Category: Journalist ramblings


No, I’m not a dev.

I know this post won’t be featured on anything considering the “SINFUL THOUGTS” I posted earlier will more than likely deter everyone, but regardless, I’m a little disturbed why we can’t just use the term “REAL Multiplayer” to describe Local.

I don’t know why developers would need to explain why they continue using Local Multiplayer. It’s not an element of gaming that should ever be abolished, which seems to be the implication of the article.

To put it bluntly, to me, Online Gaming has no appeal to me. Mostly because the people you end up playing with/against.. happen to be fuckwits. Hardcore gamers are the most likely opponents you deal with in Online gaming sessions, and if message boards and some blogs are any indication, they aren’t very desirable people to be around.

Or the more accepted version because it’s “funny”

The internet brings out the absolute worst behaviors in people. Given the almighty power of anonymity, the Hardcore are free to show people their asses with no regard for any silly concepts such as “sportsmanships”. “Courtesy” and “Consideration”. Or anything pertaining to the phrase “play nice”. “That’s for pussies”. In all seriousness, Online gaming is nothing more than a mini-alpha male environment comprised of people who more or less go into some NatGeo behavioral pattern of comparing sizes. If Xbox Live alone isn’t enough, you can check out games like Grand Chase where the community will be more than happy to bemoan you just for having crappier gear.

So why not just invite “friends only”? No one should have to go through the trouble of filtering in and out specific screen names just to have a grief-free gaming experience. And half the time, all it will amount to is joining up in a forum, making a thread, and specifically asking certain players for help in a video game. This, I feel,  trivializes the appeal of online coop into some “community” self-help service where detached players must beg message boards for in-game help. It takes away the “soul” of the coop experience. Having an actual friend or sibling along to tackle a game together.

And even then, playing with people online feels incredibly detached. Half the time, you’re basically watching several more characters join you in a quest to do w/e it takes to win. They might as well be AI controlled characters. Playing Dragon’s Crown truly gives you that detached feeling of how an Online game usually goes. Players will have no sense of true coordination and will simply do their own thing to get through hoards of enemies and/or rival teams. You don’t know what goes on in the minds of the other players, you simply see them failing worse than you or doing a helluva lot better than you at destroying enemies or you. Nothing screams detached more than the prospect of Online gaming allowing you to play with gamers from all around the world right in your living room. What’s the difference between that and playing against someone 5 states away from you? The latency? Probably. Players might have the options of posting up their flags to give the indication that they speak an authentic language, but you still get the same type of game time where you see random characters running around doing their own stuff. The excitement of playing with people globally is diminished by their lacking presence to give you an indication that you are playing people globally. At the end of the day, you’re really just playing alone pretending that you are playing with people.

A big problem with this is due to the lack of communication. Since most games adopt a “type your response in” kind of communication set for people too cheap to buy a microphone, you’d literally have to stop playing the game just to talk the people you’re playing with. It’s a hindrance for sure. But then the usual response is of course to buy a microphone. I don’t know why I have to purchase the ability to talk to people, especially since most of them are the aforementioned bastards that many would rather have no business with.

Not to say this is exclusive to online settings, but ratio-wise… yeah. The best the local cats have to deal with are children and teenagers.

There also the financial prospect which… I’m sure most well-off people will disregard. You pay for the console, you pay for the pricey ass games, you pay for the internet subscription, you might pay for the in-game subscriptions if need be, you pay for the microphone for in-game communication, and you’re off to play a game where you can barely connect half the friggin time. Most areas within the US have shit internet or NO internet at all to work with. When people raised hell about Xbone possibly being “always online”, everyone had mentioned that not everyone in the country had equal access to the internet on a regular basis, or at all even. Why use all the resources when I could invite some folks over and only use the electricity? Especially as much energy the Piss Station uses?

Everyone I’ve contacted in some way knows I have shit internet. And when I move at the end of the month, I won’t have ANY internet available, so if I wanted someone around to tackle a game with… or have someone’s ass to kick, I would need to get out of the house/apartment to find folks with the same idiotic interests that I have.

And in particular regards to fighting games, I would prefer this because I would know for sure if I’m gettin my ass whipped legitimately. You know how everyone complains about bad netcode for every fighting game available? Because for some reason, the games struggle to maintain a consistent connection between you and the player 5 states away, and this comes at the expense of overall playability. Controls will have these very noticable delays between the initial input and the actions on screen. It’s rare to find a lag free match in which you could perform well in a game based around fast reaction times. Not to mention the glitchyness of a game with bad latency. Players could see if other players are “warping” around the room, or if the game seems to “pause” midplay. It’s a completely different experience when you go from smooth ass local… into bugged up online. The horror stories I’ve had from trying MK9 and PSASBR online, maaaaan.

This kinda looks fun. 😛

I’m aware as people get older, playing games with other people around you becomes that much harder as there becomes less time for leisurely activities in order to feed families or keep your house/apartment in order. So if you had the desire to play a game, you damn sure don’t want to play it alone. Playing games alone isn’t that fun. Anyone can attest to that. People who play games alone are more likely to do so as a means of relieving stress or to curb boredom. But if you’re really into a game and you’re at an age where everyone is too old to be “invited” for a game, yeah, online seems like a benefit (or even having family over with some hyper active kids you can show off to). Otherwise, it’s not so much a staple, but an adult’s alternative to getting social gaming. And it’s not a real multiplayer experience. It’s more of a crutch. You know… you’re old and shit you had access to (like friends with interests in games) start becoming rare, then you get to one of those “age crisis’s” and… dammit, I’m rambling. Kinda sounds depressing in a way.

The appeal of Local Gaming stems from the fact that Gaming has always been a social activity. People are social creatures. They don’t want to give up their ability to be around people just because it’s a digital space. All the teenage freaks online… that’s another story. I’d blame that on the public school of how kids are dragged to institutions surrounded by complete strangers with too much pent up energy being forced to take tests not because they need their skills to be evaluated, but so the schools can pound their chests at how much better their teachers are…. but that is irrelevant.

….Seriously, Play Brawl and tell me if Online made a difference for that game. 😛

Why exactly would he advocate that Nintendo try to win back the hardcore? Wasn’t attempting to win their love the thing that got Nintendo into this jam in the first place?

It’s like the twilight zone where the more reasonable people around seem to be sippin on the industry koolaid.

Going after the hardcore should NOT be anyone’s priority in this economy. Hardcore demand Computer Centric bullshit which happens to be more expensive than Arcade Centric games. This… “Triple A” nonsense that’s becoming less profitable and more risky as the years go on. What the fuck does “Triple A” even mean?

Nintendo was better off making Wii Sports and shit that pissed off the hardcore and attracted REAL people to their console. Instead of doing that, lets take the hardcore advice and live up to the title of “most innovative” bastards in gaming and completely fuck up our chances of gaining any real respect anymore. You have to be a damn fool to suggest trying to win back the hardcore is anywhere near necessary.

I’ll take that bit about the Ipod into consideration, but what other markets would Nintendo be able to tap into? Home Appliances doesn’t seem rational. Maybe this is Iwata’s way of saying “we need other methods of making money in case the industry implodes (which it will)” . If so, then do w/e the fuck you can, but don’t leave your gaming division to a bunch of hardcore catering dipshits.

1.

I’m assuming people want my take on this seeing how the last post got taken over by it. First thing’s first, Game Theory is an irritating youtuber who’s “theories” aren’t even realistically sound. For one, he had made a video in which he tried to prove that Super Mario was faster than Sonic… by using a PORTION of SMB1’s 1-1 level and judging Mario’s speed in reaching this PORTION of it…. while comparing to the amount of time it takes for Sonic to reach the end of Green Hill Act 1. The WHOLE fuckin act, I might add. 1-1 is, by all, a very short level while Green Hill is already lengthy.

But ignoring that, he’s made a video that’s preaching to the choir. People have known that innovation does not sell ever since the Gamecube bombed. People are aware of it considering the amount of pissing and moaning people have done over Call of Duty (mainly, the Nintards). The problem with the video is 3-fold. Number 1, he implies that the world of the internet is not aware that their tastes are in minority opinion, so the only people he’s talking to is the Nintendo fans… which is a pointless endeavor because as long as one game makes it over the 1 million mark (Epic Yarn), then fuck all the facts, PROFIT WAS MAED! We don’t know how much to make a difference to Nintendo, but it’s good enough for those assbites to win their pointless debative crusades against “da haters“. There’s no point to explaining shit to Nintendo loyalists no matter how many facts you pull up. If people like BlackB0nd have trouble getting anything through their thick ass skulls, then a guy with a million subs (which he flaunts as if to establish his credibility) isn’t gonna make any difference.

