Super Smash Bros 4 (Wii U/3DS) Topic

[~automatic]

I like to believe that there will always be a market for solid games with depth. Even if gaming as we know it becomes a niche, many publishers will surely adapt to keep profit margins as high as possible while providing a solid product to those who want it.

 

[Frostwraith]

This raises an interesting question: Why do you play Video Games?

More or less the same reasons as yours: a good story with a good challenge.

Smash Bros. always had good gameplay and it's an enjoyable experience in multiplayer matches.

Sometimes, the story serves as a motivation for you to continue playing through the single player, since you must overcome the challenges that await you to continue through the story. Of course, that doesn't mean that all games must have a story. The challenge itself is more than a reason to pick up a game and play.

I like to believe that there will always be a market for solid games with depth. Even if gaming as we know it becomes a niche, many publishers will surely adapt to keep profit margins as high as possible while providing a solid product to those who want it.

Yes, there will always be a niche market, but when you belong to a minority, it's hard to find what you want.

Often I go to stores to find a bunch of games that are nothing but shovelware made for quick profits and have a hard time finding the games I want and like.

 

[Pazzo.]

Sometimes, the story serves as a motivation for you to continue playing through the single player, since you must overcome the challenges that await you to continue through the story. Of course, that doesn't mean that all games must have a story. The challenge itself is more than a reason to pick up a game and play.
/quote]

I agree. Story, Challenge or a combo.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

The problem is that the 'common mortal' is getting progressively dumber. Attention spans are shrinking and traditional gaming as a hobby is shrinking. Some of the best games are handhelds (Professor Layton, Pokemon, etc.) but now it's getting to the point that people don't care about quality. All they want is a cheap and quick escape. Let's hope that the trend doesn't hurt the video game industry too much.

I can see it everywhere. I think a good chunk of it comes from the economy.

From what I have heard, when people are poorer they are programmed to seek immediate gratification as opposed to long term. This is where the stereotypes of poor drunks and poor druggies come from, even though one would have to have quite a bit of money to support alcohol and other drugs. This is also why poorer people tend to have more children (based on statistics). Richer people tend to plan things out so that they can enjoy things on a long term basis.

Games with more depth do take more time and more commitment to complete then IOS games. Casual gamers are probably looking for that quick buzz and get it from quick games you can boot up in twenty seconds. They are seeking immediate gratification and most games don't give that anymore.

Now I'm not saying that this affects just casual gamers. It's affecting everyone right now. Since the economy is so bad, everyone's a little poorer.

I hope that made sense.

 

[volbound1700]

I also think it has to do with technology. You are going to get a phone to talk to friends, family, significant others. If you can play video games on it as well, why bother with buying a 3DS or PSP. You already have a portable gaming system with your phone.

A lot of the watering down with Call of Duty, etc. crowd has always been the graphic action fanbase which prefers hardcore games with hardcore graphics over quality. Now we have a new group the casual games that prefer Angry Birds or Wii Sports over a game like Skyward Sword.

 

[Big-Cat]

I like to believe that there will always be a market for solid games with depth. Even if gaming as we know it becomes a niche, many publishers will surely adapt to keep profit margins as high as possible while providing a solid product to those who want it.

"There must be more than these casual games!"

 

[volbound1700]

This raises an interesting question: Why do you play Video Games?

The answer for myself is probably to experience a story from the Protagonist's eyes, and to of course, have fun while challenging my mind in different ways. Heaven forbid I ever pick up a copy of Battlefield or Call of Duty: Black Ops.

*Dives for cover*

Not always.

I grew up playing Sim City, Sim Ant, Sim Tower, Civilization II, Colonization (the original), Master of Orion II, Age of Empires, Starcraft, Warcraft II, etc. Hard to determine a protagonist or fight from their point of view in those games.

Puzzle, Strategy, Simulators, Sports games most of the time, and other games generally do not have protagonists. .

 

[Big-Cat]

Doesn't Starcraft have a story though?

 

[volbound1700]

Doesn't Starcraft have a story though?

It is a collection of stories that converge into one big general story. Strategy games focus usually on large group of people, nations, and races rather than individuals. There are also free modes and online play which most people bought the game for, not the story.


Ironically I consider most Nintendo games like Smash, Mario, DKCR, Kirby, etc. to be more casual friendly. To me hardcore games are deep strategy and PC games as well as FPS.

 

[Pazzo.]

It is a collection of stories that converge into one big general story. Strategy games focus usually on large group of people, nations, and races rather than individuals. There are also free modes and online play which most people bought the game for, not the story.


Ironically I consider most Nintendo games like Smash, Mario, DKCR, Kirby, etc. to be more casual friendly. To me hardcore games are deep strategy and PC games as well as FPS.

