Has Miyamoto Completely Sold Out?

Originally Posted by rajin95

the reson is making it harder costs more money and they make enough money now so they don't have to make it harder. nothing's going to hapen unless there was a big strike or something, but it's not like that's gona hapen

um... not really. If that were true, why is it that all games have a unit price (based on the console) Every Wii game so far is 50$, and I'm pretty sure PS3 and 360 games are 60$.

It's not programming harder games that affects price, it's how hard the programming is.

Originally Posted by KeeSomething

Miyamoto's opinion on what is hard is equal to Twilight Princess. After all, didn't he say that game was challenging and only for veteran Zelda fans? Funny how it is considered the easiest Zelda games. Even if his comment about Galaxy was true, he is contradicting himself now so that statement is no longer relevant.

You got me on that, I can't retaliate.

Not quite. Do you honestly think A Link to the Past is equally as challenging as The Wind Waker or Twilight Princess? Do you think Super Mario World is as easy as New Super Mario Bros.?

I personally think that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess was harder that A Link to the Past, I can't compare the Mario's because I never beat Super Mario World, and I never played New Super Mario Bros. But I have a question for you, what do you think are the overall better games?

Nintendo games were harder back in the day because they focused on gamers, not grandmas. Now, I understand they want to expand their audience to make mroe money, as do all companies, but since they are gonig after another crowd too, difficulty settings are a must. There is no such thing as a difficulty setting that fits everyone, Nintendo just says that because they don't feel like putting the extra effort into there games. Alas, they release low-quality "games" like Wii Fit and Wii Sports. They are far easier to make and require less money (as far as I know) than a project like Zelda or Mario.

As said before, you were younger and dumber (no offence), thus games where harder. Plus games were simpler, Zelda had no map and enimies took half of heart or more, Metroid had nothing to tell you where to go at all what so ever. Megaman was just plain difficult to the point where I didn't want to play it, and I played it for the first time at age 16! I'm 17 now!

Move up a gen. A Link to the Past, harder than Twilight Princess? Think of the Lakebed Cavern and a few other dungeons. Think puzzle wise. Combat wise, simpler. Half of heart or more, but all you could do was swing and spin attack. Of course your going to have a higher death count.

Originally Posted by KeeSomething

Here is an excellent article that exposes Miyamoto for forgetting about the fans that got them so big in the first place.

Well... fans come and go. Games where simpler back then, and hell, Miyamoto's plan is working. 3rd party titles are coming to Nintendo once again. People who don't play games are coming. Hardcore fans, still love Nintendo games. Nintendo got the fans back then and are keeping them, and it is bringing new ones too. Cigarettes.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Dark Link

. . .What? I don't play Sony or Microsoft consoles as Nintendo games.

Please rephrase your paragraph; it makes very little sense to me.

Play it like you would a Nintendo game (or whatever your favorite system is). Play it none stop, or everytime you get a chance.

Originally Posted by Hungry Gamer

Actually, use there is, deep in it all its a strategy. Their plan is to make games for a wider audience from toddlers to elders and casual to hardcore. With this larger number they will rack in more sales and possibly people who will become hardcore Nintendo fans. That is another reason why they used minimal resources, and made the Wii weaker than the other systems, they were not going to create hardcore games like the other systems, and they really didn't need to.

We all know their strategy, Hungry Gamer, I'm just saying it is a cop out to their veteran fans. Regardless if Nintendo is trying to appeal to all gamers, they aren't. The Wii, as of right now, does not support the hardcore gamer's needs. Why? Because either the games have no depth like Wii Fit, or the game is too easy. Difficulty settings are a must because Nintendo's philosophy is wrong! One difficulty doesn't not appeal to everyone.

I have a much better question, if things continue, if games stay this was where you can beat it in a few days, would you quit playing Nintendo entirely? Would you quit right now?

I'd probably get an answer like "I still love Nintendo's francises."

No. A lot of fans like myself are fed up with Nintendo's catering to the casual gamers without supporting the fans that made them as big as they are. Wii is my last Nintendo console, and if Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 take me a few days to beat and offer no challenge, I will sell my Wii and buya real next-gen console.

Your complaining about difficulty, yet you still get there games, Nintendo rapped you around their finger. Even if you get another system, and put Nintendo backstage, guess what? You still have a Nintendo system, and you are still buying games!

That's right, I'm buying there games and playing them, so I have a right to complain about Nintendo's decline.

