>>181533
"You 2DS's think you're great don't you? But can you do this?"

(Wii U) Sonic Lost World - Zone 1 Gameplay

>>181515
>>181527

Wow, these are pretty terrible.

>>181529

Am I the only one that has disliked the Pokemon console games? I dunno why, but they always seemed boring and just not as fun as the portable ones. I feel like pokemon is one of those games that just works better as a portable game. Take it with you for long flights, and such, playing a bit of it at a time. Like, personally, I wouldn't want to play a game with all the regions. That just seems ludicrous and kind of a time sink. Like, I don't want to have to deal with the same annoying shit in every single region that was put in to slow my progress down.

Besides, the whole point of Pokemon is that it's something you play with your friends at Recess and lunch. You pull out your gameboy, you trade Pokemon, your friend helps you evolve your Haunter, you battle, and so on and so forth. Like, yeah, of course you can have your friends come over to play together, but it puts an extra step in the whole process.

As much as you all might hate to hear it, Pokemon isn't meant for you now, it's meant for you when you were eight. Each generation, in turn, is meant for the kids who are just turning eight when that game came out, who will get to have that experience we got when we were their age with that game.

I don't mean it's wrong of you to enjoy the games now, or that it makes you immature, but those of us in our 20's and 30's aren't the main audience. Not that Nintendo/Gamefreak ignores it's older audience completely, but we're just not their main focus.

>>181532
And this random estimate is based on what?

While they'd have to recreate it all for the Wii U, all the art, concepts, layout, and so forth are already there. B/W had that thing where you could pop into someone else's game (but I've never done that because I don't like looking like a pedo.) It wouldn't be a speed job, but they could easily turn one out, starting only with what they have now, within two or three years.

>>181536
>Am I the only one that has disliked the Pokemon console games?
I didn't, either. But I would like a main-line Pokemon game on the console, not the battle-only or bastardized gameplay of XD we've gotten before.

>it's meant for you when you were eight
Sad, but true, which is why I've no interest in X/Y (though if there is a Z, I may pick it up.) Still, I don't know why they can't expand it, as there is still a crazy-huge number of adults who play it.

Hell, make a more adult-oriented (difficulty/depth, not grimdark'n'tits) spin-off that retains the name "Pocket Monsters" so as to not confused the kiddies (but all adult fans knows what it means.) Overhaul battle and strategy, improve story (so it has some actual depth and maybe good plot turns), make progress non-linear (so I can choose which gym to battle when I like), etc. I don't even want new Pokemon, because there are like 700 of those fuckers now. Include a Nuzlocke difficulty.

(Actually, considering some of the gym leaders, I would be okay with tits...)

>>181537
>And this random estimate is based on what?
An exaggeration, but a "ha ha, only serious" one. Console games are more expensive than handheld games, no matter how little respect you have for the Wii U as a console, and require higher resolution textures with higher poly models that increase the time it takes to make them by an order of magnitude. And we're not just talking about the monsters here, which while it would be a significant jump, would only be like two or three times as expensive and time-intensive. You've also got to have six times as much geography and models for each of those zones.

Now obviously, there are a lot of places you could cut corners to reduce that time and money sink, but given your attitude toward Nintendo in general, I don't think that would sit well with you.

>>181540
But Pokemon has never been a graphical powerhouse. That's why I said to use the Coliseum (actually, Battle Revolution would fit better, plus already have 2/3 of the Pokemon models), so you even have an engine to go off, you'd just have to extend it to handle environments as well. It's always been about the catching/trading/battling, so as long as the graphics are moderate no one will care.

I'd probably be playing multiplayer Nintendo games more if my siblings hadn't both moved out or if I knew anyone else willing to play them. I should try setting on online account already, really. Got a few online Brawl matches once.

>>181529
I dunno about all six regions at once, but with downloadable stuff maybe go with an expansion pack system? That's a lot to keep on the drive, though maybe it could just store the player's team for moving between games, possibly having it be a new game+ like in Oracle of Ages/Seasons.

>>181545
Considering the size of games like Assassin's Creed IV coming to the Wii U, there would be no problem with having all six on the disc.

As for going through all of them, giving more of a "choose your own path" would allow you to decide which region to start in. Maybe as a New Game+ feature you can choose a different region, and when you get to the region you last started in you start hearing about your last character's exploits...

Remember how similar most routes are in the games; I wouldn't expect more diversity from the console version (though it would be nice), meaning you don't have as many models or bump maps to store.

If you can't see why a game that'd be about six times the size of any normal RPG with over 600 fully modeled and animated playable characters, a fully realized but also non-linear plot, a gigantic game world that's constantly evolving, and full online capabilities would be a nightmare to make, then it's not Gamefreak that needs some perspective. No game exists on the scale you're asking for outside of the biggest MMO's.

