Nintendo: ‘We Don’t Want Hardcore Gamers To Feel Left Out’

Not seeing any penis butt comment so it only leaves peteriuss

Great question.
Anyway, I already have my wii motion plus control for the case.

I wonder that as well. I have a Classic Pro, but I hope this controller is usable for CC-compatible Wii games. I think it will… from the look of it, it seems to combine the hardware of a Wii Remote with that of a Classic Controller, and could use that to emulate the connection between them.

It’ll probably be compatible with Virtual Console games, though, and this will be another interesting feature: You can use the GamePad on a stand to see the game and a Pro Controller to play the game, leaving the TV unnecessary.

Hardcore gamers play street fighter/tekken with an arcade stick. And if they don’t they can’t call themself hardcore :).

I’ll be buying the pro for SSB, if i dont get it before then anyway

I see a lot of that with people I know. People who own a Wii for Wii exclusives and a 360 for left 4 dead and other games that didn’t come out on Wii.

Wellwellwell… I’ve seen rumoured that also state that the Durango will have worser specs overall than the Wii U. We have to wait until official information is revealed.

Did you just have a conversation with yourself and tried to make it look legit lol, I didn’t Nintendo haters would stoop to such a low…..wow

Well, let’s start with the Starfox and Metroid statement. With the exception of Starfox Adventures, Starfox has had the same Rebel Assault style stuck-in-the-early-nineties gameplay in every game. Metroid, (ignoring the 2D versions, as I have yet to play one of those that hasn’t been awesome), just doesn’t live up to its potential. You compared it to Bioshock, but the problem is that the Metroid: Prime games do little to distinguish themselves from games like Bioshock which have similar gameplay (Yeah, I know, no other shooter has all of Samus’ suit abilities) but significantly more atmosphere as a direct result of much higher production values. I also just feel that the aforementioned suit abilities do not fit in a FPS style. There just isn’t enough exploration in the games to make something like the morph ball really shine. No, by comic book style I mean lacking in detail and scope, a gameworld that feels artificially constrained to the context of the immediate action, that doesn’t feel like it exists as part of a larger setting. Your experience may have been different, but that’s what Metroid:Prime felt like to me.

If you must make juvenile comments then yes, I do want to see a game like this in HD. The extra detail tends to add realism, which is important, especially if you have got used to higher fidelity graphics, sound, etc. which anyone who hasn’t confined themselves to only Nintendo consoles will have done by this point.

As for your list, I can’t stand the CoD series, never played Uncharted, have no interest whatsoever in Killzone, haven’t played Max Payne 3, and think God of War is mindless crap. I might consider sticking Halo 4 on a Christmas list or something, but since the main story concluded in Halo 3 I really have no interest in paying for it – Reach was just more of the same with some extra visual and multiplayer polish. However, say what you like about the fact that Halo 4 looks like more of the same, but you can’t deny that the series revolutionised the console FPS, 1 for general gameplay and AI, 2 for multiplayer. I don’t consider any of those titles ‘mature’. Putting words in my mouth in an attempt to imply I just like dumb gritty nonsense isn’t going to work here. Mature gaming lies in things like Silent Hill 2’s bold move to explore the basic sexuality of its main character through its enemy design, Heavy Rain’s depiction of the hopelessness of the series of events leading up to losing your child, Alan Wake’s willingness to completely immerse itself in style and content normally reserved for novels and tv shows, and to credit the player with the intelligence to not need to be spoon fed every detail of the plot. Kratos running around getting red on him is not my idea of mature gaming. Most AAA ‘shiny violence’ games are more my idea of gaming hell. Except Mass Effect, but after the first game I was willing to put up with the slow degeneration of the following 2 games in order to spend more time with the characters.

The fact of the matter is that my primary interest in gaming lies in 2 genres – Horror and RPGs. As a result I am used to much, much more atmosphere than that of M:P, and much more depth and scope of story than any Zelda game post-LttP. So, let’s look at your Zelda comments…

The death of Link’s parents is mentioned and forgotten in the space of a few minutes. Sure, great, give the character a tragic past, brilliant, but just mentioning it and showing nothing of the effect it has on the character does not make it deep. It makes it throwaway.

A boy going on a quest to defeat a wizard is one of the oldest rpg cliches in the book. The thing that made the original LoZ different was the feeling of exploration, the fact that you knew nothing about this world and had to work it out on your own. 3D Zelda has never managed to recreate this – The worlds are not big enough (with the possible exception of Wind Waker, which I actually thought was the best 3D Zelda to date, with the exception of the fact that I hated the graphical style) and there’s far to much hand holding.

As for the variety of locations, sure there was plenty of variety, but every single location (including Hyrule Field) felt small. It was odd, you got the impression of this grand scope, you could see what Nintendo were going for, but it was all ruined for me by the fact that the tiny actual size of the areas was completely at odds with it. For instance, going ‘deep into the woods involved traversing 3 or 4 areas that could each be navigated in under a minute. The ‘maze’ leading up to the forest temple was a little longer, but not much.

