Here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
I hope this man makes millions and millions more games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
Printable View
Here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
I hope this man makes millions and millions more games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
Itagaki. I had my doubts but this guy knows his shit. And.. Ninja Gaiden makes me regret my lack of X-Box. He's not the only reason, but yes. Much of X-Boxes success could be attributed to Tecmo.Quote:
Tomonobu Itagaki: Our main reason to go online was not to offer downloadable content, but to allow players to fight against one another. It goes against my policy to save room for future downloads when you have the ability to put it in the game now, just to charge people extra. I would rather give everything I can now, in the actual game
In Itagaki we trust.
you know, as weird as they sound, he's actually pretty accurate in the first and third quote. Lets face it, a lot of characters in fighting games are eye candy, colorful characters or women who in reality would not look like they do if they were even in fights, so i dont see a problem really, if anything, he's the first guy i have seen being honest on the issue. And for the second quote, well, he's probably right about that too, most of x-boxes weak sucess is probably due to doa and doa volleyball.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
To be thrown off of a cliff by an ugly opponent might make you feel bad even if the fight was fair, but to be thrown off by a beautiful woman….that should make you feel good about losing.
If you're going to lose, you might as well get an awesome cutscene of a cute girl.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
I guess you can say Tecmo's franchises have had a lot to do with the success that the Xbox has had in Japan.
The Xbox isn't popular at all in Japan, and DOA3 and Ninja Gaiden are some of the best sellers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagaki
As far as DOA, only about 50% of the game is the fighting, but the other 50% is pure entertainment.
HOLY FUCK, DO YOU MEAN, A FIGHTING GAME THAT IS ACTUALLY FUN? AMAZING! IT MUST SUCK FOR SOME REASON!
MarkRyan, do you mind telling me how the fact that Itagaki says he makes entertaining games with cute girls that sell well in Japan makes his games not the most awesome things in recent history?
Oh my god, new picture of him =D yessss
I'm really glad he touched on Code:Chronus a little bit. I hadn't heard it mentioned in awhile, but it looks like it's going to be the whole Kasumi/Ayane storyline, which is awesome. I'd really like to see the whole thing played through, I know in all the DOA games there's an ongoing rivalry, but I've only been able to piece stuff together from endings and such. I'd really like to see a game that explains it fully.
By "pure entertainment," Itagaki is referring to pretty graphics, big boobs, and lots of panty shots. He completely admits that half his game is that shit, which has about 0 to do with a little thing called gameplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxthor
Why is this a big deal to you?
He makes money that way. So who are you to argue.
I am a game critic--that is who I am to argue. Anyone with an opinion is also one to argue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian79
Britney Spears makes millions off of her crud. Should no one say anything about how her crud doesn't deserver to be called music? President Bush makes his money being President--should no one scrutinize his decisions?
Itigaki has a first name? The mystique is gone... Unless, he makes that his official name, like "Janet", and "Prince", making his name a symbol would only help.
Edit
David Bowie's image was extremely integral to his success, but Ziggy Stardust is still an awesome album.
While I don't give a damn for BS's music, who is she hurting? President bust on the other hand has a direct(or almost) impact on you, big difference there.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
If you don't like their work don't support them by buying their goods/ voting for them. Simple concept really.
I think he meant that 50% of the game is serious fighting, while the other 50% is cool ass shit (like riding some bitch like a snowboard) that may be unbalanced but is fun as hell, thus "entertaining".
Dear Damian79,Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
MarkRyan has 0wned you.
ItiGodi has owned us all though.
Why are you yelling?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxthor
I'll take the fucking Pepsi challenge between DOA's solid controls and gorgeous graphics to say Virtua Fighter EVO with its shit graphics and needlessly intricate controls. I'm sorry MarkRyan, but even a 'game-critic' should know that the purpose of a game is to atleast be entertained. It doesn't take a fighting game with awkward moves that require insane controller gymnastics to perform to be good. If it's fun and enjoyable to play, it's already way out in front of much of the crap that gets put out these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
I don't know what your problem is, but a fighting game that's 50% graphics and 50% gameplay doesn't sound bad at all to me.
if they rock half as much as DOA and Ninja Gaiden, then i agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
In the end it is about how much fun it is to play. If a game has the most awesome graphics, has the best sound and perfect controls, but is as about as fun as watching paint dry, then it is still a turd.
