Nintendo E3 2015 Digital Event in Hindsight

[ryno74]

Hello all,

I would just like to express an opinion about Nintendo's recent controversial conference now that the dust has settled on another year of E3. This is not to be an apologetic for Nintendo or anything, but just to analyze what we did see at the press conference.

So, I think this year was not as bad as people make it out to be. It was not a good year, no, but it was no E3 2008 either. I do also most of the rage of the conference because of the two "slaps-in-the-face" that Nintendo gave.

On the positive side though, they only did concentrate on the next year or so, so everything we saw will be coming out within the next year. We're getting Starfox, Xenoblade, Yoshi, the Paper Mario crossover game, and Mario Maker to last us the rest of this year. That, for a first/second-party line-up, is not bad at all. These are all good things, and I think we should remember the good things that we did get rather than the negatives.

On the negative side, there was the completely UNDERWHELMING conference, especially with the "Metroid" title and the AC board-game..thing. Nintendo doesn't even seem to have plans for a core Metroid title or the next Animal Crossing game (or F-Zero for that matter) AND almost all of the great games coming this year are games we have already heard of. I believe the biggest mistake Nintendo made was in their presentation of their material. The fact is, they NEEDED some hype footage of something (like Zelda Wii U) to appease the masses. You notice how Sony had the "BEST CONFERENCE EVAR" (-GameTrailers livestream) by showing off games that won't even be out in the next year. But, it FELT hype because these games have been hyped and awaited for SO LONG. Nintendo had NONE of that which makes Nintendo seem like they have no games or anything on the way.

I, like many others, see this as a sign from Nintendo. The Wii U has not been selling well. The PS4 is only picking up more steam and puling ahead of the pack. I think we now know, given by context clues, that Nintendo is trying to shift to the NX as best as possible. That Zelda Wii U delay? It's TOTALLY getting cross-ported. Nintendo is going to make Zelda the swan-song for the Wii U and possibly have one more hype game before the NX. That's my prediction. All of the core games we want that haven't been announced or hinted at? The NX! It makes sense.

I do sympathize with the angry fans. Metroid is a rather neglected franchise, and if you hated Other M (like I did), you've been waiting for 8 years for an amazing Metroid game. A home Animal Crossing game? About 7 years! But we also can't expect Nintendo to ALWAYS deliver the goods by themselves and their second-party developers. We also can't expect every E3 to be amazing like 2006 or 2010. Nintendo will make these games, in time. If we make our voices heard and tell them that we want these core experiences, they will comply.

Nintendo will deliver the goods eventually. This year will be slow, but we do have great, hardcore games coming out and Splatoon and Smash still giving out DLC and content. Nintendo is also obviously trying to transition to the NX smoothly without actively killing the Wii U outright. Metroid, Animal Crossing, Mario, Zelda, possibly F-Zero are all on the way (I think despite what Nintendo says sometimes), but it's for the NX and the time isn't right just yet. This year wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good either.

Thanks for reading my rant. Let's discuss the conference! What do you think of the conference now that it's over? What do you think Nintendo will do with the NX? And how do you think Nintendo will respond to the backlash from this year's E3?

 

[Warlock*G]

Here is a very interesting post on Nintendo's E3.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Here is a very interesting post on Nintendo's E3.

He just hated everything...

 

[finalark]

Here is a very interesting post on Nintendo's E3.

What point? All I got from this was a big, steaming pile of butthurt.

And lol at the 3DS being a "dying console."

 

[ryno74]

I agree, that post just seems like whining. And even though most people hated MP: FF and AC: AF, I don't think anyone would say that Star Fox, Yoshi, Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, or the Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario crossover were weak at all...

 

[finalark]

I agree, that post just seems like whining. And even though most people hated MP: FF and AC: AF, I don't think anyone would say that Star Fox, Yoshi, Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, or the Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario crossover were weak at all...

His biggest crime is ******** that Animal Crossing was never a system seller and instead should be a mobile name. Note that he didn't address the big issue here.

 

[Warlock*G]

He just hated everything...

To be fair, not everything. Just most of what Nintendo showed at E3.

