|
Pikmin has some gameplay characteristics in common with RTS games, but it's obviously pushing in a very different direction than, say, Starcraft, and it does so quite engagingly. Calling it "stunted" is goofy; it implies that since the game doesn't adopt all the conventions of the genre, it has no right to adopt any of them.
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:42 |
|
|
Louisgod posted:Hmm, you're right, 3D Land in no way attracted customers and sold over 8 million copies worldwide. Nope, not at all. But yeah, you can put words in my mouth about how I said there's a "vast array of Mario fans who despite 2D", you can say that, why not. Was 3D land the first or the second Mario platformer on the 3Ds? Is Mario 3D Land WiiU the first or the second on the WiiU?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Was 3D land the first or the second Mario platformer on the 3Ds? Is Mario 3D Land WiiU the first or the second on the WiiU? I don't know, you should have access to google like I do, unless you have an underlying question you're not asking or point you're trying to make.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Louisgod posted:I don't know, you should have access to google like I do, unless you have an underlying question you're not asking or point you're trying to make. Actually, its the question I already asked, but you ignored. So I'll try explaining it plainer. 3D Land was the first Mario game on the 3Ds. That was the point that the people who would buy a 3DS for a Mario game, did so. NSMBU was the first time a Mario game was on the WiiU. That was the point that the people who would have bought a WiiU for a Mario game, did. So now, the people who would buy a WiiU just for a.Mario game, have. So what is this group of people who hate 2D Mario games (hence why they didn't buy it for NSMBU) but love 2.5D Mario games (hence why they will buy a WiiU for the new game)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So now, the people who would buy a WiiU just for a.Mario game, have. So what is this group of people who hate 2D Mario games (hence why they didn't buy it for NSMBU) but love 2.5D Mario games (hence why they will buy a WiiU for the new game)? You're making some great leaps of logic by dumbing down the buying practices of consumers but I understand your general point: What would drive a consumer to buy a WiiU for a Mario game when they already have one in NSBMU and what makes 3D World a differentiator for potential buyers. You phrased it pretty poorly. I more or less already answered that question here: Louisgod posted:To answer your question, yes, I see it moving consoles BUT not in as high numbers as Nintendo would hope due to more than just a lack of games. There's a lack of a cohesive and focused advertisement campaign, the price is still too high, there's consumer confusion between the Wii and WiiU (like there was with the DS and 3DS), and a lack of consistent and compelling software. I think it'll do much better in Japan due to the XBone having little to no presence but it absolutely will not drive the install base as high as Nintendo hopes due to the other issues I mentioned. But to answer it directly, a new 3D or 2.5D Mario game won't exclusively drive sales when they have other issues to deal with. If anything, the 2D/2.5D Mario games sell better than their 3D brethren but I have no idea if people buy the console JUST for a 3D Mario game (I'm sure there are people that do).
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
I think all roads are still leading back to the marketing issue; 3D World absolutely has the potential to bolster the effects of a solid marketing campaign, but only if that campaign exists in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So now, the people who would buy a WiiU just for a.Mario game, have. So what is this group of people who hate 2D Mario games (hence why they didn't buy it for NSMBU) but love 2.5D Mario games (hence why they will buy a WiiU for the new game)? While a lot of people - maybe even the majority - do buy games solely on the logic of "is mario game yes/no", some people do take other things into account, like "what kind of game is this". There are people who started in the 8/16 bit generation and have already played 10-20 2D Mario games, and are kind of tired of them. Lots of them. I'm one of them. I don't know if many are gonna buy a WiiU just for that (I'm sure not) but you're being pretty reductive about what drives consumers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
As an occaisional gamer (My parent's bought me a wii a few years back for christmas, I play a few PC games), my take is that the Wii U's biggest problem is the Wii - Nintendo aren't trying to compete with Sony/Microsoft, but they're still in exactly the same market position as the Wii was. Rather than worrying about Battlefield FPS Whatever, the U has to compete with Pikmin 2, NSMB, Mario Galaxy 1/2, 2 Zelda games, and so on, all available at about half the price of the 'latest' versions. They're aiming for a market that doesn't care about cutting edge performance, but they're competing against an established console with a decade of first-party releases thats crowding them out of that market. The Wii's whole point was 'great games made on a lower spec machine', so trying to sell a higher-spec machine to that market is going... predictably. I'll happily suck down a new 2d mario game or a new zelda. The problem is that they've conditioned me to think that I don't need latest-gen hardware to enjoy it, so why would I buy a new console? e: Ah, I can't resist - maybe Nintendo should just switch to releasing Mario games for the OUYA, huh? petrol blue fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
