Nintendo had to make the Wii casual. They're a business after all.

[Firus]

thank you for recognizing marketing strategies people.....


look at the numbers. Nintendo is owning the console war right now. They have money, so they are happy.

I think the thread title said that.
But thanks for stating the obvious that we all already knew anyways.

wow, calm down. sorry i dont know what a graphics engine is. I play video games, not study everything about them. Minus 100% ending in MP3? if your talking about not being able to then i dont know what your talking about. I got 100% in MP3.

I don't study everything about them either. It took me about 5 seconds to Google "use of graphics engine" to confirm what I figured was the definition of it.

I was talking about MP1. Except for the 100% ending, which hinted at another game, it could've been a stand-alone game.

So because it wasn't a turn based RPG, that means it suck? Yeah, that's real smart and logical. >_>

Oh I'm sorry, I'll have your opinion. You're right, I have to agree with you.

Yes, it "suck", at least as a Paper Mario game, if it's not a turn-based RPG. That's my opinion, anyways.

And I know you're going to tell me that's the same thing as saying it's not a part of the series. It's not.

Yes I do.

Let's list the names of the Mario platformers
SUPER Mario Bros 1/2/3
SUPER Mario World
SUPER Mario 64
SUPER Mario Sunshine
SUPER Mario Galaxy
SUPER Paper Mario

So yeah. The name was not misleading.

SUPER Mario RPG
SUPER Mario Kart
SUPER Mario Strikers

Super Mario isn't just platformers. Your argument doesn't work.

 

[GreenKirby]

And Paper Mario isn't just RPGs anymore.

Deal with it. Heck, not only did it have a great have great characters (Bleck, DImentio, Mr. L) it's probably gonna either become spinoff of a spinoff of a spinoff or just gonna be the only platformer/RPG game

But yes, solely disliking SPM because it's not a turn base RPG is very VERY shallow.

 

[Reezy989]

i know everyone is stuck on just mentioning mostly Nintendo titles and flagship characters, but my major gripe is that sports games are complete *** on the wii.. actually ever since the N64 came out. Sports franchises are a big deal. Madden is the number 1 seller, and they come out annually. I was pissed NBA Live didnt come out for the GC at all. What the hell? Same goes for the 2k series. Nintendo has lost alot of gamers for this. Everyone went running to the ps2/xbox. I rocked my GC back in college in 03 and it got hardly any burn. because my roommate had a ps2 and everyone wanted to play that. Hell, my neighbors N64 was more popular than the gamecube. (mario kart, namely. a lil classic goldeneye, too) My GC was the **** back home, melee was ridiculous, but once i was crammed in dorms with hundreds of other kids the GC got pooped on.

 

[Firus]

But yes, solely disliking SPM because it's not a turn base RPG is very VERY shallow.

I've not heard great things about it otherwise and what made Paper Mario for me was the turn-based RPG system. The unique system, executing certain things at the right time to do more damage, all that stuff made Paper Mario for me. It's what made me really want the game after playing the demo for five minutes. It felt unique. Without that, it's just another generic Mario game with partners, paper graphics, and paper moves. I'm not a big fan of Mario as it is (I know I'll get flamed for that, go ahead and do so if it'll make you happy) and so no generic Mario platformer, basically a dumbed-down version of the original game, which I enjoyed more, is going to be something that's a must have or something that I like. I tried the game, and I don't like it. If that's a crime, who the hell cares.

But oh, I'm shallow for disliking a game you like. Bah. Elitists are stupid.

This is why retro games > new games. You can play good games that are great enough to play a million times over and you don't have to waste money buying a new game that may or may not be screwed over.

I'll just get Super Mario RPG for my SNES, finally. There, problem solved.

 

[flyinfilipino]

So all retro games are good? Thanks for the tip!

 

[Firus]

So all retro games are good? Thanks for the tip!

Yes, in my opinion. And even if they're not good, they're better than most newer games if you ask me. And yes, E.T. and Superman 64 included. I would go that far, because I'm so sick of crap games these days and even worse, the endless conversion of opinion to fact when I'm replied to.

 

[Puddin]

Obviously they are a business, we have long accepted and known that. Focusing on a key demographic alone would ruin any console with any remote hope of being successful. We as the hardcore fans should understand this more then anyone.