It still frightens me.
Rolling Stone doesn't freely give out album recommendations for an album being "fun to listen to".
Ebert or his kin won't give 3 stars to a 1 star movie solely for it being "fun to watch".
Yet GamePro is able to both define and quantify a game's worth on it being simply "fun". What's worse is how many other people buy into this theory.
Que?
When one posts without a specific quote and isn't replying to the main topic, it's usually assumed that the post's subject refers to the content directly preceeding it.
Specifically, I was reacting to statements like:
andQuote:
I'm sorry MarkRyan, but even a 'game-critic' should know that the purpose of a game is to atleast be entertained.
andQuote:
In the end it is about how much fun it is to play.
As far as I'm concerned, being "fun" simply isn't good enough to make your games the best. I'd like to assume that the userbase of this board already knows that videogames "are fun" (thus not making it a valid single criteria to judge Game X against Y), and that we all know any game can be "fun" if you're giddy or intoxicated enough.Quote:
do you mind telling me how the fact that Itagaki says he makes entertaining games... makes his games not the most awesome things in recent history?
Why compare? Some people may enjoy x game but that doesn't mean that I would find it enjoyable.Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
I mean look at Zelda 64, every review gives it near perfect scores, but I find it incredibly boring, does that mean I should buy the game even though I don't enjoy it? I don't have a problem with other people liking it, but the game wasn't much fun for me. The end.
The end... until someone feels like voicing an opinion regarding the matter. MarkRyan did so with some form of logic behind his sentiments, but that isn't good enough for you.
What you people are telling him is that he has no right to voice dissent at all, regardless of his basis of opinion or other irrelevant criteria (such as refusing to buy his games). Sure, this mindset would result in fewer arguments here, but TNL is getting inactive enough as it is.
It reminds me of the old color vs. drawing argument in art. Simplified, the appeal of color is more immediate to people and they'll like it even if they don't get the color theory behind it, whereas technically proficient rendering tends to call for a bit knowledge of what went into the work before appreciating it. So people tend to go for things that are simpler and more immediately pleasing to them, and then they compare them to things that are more technically sound that they aren't into.
It's like me saying Super Robot Wars is the best strategy game series ever because I buy into the fanboy crap that it's covered in(the whole, various robots from various popular series join forces, all with their own original BGM and voices). So because of things that have not much to do with strategy gaming at all, I could say it's better than other games in the genre.But that would be stupid. As far as delivering solid strategic gaming goes, I'd probably have to pick something else, based on how the gameplay(related to actual strategy) is actually handled-scenarios, character types,terrain design, etc.
Likewise, saying that one fighting game is a better fighter than another because the other takes too much time to get into isn't really saying that one game is a better fighting game. It's saying that you don't have enough of an interest in that sort of game to bother with something that focuses on providing a certain level of complexity in the experience. However, I think the more important question there is whether or not the people that are willing to put in the time are rewarded for it. ie: Do you spend a long time learning a fighting game just to find out it sucks, or do you find a new and remarkably deep experience from taking that time that sets the game apart from others. If that is the case with something like Virtua Fighter, then I'd say it probably is a better fighting game than something designed for you to jump into that sells itself largely on being pretty. Even if you happen to enjoy the pretty game more.
Of course, I don't know if that's the case with something like Virtua Fighter, since I haven't played it all that much. Or Dead or Alive really. Soo... so I'm just speaking generally. good night.
No I am saying that he has to to stop his constant whinging at Itagaki and DOA. He seems to give off the vibe that he can't accept that DOA is a good game to some people or even fun to some.
I am saying people see thing in games others don't and vice versa.
who said anything about being "the best"?Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
you said:
Quote:
Yet GamePro is able to both define and quantify a game's worth on it being simply "fun". What's worse is how many other people buy into this theory.
if im not having fun with a game i cease playing it. when im having fun i keep playing it.
i play games to have fun. i fail to see how a games worth depends on anything other thant how much fun i am having while playing.
try again?
I might happen to think it's fun to bury cats in the ground neck-up and go mow the lawn.
Hitler thought it was fun to shishkabob and roast Jews.
You might think it's fun to control emotionless tanks (endowed with the inability to move and shoot at the same time) as they battle emotionless zombies in a "scary environment".
Saying a game is "fun" is meaningless because no two people can ever fully agree on what "fun" is.