What point? All I got from this was a big, steaming pile of butthurt.

And lol at the 3DS being a "dying console."

I agree, that post just seems like whining. And even though most people hated MP: FF and AC: AF, I don't think anyone would say that Star Fox, Yoshi, Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, or the Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario crossover were weak at all...

His biggest crime is ******** that Animal Crossing was never a system seller and instead should be a mobile name. Note that he didn't address the big issue here.

I was expecting more precise rebuttals... if you guys even have any.

Edit: Here is some data on the sales of Animal Crossing.

However, the question remains: is that franchise going to push people to buy a platform for it?

 

[ryno74]

To be fair, not everything. Just most of what Nintendo showed at E3.




I was expecting more precise rebuttals... if you guys even have any.

Edit: Here is some data on the sales of Animal Crossing.

However, the question remains: is that franchise going to push people to buy a platform for it?

Well, that was rude, but if you want a more precise rebuttal, here it is.

No, that article was not enlightening in the slightest. The fact that he whined about pretty much everything makes his points moot. He doesn't offer anything to the table in terms of what he was expecting. Most people, unlike him, are looking forward to FE, Mario and Luigi, Starfox, and Yoshi's Woolly World. What I especially didn't care for is how he treated the "Aonuma Zelda games" as if they're complete **** and nothing will change his rose-tinted glasses about classic Zelda games. He forgets that the last "Aonuma" Zelda game was ALBW and was an incredible game. Like for instance:

"Hyrule Warriors was a hit on the Wii U and surpassed expectations. Do you know why, dear reader? It is because Hyrule Warriors was not Aonuma Zelda. So what does Nintendo do? They try to inject Aonuma Zelda into it. I cannot believe it!"

How in the hell is Hyrule Warriors 3DS "injecting Aonuma Zelda" into Hyrule Warriors?! It's just a port! Who cares? Also the Triforce Heroes game is just a spin-off and we still have Zelda U on the way. Also, the 3DS is NOT dying. It has plenty of great games and is still selling decently well (for a five-year old handheld). I mean, sorry that you aren't getting a brand-new canon title for every franchise and all of your dreams weren't fulfilled this E3, but it doesn't mean the 3DS is "dying."

He even goes on to incorrectly cite that Mario Tennis is coming out for the 3DS rather than the Wii U. My over-arching problem with this article is if you don't like most of the things you see, then don't buy it! That's plain and simple! This article has way too much a myopic view to really be taken seriously. It comes off whiny and entitled especially with lines like: "Let’s go through our E3 2015 game line up. When I am done here, I am going to take a shower to take off the filth." and, "No one is going to buy a 3DS for this. It seems like this is just left over game concepts slapped together to put something up for a dying console." when he HASN'T played the games and just rants about how everything is ****. The conference was not a success, no, but it also was FAR from the worst. Remember E3 2008? Wii Music? No Mario, Zelda, or Metroid? The ONLY thing was a new Animal Crossing. The next year was at least decent with a new Metroid title but there was still nothing that big to write home about.

I'm not going to defend everything with Nintendo. Do I think Star Fox, Xenoblade X, Yoshi, Mario Maker, and Animal Crossing are going to sell software, let alone SYSTEMS? Of course not! Animal Crossing did very well on the 3DS, so *maybe* a spin-off will help sell more 3DS's. But I doubt it. Nintendo needed a bigger heavy-hitter for the res of this year, but unfortunately, they won't really have it. I think all of these games will be pretty great, but it's not going to make Fallout 4's sales for instance. But is it going to be a complete disaster? No! Of course not!

 

[Warlock*G]

Well, that was rude, but if you want a more precise rebuttal, here it is.

Rude? Maybe.... I was merely trying to provoke an answer.

No, that article was not enlightening in the slightest. The fact that he whined about pretty much everything makes his points moot. He doesn't offer anything to the table in terms of what he was expecting.

To be fair, Malstrom offers specifications about what he expects from Nintendo in numerous other posts that he wrote over the years. I just thought that the one I put up there was interesting because it went against the tendency that some people have to excuse a boring showing from a particular corporation. (Muppets... right...)

