Can I point out I thought the whole point of the console being called Wii is so that anyone can say it regardless of language. Whether you be English, French, Japanese, German, Spanish, Chinese or goodness forbid American (Sorry sarcasm must win) you be able to go into a store and say "want that one".
Stop using common sense in here. The Gaming Academy forbids all posts not backed by Fanboyism, Flaming, or Smartassery.
~Rico
Quote:
All the games are only made for one purpose only: TO WORK WITH THE CONTROLLER AND NOTHING ELSE!
Interpretation #1 of this phrase:
Sony developer to company: hey, we've come up with a game that works without the PS2 controller.
Company rep: How does it work, pray?
Developer: Well, you sort of look at images, on the screen, and they move. We're thinking of calling it a mov-
(Rep shoots developer in the head)
Interpretation #2:
So, Pat, what do you want them to work with? Bananas, if you plug them into the console? Small dead fish?
Please stop posting your hypocrital spin and BS, Pat. You are making Sega fans look bad.
Thank you.
EDT: There are also an absence of funny in that VG Cats comic.
OMGPONIES Sega plant! XD
~Rico
Quote:
OMGPONIES Sega plant!
Where?! I'll get the Anti-Fanboy Spray! 
Just so you know, Pat, writing sentences or long phrases entirely in caps doesn't emphasise them or lend them credibility. It just makes them obnoxious.
You're lucky I don't drag Sailor Grammar into this.
No, not that!
After having a good laugh with my mom over the name and the inevitable jokes I will face at my highschool, I like Wii, but it will take awhile to grow used to the new name. Wii, though not a word in any language is supposed to be a pun on the English word 'we.' It's a simple as that. And it is something anyone in the world could pronounce with ease.
I'm still a bit iffy on the consoles success untill I see some awesome games, which will be E3. It seems strange that Nintendo is so tight lipped, but it keeps us wondering and paying attention, doesn't it?
Well, the name has to be working fairly well, as I shall use myself as an example. Yesterday at work, I said "Wiiii!" alot and sung Wii will rock you a few times; plus, I've been telling anybody at work, that I think could care the tiniest bit about video games, that Nintendy new system was Wii.
So, no matter how inane the name may be, at least it's stuck in my head, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. So, at least the Big N, is making it memorable which is surely what they want.
Quote:
All the games are only made for one purpose only: TO WORK WITH THE CONTROLLER AND NOTHING ELSE!
Actually, Pat, and I believe I said this before, Nintendo had the foresight to create a shell that makes the Wiimote act like a regular controller so 3rd parties could easily make ports to the Wii without coming up with a completely different control scheme. Also, here's IGN mockup of what the shell looks like!!
'Wii' is popping up all over the net. In the form of bathroom jokes.
Personally, I wouldn't care about what they do with it. I probably won't buy it, but rather go for the 360, which I haven't bought yet.
Buying a 360 for me would be:
1) Downgrade from my PC.
2) Waste of a lotta money.
Bathroom jokes aside these new "six million dollar" consoles are not what the reason for consoles was. A console was a cheap way to play video games, i.e. not having to buy a thousand dollar computer.
I don't see the point when they're topping 400 bucks now and comparable technology to a computer of that price. (Yeah, I'm exaggerating on that, as bub would say "sew me".)
~Rico
Quote:
now I'm definetly not buying your new console and that alot of people won't because they won't be able to pronouce it right.
Can you pronounce ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid perfectly first time?
Thought not.
But, 10,000 metric tonnes of the stuff is sold every year worldwide and I guarantee you had some with your last big mac 
...
As for me, Wii...
Why nintendo, it's not going to catch on brilliantly with the mass market in the UK as far as I can see, we seem to be immune to such marketing devices (it's called having a media who have nothing better to do than taking the piss) but, it's all down to the games I suppose so they'll just have to back it up with good games...
Which is supposed to be the point right 
(it's called having a media who have nothing better to do than taking the wii)
Fixed. ;3
I think this topic would be better off without people referencing any flame bait, and just comment on the name.
It's clear that Nintendo are again following in Apple's footsteps, using their playful i's and giving a simple quotable nonesense brandname for Japanese kids.