That it might not sell as much as the 2D games is irrelevant, as its a different subset of fans. There is signifigant overlap between gamers who enjoy 2D Mario games and 3D Mario Games, but they are not all the same gamers - thus, a full 3D Mario game would actually offer a new experience that would give gamers who currently have no reason to get a WiiU, a reason.ImpAtom posted:Except you keep moving the goalposts at this point. Yes, Pikmin is a game based around using your Pikmin. That doesn't make it a RTS any more than Pokemon is an RTS. After all, Pokemon... what is your definition here? Oh really, the pokemon in Pokemon are disposable units expected to simply die and be replaced almost instantly by functionally indistinguishable units, with no growth of the individual unit going on, and no celebration of the individual one? Or are they expected to be strengthened individually, thus making it an RPG? And no, this isn't goalpost moving, this is refining and narrowing a definition so that people who are being deliberately obtuse can't screw up the argument by bringing up bad examples. Pikmin has elements of an RTS because it is an RTS, because absolutely no other genre fits it. People keep claiming that it blends elements of other genres, but it really doesn't. It only has puzzles in that you must use your RTS units to solve rudimentary puzzles - by a similar logic you could call God of War a Hack and Slash/Puzzle hybrid. But absolutely no-one does. Similar to the platformer aspect - its not an integral part of the gameplay, its just a specific kind of unit movement over obstacles. Its merely another way to move your units from A to B. XboxPants posted:While a lot of people - maybe even the majority - do buy games solely on the logic of "is mario game yes/no", some people do take other things into account, like "what kind of game is this". There are people who started in the 8/16 bit generation and have already played 10-20 2D Mario games, and are kind of tired of them. Lots of them. I'm one of them. I don't know if many are gonna buy a WiiU just for that (I'm sure not) but you're being pretty reductive about what drives consumers. Yeah, but how many of them are then gonna jump at the chance to play a 2D game with 3 lanes? Understand that if this were a real 3D Mario game, I do think that it could bring in gamers that didn't want to buy it for NSMBU. But as its a 2.5 D game, I do not see it having its own separate grouping of fans outside the regular 2D games. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:48
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:That it might not sell as much as the 2D games is irrelevant, as its a different subset of fans. There is signifigant overlap between gamers who enjoy 2D Mario games and 3D Mario Games, but they are not all the same gamers - thus, a full 3D Mario game would actually offer a new experience that would give gamers who currently have no reason to get a WiiU, a reason. Buying a console for a single game isn't something most people do, especially not with the next gen consoles literally coming out before that game will even be announced. The WiiU is a console from 2006 released in 2012 with games to sell the system not coming out until 2014, poorly advertised and confusing to the kinds of people that their previous console was aimed at. It's a travesty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:As an occaisional gamer (My parent's bought me a wii a few years back for christmas, I play a few PC games), my take is that the Wii U's biggest problem is the Wii - Nintendo aren't trying to compete with Sony/Microsoft, but they're still in exactly the same market position as the Wii was. Rather than worrying about Battlefield FPS Whatever, the U has to compete with Pikmin 2, NSMB, Mario Galaxy 1/2, 2 Zelda games, and so on, all available at about half the price of the 'latest' versions. It's worth mentioning if you're not aware, but the WiiU plays Wii games, which is another aspect Nintendo has done a poor job of advertising. I agree though that the WiiU's biggest problem is the Wii but for different reasons, a big one being that consumers are already satisfied with their "want" via the Wii and don't see the difference or haven't been sold on why they "need" the WiiU.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
I think the Wii-U is going to need way more than 1 game to set it right. There's not going to be a magic killer app that suddenly pushes the system out of it's rut, they need like 5-10 strong games just as a start. Look what turned the PS3 back around, they started releasing exclusives that people wanted, It wasn't watered down quick time event stuff like Heavenly sword. They also re-released last gen PS2 games at a bargain price in HD, and they made their online component appealing and later offered free games with it. Sony also let their American division call the shots, which is something that NOA has really yet to do. The PS3 is also finally getting an official physical release of Project Diva in America. Yes that game won't sell gangbusters, but if you have a large library with a lot of variety you're going to attract people, all sorts of people. The same thing happened when Tokyo Jungle, granted it was a PSN only release but Sony of Japan didn't run SCEA through the mud when they were trying to get the game released in America. Nintendo has the largest back catalogue out of any of the three companies, the fact they're not pillaging it for all it's worth and even having monthly physical special edition re-releases is at the very least concerning. People would buy more stuff like the Kirby Anthology if the rest of the old games were packaged like that. Yes there's the VC, but there's loads of games released on the PSN that also have special edition re-releases that make it worthwhile to own a physical copy(i.e. Journey Collector's Edition). Stuff like X, Zelda Wii-U, Mario Kart, and poo poo should have been ready right out of the gate, the Wii had many months of empty releases. You'd think they could have planned ahead better, and not wait for everything to hit in 2014 for a system that would then be out for over a year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