Number 2. If you’re gonna tell Nintendo fans the truth that breaks the camel’s back, don’t puss out and start praising Nintendo for their past history. There’s NO data showing how influential their “innovative” motion and touch screen controls are. After all, that’s why every limp dick fuck that watches this video keeps praising it, yet there’s nothing about them innovative controls.  The Wii’s best selling games are majority-wise the ones that don’t emphasize the motion controls and are just decent games. Yes, Wii Sports/Fit are titles that baffle the fuck out of everyone, but looking at Brawl and NSMBW, even NSMBDS, the innovative controls have never been necessary in the first place. Just admit it. Innovation in ALL sectors don’t sell people (often). How in demand are innovative control schemes? Instead of looking on the internet and assuming innovation sold Wii’s and Nintendo games (a contradictory fact), you could poll some assholes on the street to get real information.

Going  step further, there’s nothing innovative about motion or touch screen controls in the first place. Shit like this has existed since the goddamn Power glove. Nintendo basically took advantage of it and made video games a little “cooler”. Driving controls with a motion controller isn’t innovative, but it feels smooth as hell. I can’t even look at Sonic Racing Transformed the same way as it’s prequel on the wii. Where they started fucking up was making certain game inconvenient by making titles like Skyward Sword and Metroid Corruption WORSE.  The point still stands that innovation doesn’t sell. Praising the Wii for innovating and “changing the industry” is a bald-faced lie. And again, I can’t help but wonder if this was mentioned just to deflect any criticism he might/will get from the religiously over-zealous nintards that will watch the video.

Number 3. Why thank you! As borderline retarded shit head, I was previously unaware of what football is. What kind of condescending asshole thinks that’s funny?

I think this video has gotten enough unwarranted attention.

2.

With my righteous and furious anger of Resident Evil 6, I had originally proclaimed to never again look to Resident Evil for survival horror. Unfortunately, my will is not that strong and even after Mikami left, I am still RE’s bitch. So hearing the hype around Revelations, I decided to pick it up and am fucking glad I am still it’s bitch. Revelations is fucking gooooooooood!

The most amazing thing about this title is that it is completely free of quick-time events! Now if that’s not a miracle, I don’t know what is! Though I suppose being a handheld port, there be some perks to that aspect. I suppose Capcom figured Nintendo fans were “pussies” that couldn’t handle QTEs or something. But w/e, I’m happy as hell. Secondly, the game’s controls are actually good for once. Yes, it’s that same RE4 turd person element, but it actually feels improved. Unlike RE6’s weird ass control set up, your character’s movement while aiming is quite fast and smooth where as with 6 it was slow and clunky.

Other than that, melee attacks while not in aiming mode have been vastly improved. Instead of these slow attacks, your character has very quick attacks that have no hit stun but provide damage while you can move at the same time. Not to mention there’s no… fucking… STAMINA meter to look after! You can melee to your hearts content…. unless your enemies have quick mobility.

But the most important thing is that the game is actually scary. Not since RE3 has the series given me quite the shivers and tension that RE was known for up until now. Since then, I’ve been playing the games for story which is a bad thing. Story should not be the sole reason to play any game or else you might as well be watching youtube. This game, holy shit, all the moments I screamed “FUCKIN ASS” when some scary shit popped out had to have been a record.

The environments are also highly reminiscent of REmake’s mansion in regards to the residential cabins on the ship. There’s also a casino… for some reason. Basically, story is a ghost ship where Jill is tasked with investigating as well as trying to give the player a boner given the cleavage shot and tight swim suit that she wear for the whole mission just so we can see that she stole dat African booty as well.

Stupid Sexy Valentine!

Unfortunately, the game’s not perfect. While at first the game boasts what we’ve come to expect from Resident Evil games, ammo starvation and all, it goes into bullshit territory by requiring you to empty out your ammo reserves just to move on to the next area. Yes, the controls are actually suitable for combat for once, but that does not mean you make combat oriented challenges in the game. Sometimes in order to survive, you AVOID enemies. Plus,there’s lots of swimming involved, and I’ll be the one to say that swimming in 3D games have never been fun, but for some reason, developers are enamored by swimming in 3D. As if seeing underwater environments with ass controls are some sort of godsend. And the puzzles are still here (such as needing to turn on/off 3 different valves in 3 separate areas). Otherwise, if you need an RE fix, you can’t go wrong with Revelations. I assure you, you won’t be dissappointed, especially if you came off of RE6.

3.

Dumbass wants to make MOAR Nintendo DLC for Sonic’s Lost Mind.

I think this confirms that Lost Mind isn’t made for any audience and is simply a game that satisfies only Iizuka and Nintendo’s own tastes.

“Sonic Lost World is a title that only released on Nintendo hardware, which is an opportunity that I couldn’t believe, collaborating together. This time, the appearance is interesting, as combining Sonic into such a world is extremely foreign, and I wanted to aim at the unexpected.

“The team says that the music, sound and songs of The Legend of Zelda were entertaining to try and re-create and is now interested in working on more levels that allow it to collaborate with Nintendo.”

I don’t know whether to laugh or shit vomit. If anything proves how anti-consumer Lost Mind is, it is the DLC’s that do not fit within the context of Sonic the Hedgehog. Lets be frank. No one in the world wants Sonic to promote Nintendo’s bullshit. Not anymore at least, but this nutless moron sees a “creative opportunity” to make more Nintendo DLC. The dipshits who supported this out of some asinine desire to “show support for the company” aren’t even taken in consideration when these assholes are making the decisions. When people bitch and moan about how awful this assimilation is, what does Sega do? They want to make MORE of it! Great job, Nintendo! Not only was Sega bad at business decisions, you’ve poisoned them with your “in your face” attitude in lacking empathy for the customers and instead drown themselves in their own desires.

A company that moderately listened to their fans has now eaten the forbidden fruit of a company that has lost all motivation or desire to serve their customers. No, lets shove MORE shit that people don’t want into the series because YOU like it, and that makes it ok.

Iizuka and the rest of Sonic team has no idea they’re fucking the pooch by doing this. They’re offended by BRB’s retarded boom designs, but they find no problem shoving Nintendo IPs into Sonic and further destroy the franchise’s identity by assimilating it into games of a company rival!? When does the stupidity end!? Sonic was promoted as a Nintendo killer! That has been one of Sonic’s core trademarks since it’s conception. The other being speed and attitude. You’ve removed the attitude, you’ve removed the speed, and now you’re removing the will to compete against Nintendo.

Great job assholes, you’ve officially killed Sonic the Hedgehog.

You can’t blame this on Sonic Colors. No, you need to throw fire at that Olympics crap. That’s where this mess all started. All because Sega wants that Italian sausage.

Enjoy it while you can, you punk bitch.

(Random thoughts: Can’t believe them mother fuckers at Amazon are posting up Metacritic scores. Say good bye to REAL opinions and hello to dumb ass numbers dictating people’s gaming purchases. Metacritic is officially the Google of game reviews)

L to the O to the L.

This may be the worst example of ignorance I’ve encountered in video game discussion.

(Come to think of it, revisiting the old games is actually a wildly disappointing endeavor. Here’s a confronting idea: what if the Sonic franchise was never that good to begin with? As he wheels through golden loops and collects rings in our memory, the real-life classic Sonic gets stuck on invisible pixels, makes frustrated leaps endlessly upward among spinning columns that loom just out of reach. The irksome sounds of his repetitive, fruitless jumping – woop, woop, woop – join the rough hiss of his “spin dash” engine revving, weep-weep-weep-weep, in an impotent sound collage.

Sonic gets fired like a shot into the impossible depths of violet liquids and dies, choking open-mouthed. His loyal buddy, the flying two-tailed fox Tails, bumbles off-screen regularly and gets crushed obliviously beneath pillars as the sour-faced Hedgehog struggles uphill, leaps awkwardly toward platforms that lurch away. The primary rival is a mustachioed man who looks like an egg, prancing on tiny legs. Nonsensical robotic machinery and casino lights colonize the natural landscape, jarring.)