Like Apple, there will always be violotile discussion regarding them, PC users will constantly argue and Apple fans are die hards, the only thing anyone can usually agree on would be that the handheld iPod is probably the best and is certainly the best selling.
My advice, shrug and move on. It's a clever marketing campiegn directed at the target audience, and proof once again that Nintendo don't really care about the western market. We rightfully regard them as childish, because the things which sell in Japan happen to be kiddy styled to us, yet gritty and angsty first person games tend to do horribly over there.
East and West divide, plain and simple. Nintny is for Japanese. That's why I don't really bother with them unless a game like Sonic Rush comes out on them.
Quote:
It's clear that Nintendo are again following in Apple's footsteps, using their playful i's and giving a simple quotable nonesense brandname for Japanese kids.
They are probably following Apples footsteps, with the console and DSlite designs and simplistic name for that matter. However, judging by their new marketing strategy with the highly successful DS and that they keep emphasing that they want the non-gamer audience(most adults who are not just 18-30 year old men), I highly doubt that they are only marketing the kiddy audience.
Quote:
We rightfully regard them as childish, because the things which sell in Japan happen to be kiddy styled to us,
I highly doubt that the highly successful Brain Training games(or in the US case Brain Age) is made to appeal to children. I mean does this official site scream made for kids to you?
Nintendo is also planing on releasing a Sudoku game for the handheld and there are also some Touch dictionary language games that are out in Japan. Point is I have a feeling that we will see more adult "non-games" like this on the Wii.
Quote:
East and West divide, plain and simple. Nintny is for Japanese. That's why I don't really bother with them unless a game like Sonic Rush comes out on them.
Huh, Sonic Rush or any other Sonic game for that matter is just as kid-friendly as your average Mario game. I don't see where you were going with this.
Other than that, many of their games such as Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, etc. also very popular and accessible in the West as well as in Japan.
Also, Nintendo created Metroid which is far from being popular in Japan but is successful in the West.
You misunderstand, Ashide. I was stating that "gimmick games" are popular and wide ranged in Japan. In the West they are shelved and regarded as kiddy crap. Animal Crossing for example, despite breaking sales records in Japan, the western reaction is mostly "ack! It's a non!game and it's cute"
I'm aware of the marketing stratergies and whom they influence, I'm merely wording a responce which wont be ripped to shreads because it sounds like I'm defending Nintendo, when I really don't care about anything, besides the marketing aspect.
I've read huge articles on things, such as the Metroid thing, and I understand it, but for the purposes of this conversation, it will have to sit shelved for another topic.
Quote:
You misunderstand, Ashide. I was stating that "gimmick games" are popular and wide ranged in Japan. In the West they are shelved and regarded as kiddy crap.
Is that why Nintendogs bombed worldwide...
...wait a minute!?
Quote:
Animal Crossing for example, despite breaking sales records in Japan, the western reaction is mostly "ack! It's a non!game and it's cute"
The sales of AC:WW in Europe that is not of the UK begs to differ. Especially in France. Also, I do recall that AC a fairly successful here(US).
Such an assertive arguementive tone for someone who's agreeing with me. I'm talking about the concencus, not the sales. We all know that what people say has no baring on the sales or success of something. So when the net is full of people who take either extreme on a situation, I am merely reflecting on the marketing stratergies and how they make people react.
I've read sales reports, I've read articles and I understand and I totally agree.
Popular opinion states that the PSP is more popular and sells more, when fact states that DS is kicking it's tail to Mars.
I'd appreciate not being argued uphill on a footnote of my main point, which was that the name Wii was designed to appease the Eastern market, where Nintendo dominate, and via the Apple analogy and various other factors, it works exceptionally well. It also serves as an international name, but like all other Nintendo products, it is focused on the Japanese market, which is neither a good nor bad thing.
Please can you stop ripping appart my "Pat friendly comments", it makes it harder to make a point. *Sighs and considers sodding off again*
Welcome to the new SHQ. Which kinda exactly reminds of me of TAMB. :p
~Rico
Two Angry Mario Bros.?
Team Artail Message Board
SH had it right.
~Rico
I bet you're pulling my leg.
