The ape beat out the bounty hunter.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/34554
Michael Kelbaugh from Retro Studios says that it was hard to decide between making a new Metroid or Donkey Kong game.
Revealed in a tweet by an ONM writer, Donkey Kong was chosen because Retro felt they had unfinished business with the franchise. Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze is one of this year's Wii U tent-pole games and a follow up to Retro's Donkey Kong Country Returns.
It'll probably be the unpopular opinion, but between these two, I feel they made the better choice. After three Prime games, I don't feel like there's anything more they could have done with Metroid.
So they had the choice and went with the safe & easy option rather than something that would actually challenge them. end.Why would Metroid challenge Retro Studios more than Donkey Kong? Both would be relatively "safe and easy" considering they have blueprints froor what works for each. There are ways to make the choices more challenging. If Retro Studios ever handles Metroid again, I'd like to see what thu could do in third person. If they ever handle Donkey Kong after Tropical Freeze, I'd like to see what they could do in 3D.
So they had the choice and went with the safe & easy option rather than something that would actually challenge them. end.Why would Metroid challenge Retro Studios more than Donkey Kong? Both would be relatively "safe and easy" considering they have blueprints froor what works for each. There are ways to make the choices more challenging. If Retro Studios ever handles Metroid again, I'd like to see what thu could do in third person. If they ever handle Donkey Kong after Tropical Freeze, I'd like to see what they could do in 3D.
The people there now have worked on THREE Donkey Kong Country games (DKCR, DKCR 3DS, DKCTF).Retro didn't handle the 3DS port of DKCR, Monster Games did.
If we're going to get another Metroid game (and I hope we do) I want it to be made by somebody other than Retro. We've seen what they can do with the franchise, and while it was amazing, I want to see someone else's take.
Because the people who made Metroid Prime are no longer with the company.Some left, some stayed. The company still has three games (four if you count Trilogy) worth of source code and art. Unless Retro Studios went in a completely different direction with a new Metroid, I don't think it would be as challenging as you're making it seem.
If we're going to get another Metroid game (and I hope we do) I want it to be made by somebody other than Retro. We've seen what they can do with the franchise, and while it was amazing, I want to see someone else's take.
What about Team Ninja?
So no matter what I was going to be let down.You're Ian Sane. Why do you seem surprised by this?
My only beef with these Donkey Kong Country games is that there are no Kremlings or King K. Rule. It doesn't feel like DKC anymore. Even DK King of Swing had them still. I guess it is like playing a Mario game but without Bowser or Koopa Troopa's in it. Maybe that would be considered a shot in the arm for the franchise but it's just part of what I consider a DKC element and just seems to like that arch-rival element like Mario vs Bowser, Sonic vs Robotnik, Link vs Ganondorf.
My only beef with these Donkey Kong Country games is that there are no Kremlings or King K. Rule. It doesn't feel like DKC anymore. Even DK King of Swing had them still. I guess it is like playing a Mario game but without Bowser or Koopa Troopa's in it. Maybe that would be considered a shot in the arm for the franchise but it's just part of what I consider a DKC element and just seems to like that arch-rival element like Mario vs Bowser, Sonic vs Robotnik, Link vs Ganondorf.
My only beef with these Donkey Kong Country games is that there are no Kremlings or King K. Rule. It doesn't feel like DKC anymore. Even DK King of Swing had them still. I guess it is like playing a Mario game but without Bowser or Koopa Troopa's in it. Maybe that would be considered a shot in the arm for the franchise but it's just part of what I consider a DKC element and just seems to like that arch-rival element like Mario vs Bowser, Sonic vs Robotnik, Link vs Ganondorf.
See to me this attitude just encourages stagnation. Mario facing Bowser every time is BORING. Batman doesn't fight the Joker in every issue, you know? If you treat the details as essential elements a series becomes really stale really fast. I never even remotely gave a damn that DKC Returns did not have have Kremlings. It still has the same platforming gameplay so it always still felt authentic to me.
Would you really be compaining about that if it had been announced?You just asked Ian Sane if he would be complaining. Is that even a real question?
My only beef with these Donkey Kong Country games is that there are no Kremlings or King K. Rule. It doesn't feel like DKC anymore. Even DK King of Swing had them still. I guess it is like playing a Mario game but without Bowser or Koopa Troopa's in it. Maybe that would be considered a shot in the arm for the franchise but it's just part of what I consider a DKC element and just seems to like that arch-rival element like Mario vs Bowser, Sonic vs Robotnik, Link vs Ganondorf.
See to me this attitude just encourages stagnation. Mario facing Bowser every time is BORING. Batman doesn't fight the Joker in every issue, you know? If you treat the details as essential elements a series becomes really stale really fast. I never even remotely gave a damn that DKC Returns did not have have Kremlings. It still has the same platforming gameplay so it always still felt authentic to me.
See, that's the conflict I have as well in that I'm glad there are new characters and you don't want a situation like Star Fox Adventures where Andross is suddenly just dumped into the end because he's the Star Fox villain. It's just that it has been over a decade since we've had K. Rule act as the nemesis and I miss it. It gave Donkey Kong more of an identity. Just like Mario has an identity with and is identified by his fight with Bowser. There have been some other Mario games where Bowser isn't the villain but they've done a bit more storywise in those games as well. There's nothing really profound I can tell about the story for this game so why not have King K. Rule as the villian? Would you really be compaining about that if it had been announced?