Most people, unlike him, are looking forward to FE, Mario and Luigi, Starfox, and Yoshi's Woolly World.

We'll see about that. My wager is that those games will barely allow Nintendo to recoup, thus reflecting most players' disinterest in those games. If I'm wrong, well, good for Nintendo.

What I especially didn't care for is how he treated the "Aonuma Zelda games" as if they're complete **** and nothing will change his rose-tinted glasses about classic Zelda games.

I happen to share his opinion on Aonuma Zelda, and you happen to not share it. That's all well and good... until you realize that the series has been declining in relation to videogames' growing popularity. (Translation: x million sales in 1987 is not the same as x million sales in 2015).

He forgets that the last "Aonuma" Zelda game was ALBW and was an incredible game.

"Incredible", eh? Nothing less. I guess I have to take you at your word here. I haven't bought it, because Aonuma's team has betrayed my expectations too often already. And I used to love Zelda too. It's one of the first three videogames I ever played and I instantly got hooked.

Like for instance:

"Hyrule Warriors was a hit on the Wii U and surpassed expectations. Do you know why, dear reader? It is because Hyrule Warriors was not Aonuma Zelda. So what does Nintendo do? They try to inject Aonuma Zelda into it. I cannot believe it!"

How in the hell is Hyrule Warriors 3DS "injecting Aonuma Zelda" into Hyrule Warriors?!

The author tells you right in his post...

It's just a port! Who cares?

I personally don't. However, Malstrom does. If you want to know why, you should e-mail him.

Also the Triforce Heroes game is just a spin-off and we still have Zelda U on the way. Also, the 3DS is NOT dying. It has plenty of great games and is still selling decently well (for a five-year old handheld). I mean, sorry that you aren't getting a brand-new canon title for every franchise and all of your dreams weren't fulfilled this E3, but it doesn't mean the 3DS is "dying."

Nintendo, as they tend to operate according to a "console cycle", will probably replace the 3DS soon (in 2017 at the latest) and let it die. We'll see.

He even goes on to incorrectly cite that Mario Tennis is coming out for the 3DS rather than the Wii U.

Yep, that's a mistake of his right there.

My over-arching problem with this article is if you don't like most of the things you see, then don't buy it! That's plain and simple!

Oh don't worry; from what I can gather, Malstrom will not buy those products.
However, some people also like to state their impressions of what is presented to them, which is what Malstrom is doing in the particular post I have linked... much to your chagrin apparently. Of course, if his opinion was similar to yours, that wouldn't be a problem, right?

This article has way too much a myopic view to really be taken seriously. It comes off whiny and entitled especially with lines like: "Let’s go through our E3 2015 game line up. When I am done here, I am going to take a shower to take off the filth." and, "No one is going to buy a 3DS for this. It seems like this is just left over game concepts slapped together to put something up for a dying console." when he HASN'T played the games and just rants about how everything is ****.

Those parts about the shower and the filth are obviously a joke; in other words, you're not *supposed* to take *those* seriously. As for the part about the console dying... make of it what you will.

The conference was not a success, no, but it also was FAR from the worst. Remember E3 2008? Wii Music? No Mario, Zelda, or Metroid? The ONLY thing was a new Animal Crossing. The next year was at least decent with a new Metroid title but there was still nothing that big to write home about.

Malstrom was never even arguing that this E3 was the worst. Moreover, to quote Doug Stanhope: "How does their suck make my suck not suck?"

I'm not going to defend everything with Nintendo.

Do what you will.

Do I think Star Fox, Xenoblade X, Yoshi, Mario Maker, and Animal Crossing are going to sell software, let alone SYSTEMS? Of course not! Animal Crossing did very well on the 3DS, so *maybe* a spin-off will help sell more 3DS's. But I doubt it. Nintendo needed a bigger heavy-hitter for the res of this year, but unfortunately, they won't really have it. I think all of these games will be pretty great, but it's not going to make Fallout 4's sales for instance. But is it going to be a complete disaster? No! Of course not!

