posted January 23, 2014 02:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
Have you been sniffing paint fumes? Nintendo has strayed away from their fanbase and been catering to the casual gamer. Have you noticed all their ad campaigns about family gaming? The people who buy nintendos games don't give a sh*t about online content or repetitive first person shooters . Most of nintendos fans have been with them since the first Mario, donkey kong, and zelda games came out in the 80s. Now they are talking about putting multiplayer and online content in legend of zelda! You can guess how that's going to work out.... But a few months ago Nintendo made a direct sequel to Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past (a game that came out in 91) and guess what? It sold like hot cakes and won game of the year! Why? Because Nintendo actually stayed true to the series and the loyal fans responded.... Yea, I know a thing or two about Nintendo considering that I was a Nintendo fanboy until they started all their crap during the wii generation.. Catering to the casual gamer worked then but doesn't now because casuals are shallow and go after the latest fad. They were all over the wii because of the motion plus but now they have moved to phone games. Nintendo lost a lot of support because of that and they are desperately trying to win back their fans. They will have to keep coming out with great games like Link between Worlds if they want to stay afloat.

---

Your concept of marketing would have sent them under faster than you can say "WTH?!" Don't get into business .

One game with a loyal fanbase isn't going to save a sinking ship. That is exactly with Edios did with Tomb Raider and the Lara Croft franchise; Only they did NOTHING to improve upon Lara's character but rather tried to focus on her as a sex symbol; And that cost Edios big time! It was only when they were aquired afterwards by Square Enix and made the new TR game did they gained a foothold in the market. But since you are so fond of talking about Zelda, A Link between Worlds won GAMESPOT'S Game of the year. The official VGA winner of 2013 happens to the ever so free world interactive game Grand Theft Auto V; And I was quite sad to hear that given the fact that I detest that franchise with a passion. However I can see WHY it won Game of the Year since it was a total open world exploration game with plenty of options.

Nintendo's branch of family interactive based games and multiplayer is where their strength was from the begining with games like Mario Kart, Golden Eye, Super Smash Bros. etc. They just dropped the ball for Zelda loving buffons and ignored this market completely. Sony and Microsoft however jumped at the chance and now rule the market with not only sales but also quality and content of the games. Nintendo HAD a chance to steal the market and solidify their presence with the introduction of Wii and its interactibility. Wii sold on to demographics that Nintendo or the others couldn't even imagine (with retirement homes using Wii) and that saved Nintendo big time (for a short while.)

However, once again, Nintendo failed to capitalize on that market and innovate their console. Microsoft however wasted no time and jumped in the market with the introduction of Kinect. And guess what? Now they are kicking Nintendo's butt all over again.

The golden age of Nintendo was during the years when it focused its energy on innovation and interactibility and produced multiplayer titles which sold wayyyy better than anything Sony and Sega could come up with at the time. However, they dropped the ball and placed themselves in a rut by catering to friggin "fan boys."

posted January 23, 2014 02:59 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Xodian:
Your concept of marketing would have sent them under faster than you can say "WTH?!" Don't get into business .

One gaming franchise with a loyal fanbase isn't going to save a sinking ship. That is exactly with Edios did with Tomb Raider and the Lara Croft franchise; Only they did NOTHING to improve upon Lara's character but rather tried to focus on her as a sex symbol; And that cost Edios big time! It was only when they were aquired afterwards by Square Enix and made the new TR game did they gained a foothold in the market. But since you are so fond of talking about Zelda, A Link between Worlds won GAMESPOT'S Game of the year. The official VGA winner of 2013 happens to the ever so free world interactive game Grand Theft Auto V; And I was quite sad to hear that given the fact that I detest that franchise with a passion. However I can see WHY it won Game of the Year since it was a total open world exploration game with plenty of options.

Nintendo's branch of family interactive based games and multiplayer is where their strength was from the begining with games like Mario Kart, Golden Eye, Super Smash Bros. etc. They just dropped the ball for Zelda loving buffons and ignored this market completely. Sony and Microsoft however jumped at the chance and now rule the market with not only sales but also quality and content of the games. Nintendo HAD a chance to steal the market and solidify their presence with the introduction of Wii and its interactibility. Wii sold on to demographics that Nintendo or the others couldn't even imagine (with retirement homes using Wii) and that saved Nintendo big time (for a short while.)

However, once again, Nintendo failed to capitalize on that market and innovate their console. Microsoft however wasted no time and jumped in the market with the introduction of Kinect. And guess what? Now they are kicking Nintendo's butt all over again.

