Anyone hype for this years E3 coming in a few days?
E3 2014
posted in
Off Topic
xbox will announce something disappointing
sony will too
nintendo will say smash brothers once and I will shit all over my penis
xbox will announce something disappointing
sony will too
nintendo will say smash brothers once and I will shit all over my penis
sony will too
nintendo will say smash brothers once and I will shit all over my penis
<insert E3 2014 drinking game here>
no expectations whatsoever, but hey at least i wont be disappointed
<insert E3 2014 drinking game here>
no expectations whatsoever, but hey at least i wont be disappointed
no expectations whatsoever, but hey at least i wont be disappointed
Darth Vader as a new smash brothers character confirmed
Darth Vader as a new smash brothers character confirmed
seems like everything's already leaked so should be another disappointing E3.
seems like everything's already leaked so should be another disappointing E3.
only thing i care about is nintendo, rest is probably gonna be next cod game or something
only thing i care about is nintendo, rest is probably gonna be next cod game or something
iFY_ryse 2 got leaked
didn't the first one get shown at E3 '13? could be wrong.
[quote=iFY_]ryse 2 got leaked[/quote]
didn't the first one get shown at E3 '13? could be wrong.
didn't the first one get shown at E3 '13? could be wrong.
Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
slinkyNow I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
[quote=slinky]Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.[/quote]
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
Ladies and Gentlemen get your marketing teams ready!
Ladies and Gentlemen get your marketing teams ready!
RawkstarslinkyNow I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D
[quote=Rawkstar][quote=slinky]Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.[/quote]
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D
downpourRawkstarmmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.slinkyNow I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D
So the entire change in story, new items, and gameplay changes just render as "1 new gimmick". The only similarity Majora's Mask had to Ocarina of time was the textures and visual effects (as it was on the same console). But the entire dynamic was changed with the way you had only 3 days to save the world, and then turn time back (or slow it down, or speed up, or other fun tricks) while using masks to alter your abilities, and go on several side quests to change the future, but then change it back again in order to progress farther IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. Then Wind Waker came with a totally new art style, different characters, and a totally different plot where everything takes place on some island where you now have the ability to sail all around and explore like you never had the chance to before. Then came Twilight Princess which was similar to Ocarina of Time in the exploration aspect, EXCEPT FOR THE HALF OF THE GAME WHERE YOU WERE A FUCKING WOLF EXPLORING THE DARK REALM BEING CONTROLLED BY SOME GOOD-WILLED DEMON TO FIGHT OFF AN ENEMY THAT HAS NO PRIOR CONNECTION THE GAME. because THAT is just so similar to everything else...And then came the trainwreck of a game, Skyward Sword...but it wasn't similar to the other Zelda games, and that's why I hated it so much. then there's the newer ones which I haven't had time to keep up with, but it's really not similar to any of the recent Zelda games, seeing as most of it is 2D.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.
[quote=downpour][quote=Rawkstar][quote=slinky]Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.[/quote]
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D[/quote]
So the entire change in story, new items, and gameplay changes just render as "1 new gimmick". The only similarity Majora's Mask had to Ocarina of time was the textures and visual effects (as it was on the same console). But the entire dynamic was changed with the way you had only 3 days to save the world, and then turn time back (or slow it down, or speed up, or other fun tricks) while using masks to alter your abilities, and go on several side quests to change the future, but then change it back again in order to progress farther IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. Then Wind Waker came with a totally new art style, different characters, and a totally different plot where everything takes place on some island where you now have the ability to sail all around and explore like you never had the chance to before. Then came Twilight Princess which was similar to Ocarina of Time in the exploration aspect, [b]EXCEPT FOR THE HALF OF THE GAME WHERE YOU WERE A FUCKING WOLF EXPLORING THE DARK REALM BEING CONTROLLED BY SOME GOOD-WILLED DEMON TO FIGHT OFF AN ENEMY THAT HAS NO PRIOR CONNECTION THE GAME[/b]. because THAT is just so similar to everything else...And then came the trainwreck of a game, Skyward Sword...but it wasn't similar to the other Zelda games, and that's why I hated it so much. then there's the newer ones which I haven't had time to keep up with, but it's really not similar to any of the recent Zelda games, seeing as most of it is 2D.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides going 3D[/quote]
So the entire change in story, new items, and gameplay changes just render as "1 new gimmick". The only similarity Majora's Mask had to Ocarina of time was the textures and visual effects (as it was on the same console). But the entire dynamic was changed with the way you had only 3 days to save the world, and then turn time back (or slow it down, or speed up, or other fun tricks) while using masks to alter your abilities, and go on several side quests to change the future, but then change it back again in order to progress farther IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. Then Wind Waker came with a totally new art style, different characters, and a totally different plot where everything takes place on some island where you now have the ability to sail all around and explore like you never had the chance to before. Then came Twilight Princess which was similar to Ocarina of Time in the exploration aspect, [b]EXCEPT FOR THE HALF OF THE GAME WHERE YOU WERE A FUCKING WOLF EXPLORING THE DARK REALM BEING CONTROLLED BY SOME GOOD-WILLED DEMON TO FIGHT OFF AN ENEMY THAT HAS NO PRIOR CONNECTION THE GAME[/b]. because THAT is just so similar to everything else...And then came the trainwreck of a game, Skyward Sword...but it wasn't similar to the other Zelda games, and that's why I hated it so much. then there's the newer ones which I haven't had time to keep up with, but it's really not similar to any of the recent Zelda games, seeing as most of it is 2D.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.