I think it's a bit late for anyone to be using the release title Twilight Princess as an argument of any kind. That done and gone, gaming is an industry in which the consumer is always demanding more (much more so then any other entertainment based industry). No game lasts forever, or ever perfectly fits the needs or expectations of the fan-base. Therefore bringing a lack of the games the fans demand can be a bad move for any company.

However we must understand that these games take time, and since we will never be perfectly satisfied with what we get from a game the companies do their best to meet our expectations so that the wait is worth it. Making a game to fit the demands of the fans is a time consuming process.

 

[GreenKirby]

I've not heard great things about it otherwise and what made Paper Mario for me was the turn-based RPG system. The unique system, executing certain things at the right time to do more damage, all that stuff made Paper Mario for me. It's what made me really want the game after playing the demo for five minutes. It felt unique. Without that, it's just another generic Mario game with partners, paper graphics, and paper moves. I'm not a big fan of Mario as it is (I know I'll get flamed for that, go ahead and do so if it'll make you happy) and so no generic Mario platformer, basically a dumbed-down version of the original game, which I enjoyed more, is going to be something that's a must have or something that I like. I tried the game, and I don't like it. If that's a crime, who the hell cares.

But oh, I'm shallow for disliking a game you like. Bah. Elitists are stupid.

This is why retro games > new games. You can play good games that are great enough to play a million times over and you don't have to waste money buying a new game that may or may not be screwed over.

I'll just get Super Mario RPG for my SNES, finally. There, problem solved.

I'm not gonna flame you for not being a huge Mario fan. But I still think it's idiotic that you dislike SPM because it wasn't turn based. And of course, other people dislike it but they had actual legitimate reasons instead of 'Durrrr it's not lik da first and second'

And I never played game myself pinhead. Way to assume.

And only the second Paper Mario had a great battle system. The battle system in the first one was highly crappy in comparison:
1) With a few exceptions, most enemies only attack Mario
2) Most the status alignments cost a turn when they don't in other RPGs.
3) When your partner is attacked he/she is K.O.d
4) MagiKoopas and Hammer Bros

Yes, in my opinion. And even if they're not good, they're better than most newer games if you ask me. And yes, E.T. and Superman 64 included. I would go that far, because I'm so sick of crap games these days and even worse, the endless conversion of opinion to fact when I'm replied to.

There was just as many if not more ****fest games back then. But of course, people are usually blinded by their nostalgic rose colored glasses. How can anybody enjoy the DK Arcade trios moreso than the DK games afterwards is beyond me.

 

[Firus]

I'm not gonna flame you for not being a huge Mario fan. But I still think it's idiotic that you dislike SPM because it wasn't turn based. And of course, other people dislike it but they had actual legitimate reasons instead of 'Durrrr it's not lik da first and second'

And I never played game myself pinhead. Way to assume.

And only the second Paper Mario had a great battle system. The battle system in the first one was highly crappy in comparison:
1) With a few exceptions, most enemies only attack Mario
2) Most the status alignments cost a turn when they don't in other RPGs.
3) When your partner is attacked he/she is K.O.d
4) MagiKoopas and Hammer Bros

I think I did give an actually legitimate response, in my last post. Or did you read? I said there's nothing to it for me to like if there's no turn-based RPG. I might as well be playing a regular Super Mario game. The lack of turn-based battles does more than just make it dissimilar to 1 and 2. If you don't think that's a legitimate reason, I honestly don't give a crap because I'm allowed to like or dislike a game for whatever reason I like, whether or not you think it's a good one. I don't care if you say it's shallow. It's NOT.
And even so, that's how things work these days, at least for me. Metroid Prime Hunters was not a very good game, but it was especially a failure as a Metroid game, so I didn't like it very much. Animal Crossing: Wild World was good, but it was lacking the same feeling as the original, so I don't like it as much. I grade games based on past games in the franchise, mostly because I play by franchises. I don't usually buy generic, one-time games, I get Metroid or Mario or Zelda or Sonic games, or I buy a Star Wars game. That's why I stuck with Nintendo in the first place, for their franchises.

Considering how fervently you're defending the game, I think it's a logical assumption to say you've played the game.

How is your last point relevant again? It's flaws in the game, but how is it relevant to what I was saying? You're basically trying to bring the original down to SPM's level, saying "It's not any better!" To me, it is. There's flaws in every game. Pointing those out hardly seems relevant.

There was just as many if not more ****fest games back then. But of course, people are usually blinded by their nostalgic rose colored glasses. How can anybody enjoy the DK Arcade trios moreso than the DK games afterwards is beyond me.