Now, play an old game from the first system you had. Play one that you have played before, or even one that you never played before. Isn't it a little easy? Your older, smarter, and have better reflexes, games aren't getting just getting easier, your getting better!

No, I still have a lot of trouble with pretty much any NES game including SMB 1-3, Zelda, and Metroid. Do you honestly think Twilight Princess was so easy just because I'm more experienced now? That could be part of the reason, but how come I still find the NES and SNES games hard still? How come Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are harder? Maybe because Twilight Princess is just easier. In fact, that is the same with all of Nintendo's sequels. They are getting easier.

I personally think that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess was harder that A Link to the Past, I can't compare the Mario's because I never beat Super Mario World, and I never played New Super Mario Bros. But I have a question for you, what do you think are the overall better games?

Is this a serious question? Super Mario World and A Link to the Past are far better.

By the way, did you play the GBA version of ALttP or the SNES version? I ask this because the GBA version was made easier, just like the GBA version of Super Mario World.

Originally Posted by Blizzaga

I see nothing wrong with a game that's easy at the beginning, but gets harder as you progress. In fact, that's how it always should be. That way, you attract all gamers.

I agree.

You guys are complaining about nothing. Miyamoto is only emphasizing what Nintendo has been doing since the start.

He is not talking about making games harder as you progress, he is saying that challenge doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by KeeSomething

We all know their strategy, Hungry Gamer, I'm just saying it is a cop out to their veteran fans. Regardless if Nintendo is trying to appeal to all gamers, they aren't. The Wii, as of right now, does not support the hardcore gamer's needs. Why? Because either the games have no depth like Wii Fit, or the game is too easy. Difficulty settings are a must because Nintendo's philosophy is wrong! One difficulty doesn't not appeal to everyone.

And I agree with you somewhat. I'm just trying to explain why games are easier.

No. A lot of fans like myself are fed up with Nintendo's catering to the casual gamers without supporting the fans that made them as big as they are. Wii is my last Nintendo console, and if Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 take me a few days to beat and offer no challenge, I will sell my Wii and buya real next-gen console.

Bet you get the same result. They may not be as easy but it'll still take less that a week or two.

That's right, I'm buying there games and playing them, so I have a right to complain about Nintendo's decline.

Go ahead! I'm not taking your right.

No, I still have a lot of trouble with pretty much any NES game including SMB 1-3, Zelda, and Metroid. Do you honestly think Twilight Princess was so easy just because I'm more experienced now? That could be part of the reason, but how come I still find the NES and SNES games hard still? How come Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are harder? Maybe because Twilight Princess is just easier. In fact, that is the same with all of Nintendo's sequels. They are getting easier.

Question answered above. Simpler, limited place for strategy.

In a sense, I agree. For example, the new Super Mario was never a real challenge but yet, almost everyone who played the game loved it to bits. Of course there has to be some level of difficulty but having games at the level of God of War or Devil May Cry all the time would really get tiresome quickly. If you look at some very fun and impressive games, alot of them are never overly difficult. Prince of Persia Sands of Time series, Gears of War (ya it had it's hard moments...but it was still fairly easy), almost all Zelda's, heck I think almost all the post SNES mario games have been pretty easy.

I do appreciate a really hard game every now and then, but having a constant stream of tough games without something that keeps it easy for you would just turn me (and I'm sure a lot) of people off of gaming. I'm sure there will be plenty of games that offer a challenge but I don't see too big of a problem with some easier games. The time to raise a red flag is when we start seeing games like Brain Age and Nintendogs take priority over the Zelda's and Metroids.

Originally Posted by Hungry Gamer

Play it like you would a Nintendo game (or whatever your favorite system is). Play it none stop, or everytime you get a chance.

I don't get how it would somehow change my view or enjoyment of the game; or change the difficulty (if that's what you're implying).

What are you implying anyways? That if I somehow trick myself into thinking that I'm playing a good game (when I'm in actuality not), I will eventually enjoy it?

[QUOTE=Hungry Gamer;1619793]And I agree with you somewhat. I'm just trying to explain why games are easier.[quote]
Experience and practive is certainly a facotr in games becoming easier, but Nintendo is also making their games much easier.

Bet you get the same result. They may not be as easy but it'll still take less that a week or two.