>>181551
And the thing about that is, it wouldn't even make THAT much more money than a game one sixth the size. That's the thing about all these megaprojects that nerds crave--most of them, as amazing as they would be, would have a TERRIBLE Return on Investment compared to projects that could be made quicker and for less money. Pokemon games regularly sell four million copies in their first month with relatively small budgets, and can be made about once a year. Ramping up that much to make a game that would sell, let's say ten million copies in their first month, would just be a bad business decision all around. And you're just not going to get much more than ten million copies out of a full-priced game that's exclusive to a single platform. Maybe if the platform in question were PCs and we counted $20-30 as full-priced, like Minecraft, but there's no way a game of the scope you're talking about would come out for $20-30.

>>181551
So make it the first Massive Single-Player (Solo Multiplayer?) Online game. Release the game with an expanded Kanto. Primary focus is playing through solo, but drop in/out is easy, towns offer global tournaments and can also change over time. The other regions become paid expansions. If they need more income, make some of the online features part of a subscription.

>>181553
>And the thing about that is, it wouldn't even make THAT much more money than a game one sixth the size.
Which is the sad truth, and why it will never happen. Gamefreak is not going to consider changing any part of the core mechanics until they put out a game that doesn't print money.

But I can dream~

>>181556
So your solution is to make the game even BIGGER and include microtransactions? Why don't we just add some dialog treees and real-time action/adventure battles, since we're putting in every game mechanic there's ever been? This idea is essentially six Dark Souls with Shin Megami Tensei's roster size. It's absolutely crazy that you're calling Gamefreak lazy for not making a game that would be a bigger project than practically anything ever made.

>>181557
>microtransactions
>>181556
>make some of the online features part of a subscription
You're reading things that aren't there. And I said nothing about making it bigger (I never imagined the regions would go in as-is, though I didn't state this in my posts), only about splitting it up so they can do an expansion release instead of making this huge game all at once.

>you're calling Gamefreak lazy
for not enhancing the stagnant core gameplay and/or mixing up the simple plot lines. Then I gave a suggestion as to what I think would be a "killer app" Pokemon game for the Wii U, which I admit is quite large. I don't agree it's as large a challenge as you make it out to be, though it would take more effort than the current Pokemon games seem to get.

No. For not enhancing the stale core gameplay the way you want.

>>181562
While I have my preferred enhancements, I would at least read up on any others they cared to take. Which they haven't since GSC.

>>181557
And quick time events!

>>181577
That doesn't make sense. Nobody's hopes have hit the ground yet. It still looks really really fucking good.

>>181577
1. Who is this?
2. There is nothing about Lost World that harkens the issues the prior crap games had. What could possibly have made the game so bad against all the positive we've seen and heard?

>>181588
>>181585
Isn't part of the Cycle everyone being really stoked for it at first? Maybe he's saying no one gave a shit about Colors when it was first advertised, and therefore the cycle failed there, and the Cycle might be back in effect if everyone's excited about Lost World.

>>181589
That's...stupid.
People where excited about Generations and that turned out great.

Is Marcel a big name or something?

>>181596
Bigger than "Bob," smaller than "Giovanni."

>>181597
I don't know who those people are.

It's especially dumb because everyone knows the daytime portion of Unleashed originally broke the cycle anyway.

>>181598
I think he's making a joke based on the sizes of the names.

>>181596
No, but he's usually has the heads up on gaming info related to Nintendo or otherwise. I also like he's willing to call out Nintendo, even though he runs/writes a Nintendo fan site.

>>181604
Then he could at least try to understand what he's talking about.

So, this is how Nintendo will market 3DS games from now on.

Meanwhile, the back of the Pokemon X/Y box doesn't mention the game is compatible with the 2DS.

http://gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=214254

>>181619
I would say that this could confuse a lot of parents, but these same parents are quite likely already confused, buying 3DS games for their kids' DSi because they aren't aware of the difference (and if you think you're getting the right type of game, why would you read the back of the box?)

I bet more parents buy X/Y when their kid has a DS/Lite/i/XL as don't buy it when their kid has a 2DS.

Project M Roster Reveal: Chall…

Neat.

>>181692
>Project M in charge of making Mewtwo look legit as shit
MY MONEY!
TAKE IT!

If this didn't nuke your custom stages I'd ingest this shit immediately.

So, what 3ds games are legitimately diminished by not having 3d as a usable option?

Super Mario 3d Land maybe? What else?

>>181698
None really. It's just a nice feature for those that enjoy it. It annoys me that Pokemon doesn't use it outside battles though. I understand that they're backing away from the feature, but I wish they didn't just throw it away.

>>181699
I think it's just due to limitations.
The 3D also doesn't work in battles larger than 1 on 1.