The whole point was to reach those ‘out of reach’ places, you know, because running through loops with no challenge or interactivity is a terrible game [proven by the shallow third dimensional sequels].

The model was a genius system that provided an incredible sense of exploration and freedom that was impossible prior to 16-bit consoles, providing rewards of either quantitative or qualitative [feeling of speed] nature in gigantic maps of branching complexity few titles reach even now.

SEGA bought the marketing and emphasized ‘speed’ in 3D, creating the exact opposite experience.

The thoughts here are a disturbing reminder of how far game design fell as big companies found that technology would create unprecedented opportunities to celebrate shallow banality. Perhaps Sonic requires purchasable physics tweaks so you can reach those annoying platforms for the low price of 1 dollar, and anything requiring player thought should include a way to progress through brain draining grind.

But in the next of those paragraphs you criticize the wildly inventive and artistic environments as ‘jarring.’ Seriously? Mario and Sonic depend on those fantastic environments.

Most of the post is a wordier version of the same nonsense you could find on the worst of the boards on the internet, frequently debunked but popular because FURRIES! Interesting how you see people explore kinky fan labor only when the series under discussion is criticized.

This man needs a medal.

The Guardian, one of the more well known news papers from the brits, has been around since the 1800’s. Having had the second most popular website in 2011, it’s probably best to assume their readers trust their shit. Of course, game journalists are also on this site. Leigh Alexander only has 2 articles on this site. And reading the mess she wrote, we should be grateful.

An anonymous had shown me this article she had on Sonic fandom in which the fans have “subverted the franchise”. I’m a little irritated at the recent spike in journalism’s desire to berate and criticize this one fanbase time and again. But how far does this one go?

“Sonic fans are fetishists, they like to draw porn of it”.

Now… I’m aware game journalists don’t know what they’re talking about half the time, but in an article that tries to dissect a certain fandom, why is there such a huge focus on the sick shit people tend to draw?

Course, I think I’ll do what one of the commentators suggested.

I can’t be bothered to list the problems and bias of this article. I have better things to do with my life.

True dat. See yah.

……………….

…………………………..

……………………………………

………….But something bothers me about this. I don’t have enough fingers on hand to count the overwhelming amount of articles that go on tirades against Sonic fans in particular. I mean, I’ve not seen ONE piece of writing that rips Nintards a new one, I’m positive the FGC rubs more peeps the wrong way than any other gaming community out there, and Amma knows those goddamn PC gamers need some scientific research into why they’re douche bags toward people who just enjoy playing with their thumbs for fuck’s sake.

Why are we in particular getting so much flak?

I’m resisting the urge to claim Sega is paying these fools to discredit any critic of Sonic Boom or Sega’s recent unwarranted changes to the series, because thus far we’ve had Kotaku, Destructoid, Stadium and several other spots up in the arse of this one fanbase. It almost seems deliberate,  like anytime the fans are in an uproar, these sons of bitches are quick to lay the juvenile, condescending smack down of ad hominim. “Oh, don’t pay attention to those guys. They draw furry porn!” is what I’m reading from this thing. Why don’t Pokemon fans get blasted on for masturbating to Gardevoir? Or Digimon fans for that yellow… fox thing? Hell, there’s even some nasty shit involving Krystal from Star Fox. It’s as though only the journalists can see Sonic porn.

Rafei: “Damn, I wanna fuck that!

But, beyond that, I see the same arguments crop up in most of these things, and the most common one happens to be the whole “cartoon hedgehog” argument. I don’t know how being a “cartoon” makes any difference. People have often taken cartoons seriously in the past. South Park naturally sparked controversy for being fowl shit. Boondocks obviously struck a few nerves (kinda got a kick out of Will I M getting mad at the Obama episode). Hell, we got grown ass men having conventions dedicated to fucking My Little Pony characters. And Anime fans will not stop after their teens to dress up as some half naked big eyed loli at conventions, not to mention the nerds that buy up all Gundam kits just to feel as though they have lived. Cartoons are definitely not some “special” entity in which people can wave away as something of non-importance. I mean, they aren’t a high priority for people’s lives, but it’s obvious that no, cartoons are not exempt from the “why so serious” card. But even going beyond that, no one cared if kids cried when Bambi’s mother died. Cartoons have struck emotions with people in the past. The most prominent example being the goddamn Lion King. Others might be Wall-E. If the death of a fictional lion is worthy of tear jerks, then a black hedgehog who died after popping lizard zits is worthy as well.

…..Shit, these assholes ALL cried when that bitch Aerith died. And hey, people took a cartoon green ass MONKEY seriously when it was announced to be on-disc DLC. I don’t get this shit with making Sonic out to be the exception of what people cannot be “serious” about. We’re talking about a mother fucking “video game icon”. Not too many video game characters carry that label, have a few bumps in road, and STILL be relevant to some mother fuckers. If people still raise hell over what’s going on in recent installments of the Sonic franchise, then dammit there’s a reason for it. You don’t see too many people being pressed over the indefinite cancellation of Mega Man games or Pac Man’s awful new merchandise driven enterprise. The only “cartoon” game characters people give a damn about are Sonic, Mario, and Chun-Li. Mainly because these games have touched people and made gaming relevant to them. It gave them a reason to be excited to turn on the game box and just play shit even though they might be wastin precious time. Something about grabbin rings and eating mushrooms to grow ten sizes higher is enamoring to people.

Sonic games are shit today because the company in charge does not give any ounce of a fuck about them. This is why fans are consistently pissed off. They’re not being serviced and they damn well know they deserve better for sticking with these ungrateful cocksuckers for the last 20 mothah fuckin years, even when Sega is DESPERATE to replace them. Writing off any concern as being too serious about a “cartoon hedgehog” is a disservice and an insult to not only Sonic fans, but any fanbase that gives 2 inches of a fuck about ANY franchise containing playable animals. If Pokemon started being shit, watch what would happen and I guarantee, the rage would not be quenched. And I know Pokemon fans are too damn loyal to Nintendo to take anyone’s bullshit on the matter.

Secondly, the shit about “a hedgehog fighting some fat guy shaped like an egg” is an argument that casually occurs over the internet. The rebuttal for the “cartoon hedgehog” argument applies, but let me go a little further. The relationship between Sonic and Robotnik has never been silly. In fact, it’s perfectly reasonable.

Why does fiction exist, first of all? Where does fiction come from? The imaginations of people. But how can people have an imagination? There has to be a “base” for imagination to occur. So in order for fiction to exist, there has to be a spark of imagination based on what? Reality. What is the base reality of Sonic’s battle against Robotnik? Think about Bugs Bunny’s relationship with Elmer fudd. He’s a rabbit that could be chillin but has to contend with asshole hunters who want to kill him for sport. There’s a film called Ratatouie that has the mice seeing that humans actually kill rats in order for the main character to understand that he cannot be friends with a human chef.

Shit like this shows the perspective of human nature from the eyes of animals. In that humans are bastards. Bastard covered bastards in bastard filling. Humans do a lot of detrimental shit to animals that they don’t notice or care about. This is obvious, I mean, we catch em, take em out of the wild and hold them up in cages for exhibits and prying eyes of other humans. We hunt them, we eat their asses up, or we tranq em and tag em with some shit on their ears, but most importantly, we test all kinds of deadly chemicals on them or use them for detrimental experiments. Robotnik fits all of those criteria, does he not? He hunts animals, runs experiments on them, tortures them, and domesticates them (roboticizing) to hunt other animals like a pack of hunting dogs. So Sonic would be the animal that tries to combat the bastard humans. This is an age old trope that continued with Crash Bandicoot and to some extent, Ratchet and Clank.

Fuck me, it’s not like Yuji Naka and Naoto Oshima got stanko one night, fucked a fat bitch and came up with the idea of a fat guy to be shaped like an egg, that’s just a distinguishing feature they made so the characters could stand the fuck out. Sega had a lil’ more sense back in the day, give them some credit. Do hedgehogs not naturally curl up into tight balls as a defense mechanism? Do their spines not hurt? Dumbasses online CONTINUE to fail to understand the logic behind the concepts that go into Sonic the Hedgehog and pretend to think that everything about Sonic is some cracked out Japanese randomness when everything that went into Sonic made more logical sense than a plumber entering a kingdom filled with demonic turtles and excrementals called Goombas. There was a base for a lot of the ideas that went into Sonic prior to SA2. Goddamn, I wish mother fuckers online would think sometimes.