RawkstarSo the entire change in story, new items, and gameplay changes just render as "1 new gimmick". The only similarity Majora's Mask had to Ocarina of time was the textures and visual effects (as it was on the same console). But the entire dynamic was changed with the way you had only 3 days to save the world, and then turn time back (or slow it down, or speed up, or other fun tricks) while using masks to alter your abilities, and go on several side quests to change the future, but then change it back again in order to progress farther IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. Then Wind Waker came with a totally new art style, different characters, and a totally different plot where everything takes place on some island where you now have the ability to sail all around and explore like you never had the chance to before. Then came Twilight Princess which was similar to Ocarina of Time in the exploration aspect, EXCEPT FOR THE HALF OF THE GAME WHERE YOU WERE A FUCKING WOLF EXPLORING THE DARK REALM BEING CONTROLLED BY SOME GOOD-WILLED DEMON TO FIGHT OFF AN ENEMY THAT HAS NO PRIOR CONNECTION THE GAME. because THAT is just so similar to everything else...And then came the trainwreck of a game, Skyward Sword...but it wasn't similar to the other Zelda games, and that's why I hated it so much. then there's the newer ones which I haven't had time to keep up with, but it's really not similar to any of the recent Zelda games, seeing as most of it is 2D.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.
Majora's Mask is the only Zelda game I really enjoy (besides LTTP because that was the first one I played) because the story is so radically different from all the others. Didn't involve Zelda or Ganon in anyway, its actually interesting.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.
[quote=Rawkstar]So the entire change in story, new items, and gameplay changes just render as "1 new gimmick". The only similarity Majora's Mask had to Ocarina of time was the textures and visual effects (as it was on the same console). But the entire dynamic was changed with the way you had only 3 days to save the world, and then turn time back (or slow it down, or speed up, or other fun tricks) while using masks to alter your abilities, and go on several side quests to change the future, but then change it back again in order to progress farther IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. Then Wind Waker came with a totally new art style, different characters, and a totally different plot where everything takes place on some island where you now have the ability to sail all around and explore like you never had the chance to before. Then came Twilight Princess which was similar to Ocarina of Time in the exploration aspect, [b]EXCEPT FOR THE HALF OF THE GAME WHERE YOU WERE A FUCKING WOLF EXPLORING THE DARK REALM BEING CONTROLLED BY SOME GOOD-WILLED DEMON TO FIGHT OFF AN ENEMY THAT HAS NO PRIOR CONNECTION THE GAME[/b]. because THAT is just so similar to everything else...And then came the trainwreck of a game, Skyward Sword...but it wasn't similar to the other Zelda games, and that's why I hated it so much. then there's the newer ones which I haven't had time to keep up with, but it's really not similar to any of the recent Zelda games, seeing as most of it is 2D.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.[/quote]
Majora's Mask is the only Zelda game I really enjoy (besides LTTP because that was the first one I played) because the story is so radically different from all the others. Didn't involve Zelda or Ganon in anyway, its actually interesting.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.