>>181699
Yes it does.
I have seen it in places like Glittering Caves and the Fireworks show.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/128641-Zelda-Producer-Aims-to-Stop-Hand-Holding-in-A-Link-Between-Worlds?utm_source=latest&utm_medium=index_
carousel&utm_campaign=all

YES, FUCKING JESUS YES

>>181708
>And we kind of have a bad habit of hand-holding, trying to make things easier for everyone. But more and more, I start to think that that kind of isn't actually that fun.
Finally! I've been missing this sort of thing sense Majoras Mask.

>>181708
Thank god. Fucking Fi.

>>181694
You can always transfer your custom stages to an sd card and then onto your computer, then put them back on whenever you play normal Brawl. You just can't play them with P:M. The trade off is definitely worth it in my opinion.

>>181708
This news is good news.

>>181708

Sounds neat.

Also, I was thinking, with Pokemon: Origin out, do you think Nintendo would remake R/G/B in the current generation. I mean, i doubt they would, but it might be kinda neat if they did.

Or just release the original fucking Red & Blue on the DS market. No I don't care that FR and LG are technically better, I just want to play the old 8-bit games without having to pirate them, damn it. If only for the goofy ass sprites.

>>181718
Pokémon Origin seems more like a vehicle for advertising mega evos to older players to me.

I think Nintendo's greatest strength is also their greatest weakness.

Whenever a new Nintendo console is announced all you hear about it is "Oh great I can't wait to play the New Mario/Zelda/Smash Bros!" and that's fine, except for one really big problem.

Wonderful 101 and Zombie U were two REALLY GREAT GAMES that were Nintendo WiiU exclusives... and not only did both sell ABYSMALLY but they did NOTHING to ship the console. There's more hype for Super Mario 3D world than EITHER ONE OF THOSE games and I think that's saying something. Specifically: Nintendo has come to rely on their own damn IP's so much that they literally cannot sell their own damn hardware without them, and games or companies that want to create their own thing cannot get ANY FOOTHOLDS because the only fanbase Nintendo has thus far are people into Waggling (who don't own a WiiU) and people who play Nintendo games.

What would your reaction be if Nintendo was gonna release a console, and they explicitly said they had no plans to release a Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong or Smash Bros on it? You'd think they were fucking crazy! Who would buy a Nintendo Console if they weren't GUARANTEED those games?

Alternatively. If Sony announced a console and they were like "No Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, God of War or Killzone in the foreseeable future" you might bat an eye. You might think that was weird. Hell you might even be excited! Means they're working on new IP's right? But it wouldn't be a fucking dealbreaker like it is with Nintendo.

I guess what I'm saying is, Nintendo's tried its hardest to get 3rd parties on board with them but the BIGGEST HURDLE is the one they themselves made. By having such iconic titles and such a cult of fanaticism around them Third Parties working exclusively on Nintendo platforms simply can't get around the huge fanfare a new Mario title makes... and the worst part?

We're all guilty of this. I mean Mario and Zelda games traditionally have very good track records. Not the BEST but very good. And Nintendo's first party titles... generally... have very high standards of quality! People lose their shit when new Pokemon titles are announced.

But like an Actor who's typecast, or a Comedian with a Shtick. It's painfully clear that Nintendo consoles are assumed to only sell Nintendo games, and that makes third party devs wary to put new IPs on there.

I think its saying something that there was more hype for the WiiU Zelda. The game we know NOTHING ABOUT. Have no screenshots, character models, concept art or NOTHING. Than there was for Wonderful 101 AS IT WAS BEING DEVELOPED AND COMING OUT.

This probably ties into that whole "Old IPs given a fresh coat of paint always garner more attention than new IPs" issue discussed earlier. Well Nintendo has the strongest IPs out there, it's literally a tank full of sharks that it's trying to throw a couple guppies into and hope they survive.

I guess that's the one thing positive about a distinct LACK of Company-Specific Mascots like Sony and Microsoft have.

The Twitch stream of Sonic Lost World just killed /v/'s enthusiasm for the game.

http://www.twitch.tv/gurdill63/profile/pastBroadcasts

Level designs seem to suffer later on and instant-death platforming increases too. The game apparently borrows way more from Super Mario Galaxy than originally thought, with one the boss fights resembling the final match with Bowser.

>>181752
Add to that, that first party Nintendo games takes age to go on sale and sometimes never do.
Meaning that cheapskates like me go for them first and wait for the rest to drop.
And PSN has better sales...

>>181752
>>181754
No kidding about all these points. Plus if Sony retires a game series like Ratchet or Sly Cooper, we all know that third parties will still make recognizable games on their consoles like Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, and Final Fantasy to name a few.

No such luck with Nintendo. A Nintendo console that has no mascot pillar game series is automatically a failure. In fact if Nintendo tried to do a generation with NO Pokemon (their biggest rehash cash cow central that surpasses even Mario), no Zelda, and no Mario and instead only focuses on Pikmin, Starfox, Metroid, F-Zero, and Kid Icarus, etc it would probably colossally fail on a monumental level.