The characters had personality, yes, but I never contested that.

As for the game having more creativity (as I am assuming you meant to say when typing that the game ‘had more creative’) than 90% of games nowadays, you’re probably right. Nowadays there is a distinct lack of creativity in the industry.

Back when it was first released however, it was a very different matter. During the N64’s console generation, the Final Fantasy series was hitting its high point, with both 7 and 8 (and even 9, as much as I hate to admit it) providing much more depth of story and characters, and much more epic a world than OoT. Of course, you could argue that Zelda is not a regular RPG, it’s an ‘Action/Adventure’ game or an ‘Action RPG’, but in that case that very same console generation yielded the only Zelda clone to prove better than the current instalment of the game it was copying: Alundra. Sure, it was 2D, so it was easier for the developer to make the world bigger, but it had just as much innovation in terms of items, the main premise was much more interesting, and the supporting cast was much more fleshed out due to the fact that the player got to actually see (and explore) inside their dreams (well, some of them, but enough that they felt complex and interesting, like real people).

Every side character in OoT did NOT have a purpose. If you’re saying that every person at the Market had an important role in either the story or the gameplay then I suggest you go back and play it again. Many of them are just there to provide window dressing. Sure, they have fairly vivid personalities, but any half decent game with RPG trappings will manage that.

As for OoT’s bosses and dungeons, I completely agree with you. The bosses were imaginative and varied, and I even said in my original post that no game does dungeons as well as Zelda games do dungeons. I wasn’t saying that Zelda games should be more like the Elder Scrolls games in general, just that the Hyrule I grew up with (and necessarily had to flesh out in my head) seemed much closer in terms of the sense of scope and exploration to an Elder Scrolls overworld than the small, boxed in Hyrule of OoT. Imagine a Hyrule as big as that, with as much to explore, as much to find and do, but with all the personality, lore, clever gameplay mechanics, etc that characterise Zelda games. Can you really say that riding around a little square of land on Epona is better than the idea of being able to climb to the top of a mountain several km tall using only the hookshot and your own initiative just to be able to watch the sun set behind the Kokiri forest, the light filtering beautifully through the trees, casting vivid oranges and reds against the walls of Hyrule castle, creating a long shadow on the other side, the smoke billowing realistically around the crater atop Death Mountain in the distance, smaller settlements, rivers, hills and forests dotted around the land, all accessible if you travel far enough in that direction. That kind of thing is possible with current hardware, it had been for years now. That’s what frustrates me about Nintendo – they have the ability to realise this beautiful, epic world, but they never do, and not because they can’t, but because they won’t. Frankly I criticise because I love Hyrule as a setting and think it deserves better treatment than it gets.

I can forgive you for thinking I was some kind of troll, but the fact is that I remember Nintendo in the 8bit and 16 bit eras, back when they were unmatched, when every Zelda game was epic and breathtaking (for it’s time of course), back when Metroid had its own distinct gameplay across sprawling, vast planets, rather than being an average fps with a few adventure elements thrown in, back when they didn’t struggle to meet the potential of rival hardware, they matched it or dominated it. With the advent of 3D gaming, the only Nintendo franchise that hasn’t suffered has been Mario. I see potential for this to change with the WiiU, which is why I’m excited about it, because everything that Nintendo should have been doing this generation will be finally be possible.

That’s what I meant. I want the Wii U to run Unreal Engine 4 at full power.

Scaled down is nothing to talk about if it looks nothing like what the engine does on a more powerful machine.

The Radeon HD 8000 series doesn’t even exist and, also, can you cite your source?

Ok. I am tired of you talking crap about Nintendo. I dont think you even know anything about the Wii U! You are just trying to get people on your side with “realistic information” so that way people will start hating Nintendo because of you making comments about how weak the Wii U in graphics or power or whatever. I dont even think the sources you are using are even real! So please, If you dont like Nintendo, then go talk on a Sony or Microsoft page about how much you like it and talk good stuff about like what processors they’ll be using or if they expanded their flash memory for their storage capacity or whatever, yet you talk shit about Nintendo and how weak their system is. I really like Nintendo. I’ve been playing ever since the Game Boy Advance was released and I sticked with Nintendo, but I get upset because there is some guy (YOU) that is talking trash about Nintendo and that it will be very weak and outdated and none of that is even true so just get out of this talk page. Go say how Sony and Microsoft is good at a Sony and Microsoft news page. Come on! Go! Im sick and tired of you getting into fights with other people and telling retarded stuff. Please just dont bother this page anymore. I hate it.

yeah, but the PS3 and 360 don’t run the engine that well, specially the PS3. The PS3 version of Crysis 2 had worse resolution and a worse frame-rate than the PC version. Even the 360 version had better graphics than the PS3 version.

The thing is we are talking about Nintendo going after PS360 fans that play Crysis, Halo, gears, Uncharted all day.