The golden age of Nintendo was during the years when it focused its energy on innovation and interactibility and produced multiplayer titles which sold wayyyy better than anything Sony and Sega could come up with at the time. However, they dropped the ball and placed themselves in a rut by catering to friggin "fan boys."

Fan boys destory the industry; Sticking on their deluded fantasies because they care about their beloved gaming characters so much! Bo friggin ho! Listening to them is poisonous to development.

---

posted January 23, 2014 03:17 AM            

quote:

---

You don't know what you are talking about.... Nintendo's charm has always been that they stay true to their fans and stick with their bread and butter franchises... You get to see the familiar characters you love like Mario, Link, Samus, and Donkey Kong but they improve the gameplay and add new elements to the games. That's what worked for Nintendo... The casual gamers loved the wii because of the new motion controls but nintendo's loyal fanbase hated them ..... That's where nintendos trouble started... Of course the wii was wildly successful because they catered to the casual gamer, but they alienated the loyal Nintendo fans.. Now the casual gamers have moved onto other things and the Wii U is tanking.......

---

No. No upon no. Throw away your fanboy goggles for a second and look at Nintendo through a business prespective.

Nintendo's oldschool charm as you descibed it only exists today BECAUSE the franchise in tanking. Nintendo's Golden years of sales and prosperity were a direct result of innovation and thinking faaarrr ahead of their competition. They capitalized on the success of their past franchise brand names and built more and more interactive games ontop of that. Mario led to Mario Kart. Metroid let to first person shooter Metroid Prime, Goldeneye was the first game to offer a full on multiplayer experience. Wii offered full on interactibility with the gaming environment and so on. Had Microsoft and Sony did the same thing as Nintendo did, they would have suffered the same fate. But those two poured a SIGNIFICANT amount of capital into changing their specs, offering more online interactibility and innovating their games.

Wii U is hardly a breakthrough. The graphics and the specs. of the console are the same! Compare that to Xbox One and its interactibility with its games. Hell you can practically reach out and TOUCH the flora and fauna in Assassin's Creed 4. Throwing in a random gimick isn't going to fix the REAL issue with Nintendo. Neither will throwing an online option for its old dying franchises THIS late in the competitive game.

posted January 23, 2014 03:59 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Xodian:
No. No upon no. Throw away your fanboy goggles for a second and look at Nintendo through a business prespective.

Nintendo's oldschool charm as you descibed it only exists today BECAUSE the franchise in tanking. Nintendo's Golden years of sales and prosperity were a direct result of innovation and thinking faaarrr ahead of their competition. They capitalized on the success of their past franchise brand names and built more and more interactive games ontop of that. Mario led to Mario Kart. Metroid let to first person shooter Metroid Prime, Goldeneye was the first game to offer a full on multiplayer experience. Wii offered full on interactibility with the gaming environment and so on. Had Microsoft and Sony did the same thing as Nintendo did, they would have suffered the same fate. But those two poured a SIGNIFICANT amount of capital into changing their specs, offering more online interactibility and innovating their games.

Wii U is hardly a breakthrough. The graphics and the specs. of the console are the same! Compare that to Xbox One and its interactibility with its games. Hell you can practically reach out and TOUCH the flora and fauna in Assassin's Creed 4. Throwing in a random gimick isn't going to fix the REAL issue with Nintendo. Neither will throwing an online option for its old dying franchises THIS late in the competitive game.

They need a COMPLETE overhaul!

---

posted January 23, 2014 04:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
I will say one more time that you don't know what you are talking about... Nintendo has never been about the graphics, they have been about quality gameplay over all those bells and whistles. They have strayed away from that..... The game lineup for wii u is sh*t right now... They used to make less games but and have fewer titles but almost all of them were hits when they did come out.. Now they are mostly coming out with tons of crap... In the absence of good games people are going to choose Better graphics over the wii u. Again, need I remind you that an old school style zelda game won game of the year over all the games with amazing graphics? Just proof that there is a very large segment of the gaming community that values gameplay over graphics.

---

Now I know what Odette feels when arguing with you.

YES quality of interactibility and gaming IS Nintendo's Modus Operendai and that has been the company's statement for quite a while now. HOWEVER, and I can't stress this enough, OTHERS HAVE CAUGHT UP! Zelda's classic story or gameplay is pretty much crap compared to an innovative game series like Assassin's Creed for instance; Or Fable for that matter. The only reason Nintendo is hanging in the market is BECAUSE of the breathing room they got from Wii.