Pet peeves aside, as of writing this, I’ve already figured out why there’s so much crap like this online is because people perceive low quality items as less of a priority and feels disturbed by those that care a little too much. “After all, why cling to a decaying icon”? Unfortunately, nowadays being a fan of something that is almost universally perceived as low quality is to be equated to that of a mental dissorder. How many times have people claimed Sonic fans were autistic based off one video of some screaming child that goes “WHAT THE FRICK” in every line he speaks? That said, people write off a series with a bad reputation as unimportant, and have a huge tendency to make a mockery of people who care. “Just leave it behind and move on” is what people keep demanding.  Course, when it becomes their business, we’ll ask for their advice.

This could be no less attributed to their preconceived hatred of all things western, but it is funny when you have people describing the team not wanting to look at the screen, the designs were that ugly. Could you imagine if the Sonic characters were given pants?

*looks at Wave and Rouge* Ahem… aside from spinoffs?

This could be the real reason the game won’t be in Japan. As high strung as those mother fuckers are, they might think this game being released with those designs would be some sort of disgrace.

It also sheds some light on how much Sonic Team themselves actually care about the Sonic franchise and not so much Sega itself. I can’t speak much on behalf of Iizuka as he’s been more of a nuisance since Sonic 3, but if even he hates the designs, then at least he’s showing good taste.

This could mean that Sega (separate from S-Team) doesn’t give a shit about Sonic. Just make something to sell it. Which is normal at this point. Japanese publishers seem to be taking a tyrannical turn during their continued economic implosion where the managers are all eating asshole sandwiches, flipping off their fans, and doing whatever they can to rake in money.

Afterall, Sonic Team is nothing more than Sega’s personal sweatshop now. It’s a little oddball that only this specific division is the main one creating subpar games per year while other development teams within the company are given so much leg room to make better titles that… still don’t sell. If they didn’t care about their products, they wouldn’t be so squeamish about Boom’s awful designs.

Damn you Hajime Saotome.

Here… and here.

Emily Rogers is one of the few journalists on the internet that seems to make sense. She’s got well researched articles, and in particular, I enjoyed the one that smacks down the hype about Nintendo’s “family friendly” approach. It certainly woke up some hedz in the Sonic fanbase about their fanatical defense of making Sonic exclusively for children.

I’m a little disheartened that she could write such a bullshit article in regards to the Star Fox franchise. Specifically, putting up an argument for why Star Fox can’t be rebooted (easily). The very nature of this article seems less about informing people about specific problems with making Star Fox relevant and seems more hostile towards the rabid fanboys online. It reads like a typical forum post.

Everyone criticizes Nintendo’s treatment of Star Fox, but who exactly is the audience for Star Fox? Last year, Japanese gamers were asked in a survey about what their top ten favorite Nintendo franchises were. Star Fox was not listed anywhere in the top ten for males or females. In fact, more women in Japan prefer Pikmin over Star Fox, and males preferred F-Zero over it as well. The “Mother” franchise hasn’t released a new installment since 2006, but the franchise was ranked at number 7 for Japanese men

Considering the Japanese aren’t really into science fiction as much as the western world, this is obvious. There’s nothing in Star Fox that appeals to the Japanese as it was made in the hands of a western developer. Western developers understand their own market better than they understand (or care about)  Japan’s. That said, we’ve no details about the demand for a Star Fox game in the western territories. The Japanese aren’t gonna pick any franchise with anthromorphic animals that don’t scream cute.

That said, the audience would be in western territories, exclusively. Unfortunately, Nintendo is not in the interest of catering to baka gaijin which is why they killed off the Star Fox franchise while continuing to make Pikmin games that don’t sell.

Contrary to popular belief, Star Fox is not an easy franchise to reboot. The franchise is too hardcore to appeal as a family game like “Mario Kart”, “New Super Mario Bros”, and “Wii Sports”. It struggles to appeal to the Titanfall/Gears of War audience because it has talking animals for protagonists. Star Fox struggles to attract small children because the characters aren’t drawn cutesy and adorable like Yoshi, Kirby, or Animal Crossing. Nobody plays Star Fox at competitive tournaments like Super Smash Bros or Pokemon. It lacks Japanese appeal like Monster Hunter, Persona, Dragon Quest, Fire Emblem, etc.

Ok, one, a game does not have to make Mario Kart numbers to be a success. Two, Star Fox was never a “family” game to begin with, and despite writing an entire post on why the family centered strategy of game making that Nintendo has had up it’s ass was nothing but a farce, it’s now some sort of necessity for Star Fox to sell. Three, if children are drawn to Ratchet and Clank and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2 franchises that don’t focus on anything cute about their characters), Star Fox is not out of the question. Yoshi and Kirby haven’t been relevant since… ever. And why would being featured at a tournament actually matter to people?

This whole statement is oddball in itself. As the entire article ousts Star Fox as being a viable franchise based on gameplay reasons alone, but does not explain why Star Fox has no appeal to any audience.  This is important later on.

The shoot em’ up genre began life in the arcades with games like Space Invaders and Space Harrier. If someone enjoyed an arcade game, they were later influenced to purchase the home console version. Unfortunately, the technology of home consoles began to rival arcades, and this forced many arcades to eventually close down. The demand and interest for shoot em’ ups was weakened, and the genre became increasingly niche by the mid 90′s.

It’s not at all technology, but rather convenience. In America at least, video games on consoles simply had more entertainment value, and you didn’t have to leave home just to play a game. Not to mention going to a specific arcade didn’t mean your favorite game was going to be there for a long time. If you enjoyed Simpsons arcade, you better enjoy it while you can because eventually it might get replaced. But buying a game from the store? You get to keep it indefinitely. Not to mention a lot of console games (outside of maybe fighters) were just that much more appealing.

The convenience of the video game console was what rivaled arcades.

Star Fox isn’t relevant today because the gameplay never offered anything original to begin with. Maybe it deserves credit for improving on existing formulas, but its contributions to the genre have been vastly overrated. Parappa the Rapper contributed more brand new ideas to the rhythm music genre than Star Fox has contributed to rail-shooters and shoot em’ ups.

Ok, the originality clause is a poor argument. Video games do not sell on original or creative ideas, but rather quality of entertainment value that is delivered. Star Fox prior to Adventure and Assault had enough entertainment value to carve out a decent audience.

The gameplay of Nintendo’s newest games such as the Galazy’s and Link between Worlds showcases “originality” in each installment, but as we see, people rush toward the games that have no originality. Every Call of Duty is derided as un-evolving, but continue to sell gangbusters until Ghosts. People do not give a shit about originality outside of content. Castlevania Lords of Shadow has unoriginal gameplay AND content, but miraculously manages to sell way beyond the CV fanbase’s expectations. Lets face it, everyone knows the Simpsons did it. But doing something first and then doing it well are 2 different things. Street Fighter 2 wasn’t the first fighting game to have special moves, but they did it extremely well to become an arcade phenomenon. Space Harrier, Galaxy Force, etc. might have been hailed for technical achievements, but no one even cares about those games these days as they have no content to speak of. That and they played like shit. It’s something that at least Star Fox can claim.

The Star Fox franchise sells best when it’s the first game to introduce gimmicky technology. When Star Fox isn’t the first to introduce gimmicky technology, it becomes just another rail shooter to throw on the pile.

“Just another rail shooter” would be something along the lines of Resident Evil Darkside Chronicles. Dead Space Extraction. House of the Dead Overkill. Time Crisis. Games where you can only move the crosshair and have to mke twitch moves to shoot enemies furiously. That shit got saturated real quickly on Wii at least.  Star Fox barely plays anything like a typical Rail Shooter. You have a CHARACTER to move, making it more about maneuverability to avoid taking damage rather than furiously shooting enemies and projectiles. If anything, Star Fox would’ve been a breath of fresh air on the Wii. Not to mention Star Fox had it’s own gameplay quirks that made it far more interesting than your typical rail shooter. Completing different objectives in stages meant gaining access to newer, hidden levels. 64 was a game that kept people interested in exploring the entirety of the Lylat System. Not just having a branching path in single levels that only lead to different areas, you actually had to work to get brand new levels during a playthrough. That adds replay value in itself.

The first Donkey Kong Country and the original Star Fox share some similarities with each other. Neither game reinvented their respective genres with innovative gameplay, but they blew everyone away with their graphics.