How you can enjoy Metroid Prime 3 and Twilight Princess over Super Metroid and A Link to the Past is beyond me. Guess what, that's how opinion works!

This is a commonly used argument and somehow, I see no relevance in it other than "Um...I disagree, so I'm going to assume you're nostalgic!!" It's like, someone likes an old game better than a new one and they're automatically mentally wrong because of nostalgia. Ugh.

Believe it or not, people can disagree with you and the reason doesn't have to be nostalgia. And depending on how you define nostalgia, I don't necessarily fit that stereotype. If it's just a love of all things old, that's possible, but if it has anything to do with games I've played for years, then it doesn't. Super Metroid is most likely my favorite game of all time, but I didn't even play it until...last year?

Also, it's NOT just nostalgia, I know this for a fact. Now, I love both Super Metroid and Metroid Fusion. I mean, I've played through Fusion about 25 times now, literally. I was playing Super Metroid about the entire past weekend. Then I went back to Metroid Fusion the next day and all of a sudden it felt...bland, like something was missing. Super Metroid just had something that Fusion didn't.

With the latest crapfest of DK games, I'd choose DK Arcade over the newer ones. Going a little further, DKC2 is a great game, probably better than every other DK game save for maybe DK64.

In all honesty, this is all just opinion. I'm allowed to disagree without you calling me shallow for having my opinion, or nostalgic for liking older games. In the same token, you're allowed to like new games without me flaming you. But I don't believe I have, have I? When it comes down to it, even if my reasoning simply were that SPM isn't like one and two, why is that bad? What if I greatly preferred the first two games? I'm still not allowed to use that as a reason, that they got rid of something great?

 

[GreenKirby]

And even so, that's how things work these days, at least for me. Metroid Prime Hunters was not a very good game, but it was especially a failure as a Metroid game, so I didn't like it very much. Animal Crossing: Wild World was good, but it was lacking the same feeling as the original, so I don't like it as much. I grade games based on past games in the franchise, mostly because I play by franchises. I don't usually buy generic, one-time games, I get Metroid or Mario or Zelda or Sonic games, or I buy a Star Wars game. That's why I stuck with Nintendo in the first place, for their franchises.

And this is why people complain. People usually compare the newer games to older games and when it's not exaclty like the older ones, they bash it.

Which is the exact reason Mega Man 9, Wario Land Shake It, BK: Nuts and Bolts, and Kirby Ultra Super Star can and will bomb

Considering how fervently you're defending the game, I think it's a logical assumption to say you've played the game.

So I defend the game. Big deal. I haven't played Sonic Chronicles but I defend that game as well to people complaining that it's an RPG from people who cry 'duuur where's da speed?'

How is your last point relevant again? It's flaws in the game, but how is it relevant to what I was saying? You're basically trying to bring the original down to SPM's level, saying "It's not any better!" To me, it is. There's flaws in every game. Pointing those out hardly seems relevant.

LOL Nostalgia. And you're trying or implying that the first two (though great) are the holy grail. And if you read a thing I said

"And only the second Paper Mario had a great battle system. The battle system in the first one was highly crappy in comparison:"

In comparison to the 2nd game it was bad and severely broken but I still enjoyed uit. And it's turn base RPG. I'm sure it's a legitimite reason especially since it's a turn based RPG

How you can enjoy Metroid Prime 3 and Twilight Princess over Super Metroid and A Link to the Past is beyond me. Guess what, that's how opinion works!

Why do like assuming that the play certain games? I wasn't a Nintendo fan until 64. Gah. The only out of the four I played was Twilight Princess. And if I did play all of them and enjoyed the recent games compared to the older, am I bad gamer now? Am I not 'true gamer' because I enjoyed MP3 and TP over SM and ALttP?

Not everyone shares your opinion

This is a commonly used argument and somehow, I see no relevance in it other than "Um...I disagree, so I'm going to assume you're nostalgic!!" It's like, someone likes an old game better than a new one and they're automatically mentally wrong because of nostalgia. Ugh.

Yes, as I said eariler. It's nostalgia that's gonna make other games flop when they don't deserve too. That's part of the reason why the GC failed. Every 1st/2nd party was being compared to originals

Believe it or not, people can disagree with you and the reason doesn't have to be nostalgia. And depending on how you define nostalgia, I don't necessarily fit that stereotype. If it's just a love of all things old, that's possible, but if it has anything to do with games I've played for years, then it doesn't. Super Metroid is most likely my favorite game of all time, but I didn't even play it until...last year?