You know what? Rather than wasting energy typing it all out again, read this:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/07/technology/nintendo-problem/index.html

This is written by OFFICIAL Business and Gaming Industry experts. You continuing argument of Nintendo's prowess due to its "classic" games is one of the reasons highlighted as the issue it. Much like the squawking of Nintendo Fanboys, the Nintendo franchise IS tone-deaf to what the modern gamer wants from their consoles.

As for Zelda winning game of the year; God damn it, I am going to say this again; IT WON GAMESPOT'S 2013 GAME OF THE YEAR. IT DIDN'T WIN THE OFFICIAL 2013 VIDEO GAME AWARD'S TITLE OF GAME OF YEAR. GTA 5 WON THAT!

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story /339356/scitech/geeksandgaming/the-last-of-us-gta-v-conquer-spike-tv-s-video-game-awards-show-vgx-2013

It won HANDHELD game of the year and given its competition, I can see why since it didn't have much to compete with in that genre. Hardly an achievement.

posted January 23, 2014 05:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Xodian:
Now I know what Odette feels when arguing with you.

YES quality of interactibility and gaming IS Nintendo's Modus Operendai and that has been the company's statement for quite a while now. HOWEVER, and I can't stress this enough, OTHERS HAVE CAUGHT UP! Zelda's classic story or gameplay is pretty much crap compared to an innovative game series like Assassin's Creed for instance; Or Fable for that matter. The only reason Nintendo is hanging in the market is BECAUSE of the breathing room they got from Wii.

You know what? Rather than wasting energy typing it all out again, read this:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/07/technology/nintendo-problem/index.html

This is written by OFFICIAL Business and Gaming Industry experts. You continuing argument of Nintendo's prowess due to its "classic" games is one of the reasons highlighted as the issue it. Much like the squawking of Nintendo Fanboys, the Nintendo franchise IS tone-deaf to what the modern gamer wants from their consoles.

As for Zelda winning game of the year; God damn it, I am going to say this again; [b]IT WON GAMESPOT'S 2013 GAME OF THE YEAR. IT DIDN'T WIN THE OFFICIAL 2013 VIDEO GAME AWARD'S TITLE OF GAME OF YEAR. GTA 5 WON THAT!

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story /339356/scitech/geeksandgaming/the-last-of-us-gta-v-conquer-spike-tv-s-video-game-awards-show-vgx-2013

It won HANDHELD game of the year and given its competition, I can see why since it didn't have much to compete with in that genre. Hardly an achievement.

Here, now I presented FACTS to you.[/B]

---

posted January 23, 2014 09:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:

I'm getting extremely tired of your little man syndrome attitude. You are just an arrogant little prick that thinks you know everything but I'm here to tell you that you don't. I speak as a longtime fan of Nintendo and I have spoken to tons of others online and real life who feel the exact same way. What you don't seem to understand is Sony and Microsoft are much bigger companies than Nintendo. They can afford to bring out these systems that cost $500+++ dollars . Another fact is they actually lose money on their systems the first couple of years because they are so expensive to make. Nintendos strategy has always been to make systems that are affordable so people will buy them so they can make a profit. They were also committed to making quality games that appealed to their fans to keep them coming back. This strategy worked very well for Nintendo until they started pandering to the casual gamers with the wii. They started dumbing down their games big time and lost a lot of their fanbase. Now they are still doing the same thing but the casual gamers have moved on and nobody is buying the Wii U. My point with Zelda : Link Between Worlds is that it actually sold!!!! Tons of sales!!! And got a bunch of awards... Which flies in the face of your argument that nobody cares about nintendos classic franchises. If Nintendo keeps coming out with great games like it they will be in better shape in no time. They just need to start coming out with better games on the Wii U! There aren't really any games worth playing on there now .[/B]

---

LOL! I am going to ignore the "little man syndrome" quip. I mean, this is coming from a guy whose usual response to a well placed argument is "well I experienced it this way so there!" *pout.*

Reminds me of this little meme:

But moving on; I am going to assume that you have read nothing from that article I posted or any other FACTUAL based sources that I have put up. Because once again, your broken record argument is up. Oh yeah! Just because a bunch of Nintendorks think this is so then it must be so! Yeah, great logical thinking there sherlock!

