This Just In: Nintendo Doesn't Get It

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squall_vb

But nobody on TNL like their games because they're not hardcore enough.

---

That's not what the point of what the original post was about.

Quote:

---

So what do you care what two Japanese guys think of your gaming preferences?

---

Quote:

---

it is them telling people who like challenging games that they're idiots for doing so. And also for them saying that Continuing was put into games because they got to be too challenging, because that is factually wrong.

---

...

Quote:

---

Even without the word "enough," it is still assumed that you didn't have enough time.

---

I'm sorry. Again, I continue to assume that the posts I write are comprehendible without confusion.

Please read that sentence to be worded as follows:

Quote:

---

ps: and yeah I don't have enough time to play the games I have purchased and like to the extent that I feel that I have played them to the point of total completion and mastery, hence leaving me feel that I have played said games for as much time as I want to play them and have no desire to ever play them again for the rest of my life, so you better beileve I outright never play a lot of games that I may deem as "crap", however undeserved that may be. Sorry.

---

I hope I am understood clearly now.

(and I wrote this while FirstBlood posted so this is redundant)

Quote:

---

if you don't like modern Nintendo games, and you don't like the way modern Nintendo execs feel about the industry, take your money and your time somewhere else.

---

I've already taken my money elsewhere and I still disagree with those statments, so what other recourse do I have?

Can you please tell me when it is permissible for someone to express disagreement with another person's opinion? Last I checked it was "always" but now you're insisting otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dog$

(and I wrote this while FirstBlood posted so this is redundant)

I've already taken my money elsewhere and I still disagree with those statments, so what other recourse do I have?

Can you please tell me when it is permissible for someone to express disagreement with another person's opinion? Last I checked it was "always" but now you're insisting otherwise.

---

Of course, you're free to express as much disagreement as you see fit. I just don't see the point in getting so damned worked up over it when I could be doing something fun... let getting around to some of those aforementioned underplayed games.

How do you know I'm not doing that while periodically glancing here? Or that I'm looking over here while waiting for some web content to load for some online education as part of my upcoming job? The latter is what I am in fact currently engaged in.

Moreover, who says getting worked up isn't fun? Not me, anyway. This is a blast.

Yeah, sometimes it can be a hoot. Best of luck with the job.

Quote:

---

Miyamoto- So it's tough. Even if you're just about to get to the boss, you could fall into the lava, get burned and be sent straight back and have to start again from scratch.

Iwata- It's very unforgiving when you fail.

Miyamoto- Right. So even if you slip up just before clearing the castle, you'll be sent right back to the starting point. Maybe this is all due to my nasty streak! (laughs) But I think playing at that level of intensity is actually the most enjoyable way to play.

Iwata- You think it's more fun to have to play from the start of the level again?

Miyamoto- With platform games, only playing the difficult parts can really take it out of you. It feels good to play parts that you can breeze through as well.

---

What they're talking about here is basic level flow. Intensity followed by brief rest. If it's all intensity all the time it burns the player out, it's not fun. By sticking the player at the beginning of the level when they run out of lives, or back at a checkpoint after losing one, they ensure they've got one or two bits the player can be good at before kicking his ass again. They're viewing a cycle of accomplish-accomplish-fail as better than fail-fail-fail-fail-fail.

And yeah, their comments on the origin of continues is dumb, but that's not really relevant to the overall discussion.

James

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

What they're talking about here is basic level flow. Intensity followed by brief rest. If it's all intensity all the time it burns the player out, it's not fun. By sticking the player at the beginning of the level when they run out of lives, or back at a checkpoint after losing one, they ensure they've got one or two bits the player can be good at before kicking his ass again. They're viewing a cycle of accomplish-accomplish-fail as better than fail-fail-fail-fail-fail.

And yeah, their comments on the origin of continues is dumb, but that's not really relevant to the overall discussion.

James

---

I hadn't thought of it in that context, but you make a good point. That's precisely the thing that made me give up on Gears of War. It became a process of trying to die as little as possible between checkpoints, and I got tired of it. I really hate to give up on a game--especially one I paid for--but that was one of the rare times that I did.

Everyone does what Nintendon't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squall_vb

I hadn't thought of it in that context, but you make a good point. That's precisely the thing that made me give up on Gears of War. It became a process of trying to die as little as possible between checkpoints, and I got tired of it. I really hate to give up on a game--especially one I paid for--but that was one of the rare times that I did.

---

I hope you gave up on Insane/Solo.... otherwise, I can understand why you have no problem with Nintendo games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

From the snippet posted, it seems they're talking about level checkpoints rather than an overall save system.

---

They are. They are talking about how Mario platformers will typically give you a short and easy stretch with a single power-up after a checkpoint so you can take a hit before reaching the hard part of the stage again, or something along those lines.

This is one of the silliest threads I've seen on this forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingoffighters

I hope you gave up on Insane/Solo.... otherwise, I can understand why you have no problem with Nintendo games.

---

It wasn't that it was too hard to progress at all; I was consistently making progress. It just felt wrong all over, and a lot of it I blame on the clunky controls. The excessive one-hit deaths didn't help matters. It was like Contra without the fun.

I like being challenged. Hell, I burned the better part of a Saturday on that cocksucking motherfucking "Supply Lines" mission in GTA: San Andreas. But in the case of Gears, it was more frustrating than enjoyable, and I had to bail.