The irony is that....as a Nintendo veteran I'm honestly sick to death of Pokemon, Mario, and Zelda. I outgrew Pokemon when I realized it was a cash in rehash series with cheap budgets that would never go console all for the sake of "collect them all...til we invent more half assed Pokemons to mass extort you out of your cash! Ha ha!"

Mario's last actual decent game was Galaxy (not Galaxy 2). And Mario Sunshine had those accursed Blue Coins from hell. I don't care for 2.5D Mario games that are shamelessly regurgitated, I don't care for Mario RPG games like Paper Mario or Dream Team (I want an actual Square developed Mario RPG again), and I don't feel impressed by 3D World since it also seems to bank on the multiplayer aspect which is not what I play Mario for.

And Zelda? The series has just grown stale IMO. The formula just isn't fresh enough to warrant excitement. Plus Skyward Sword's bullshit like backtracking so much and tedium of tear collecting and that stupid song collecting and irksome motion controls and frankly mostly uninspired and redundant boss fights scarred the series for me (who the fuck wants to fight the same boss more than twice? I hated the Windwaker Boss Rush and SS' bosses were so uninspired that 3 of them literally have the same weak point, an eyeball).

Nintendo may have a nest egg in the bank to keep them afloat, but I don't see anything particularly noteworthy coming from them soon or any time in the future.

>>181760

>Mario's last actual decent game was Galaxy (not Galaxy 2)

Usually I don't believe that a single statement can invalidate EVERYTHING someone says but damn son.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/35745
>Reporting 15 days days of sales data, the price drop of the Wii U Deluxe Set from $349.99 to $299.99 has improved sales of the Wii U signifigantly, over 200 percent. Nintendo also credits the sales increase to The Legend of Wind Waker HD Wii U bundle.

>Sales of the 3DS have stayed strong with it remaining the number one selling system in the US for the fifth month in a row.
Some good news for Nintendo, but this is like the eye before the storm; come next month when the PS4 and the Xbone release, their numbers won't even register. It'll stay that way through New Years, but it will be interesting to see if the PS4 and XBone keep their initial high sales volume after the first two months, unlike the Wii U.

Oh yeah, that really cool Link Between Worlds 3DS that Europe is getting? Kiwis get it, too.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/35726

>>181752
>I guess that's the one thing positive about a distinct LACK of Company-Specific Mascots like Sony and Microsoft have.
While Sony and Microsoft don't have any immensely-popular-and-visible group of mascots like Nintendo, they still have their core franchises, even if some are second/third party. Sony has Killzone and Infamous, plus they're the go-to on series like Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy. Microsoft has Gears of War, Halo, and kind of Dead Rising.

To pigeon-hole the three, their franchise strengths are:
Sony: RPG, Action/RPG
Microsoft: FPS, Action, Shports? (EA puts their sport series out on everything from the 360 to the Neo Geo Color, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were highest selling on the 360)
Nintendo: Action/Adventure, Platforming

Microsoft saying "Nah, we're bored of Halo and Gears of War" or Sony saying "We're encouraging Squeenix to move their main Final Fantasy/Kingdom Hearts games to Nintendo consoles" would be positively devastating. You wouldn't hear about it near as much as Nintendo giving up Mario (a report from some time back said Mario was more identifiably than Mickey Mouse around the world), but it would cause just as much of a dive in their sales.

>Nintendo's tried its hardest to get 3rd parties on board with them but the BIGGEST HURDLE is the one they themselves made.
I disagree. They were better back in the GCN and early Wii days, when they were floundering hard, but after the Wii's success they went right back to their hubris. I'm reading articles in GameInformer about Sony and Microsoft approaching third parties for input on their next consoles, but I've never heard a single thing like that for Nintendo.

And, a part of that is that Nintendo gets access to their hardware first, so no matter what the dev studios at Nintendo will have a huge advantage in getting the most from the console. Even though other games will release first, and even if they're great, people will later turn to say "Zelda U did X so much better than Third Party Platformer."

>By having such iconic titles and such a cult of fanaticism around them Third Parties working exclusively on Nintendo platforms simply can't get around the huge fanfare a new Mario title makes
Agreed, but more importantly is that Nintendo doesn't seem to care. It still does pretty large advertising campaigns for its titles, when it could instead have smaller ones and partner with third parties to better promote their games for Nintendo's systems. I'm talking giant thrusts of advertising, like a large event for Wonderful 101 encouraging people to dress up as their own superheroes and stuff. They can't and shouldn't do this for everyone, but if they hope to have the third parties return it's certainly a big boost.

>No Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank
...These haven't been big series for years now, outside of a few small handheld games and some HD re-releases. Ratchet & Clank is getting a new one here soon, though...

omg