 13, 2005, 07:23:59 PM »
Then don't advertise it....at all, during the game.  I think it's almost a crime to walk around in Animal Crossing and have blatant Nintendo advertisement, and encouragement to buy a specific product, by the animals.  "Oh, you can call Captain so-and-so with a GBA!  But you can't get such-and-such item or get the good fishing without this (what was then) $70 accessory!"

39
Nintendo Gaming / RE: psp is online now wheres nintendos plan
« on: February 13, 2005, 07:20:12 PM »
I'm completely ignorant, so forgive the question; what does Warcraft III being peer-to-peer have to do with the costs of running an online network?  If the answer is "peer-to-peer is insanely cheaper," then why not set up a network like that?  It's a genuine question asked out of ignorance - I have no clue how these things get set up...you know, behind the curtain.

With regards to the server trouble for WoW, I think a lot of that had to do with how ridiculously well the game sold in the first few weeks.  I read an interview somewhere where a Blizzard rep. said that based on market research (other massive online games), WoW was only expected to sell X amount in the first 4-6 months; this amount was achieved in a matter of weeks.  I don't think Blizzard was ready for the popularity of the game.

I've never heard of difficulties with Warcraft III online.

40
Nintendo Gaming / RE: LOZ: 2005
« on: February 13, 2005, 11:11:27 AM »
I agree that Nintendo really needs to start advertising this game...right now.  Maybe not TV spots and such, but a couple of ads by March, for sure (in magazines and such...maybe another trailer before E3?).

The only thing I'm really hoping for is an absence of the mooch factor from Nintendo.  In other words, I don't want anybody in the game telling me that my gameplay experience can be enhanced ten-fold by hooking up my Gameboy Advance that I don't have.  I hope that 100% of the game can be experienced without that particular gimmick.

41
Nintendo Gaming / RE:psp is online now wheres nintendos plan
« on: February 10, 2005, 07:58:42 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
"We all know the DS is going online and we all know it will have online voice chat so yeah let's stop arguing since it won't affect anything."

No, actually. When the DS and Revolution go online and people start complaining about how much the games suck I can be like Ian and complain about how Nintendo never listened to my advice in the beginning. I'm thinking long-term here, pre-bitching and all that.


No one is responding to Ian's earlier point that online sells; when a consumer sees two similar product in a store, and one has just a couple more features than the other one, EVEN IF there's no chance they'll ever use those features, that other product starts to look a hell of a lot better.  Like it or not, now that more and more casual gamers exist, this is something that has to be dealt with.

I have lots of faith in Nintendo.  I think that, being the best gaming company around, that they would have little trouble creating an easy-to-use, accessible online option for future consoles while sacrificing nothing in terms of quality with regards to their games.

On the other hand, with regards specifically to the DS, I think that the price point of the PSP really is something to make a big deal about.  Unlike some folks who may point to the "iPod" generation, I really don't think 22-23 year old college students are going to run out and plunk down, what is it, like $300, to play portable GTAIII or Metal Gear.  Listening to music from class to class, on the bus, in class, in the car, etc. etc., are far different than spending that much money on a portable gaming system that probably won't get that much use.  (This is all assuming that the 18+ demographic is what Sony is going for...?)


42
Nintendo Gaming / RE:Star Fox Assault
« on: February 09, 2005, 07:54:34 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: joshnickerson
Quote

Originally posted by: heinous_anusAnd what's the big deal with Matt at IGN liking the PSP?  I'd much rather hear true opinions from a guy in his position than mindless Nintendo-loving banter.  If he doesn't like the DS, he doesn't like the DS, who cares?  Let him dislike it - I think he's given some very reasonable reasons for doing so.


The point is that he's running a DS site, and he doesn't even seem to like the console. It'd be akin to some guy who utterly hates Star Wars running a Star Wars news site.


I don't think that's a very good comparison; as far as I know, Matt just "works" at IGN, right?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but is he the only Nintendo person there?  Is he really the top DS guy working over there?  And as far as I can tell, Matt doesn't hate Nintendo, nor does he hate any of their systems.