And DKCR does nothing special. Yet it still sells.

I’ll give her the gimmicky tech angle. Star Fox wouldn’t be anything worth of interest if not for 3D graphics. After this point, however, Star Fox has solidified it’s place as a franchise that people have demanded sequels for regardless of graphics. Technology has advanced to the point that it’s a waste of time and money to make anything gimmicky anymore. Adding to that, Star Fox 64 isn’t remembered for gimmicky tech like the first game was. How many people care about Gyromite when it’s gimmick was ROB the toy robot? Or that puzzle game? Does Star Fox not warrant any merit for being a quality title for being remembered for more than the Rumble Pak?

If DKCR is proof of anything, no video game is required to have gimmicks to sell anymore.

Star Fox Command was NOT the first game to show off the Nintendo DS touchscreen. Therefore, most people weren’t excited about Star Fox Command using the touchscreen…..Star Fox Adventures and Star Fox Assault didn’t introduce any new pieces of gimmicky technology, and therefore, most people didn’t pay any attention to them.

Command wasn’t even a rail shooter. It was a poor experimental strategy line-drawing game that shoe-horned the touch screen into the game for no reason. It was a HORRIBLE game, and sold like ass as a result. This isn’t an example as to why Star Fox can’t be rebooted. Technology is no longer an issue.

Adventures and Assault had their own issues. When you establish a gameplay element of a franchise, you establish the expectations of that audience. Adventures did not meet the expectations of Star Fox’s audience by forgoing the rail shooter mechanic in favor of being a Zelda clone as well as being a drastic departure from Star Fox content in general. Assault had the same problem, where aerial  dog fights were marginalized in favor of ground missions that were boring and tedious to play through. And the game was the beginning of Star Fox being turned into a space opera that rubbed everyone the wrong way.  People imagined Star Fox as that saturday morning cartoon of animal space warriors kickin ass, not some animu shit stain between whether or not Fox admits he has a hard on for Krystal.

Grouping Star Fox into a non-Star Fox game, making a shallow sequel, and making a strategy game killed Star Fox, not the lack of gimmicks. You can’t have an audience for a franchise that only has one or 2 games they only like. If you’re not going to build off the game in a series people like, it’s going to struggle in the long run.

Using poorly designed games as examples of Star Fox’s dependency on gimmicks is rather under-handed, I might add. Nintendo (as a Japanese company) barely cares about games that don’t appeal to Japanese tastes, so they do what any other company would and passes them off to other teams to make them. It’s a little shocking that Namco couldn’t make a decent Star Fox game themselves, but past history of talent doesn’t = good team to dole out a game plan for.

The main story modes of “Star Fox” and “Star Fox 64″ didn’t last much longer than two hours, and they were both originally released at the price of $60-$70. The best Star Fox games were designed as short games that players would replay multiple times to unlock everything. Nowadays, too many gamers care more about a game’s length instead of it’s replay value, and today’s gaming media would absolutely crucify a $50-$60 Star Fox game that is shorter than five hours long without some extremely solid online multi-player.

This is assuming that a Star Fox game would automatically be priced that high for a short length. Despite high development costs and a necessity to rake in profits, against all logic and reason, Ratchet and Clank into the Nexus released at $30. Why? because the game is incredibly short, only containing 4 worlds and having no replay value to boot. That’s awfully generous.

That said, I don’t see how a short game is automatically a non-seller. New Super Mario Bros. (both versions) are both short, piss easy, and break sales records on occasion. Sonic 4 Episode 2 only has 4 levels, tops PSN sales charts, even beating Final Fantasy. The REAL problem with short games are when they offer no real entertainment value in their short time frame. Star Fox 64 3D is a remake with no extra bells or whistles added. People have played the shit out of SF64 on N64 and Wii combined. Making a remake with nothing else besides the main game was foolish on Nintendo’s part. A short game is not bad in itself. A short game  with nothing to compensate for being short is.

That’s why games could get away with being high priced and short back then. The games weren’t piss easy where you’d beat the game in one sitting. Developers think gamers are pussies today via making games for children. And were still captivating enough for people to keep replaying them.

Giving Star Fox an on-foot adventure wasn’t Miyamoto’s mistake. That was a good idea because the action/adventure genre is the only way to broaden Star Fox’s marketing appeal in the long run.

It never was. People have expectations of certain franchises. When people like Star Fox for the space wars, that’s what the hell they want. There’s no evidence to support a game building off of SF64 would not broaden Star Fox’s marketing appeal. A couple of reviewers complaining about a remake’s game length isn’t enough

Would a Star Fox game having more stuff to do actually help? Of course. But no one wants Adventure elements in their Star Fox. If it played anything like Ratchet and Clank, no one would have a problem.

The ideas behind Star Fox Assault and Star Fox Adventures were good, but even the best ideas can end up with sloppy execution or below average results. Unfortunately, people use those two games as evidence on why Star Fox shouldn’t explore the action/adventure genre more. Yes, Star Fox Adventures sold one million units which is less than Star Fox 64′s three million units, but GameCube’s install base was also significantly smaller than Nintendo 64′s install base.

Super Smash Bros. Melee has sold more than the original on the N64 despite having a smaller install base. Metroid Prime has sold more than Metroid Fusion despite having a smaller install base. Metroid Prime 3 has sold less than Prime 1 despite having a higher install base. Skyward Sword has sold less than Ocarina of Time even with the higher install base.

What’s Star Fox Adventure’s excuse? Having little to nothing of what people enjoyed about the originals. Assault would’ve made it out better had ground missions not been a bore or so disproportionately numerous in comparison to the segments people enjoyed.

Star Fox could learn a lot from how Rareware’s “Donkey Kong Country” series reinvented and modernized the ‘Donkey Kong’ intellectual property for a new generation of gamers. The “Country” trilogy made Donkey Kong feel cool and hip again with 90′s kids who were obsessed with cool and edgy mascots like Sonic the Hedgehog and Earthworm Jim. It established Donkey Kong’s universe with an entire family of Kongs, an entire cast of enemies, and a wide selection of animal buddies.

This paragraph more or less kills Emily’s entire argument. Throughout the entire article, she hammers in that Star Fox could not be anything without it’s dependency on gimmicky technology, yet goes in to admit that Donkey Kong Country could compete by having good content. Nowhere does she praise the  gameplay which is understandable as the game was terrible. But if Donkey Kong can get away with cool content, there’s no reason Star Fox couldn’t. If anything, Star Fox has all the potential in the world to become bigger than it is. Unless she is implying Star Fox has bad content.

Going a bit further, putting Star Fox on Dinosaur Planet WAS a grave mistake on Nintendo’s part. The stories and universe of Dinosaur Planet muddled with Star Fox’s on universe by reducing an entire galaxy with a single star based in prehistoric times. Why would anyone want to move away from inter-galactic warfare with scifi elements, surreal technology, and some creepy aliens… for generic reptiles? Content fluctuation had taken hold and the Star Fox franchise had already suffered by the time we get to Assault, which seemed like a half-hearted apology at best.

More over, Donkey Kong Country really sold for the same reasons Star Fox did. Good graphics. While it is mentioned, it is made out to be a minimal factor of DKC’s success.

This goes back to what I said earlier. There is no explanation for why Star Fox has no appeal beyond gameplay reasons or blunt assumptions about audience tastes. People who are into Gears of War or Titanfall weren’t going to be a target audience for Star Fox either way, and having cute characters has never been a requirement to appealing to children. I have no idea where that came from.

Games like “Donkey Kong ’94″ and “Mario vs DK” were great.

Now you’re breaking my balls.

Nobody has a problem with Mario having two RPG series (“Paper Mario”, “Mario & Luigi”). Many Wii U owners were cool with Zelda having a Dynasty Warriors spinoff franchise called “Hyrule Warriors”. Nobody complained when Donkey Kong Country ditched the old 80′s arcade gameplay and imitated “Super Mario World”. Everyone loves when Nintendo tries experimental ideas with Kirby like “Kirby Canvas Curse”. There are no complaints when Pokémon gets spinoffs like “Pokémon Snap”.

It’s because fans of those franchises were still getting games that meet their expectations. That and no one cares about Kirby.