Buying a 360 for me would be:
1) Downgrade from my PC.
2) Waste of a lotta money.
Well how am I supposed to play Halo 3 (which is called Forerunner, from what I understand) when it comes out if I don't have a 360? Explain that.
No Wii for me. Wii bad. Wii goes where it should go.
<i>(which is called Forerunner, from what I understand)</i>
That rumour is aaaaages old, and I haven't heard of it in months. I doubt it's true, actually.
Atop that, there's actually no official announcement on Halo 3 yet, but again, rumoured to be announced in May 9th.
And finally, not everyone's into Halo. Rico was talking on a personal level; as such, he's not telling you not to get one, just that he wouldn't get one himself. 😯
Niiiiitpiiiiiick~~ that came off kinda crappy butohwell
Quote:
wouldn't a Wii by any other name still play EVERY MARIO AND ZELDA GAME KNOWN TO MAN?
Summed up, in a nutshell, the entire reason why I will not be getting one. Simply add Pokemon to that sentance and you'll have my entire viewpoint on the matter.
Personally, I think the name is completely stupid, but it is true that it's got everyone talking about it...this topic has enough pages in it to prove that point, so even though it's nonsence, it's worked.
I'm afraid it'll take more than smart advertising techniques to win me over though. 
Wraith
Well how am I supposed to play Halo 3 (which is called Forerunner, from what I understand) when it comes out if I don't have a 360? Explain that.
Why would any sane person want to?
@ Wraith
Because most people who have no idea what game design means think, somehow, that the Halo series is the pinnacle of modern gaming, despite the fact that It isn't even that good of an FPS, let alone "The best game ever" as I've heard quite a few people proclaim it to be.
Quote:
Well how am I supposed to play Halo 3 (which is called Forerunner, from what I understand) when it comes out if I don't have a 360? Explain that.
I suspect that, like Halo 2 is, it will be released for Windows Vista.
I understand people buying a console FOR a game... but how does Mario, Zelda and Pokmon make a console less attractive?
You are aware of the option of "not buying" things, right?
Serious question, though. I fail to see the logic.
For people who don't have the money to shell out for uber-gaming rigs (points to Cycle's computer on another topic), an Xbox, Halo 2, and an Xbox Live account (50 dollars a year. Very nice.) can provide an online multiplayer experience, that to this day, is STILL the most popular title on Xbox Live.
Single player issues aside, Halo/Halo 2 was the equivalent of N64's Goldeneye 007 for the last console generation.
Exce[t that Goldeneye had at least a semi-balanced Multiplayer mode.
When you can jump 50 feet in the air and kill people in one hit with a non-headshot, you are NOT Goldeneye 007.
Hell, you're not even Rogue Agent.
Halo 1/2 Single player is the most boring thing I've had to do. At least with Sonic Heroes you had frustration and anger from the bloody characters falling of the edge to their death.
Multiplayer with friends its really fun. I hated Goldeneye to be honest. Which was wierd because I did like the N64 controller.
Mmm, the one handed vibrating wii controller...
I've been looking at reactions about this from various fora and people and its really quite interesting. Its been pointed out here I think but wow has this name gotten everyone, and I mean everyone talking about it. Just wether it'll work to their favour or not, time will tell.
Quote:
I understand people buying a console FOR a game... but how does Mario, Zelda and Pokmon make a console less attractive?
Well, for starters, there's the embarrassment of owning a console from a company that premiered those games...were I to own a Nintendo in any shape or form I wouldn't be able to walk out on the street without a bucket over my head, even if people out there didn't have a clue who I was.
Then there's the principle of the thing...to give money to those who started such horrors would be in a roundabout way saying that they were good and had some substance to them, which they weren't and didn't.
And finally, those three highlight pretty much everything Nintendo stand for...granted they're the most extreme examples, but virtually every single game for a Nintendo console is influenced by or resembles one or more of those three in some way, which is not a good claim to fame.
(And before anyone starts shouting at me, remember all facts stated in my posts are in my own oppinion, and I understand others may not agree.)
Wraith
Wraith.