A Star Wars fan, in fact, many Star Wars fans, have complained non-stop about the recent DVDs that came out (the "special edition").  I'd still consider those guys fans of Lucasfilm products, even though they have reasonable issues with the DVDs.

And also, he's expressed his complaints about the system so far, and, like I said, his complaints are pretty reasonable (a port of a 1-generation old game for the big Nintendo launch-title, the fear of the dual-screen turning out to be more of a gimmick than a revolutionary concept).  He's not completely dismissing the system, just pointing out areas where Nintendo could be more succesful.  Nothing wrong with that.

Myxtika:  I'm pretty sure that the lone fact that Starfox:Assault was on-rails didn't warrant the 7.0 rating.  I personally wouldn't have complained about an aspect of the game like that, but come on, it's not like the guy dedicated an entire page, or paragraph, to the matter.  It's just something that he, as the reviewer of the game, didn't like.  He expressed other reasons, as have other media outlets, why the game didn't deserve a high rating.

43
Nintendo Gaming / RE:psp is online now wheres nintendos plan
« on: February 08, 2005, 08:53:42 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: mantidor
Im not saying that you, or for that matter, all of us here dont want online, we do, of course! we enjoy it,  (maybe its more like you, I have been bored to death with online gaming), but there are millions of people out there without internet but with a tV and the income to buy a console, thats why Nintendo said "gamers dont want online", they want to please us as much as they can, but they also want all those "offline" people  (which are for now the majority) to play games, the want your mom and dad and your grandparents to enjoy their games, and thats what the whole DS, revolution and their supposed "k¡ddie" games are about,  a game like resident evil would discourage someone like my teachers to play games, but not Pikmin or Mario Party.

All this sounds almost utopian, but thats Nintendo's philosophy, or at least what Ive come to understand, and I honestly like it, they are here to make games, they arent trying to make their operating system to control every electronic device in your house (microsoft) and they dont want every single electronic device in your house to be made by them (sony). The bad part is that most gaming related information comes from the internet and avid internet users, and that explains why Ninty public image is so deteriorated.


I totally see your point, and I think a lot of Nintendo fans (myself included) think the same way.  I like the utopian idea that you talk about, as well.  Nintendo has explicitly stated in the past that they are a gaming company first and last, and that will always take supreme priority over anything else.

At the same time, it doesn't hurt to include features like "online play" with your systems just to be able to say that you have it.  I still don't think, even with this next batch of consoles, that online play is integral to the gaming experience (it may very well never be), but, at the same time, not offering such a service, or not touting/supporting such a service could prove very costly.


44
Nintendo Gaming / RE:Star Fox Assault
« on: February 08, 2005, 08:27:27 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Gamebasher
IanSane, you wrote:

"Yet all the Star Fox fans are complaining that there's not enough on-rails levels. IGN's score sounds accurate it's just their complaints about the game are the complete opposite of what the target audience thinks.

"IGN in general though is REALLY bad at judging any game in a non-mainstream genre. Gradius V for example lost points simply because it's a SHMUP and numerous 2D fighters get slammed for being 2D fighting games."

Hmm, I must say that I don´t think it´s a huge problem for Nintendo that IGN gives StarFox a hard time. Not on second thought. I think we haven´t seen the last of IGN´s bad scores for Nintendo games. Next one up to score badly may be the next Metroid game which they may not like for some reason. But that is no problem. Nintendo wont be affected by that website and it´s anti-Nintendo tunes.


I've heard a lot of "IGN this" and "IGN that" on these forums - what gives?  If you are going to complain about something from their site, certainly it couldn't be Starfox - judging by EGM and Gamespot's scores (both 7.3), I don't think that they gave it an unfair review.

From what I've heard from you guys, this is a total rent game.  Having played the first two Starfox's thoroughly, my expectations are naturally going to be very high for the game, no matter what I may do to dissuade them.

And what's the big deal with Matt at IGN liking the PSP?  I'd much rather hear true opinions from a guy in his position than mindless Nintendo-loving banter.  If he doesn't like the DS, he doesn't like the DS, who cares?  Let him dislike it - I think he's given some very reasonable reasons for doing so.  

