The Nintendo "Off My Chest" thread (BE CIVIL)

[Perkilator]

I know original Ice Climber on the NES may not have been a great game, but that doesn't make the idea that the Ice Climbers shouldn't have been in Melee any less heartbreaking. It's one thing to only want the obvious picks without letting them coexist with the more inventive choices, but in the Ice Climbers' case, it's especially disappointing to see people treat them like a black sheep when they only ever had one game decades ago.

 

[Perkilator]

I think Smash Bros. and Mario Kart are the two Nintendo franchises that I want to do as many new things as possible when their newest entries release on the next Nintendo console. Basically, the success of SSBU and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe should be a reason wipe the slate clean in terms of the series standards of old.

 

[Quillion]

I think Smash Bros. and Mario Kart are the two Nintendo franchises that I want to do as many new things as possible when their newest entries release on the next Nintendo console. Basically, the success of SSBU and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe should be a reason wipe the slate clean in terms of the series standards of old.

Why be so black-or-white about that issue?

If you want Mario Kart to "wipe the slate clean" in terms of series standards, you might as well say that they should ditch karts entirely and re-imagine the horses in Mario Sports Superstars.

 

[Waddleclaws]

Got an opinion about Nintendo products you need to get off your chest, popular or unpopular? This is the place for you.

Spoiler: Original Introduction

We have an Unpopular Opinions thread on this subforum that only covers Smash. Might as well have one that covers other Nintendo material outside of Smash.

----
Durability is the only good part of Breath of the Wild's weapon system. Everything else about the BotW weapon system, or how it's implemented, is subpar-to-bad.

I know this is a fairly popular opinion, but Nintendo should put their games on PC. Literally every other company is doing it, and often, people in third world countries can't get the consoles until the lifespan is well over. Putting their games on steam, in SOME form, could boost accessibility a TON.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I know this is a fairly popular opinion, but Nintendo should put their games on PC. Literally every other company is doing it, and often, people in third world countries can't get the consoles until the lifespan is well over. Putting their games on steam, in SOME form, could boost accessibility a TON.

I agree to an extent. It's much better for the consumer, but I think Nintendo won't do it for quite some time. Nintendo consoles thrive off of exclusives and they can currently see the value of X-Box and PS5 plummet due to lacking exclusives.

I'd actually argue the other two console makers releasing their games on PC is hurting their brand immensely.

 

[Waddleclaws]

I agree to an extent. It's much better for the consumer, but I think Nintendo won't do it for quite some time. Nintendo consoles thrive off of exclusives and they can currently see the value of X-Box and PS5 plummet due to lacking exclusives.

I'd actually argue the other two console makers releasing their games on PC is hurting their brand immensely.

I can especially see this with Microsoft, especially considering literally every game on the Xbox seems to be also released for PC. If you've already got a PC that can play, Starfield, for example, then there's no point in buying an Xbox. And Xbox controllers work with most PCs, so if you prefer the style of playing with a controller, you also have that option on your PC. So, as I said, most people don't see the point in buying an Xbox.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I can especially see this with Microsoft, especially considering literally every game on the Xbox seems to be also released for PC. If you've already got a PC that can play, Starfield, for example, then there's no point in buying an Xbox. And Xbox controllers work with most PCs, so if you prefer the style of playing with a controller, you also have that option on your PC. So, as I said, most people don't see the point in buying an Xbox.

Exactly. The X-Box brand is dissolving. I think Nintendo will avoid that as much as possible.

Also they can be Scrooges.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Nintendo is a company very concerned with perceived value. Whether that's due to being an older/conservative company or seeing what happened to Atari during the 1983 Crash (when cartridges were cut in price so deeply to unload bloated inventory that they eventually had no value) I don't know. However, with Nintendo, you can see that philosophy reflected in both keeping their games exclusive and generally not allowing major discounts to first party titles. Cuts to consoles and cheaper entries via Greatest Hits editions make for nice memories, but they're often hallmarks of a Nintendo struggling in the market in some fashion.

Something like the Gamecube being reduced to $99 stands out as significant nostalgic memory for young gamers and as a symbolic sign of how much the console was third place presence in the sixth gen.

 

[Quillion]

I know this is a fairly popular opinion, but Nintendo should put their games on PC. Literally every other company is doing it, and often, people in third world countries can't get the consoles until the lifespan is well over. Putting their games on steam, in SOME form, could boost accessibility a TON.