That's not opinion, that's just f*cked up logic.
lol if you say so Batman^^
W
Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon are 'horrors'? The last one I can at least grasp...but Mario and Zelda?
O____o?;?;?;?
I feel we should respect his opinion, it may differ from ours, but it's his and his alone.
Though I feel that it's more of a random stab excuse for blind bias, than an actual reason, he's allowed irrational bias too.
I think Wraith more or less just said Halo is better than Zelda.
lol Actually Cyc I'm not into FPSs either. I'm a Racing fanatic.
Give me Gran Tourismo! Now THERE'S a game!
And to explain myself a little more: My view is basically that Mario etc insults the intelligence of a 5 year old. A character you really seriously desperately want to abuse with a stick, music that sounds like an out of tune orchestra and the gameplay of a cold chip isn't really my idea of fun. And yet, I see this or elements of this on every single Nintendo game I have ever played.
PS2, XBox and SEGA in their time all had titles that were along these lines, granted, but the key element in this mixture is that they also had plenty of great, imressive, awe-inspiring games as well that one could get instead of the stupid ones, and because of this I simply gravitated towards them, first with SEGA and Sonic, and later more towards the PS2.
If people are into the "younger style" games that Nintendo are famous for, then credit to them, and may they enjoy themselves, but personally I prefare companies that respect the intelligence of said gameplayer.
Just my view.
Wraith
So basically you're one of those "OMG THAT GAME IS TEH KIDDY" fanboys.
Okay, I totally see where you're cominh from and will thus disregard all arguments made by you in the future.
By the way, you know what I did the other day?
I played Chibi-Robo.
Is it kiddy as hell? Yes.
Is it a fun game? Certainly morese than Gran Tourismo.
Did my friends laugh at me for playing it? Yes.
So you know what I did?
I punched them.
Then they stopped laughing.
Seriously, you have to get over this whole "Kiddy=Bad" Mentality or you're going to be stuck missing the chance to play some of the greatest games of all time (Zelda:Ocarina of Time, hello?) Because you dismiss them as being for children before you even play them.
On a final note, I LOVE how you completely fail to see the overwhelming irony in the fact that you bash Mario, Pokemon, and Zelda games for being "Too Kiddy" and yet you're on a Sonic the Hedgehog message board, with a Sonic the Hedgehog related name.
Anyhow, the moral of the story is that "If you don't like it, stay the f*ck out, don't come in to bash it" Still applies here, even after Pat L's multiple tirades.
Quote:
And to explain myself a little more: My view is basically that Mario etc insults the intelligence of a 5 year old. A character you really seriously desperately want to abuse with a stick, music that sounds like an out of tune orchestra and the gameplay of a cold chip isn't really my idea of fun. And yet, I see this or elements of this on every single Nintendo game I have ever played.
Donkey Kong, the original Mario game, was the first platformer to include jumping, since then, nearly every platformer allowed you to jump. Super Mario Bros. was the first platformer (IIRC) to include scrolling back grounds and background music, since then, ALL games have music and ALL platformers, fighters, adventures featured mscrolling backgrounds. Super Mario 64, the first 3D platformer with analogue controls, changed the way we play 3D home console games to this very day, it allows the finest 3D movement and fantastic acrobatic platforming, 3D flight and swiming, with perfect control with the analogue stick. It tool the crown as the greatest 3D platformer and still hasn't given it back.
To say that Mario insults a five year old's intelligence insults game developers and gamers everywhere. Hell, you love Sonic, no Mario, no Sonic!
And about the music, listen to any live performance of Mario music, just listeb to the audiences' reactions, I don't normally hear that from the VG music conserts I've heard, including Nobuo Uematsu's performances.
Quote:
Seriously, you have to get over this whole "Kiddy=Bad" Mentality or you're going to be stuck missing the chance to play some of the greatest games of all time (Zelda:Ocarina of Time, hello?) Because you dismiss them as being for children before you even play them.
Batman, you're missing my point entirely^^ I don't avoid these games because they're "kiddy". I avoid them because they're no fun! The fact that they are no fun stems directly from the fact that they're "kiddy", but even a game that had chibi style graphics or whatever that was well made, with good gameplay and excellent characters, I would play!