Some games are like that, no doubt. But there are plent of hardcore titles comin or already out for Xbox 360 and PS3 that will have lasting appeal. Not to mention, you can take the games online to test your skills against others, unlock achievements, and many of those games have difficulty settings that reward you with new modes or unlockables.

I can't think of a single Wii game yet that would last a gamer 2 weeks and have them coming back for more.

Question answered above. Simpler, limited place for strategy.

NES games were very primitive, so they were challenging based on the limitations of the game engine, but Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 were not primitive that way and they still managed to offer great challenge for the most part.

Originally Posted by Dark Link

I don't get how it would somehow change my view or enjoyment of the game; or change the difficulty (if that's what you're implying).

What are you implying anyways? That if I somehow trick myself into thinking that I'm playing a good game (when I'm in actuality not), I will eventually enjoy it?

No, I'm saying one simple thing: You will beat it in a week or less.

Originally Posted by KeeSomething

Experience and practive is certainly a facotr in games becoming easier, but Nintendo is also making their games much easier.

Maybe.

Some games are like that, no doubt. But there are plent of hardcore titles comin or already out for Xbox 360 and PS3 that will have lasting appeal. Not to mention, you can take the games online to test your skills against others, unlock achievements, and many of those games have difficulty settings that reward you with new modes or unlockables.

I can't think of a single Wii game yet that would last a gamer 2 weeks and have them coming back for more.

What PS3 game leaves lasting appeal? Example please. Just like the Wii, its still in it's first year.

NES games were very primitive, so they were challenging based on the limitations of the game engine, but Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 were not primitive that way and they still managed to offer great challenge for the most part.

Sigh... To me, Ocarina of Time is not that much harder than Twilight Princess. Super Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine both had the same concept of collect the items, so did the Banjo series and several others. Metroid Prime had a difficulty setting as well as extras (an underhanded way to get them, but still extras). Super Metroid... well I haven't played it in a while, I'll get back to you on that. Super Paper Mario is almost a whole new genre. Resident Evil 4: WE was dumbed down due to controls, but has many extras. Call of Duty 3has a difficulty setting, and I haven't beat it on easy yet. (partally because I stopped playing it, very fun game, I got to get back to it). The Fire Emblem series is... hard, now thats a game you should play.

Originally Posted by Hungry Gamer

No, I'm saying one simple thing: You will beat it in a week or less.

It's not as simple as just beating a game under certain amount of time.

Adding actual difficulty to a game means more then just extended gameplay time. It adds a sense of desiring to accomplish something, and then gaining that sense of accomplishment. It also sometimes even replay value if you so desire to go back to a game that's been difficult for you in the past (it all depends on the person). It gives players a meaningful challenge to complete and a motive to complete that challenge -- it adds depth; instead of the game just basically walking you right through the game while holding your hand. In most cases it also gives diversity to the gameplay as well.

It can never actually hurt the game just to add a difficulty level. Miyamoto seems to think so otherwise though. . .


EDIT:

Originally Posted by Hungry Gamer

What PS3 game leaves lasting appeal? Example please. Just like the Wii, its still in it's first year.

At the top of my head:

- Resistance: Fall of Man
- Ninja Gaiden Sigma
- Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas
- The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

(Although to be fair, those last two are on the 360 as well.)

:: Ponders:: Well, that does annoy me somewhat. But I dont think hes really selling out persay. He just thinks thats whats best for people. At the same time I feel as though his co-workers wont sit idly by and allow myamoto to make all these games some cake walk with no difficulty settings. Though mario, zelda, and metroid I am not so sure about. They wre traditionaly to have one setting and will probobly stay that way. But as time goes on sooner or later there going to have to realise what people rellay want. ( game testers ftw)

Originally Posted by Hungry Gamer

No, I'm saying one simple thing: You will beat it in a week or less.

No. Oblivion alone will last longer than all Wii games combined.

What PS3 game leaves lasting appeal? Example please. Just like the Wii, its still in it's first year.

As of right now, only Oblivion and Resistance. I was mostly thinking about Xbox 36, but even so, PS3 has an extremely bright future that goes beyond 2008. Wii end off 2007 with 3 classics, which is insane, but 2008 is empty.

Sigh... To me, Ocarina of Time is not that much harder than Twilight Princess.

Both are easy games. I won't deny it, even if Ocarina of Time is harder.

Super Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine both had the same concept of collect the items, so did the Banjo series and several others.

OK...? How does this relate to games being more challenging?