But don't you consider your playing of hardcore strategy (I love it too... I used to play Age of Empires) the same as my want of a challenge?

 

[volbound1700]

True,

Although I find strategy games relaxing because you don't have to use speed or motion for some of them and you can relax. I mean with the Sim games or sometimes Age of Empires you can walk out of the rum and leave them running and be alright. It doesn't come down to have fast you hit a button on your controller or how you make a jump which is the frustration sometimes in platformers. Of course platformers aren't that bad, I have recently beaten Rayman Origins and DKCR plus got most of the additional content. Both are tough (although tougher when you try to collect additional items than normal). However, Megaman series wins it for me on tough platformers. Well then again even that looks easy compared to some NES Titles: Battletoads, TMNT 1, Ghostbusters 2, and Astayanax.

I always loved the Civilization series too. If you like Age of Empires, try Civilization and the Total War series. You won't regret trying either of them.

 

[Deleted member]

I've been thinking for a while about Snake and Sonic (mainly Sonic for what I'm about to say), and I think I may have found the one logical reason to exclude Sonic next time around;
Should Sega want to make their own all-star platform fighter, wouldn't it make sense to avoid having Sonic being in Nintendo's so that it doesn't mess with sales for their game?

With Superstars Tennis playing on the success of Mario Tennis, and All-Stars Racing and its sequel playing on Mario Kart, wouldn't it make sense for Sega to play on Smash's success using their own characters?

 

[volbound1700]

@ Golden - perhaps but at this time we don't know if Sega plans to make a Smash style fighter. After seeing PSABR go up in flames, I doubt any company is ready to jump into the mix for the time. Marvel vs. Capcom is the main rival series to Smash at the moment and will likely stay that while in the foreseable future.

 

[Deleted member]

Strangely, we have no idea of any of Sega's plans, do we?
We don't even know if a new Sonic game is in the works or not, which is strange.

 

[volbound1700]

I think SEGA at this time is content to just have Sonic in Smash Brothers but there could be some thought for it in the future.

 

[Deleted member]

I just hope the Sonic series isn't dead at this point, as it was getting good again.
Then again, Sonic Generation's ending really screwed over most of the series' chronology.

Unless they come up with an excuse as to how Classic Eggman gets back to his own time and doesn't decide to give up trying to take over the world and be a teacher, the timestream should theoretically collapse after the events of Sonic 2.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

OMG, instead of making Kingdom Hearts 3, they are remaking Kingdom Hearts 1 in HD and adding more content. Calling it "Kingdom Hearts 1.5"


What's with Square now a days

I just hope the Sonic series isn't dead at this point, as it was getting good again.
Then again, Sonic Generation's ending really screwed over most of the series' chronology.

Unless they come up with an excuse as to how Classic Eggman gets back to his own time and doesn't decide to give up trying to take over the world and be a teacher, the timestream should theoretically collapse after the events of Sonic 2.

I don't think anything Classic Eggman said was to be taken seriously

I also don't think he'd have any problem getting out of any predicament, considering he's a main villain from a repeating series in the 90's.

Also, if the timeline changed, Sonic would have noticed it upon entering modern times

 

[Deleted member]

It wouldn't be immediate that he would notice.
If anything, after the ending cutscene, he would just cease to exist along with his now non-existent future.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Eh, you'd think in a series like Sonic if the timeline changed there would be burning buildings and ruin everywhere as soon as he stepped out.

 

[Oasis_S]

Plot twist: Sonic steps into a future where he doesn't exist and the world is a better place for it so he kills himself.

 

[TheFirstPoppyBro]

Eh, you'd think in a series like Sonic if the timeline changed there would be burning buildings and ruin everywhere as soon as he stepped out.

Was that a Crisis City joke? Because it sure sounds like one.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Plot twist: Sonic steps into a future where he doesn't exist and the world is a better place for it so he kills himself.

Eh, if it were me I'd just enjoy living in the better world and with a clean slate

 

[Oasis_S]

Sorry Psycho, but the world just ain't no place for eyeball robots or blue hedgehogs.

 

[Big-Cat]

OMG, instead of making Kingdom Hearts 3, they are remaking Kingdom Hearts 1 in HD and adding more content. Calling it "Kingdom Hearts 1.5"


What's with Square now a days

Well, it's not like it'd be an incredibly expensive project. All the levels and everything are the same, just upscaled graphics.

 

[volbound1700]

@ Frostwraith, about the article did you read the posters below? Wow, some really Nintendo haters there. They were saying SNES was Nintendo's heyday lol. I think Nintendo made a mistake with Wii U but you cannot deny the success of the Wii so Nintendo has had its ups.