And believe it or not. Not everyone thinks like you. If people overrate moves, cartoons, and books base on nostalgia, what makes video games any different?

With the latest crapfest of DK games, I'd choose DK Arcade over the newer ones. Going a little further, DKC2 is a great game, probably better than every other DK game save for maybe DK64.

Jungle Climber is good. Of course, people won't like it because 'wahhhhhhhh it's not a platformer. Must slit self'

 

[Firus]

And this is why people complain. People usually compare the newer games to older games and when it's not exaclty like the older ones, they bash it.

Which is the exact reason Mega Man 9, Wario Land Shake It, BK: Nuts and Bolts, and Kirby Ultra Super Star can and will bomb

It's a freakin' FRANCHISE! The point is to have multiple games that are similar, so yes, when I buy *insert game here* and love it, and then I play the sequel, I'm going to be expecting the sequel to be up to the same standards.

Also, I never bash a game just because it's not as good as past titles. I don't bash Metroid Fusion because I love Super Metroid so much more. If the initial game is good, then I say "It's good, but this is better." I flat-out DON'T LIKE Super Paper Mario. Not "ZOMG IT'S NOT AS GOOD AS/SIMILAR TO PAST GAMES!! I HATE IT!"

So I defend the game. Big deal. I haven't played Sonic Chronicles but I defend that game as well to people complaining that it's an RPG from people who cry 'duuur where's da speed?'

There is no big deal. Just don't call me a pinhead for assuming you'd played a game you're flaming me over.
I won't even go into Sonic Chronicles because you'll just flame me for not liking it...oh wait, too late. Well, go ahead and flame me then.

LOL Nostalgia. And you're trying or implying that the first two (though great) are the holy grail. And if you read a thing I said

"And only the second Paper Mario had a great battle system. The battle system in the first one was highly crappy in comparison:"

In comparison to the 2nd game it was bad and severely broken but I still enjoyed uit. And it's turn base RPG. I'm sure it's a legitimite reason especially since it's a turn based RPG

Okay...that's great. There's a flaw. Again, how does this have anything to do with the argument at hand? There's a difference between "not as good in comparison" and "not even close to the same thing, nor is it as good in comparison".

Why do like assuming that the play certain games? I wasn't a Nintendo fan until 64. Gah. The only out of the four I played was Twilight Princess. And if I did play all of them and enjoyed the recent games compared to the older, am I bad gamer now? Am I not 'true gamer' because I enjoyed MP3 and TP over SM and ALttP?

Not everyone shares your opinion

...What? Could you TRY to use proper grammar so I don't have to decipher what you say? "Why do like assuming" makes 100% no sense.

I didn't start on Nintendo until GB/N64 either. I went backwards and got a SNES from there, and intend to get an NES at some point in the near future.

Now you're just twisting words. My point was, EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, AND THEY'RE ALLOWED TO. And you're countering me with "ZOMG PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS!!!!" NO ****! I don't understand how you can hate Super Metroid so much, but they're allowed to think whatever they want and quite honestly, I don't care what they think. They can rate it a four or a three if they want, MANY OTHERS would consider it one of the best games of all time. And that is not just me speaking, before you tell me that. Look it up.

The whole point of that part of the post was that you're basically telling me my opinion is wrong, and I'm telling you everyone has their own opinion, so you can't tell me it's wrong.

Yes, as I said eariler. It's nostalgia that's gonna make other games flop when they don't deserve too. That's part of the reason why the GC failed. Every 1st/2nd party was being compared to originals

Well by that reasoning, I'm not nostalgic. I love the Gamecube.

Again. Games like Metroid Prime Hunters and SPM flop because they suck already. The fact that they don't compare with other games in the franchise is just icing on the cake.

And believe it or not. Not everyone thinks like you. If people overrate moves, cartoons, and books base on nostalgia, what makes video games any different?

I never said they did. Again, I know people have their own opinions, and while I disagree, I do not try to indoctrinate them like you are. I don't force my opinions on them and say "YOU AREN'T ALLOWED TO COMPARE METROID AND SUPER METROID AND LIKE METROID MORE!!" If I were saying I liked SPM better than TTYD, would you have a problem with it? No! Basically you're saying I'm not allowed to unfavorably compare new games to old games, but I am allowed to do the opposite. You're only speaking out against "nostalgia" and people liking a game less because it's not the same as past titles. You've not once said anything about people disliking old games because of new games.