See, this is what's bothering me: back in the NES, SNES and arguably Wii days, nobody had to make excuses like this. Nintendo made great games and that was it...

 

[ryno74]

Rude? Maybe.... I was merely trying to provoke an answer.


To be fair, Malstrom offers specifications about what he expects from Nintendo in numerous other posts that he wrote over the years. I just thought that the one I put up there was interesting because it went against the tendency that some people have to excuse a boring showing from a particular corporation. (Muppets... right...)


We'll see about that. My wager is that those games will barely allow Nintendo to recoup, thus reflecting most players' disinterest in those games. If I'm wrong, well, good for Nintendo.


I happen to share his opinion on Aonuma Zelda, and you happen to not share it. That's all well and good... until you realize that the series has been declining in relation to videogames' growing popularity. (Translation: x million sales in 1987 is not the same as x million sales in 2015).


"Incredible", eh? Nothing less. I guess I have to take you at your word here. I haven't bought it, because Aonuma's team has betrayed my expectations too often already. And I used to love Zelda too. It's one of the first three videogames I ever played and I instantly got hooked.


The author tells you right in his post...


I personally don't. However, Malstrom does. If you want to know why, you should e-mail him.


Nintendo, as they tend to operate according to a "console cycle", will probably replace the 3DS soon (in 2017 at the latest) and let it die. We'll see.


Yep, that's a mistake of his right there.


Oh don't worry; from what I can gather, Malstrom will not buy those products.
However, some people also like to state their impressions of what is presented to them, which is what Malstrom is doing in the particular post I have linked... much to your chagrin apparently. Of course, if his opinion was similar to yours, that wouldn't be a problem, right?


Those parts about the shower and the filth are obviously a joke; in other words, you're not *supposed* to take *those* seriously. As for the part about the console dying... make of it what you will.


Malstrom was never even arguing that this E3 was the worst. Moreover, to quote Doug Stanhope: "How does their suck make my suck not suck?"


Do what you will.


See, this is what's bothering me: back in the NES, SNES and arguably Wii days, nobody had to make excuses like this. Nintendo made great games and that was it...

Well, he claims that Hyrule Warriors 3DS is having Aonuma Zelda added in because all of the characters have been added from Aonuma Zelda games. But, unfortunately, people have been playing "Aonuma Zeldas" for the past almost 20 years. Obviously they're trying to appeal to as many Zelda fans as possible, but aside from Link, Zelda, and Ganon from the four before OoT, who else would you exactly add? Maybe costumes? Or people like Marin or Agahnim? Or even maps from the games? But I don't think in a game like Hyrule Warriors have the retro Zelda games would've been all that different.

Also, I agree with you (which is what I said) that the games coming out this year will not be profitable for Nintendo. I mean, if Smash Bros. and Mario Kart weren't the biggest system sellers ever, these sure as hell won't be. And that's why this press conference was really disappointing for a lot of people. And I'm also not really excusing Nintendo from a boring show. Yes, they did have a boring show and they should have brought something more, but all I was arguing was that it's not as bad as people made it out to be. And obviously my original post was made out to people like Malstrom who thought it was god awful. He's entitled to his opinion, for sure, but I'm also entitled to argue against it if I don't agree with it.

Lastly, I do encourage you to at least try ALBW. It's a very good, quality Zelda game. I imagine what you mean by "Aonuma Zelda games" are akin to just Modern Zelda in general (like how Egoraptor refers to them in his Sequelitis video.) And by that, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume you don't like Modern Zeldas because they're more linear, less challenging, more story driven, etc., so, I understand how you don't care for modern Zelda games and I get why you probably want more representation from Classic Zelda games in Hyrule Warriors, but to Nintendo they're trying to go for appeal. ALTTP is for sure up there as one of the best, but so is Wind Waker, OoT, MM, and sometimes TP.

 

[Warlock*G]

Well, he claims that Hyrule Warriors 3DS is having Aonuma Zelda added in because all of the characters have been added from Aonuma Zelda games. But, unfortunately, people have been playing "Aonuma Zeldas" for the past almost 20 years.