Compare to franchises like Sonic which keep shafting fan demand in favor of experimental gameplay elements and even worse content than a Bomberman game. People who like Pokemon’s main games can still enjoy Pokemon’s main games without being usurped by an experimental design philosophy running amok at the company. When Adventures was being made, where was the Star Fox people really wanted? People had to wait a good 9 years to get an appropriate sequel, and that turned out to be mediocre.

The real reason for Star Fox’s irrelevancy is the same reason for Earthworm Jim, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Mega Man. Mishandling of the franchise. Nintendo couldn’t give a damn about Star Fox as the ideas of the series came from “American scum“. Attaching it to a zelda clone pissed gamers off. Handing it off to Namco because they didn’t want to bother further pissed people off. Shifting genres into tactical strategy further pissed people off. Consistently shitty games become irrelevant to gamers. Being attached to a specific genre doesn’t make it irrelevant by itself. Mario Galazy wouldn’t sell being a 3D Platformer had it not been Mario on the cover. There is nothing to imply that Star Fox could not sell in this environment as no one has made a game good enough to be fairly judged today. If game length is the primary issue, it can easily be rectified.

This article feels less like Rogers and more like hardcore gamer logic. Furthermore, all the “what-if” scenarios about if Star Fox had no 3D is also irrelevant and feel more so an attempt to further deride the Star Fox series of any merit just by looking plainly into it’s game rules. If a game is fun and entertaining, people will come to it. Writing off the Star Fox series based on the fact that it’s “just another  Rail Shooter” is dishonest and mis-informative. There aren’t many rail shooters that people have memories of in comparison.

And honestly speaking, if Nintendo’s wasting money on games no one buys anyway, they might as well waste it on a franchise with some balls.

Not just from professional reviewers, but it seems like ANYONE who is into video games can’t seem to write a decent review that doesn’t seem to have the same old college-like categorical review format. Bonus points if said game is a part of a franchise.

Here’s how this shit flows.

1. Intro

This comes in 3 flavors. Personal, Historical, and Relative.

Personal Intros explain the reviewer’s past history playing said games in a series. Something to establish his/her credibility in that they know what they’re talking about when reviewing the game. Afterall, how do you establish credibility when all you’re doing is giving an opinion on a piece of software? “I know my *game name*!” is. These indicate whole heartedly that the review is simply his/her standards being or not being met by said game. And the series it belongs to is his childhood, so you can’t fault him on faulty intel (har har)

Historical intros actually talk about the franchise history, it’s beginnings, it’s ups, it’s downs, and how it influenced games (if ever). This is supposed to indicate the standards that this game is supposed to live up to, which is ok unless you personally have no idea what in fresh hell a “Borderlands” is, so all it does is pile over from the Personal intro slant as to what standards the series should live up to.

Relative Intros are about the same as the above except it talks about the genre the game belongs to as a whole. Mostly used for new franchises or games with no prequels or sequels. Basically, the intro asks whether or not this game will do anything for the genre as a whole in terms of improvements or innovations. You know, all the shit no one cares about.

All these intros do is establish standards. Personal standards of sticking to nostalgia, historical standards of maintaining series staples and quality, and relative standards of doing something for the “genre”.

2. Categories

Then you get into the categorical review where they dissect the game into different sectors of quality.

Story (will sometimes talk about characters being “memorable”, as if recalling characters from memory could ever be considered a quality)

Graphics (Because I really care about how real the shit looks)

Gameplay (always required, prepare for rants against a camera)

Music (never mentioning how it enhances the experience, just talks about how this one composer whose name you’ll never be able to recall creates this “masterpiece” of a soundtrack. )

Replay Value (which can’t be defined at all, but they just list a bunch of unlockable features/DLC and claim “there’s lots to do in this game” like fetch quests and 100% completion bullshit that no one likes).

3. Closure

And then the conclusion ends off with some lame paragraph, usually titled “overall” or “in conclusion”, that again goes back to the “Personal, Historical, or Relative intro standards” and judges the game based off that… and then has the gall to suggest whether you rent it or buy.

Take this shit from a Sly 2 review.

Controlling Sly is fun, because he can traipse around the world easily unseen, using the environment to his advantage to take him to hard to reach places. He can steal, he can sneak, and he can hide better than anybody—perhaps a game with a shadow of Sly as a villain would be fun, where you sneak around and try to find him as he tries find you. Controlling Sly is fun, but it’s nowhere near as satisfying as controlling Murray.

What’s wrong here? He doesn’t really describe WHY IT’S FUN! He just says it is and goes on describing what Sly can do. This is despite the fact that throughout the review, he implies it’s fucking boring! Not to mention that lie.

That’s why people play games, so their minds and skills are challenged.

In the words of Clank: “What a load of bull-

This causes problems, why? Because in many ways, it disconnects people from the actual material at hand. How? The person who is doing the evaluation is leaving out one important aspect. How it makes the player “feel”.

Sure, it’s a difficult to describe how a game makes the player feel because “everyone is different”, but it’s much more helpful in the long run because a good majority of categorical reviews describe the game mechanically. The games are judged based on performance and standards with personal slants, but many of these reviews fail to describe how it entertains the reviewer. If you were to read a review about a movie, you might get complaints about plot holes. You won’t initially take note of plot holes and inconsistencies in movies until after a second viewing so it’s unhelpful information as it doesn’t describe how it entertains you.

For instance, if you were to read a review on like Anarchy Reigns or something and the reviewer were to describe the music, you might get something along these lines.

Platinum Games injects a strong soundtrack of hip hop music which is much better than today’s mainstream rap music with many different talented artists yadda yadda…

That kind of shit. Who cares how it compares to mainstream rap!? Who cares who made the fucking songs? How does it enhance the experience for you? If the reviewer instead used something along these lines…

The feeling of being able to kick butt with a soundtrack that gets you pumped up is oh so satisfying! You got lyrics talking about wrecking your shit, and then I just cracked a bat upside his head!

Or some shit like that, THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE HELPFUL! It’s describing how it entertains the player.

I think people would get a kick out of beating up loads of enemies, but it gets kinda boring after a while. All I’m doing is running around beating up enemies so after about 2 areas, I really wanted a change in gameplay.

This is also helpful in describing how the game could be less entertaining for extended periods. Or for something like MGR…

Sometimes I can’t even keep up with this game, the camera spazzes out all the time, so if I’m trying to look for an enemy while fighting like… several hoardes at once, if I go behind a wall or an object, the camera will start screwing up on me and then I gotta retreat and readjust it sometimes. It just gets really disorientating after a while, especially if you get into like tight and small spaces like an office or something, it gets really difficult to fight, and then they have the nuts to send out those big metal gear T-Rexes in an office all at once.

…..You know? Shit like that. Not this.

The audio is top-notch. The voice acting is great, especially for Murray and Bentley this time around. Their characters come through so much stronger. The combat sounds, Sly’s tip-toe music, the trumpet blast when Sly hits an enemy with a finishing move, even the little noises that come up when you go into the game’s menus are all very cool. The music matches the tone of the game perfectly.

Where no entertainment value is stated, just performance. If there was like “the music makes the game feel like a cool spy movie!”, that would be much more helpful

These kinds of… review portions are much more helpful because it describes feelings as well as uses personal experiences from portions of the game to describe positives or negatives. These describe entertainment value much better than actually dissecting the entire game, stripping everything down to it’s inner workings and judges the game based on performance and standards. You know, the shit that the hardcore nerds think makes a good game. Like if you talk about Garou, Mark of the Wolves, you’d think by describing how good the fighting system is would be enough, but that creates disconnect because you’re not describing entertainment value, you’re just describing how well the game performs based on it’s fighting system, and I swear that’s how a good majority of fighting game reviews are done.

I suppose video reviews are much better in this regard because you can see/hear these reactions in real time. There’s this one reviewer called Armake21 who probably does the best video reviews as… most of it is natural. Oh look, he did Sonic 06.

Yeah, this blurry ass mess right here is much more helpful than most other video reviews. Yeah, you’re probably gonna make a comment about him saying “it’s a kids series”, I know what you’re thinking, but pay attention to the overall videos, he’s constantly saying “you” as in “you yourself are going to feel empathetic toward this guy for playing this shit”. Instead of cutting a pasting different sequences from several segments in the game like most video reviews do (Gametrailers and IGN especially), this guy shows one whole segment, no real skits or silly antics like that AVGN cunt, though he also does a job of relating to his audience (I guess).

