Windmill's Blogs

Going on Strike

Wii Music. 95% of movie franchise games that will ever come to video game land. Sport franchises. Even Animal Crossing, are all an example of the video game community not punishing the video game developers enough, and them getting lazy, resulting in games not up to snuff as they should be. Yes, even Animal Crossing. No, I am not joking.

_{Let me please excuse myself first if I refer to a lot of Nintendo games for reference. Historically, I am a nintendo gamer, but not strictly held to nintendo games.}

Back on track then.

Video game developers will make what brings in the most moolah. Can you blame them? It is strictly business, after all. And currently off the basis of strong franchise loyalty and/or pretty pictures, people will buy most any game from said critera shoved in their face. Don't believe me? Here is a quick example.

Jaws Unleashed

Selling a syaggering 250,000 copies in 2006 despite its abysal 5.2 Gamestats score, is like the video game community flogging itself.

_{Why would you buy this.}

Gamespot compared it to Psychonauts, an extremely impressive platformer that garnered a 8.8 on Gamestats and won numerous awards, that sold less than half the copies of Jaws Unleashed over 3 platforms (PC, PS2 and Xbox) in 2006. What are we doing to ourselves, people?! This applies to other movie franchise games too. Hasn't the gaming community learned its lesson yet- movie franchises suck, stop buying them, and maybe developers will stop making horrible movie games.

Wii Music

The brain child of our beloved Shigeru Miyamoto, who brought us so many countless gems. How could he have sunk so low?

I think this video sums it up the best :)

How could this genius of a man who just recently gave us Super Mario Galaxy bring us this? Here, let me show you.

At E3 2008, Shigeru was asked the following question by a European Games Journalist;

"Isn't 'Wii Music' more a toy than a video game?"

Shiggys response;

"Yes, that's right, and that's why it's more interesting than a video game."

Such an answer was greeted with applause by the audience. Now whether that was merely polite applause we do not know. Yet it doesn't matter, they were still in doing so telling Nintendo good boy! Keep making these mindless casual games! We'll buy it!

_{"Toys" don't deserve him. THIS is where he should be!}

Here is a classic example of where rewarding developers for average games has blown up in our face. How can we blame Nintendo after what we taught them through Wii Fit?

Everyone rushed out to buy Wii Fit, particularly overseas. In fact, its in such hot demand in the States people are selling it above MSRP on ebay! Yet us kiwis are not exempt. I'm ashamed to say it but Wii Fit is sold out in one of the EB games's stores in Christchurch.

_{Speaks for itself.}

For such a highly priced game as Wii Fit selling for a premium $200 NZ, the game is just not up to snuff. You could, if you shopped around for a good price at a community gym, get a one year membership for less than $200 (and tell me, would you truly play Wii Fit for an entire year?). Maybe even enough left over to buy a cheap MP3 player to make the exercise that much more fun. Extremely simplified "exercise program" vs. access to tons of fantastic fitness equipment. HMM. Guess what people chose. Want to have fun while exercising? Get an eyetoy. Way Cheaper.

Therefore, how can you blame Nintendo, for bringing out a fisher-price like "toy" that is Wii Music, with a replay value of 10 minutes? 

Sports Franchises

The question is always pitted, "Why do people buy the same game year after year?" In reference to sports franchises, especially Madden.

_{Rated 0/10 on IGN. Here is their review- "Note: Olympic Hockey Nagano '98 adds new colors, player defections and exclusive world hockey teams to Wayne Gretzky Hockey '98 (already only a slightly enhanced version of the first Wayne Gretzky Hockey). Other than that the two games are identical. We'll post a new review when Midway releases a new game."}

They update the roster, add in a few features, and the sports fans go frantic! I'll admit, I'm not quite the sport junkie myself, but I do have some common sense in me. As much fun as it may be to replay the game with different faces on the character models, I really think this has got to go. While sometimes EA actually decides to put some effort in and update the game, most of the time it doesn't. Do yourself a favour, and resist purchasing the latest NBA game without checking the reviews to see if the update is substantial.

Animal Crossing: City Folk

This is what this blog has been building up to- my very large rant for the day. Here is a bit of history for you: Animal Crossing was first released as Animal Forest in Japan in 2001.

_{Here is a screenshot of Animal Forest for the N64.}

It recevied its well-deserved critical acclaim. Sadly, the game never got localised. Instead, it was essentially ported to the Gamecube as Animal Crossing.