I'm in favor of them putting SOME of their games on PC. Just a mix of retro favorites and some old obscurities that would be hard to preserve otherwise.

I wouldn't see them putting Mario Kart 8, the Zelda Wild duology, or Xenoblade 2 and 3 on PC, but some of the oldies would be viable.

I'd actually argue the other two console makers releasing their games on PC is hurting their brand immensely.

I know that Xbox and PlayStation have turned (more) to the PC market due to flagging profits, but I don't see how that hurts the brand.

The consoles are still accessibly priced and easy to set up, while the PC offers more control and versatility.

Cuts to consoles and cheaper entries via Greatest Hits editions make for nice memories, but they're often hallmarks of a Nintendo struggling in the market in some fashion.

They did that during the Wii era though.

As for the rest of your post, that's a major part of why I consider the current copyright system corrupt on the systemic level. But it's worsened by the whole entertainment sector only having inflation as the only method of devaluation (the technical accounting term for what is commonly called "depreciation"). And it's horribly ineffective because it leaves the corporate copyright owners free reign to inflate anything produced from an IP if it's still valuable.

The entire entertainment industry needs harder, legally enforced devaluation on any of their products. It's only then when we'll see this period of stagnation across industries end.

 

[Perkilator]

Quoting myself from the next Smash thread:

In general, I wish Nintendo wasn't such a stingy old grandpa of a company, especially with how much more money they've raked in during the Switch era.

 

[Quillion]

In general, I wish Nintendo wasn't such a stingy old grandpa of a company, especially with how much more money they've raked in during the Switch era.

It's either that or pursue more forward-thinking policies and end up laying off so much staff, constantly interfering in releases to the point of delays, and keep looking for ways to make players spend more money on games they already own.

The consumer loses either way.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

I think some of the reactions to the Palworld patent lawsuit and the recent Game Freak leaks is underscoring that Pokémon and some its fans have one of the most toxic dynamics in gaming (or at the very least for Nintendo ones). While many rightly decry the former for being a dubious use of legal ownership and many are just fascinated by what behind the scenes material has come out from the latter, it is hard not to notice a degree of spite towards the franchise in both cases driving a desire to or enjoyment at seeing Game Freak/TPC/etc "lose" in some way.

While some of this is undoubtedly due to the series stagnation and recent games coming out with questionable performance (both coming from the IP being a merchandising empire chained to a timetable), I do think a lot of it is rooted in bitterness over Pokémon not being what it once was to them. Whether that's from changing too much (and thus becoming something not recognizable as their experience) or not enough (fueling disappointment that the series isn't evolving) I don't know, but that brand of antipathy does feel significant in the discourse.

The Palworld legal case especially stands out as an example where numerous current/former fans of Pokémon seem to be using the matter as an excuse to vent about how unhappy they are with the state of the latter. There are countless questionable motives for Nintendo/TPC suing Pocket Pair no doubt, but that so many have expressed a variation of "they're jealously suing because someone made a better Pokémon esque game than they did" despite there not being any actual evidence of such? It suggests that there's an undercurrent of those that just want Pokémon developers to get a proverbial punch to the nose, either as karma for not doing better with the series or to spur them to make it better (or at least more like how they remember it).

Obviously, many fans are not like this and have condemned the leaks for things like doxing employees and as someone that was deeply fascinated by the 2020 Gigaleak, I'm not going to judge anyone for being intrigued by what this recent dump of materials has revealed. I just think that some of the recent discussion with it is related to the dubious back and forth with Pokémon re: its fanbase.

 

[Quillion]

I think some of the reactions to the Palworld patent lawsuit and the recent Game Freak leaks is underscoring that Pokémon and some its fans have one of the most toxic dynamics in gaming (or at the very least for Nintendo ones).

I'd welcome the toxicity. It can be a force for good, you know?

 

[Lenidem]

I'd welcome the toxicity. It can be a force for good, you know?

Sure, let's all worship evil! Because, you know, sometimes, some good might come out of it...

 

[Quillion]

Sure, let's all worship evil! Because, you know, sometimes, some good might come out of it...

It's more of an acceptance/welcoming than outright "worshipping" the way I see it.

 

[Lenidem]

It's more of an acceptance/welcoming than outright "worshipping" the way I see it.

"Let's accept/welcome evil" is still pretty baffling to me.