Also, if you're honestly telling me that you read a book, then read its sequel and don't compare the two, or that you do the same with movies or cartoons, then you are flat-out lying there. Everyone does that. And what do you notice there? Hm...most people like the originals better! 90% of people would pick Jurassic Park over The Lost World (book or movie). Does that mean most people are nostalgic?

What about people who are obsessed with newer, shiny games that wouldn't pick an old game just because they like HD, 3D graphics? No problem with them, right?

Jungle Climber is good. Of course, people won't like it because 'wahhhhhhhh it's not a platformer. Must slit self'

The problem with new games is that none of them are real DK games (oh boy, here we go again. Yes, I see the flaming coming this time, but I'll still say it.) They're all spinoffs now, Donkey Konga, Jungle Beat, Jungle Climber...the last time we got a REAL DK game was DK64 for heaven's sake! It's been two generations, and that's just idiotic.

But another problem is that the games are not as good in general.

Basically your whole reasoning here is that people have to like all genres, rate everything without any comparisons, and if they so much as make a peep about a game not being good compared to past games they're a whiny idiot who needs to be flamed. What if someone genuinely does not like puzzle games? Are they still supposed to like a game if they liked past games, not allowed to discriminate at all because it's a different genre? Ugh.

If you don't shape up your points in your next post, I might not even bother responding to you. Your whole argument is basically that people are not allowed to rate games their own way.

 

[Mr. Rogu]

I'm not gonna flame you for not being a huge Mario fan. But I still think it's idiotic that you dislike SPM because it wasn't turn based. And of course, other people dislike it but they had actual legitimate reasons instead of 'Durrrr it's not lik da first and second'

And I never played game myself pinhead. Way to assume.

And only the second Paper Mario had a great battle system. The battle system in the first one was highly crappy in comparison:
1) With a few exceptions, most enemies only attack Mario
2) Most the status alignments cost a turn when they don't in other RPGs.
3) When your partner is attacked he/she is K.O.d
4) MagiKoopas and Hammer Bros

The thing is that they sucked the RPG right out of Super Paper Mario. And 1 of your reasons that PM1 isnt as good as PM2 is of magikoopas and hammer bros? just cause you dont like certain enemies, doesnt make the combat system as bad. guess what? they were in PM2 too!! Sorry but Bleck the the irish looking thing and Dimmentio arent cool. Two out of the three people cant even talk right.

 

[Pas]

Nostalgia in games, summed up by the one man who seems to be able to sum everything up the best, even if you're sick of him:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/222-XBLA-Double-Bill

 

[GreenKirby]

It's a freakin' FRANCHISE! The point is to have multiple games that are similar, so yes, when I buy *insert game here* and love it, and then I play the sequel, I'm going to be expecting the sequel to be up to the same standards.

So by your logic, you shouldn't have loved Paper Mario. lol

Also, I never bash a game just because it's not as good as past titles. I don't bash Metroid Fusion because I love Super Metroid so much more. If the initial game is good, then I say "It's good, but this is better." I flat-out DON'T LIKE Super Paper Mario. Not "ZOMG IT'S NOT AS GOOD AS/SIMILAR TO PAST GAMES!! I HATE IT!"

Who cares if you don't? Too many other people do.

I won't even go into Sonic Chronicles because you'll just flame me for not liking it...oh wait, too late. Well, go ahead and flame me then.

You never even said that you dislike SC. And it's also wrong to judge a game before even playing it and so far, it's been getting reviews

Okay...that's great. There's a flaw. Again, how does this have anything to do with the argument at hand? There's a difference between "not as good in comparison" and "not even close to the same thing, nor is it as good in comparison".

It's part of the argument because as I said earlier, people glorify the past as if it was perfect when it wasn't.

Well by that reasoning, I'm not nostalgic. I love the Gamecube.

I..... am.... not.... talking about you!

I never said they did. Again, I know people have their own opinions, and while I disagree, I do not try to indoctrinate them like you are. I don't force my opinions on them and say "YOU AREN'T ALLOWED TO COMPARE METROID AND SUPER METROID AND LIKE METROID MORE!!" If I were saying I liked SPM better than TTYD, would you have a problem with it? No! Basically you're saying I'm not allowed to unfavorably compare new games to old games, but I am allowed to do the opposite. You're only speaking out against "nostalgia" and people liking a game less because it's not the same as past titles. You've not once said anything about people disliking old games because of new games.