It arrived in America in late 2001, and came almost 2 years after that to New Zealand shores (Europe had to wait almost a year after that!). Essentially, the game was awesome.

_{One of the best games ever.}

If you liked it, your life became your little village for the next two years of your life. I know mine did. Even my non-gaming sister loved it. But after this time, after you'd done pretty much everything, you eventually moved on, hoping the next game will be awesome. The game sold pretty well, too.

And then came Animal Crossing: Wild World.

_{This feels familiar...}

I was so excited, until it turned out to be a port of the original game I'd finally grown tired of- except now I could change my hair style, and use a broken online system! Fun! Never mind that fact that your new flash hair style eventually stopped masking the fact you'd already grown tired of creating orchards. Yet, amoungst casual gamers, especially in Japan, this sold exceptionally well, millions upon millions of units.

Then Nintendo teased fans with the Animal Crossing Animated Movie, only being released in Japan.

_{By far the best ever video game movie!}

The ideas of such a living, breathing world created in the movie were mesmerising, especially since at the end of the movie it said "See you on the Wii", leaving gamers wondering if the movie was a start of the things to come. But then it happened: E3, 2008. Nintendo announces its hardcore game;

Animal Crossing: City Folk

_{Deja Vu stopped being funny a long time ago.}

Essentially a mixed port of Animal Crossing (a port of Animal Forest) and Animal Crossing: Wild World (essentially a port of the former) with the exact same game you got bored of with few extra features. How you have;

• A extremely small city, with shops that you already had
• A weird and expensive "WiiSpeak" microphone so you can now talk to your friends when you go over to each others towns via WiFi (already available in Animal Crossing: Wild World) until you realise... there is nothing to do here.
  
• Uh... this time instead of starting the game by coming in a taxi, you come in a bus?
• Oh yeah, you can put on a "Mii mask". Hold on, hold on, we have our winner for technical excellence of the year! LittleBigPlanet, move along.

It was so horrible of an announcement, that it is impossible to describe the horror that filtered through me. All hype for the game was now gone, in an instant. THERE AREN'T EVEN MOTION SENSING CONTROLS. You have Animal Crossing, with an axe, and you don't include the option to have a swinging wiimote axe?! It doesn't need to be the only way to use an axe, but it SHOULD BE AN OPTION, COMMON SENSE DEMANDS IT!!!

Here is Nintendo, expecting us to pay for the exact same game, with a little "city" attached. Do you know WHY, people?

Because people buy these rubbish/same game as 7 years ago games.

Quite frankly, I am plain sick of it. I check out reviews. I find out about my games before hand. Why don't other people too?! Its common sense! This shouldn't be the Weet Bix Triatholon where everyone wins. This is what should be the high-grade cut throat video game market. Instead, its the video game market where games sell because of franchise loyalty/pretty pictures on the box.

_{This game sold moderately well.}

Go and do your bit for the environment, and go and do your bit to further raise the standard of video games and actually buy GOOD ones. If we all band together to punish developers for making poor games but reward them with shiny dollars for good ones, I'm sure the quality of games would increase expoentially, since we'd stop them from making a profit off their rush-jobs.

I'd rather like that, actually. We have some amazing titles coming out now. Titles like Mirrors Edge, Fallout 3, LittleBigPlanet, Banjo Kazooie Nuts & Bolts, Star Ocean IV, Fable 3... the list is just huge! (See, I'm not totally cynical!) 

Yet we shouldn't be placid. The more we demand, the more we will get! Don't cater for second best! Make the developers serve YOU, not the other way around!

 del.icio.us  Facebook  Reddit

ReplyPosted by pantomimechicken on 11 August 2008, 12:05AM

I do think u have to take into account the number of idiots there are in the world. And your right it is bout profit it costs 90 million to make a blockbuster game these days, at least. Much cheaper to take a game thats paid for itself spend pocket change on it and make 200% profit. Profit is tasty.

 

ReplyPosted by BlackRetina on 11 August 2008, 12:42AM

I'm proud to say I've never bought a game with a rating below 8/10. Probably because I find looking at game reviews and such fun. Other people don't share the same vigour.

 

ReplyPosted by stupidlikeafox on 11 August 2008, 06:55AM

lol, the idea of playing as jaws souns kinda cool. just swim about eating dumb people could be fun...

 

ReplyPosted by Ron on 11 August 2008, 09:18AM

Great blog!!!