[quote]Metroid Prime had a difficulty setting as well as extras (an underhanded way to get them, but still extras). Super Metroid... well I haven't played it in a while, I'll get back to you on that.[quote]

Super Paper Mario is almost a whole new genre.

It most certainly did not, and again, what does that have to do with difficulty?

Resident Evil 4: WE was dumbed down due to controls, but has many extras.

How was it dumbed down? It's a port that apparently was improved and made easier with a superior control. Difficulty created by an awkward or less-than-perfect control scheme is more of a flaw. It's not the same unless they added a win button, like the parry attack in Wind Waker. That would be dumbing down a game.

Call of Duty 3has a difficulty setting, and I haven't beat it on easy yet. (partally because I stopped playing it, very fun game, I got to get back to it). The Fire Emblem series is... hard, now thats a game you should play.

All shooters have diffiulty settings, and I'm not a fan of tactical strategy games so I would not enjoy Fire Emblem.

I'm going to give you guys the simple answer: F*** NO. Look how creative the wii is. And, the new titles coming out are insanely good. If you look at all the trilogies, everyone followes them strongly. This remains true for nintendo. Even thinking of him selling out is stupid.

What's up with everyone and difficulty?

Originally Posted by Idiot Fan Boy

If it's not difficult, then it's not fun.

Come on, video games are meant to be fun. That's it. It's called ENTERTAINMENT. Difficulty has nothing to do with it. If you want the game to be difficult, then make it difficult yourself. Play through Medtroid whilst skipping power ups. Complete a shooter using only a pistol. The games aren't getting easier, you're getting unimaginative.

And as for 'selling out,' how can a man who defined video game characters 'sell out?' What's there to 'sell out' to? You're taking a term that applied to 70's production companies and applying it to video games.

Calm down and play Zelda on a three heart run.

Originally Posted by Fish Head

Come on, video games are meant to be fun. That's it. It's called ENTERTAINMENT. Difficulty has nothing to do with it.

Hey, Mr. Genius, I got you some news: For MANY people, difficulty only makes the game more fun. Don't think you're talking on behalf of all gamers here. Of course difficulty is directly tied with the fun factor and quality of the game. I had much more fun beating Euryale in God of War 2 than beating these so called "fun" bosses in TWW for example. Get over it: Difficulty equals fun for many people, and you can't change that fact.

Originally Posted by Fish Head

If you want the game to be difficult, then make it difficult yourself. Play through Medtroid whilst skipping power ups. Complete a shooter using only a pistol. The games aren't getting easier, you're getting unimaginative.

That's also a very good sign of a mediocre product. If I'm expecting a complete package, then it's supposed to make me feel challenged without me interfering. That's how good games are: they put upgrades because you HAVE to use them unless you want to get yourself killed, which adds content to iy. They add guns because you HAVE to use them unless you want to get overrun by hard enemies.

Originally Posted by Fish Head

And as for 'selling out,' how can a man who defined video game characters 'sell out?' What's there to 'sell out' to? You're taking a term that applied to 70's production companies and applying it to video games.

How can he sell out? By spitting out all this bull**** in an interview. Miyamoto is not a god, stop being a fanboy. He clearly lost his touch in making videogames, and now it seems he's throwing everything out of the window.

Originally Posted by Fish Head

Calm down and play Zelda on a three heart run.

Do I ahve to miss content from a game in order to enjoy it? I see you're a conformist. That's the type of costumer Nintendo wants, good job .

I like games with a story. Not like Big Brain or WarioWare or Cooking Mama or Wiisports or Wiifit or Wing Island or Mario Party or Mario Strikers.

They're fun games, they're fun to play, but I like games with stories. Like Zelda. And Fable. And Final Fantasy. And other games. Miyamoto may dumb down difficulty, which I don't mind too much, it is a bit of a bummer they're totally making me waste 50 bucks for some easy game I'll crank through. Like Zelda. But as long as more story filled games or games that feel like whole games and not a bunch of mini games thrown onto one disc with a 50 dollar price tag, I'm good.

Originally Posted by Tasslehoff

Seriously, your all being hypocrites.

Well I don't know about you, but Twilight Princess was un-satisfyingly easy. Yes most of us are pros and Zelda games would be a lot harder if we hadn't played one before. But TP was easy in all aspects, especially the enemies. Now how much time would it take to code a three level difficulty setting? Easy, Medium, Hard? Make all enemies harder to beat higher you go, IE they can take more hits and they do more damage to you.