Would you really be compaining about that if it had been announced?You just asked Ian Sane if he would be complaining. Is that even a real question?
**** YOU RETRO
I was joking. I harbor no ill will toward anyone on NWR.Would you really be compaining about that if it had been announced?You just asked Ian Sane if he would be complaining. Is that even a real question?
Yes and I received the answer I was looking for. His only complaint about my wanting K. Rule in the game was what he mentioned about creating a situation where there is little reason to innovate. It had nothing to do with the character itself and he wouldn't have made any fuss about it if he had shown up.
I know it is easy to seem like Ian is negative about everything but he can also be positive on things and he isn't being negative for the sake of it. He gives reasons for what he dislikes and why which is the proper way to give an opinion. But I've always been able to understand where he is coming from a lot of times more than other people on this site. Maybe it's a Canadian thing. It creates discussion and a sharing of different viewpoints on a matter which is the reason for these forums.
People forget that if he didn't actually like Nintendo or their games, he would have left a long time ago. He still buys and plays them and like all of us, shares what he thinks could be done better or speculates on why things aren't going right and shares what he would like to see in the future. No different than anyone else really. Just my take on it all.
My only beef with these Donkey Kong Country games is that there are no Kremlings or King K. Rule. It doesn't feel like DKC anymore. Even DK King of Swing had them still. I guess it is like playing a Mario game but without Bowser or Koopa Troopa's in it. Maybe that would be considered a shot in the arm for the franchise but it's just part of what I consider a DKC element and just seems to like that arch-rival element like Mario vs Bowser, Sonic vs Robotnik, Link vs Ganondorf.
See to me this attitude just encourages stagnation. Mario facing Bowser every time is BORING. Batman doesn't fight the Joker in every issue, you know? If you treat the details as essential elements a series becomes really stale really fast. I never even remotely gave a damn that DKC Returns did not have have Kremlings. It still has the same platforming gameplay so it always still felt authentic to me.
Still, like Mop It Up said, he can be condescending which gets old. For example, his insistence that casual gamers who like motion control games are "rubes." That line of thinking is total bullshit. Just because others like something he detests doesn't make them stupid.
I use the term "rubes" not because casual gamers have different tastes than me but because I feel that Nintendo's strategy is to INTENTIONALLY offer a half-assed product and sell it to this demograhic because they are too ignorant of gaming as a whole to know they could have better. I see the Wii as a con and cons prey on rubes. Nintendo is really who sees them as rubes or marks or suckers. I feel that Nintendo would never have made the Wii or games like Wii Sports as is if they were targetting an audience more familiar with videogames.So the years and millions of dollars they invested on research and development was all an elaborate plan to prey on stupid people with half-assed products?
they are too ignorant of gaming as a whole to know they could have better.See, that's you being condesceding again. You're assuming that casual gamers should view gaming the same way you do. Yet they don't give a damn about Zelda or God of War or Halo or [insert core series here]. If they did, they already would have bought those games. In fact, it's ignorant to assume their preferences is ignorance. Not liking core games is much of what makes them casual gamers. What is "better" is a matter of perspective. "Better" is whatever someone enjoys more. Nintendo spent a fortune trying to figure out how to reach them because Mario and Metroid sure as hell weren't getting it done. If Nintendo wanted to **** out a bad product, they could have easily done so without the enormous bill. You're not more informed than casual gamers. You just want something very different from them which is fine until you start denigrating others for their preferences.
No need to insult another member like that."idiots" is the wrong word, but the rambling part fits him quite well
There are situations where I see it as someone having different tastes. Like I don't like what they like but I get WHY they would like it. Then there are times where it seems like someone is getting scammed. To me the Wii was just Malibu Stacy with a new hat. It relied on it's target audience to not know that it was effectively just a re-released Gamecube. That isn't a different opinon on the part of casuals but rather a lack of knowledge.Again, you're assuming they should view gaming the way you do. You care about the hardware. Casual gamers do not. They don't care what the hardware is; they care about what it does and it was the only one that let them play Wii Sports. You call it getting scammed, but are you even trying to see it from their perspective? They already looked at core games and decided, "I don't want these." Nintendo was just smart enough to give them something they wanted. If Nintendo knew what they had (e.g. a console that would be constantly sold out for nearly two years), maybe they would have included better hardware.
**** YOU RETRO
Donkey Kong Country Returns sold over 4 million. Metroid Prime 3 sold around 1.5 million. I think this was a factor.
Donkey Kong Country Returns sold over 4 million. Metroid Prime 3 sold around 1.5 million. I think this was a factor.
I believe DKCR actually outsold the entire Prime trilogy.
Now it seems to be the case that they are doing that with Smash Bros. The question is why did they decide that making a 3ds port with 4 players was better than making a sequel to Galaxy. At this time Nintendo should be trying to prove they are capable of making a competantly competative game.If I remember correctly, Iwata planned on asking Sakurai to lead development on a Smash Bros. for 3DS or Wii U and Sakurai wanted to do both. And Nintendo isn't even developing either Smash Bros. game. Namco Bandai has some of their best people working on the games and if they're busy with Smash Bros., they aren't making games for competing hardware. Sounds like a pretty good deal for Nintendo.
now the excuse is being thrown around "we haven't been working on systems this powerful, we're behind the learning curve"
Nintendo can't go back in time and change those decisions, though. Sure, they put themselves in this position, but there isn't really anything they can do to magically fix things right now.