[SARCASM]I mean, what do I know? I mean my company actually WORKED with Microsoft with mass production and distribution of Xbox consoles in Canada:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/microsoft-chooses-celestica-for-xbox-360-1.545398 [/SARCASM]

But putting that aside, the MARKET says that you fan boys are wrong and your bloody little Zelda game (which only sold well because it had no significant competition against it in the HAND HELD Market!) does not prove otherwise. Yes Microsoft lost money in the sort run for every Xbox they sold but IT WAS PART OF THEIR STRATEGY! Their aim (the one which Nintendo missed completely) was to gain a majority share of the gaming market from EVERY GIVEN DEMOGRAPHIC! And they succeeded in doing that! Wii RESCUED Nintendo. Had they not chosen to introduce Wii, and continue on making those "classic" sh***y games with no innovation added on, Nintendo would have gone bankrupt eons ago. As one person puts it brilliantly in the article I posted:

quote:

---

Regardless of that if Nintendo exclusively for the "hardcore" it's going to lose everything that it gained last generation. Wii could possible be the most successful console Nintendo launched in its lifetime.

---

Yeah, ironic isn't it? The one console that you are labeling a gimmick sold more units than any other console to date that Nintendo made.

But you know what? Let the Nintendorks jerk each other out while putting on their Zelda hats and playing make belief sword fight games in their bedrooms.

posted January 23, 2014 09:45 AM            

Sorry for messing up your thread dude. I will make it up to you!

posted January 23, 2014 05:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Xodian:
Yeah, ironic isn't it? The one console that you are labeling a gimmick sold more units than any other console to date that Nintendo made.

But you know what? Let the Nintendorks jerk each other out while putting on their Zelda hats and playing make belief sword fight games in their bedrooms.

The world has moved on (thankfully.)

---

posted January 23, 2014 06:22 PM            

Did anyone mention Kill Bill?
I may have missed it.
http://hdwallpapers4you.com/data/media/1/kill_bill_wallpaper_7-normal.jpg

posted January 23, 2014 07:32 PM            

Sometimes we'd (females) would make guys uncomfortable, like when some guys included us in seeing Heavy Metal with them thinking we'd like it for the strong female character we couldn't help but kid them over it ("oh, look, another woman taking her clothes off"). Don't get me wrong, I actually did kinda like it (and can admire it for being groundbreaking for its time) but it takes more than wielding a sword in a bikini to make it interesting...and part of the fun was laughing AT it (but it did seem the writers were winking at the audience at times so sometimes it was a blurry line of "laughing at" and "with").

One thing I wonder, do guys who love Yoko Littner have experience with firearms? For those who don't know, here, I believe she's unquestionably the most popular character (or at least the one most want to look at ) of the series she's in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8__dusOqRw

Because when I saw her I was cringing thinking of brass burn...I once had trouble washing dishes when I got brass burn on my hand and the thought of getting brass burn on my boobs doesn't bear thinking about. And I'm nowhere a baby about it as this guy was:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxQXBueF4Bc

Most guys I know well know about brass burn, but then most aren't fans of anime either. I was wondering if the fans who are and love characters like that also know of brass burn because if they do then that lends credence to my guess that they love it for being the best of "boobs and violence in one package" but if they don't then maybe they actually think that's actually inspiring rather than absurd. Obviously, brass burns aren't the only thing very unrealistic about firing a gun like that, not to mention her excuse of fighting nearly naked is ridiculous (not sure if it's intended as comedy and/or as fan service for its target, that is male, audience).

posted January 23, 2014 08:10 PM            

I think they should give Wonder Woman her own movie.Although I will admit I don't hate her but I don't feel drawn to her either.She just
comes off as this bland 1 dimensional goody two shoes.I do like watching her kick ass.Although if she is comes across a super villain/villainess that appeals to me more I am ok with watching her ass get kicked or at least kicked a little since she usually always wins and comes off smelling of roses.

A movie with Ivy and Harley actually sounds like good fun.I love the both of them.I would be more inclined to give Ivy her own movie.
I would hope they would make her more like she would be in the comics.Even though I laughed at the cheesy humour in Batman and Robin the portrayal of Ivy in that movie sucked.
I really feel like I can identify with Ivy for various reasons.Even though she still has human emotions and sometimes she has let them
shine through a lot of the time she seems to be more plant than human.I actually have been diagnosed with Aspergers syndrome and can sort of relate to the way she separated herself from the rest of humanity.I don't really know much about plants but i have always loved animals and loved learning about them ever since I was a child.I will admit that sometimes I feel like I like animals better than I human beings.I hate animal cruelty and I can understand why Ivy feels so strongly about punishing people who destroy her plants. Plus I feel like I can relate to her violent shifts in moods and her unfortunate love life.She has done some bad things but I don't really view her as evil.I think she just got caught up in the middle of the universe and decided to bite back.