WendigoJohnson posted:I think the Wii-U is going to need way more than 1 game to set it right. There's not going to be a magic killer app that suddenly pushes the system out of it's rut, they need like 5-10 strong games just as a start. Look what turned the PS3 back around, they started releasing exclusives that people wanted, It wasn't watered down quick time event stuff like Heavenly sword. They also re-released last gen PS2 games at a bargain price in HD, and they made their online component appealing and later offered free games with it. ...Are we talking about the same console? Because I remember that it was definitely just one game that turned around the Ps3 - Uncharted 2 (With a price cut as well). The quality games that came before it - MGS 4, LittleBigPlanet, Killzone 2, inFamous - they are all great games, but none of them really shifted public opinion on the console until Uncharted 2 came out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Actually, its the question I already asked, but you ignored. So I'll try explaining it plainer. I couldn't really see the difference between the WiiU NSMB and the one for Wii Classic. They look like the same game to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Louisgod posted:It's worth mentioning if you're not aware, but the WiiU plays Wii games, which is another aspect Nintendo has done a poor job of advertising. Louisgod posted:I agree though that the WiiU's biggest problem is the Wii but for different reasons, a big one being that consumers are already satisfied with their "want" via the Wii and don't see the difference or haven't been sold on why they "need" the WiiU. Agreed. The only thing I would be interested in the Wii U for would be some sort of RPG with the 'GM' using the tablet to place traps/monsters in realtime. Aside from that, I can't imagine any use for it. I'm pretty much the ideal market for the Wii U, someone who likes playing but doesn't want a high-end console, and my impression is 'don't buy this, it's DoA.'. e: Also - only able to support one of the tablets? REALLY? I hated the design, but I would drop serious scratch for a modern 4 swords / crystal chronicles. petrol blue fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Oh really, the pokemon in Pokemon are disposable units expected to simply die and be replaced almost instantly by functionally indistinguishable units, with no growth of the individual unit going on, and no celebration of the individual one? Or are they expected to be strengthened individually, thus making it an RPG? Except for all the ones that do. Puzzle games with light resource management elements have been around for ages and will continue to be around. Do you notice how you keep moving the goalposts for any other game I mentioned but not for Pikmin? Every single time I come up with something you go "B... but if you add THIS on then it counts as an RTS!" You quite literally keep changing the definition every single time I point out how flawed your definition is. One of the biggest elements of RTS games is that they tend to focus on multiple positions at once without a central reliance on a protagonist unit, thus giving them the "strategy" element. You have powerful hero units like Warcraft 3's Heroes but they are only slightly less disposible than the average unit. The emphasis on macro and micromanagement is one of the defining features of RTS games and what they are designed around. You can get into more detail with subgenres but beyond a certain point they're only minimally something you count as RTS. MOBA games are literally built on the bones of an RTS game but have altered the gameplay significantly enough that they have almost nothing in common with them beyond basic interface. Same for Tower Defense games actually. Playing DotA2 and blaming it for being a lovely RTS would be laughable even if it's literally built on an RTS. The fact that you can point out similarities doesn't make it the same kind of game. You're hyper-focused on the idea that an RTS IS ~THIS~ when genres are not so clear-cut or so defined that you can do that. Similarities do not mean it is in the same genre nor is it trying to be in the same genre. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Except for all the ones that do. Puzzle games with light resource management elements have been around for ages and will continue to be around. Do you notice how you keep moving the goalposts for any other game I mentioned but not for Pikmin? Every single time I come up with something you go "B... but if you add THIS on then it counts as an RTS!" You quite literally keep changing the definition every single time I point out how flawed your definition is. This is a really stupid and long-winded derail when Pikmin is listed as an RTS on Wikipedia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Pikmin's genre categorization has nothing to do with whether it's good anyway (it's good).