Again that's good that you don't. But many other so called gamers do. Stop taking it personally.

Also, if you're honestly telling me that you read a book, then read its sequel and don't compare the two, or that you do the same with movies or cartoons, then you are flat-out lying there. Everyone does that. And what do you notice there? Hm...most people like the originals better! 90% of people would pick Jurassic Park over The Lost World (book or movie). Does that mean most people are nostalgic?

I'm not talking about sequels. I'm talking about stuff in general. Like this:

"Today's cartoons are crap. The ones I watch growing up are great."

That kind of example.

What about people who are obsessed with newer, shiny games that wouldn't pick an old game just because they like HD, 3D graphics? No problem with them, right?

To hell with them. I don't even want to do deal with them. Besides, I shut them down as well.

The problem with new games is that none of them are real DK games (oh boy, here we go again. Yes, I see the flaming coming this time, but I'll still say it.) They're all spinoffs now, Donkey Konga, Jungle Beat, Jungle Climber...the last time we got a REAL DK game was DK64 for heaven's sake! It's been two generations, and that's just idiotic.

Define a 'real' DK game. Other than it has to be platformer.

Basically your whole reasoning here is that people have to like all genres, rate everything without any comparisons, and if they so much as make a peep about a game not being good compared to past games they're a whiny idiot who needs to be flamed.

I'm tired of being a broken record. So I'll give examples.

Super Mario Sunshine. 'sucked' to the public
Wind Waker 'sucked' to the public

Not because they were bad games. (They weren't) But people were literally expecting Super Mario 64 2 or Orcania of Time 2. THAT'S the problem, imo. And they shun off those possibly good games because of it. That's why I'm critical of nostalgia. Not because it's bad because it isn't. Because it's clouds judgment. Seriously those two games were criticized because they were 'too different.'

Now do you see? I'm not saying you're a bad person if you think game X is better than game Y. I'm saying that it's stupid to diss game Y because it wasn't game X 2. And I'm not saying that you do it, but a lot of people do it however.

What if someone genuinely does not like puzzle games? Are they still supposed to like a game if they liked past games, not allowed to discriminate at all because it's a different genre? Ugh.

Well people usually miss out on great games because of genre. Which is sad cause no genre is terrible. Well imo

The thing is that they sucked the RPG right out of Super Paper Mario. And 1 of your reasons that PM1 isnt as good as PM2 is of magikoopas and hammer bros? just cause you dont like certain enemies, doesnt make the combat system as bad. guess what? they were in PM2 too!! Sorry but Bleck the the irish looking thing and Dimmentio arent cool. Two out of the three people cant even talk right.

They didn't suck all of the RPG out of SPM. HP was still there. Status affects were still there.

The problem I have with Hammer Bros and Magikoopas were that they broken and overpowered in the first Paper Mario. The fact that a Hammer Bro can take 10 HP off you AND lower attack was bad. The fact that Magikoopa had an attack of 6 and attack in groups of 4 with some of them flying was terrible. I'm up for a challenge and I know they only appear in Bowser's Castle, but they were overkill.
Of course, both enemies were nerfed in the second game which is why I wasn't complaining.

That's your opinion that you don't like the characters. Spoiling myself of SPM I found the characters rather developed for a Mario game. Especially Dimentio.

 

[Firus]

Nostalgia in games, summed up by the one man who seems to be able to sum everything up the best, even if you're sick of him:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/222-XBLA-Double-Bill

Only...

A) He's referring to REALLY old games.
B) It's pure opinion. No facts, just saying that HE thinks new games have better systems of music and such. Honestly? I like simplistic games better than complex, 3D games.

So by your logic, you shouldn't have loved Paper Mario. lol

...What? No.

By my logic, I compare Metroid Prime 2 to Metroid Prime 3, I don't treat them as separate games. I said NOTHING about how much I like the games.

Do you pull ALL of what you say out of your ***?

Who cares if you don't? Too many other people do.

Then why the hell are you flaming ME?
You're attacking me and then saying "Well, you don't do it, but I have a reason to yell at you because other people do." Attack them, then.

