I didn't really enjoy any of the games at E3. (Though I'm really looking forward to the 3DS.) However, I'd buy Skyward Sword if I had enough money.
Haha, yeah I know, I'm so clever right? In fact, I'm so clever that I don't even need sarcasm tags for this.TheDarkLucario said:Haha Claus, your funny, replacing my name with shrub. Ahaha I'm rofl. You funny![/sarcasm]
I'm sorry that your so fan-boy that you can't think clearly, Zelda has lost its touch.
You're looking at it wrong. The map is not a literal (fictional) map. The map of Hyrule comes from the writings and oral stories of the legends of heroes in Hyrule. Legends are vague - they don't give specific directional details. Like, when's the last time you heard a legend that said "And the volcano was located in the northeastern area of the country (relative to the centermost point), exactly 527 feet Northnorthwest from the place where the fish people lived, 224 paces southward from the country's northern border directly north of the volcano"?TFO said:Okay, this is bs right here. I don't mind a slight shift because yes, maps change a bit over time. But because they moved the ToT to castle town they should /keep/ it there. And they completely moved the woods from one part of the pap to another. Going from the East side to the South side of the hyrule map is not continuity. Your argument doesn't hold up very well Claus.
It acutally happened pretty much right after WW. But this point is moot, as WW Link and PH Link are the same Link, it's more than confirmed.TFO said:Technically Phantom Hourglass didn't follow that long after Wind Waker. It was less than 10 years to say the least.
It is most certainly not fun to me D: But I try not to judge people by what they like, so we can still be best buddies :>Gale said:You know, Claus, you'd think we'd be like best buddies if it weren't for all this debating. Oh well, it's fun.
That's not necessarily true. While some franchises like Pokemon (even though it's not made directly by Nintendo) are directed specifically at kids, others aren't. Instead, they're made to be accessable to everyone, and this includes kids. Miyamoto has said countless times how he wishes for all kinds of people to enjoy his games, not just kids, not just adults, not just teens, but everyone. He wants to make games that anyone of any age group can have a great time playing.Maybe teenagers and some adults buy Nintendo's games, but they are FOR KIDS.
So you're saying that it gets annoying after a while to hear people enjoying something you don't like, therefore you feel the need to explain to them that what they like really isn't good, implying that they don't know what a truly good, 'quality' game is and that you do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds pretty elitist.People can enjoy a Nintendo game, people can enjoy a Microsoft game, people can enjoy whatever they want. But it comes to a point where it just gets annoying, and where it's difficult to not debate with someone over the quality of a certain video game/company.
And that's what I admire about you. You're a pretty unique debater, when it comes to this kinda thing :>Gale said:I played NSMBW. I can't bash Nintendo without playing the majority of its games. I'm not a jerk like most people who do that.
Well, on the most basic level, yes. But that's akin to saying Pokemon is just about training monsters and making them attack other monsters in battle. While that's true on the most basic, fundamental level, it's much more complex than that, as we know.Gale said:Skyward Sword, so far, is just about swinging the sword and blocking, no matter how complicated you try to make it seem.
Acutally I'm of the opinion that PH is one of the least innovative games in the series. The art style was already done, as well as the ocean-boat-travel-over-a-series-of-islands concept. Really the only innovation was touch screen control, which were great (later to be perfected in Spirit Tracks).Gale said:Just because a game is innovative does not make it good.
...
Zelda has always been about innovation, I'm not denying that. Just because a game is innovative does not make it good (Phantom Hourglass).
You see Gale, I feel like you're saying this because you've had bad experiences with motion control in the past. All you've seen is gimmick this, gimmick that, and you don't want that for Zelda. Even though you said you don't think SS is full of gimmicks, the main reason you don't like motion control is because of gimmicks, and if this is true, not liking SS because of motion control boils down to your dislike of gimmicky motion control.Gale said:It's my personal opinion that motion controls are the wrong way to push this game into the future.
Well it's a big deal on whether you buy the game or not. But you can't say your personal taste for the concept is a big deal on whether the game itself is a good game or not.Gale said:Like I said, it's my opinion that yarn is stupid. It's also a pretty big deal that the entire concept of the game rubs me the wrong way.
Bulbasaur45S said:Im surpised COD:Black ops isnt on there =p
The Assassin said:If you didn't vote Halo: Reach, you fail at life. It will be game of the year, and it was decided to be the most anticipated game of the year, like on 10 different official sites, ex: IGN.com
Halo wins. GG.
The Assassin said:If you didn't vote Halo: Reach, you fail at life. It will be game of the year, and it was decided to be the most anticipated game of the year, like on 10 different official sites, ex: IGN.com
Halo wins. GG.
It is most certainly not fun to me D: But I try not to judge people by what they like, so we can still be best buddies :>
Anyhow, you state your opinion well about e-sports. I have nothing to say. And I still agree that motion control isn't the main future of gaming. However, I still believe that they have a future. I believe that later on, instead of trying to take the main spotlight, they'll take their place as, for some games, a user-choice alternate way to play, and for other games, improvements that will stay, improvements that will fully utilize motion to it's potential (coughSkywardSwordcough), and be done without gimmick. But this will just be for some games, of course. Motion'll probably never touch most games, and it probably never should. Zelda is really the only one that comes to mind that seems to be capable of utilizing motion to great potential, though I'm sure there are a few more games/franchises that could do it. Just not nearly all.