And the series has been declining for the past almost 20 years; this is apparent if you take the number of sales in the context of a growing videogame market. Zelda used to be a series that created new gamers of all ages: people introduction to videogames would be Zelda. Nowadays, more people play games than ever before, yet Zelda struggles to appeal to as many people as it used to do back then, within a much smaller market, back in a post-crash environment.

Obviously they're trying to appeal to as many Zelda fans as possible

I find this sentence very telling. It suggests that Nintendo has given up on attracting new customers to Zelda, that they are content merely appealing to Zelda fans and not new people as they used to do. It indicates that Nintendo is settling for less! Imagine that! The company that single-handedly revitalized the video-game industry and brought us the mega-popular Wii, settling for less! They are not trying to appeal to former fans either, of which I am.

but aside from Link, Zelda, and Ganon from the four before OoT, who else would you exactly add? Maybe costumes? Or people like Marin or Agahnim? Or even maps from the games? But I don't think in a game like Hyrule Warriors have the retro Zelda games would've been all that different.

The point that Malstrom is making there is that, if Aonuma characters are added, this might mean that Aonuma has a hand in the 3DS port of Hyrule Warriors. Maybe he insisted that those characters be added, which could mean his influence will be seen in other areas of the game. Obviously this is all conjecture, but the furthest Aonuma is from anything Zelda, the better... even if this is merely a port of Hyrule Warriors we're talking about.

Also, I agree with you (which is what I said) that the games coming out this year will not be profitable for Nintendo. I mean, if Smash Bros. and Mario Kart weren't the biggest system sellers ever, these sure as hell won't be. And that's why this press conference was really disappointing for a lot of people. And I'm also not really excusing Nintendo from a boring show. Yes, they did have a boring show and they should have brought something more, but all I was arguing was that it's not as bad as people made it out to be. And obviously my original post was made out to people like Malstrom who thought it was god awful. He's entitled to his opinion, for sure, but I'm also entitled to argue against it if I don't agree with it.

It's all right; it's only E3, which is not really important. That's the reason why Malstrom made a light post containing more declarations than explanations.

(In fact, putting it in perspective, video-games aren't all that important after all; the fact that we have the luxury of arguing like this on a message board speaks volumes about how comfortably we live).

Lastly, I do encourage you to at least try ALBW. It's a very good, quality Zelda game.

The last time I listened to someone and did that, I bought Skyward Sword. The result? I went as far as the doors of the second dungeon, saved and quit... and I never again had the urge to play it. The game was boring enough that I never wanted to put the disc back in the console.

That said, maybe I will borrow ALBW from a friend. I'm not ready, however, to yet again spend my money on a series that has disappointed me so many times.

I imagine what you mean by "Aonuma Zelda games" are akin to just Modern Zelda in general (like how Egoraptor refers to them in his Sequelitis video.)

When I say "Aonuma Zelda" I mean "Zelda games designed by Aonuma". I don't put OOT (is it considered a modern Zelda or not?) in this category, as Aonuma didn't design it per se; he was in charge of the dungeons. That includes this awful Water Temple. Yes, the only part of OOT that people in general tend to dislike and complain about was designed by Aonuma.

And by that, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume you don't like Modern Zeldas because they're more linear

Yes. Linearity implies the (quasi) absence of exploration. However, Nintendo used to talk about Zelda as a "world to explore".

less challenging

Exactly. There is no excitement in a game that cannot possibly be lost. Ergo, a video-game where death is impossible is boring. If you cannot lose at a game, then winning means nothing; you might as well have a prompt on-screen that says "press A for visual stimulation". I want my palms to sweat as Gohma tries to kill me, damnit!

more story driven

I am not opposed to story per se; however, what I get from Aonuma Zelda is that it seems story driven only because story is all that's left. Classic (pre-Aonuma) Zelda used to be driven by exploration and gameplay, not because there was no story, but precisely because story was only one of the elements that held the game together as a coherent whole.

