Why, I think, Nintendo has not lost its touch

**Grave** · 03 Feb 2004, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by burgundy

You shouldn't, because the only way you should be playing GGX on your TV is on your PS2.

I stand by my SF64 statement. And the DC version of GGX was quite alright. Though, the GBA version was fun for the $10 I spent... primarily for laughs. And its ridiculously easy difficulty on all levels.

**Mzo** · 03 Feb 2004, 11:59 PM

Originally Posted by burgundy

Oh, my. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what in living hell do you find wrong with StarFox 64?

I can't even imagine... great graphics, great gameplay, new mechanics with the charge shot to kill groups of enemies for combos, different vehicles, teh rumble, and voice acting. COCKY LITTLE FREAK!

**Ragnarok the Red** · 04 Feb 2004, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by jarrod

GBA SP >>>>>>>>>>>>> GB player

Originally Posted by Mzo

I've used my Player like twice. I just play my SP on my bed. It's perfect.

Hell, I thought I was the only one who felt like this, I've only used my GBA Player a handful of times since I got it, most games loook like shit on the thing.

I don't believe Nintendo's lost their touch. The problem is games as a whole have become less original nowadays. The hobby's grown so large and so expansive there's barely any room for innovation anymore nowadays. Developing games costs assloads of time and money, and most companies prefer to stick with a formula that works.

I credit Nintendo for still churning out original stuff once in a while like Animal Crossing, Pikmin, Wario Ware, etc. But it's gotten to the point where I don't expect every major Mario, Zelda, or Metroid release to be a true gaming classic. If they are, lucky us, if not, they'll still more than likely be damn good games. And that's good enough for me

**voltz** · 04 Feb 2004, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by burgundy

Oh, my. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what in living hell do you find wrong with StarFox 64?

When star fox first came out, it was a major turning point for gaming because it brought a new style of gameplay (3D) that was something we never truly experienced on a console before.

I can't exactly call star fox 64 innovative in the same light because we've been playing games in 3D for the past 3-5 prior to it's release, all this did was bring the franchise closer to perfection and that's what we'll likely see if we get another sequel on gamecube.

**Damian79** · 04 Feb 2004, 12:38 AM

Originally Posted by voltz

When star fox first came out, it was a major turning point for gaming because it brought a new style of gameplay (3D) that was something we never truly experienced on a console before.

I can't exactly call star fox 64 innovative in the same light because we've been playing games in 3D for the past 3-5 prior to it's release, all this did was bring the franchise closer to perfection and that's what we'll likely see if we get another sequel on gamecube.

Uh, no. It is going in a completely new direction on the GC as it is being made by the ace combat team.

**burgundy** · 04 Feb 2004, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by voltz

When star fox first came out, it was a major turning point for gaming because it brought a new style of gameplay (3D) that was something we never truly experienced on a console before.

I can't exactly call star fox 64 innovative in the same light because we've been playing games in 3D for the past 3-5 prior to it's release, all this did was bring the franchise closer to perfection and that's what we'll likely see if we get another sequel on gamecube.

1) You didn't say SF64 wasn't innovative, you said that Star Fox doesn't have a true sequel. Huge difference.

2) StarFox 64 came out in early 1997. Where were you playing 3D games in 1992?

(If StarFox is that old, consider me surprised, but even then, it was a novelty for quite a while.)

**Diff-chan** · 04 Feb 2004, 01:52 AM

I also want to say that it may be fucking rosy and dandy that Nintendo is making great GBA games, but really this is not 1992 anymore and part of being a great developer is pushing the envelope. That is what makes Bioware so good. Not necessarilly for strictly graphics and atmophere (although thats a big part of it), but for making advanced and groundbreaking gameplay.

Nintendo has shown to be completely and utterly incompetent when it comes to GameCube development. Their games are mostly nonsense. The best, most groundbreaking game on the system was made by a bunch of Americans in Texas. Meanwhile the best Nintendo EAD could throw on to the screen is a nifty remake of an N64 game, a low-rent tactical action game inspired by Miyamato's shroom trips, and a fucking vacuum simulation. And NST cant do much more than prettify and worsen existing N64 racers.

If, and a very good case can be made based on the evidence, Nintendo is simply unable to make groundbreaking 64/128+ bit games and they (and Miyamato, and EAD, and whoever else) really are only comfortable making games using the same tech they were making a decade ago, than they still suck.

It's kind of like a basketball player who's amazing in college but gets to the pros and can't handle himself. He still sucks.