So when you tell me that you like a game for it being "fun", my reaction is that you're using the word "fun" in an attempt to conceal your ignorance and lack of ability to truly define what it is that you like about the game.
Not all games are fun no matter how hammered you are. Not all games are fun to the same people. Assuming that videogames are fun is like assuming that the next Hollywood blockbuster will be worth watching. That'd be nice in an ideal world, but that's not the world I live in.Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
Team Ninja don't make the best games I've ever played, but at least they're fun.
:bs:Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
who gives a shit if i can define why a game is fun to me or not?
if we're talking reviews here, stop reading gamepro.
remember saying this?um, who cares if its 'teh best!"?Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, being "fun" simply isn't good enough to make your games the best.
i spend my hard earned cash to play games that i find fun. sorry thats so hard for you to understand.
this is silly :bang:
Totally.
I come here expecting to converse with people who have at least half of a functioning brain-cell so that they could define what makes things "fun" and I get emoticons in reply.
ps: You keep getting hung up on the words "the best". Exchange the phrase with "worth talking about", or "worth playing", or "worth giving a damn about", whatever. You're still the one telling me that I can't understand you, despite your insistence in giving me no information to analyze in the first place.
Apparently, gameplay = future pay download.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomonobu Itagak
Fun is the sum total of how each part of a game responds to you. Happy? A single element of a game can make a game far more enjoyable to some than to others. So that is why people like to say the like a game because it is "fun". They aren't reviewing a game so why should they bother to analyse it?
Post that again in English, please.
This is absolute fact. The only substantive backing I have heard from the DoA fans is that it is easy for their non-gamer friends to pick up and play. That's like saying that bobbing in the water is a great swimming style because people with no arms or legs can do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
Fun != Good
Gee MarkRyan, thanks for bringing this topic back up, our forum was sorely lacking discussion on this topic. Now the same 5 or 6 people can repeat themselves endlessly!
JM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
WTF man...calm down :doubt:
Last time I read TNL, there was this really long thread where the same five people either complained about or text-fellated Tomonobu Itagaki. I'm pretty sure there was another one the time before that. Do you guys just make a new one every morning?
In this spirit, I propose the "Heated Discussions About Tomonobu Itagaki" forum. This way classic posts such as "DOA is shit I hate Itagaki let's talk about him some more that fuck I hope he dies so i can make a thread about it" and "DOA is Jesus pls to let me fuck big hero rock star Itagaki so i can make a thread about it" can be archived for easy access and used as valuable support in the next heated discussion about Tomonobu Itagaki.
Beh, I'd rather have a flood of Itagaki topics instead of Sales Chart threads or 1,001 Nintendo Themes.
SHAT YAW MOUF!
Constant Itagaki fandom vs anti-fandom "discussion" gives TNL "character"...
What is it with you guys? People aren't allowed to like anything against your authority? There are plenty of things I hate that others love, do I get in their faces and make a nuisance of myself in a vain attempt to make them dislike something that gives them joy? No, I simply let them be. I wouldn't want anyone doing that to me, were the situation reversed.
Next time you buy, see, or rent a mainstream movie, I hope an annoying, pretentious clerk goes on a rambling tirade about what an idiot you are for buying something so base and unintelligent, never mind that it actually entertains you.
It's simple, Bacon. These jokers have shoved Itagaki bullshit down our throats for so long that we snapped. This "it's fun" approach is new. They finally gave up on claiming the games were good.
So... where's all this proof that Itagaki or his games suck?
The only thing that this proved to me is that Mark Ryan seriously needs to find a better hobby than trying to bash Itagaki.
What the fuck kind of argument is this? This makes about as much sense as "We hear better from one direction!"
The way I see it, the order of ease to pick up relatively new 3D fighting games goes something like:
-SC2
-DOA
-Tekken 4
-Tekken Tag
-VF4
That list, from best to worst looks something like :
-VF4
-Tekken Tag
-SC2
-Tekken 4
-DOA 3
Now, what you get with a "poor" fighting game is extreme repetition, mindless gameplay, ineffective defensive systems/ Overeffective defensive systems, Few characters being playable, ect.
Note:That list is baised, SC2 and DOA are up in the air for easiest to pick up.