Now that gameplay revolves around "puzzles" that are nothing but formalities and that exploration is no more because the overworld has been taken away, story is the only thing that can make the game (shakily) stand. Enter the abundant cutscenes and lengthy monologues. Enter the convoluted "Zelda timeline".

so, I understand how you don't care for modern Zelda games and I get why you probably want more representation from Classic Zelda games in Hyrule Warriors, but to Nintendo they're trying to go for appeal.

We were merely talking about Nintendo's E3 and Malstrom's post. I am personally indifferent to Hyrule Warriors.

ALTTP is for sure up there as one of the best, but so is Wind Waker, OoT, MM, and sometimes TP.

I would separate the chaff (Wind Waker, TP, MM) from the wheat (TLOZ, ALTTP, OOT). See my replies above to see why.

 

[ryno74]

Well, I'm glad we get a chance to argue these sorts of issues, and you're right, video games in the grand scheme of things are pretty silly to argue about. And, even though I don't agree with you on the decline of quality of Zelda games, I do understand where you're coming from. I would also argue that ALBW is an attempt to attract older Zelda fans and to perhaps open up newer Zelda fans to the idea of an actual non-linear , exploration-based Zelda game like they used to be.

Now, on your Skyward Sword point, I understand what you mean. I also dislike Skyward Sword because it takes the negative aspects of Zelda and takes them to the nth degree (Fi...) and with no real open-world exploration. BUT, not to beat a dead horse, I truly do think you'll enjoy ALBW if you get the chance to borrow it. And if Zelda U (or NX at this point, let's be honest) is everything that they're promising, it looks like to be a great blend of classic and new...and possibly Skyrim.

Anyways, thanks for sharing the article, it was nice to have a respectful debate!

 

[finalark]

The last time I listened to someone and did that, I bought Skyward Sword. The result? I went as far as the doors of the second dungeon, saved and quit... and I never again had the urge to play it. The game was boring enough that I never wanted to put the disc back in the console.

A Link Between Worlds is literally a Link to the Past 2.0. If you have a raging nostalgia boner for that game you'll probably love it.

 

[Warlock*G]

A Link Between Worlds is literally a Link to the Past 2.0. If you have a raging nostalgia boner for that game you'll probably love it.

Good thing I have no nostalgia for ALTTP then. That way, if I ever play ALBW, I'll be able to judge it as its own game. Bonus if the "judging" is actually fun.

 

[Heroine of Winds]

It's not as bad as their E3 presentation back in 2008, but it was still pretty underwhelming and a clear sign that Nintendo's very out of touch. You know a conference is terrible if the only things good about it are the puppets and toys. :/

 

[AEMehr]

Here is a very interesting post on Nintendo's E3.

lol what am I reading?

The Aonuma hate stumps me, I really hope this is mostly a satirical article because he called Mario Tennis Ultra Smash a 3DS game and think Aonuma mentioning Hyrule Warriors 3DS at E3 means he is now directly involved and everything is ruined. Like seriously??

Nintendo's E3 wasn't bad, it just wasn't filled with titles that are really worth the E3 show floor. Only game worth the E3 reveal was Star Fox Zero, the rest of the new titles was definitely Nintendo Direct material. Though I feel the Nintendo Directs spoil the Nintendo userbase since every two months we get mini E3s. Iunno, Nintendo announces things throughout the year and other companies generally don't do it nearly as much. They kinda just blew their load super early imo.

 

[finalark]

Though I feel the Nintendo Directs spoil the Nintendo userbase since every two months we get mini E3s. Iunno, Nintendo announces things throughout the year and other companies generally don't do it nearly as much. They kinda just blew their load super early imo.

This is actually a pretty good point. I feel like this, combined with the fact that Nintendo lacked any real megaton announcements and their extended focus on only Mario Maker and Star Fox Zero is what really hurt their E3.

It's almost like Nintendo's forgotten how to put together an E3 presentation. People watch E3 because they want to get excited for new games, even if those games aren't going to be coming out for a while. Sony pretty much has it down. You thought Last Guardian was dead? BOOM. Last Guardian game play. Shenmue 3 and an FFVII remake are pipe dreams? BOOM, Shenmue III and FFVII remake announcements. You wanna see more of that neat No Man's Sky thing? BOOM. No Man's Sky game play.