 

[volbound1700]

I just hope the Sonic series isn't dead at this point, as it was getting good again.
Then again, Sonic Generation's ending really screwed over most of the series' chronology.

Unless they come up with an excuse as to how Classic Eggman gets back to his own time and doesn't decide to give up trying to take over the world and be a teacher, the timestream should theoretically collapse after the events of Sonic 2.

SEGA practically is Sonic now so he won't die. He is by far their biggest franchise and has been since his inception. In fact, SEGA is only trying to promote him more. The problem is he has been overpromoted and put into junk games often to make a buck off his image. This is why I see him in Smash, SEGA wants him in their to promote him. Anything about getting out his image. A SEGA executive stated that they wanted to make him the next Hello Kitty. Look at all his TV appearances lol.

 

[Wario Bros.]

Isn't SEGA also having financial issues currently? That's one reason I'm doubting a SEGA All-Stars fighting game will happen (that, and the results of PlayStation All-Stars). Sonic returning in Smash sounds like a better idea.

 

[volbound1700]

Pretty much every video game company is having financial problems right now lol.

 

[Oasis_S]

I wonder what each of our Smash Bros. rosters would look like if the characters were taken only from our own game libraries. Off the top of my head I know I would have Chibi-Robo, Godzilla, and Tony Hawk has newcomers. Would have to cut Falcon, Olimar, Ice Climbers, Game & Watch, a few Zelda characters, All the Earthbound and MOTHER characters, and Snake though. Meta Knight too since I don't own a Kirby game with him in it. Also I only have two Kirby games so I'd have to reflect that.

 

[Big-Cat]

Pretty much every video game company is having financial problems right now lol.

Everyone is having financial problems.

 

[Pazzo.]

I wonder what each of our Smash Bros. rosters would look like if the characters were taken only from our own game libraries. Off the top of my head I know I would have Chibi-Robo, Godzilla, and Tony Hawk has newcomers. Would have to cut Falcon, Olimar, Ice Climbers, Game & Watch, a few Zelda characters, All the Earthbound and MOTHER characters, and Snake though. Meta Knight too since I don't own a Kirby game with him in it. Also I only have two Kirby games so I'd have to reflect that.

I would have Professor Layton, Luke, Desole, Flora, Anton Herzen....you get the point. Mario characters stay, and classic Sonic... So does Team Star Fox. So many characters would be removed..... and added.

 

[FalKoopa]

Technically, I wouldn't have to remove a single character, because I own a copy of Brawl, all the characters are in it.

 

[Curious Villager]

I would have Professor Layton, Luke, Desole, Flora, Anton Herzen....you get the point. Mario characters stay, and classic Sonic... So does Team Star Fox. So many characters would be removed..... and added.

I love how you mentioned Flora but not Emmy.

 

[Oasis_S]

Technically, I wouldn't have to remove a single character, because I own a copy of Brawl, all the characters are in it.

NOPE THAT'S CHEATING. TO AVOID SUCH CHEATING, I PROPOSE YOU COULD ONLY ADD ONE CHARACTER PER GAME YOU OWN if you feel like one is even necessary, also that character has to appear in that game. So at best you could add three characters that appear in Smash that don't appear elsewhere in your library.

Unless you want to be a filthy cheater. That's fine too. I GUESS.

 

[~automatic]

I shouldn't have sold a lot of my old games.

EDIT: At least Isaac would get in.

 

[volbound1700]

Of the Brawl characters based on games I own and not played (I did play Earthbound and Metroid titles)

Mario, Yoshi, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, Pikmin, Sonic, Kirby series stay. (No Star Fox, Earthbound, Metroid, Gyromite, Kid Icarus, F-Zero, Fire Emblem, Metal-Gear, Pokemon, or Warioware ownership).

We would gain Banjo-Kazooie, Megaman, more Sonic, and Rayman.

 

[---]

I wonder what each of our Smash Bros. rosters would look like if the characters were taken only from our own game libraries.

I spend too much on games so I'd only have to remove Lucas.

 

[FalKoopa]

Now, on to actual answer. I'll have to remove the StarFox. Characters, Fire Emblem characters except Roy, Meta Knight, Mother characters, Snake, Sonic, Samus, Pit, ROB and Mr. G&W.

And have to add a ton of Mario characters, Pokémon, GBA FE lords, WarioWare characters, Tingle, Impa, and Super Bubsy ().

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Since I have the smash games in my game library, it'd probably look the same for me

 

[Robert of Normandy]

Wait, do we have to include one character from every game in our library? And is it just for games on Nintendo systems?