 

[Perkilator]

You know, in a weird way, I’m kinda glad the “all characters are just functions” meme exists. Because if my time in the Smash speculation scene has taught me anything, it’s that there are people who genuinely believe that.

 

[Quillion]

You know, in a weird way, I’m kinda glad the “all characters are just functions” meme exists. Because if my time in the Smash speculation scene has taught me anything, it’s that there are people who genuinely believe that.

"Characters are just functions" only exists as a criticism of the idea that one character can replace another if they are functionally similar, like how Combofiend stating how Nova, Carol Danvers, or Ultron can replace Magneto because the former three can 8-way dash.

That said, I think there is SOME grain of truth to it, at least as far as not designing two characters on the same roster to be similar. And in a crossover fighter, that means excluding some characters because they'd otherwise be too similar to another without justifiably being a clone. There's a reason why Lyn and Mythra wouldn't work on the same roster.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Characters are just functions though.

 

[Opossum]

There's a reason why Lyn and Mythra wouldn't work on the same roster.

They absolutely could. Do you hear yourself?

 

[Quillion]

They absolutely could. Do you hear yourself?

They'd be redundant lightweight, speedy sword wielders doing a lot of pseudo-teleporting. They'd either step on each other's toes, or Lyn would have to be arbitrarily portrayed in a way to avoid that.

 

[Baysha]

They'd be redundant lightweight, speedy sword wielders doing a lot of pseudo-teleporting. They'd either step on each other's toes, or Lyn would have to be arbitrarily portrayed in a way to avoid that.

If you're talking about like, 6 characters, you might have a case, but in Ultimate, there's nearly a hundred characters. I'd be surprised if there wasn't any toe-stepping.

 

[Guynamednelson]

If you're talking about like, 6 characters, you might have a case, but in Ultimate, there's nearly a hundred characters. I'd be surprised if there wasn't any toe-stepping.

There was even toe-stepping in the DLC. Byleth the "distance demon" got out-distance demon'd by at least two characters in FP2.

 

[Quillion]

If you're talking about like, 6 characters, you might have a case, but in Ultimate, there's nearly a hundred characters. I'd be surprised if there wasn't any toe-stepping.

Eh, I'll give you that some overlap is inevitable. But they should still be cautious not to select a fighter for inclusion that would be TOO similar to another without reasonable justification for being a clone.

And still, all the more reason that Smash's as-of-yet focus on the characters is a dead end. The post-Ultimate trajectory of the series definitely warrants a pivot away from them and more towards improving other aspects like modes and stages. Not a total pivot away from characters, mind, but a severe reduction in how many newcomers are added, DLC or otherwise.

 

[Lenidem]

Characters are just functions though.

No, they're not.

If they were, they wouldn't have any backstory, no attention would be put in their design, and they wouldn't even have names, only something as basic as "Character #1", "Character #2", and so on.

 

[AlRex]

Mixed on it. Characters can be included for unique function, their notability as characters or some other aspect, or a mix of both. It’s not all or nothing. I want some vehicles, animals, puzzle game characters, point and click characters, etc. If they emphasize more crossover aspects within a game, I’d want a few more for the character/their interactions.

But I also don’t see as much of the point of doing a crossover fighter of preexisting, well-known characters if characters are all uniformly just considered functions…though I’d cut out some redundancies if one character is cooler, more popular, more demanded, has more potential than a less requested character with similar function…like Magneto over Nova or Captain Marvel. Go figure.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Sometimes I think some people write stuff in here not because their opinion is unpopular but they not it's biased and terrible and they don't care.

 

[Baysha]

Sometimes I think some people write stuff in here not because their opinion is unpopular but they not it's biased and terrible and they don't care.

I feel like it's a little reductive to say that opinions posted to here are posted here because people "know" that their opinions are "terrible." I don't even know if it's possible to have a "terrible" opinion on something as petty as a crossover fighting game without like straight-up bigotry or something. Like, I think that not having a new Smash game and instead having an Ultimate port would be a really bad idea, but I'm not gonna dog on someone who wants that.

 

[Quillion]

No, they're not.

If they were, they wouldn't have any backstory, no attention would be put in their design, and they wouldn't even have names, only something as basic as "Character #1", "Character #2", and so on.

That's only shallow window dressing that pleases the casuals, aka the group that's only valuable for marketing to and not for any significant design tailoring.

Sometimes I think some people write stuff in here not because their opinion is unpopular but they not it's biased and terrible and they don't care.