As much as I love SC2, it's the only game on that list that I've ever seen go as fast as it came. Literally everyone bought it in august when it came out, then you had to work to find anyone willing to play it after around November.
The funny thing is, this guy works for IGN. He's part of the videogame journalism industry. And you wonder why nobody takes videogames seriously... because baboons like him are the ones writing about them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Do You Like Erotic?
God forbid I express my opinion!
Whenever I mention my fandom of MvC2 I'm told how retarded I must be. If I bring up loving Metal Gear Solid 2 I'm always reminded of how "teh gay" Raiden is. I don't take that shit and just go, "Aww, why you gotta be a hater? Can't you just accept the fact that my opinion is different?" Because I value my views, I argue them--I welcome dissenting opinions. I'm not on a web forum to hold hands.
And dog$, thanks for taking me back about six years to Game Rave ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destin
Yeah, what he said.
Um...Itagaki and his fun games being compared to Hitler roasting Jews?
Please MarkRyan, just go to Japan with a sniper rifle and put a bullet through Itagaki's skull. Just for the love of God shut the hell up about him.
Nobody cares what you think of him anymore. Grow up.
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Someone who thinks that ZOE2 is an example of a great game should not be paid for his opinions.
That's the problem though, you don't argue the issue you just spew out your anti-Itagaki rhetoric and then attack people who disagree with completely unrelated arguments. You have to yet to show anyone in this thread a logical argument why the DOA games 'suck'.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
If these were niche games only the few diehard Itagaki fans lusted for then I might find some wisdom in the unsupported drivel you spout, but nearly every one of Team Ninja's games that have come out have sold fantastically. Plus, this isn't even due to casual gamer appeal, Ninja Gaiden has absolutely NO casual appeal and yet raked in millions. Why? Because people enjoyed the game, 'shitty' camera and all.
MarkRyan, you need to face up to an important fact. Just because your opinion is different from the norm doesn't make it better. If you don't like Team Ninja games and have a valid explanation why, by all means share it. However, if you're going to just bash them and their games based solely on your personal preference and the same tired arguments that have been addressed countless times before in different threads, then I think you should just move on.
And also to dog$, gaming magazines use "fun" as a decriptor because that's what games are fundamentally meant to be. The same isn't necessarily said about movies or music, but by the same token those genres have their own vague terminology that critics liberally apply. How many times have we heard a movie critic refer to a film as "smart" or a music critic refer to an album as "experimental"? Sure, these labels are highly subjective, but reviews of any kind on the whole are subjective. But, if enough people agree that a certain quality about a game, movie, or album appeal to them, that's how they're going to describe it to their friends. I see no problem in calling a game "fun" if it is to me. If other people disagree fine, but ragging on me simply because I enjoy a game isn't criticism, it's stupidity.
According to some she's influencing little girls to turn into sluts. Granted, as females they'll become such anyway, but nevertheless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian79
You're my hero for the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
I also agree with Destin's list. As much as I can, anyway, since I don't know dick about TTT.
I'm with dog$ here. I mean, did I have an insane amount of fun with Romance of the Three Kingdoms VIII? Hell yes I did. But I can also be reasonably certain most people don't enjoy managing 3rd century politics and moving grain around. So I say "FUN FACTOR 8!!" and you buy it on my recommendation and next thing you know Xu Yu is telling you that Xu You is requesting troops from Shang Xiang.
Well, there is no universal "Fun-factor", as it's all subjective.
But still I think that ultimately, all game designers strive to create a game that is fun. Sometimes they forego depth for ease of use, and sometimes try to infuse their games with both, which is more difficult.
I tend to judge all media (TV, Movies, Music, Books, Video Games, etc.) based on what the creators were trying to accomplish (and how well they accomplished their goals), not strictly on my own biases and wants and expectations. If I wanted a truly in-depth fighting engine that would take months to perfect one character, got DOA III, and complained that this game didn't give me what I wanted, is Itagaki to blame or I? After all, by all accounts he never claimed that his games were that in-depth, nor have reviewers or others who have played it.
That's why I hate it when reviewers constantly judge a game not based on its own merits, but in comparison to a game that sometimes has very little in common besides being in the same genre.
So DOA isn't as deep as VF. We've established this time and time again. Do we need to read up about it every week? Do we need confirmation that this rule still exists so often? And besides, what does that have to do with the enjoyment those who like the game have? You only get as much as you put into it, and plenty have given up on VF since they felt it wasn't worth it. Yet you won't hear many claim tha VF is a bad game; some can differentiate from a game that doesn't appeal to them and a badly made game.