Just that, would make the game a little more satisfyingly for the hardcore gamers.

And no we're not being hypocrites, we just simply want Nintendo to remember what made them all their money. "Casual" games weren't around 24 years ago.

But hey, who cares. My Wii is on Ebay, I might buy another one when the next Zelda comes out.

Indeed, it would be easy to program the enemies to simply make more damage to you, the higher the difficulty you want.

Frankly, this all has a simple answer. Nintendo want money, just like anybody else. If they see easy games sell very well, they'll stick to that tactic. They won't care much what we say.

The only way a fanbase can truly make itself heard is by looking at sale numbers. From Nintendo's money-perspective, most of us seem pleased.

Stop it right now. My mom can beat SMB1, that's not a tough game. My parents also beat LoZ quest 2, so I must say this... The Wii has been the only other console that I have seen my mom play.

TP was the toughest 3D Zelda game by far. I did a 3 heart quest with OoT, and a 3 Heart Quest with TP, and I died a LOT more often in TP. It's just that certain Zelda Traditions are getting in the way of the game's difficulty, and make the game a cakewalk.

The Wii has no good games for it right now that aren't purchased in the VC. Thank god I got mine for free.

Wasn't I suppost to make a point? Oh yea...
What if Nintendo purposely put all of their easiest games out first, so that they would rapidly grow their casual gamer base, then sell the more Hardcore games later?

Whoa, whoa... people seem to be losing sight of what makes games fun. Just because certain games aren't hard doesn't mean they are terrible games. I'm with Miyamoto on the fact that easier games can be enjoyable. I love playing Wii Sports, despite its simplicity.

I'm against Miyamoto on the fact that he seems to think that hardcore games are no longer the way to go... Which is bad thinking. They used to be preaching "catering to all audiences", and I hope for the love of games that it still includes Nintendo's biggest fans, most of whom grew up with Nintendo. As someone said earlier, at least Miyamoto doesn't control EVERY Nintendo game. And there is that fact that he said he was making Galaxy almost too hard for the rest of the staff. I just hope he didn't back off TOO much on that.

There's also what they're doing with games like Galaxy and Phantom Hourglass: reinventing something in a way so that new and experienced gamers alike enjoy it while having a fresh experience. I'll be darned if anyone masters all that Galaxy spherical-planet gravity-hoppin' quickly.

At least we're getting things like Brawl, Metroid Prime 3, and Galaxy now, which definately aren't for just anybody. But down the road, I'm a little ...curious... to see where Nintendo's headed. I hope they make the right choices... I don't think they'd be so stupid as to forget the fans that built them. Again, "Miyamoto" isn't synonymous with "Nintendo's entirety".

Originally Posted by Old-Sckool Link

TP was the toughest 3D Zelda game by far. I did a 3 heart quest with OoT, and a 3 Heart Quest with TP, and I died a LOT more often in TP. It's just that certain Zelda Traditions are getting in the way of the game's difficulty, and make the game a cakewalk.

Aren't you kind of contradicting yourself there?

Having different outcomes on a three-heart challenge doesn't mean one game was less difficult then the other. Firstly, when comparing both games as a whole (not by a superficial challenge that doesn't tell what the difficulty of the game is), it's obvious that OOT was harder. Secondly, I'm sure you've had a lot of experience with OOT -- so you've obviously perfected your "form" over the past few years; instead of the past nine months or so.

I hardly doubt "traditions" (whatever that means) was the excuse Miyamoto had in mind when developing TP. It obviously lacked the difficulty OOT had. Enemies, puzzles, temples. Everything.

Wasn't I suppost to make a point? Oh yea...
What if Nintendo purposely put all of their easiest games out first, so that they would rapidly grow their casual gamer base, then sell the more Hardcore games later?

Judging by Miyamoto's blatant views of difficulty and how they won't be needed in the "future of gaming," I hardly doubt that's the case. Unless of course, he himself is a hypocrite.

Originally Posted by Tonchiki

And there is that fact that he said he was making Galaxy almost too hard for the rest of the staff. I just hope he didn't back off TOO much on that.

Oh! God forbid he make a game that actually provides some fulfilling difficulty. . .

I'd love to see what his standards are for a "hard" game. As stated before by Kee, he said TP was going to be hard. Look what the end results ending up giving us. One of the most linear (and, quite probably one of the most easiest) Zelda's to date.