Hey, it's "Off My Chest", not "Unpopular". I changed the title for a reason.

 

[Lenidem]

That's only shallow window dressing that pleases the casuals, aka the group that's only valuable for marketing to and not for any significant design

Sure, atmosphere in video games only matters to casuals... Must be the same for the stages, the musics, and so on. Like, why did they even create a stage and a theme song for each character in Street Fighter 2? The "true gamers" know that game would have been just as good with stick figures fighting on a horizontal white line with a totally black background and no music at all... Ah, those silly casuals!

 

[fogbadge]

That's only shallow window dressing that pleases the casuals, aka the group that's only valuable for marketing to and not for any significant design tailoring.

smash is a casual game

 

[Guynamednelson]

That's only shallow window dressing that pleases the casuals, aka the group that's only valuable for marketing to and not for any significant design tailoring.

Everyone starts out casual. Many competitive Melee players may only care about gameplay now, but they first wanted to play as Fox because he's the guy from Star Fox, not because he's top tier.

Hell, the reason I have Pikachu as my 64 main is because I want to play as Pikachu, the Pokemon, not Pikachu, the top tier. That's just a bonus.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Smash without the deep functional move design of the fighters is a title without a brain.

Smash without the beloved characters, series tributes, and sense of genuine crossover is a game without a heart.

The franchise cannot sustainably thrive without both being considered seriously.

 

[Quillion]

Everyone starts out casual. Many competitive Melee players may only care about gameplay now, but they first wanted to play as Fox because he's the guy from Star Fox, not because he's top tier.

Hell, the reason I have Pikachu as my 64 main is because I want to play as Pikachu, the Pokemon, not Pikachu, the top tier. That's just a bonus.

Yes, everyone starts casual, but if they stay that way, their opinions are WORTHLESS.

Casuals are nothing but dronesheep that worship creators and can't reflect on flaws of anything.

Smash without the deep functional move design of the fighters is a title without a brain.

Smash without the beloved characters, series tributes, and sense of genuine crossover is a game without a heart.

The franchise cannot sustainably thrive without both being considered seriously.

As if casuals can even consider both seriously.

 

[Opossum]

Sometimes I think some people write stuff in here not because their opinion is unpopular but they not it's biased and terrible and they don't care.

I swear half the thread is just this image.

 

[Guynamednelson]

Yes, everyone starts casual, but if they stay that way, their opinions are WORTHLESS

Not being casual doesn't mean you can stop caring about who gets in.

You would know, you and a couple others tell people to stop wanting (insert character here) for reasons that have nothing to do with how they'd play despite allegedly only caring about gameplay.

 

[Quillion]

Sometimes I think some people write stuff in here not because their opinion is unpopular but they not it's biased and terrible and they don't care.

I swear half the thread is just this image.
View attachment 395396

It's more that I dislike echo chambering so much that I prefer that people disagree with me, because there's no real discussion in echo chambering.

Though admittedly, in moments where I am extremely frustrated with my life and all of humanity (such as the past several days), it does distort into an urge to indulge my spiteful side to reclaim some semblance of agency to it.

 

[Perkilator]

Yes, everyone starts casual, but if they stay that way, their opinions are WORTHLESS.

Casuals are nothing but dronesheep that worship creators and can't reflect on flaws of anything.



As if casuals can even consider both seriously.

At this point, why are you even here if you have nothing but mean things to say?

 

[Quillion]

At this point, why are you even here if you have nothing but mean things to say?

The post directly above yours here explains why.

 

[SharkLord]

Smash's whole identity is being a crossover fighter. The crossover aspects define and influence every bit of gameplay - The movesets, the stages, the collectables, so on and so forth. It would be window dressing if it was just Marios wrapped around a generic shotoclone moveset slugging it out on a generic flat plan colored vaguely based on Mario stages, but it's not; It's specifically Mario with his Fireballs, Cape, and FLUDD, fighting on the specific layout of Princess Peach's Castle, with very specifically a Banzai Bill or behemoth bill as they want to call it now crashing into the stage. The only "window dressing" character is Captain Falcon reusing the placeholder moveset from when Smash was still The Dragon King, but even then, we wouldn't love him so much if they didn't make him scream "FALCON PAWNCH" every time he used the big strong punchy move.

So in short, good gameplay isn't enough to make a truly great game, you need to give it the sauce if you want it to stand out.