You never even said that you dislike SC. And it's also wrong to judge a game before even playing it and so far, it's been getting reviews

Yes I did. I said "...for not liking it." I didn't say you'd attacked me, just that I'd said it already.

And it's not wrong to judge a game before I've played it. Sonic has sucked since Shadow, and has gone downhill since Heroes. It's a reasonable assumption. Also, I don't care about reviews. I honestly don't. I look at them, but Brawl got a 10 from Nintendo Power and I hate it, Secret Rings got like...7 or something, and I'd give it a 3, probably. I don't trust reviews, I trust myself. And as you pointed out, people have given Super Metroid 3s and 4s while I'd give it a 9.5 at the ABSOLUTE LEAST. It's more of this opinion. And I'm not going to take reviewers' words for it.

It's part of the argument because as I said earlier, people glorify the past as if it was perfect when it wasn't.

I'm not saying that. I never said anything was perfect. I say things how they are. Paper Mario being better than Super Paper Mario =/= being perfect.

I..... am.... not.... talking about you!

O...kay!

Again that's good that you don't. But many other so called gamers do. Stop taking it personally.

You're saying it in a reply to me. Stop saying it in a reply to a quote of mine if it's not directed towards me.

I'm not talking about sequels. I'm talking about stuff in general. Like this:

"Today's cartoons are crap. The ones I watch growing up are great."

That kind of example.

That's not necessarily nostalgia.

I love how people define "nostalgia" as so much as liking anything old. Because if you like old things, you've got to have something wrong with you, you can't genuinely like them.

Define a 'real' DK game. Other than it has to be platformer.

That IS what a real DK game is. A main game rather than a spin-off.

I'm tired of being a broken record. So I'll give examples.

Super Mario Sunshine. 'sucked' to the public
Wind Waker 'sucked' to the public

Not because they were bad games. (They weren't) But people were literally expecting Super Mario 64 2 or Orcania of Time 2. THAT'S the problem, imo. And they shun off those possibly good games because of it. That's why I'm critical of nostalgia. Not because it's bad because it isn't. Because it's clouds judgment. Seriously those two games were criticized because they were 'too different.'

Now do you see? I'm not saying you're a bad person if you think game X is better than game Y. I'm saying that it's stupid to diss game Y because it wasn't game X 2. And I'm not saying that you do it, but a lot of people do it however.

Okay, well I perfectly agree there. I love both Wind Waker and Sunshine, and for someone to dislike them just because they weren't the old games is ridiculous.

I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with disliking a game because it was lacking something distinctive (e.g. a genre or type of gameplay) from older games.

Well people usually miss out on great games because of genre. Which is sad cause no genre is terrible. Well imo

Some people don't like certain genres. For example, I don't like sports games. No genre is horrible, but in general not everyone likes every genre. I like most, but not sports.

They didn't suck all of the RPG out of SPM. HP was still there. Status affects were still there.

HP is in most games, just in a slightly different way. Metroid, Zelda, Mario, all of those have their own kind of HP systems.

Status effects...I can't think of any examples at the moment, but I don't think that's exclusive to RPG's. Either way, those are minuscule.

 

[SkylerOcon]

There are status effects in Brawl. In Spore. In Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games. In Pac-Man.

Status effects are not exclusive to RPGs.

 

[Firus]

There are status effects in Brawl. In Spore. In Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games. In Pac-Man.

Status effects are not exclusive to RPGs.

Yeah, I was thinking of them in the more RPG-ish context. Completely forgot about those.

 

[Mr. Rogu]

They didn't suck all of the RPG out of SPM. HP was still there. Status affects were still there.

The problem I have with Hammer Bros and Magikoopas were that they broken and overpowered in the first Paper Mario. The fact that a Hammer Bro can take 10 HP off you AND lower attack was bad. The fact that Magikoopa had an attack of 6 and attack in groups of 4 with some of them flying was terrible. I'm up for a challenge and I know they only appear in Bowser's Castle, but they were overkill.
Of course, both enemies were nerfed in the second game which is why I wasn't complaining.

That's your opinion that you don't like the characters. Spoiling myself of SPM I found the characters rather developed for a Mario game. Especially Dimentio.

well i think that metaknight is overpowered in brawl but u dont see me saying brawl is horrible because of that. So what if they were powerful enemies. then its a challenge to beat them, there actually worth your time. not like goombas. in my opinion, magikoopas werent even that hard. i think the hardest common enemy in that game were those rock guys at that ice palace place.