Eh, other developers are already basically making Zelda games minus the name, and you can play them without giving nintendo money. Unsighted, Death’s Door, and Crosscode are all great and take strong inspiration from Zelda, just to name a few.
Keep your eyes open for Mina the Hollower hopefully later this year, it wears its Link’s Awakening inspiration on its sleeve. Adorable mouse character and healthy dose of Castlevania mashup from the developers of Shovel Knight, I’ll be surprised if it turns out anything other than a slam dunk.
I don't know if difficult is the word I'd use, but I couldn't stand Pikmin 3, and I imagine I couldn't stand Pikmin 1 either, because of the time limits. I want to be able to take my time, strategize, and explore at my own pace. It ruins the fun to know that I only have 30 days, or that I'll lose if I don't collect X amount of fruit per day.
Pikmin 2 is so far the best game in the series, in my opinion. If I want to spend three days building up my Pikmin army and stockpiling the sprays, I can do it without worry that I'm running behind now. I don't need to rush through the game, and can take it at my own pace.
If only there were a mod for Pikmin 3 that removes the juice mechanic, or gives unlimited juice from the start.
Never played pikmin 3, but I had a funny experience with the day limit in pikmin 1. You have way more than enough time to complete the game in the day limit, even if you play very suboptimally.
Despite that, in my initial playthrough I still hated it for all the reasons you listed. Theoretically, I could see how a day-limit could be good for the game. Adding tension and the like. But on that first playthrough when I had no idea how much time is worth, I always felt the need to rush. As it turned out, I could have easily taken a few days to just explore or strategize. But there's no way to know that at the start. Maybe it could work better if the game could communicate somehow if you're ahead of schedule or something.
I feel like it’s a lot like the weapon breaking in Breath of the Wild - one of those systems that imposes heavy limits on players to enforce their creativity and flexibility in their approach.
I know a lot of people approach every game in a completionist, meticulous way where they do every quest, never use any consumable items, etc; and it often ruins the fun. It’s also why Ubisoft had the somewhat crazy idea in Far Cry 5 of actually forcing you to do story missions after game progress, trying to use designer mechanics to push some variety into people’s game sessions.
In Pikmin’s case, and I think Dead Rising / Persona too, the time limit is meant to get you to prioritize path planning so you get as much as you can done in a certain span. The core gameplay of Pikmin just isn’t all that interactive when you have all the time in the world for it - it’s built around the benefits of delegation and synchronization.
I haven't played Pikmin but when it comes to BotW/TotK I still would prefer if weapons didn't break. Seems to me that it creates grind and it takes away flexibility, because more situational options take the same slots as raw power, and get spent just as quickly. Comes to mind also how XCom 2 insisted on turn limits, and one of the first mods it got was to remove the turn limits.
Sometimes designers insist on certain limits to prevent that players "optimize the fun away" but they don't realize that some players legitimately do have more fun without those limits.
I feel the same way. My current BoTW save has a bunch of semi-unique or rare weapons in my inventory and I don't have any more slots. Whenever I want to fight something now I have to ask myself "which thing should I break and never get back?"
Oh some basic mobs to clear? Oh well, all I have are these super high damage weapons. It discourages me from getting into fights because I feel like my weapons aren't balanced for the enemies at hand, I gotta save them for tougher fights.
Comes to mind also how XCom 2 insisted on turn limits,
I mean I would argue sure they were a bit too tight and I'm 100% down for increasing them but Xcom (2013) did have a problem with overwatch creep. Where people were legitimately optimizing the fun out of the game. Time limits force you to make less than optimal decisions where it works very well with the setting of Xcom 2 where you are a rebellion force, you don't have the luxury of taking things at your pace. You need to strike and get out before a larger response force come in to take you out. The only negative to the turn limits is you being forced to trigger pods early and pods waking up give them a free move action.
I get the reasoning in theory, but... it doesn't work for everyone.
