Revolution or Evolution?

Quote:

I know, Kart was good, but I can't say the same over Dr. Mario, Tennis, or Soccer. Where's the originality in that?

Why does every single game that Nintendo creates have to be vastly original? Can't some of them be just, y'know, fun?

I see more innovation coming from Nintendo than from any other developer. Even with the spin-off Mario games. They're not brimming with innovative new gameplay mechanics, but they're not normal sports games. You can play normal tennis, or Mario Tennis. There's a distinction between the two, because you have the option of more diverse gameplay in the latter.

As for other developers, let's think of their franchises. And not just the one convenient one they have where there are only a few off-shoots.

Konami makes Metal Gear. How many iterations of Dance Dance Revolution are there? How many more do you think there'll be before they stop? Hell, they made a Mario DDR. Sell outs, right?
I've also been informed that they make the Yu-Gi-Oh games. It doesn't get much worse than that.

Namco. Pac-man. What should have been one game now includes Mrs. Pac-man, which is essentially the same, and I believe Pac-man Jr. as well. Then there's the 3D versions, which are absolute crap, and it's beyond me why Namco doesn't get a different mascot. Pac-man is also in the Mario Kart arcade game.
The only decent (and original) Pac-man game made since the original is the Gamecube connectivity game, made by Miyamoto.

Square-Enix. Final Fantasy. We've got all twelve games, plus Final Fantasy X-2. They've also released a movie (wait, make that two, though one wasn't even based on the series), they're making so many FF7 (the most popular one) spin-offs it's ridiculous. And not even good ones. Shit like a Vincent Valentine game and cell phone games and God knows what else.
They also made Kingdom Hearts, which aside from being a shitty game is obviously a sell out by including Disney.

Capcom. How many damn Megaman games are there? How many dozens of Resident Evil remakes? Christ, they're hardly even making new games anymore.

I won't do Sega or EA or Ubisoft or Atari or any of those, too easy.

I could go on, but I think this is sufficiently long already.
I'll just finish up by citing a few Nintendo franchises that don't have spin-offs (aside from inclusion in SSBM, which is a Nintendo character game):

Animal Crossing
Pikmin
Fire Emblem
Earthbound
Zelda (Four Swords is the only one I can think of)
Advance Wars
Metroid (only one, Metroid Pinball)
Starfox (the shitty games made by Rare and Namco aren't spin-offs, they're just shitty)
1080
Wave Race
Punch Out
Golden Sun
F-Zero
Excitebike
Pilotwings
Star Tropics

Those are all franchise games. I could name single games that they didn't feel the need to expand upon, but the list would probably double.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

How does Mario tennis have "more diverse gameplay"? You have a bunch of characters whacking a ball around. It's the same thing.

You've got the power-up dynamic, and in soccer there seem to be a variety of items or attacks not in normal soccer games. I believe these are optional. I don't know, because I don't buy most Mario spin-offs (only Mario Kart).
My point is, the Mario sports titles are strong, fun games that add a little, tiny extra to the mix. If you want it.

Ms. Pacman was essentially the same game. It didn't add enough to warrant a new game. They should have called it Pacman 2.
Also, I didn't say that Nintendo enhanced Pacman. I'm saying they made the only good version in about twenty years.

Quote:

...oh yeah, I stopped reading there.

Oh yeah, that's a valid point you're making. Brilliant argument.
I like how you blatantly ignored all the best examples, which you couldn't argue with. Nice technique you've got there.

Most amazing jew boots

It's been a very long time since I've played Ms. Pacman, I could be wrong about it.
Doesn't explain the shit 3D games.

Quote:

Mario Tennis, Mario Soccer, Mario DDR etc etc are not "fun."

Oh yeah, opinions are fact. Forgot, sorry.

Quote:

http://img489.imageshack.us/img489/6...tendogs6pe.jpg

One game to account for every game they make.
Not to mention the most advanced, comprehensive, and interactive pet simulator ever made, according to popular opinion. And I mean very popular, several million people opinion.

Quote:

Square is known for quality. Alot of their games are worthwhile, bar a few.

Yeah. Same goes for Nintendo.
Also, I've played Kingdom Hearts. People say it's good but the gameplay sucks. Square is terrible at actual gameplay.

Quote:

Snowboarding and water racing which came out of Nintendo must be original somehow I guess?

If you'd paid attention, I wasn't naming games that were original, I was naming games that don't have spin-offs.

I don't even know what you're arguing about anymore. I think you're just trying to argue against whatever I say, regardless of what it is, meaning that your argument is so flawed and inconsistent that it doesn't make sense.