Case in point: Sonic.
Yes, it's a platformer with a crazy character and colorful levels etc, just the same as Mario. The differences?
1) Seriously: Sonic design vs. Mario design...you tell me which is better! Mario is a fat balding ugly baby-faced chump of a plumber who spouts wierd noises in a voice like a mouse stuck down the U-bend of a sink. Sonic is a sleek, streamlined, "cool" looking figure who has some actual personallity even though he says nothing (in the older games) and actually has, for want of a better term, some "class". One look at Mario's bloated features just makes me want to punch his lights out he's so annoying!
2) Level design. Compare Sonic 1 or 2 to the Mario gomaes of the time. Smoother textures, more innovative, sleeker looking levels with actual style to them rather than every level looking exactly the same as the last. Smooth animations...the list goes on and on.
3) Music, a major MAJOR beef. Even on Sonic 1, the music on the levels was complex, intricate, with harmonies, plenty of thought going into it, everything! Matio? "Oh look, a keyboard stuck on the most annoying sound we can find! Let's hit abotu five notes randomly and record what comes out!"
4) Storyline. Did Mario actually have any? If it did, it was so weakly incorperated into the game that I completely missed it! The Sonic storyline, though, granted while being somewhat "crazy" about a mad scientist turning animals into robots, was cool and new, fitted the character and the world perfectly, and captured the imagination of people in such a way that fans even now write fanfics set in that world, RP it, create their own characters for it, etc.
If I was to find a game exactly like Mario, but with the "lameness" fixed enough to interest me, even if it looked like the chibiest game in the world, I would play it and enjoy it! I don't refuse to play games because they're kiddie games, I refuse to play them because they are no fun for me, and do not interest me, no matter what they look like.
Quote:
To say that Mario insults a five year old's intelligence insults game developers and gamers everywhere. Hell, you love Sonic, no Mario, no Sonic!
Robo, I'm not denying that Nintendo have the knowledge to create good games if they tried, and indeed have come up with good advances in game physics etc. I'm saying that game enjoyment is a must for me, including storylines, graphics, and most of all, gameplay. Yes, Nintendo have lots of experience and great skill, but their games do not live up to the skill they pour into them in terms of one simple aspect...fun.
Sonic = fun.
Mario = annoying.
No ammount of game physics will change that, as it is measured by completely other means, like the ones I mentioned above.
And I have not heard any live performances of Mario music. Personally I wouldn't want to, however if someone came to me and asked me to listen to some I would keep an open mind and formulate my own views when I heard it. The fact that other audiences may have good reactions, though, would make no difference...as I stated earlier, these are my oppinions, not anyone elses. Everyone in the world may like something, but that doesn't mean I have to as well. And I can honestly and truthfully say that I do not like Mario music, to the point of wanting to smash something up every time I hear it.
Am I a fanboy? Some may call me such. Personally I prefare to think of myself as "an enlightened gamer", enlightened in the sence that I generally prefare more serious games to cartoony ones, not in the sence that I am above anyone, which I am not. At the end of the day, I look for the same things from games as anyone: Fun, Excitement, and Playabillity. Does Gran Tourismo give me this? Majorly so! Does Sonic give me this? Darn yeah! Does Mario, Zelda or Pokemon give me this? No, despite my frequent attempts to find it from those titles.
Quote:
Anyhow, the moral of the story is that "If you don't like it, stay the f*ck out, don't come in to bash it" Still applies here, even after Pat L's multiple tirades.
But Wonder, the whole point of a discussion is that people voice ther opinions and talk about things from different perspectives. This is all I am doing, and as mentioned in the earlier post, it is simply my oppinion. I am sorry if you do not agree with me, even more so if my oppinion upsets you in any way, but I am simply voicing it and explaining my viewpoint as many others also are, including yourself. No personal offence is ment by it, I assure you, and if you disagree with me that that is your choice to make 
Wraith
You came into a topic on the Wii to say nothing more than
"NINTENDO MAKE SEVERAL GAMES THAT I DON'T LIKE SO THEIR SYSTEMS AND EVERY GAME ON THEM THEREFORE SUCK" which really contributed nothing to the topic and qualifies as spam. =/
Sorry, but that's just the truth. You didn't even voice your thoughts about anything on-topic, you just started bashing every game and system Nintendo makes because of a few games made by them you don't like.