And don't act like Pokemon or Fire Emblem are less than Call of Duty. Both of those games take place in fantastical realms with everything coming from the imagination. New characters, new creatures, different timelines and stories with all sorts of features which actually make the games feel different than before. IN CALL OF DUTY, THEY ARE ADDING RESKINS TO THE SAME DAMN 3 FILES, AND CHANGING THE STATS FOR EACH ONE. The difference here is that Fire Emblem and Pokemon actually require originality in order to come up with these characters, creatures, fighting styles, and such. Plus they need to design the game with a very raw idea of strategy in mind (for example, Water pokemon have advantage over fire pokemon, though a fire pokemon could overcome a water pokemon with enough stat promotion). In Call of Duty, that type of strategy doesn't exist. That type of balance just isn't there...You could walk out onto the battlefield with any type of weapon, and kill just about any player using any other weapon, (with a few exceptions). Don't get the wrong idea and think that I'm saying that Call of Duty doesn't require strategy, because it does, but it's in a totally different way. (It's more player strategy rather than gameplay strategy). Point is, the other franchises that Nintendo has aren't being "milked". Nintendo knows that they aren't making much money with these non cannon titles, but they still put them out there for the long time fans to enjoy, and there is so much more work going into them than you could imagine.[/quote]
Majora's Mask is the only Zelda game I really enjoy (besides LTTP because that was the first one I played) because the story is so radically different from all the others. Didn't involve Zelda or Ganon in anyway, its actually interesting.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.
downpour Majora's Mask is the only Zelda game I really enjoy (besides LTTP because that was the first one I played) because the story is so radically different from all the others. Didn't involve Zelda or Ganon in anyway, its actually interesting.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.
Aye, I didn't mean to come off too aggressive, but having some previous development experience (and growing up with Nintendo Games), I can't help but defend them a bit. I mean, at least from what I can tell, Nintendo is at least trying to change things up a little more than Activision in Nintendo's less popular franchises. Both companies need to change it up, but keep the core ideas intact.
[quote=downpour] Majora's Mask is the only Zelda game I really enjoy (besides LTTP because that was the first one I played) because the story is so radically different from all the others. Didn't involve Zelda or Ganon in anyway, its actually interesting.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.[/quote]
Aye, I didn't mean to come off too aggressive, but having some previous development experience (and growing up with Nintendo Games), I can't help but defend them a bit. I mean, at least from what I can tell, Nintendo is at least trying to change things up a little more than Activision in Nintendo's less popular franchises. Both companies need to change it up, but keep the core ideas intact.
i love pokemon but its literally been the same game everytime with some extra monsters. the most innovative thing to enter pokemon was a bike that can jump sideways and MAYBE double battles.
I dont have enough knowledge on Fire Emblem to really comment as I just got into it with Awakening (which im really loving btw, SRPGs are fantastic) but I have a sneaking suspicion that just like every other one of nintendo's IPs, its very very similar to the original Fire Emblem.
I'm not even defending Call of Duty here, I agree that CoD needs to change things up (and i mean more than just going into the past/present) they need to add interesting combat and movement mechanics so that it doesnt feel like the exact same thing everytime.[/quote]
Aye, I didn't mean to come off too aggressive, but having some previous development experience (and growing up with Nintendo Games), I can't help but defend them a bit. I mean, at least from what I can tell, Nintendo is at least trying to change things up a little more than Activision in Nintendo's less popular franchises. Both companies need to change it up, but keep the core ideas intact.
To be honest, you could also say that Valve keeps rehashing CS and L4D, and no one really cares too much (aside from people who still think the Half-Life series isn't dead). And honestly, it's not completely bad. It renews interest in series and feeds the fanbase. Just think about if Valve made a TF3 that had competitive support, but in other respects was not much different from TF2 aside from better weapon balancing. We would see it as a revolution (not sure if this is the word I was looking for, I need to get to bed), but non-TF2 players looking at TF3 (and probably even many pub TF2 players) would see it as a rehash of TF2. My point is that just because there doesn't appear to be any major changes on the outside doesn't mean there are none.
If this doesn't make any sense it's because I'm tired.
To be honest, you could also say that Valve keeps rehashing CS and L4D, and no one really cares too much (aside from people who still think the Half-Life series isn't dead). And honestly, it's not completely bad. It renews interest in series and feeds the fanbase. Just think about if Valve made a TF3 that had competitive support, but in other respects was not much different from TF2 aside from better weapon balancing. We would see it as a revolution (not sure if this is the word I was looking for, I need to get to bed), but non-TF2 players looking at TF3 (and probably even many pub TF2 players) would see it as a rehash of TF2. My point is that just because there doesn't appear to be any major changes on the outside doesn't mean there are none.
If this doesn't make any sense it's because I'm tired.
If this doesn't make any sense it's because I'm tired.