Here, he actually describes that because of how sloppy the controls and camera are, he’s AFRAID of even moving the game character even slightly because it’s far too easy to die in this game. You could say “if he doesn’t feel comfortable even trying to progress, then why would I want to get into this game?”. And that’s easier to relate to cause recently (never happened 6 years ago when I first played), I tried a homing attack on the Egg Wolf or w/e, I hit it and then I just fly into space. I have no idea how that happened, but I’m laughing my ass off, but the next time, because the boss fight is pretty long, I lose my patience with it, but I gotta be all precise and shit because now there’s a bug that will kill me if I just attack him randomly.

I also believe changing our style of reviewing games is paramount in helping people (especially on the internet) understand how and why certain games are much more successful than others. If you wanted to understand the success of games like NSMBW in comparison to SMG2, describing entertainment value would work fucking wonders. I could see how people would be entertained by NSMB rather than SMG. NSMB, I’m using power ups to kick enemy ass. SMG, I’m using power ups to “explore and find stars!” I constantly fail to see the entertainment value of the most praised Nintendo games because reviewers choose to bullshit you with performance quality and standards instead. If you wanted to see why people praise the fuck out of the Last of Us, you can’t rely on reviews. 9 out of 10, you’d have to buy or rent the game instead, or watch youtube videos. There was this one video walkthrough series on the Last of Us where this white boy was making all kinds of obnoxious commentary, but it’s funny cause when he kicks a guy’s face in, he goes “whoooooooAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!” and starts sounding like one of those frat fucks from a Fast and Furious movie. Hey, it helps more than an actual review.

K, Done.

And

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but both games are examples of extreme content fluctuation, both of which probably led to the demise of both franchises.

Both of these games colored their respective fanbases in the wrong way as both fandoms do not believe any title after these 2 are worthy of mention. Most of them, at least.

Both of these games, when played, led to an extreme level of frustration and agony in different ways (Shadow was confusing at first and had quite a few tedious missions, Jak 2 was just bullshit ridden all over the damn place).

Both of these games have crap stories (YMMV on Jak 2) as well as try-hard “badittude” with characters swearing for no good reason or making titty jokes.

Both games have the potential to grow on you anyway (yet still hate their fucking guts for why they were made)

…..But here’s the key difference.

Hardly anyone praises the city in Jak 2. In fact, everyone hates the city. No mention of constantly bumping into shit as you roll through, no mention that “the variety of shit you do” is actually forced on you (60 tedious missions, and you have to complete every single one of them to advance the game). Shadow the Hedgehog gives you freedom to choose what missions you want to do to advance the story (No necessity to complete everything unless you choose to) as well as “run around high speed” as they originally complained about (not noting that it was by choice to face the enemies anyway instead of moving at a preferred pace). Jak II is much more limiting in that regard. One mission in particular (the sewer escort), if you try to leave those 3 assholes behind, they automatically die and your ass is sent back to the beginning.

No mention of Shadow’s superior auto aim either. At least in any version other than BS2. Oh wait, were they reviewing the Xbox version?

None of this is mentioned in either reviews. All of Jak 2’s problems are glossed over while Shadow’s are exaggerated.  Jak 2 also has a much worse camera.

Both games have the same general stupidity in design choices and content, and were both a result of fan feedback and Grand Theft Auto 3 (The “COD Cancer” of the time). But in either case, Jak 2 caused a number of frustrations back in the day, and still does. Jak 3 fell on def ears and the series has been on death row ever since. Sonic as well, but maintains a partial, but rapidly shrinking, demand after Unleashed (and damn sure after Lost Mind.) Jak has no demand.

These 2 games were instrumental in destroying these franchises, yet one is praised with no real explanation given. Brutally honest my ass.

If I were to explain why Jak 2 was “better” than Shadow the Hedgehog, it’d be this.

Game Length (We were obsessed with long games in the 5th and 6th gen, and arcade centric games just didn’t cut it.)

Effort detection (Everything about Shadow feels cheap when compared to games like Soul Calibur 2 and even Bloody Roar Primal Fury. Course, we all know why by now)

Cultural standards (Shadow appeals more to the Japanese while the opposite is for Jak 2)

Computer Centrism was a western industry pasttime (shit, any game that had fuck loads of puzzles was praised). Shadow the Hedgehog was still very Arcade Centric even with it’s stupid shit like disarming 50 bombs with a goddamn vacuum cleaner.

Jak 2 being a Playstation exclusive (Sony dominated everything at the time, so everything their developers made was automatically branded a classic for no reason other than being Playstation). 😛

Laughter is the best medicine (And Jak 2 is fucking hilarious at times).

I would NEVER praise Jak 2 for it’s so-called “challenges”. Super Monkey Ball, yes I would, because that shit is actually FUN while dying a lot. Jak 2 feels like taking a razor to the nuts, shaving off all of your pubes while nicking yourself a little just to show your peers that you are a man dammit! Content, while flawed, is actually compelling in Jak 2 which is why you feel more encouraged to play despite the constant and inevitable feeling of being jerked around like a mean steak, tortutred endlessly, beaten to death by a sadistic developer with no concept of balance or was just the biggest asshole ever hired by Sony, and feeling like Link currently does in Aonuma Zelda IE the fucking errand boy who just does shit with little to no hesitation. Shadow the Hedgehog isn’t compelling at all beyond a few gameplay improvement (diverse levels, checkpoint teleports, ring system and a better challenge after the snooze fest that was Heroes).

But you wouldn’t know all that and think Jak 2 was “awesome” due to gameplay. Man, weren’t you the pissed off kid with that mindset?

I also love the excuse of Jak 2 having no strafing because “it’s an old game”.

VG Cats - I can't believe it's not Updated_1367606609993

Mega Man Legends had strafing and that shit is ANCIENT compared to Jak 2. Even Shadow has strafing. Ur mom can strafe something fierce in the sack. Twas no fucking excuse especially since the way shooting works ends up wasting more ammo than need be.

PR Wizardry powers, activate!

In the wake of 3D World’s demise, Reggie Fils Aime is tasked with spreading bullshit to keep their PR in check. And as the externally labeled “Nintendo hater”, I am tasked with exposing the bullshit. Bullshit to expose will be in bold.

What would you say is the most significant innovation in gaming in the past decade?

It’s gotta be the WiiMote. The WiiMote introduced a completely new style of play that arguably set an industry standard for motion controls, and let the consumer experience games in an entirely new way. The thing, I think, that’s really set Nintendo apart from the competition is its focus on new styles of play. We’re always looking for ways to innovate, ways to bring new and fun experiences to the consumer. In the end, it’s all about the software, and all about how you experience that software—and controllers have a huge effect on that.

Bullshit!

There is no industry standard for motion controls. It’s been proven (and exaggerated by the hardcore) that motion controls were NOT good for a majority of games. The best thing about the Wiimote was the customizability. You could use it as an NES controller, a light gun, and plug in 2 different attachments for different controls. These aren’t NEW WAYS to play games, persay, but more “convenient” ways to play games. I could play Brawl with Wiimote while another person could play with a gamecube controller. It was a console that didn’t discriminate against a person’s preferred way to play a game, and that’s one of the coolest fucking things about the Wiimote. It doesn’t force anything on you. It says “ok, you wanna plug a CC up my ass? Be gentle!”. And it loves me for it.

Can you do that with the BS3 or 360 controllers? No, you have all these uncomfortable configurations that YOU CAN NEVER FULLY CHANGE! Don’t like firing weapons on R1? Tough shit, scrub! You’re going to exercise your index and you’re going to LOVE IT!

The Wiimote is inviting. But don’t confuse that for “innovation”. The N64 controller could be considered the same thing with all the BS you could plug into that. The Transfer pak was more innovative than the Wiimote, hell.

When you released the DS, you had an entirely different idea of play style in mind. How does that concept manifest itself in the 3DS?

So here’s what’s interesting. The question that you asked me is “what was the single biggest innovation in the video game industry in the past decade?” if you would have asked the question differently, during my tenure, what was the gaming system that arguably has redefined the industry, I would’ve said the [Nintendo] DS. Because if you think about it, it was the first system that had a touch screen, a built in microphone—and the types of games that that enabled? You know, in many ways, it’s the forefront of what’s happening now with mobile and touch and things of that nature. The system that sold over 150 million globally?

Bullshit!