Quote:
1) Seriously: Sonic design vs. Mario design...you tell me which is better! Mario is a fat balding ugly baby-faced chump of a plumber who spouts wierd noises in a voice like a mouse stuck down the U-bend of a sink. Sonic is a sleek, streamlined, "cool" looking figure who has some actual personallity even though he says nothing (in the older games) and actually has, for want of a better term, some "class". One look at Mario's bloated features just makes me want to punch his lights out he's so annoying!
Mario wasn't mean't to be the perfect hero figure, Miyamoto has said before that Mario was't designed to be handsome. What's more Mario's design works really well (and isn't balding in the games), he's the most unique and recognisable character in video game history. He's mean't to be humourous to look at, not the trying too hard to be cool types you get a lot now a days. He's like Mickey Mouse in that his design is to appeal to anyone, not stricktly children, teenage or adult. Sonic shifts between children and teenage, as do a lot of platform characters, while characters like Solid Snake and Master Cheif between Teenage and Adult, not many can fit all.
Quote:
2) Level design. Compare Sonic 1 or 2 to the Mario gomaes of the time. Smoother textures, more innovative, sleeker looking levels with actual style to them rather than every level looking exactly the same as the last. Smooth animations...the list goes on and on.
The Mario games of that time all came out before Sonic 1 and 2, and only one was made for the 16 bit consoles, as I said before, Super Mario Bros. was the first of it's kind, and is still considered by millions to be one the greatest. Super Mario Bros. 2 in the US and Europe shouldn't really count as it isn't originally a Mario game, just made into one for the West (a la Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine), Super Mario Bros. 3 did a lot considering the hardware, it made great use of the NES and had a great variety in levels, that weren't just flat. Super Mario World had an incredible amount of levels, with challenging platforming gameplay, it introduced a map to visit past levels, just for fun.
Quote:
3) Music, a major MAJOR beef. Even on Sonic 1, the music on the levels was complex, intricate, with harmonies, plenty of thought going into it, everything! Matio? "Oh look, a keyboard stuck on the most annoying sound we can find! Let's hit abotu five notes randomly and record what comes out!"
Again, the hardware available at the time for Sonic was much more advanced for the Mario games at the time, and they did a damn good job with the music, creating some of the most memorable themes of any game series, which still go on today, unlike Sonic, which has become a mixture of bad rock, bad rap, and bad electronic since SA2.
Quote:
4) Storyline. Did Mario actually have any? If it did, it was so weakly incorperated into the game that I completely missed it! The Sonic storyline, though, granted while being somewhat "crazy" about a mad scientist turning animals into robots, was cool and new, fitted the character and the world perfectly, and captured the imagination of people in such a way that fans even now write fanfics set in that world, RP it, create their own characters for it, etc.
Again, the time of the games back then were different, even Sonic's stories weren't much, rellying on the manuals for the tale, or comics, Mario didn't bother filling in gaps outside of the game, kept things simple and understandable. And lets face it, stories in platformers is still pretty young, especially in terms of quality.
Quote:
If I was to find a game exactly like Mario, but with the "lameness" fixed enough to interest me, even if it looked like the chibiest game in the world, I would play it and enjoy it! I don't refuse to play games because they're kiddie games, I refuse to play them because they are no fun for me, and do not interest me, no matter what they look like.
That's fine and dandy, but these games are a load of fun, and you mainly picked at looks, design and sound, nothing about control in the above.
Quote:
Robo, I'm not denying that Nintendo have the knowledge to create good games if they tried, and indeed have come up with good advances in game physics etc. I'm saying that game enjoyment is a must for me, including storylines, graphics, and most of all, gameplay. Yes, Nintendo have lots of experience and great skill, but their games do not live up to the skill they pour into them in terms of one simple aspect...fun.