So! I think we're pretty happy happy with each other on that point now :>
That's not necessarily true. While some franchises like Pokemon (even though it's not made directly by Nintendo) are directed specifically at kids, others aren't. Instead, they're made to be accessable to everyone, and this includes kids. Miyamoto has said countless times how he wishes for all kinds of people to enjoy his games, not just kids, not just adults, not just teens, but everyone. He wants to make games that anyone of any age group can have a great time playing.
But you know how the saying goes - 'you can only run as fast as your slowest person.' Or something like that. In this case, the non-literal 'slowest person' would be the kids. The people who it would be best not to expose to excessive realistic violence, lewd material, etc. So in making games accesable to everyone, this must be taken into account. I mean it's not like they want to make a game with mature content and feel hindered because they can't; they just know that such content has no place in an accessable-to-everyone game.
Just to get it out of the way, I'm not in any way bashing games that include such material or companies that do. Whoever likes them, that's up to him/her, and more power to them.
So you're saying that it gets annoying after a while to hear people enjoying something you don't like, therefore you feel the need to explain to them that what they like really isn't good, implying that they don't know what a truly good, 'quality' game is and that you do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds pretty elitist.
I'm not trying to judge or criticize you or anything; like I said, I've been guilty of doing just what I described above before.
And that's what I admire about you. You're a pretty unique debater, when it comes to this kinda thing :>
And sorry about a bit rude about NSMBW and Galaxy 2 earlier. Sitting on the computer and debating all day is not good for the happiness, I'm afraid. Fortunately, dinner is, and I'm feeling better now :> I try not to let my initial irritation plague my posting, but it does sometimes :<
Well, on the most basic level, yes. But that's akin to saying Pokemon is just about training monsters and making them attack other monsters in battle. While that's true on the most basic, fundamental level, it's much more complex than that, as we know.
It truly is more complicated than that. It's not just mindless swinging; it's swinging with purpose, with thought and strategy in mind. The Deku Baba example is a good one, but it's basic. They've said that pretty much whole game will be like this, cleverly using motion plus in more creative ways than just hacking in order to defeat enemies, solve certain puzzles, etc. Granted, we've yet to see just how exactly it will be used for other things, but that's something that we'll just have to wait and see.
Acutally I'm of the opinion that PH is one of the least innovative games in the series. The art style was already done, as well as the ocean-boat-travel-over-a-series-of-islands concept. Really the only innovation was touch screen control, which were great (later to be perfected in Spirit Tracks).
And it's true that innovation doesn't mean a good game. It does strongly indicate that they actually care about the game, however. Otherwise they'd just keep rehashing pretty much the same thing with the same concept for the quick cash. We'll just have to see how this specific innovation turns out in the long run of the game.
Gah, every one of our arguments ends the same - 'we'll just have to wait and see' D:
You see Gale, I feel like you're saying this because you've had bad experiences with motion control in the past. All you've seen is gimmick this, gimmick that, and you don't want that for Zelda. Even though you said you don't think SS is full of gimmicks, the main reason you don't like motion control is because of gimmicks, and if this is true, not liking SS because of motion control boils down to your dislike of gimmicky motion control.
My entire point in this debate is that Skyward Sword is looking to be differernt. It's looking to introduce motion as a genuine, valid way to play a game, at least this game. Not every game, just this one. Zelda, one of the most tried-and-true franchises in gaming, has not had a fair chance to try motion control. So I say give Skyward Sword a go. See what it does for you. Go into it with an open mind, with no premature opinions based on what you've seen in the past of motion control. If it turns out to be not so great, then, if even Zelda can't do it right, who can? But you just might be surprised.
Well it's a big deal on whether you buy the game or not. But you can't say your personal taste for the concept is a big deal on whether the game itself is a good game or not.
Okay, we need to wrap this up pretty soon. Unless someone (like maybe c-m) wants to come in and take my place, because I'm having to leave after Monday for almost a week, and won't have access to the Internet (ohdearsweetheavensthankyou). This debate seems pretty close to being done anyway, I guess.
Spending all day online typing post after ridiculously long post is not good for me at all, but I guess that's my problem :<
Leafy101 said:Oh! I forgot about infamous 2.
The Fallen One said:For your list being mostly Wii and 3DS games, I'm surprised you forgot Conduit 2.
Just saying.
The Fallen One said:That's because CoD isn't really a good game. There are plenty of other shooters that are coming out soon (Conduit 2 and Goldeneye for Wii, Reach for 360) that blow it out of the water. Plus if you play it on the Wii that's just silly.
Delta said:COD is one of the best shooters around! Any shooter for the wii is an automatic upset. I was absolutely amazed when I heard that Goldeneye for the wii was coming out and then I remembered it was for the wii...my spirits just fell and I stopped caring about it. I have stopped playing my wii altogether now that I think about it. Halo reach is on the scales, until I see game play (and maybe I should before I post this) it's in the middle. The Halo series is mediocre at best.
*Hides from fan-boys
The Fallen One said:Obviously Claus you can't see anything but your point of view so I won't bother responding.
That's because CoD isn't really a good game. There are plenty of other shooters that are coming out soon (Conduit 2 and Goldeneye for Wii, Reach for 360) that blow it out of the water. Plus if you play it on the Wii that's just silly.
TheFudgehogGuy said:Really, TFO? What makes it so silly to play on the Wii? And apparently, CoD is a good game. As posted by many before me, it has a positive outlook towards it. And I'm nt even a CoD fan.