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Does it matter? Pikmin is fun, but Pikmin 3 is effectively the same as NSMBU, filler content to keep the fans happy till a 'real' game is released.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Pokemon is not a Real-Time Strategy game because it's not real time. You could call it a turn-based strategy game if you really wanted I guess, but the strategy involved is pretty light. If enemies showed up on the map instead of being random, it really wouldn't be that bad of a fit to call Pokemon a TBS-lite. (obviously it fits better into the "jRPG" mold, though) But that's getting off track. No, Pikmin doesn't fit perfectly into the typical idea of an RTS. In a lot of ways it is a simplified RTS. But since when does being simpler make something a bad game? That's the same as saying the more features you add to a game, the better it gets; in fact, it's often the complete opposite. Are you gonna claim that Mario Kart is just a "stunted, way too simple" racing sim? XboxPants fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:This is a really stupid and long-winded derail when Pikmin is listed as an RTS on Wikipedia. Oh, well, if Wikipedia said it then it must be true. Pikmin unarguably has elements in common with RTS games but that is where this argument gets stupid, because what he is saying is "well, it's in the same genre as Starcraft and thus is getting a pass from journalists despite being simplified compared to (insert RTS here)" which is an incredibly dumb argument. It isn't designed or played like Starcraft except in the most shallow of comparisons. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:Does it matter? Pikmin is fun, but Pikmin 3 is effectively the same as NSMBU, filler content to keep the fans happy till a 'real' game is released. Oh? Care to expand on that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
Bland posted:Oh? Care to expand on that? I'm in no way claiming to be an expert, but my take is that it's an iteration on something that already existed, instead of something new and exciting. It's more like a sequel to something already existing than a new game in its own right. If Nintendo weren't so anti-internet, I'd call it DLC. e: A change to HD and some new levels doesn't qualify as 'new game' to me. I'd buy NSMBU and Pikmin 3 in a second if they were released as Wii games, but they're a long way from feeling 'next gen'. petrol blue fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
Bland posted:Oh? Care to expand on that? Not too many people are going to see Pikmin 3 and say "Holy poo poo I need to go out and buy this $350 console RIGHT NOW and play this plantmans game." And I say that as someone who would go out and buy a $250 console RIGHT NOW to play a new plantmans game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Oh, well, if Wikipedia said it then it must be true. Gee, I wasn't aware that we weren't supposed to compare games to other games, but instead had to like each and every one because they're all unique little snowflakes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:I'm in no way claiming to be an expert, but my take is that it's an iteration on something that already existed, instead of something new and exciting. It's more like a sequel to something already existing than a new game in its own right. If Nintendo weren't so anti-internet, I'd call it DLC. What?  You must think a lot of games are DLC then.OatmealRaisin posted:Not too many people are going to see Pikmin 3 and say "Holy poo poo I need to go out and buy this $350 console RIGHT NOW and play this plantmans game." Pretty much this. I have a Wii U and I'm not entirely sure I'm going to bother with Pikmin 3. It isn't a "must play this now" game. Fulchrum posted:Gee, I wasn't aware that we weren't supposed to compare games to other games, but instead had to like each and every one because they're all unique little snowflakes. You can compare games. You can also make stupid comparisons. "Man, Godhand is a way shittier game than Devil May Cry. I mean it's much slower paced, the graphics are uglier, you can't jump or move around... Yeah, 3/10 sounds about right." ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Gee, I wasn't aware that we weren't supposed to compare games to other games, but instead had to like each and every one because they're all unique little snowflakes. You can compare them, just not on relative simplicity. You can't judge whether a game is good or bad based on how complicated it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:What? I don't buy many games. I own a PC, a Wii, and I don't generally bother with sequels, Galaxy 2 being the only one I can think of. e: My point being that nothing so far says 'next gen' to me. It says 'hey, we polished the graphics and added new levels'. I'd buy a game on that strength, if I loved the original, but not a whole new console. petrol blue fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
One could just as easily argue that other RTS games are "stunted" by the lack of a heavy exploratory element, or the failure to feature the commander as an on-the-ground unit. It would be equally stupid as calling Pikmin stunted, but you could do it!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
bushisms.txt posted:On the other side of that, Nintendo is the only company everyone is expecting to "innovate" every title. The same "journalist" will praise AssCreed 7, but be unforgiving of Pikmin 3 for not drastically changing the game. Which leads to consumers saying stupid poo poo like they have Pikmin 2, so what do they need the third one for? That's an actual comment from a Pikmin 3 review. I see now what you meant by this post
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