Nintendo have stated and proven time and time again, that they're games are primarily about fun, innovation being key to that, changing things so they don't get stale. When I was talking about Mario 64, I wasn't talking about physics, but control, the smoothness and simplicity of how things worled made everything perfectly fun, I had fun just running around the courtyard for about an hour before trying the first level, the rest of the game kept me playing until today with the amount of enjoyable and varied gameplay on offer, and nothing I've played today matches it, including Jak, Ratchet, PoP and Tomb Raider Legends. It has a great variety in world and level design that can be both challenging and relaxing, but always fun.
Quote:
And I have not heard any live performances of Mario music. Personally I wouldn't want to, however if someone came to me and asked me to listen to some I would keep an open mind and formulate my own views when I heard it. The fact that other audiences may have good reactions, though, would make no difference...as I stated earlier, these are my oppinions, not anyone elses. Everyone in the world may like something, but that doesn't mean I have to as well. And I can honestly and truthfully say that I do not like Mario music, to the point of wanting to smash something up every time I hear it.
It's fair enough not to like it, that's not my point with any of this, it's that you're more or less saying it's all half arsed work, when it is well written, and enjoyable for many, many people, even people like my Mom and Dad, who don't care for games at all, but love the music when they heard it (and for the record, they're musicians themselves ).
Quote:
Am I a fanboy? Some may call me such. Personally I prefare to think of myself as "an enlightened gamer", enlightened in the sence that I generally prefare more serious games to cartoony ones, not in the sence that I am above anyone, which I am not. At the end of the day, I look for the same things from games as anyone: Fun, Excitement, and Playabillity. Does Gran Tourismo give me this? Majorly so! Does Sonic give me this? Darn yeah! Does Mario, Zelda or Pokemon give me this? No, despite my frequent attempts to find it from those titles.
Yes they do, just becaus you don't like them does not mean they are not well made, playable, exciting and, above all, fun games. You're preference, from what I gather, are fast games, that's fine, I won't argue on what you do and don't like, but you could hate Motzart, but he's still a great composer.
For myself and millions more, no one can make games as fun as Nintendo can. 
Edit: Gah, sorry for the long post. :/
<<< Wraith on an alt again.
Quote:
You didn't even voice your thoughts about anything on-topic, you just started bashing every game and system Nintendo makes because of a few games made by them you don't like.
Forgive me, I thought this topic had progressed from simply the name of the new system, as the majority of the posts I read just before I posted didn't seem to mention it. Maybe I should re-read them, but I thought the topic had become "Nintendo" rather than "The latest name for the Revolution" so I thought it was reasonable to express my views, controversial as they may be to some. Also, it would be unfair of me to bash games I haven't played or seen playing, and I didn't mean these. I simply ment ones I had personally played or seen.
I thought this was on topic with the way the topic had developed, but if you didn't think so, then I'm sorry for upsetting you. All I want is a friendly discussion where I and others share our views and discuss our differences, as stated before, I don't mean to upset anyone.
Quote:
Mario wasn't mean't to be the perfect hero figure, Miyamoto has said before that Mario was't designed to be handsome. What's more Mario's design works really well (and isn't balding in the games), he's the most unique and recognisable character in video game history. He's mean't to be humourous to look at, not the trying too hard to be cool types you get a lot now a days. He's like Mickey Mouse in that his design is to appeal to anyone, not stricktly children, teenage or adult. Sonic shifts between children and teenage, as do a lot of platform characters, while characters like Solid Snake and Master Cheif between Teenage and Adult, not many can fit all.
I see your point, and I admit he's certainly recognisable lol. Each to their own, I guess.
Quote:
The Mario games of that time all came out before Sonic 1 and 2, and only one was made for the 16 bit consoles, as I said before, Super Mario Bros. was the first of it's kind, and is still considered by millions to be one the greatest. Super Mario Bros. 2 in the US and Europe shouldn't really count as it isn't originally a Mario game, just made into one for the West (a la Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine), Super Mario Bros. 3 did a lot considering the hardware, it made great use of the NES and had a great variety in levels, that weren't just flat. Super Mario World had an incredible amount of levels, with challenging platforming gameplay, it introduced a map to visit past levels, just for fun.