 

ReplyPosted by LoNe on 11 August 2008, 12:55PM

potomimechicken hit it on the head.

we're outnumbered by idiots :(

 

ReplyPosted by Windmill on 11 August 2008, 03:40PM

So what do we do about the idiots if they won't listen to reason? D:

 

ReplyPosted by Koopa18 on 11 August 2008, 03:51PM

Haha Jaws unleashed was fun.. well, it was fun if you didnt play the actual game, and instead hired it and just swam around eating people.

Good stuff - but i wouldnt go round criticizing a game that isnt out yet, and we dont even know all the features yet.

And they arent working for scores, they are working for money like the rest of us.

Eg Okami, fantastic game, sold extremely poorly on PS2, and the Wii version isnt faring too well either. The developer went bust. If they had made Kung Fu Panda, they probably wouldnt have.

 

ReplyPosted by Windmill on 11 August 2008, 04:08PM

I think we can criticise a game based off the knowledge we have. In the case of Animal Crossing, what we have seen is a very substantial amount of information, no? Quite a lot, we have been hands on, had interviews and what not. We can also go off past experience to help us.

Based off the knowledge we have, Animal Crossing: City Folk is looking pretty poor in terms of originality. If you haven't played one of the other versions then OK. But they are not going off that premesis. This is meant to be a "hardcore" game therefore it deserves hardcore treatment- therefore it should be a *decent follow up* that is original.

But yet it is not. We have heard you'll be doing the same things again- digging up fossils, gyroids, watering plants, visiting villages, doing chores, PAYING OFF A HOUSE, fishing, having extremely similar events, etc. What we can see from past experience with AC: WW is they named the title off the latest and greatest feature- the fact its a whole world open to you in terms of peoples villages. In this game, the latest and greatest feature is the city. While that may improve gameplay a bit by having shops open to you (this is actually largely debateable..), it is not enough to mask everything else you will be doing is basically the same. If there was a large change, it would have been noted by now when people explored the villages in hands-on stuff.

Heck, even the *village size is the same!*

We should also I don't think be afraid to criticise games. Even if new knowledge comes to light, we can then change our impressions then. However, I think that if we don't criticise early enough, we risk not being able to influence the developers. If they fail to be influenced fine, but we should try to get what WE want. Because WE are funding them. They need us. They are serving us. "The customer always comes first" after all. It is best to not be to placid.

 

ReplyPosted by Koopa18 on 11 August 2008, 04:12PM

Unless ALL the details have surfaced?

I havn't checked up on it lately. The more i think about it less it interests me, as i think Animal Crossing is perfectly suited to a handheld, as the anywhere anytime aspect of it is pretty major in a game like that.

 

ReplyPosted by Koopa18 on 11 August 2008, 04:18PM

Posted that at the same time - Is the village really the same size?!

That sucks! To tell the truth, i was quite dissapointed with my villages size in WW!

 

ReplyPosted by Windmill on 11 August 2008, 04:28PM

I actually think Animal Crossing is better suited to the big screen. Animal Crossing on the gamecube- if you liked it- was an exceptionally immersive experience. Therefore, I believe it deserves the full treatment :3

I think though what you're missing to be honest, is whether or not full details have been shed or not, we're in a perfect position to judge the game in its current state, and hypothesis. If we don't, then we are just leaving it up to the developers, and they may have nothing more planned, so if we stay nuetral, and don't express ourselves, they may decide to keep it the same. Games have been changed based off impressions in old builds.

Then you could say the same about a review. You shouldn't review it until you've been playing a year to experience the full Animal Crossing experience... that is utterly ridiculous. We can make judgements based off what we know now, we just have to be willing to change them :)

Another thing too, is of course, the likelihood of there being anything significantly different is extremely, and I mean, extremely tiny. We have a lot of information on this game, it is following the same patterns of the past in the way information is being filtered. It is also following in similar to vein of what we would actually EXPECT of Nintendo and the Animal Crossing franchise.

The changes we're seeing are ones that further refine the experience, e.g. new items, DS connectivity to help you move your character from one town to another to "travel". However, these refinements just make little niggly things easier. They don't change the overall game at all. The overall game is still extremely EXTREMELY the same. Theres plenty of info out, even a pretty large wikipedia page on it :) if you're interested.

 

ReplyPosted by Windmill on 11 August 2008, 04:32PM

Hold on, this is in response to your other thing :)

Yeah I know. That does suck. The thing is, they just aren't really changing anything. It was great, but we need more to keep entertained. Animal Crossing is a game you play literally to death if you like it, it is the very nature of the game. If you don't and you don't play it much, the series is probably not right for you, because without playing it constantly, you miss out on so much.

