|
|
Post by retr0gamer on Nov 9, 2010 16:12:59 GMT -5
Actually speaking of Castlevania it annoys me when people say that Kojima and his team were responsible for the latest game when they were really only in an advisorary role for Mercurystream who did the vast majority of the work and the Kojima productions label was only slapped on the box as a sort of 'presented by Quentin Tarantino' way.
|
|
|
|
Post by aganar on Nov 9, 2010 19:22:56 GMT -5
That sort of makes sense, seeing how Kojima claims that he came up with the gameplay concept of the Boktai series, even though he was only the producer of the games. I believe he was going to do a similar with Snake Eater (he wrote the basic outline of the game with the intend of handing the development to someone else), but was pressured to direct that as well. I'm more curious to know how much creative input Yoshio Sakamoto had compared to Gumpei Yokoi in the original Metroid games. The only game in the series Sakmoto wasn't involved with was Metroid II. Gunpei wasn't really that involved with Super Metroid; IIRC Sakimoto said in a retrospective interview (either in EGM or Retro Gamer, I forget) that Yokoi's input was all in the paper stages. After that he just popped in to look at the progress and give a nod. |
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Apr 26, 2011 23:48:54 GMT -5
Sorry to bump this thread, but... Also, a lot of people neglect to mention the fact that the other reason why Lost Levels did not get overseas release was also the fact that it was a less-fun rehash of the original. Well, I don't mean to sound brutal or anything (if I do, I apologize), but I personally enjoyed the challenge that Lost Levels had to offer, despite being a rehash of the original. Of course, that's not to say I don't like the US SMB2 any less. And speaking of Mario, I thought I remember reading that there was a misconception that Miyamoto was inspired by Alice in Wonderland when he made the first SMB1, because Mario eating mushrooms to grow bigger was similar to Alice doing the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Apr 27, 2011 0:01:20 GMT -5
No, I don't consider you brutal at all. And I don't consider Lost Levels to be a bad game either. I should have been more specific with that post, since that was Nintendo's official rationale for localizing Super Mario 2 (Howard Lincoln apparently hated the game). I actually never played the Disk System version beyond the first few stages and I only finished the All-Stars version a long time ago. I don't even remember the game that much to be honest, other than the difficulty was not as hard as advertised (then again, the SNES version had stage-specific saves). Why would you bump six months-old thread anyway?  |
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Apr 27, 2011 0:04:46 GMT -5
I just had something to say about the different SMB2s, and wanted to bring up another gaming misconception I thought I remember hearing.
Regardless of what people think of Lost Levels, it did introduce elements that have since become trademarks of the mario series such as Mario and Luigi having different strengths and weaknesses, even though they were still palette swaps of each other.
|
|
|
|
Post by LouieBee on Apr 27, 2011 14:05:14 GMT -5
That the Wii's library has nothing good. Not only is this wrong but rather unfair considering alot of these so call "not good" games involve many original, but sadly under the radar, releases.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2011 14:21:20 GMT -5
That the Wii's library has nothing good. Not only is this wrong but rather unfair considering alot of these so call "not good" games involve many original, but sadly under the radar, releases. I was just thinking about this in the shower today (yeah, I think about weird stuff at odd times). Arkham Asylum would have sold just fine on the Wii, providing the hardware was comparable to the competition (and that waggle didn't ruin the experience). Nintendo is so laser-focused on being a baby's toy, they've completely lost sight of anything else. |
|
|
|
Post by susanismyalias on Apr 27, 2011 15:58:43 GMT -5
I'd say they're focused on sales more than being a baby's toy |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2011 16:10:23 GMT -5
I'd say they're focused on sales more than being a baby's toy Sales are down 66% this year. Can't say that plan's working out for them anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by muteKi on Apr 27, 2011 18:02:40 GMT -5
Well, part of that is just about everyone who wanted to get one probably already has.
Now, if only they were working on a new console, one to appeal not only to their current user base but the people who were possibly put-off against buying a Wii, then maybe they'll see a spike in sales...
|
|
|
|
Post by derboo on Apr 27, 2011 18:14:11 GMT -5
Now, if only they were working on a new console, one to appeal not only to their current user base but the people who were possibly put-off against buying a Wii, then maybe they'll see a spike in sales... Why would their current user base want a new console? |
|
|
|
Post by muteKi on Apr 27, 2011 18:36:13 GMT -5
Fair enough |
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Apr 27, 2011 22:18:20 GMT -5
Now, if only they were working on a new console, one to appeal not only to their current user base but the people who were possibly put-off against buying a Wii, then maybe they'll see a spike in sales... Why would their current user base want a new console? If people continue to buy new i-things, I can see people (at least a significant amount) wanting new systems as well. That the Wii's library has nothing good. Not only is this wrong but rather unfair considering alot of these so call "not good" games involve many original, but sadly under the radar, releases. I was just thinking about this in the shower today (yeah, I think about weird stuff at odd times). Arkham Asylum would have sold just fine on the Wii, providing the hardware was comparable to the competition (and that waggle didn't ruin the experience). Nintendo is so laser-focused on being a baby's toy, they've completely lost sight of anything else. I wouldn't say that that's what Nintendo's focus is. If that were the case, then Nintendo wouldn't have released at least 75% of the games they currently have for the Wii. I just wish they were more consistent, and (especially their North American branch) more willing to take a chance on niche titles. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2011 6:45:32 GMT -5
I wouldn't say that that's what Nintendo's focus is. If that were the case, then Nintendo wouldn't have released at least 75% of the games they currently have for the Wii. I just wish they were more consistent, and (especially their North American branch) more willing to take a chance on niche titles. Hmm. Not quite sure what you mean by that. Nintendo has built up its reputation over the past 30 years as the "family" company. The N64, Gamecube and Wii, in particular, have all been seen as the "little brother" machine in comparison to their more "grown up" competitors. Nintendo needs to stop dicking around in the shallow end of the pool and make a machine that's at least as strong as the competition, while also ditching the family-centric approach. True, the Wii worked out for them for a while, but they're getting their asses handed to them, now that the fad has worn off. Of course, I know they'll never change how they operate, but a man can dream. |
|
|
|
Post by Snarboo on Apr 28, 2011 16:26:16 GMT -5
Nintendo needs to stop dicking around in the shallow end of the pool and make a machine that's at least as strong as the competition, while also ditching the family-centric approach. Honestly, the Gamecube seemed like Nintendo was attempting exactly this. It was just as powerful as the other two systems out at the time, and it had some of the most mature and violent games of any console that generation (see: Killer7, RE4). For whatever reason, it just failed to pick up steam with developers or gamers. The whole failure of the GC also lead directly to the Wii, and really, can you blame Nintendo for not wanting to compete this gen? |
|