I wasn't aware of most of those facts, thanks for sharing^^
Quote:
Again, the hardware available at the time for Sonic was much more advanced for the Mario games at the time, and they did a damn good job with the music, creating some of the most memorable themes of any game series, which still go on today, unlike Sonic, which has become a mixture of bad rock, bad rap, and bad electronic since SA2.
I majorly agree on the Sonic music going downhill at SA (although some of the tracks on SH are fantastic^^). I was meaning the earlier Sonic games.
Quote:
Again, the time of the games back then were different, even Sonic's stories weren't much, rellying on the manuals for the tale, or comics, Mario didn't bother filling in gaps outside of the game, kept things simple and understandable. And lets face it, stories in platformers is still pretty young, especially in terms of quality.
Accepted, but I just felt the Sonic games were more story oriented in my view...again, each to their own.
Quote:
That's fine and dandy, but these games are a load of fun, and you mainly picked at looks, design and sound, nothing about control in the above.
If you view them as fun then by all means play them^^ 
"> Far be it from me to impose my will on anyone else. And the reason I stated the looks, design and sound was because they all contibute to the overall fun of the game in my view, including the control. My bad, I should have structured it better, sorry
Quote:
Nintendo have stated and proven time and time again, that they're games are primarily about fun, innovation being key to that, changing things so they don't get stale. When I was talking about Mario 64, I wasn't talking about physics, but control, the smoothness and simplicity of how things worled made everything perfectly fun, I had fun just running around the courtyard for about an hour before trying the first level, the rest of the game kept me playing until today with the amount of enjoyable and varied gameplay on offer, and nothing I've played today matches it, including Jak, Ratchet, PoP and Tomb Raider Legends. It has a great variety in world and level design that can be both challenging and relaxing, but always fun.
lol I guess we have different tastes.
Quote:
It's fair enough not to like it, that's not my point with any of this, it's that you're more or less saying it's all half arsed work, when it is well written, and enjoyable for many, many people, even people like my Mom and Dad, who don't care for games at all, but love the music when they heard it (and for the record, they're musicians themselves ).
lol Maybe we have different ideas of what contitutes music as well 
Again, each to their own.
Quote:
Yes they do, just becaus you don't like them does not mean they are not well made, playable, exciting and, above all, fun games. You're preference, from what I gather, are fast games, that's fine, I won't argue on what you do and don't like, but you could hate Motzart, but he's still a great composer.
Fun is in the eye of the beholder 
I guess nobody is authorised to call something catagorically "fun". The terms they should use are "Fun for me" and "fun for you".
Wow, philosophy! I'm gonna start using that in future!
Meep, I've done a long post now lol. Ah well, all in the name of discussion ">
EDIT: Just looked back at my first post in this thread again (I'd forgotten myself what I'd put lol 
) and would like to make a couple more small points. Please note that I did actually state my views on the new name for the Rev alongside my views on Nintendo (done as mentioned above believing that this was on topic) and only expanded upon those views when questioned about them.^^
I can see this esculating without stop unless someone says this loud enough.
He's allowed to have an opinion, even if you disagree with the reasons he choses to voice. As this is not the time nor the place to lynch, just let it go and move on. It's not like you can convince him to buy a system or withtract a belief like that.
Can we please get back to discussing the new console, it's name, it's specs, it's possible games, and not wether we should live or die and Wraith's alligance.
Quote:
He's allowed to have an opinion, even if you disagree with the reasons he choses to voice. As this is not the time nor the place to lynch, just let it go and move on. It's not like you can convince him to buy a system or withtract a belief like that.
I awsn't trying to pick at whether he liked the games or not, but that he was saying they were poorly made games because he didn't like them.
Still, I agree, I'll stop about it now.
As for Wii, I think it's a pretty good name in that it stands out, plus it makes conversations more humourous.
Also, Wii is the only definate choice for me of all the next gen titles, simply for the games I know will be on it, such as Zeldma, Mario and Super Smash Bros., I see little reason to buy a 360 as most of the games I wanted are either pretty weak or nothing new (PDZ, Kameo, DOA4) or will most likely be on PC anyway (Oblivion (which is on PC anyway), Fable 2, Mass Effect, and Sonic the Hedgehog (hopefully at least)).
So Wii it is. ^^