Now an honest question:
Do you have the capacity for fun? I mean, can you literally have fun?
Because I'm sort of doubting it. And I'd pity you for that, but I'm having trouble there, too.
I mean, I don't go brew trouble in the Sony forum for no reason.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Quote:

You are wrong about it. How can you honestly say that Nintendo are doing a better job of handling Pacman over Namco? THEY INVENTED IT.

You manage to miscontrue EVERYTHING I say. I'm fairly impressed.
Thomas Edison invented the motion picture. I'd say Kubrick and Godard and Tarantino have used it more effectively.
Anyway, I'm not saying that the connectivity game is better than Pacman, or even Ms. Pacman (which you must be a HUGE fan of, defending it so staunchly). But it is better than the game it came with, the 3D Pacman game, made by Namco, which was shit. It's the best one in recent years.

Quote:

Sure, you have puppies, they never die, and you can virtually touch them, but it's nothing more than a gimmick that appeals to both sexes. It also isn't a game.

You lose for resorting to calling it a gimmick. Most over-used fanboyism of the year.
Anyway, it's a really brilliantly designed game (or nongame, if your PURE GAMER SOUL won't permit me to call it a game), and lots of people like it. A lot more than they like the PSP, apparently. Gimmick for the win.

Quote:

I thought you said it wasn't about gameplay, but about originality and then you raffled off a bunch of original games without spinoffs? Right.

I don't even know what the fuck you're saying here. I never said anything "wasn't about gameplay", and I never mentioned originality. I think you're making shit up, unless you can come up with a quote from me that says just that.
Again, I didn't call those original games. I called them Nintendo franchises that had no (or just one) spin-offs.
To point out the sheer number of franchises that don't face the multi-genre treatment (which I'm not opposed to, but which I don't buy into).

Quote:

I have fun, and when I do it usually doesn't include Nintendo material.

All of this is just Nintendo whining. I don't even think you made a valid point.
And yes, SSBRevolution. It'll be awesome.

Quote:

No, but you seem to do a good job of it anyway.

What.
If you haven't noticed, you're the one that EVERYONE ELSE is arguing against. And don't pull some underdog is right bullshit either, because you're not the underdog and you're not right.

Quote:

Getting back to the point I was trying to make - Nintendogs wasn't an original idea like he said it was.

BWAgjaeifnaekflm.
I never said that. Ever. Please, for Christ's sake, stop making shit up.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Quote:

Hypocrite.

I might have said something hypocritical in the course of my argument.
Those two quotes, however, are not remotely hypocritical, even when you took them out of context. So I don't follow.

Quote:

Why are you evading the truth? You clearly said that you like Nintendo because their stuff is original. I presented Nintendogs to you, and now you're denying you ever said that. What, do I need to spell it out for you?

Yes, exactly, please. In my own words, quote it word for word what I said, and show me where I said it. Cuz I swear, I've looked through the thread and you must be seeing something I'm not.
I said Nintendo was innovative, you posted a picture of Nintendogs. I respond like so:

Quote:

One game to account for every game they make.
Not to mention the most advanced, comprehensive, and interactive pet simulator ever made, according to popular opinion. And I mean very popular, several million people opinion.

Not once in that response do I mention Nintendogs being original. Good, but not original. Tamigotchi wasn't original, because PETS EXIST.
You said this in response:

Quote:

One game says alot. I'm sure I could think of more examples, such as the Pikachu 64DD shit they concucted up like, years ago. That was reeeeal necessary.

You also mentioned Tamigotchi again, for some reason.

And then, this is the coup de grace, you say this:

Quote:

Getting back to the point I was trying to make - Nintendogs wasn't an original idea like he said it was.

Which I never said. Fuckin' check it if you like. I said Nintendo is innovative, and you posted a picture of Nintendogs and somehow assumed I meant that game. I never did.
Metroid, Zelda, Pikmin, Earthbound, all extremely original games.
I think Shadow of the Colossus is original. Fighting big enemies isn't original at all, but it's an innovative game in many ways. The same goes for a multitude of Nintendo games.

Anyway, I like how Nintendogs is the only consistent example you have for Nintendo's lack of originality.
Nintendogs is not original. But it expanded the borders of virtual pet games far beyond what they'd ever been before.

Also, in regards to this quote:

Quote:

I thought you said it wasn't about gameplay, but about originality and then you raffled off a bunch of original games without spinoffs? Right.

Don't misconstrue what I'm saying. Kingdom Hearts is original, I was interested in it. But when I saw it, the gameplay was shit. Utter shit.
I like Nintendo because they have original games and original GAMEPLAY. Gameplay is the most important thing to me in games. I don't know what is to you. Probably arguing about them.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Thanks, Cetra. I should've never got caught up in it.
I'll respond to it later, like I should have from the start. I'm about to head out now.

How ya doing, buddy?