Redefined my ass. The most popular DS games don’t even use the touch screen or the microphone. You know why? Because that shit doesn’t feel natural. Playing Phantom Sour Ass, being told to scream and blow into a piece of hardware just to progress through the game was retarded, and probably put me in more friend zones than I needed to be. The only benefit of touch screens in gaming was more convenient menu navigation. Just think how much easier it is to play RPGs now! What a dipshit.

Shit, if touch screen tech redefined the industry, it would be in demand for more games. I don’t see the Pii U selling more because of that big ass touch screen, do you? Shit, that probably deterred more potential buyers than usual. Speaking of Pii U…

We just recently passed the one year anniversary of the Wii U. Is there anything you would have liked to do differently, if you could go back and re-do it?

You know, what drives a system are those key must-have games. When we launched the Wii U, we were pointing to Pikmin, we were pointing to Wii Fit U, and we were pointing to Zelda and Mario—so all of these great games that are coming out now? We wanted them to come out by the end of March last year. That’s been the biggest challenge we’ve had. We knew we had a great line-up. We wanted it to launch much earlier to drive the system. So, what does that mean going forward?

That means that we have to make sure that the pipeline for new games has that steady pace. We’ve had it arguably since July, in terms of that regular pace of games—and guess what? The Wii U has responded, and we just have to make sure that that pace is consistent.We’ve got Wii Fit U in January, and Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze in February. [Mario] Kart is still Spring 2014—no solid release date, it’s still just Spring. All we’ve said for Smash Bros. is 2014.

Bullshit!

Didn’t you have some investors recommending that you discontinue the Pii U by next year!? Didn’t Pikmin 3 bomb? You guys were very quiet about that bitch since it’s release.

If you knew you had a great line up, you wouldn’t need to lower the price and sell the Pii U at a loss. You also wouldn’t need to bundle up New Super Mario Bros U LATE in the console cycle just to make up for lost sales. If you KNEW you had a great line up of games, you wouldn’t need to lower the price so soon and make several bundles to entice people. A sign of confidence in your software line up would mean not caving in and re-releasing games that were released last year in a new bundle this year around the holidays. That is a sign of desperation. Your own investors have zero faith in your product. I’d be shittin my pants if I were in Nintendo’s position at this point.

Now that Mr. Iwata is the CEO of Nintendo of America, are you going to see a greater emphasis on regional games developed here in the Americas?

The fact of the matter is, we have two internal studios that are based in the U.S.: we’ve got Retro, and we’ve got NST. In addition, there are a number of key relationships we have with companies based here in the Americas. The team that did Luigi’s Mansion: Dark Moon, for example, is up in Vancouver. We’re looking to build more and more relationships with great developers here—developers who can take some of our best franchises and help create fantastic content.

Bullshit, Bullshit, Bullshit!

Nintendo NEVER likes it when American developers outdo them on their own franchise. Rareware was the first example, Retro Studios is the second. Miyamoto despised the fact DKC was more successful than his Super Mario World series on SNES, tried to make Yoshi’s Island in defiance, and failed. Sakamoto despised that Metroid Prime kicked the shit out of his darling Metroid Fusion, and now he seeks to revoke any position in continuity within his shitty canon of motherly love for aliens. What has Retro been doing since then? Being used for mere art assets and crappy Donkey Kong games.

Nintendo wanting to build relations with American developers? When their egos let them, that is.

How long does Nintendo intend on releasing games for the Wii?

Well, in terms of Nintendo-published titles, we’re not publishing any more Wii games—neither are we publishing any more DS games. Third parties are publishing for them – but we’re focused on driving the install base of the Wii U. From a licensing perspective, it’s tough to ignore a 100 million unit install base on Wii, and a 150 million unit install base on the DS, but from a Nintendo first-party perspective? We have to focus on driving the install base of the new platforms, because if we don’t do it, no one else will.

Bullshit!

Nintendo ALWAYS ignores a console after 3 years because according to them, consoles run in cycles, and after 3 years, they shift ALL their attention on the next console while the old gets shafted. 2010 and onward is proof of this. They might release a few games here and there to appease customers, but it’s always low tier shit and maybe a zelda title. Is that NOT what happened on Wii? I can’t even recall most games on DS outside of Pokemon that was worth a damn later on after they went 3DS crazy.

Speaking of driving interest, that also includes not making people WAIT 2 years after a console release just to put out the games that people want. The reason the playstation brand continues to be popular is because they have shit people want right off the bat. Because even if Sony doesn’t, others will. But hey, everyone in the industry hates your fucking guts so I guess I can’t blame you for making that statement. But really, why didn’t people have a Smash Bros. game at launch like with the gamecube? There was nothing of worth on the Pii U at launch. You can’t drive an install base with puppet ass link!

Where do you think you see Nintendo or the industry in ten years?

I mean, the wonderful thing about Nintendo is that we’re always thinking about what’s going to make people happy? What’s going to be a great experience? And then we create the content and hardware to bring it to life. So, what are we going to be doing ten years from now? I don’t know what the hardware is going to look like, but I can guarantee you that the software is going to make you smile.

Bull FUCKING shit!

Lately, the exact has been happening. The Pii U controller is ILLOGICAL. The shit you do in Skyward Sword is IRRATIONAL. The objectives you perform in 3D Mario is BORING!

Outside of 2D games, Kirby, and Pokemon, Nintendo has been focused primarily on showing off their hocus pocus innovashuns rather than the entertainment of their fans. Who the fuck asked for Fi!? The instructional DvD? The goddamn cat suits!?

No really, 3D World was the biggest middle finger to the fans of 2D Mario. The asshole move of putting the features people wanted in 2D MARIO, they withhold… for 3D Mario! No one likes 3D Mario except for American nerds with bad taste. Who wants girly villains in Zelda games anymore!? Who wanted Nintendo Land!? People WANT the tech demo of Pii U Zelda, but you assholes want to do something more “surprising” than that.

If you thought about what was fun for the consumers, you’d make more 2D Mario (I swear, if it wasn’t for investors, we would never get an NSMB2), more GOOD Starfox, a REAL Strategy game and not that Fire Emblem shit, and controllers that make sense again. You show us your asshole and tell us to lick it anyway because our desires doesn’t fit your little zone of comfort.

Going off of that, how much do what fans want or say influence your decisions? [Operation Moonfall and Operation Rainfall are cited as examples here.]

I have to tell you—it doesn’t affect what we do. We certainly look at it, and we’re certainly aware of it, but it doesn’t necessarily affect what we do. I’ll give you an example. I mentioned earlier that our head of product development had a bet on X versus Y—we also had a bet around localizing Xenoblade.

I wanted to bring Xenoblade here. The deal was, how much of a localization effort is it? How many units are we going to sell, are we going to make money? We were literally having this debate while Operation Rainfall was happening, and we were aware that there was interest for the game, but we had to make sure that it was a strong financial proposition.

I’m paid to make sure that we’re driving the business forward—so we’re aware of what’s happening, but in the end we’ve got to do what’s best for the company. The thing we know [about petitions] is that 100,000 signatures doesn’t mean 100,000 sales.

…..Semi bullshit.

I’ve already said Nintendo doesn’t really give a fuck what fans want, and Reggie basically admits this in the bolded. On the other hand, sales means fans, and Nintendo pays attention to sales. So when Xenoblade sells out at Gamestop, there was literally a reprint.

So those signatures did mean money. Just because this isn’t “always” the case doesn’t remove the fact that Xenoblade sold well enough to justify a reprint.

That being the case, if you didn’t care about what your fans wanted, why are you still in business? Why is there a 2DS at a cheaper price? Why are we just now getting NSMB bundles for Pii U and not when the damn console was first released?

Reggie just blatantly admitted that Nintendo doesn’t give a fuck about what the fans say or think. Which is ironic because they care about sales, which come from the fans since the fans are the only ones buying Nintendo games now (sans Pokemon. Everyone buys Pokemon).

I also have to beg the question of why Reggie talks like a true asshole? He keeps on using hypothetical statements like “if you were to say this and that, I would’ve responded differentlyJUST ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION YOU CHEAP MTV REJECT!

They’re free to do so.

Don’t listen to Sillyconera’s suggestions. Streets of Rage, Vectorman, Golden Axe, mother fucking VIRTUAL-ON, and goddammit if someone doesn’t bring back E-SWAT or Gunstar Heroes.

MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!!

GRAND UPPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

 

ATOMIC…. FUCKING……DROP!