Therefore, when you've totally played through it, you need more, not another enclosed town with a pathetically small city attached. In the AC movie for instance, there was an awesome cave they explored. Heck, why don't we get more areas to explore! Villages should also be so much more interactive, and characters shouldn't be so wooden and should be far more advanced and develop REAL relationships. It'd be hard but it'd definitely be possible! The problem is there isn't enough money in it for Nintendo. So they will just do what makes them the most profit. People will buy this in droves when it comes out, so they will do it.

 

ReplyPosted by Koopa18 on 11 August 2008, 04:44PM

I missed the GCN one, and only recently got the DS one (about 3 weeks ago) and am still hooked, but find myself playing it at strange times which i wouldnt be able to play an actual console version.

But, if i can spend extended periods of time playing Harvest Moon, im sure i can do the same with Animal Crossing :D

What kind of things would you personally like to see added? I would love to be able to marry some freaky Octopus woman, but that brings up all kinds of debates..

Online competitions, such as in Mario Kart would also be pretty awesome. And ACTUAL online digsites, where you can excavate all sorts of things with a team of friends.

 

ReplyPosted by Windmill on 11 August 2008, 05:12PM

Well what would I like to have added to it? If I'm going to look at that, I suppose I need to break it down.

As a gamer, I live off atmosphere. This is why I adored Ocarina of Time. The atmosphere was incredibly thick with a sense of reality. The game wasn't realistic, but it was believeable, and made you feel like you were part of this huge quest, that you were this mystic mysterious super-natural reserved-yet-not-angsty hero.

Now then, this is something Animal Crossing did will for me, especially on the big screen. It created this sense that you were part of the town. It was exceptionally immsersive. So much so, I used to actually think the characters and I held relationships within the game- I was just seeing though more than what was there, the characters didn't change too much based off how you acted, but eh.

Therefore, I want to feel immersed in the game again. I want additions which will do this. A huge part to that would be believeable relationships with the animals. This I don't know how would be done. If I had pen and paper and was sitting there in front of you, I could probably nut out some good ideas/concepts. What you need is fluid towns, alive whether you are there or not, and you interact with it, and it changes. Not that you add flowers, and animals might say wow nice flowers. Realistic/believeable results must occur that are reasonably complex.

E.g. animals see new flowers, gather around, and they start to chat. Then one talks to another and says they'd like flowers like that too. So the other agrees to help them, and they go off, and the buy some flowers, and they plant the garden. Then they might come to you, and take you by the arm, and show you the flowers, and talk to you about them. Even if that isn't realistic, if its done right, its believable, and its a complexish action, which adds to the immersive nature.

Or perhaps you bring a active character some food, and he gets fat off of it, so decides to burn it off. He decides to go for an early morning run around the village. He then goes to find a running partner. However, he finds all of the animals busy except for a very sweet, innocent but lazy girl. She agrees out of being a push over. They get up, he speeds ahead, and she's weazing along. She ends up at the end going back to bed, and sleeps in significantly for the day.

What we need, is immersive interaction. That, is what we're not getting. That is possible. But it requires EFFORT. If Nintendo can't do that, they could still do so much more than what they are doing.

 

ReplyPosted by Ruptunex on 11 August 2008, 06:31PM

Well done. Great blog. Thoroughly thought out. unlike mine...

 

ReplyPosted by ChatterboxZombie on 11 August 2008, 07:06PM

LOL!
Shigeru Miyamoto just got RICK-ROLLED!

 

ReplyPosted by howzit on 11 August 2008, 08:25PM

sweet blog dude

 

ReplyPosted by Ron on 12 August 2008, 11:08AM

Can't wait to see the next blog!

 

ReplyPosted by Rapidity on 12 August 2008, 02:43PM

Can't agree more, however I must admit my fingers are twitching at the prospect of Fifa 09, I already own Fifa 08 maybe 5 of the previous iterations

 

ReplyPosted by Genocide on 12 August 2008, 08:10PM

Great blog. It is unfortunate the majority of people are stupid.

 

ReplyPosted by Ruptunex on 28 August 2008, 12:03AM

People = shtiupd

 

ReplyPosted by cute_maori on 22 November 2008, 01:30PM

Awesome blog, bro took me 20mins just to finish reading this.