I don't think Nintendo's E3 was that terrible, but it's not what Nintendo needs right now.

lol what am I reading?

The Aonuma hate stumps me, I really hope this is mostly a satirical article because he called Mario Tennis Ultra Smash a 3DS game and think Aonuma mentioning Hyrule Warriors 3DS at E3 means he is now directly involved and everything is ruined. Like seriously??

He's probably one of those guys who is super salty that Wind Waker had a different art style and never got over it. Besides, Aonuma was a lead designer and director on Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, both of which have characters and in Hyrule Warriors so I don't see what the big deal. Then again, given that he couldn't even take to do a quick Google search to check what the new Mario Tennis was coming out on probably means he isn't willing to actually check what games Aonuma was heavily involved in or doesn't care.

 

[Warlock*G]

lol what am I reading?

The Aonuma hate stumps me, I really hope this is mostly a satirical article because he called Mario Tennis Ultra Smash a 3DS game and think Aonuma mentioning Hyrule Warriors 3DS at E3 means he is now directly involved and everything is ruined. Like seriously??

That particular post by Malstrom is interesting, notably because the opinions therein provoke reactions such as yours. If you want actual justifications for the author's opinions, there are a multitude of other posts on his website, most of which are more detailed than the one I linked. However, be cautious if you ever decide to read some of them: you might get offended. You might also agree with some of his points, who knows?

As to the content of the cute little post that I have linked, I have said plenty. See some of my replies above if you are so inclined.

He's probably one of those guys who is super salty that Wind Waker had a different art style and never got over it.

I have read a whole lot of his posts and I can assure you that's not the case.

Besides, Aonuma was a lead designer and director on Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, both of which have characters and in Hyrule Warriors so I don't see what the big deal.

I am going to quote myself here:

When I say "Aonuma Zelda" I mean "Zelda games designed by Aonuma". I don't put OOT (is it considered a modern Zelda or not?) in this category, as Aonuma didn't design it per se; he was in charge of the dungeons. That includes this awful Water Temple. Yes, the only part of OOT that people in general tend to dislike and complain about was designed by Aonuma.

Then again, given that he couldn't even take to do a quick Google search to check what the new Mario Tennis was coming out on probably means he isn't willing to actually check what games Aonuma was heavily involved in or doesn't care.

No, it just means he put that particular post together really quickly. He damn well knows what games Aonuma was involved in.

 

[finalark]

No, it just means he put that particular post together really quickly. He damn well knows what games Aonuma was involved in.

It took me five seconds to confirm that Mario Tennis was coming out for Wii U. If he has time to pull up a thumbs-up thumbs-down images then he has time to fact check.

 

[Warlock*G]

It took me five seconds to confirm that Mario Tennis was coming out for Wii U. If he has time to pull up a thumbs-up thumbs-down images then he has time to fact check.

Why do you assume that he didn't fact check? (And why do I assume he put it together quickly?) It could be an honest mistake. Hell, it could be anything.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Why do you assume that he didn't fact check?

It could be an honest mistake. Hell, it could be anything.

This is why we assume he didn't fact check.

You double check your work. Especially journalism.

 

[Warlock*G]

Especially journalism.

There's a second assumption.

Edit: Let's grant the proposition that the author is a journalist, which seems reasonable given the title of his website. I mean, whatever. Here's another post of his.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

There's a second assumption.

An assumption that doesn't invalidate my point.

 

[Warlock*G]

An assumption that doesn't invalidate my point.

True... but here you're assuming that I was trying to invalidate your point. I'm just playing "count the assumptions", here. Hey, I even counted my own, earlier.

Anyway, as I said in my previous post, let's grant the proposition that Malstrom is a journalist, which seems reasonable.

Now, of course, the more fact-checks are done, the less mistakes are made... but couldn't it be possible that Malstrom wrote his post, fact-checked his stuff and still made a mistake? I'm just asking.

Now, again, here's another post of his, if anybody feels like reading it.