I don't understand why (outside of his irrational hatred for all things Team Ninja) MarkRyan created a whole separate thread to this topic, when he could have just put this into one of the other numerous threads devoted to this topic. This wasn't even provoked; there was no need for this thread.
I tend to judge and rate games based on how much fun I had with them. Given the game, I could be letting the game fly on its owm merits, comparing it to previous entries in a series, comparing it to future entries of a series, or any number of things. If I didn't have fun with a game, I'm not going to lavish praise upon it. Sure, it might be "technically" the best game to graze the Earth, but if I didn't have fun with it, I'd be lying to readers, and to myself, by giving it high praise or marks in areas where they don't apply. Itigaki's games have been fun, but for the most part, I don't feel the fun that can be had with them is worth the frustration caused by the lackluster gameplay. They simply aren't my cup of tea.
Much like how Gran Turismo and games of that ilk just aren't games that I enjoy. Despite that, I'll continue to review them, as I have just as much right to post my opinion on them as someone who does love them to death.
There's a difference between saying the games are good and swinging from Itagaki's nuts all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian79
"OMG!! HE CAN DRAW AWESOME BOOBS!!!1"
Get's old after 234,0000 threads.
IMO, aside from Ninja Gaiden, nothing he's done has been exceptional. In fact, what else outside of DOA has he even done?
I can't say I'm a huge fan of his games, but just from press releases and the like I have to admire someone who truly does listen to his fans. Even if I hate DOA Itagaki is awesome. That's all I can say about him.
(Ninja Gaiden though, I love).
And I think everyone is putting way too much focus on MarkRyan's opinion. And I think MarkRyan needs to stop reiterating the fact he hates Itagaki. We know.
I think this thread is fun to read.
if you're a masochist.
in related news, i was just replaying ninja gaiden on hard mode. the camera in chapter 2 is horrid. the horsemen, the boss.. ugh. i'm pretty sure that level had a lot to do with some people's dislike of the game. at least it gets much less terrible in chapter 3+.
I don't remember anyone saying that. However, if you can find evidence of that in on of the "234,000" threads you speak of, by all means, reprint it here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
I agree Epmode, the game looks and plays awesome but the camera totally horrible. A fun game but they could really improve the camera.Quote:
Originally Posted by epmode
TASTES GREAT.
Andy Warhol once said, "Don't pay any attention to what they write about you. Just measure it in inches."
I think, using this formula, Itagaki has the biggest internet penis in the world thanks to TNL.
... And this satisfies you.
All night long, baby.
What no "kekekekeke"? :(
I'm seeing the future of amatuer porn vids "Itagaki and Satsuki".
I personally don't actually have anything against DOA3, I just think that series just losses its fun factor far faster than the other fighting games. Its a blast playing against friend for the first few hours or so, but its just nothing I could see myself actually purchasing.
I have to measure long ways and not height ways D=
what noble intentions. was that really why you came in here?Quote:
Originally Posted by dog$
so if i defined to you what makes a Resident Evil game "fun" for me (the music, the art, the atmosphere, the plot, the sum of all parts that make up the whole game) would that make it easier for you to make a decision on wether or not you found it "fun" to play?
you said it yourself: fun is subjective.
you would have to define such things for yourself.
pretty simple really. put down the Gamepro. its time. just let it go.
maybe this will make you feel better: :chu:
Yes.Quote:
so if i defined to you what makes a Resident Evil game "fun" for me (the music, the art, the atmosphere, the plot, the sum of all parts that make up the whole game) would that make it easier for you to make a decision on wether or not you found it "fun" to play?
Which is why I'd prefer you refrain from using the word "fun" at all.
That paragraph gives me a definition instead of an empty word. That's what I asked you for 50+ posts ago.
Ask and thou shalt receive.Quote:
you would have to define such things for yourself.
But, I'm not the one using their vocabulary.Quote:
pretty simple really. put down the Gamepro.
you are hopeless.
i on the other hand, am the winner.
Wait a minute, am I seeing this right?
http://falcon.tp.devry.edu/~tmcn9298/gamefaqs.jpg
Christ, someone needs to check the DNS tables, stat.