45
Nintendo Gaming / RE: Resident Evil 4 Discussion
« on: February 07, 2005, 06:32:29 PM »
From what I understand, a lot of people have praised RE4 for its new non-fixed camera, which also affects the controls, and also the abundance of ammo.

I know I'm in the minority, so I have no right to "complain," but I really loved in, well, especially 2 and Code Veronica where part of the "survival" in "survival horror" included strategically using your ammo.  In other words, using handgun ammo whenever possible to avoid using "better" weapons, not killing some enemies you can just run past, etc.  The lack of ammo in these other games, combined with the very non-linear gameplay, made the entire weapons system a big part of the spook factor.  I remember, and I recall this for friends, as well, getting extraordinarily scared when I was almost out of shotgun shells, or the tremendous relief one felt when finding those golden magnum bullets later in the game.

I'm not saying that "fixing" these things is necessarily a bad thing for the game, I just find it curious that I've been selling off ammo the whole game to avoid having to discard it.

By the way, in this "Professional" mode that I keep hearing about, do you get less ammunition throughout the game, or do enemies take more damage before they die?  This would be a very compelling reason, on top of the other goodies I've been hearing about, to replay the game.

46
Nintendo Gaming / RE:Where did all the Gamers Go?
« on: February 05, 2005, 11:47:09 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: PJ gamer10
I'm an Eb employee and it has gotten to the point that I have had verbal arguments with customers because they do not think

the Gamecube is a legitimate platform for games.  They are perceived as a tiku tiku tiku!  system. After RE4 launched me and my

co-worker who is a nother Big N fanatic put it on and let people play it. People couldn't believe the power of the game and the

system. We even sold a few Gamecubes because of it.  Most people however are waiting for the PS2 port. Even with the DS,

people will examine the PSP and say this is better. Im beginning to think that people don't want quality games anymore but

they want an image.


I don't think people want an image.  People are given "an image" or "image 'x'" through advertising, word of mouth, friends, sales clerks, and the emphasized games on any given system.

Bearing in mind that Microsoft has a virtually unlimited pool of cash with which to work, there is little to no logical reason why it should ever outsell the Gamecube...or, for that matter, the PS2 for a given week/month, which I believe it did sometime during December.  Nearly every 3rd party game released on the Xbox can also be found on the PS2, which has a much more vast library of games (think backwards-compatability).  Of the remaining "exclusives," many of the Xbox's best games (Halo, KOTOR, KOTOR II, Doom III, etc.) can be found on the PC.  You're left with games like Halo 2 and Ninja Gaiden to warrant the purchase of the system...again, logically speaking.  And while these are fine games themselves, surely they couldn't alone justify to the common consumer, glancing down the aisle at the massive PS2 display, a $150 purchase?

My point?  Maybe some would, in this circumstance, thinking only in the terms above, buy that system (the Xbox).  But I attest that most wouldn't without another variable, and in advertising and "an image" we have such a variable.  Xbox doesn't have to be a good system; it doesn't have to have the exclusives that Nintendo has, or the broad genre coverage that Sony has.  It only has to have a company behind it that will convince at least part of the general public that it is the better system, bar none.  That is what Microsoft has done.

I saw a San Andreas commercial extraordinarily late on Comedy Central the other night while "studying;" this was like 3 in the morning, mind you, and San Andreas was released in November.  Why am I not seeing constant RE4 ads....all the time?  Does anyone remember how cool Nintendo's commercials used to be, and how frequently you saw them on TV?  Go, go right now on the web looking for the old Dr. Mario commercial.    

I want, as many skeptical Nintendo fans want, to continue playing games well into the future on a console made by the big N.  The real fear here is that Nintendo will either be 1) Sega-matized, which is of course no good, or 2)demoted to "cult" status, putting out pretty much Nintendo-only software on their system.  Neither one of these should happen, but certainly could happen unless Revolution is really that Revolutionary, not just with respect to how we play games, but with respect to how many different companies (and genres) we get to play games from.  

Pages: 1 [2]