Its a pity the Catwoman movie wasn't about Selina Kyle.Although I did enjoy Patience Philips squaring off against Laurel Hedare and watching that smug B**ch Laurel plumit to her death it was long overdue. Catwoman actually was the character that made me pay attention to Batman as a child.I loved watching her toy with him and slash at him with her claws lol.
I loved Michelle Pfieffer in Batman Returns and Eartha Kitt was amusing as Catwoman plus I actually like some of her music.

Elektra could have been better.I haven't seen Vampirella but I heard it sucked.Barb Wire was ok it occasionally made me laugh.Its a shame we didn't get to see that other trick she taught her Rottweiler lol.The Bloodrayne movie was horrible it was nothing like the games.I wanted to see Rayne slice through those evil Nazi's like in the 1st game.In the X men they wasted an opportunity.They could have done so much more with Dark Phoenix they should have given her more fire like in the cartoons and they should have had the X men and The Brotherhood of Mutants fighting for their lives trying to survive her wrath.

I think these heroines and Villainess seem to be quite cool.
Silver Banshee

Mystique

Selene

Circe

Red Sonja

Scarlet Witch

posted January 23, 2014 10:29 PM            

LOL once my post actually imploded someone else's thread and it was called Kerosene... It was so weird..

posted January 23, 2014 11:28 PM            

Can you please take down the image to Psylocke and just post a link to the image? It's breaking the margins of this thread for me making it hard to read.

posted January 23, 2014 11:48 PM            

Are X and AG REALLY arguing over the quality of video game genre's?

A commercial, entertainment interest, whose sole model is suck the one thing everyone has, 24 hrs a day, ie time in utterly useless pursuit of some "attaboy" for "finishing" while producing nothing at all of tangiable creational value to the world.

I've heard T levels are low in young men today, this is uhm, anecdotal evidence.

I do not blame the ladies at all.

Out of curiousity, would it be better to see stronger female heroines in film (tho I do think there are plenty of them) or would it be better for BF/Husbands to spend hours on video game play?

posted January 24, 2014 12:08 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:

On something of an observational note:

Are X and AG REALLY arguing over the quality of video game genre's?

A commercial, entertainment interest, whose sole model is suck the one thing everyone has, 24 hrs a day, ie time in utterly useless pursuit of some "attaboy" for "finishing" while producing nothing at all of tangiable creational value to the world.

I've heard T levels are low in young men today, this is uhm, anecdotal evidence.

I do not blame the ladies at all.

Out of curiousity, would it be better to see stronger female heroines in film (tho I do think there are plenty of them) or would it be better for BF/Husbands to spend hours on video game play?

Assuming hetero sexuality of course.

---

posted January 24, 2014 12:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Padre35:
[b]
On something of an observational note:

Are X and AG REALLY arguing over the quality of video game genre's?

A commercial, entertainment interest, whose sole model is suck the one thing everyone has, 24 hrs a day, ie time in utterly useless pursuit of some "attaboy" for "finishing" while producing nothing at all of tangiable creational value to the world.

I've heard T levels are low in young men today, this is uhm, anecdotal evidence.

I do not blame the ladies at all.

Out of curiousity, would it be better to see stronger female heroines in film (tho I do think there are plenty of them) or would it be better for BF/Husbands to spend hours on video game play?

Assuming hetero sexuality of course.

---

How funny, question was directed at the women participants in the thread, and yet you respond.

And as per the norm AG, I'm NOT advocating "cultured", in fact believe such wastes of time are very cultured, at least as current culture is arrayed.

Enjoy your low T, it's not by accident malakis.

posted January 24, 2014 12:37 AM            

If you're a hardcore gamer you should date someone who is into your hobbies.

My ex was really into games being exposed to free games was fun because I too much of a cheap ass to spend 60 bucks on something virtual. Yeah steam sales are everything..

posted January 24, 2014 01:34 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kerosene:
implying every youth plays video games 12 hours a day.
My attractive female friend and I play games on steam every weekend.

If you're a hardcore gamer you should date someone who is into your hobbies.

My ex was really into games being exposed to free games was fun because I too much of a cheap ass to spend 60 bucks on something virtual. Yeah steam sales are everything..

One summer all I did was game and I pretty much improved my hand eye coordination. I was just more reactive to moving objects lol.

---