Bland posted:I see now what you meant by this post That's a fair point. But then, they've cultivated that reputation, "Nintendo innovate without massive hardware", so they have to lay in the bed they made.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:You can compare them, just not on relative simplicity. You can't judge whether a game is good or bad based on how complicated it is. I think the "simple is better" argument loses its credibility in a genre where the entire focus is on clever strategy. Beyond a simple color matching, there is no room for a player to enact actual strategy - no unit upgrades, no troop carriers, no end-game superweapons (gimme my loving Pikmin Nuke). It limits players options way too far, and hence disallows any advanced strategy play. And you can't even engage in competitive multiplayer, which has been the basis of the RTS for 15 years. Supercar Gautier posted:One could just as easily argue that other RTS games are "stunted" by the lack of a heavy exploratory element, or the failure to feature the commander as an on-the-ground unit. It would be equally stupid as calling Pikmin stunted, but you could do it! ....how in the gently caress does a game where you are forced to go out and find a steady supply of resources to fuel your army, not have an exploratory element? Did they strike resources from RTS's while I wasn't looking? Oh, and what did you think the scout unit was for? The fog of war? Did you think they were just for show? As for the on the ground commander, how does that improve the game in any way, or open it up to additional strategies?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:I don't buy many games. I own a PC, a Wii, and I don't generally bother with sequels, Galaxy 2 being the only one I can think of. I get what you're saying but generally people will be willing to jump to a new platform just based off "polished graphics + some new stuff." The X-Box One and PS4's launch lineup are largely that, ports/simultaniously releases with the previous gen, or things like Knack. (Which I admittedly want but wouldn't buy a system for.) Call of Duty/Battlefield 4 are going to sell systems entirely on their own. I just don't think Pikmin is one of those system sellers, and neither is Wonderful 101. Mario 3D is like the first one that has a potential of being one with Kart 8/SSB being the more likely bets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
I'm going to have to ask if you've even played Pikmin if you're going to compare the game's exploration/adventure aspect to seeking out resources on a (often familiar) map. On a conceptual level, it's apples and oranges. You're continuing to try to evaluate the quality of a game entirely based on genre conventions and its rigorousness in adhering to them, entirely ignoring focus and execution. That's an insane way to evaluate a game, and even by the low standards of game journalism you would not likely be hired as a reviewer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:...generally people will be willing to jump to a new platform just based off "polished graphics + some new stuff."... That's going from a pretty limited sample, and the Wii brought in a whole new crowd who're likely to react very differently than the 'usual' metrics. Again, Wii U's biggest problem is the Wii, it sucked in a massive userbase that's basically unpredictable at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:I think the "simple is better" argument loses its credibility in a genre where the entire focus is on clever strategy. Beyond a simple color matching, there is no room for a player to enact actual strategy - no unit upgrades, no troop carriers, no end-game superweapons (gimme my loving Pikmin Nuke). It limits players options way too far, and hence disallows any advanced strategy play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
All this rts talk has me wishing they'd remake World in Conflict and let me use the touch screen. I'm really liking my Wii U so far and can't wait for pikmin 3 next week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:I'm going to have to ask if you've even played Pikmin if you're going to compare the game's exploration/adventure aspect to seeking out resources on a (often familiar) map. On a conceptual level, it's apples and oranges. A map will only be familiar if you've played it before. If you've played the good RTS level before, you judge it against the Pikmin level you've played before, at which point you know where all the ship parts are, and there is no exploration. In Pikmin, you are looking for pills (your resources to make more units) and ship parts (your goal). In RTS's, you are looking for wood, meat, gold, vespene gas, radioactive minerals, etc (Your resource to make more units) and your enemy/promised land/abandonded units/Wonders of the modern world/lost pie recipe (your goal). Wheres the difference here? Actually, Pikmin has less exploration, as the pills and ship parts never change locations, whereas your enemy can choose where they put their base. Strange Matter posted:So what you're saying is that Pikmin, a game that you are describing as a Real Time Strategy game, has no Strategy, which would be like saying that Myst is a crappy First Person Shooter because it doesn't have any guns. Its a real time strategy with crappy strategy. Like a first person shooter with crappy shooting. As I recall, we condemn them just fine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
Can I ask: What sold you on the U? Was it the design, or the brand, or something else?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:42 |
|
|
When I played the original Pikmin so long ago, I felt it was closest to a RTS in gameplay. In any case, I doubt Pikmin 3 is the game that is going to save the Wii U. In my case, in order for Zelda to engage me more, it needs to break the formula of going from dungeon to dungeon. They are cool, don't get me wrong, but sometimes I feel that I live more for the things in between dungeons than the dungeons themselves. For example, Gerudo Valley from OoT and that ghost town in Twilight Princess were some of my favorite sections of the games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 01:46
|
|