The most major difference between CoD and Mario games is the amount of games. There have been 19 mario platformers in 30 years, and that is including 3d games and games on handheld and consoles (not re-releases though). For CoD there are 10 games in 11 years, only including main series games (21 if you are including handheld games and "expansion" games).
You can see why one would seem more "milked" than others, but if it sells and people like the game, then why not?
The most major difference between CoD and Mario games is the amount of games. There have been 19 mario platformers in 30 years, and that is including 3d games and games on handheld and consoles (not re-releases though). For CoD there are 10 games in 11 years, only including main series games (21 if you are including handheld games and "expansion" games).
You can see why one would seem more "milked" than others, but if it sells and people like the game, then why not?
You can see why one would seem more "milked" than others, but if it sells and people like the game, then why not?
I expect this to be me all through E3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPjUO2YSjn0
I expect this to be me all through E3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPjUO2YSjn0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPjUO2YSjn0
If you think that all of the Legend of Zelda games are the same then you are just flat out wrong. Actually play the games, pay attention to the design and put some actual thought into the subject before generalizing things.
The big hint you have here is that a new legend of zelda game only comes out every 3-6 years. A new COD game comes out every year.
If you think that all of the Legend of Zelda games are the same then you are just flat out wrong. Actually play the games, pay attention to the design and put some actual thought into the subject before generalizing things.
The big hint you have here is that a new legend of zelda game only comes out every 3-6 years. A new COD game comes out every year.
The big hint you have here is that a new legend of zelda game only comes out every 3-6 years. A new COD game comes out every year.
GameFaqs for the last 10 years has been a bigger shitfest than this place could ever hope to be.
GameFaqs for the last 10 years has been a bigger shitfest than this place could ever hope to be.
the only fond memory I have of GameFaqs is the Veterans board
I don't remember why though lol
the only fond memory I have of GameFaqs is the Veterans board
I don't remember why though lol
I don't remember why though lol
i used to have a notebook full of mad cheat codes for games from gamefaqs
RIP
i used to have a notebook full of mad cheat codes for games from gamefaqs
RIP
RIP
downpourRawkstarmmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.slinkyNow I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides
going 3D
Look at the difference between the newest one (between two worlds) and ocarina, and skyward sword, and mm. Those games are so different if Link wasn't in them you'd call them a different game. Look at the difference between CODBO, and CODMW2, and there isnt one. You just get dropped into the middle of a war, handed an AK (I'm looking at you airport scene), and just gun down a few hundred people. the end.
[quote=downpour][quote=Rawkstar][quote=slinky]Now I know im going to be in the minority about this and im fine with it but I dont see why everyone loves nintendo as much as they do. People shit on the COD series for milking that franchise as much Activision does but Nintendo do the exact same thing and people love them. I mean nintendo has been releasing the same 5 games since the 80s and 90s and people just love them for it. For both the COD series and most if not all of the nintendo series if you've played one then you've played them all. Its just something I dont get and why people have to be hypocrites with their likes and dislikes for franchises/companies is something I also dont get.[/quote]
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides
going 3D[/quote]
Look at the difference between the newest one (between two worlds) and ocarina, and skyward sword, and mm. Those games are so different if Link wasn't in them you'd call them a different game. Look at the difference between CODBO, and CODMW2, and there isnt one. You just get dropped into the middle of a war, handed an AK (I'm looking at you airport scene), and just gun down a few hundred people. the end.
Lets not generalize here...Mario and Kirby have been milked a ton. Zelda not so much, each one of those games have been unique and incredible, bringing new ideas and fresh stories along each and EVERY time. Sure there's the occasional remake, but that's no reason to get mad at a company. Smash Bros has really changed it up between games; maybe not to the common eye, but to a loyal follower, there have been major changes across the board. And if you dig deeper into other franchises like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Metroid, you'll know that the developers have been working a hell of a lot harder than anyone at Activision.
On a side note: I'm pumped for Smash Bros.[/quote]
mmmm nope, zelda has been pretty much the same thing everytime. just because you add 1 new item/gimmick doesnt make it a whole new interesting game.
all of those other IPs have been around for at least 10 years and haven't really changed besides
going 3D[/quote]
Look at the difference between the newest one (between two worlds) and ocarina, and skyward sword, and mm. Those games are so different if Link wasn't in them you'd call them a different game. Look at the difference between CODBO, and CODMW2, and there isnt one. You just get dropped into the middle of a war, handed an AK (I'm looking at you airport scene), and just gun down a few hundred people. the end.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.