Speaking for myself, I don't appreciate the anxiety. I only played XCom EU but the timed missions were the ones I hated the most. I just didn't want to play a game that was just that every time. It doesn't make me thrilled, it makes me stressed. I do actually want to inch my way through every mission, so I can stay prepared for danger, since the game will pop out a bunch of enemies with free actions at any moment. I felt like the commander of an elite team whenever I managed to badly damage any enemy even before they got the chance to attack.
When they "fixed" me "optimizing the fun out of the game", they just took me out of the game entirely. What they see as fun or not fun is not universal.
Some might say that if this is how I think maybe that's not the game for me. But if having both possibilities is an alternative, why shouldn't I be able to play the way I actually like it?
Given the amount of times Rayman 2 has been ported as a “new” game every time a new console was released I’m very surprised UbiSoft haven’t remastered it for PC yet.
“worker said they’d work if offered the chance”. As a long term Rayman fan - it’s not happening till proven otherwise. And by proven, I mean released.
It’s a great universe and getting more 3D Rayman is my childhood dream. But it’s been so many years of the character being sidelined, there’s basically no chance of a return. Especially since the creator of the lore left the company in disgrace
I don’t understand why they ever stopped. Rayman Legends was amazing, and wasn’t it a big success? They keep porting it everywhere but I’d really love a sequel.
He can’t decide that and is purely speaking from a perspective of a (legendary) game dev with more experience than some studios have as a whole. He’s been longer in the game than almost anyone else for better or worse.
They’re not a big tech company, not really, there’s no reason they would have the necessary compute to develop an AI in the first place so what they’re really announcing is that something that no one expected them to do is not going to happen.
In similarly news, Crayola are not going to develop an AI.
I didn’t really expect them to do that either, because what would it do?
The reason companies like Google are developing an AI is because they have a lot of processor capacity anyway, so they can make use of it and they have a broad enough product catalog that it fits with their current offerings.
Its Nintendo. They are always a decade behind on new technology.
Come 2032 or so they are going to be all about how great this technology that lets them create custom VAs for all their characters (so they never have another Marinet situation) is amazing.
Nintendo used to be ahead of the curve with the N64, but you’re right that they’ve been trailing behind for a while now. The Switch still uses the Nvidia Tegra X1 CPU/GPU, which was released in 2015.
I would actually very much argue that the N64 is when they “stopped trying” as it were.
Sony (which is a can of worms on its own), Sega, and even frigging Atari realized that CD-ROM was “the future”. Nintendo… let’s skip the Sony aspect and just say they chose not to.
The end result is that everyone else had 700 MB-ish to use for resources and were working on finding ways to hide the load times (RIP Shang Tsung). Nintendo continued to use a cartridge that could hold 4-12 and later 32 and 64 MB. This meant dialogue and cutscenes remained almost non-existent and texture work was similarly VERY limited in favor of solid colors.
Its Nintendo and most of The Internet are still the kids on the playground looking to beat up the Sega kids so we mostly talk about the good parts of those consoles going forward. But it is always fun to watch one of the Influencers have that “So… outside of like four games the N64 REALLY sucked, huh? BUT THOSE FOUR GAMES ARE THE GREATEST GAMES TO EVER EXIST AND I STILL LOVE YOU MIYAMOTO SAN!!!”. Whereas we all almost universally agree “The Playstation had an amazing library… and most of them look like someone sharted on the screen” because… 700 MB is still not a lot for texture and audio work. And “Oh yeah. The Sega Saturn existed… That was the tower of power, right?”
And from then on? It was gimmick city. The Gamecube was “portable” because of the handle. Wii is obvious. Wii U was marketed atrociously but actually was way ahead of its time in terms of second screen (… I actually loved my Wii U) but was marketed like another condom for a wii mote. And the Switch is obviously the gameboy/console hybrid.
They are not behind. Since they are not trying to catch up with Sony or MS. They purposely choose to use cheaper hardware and go a different direction. That’s not the same as being behind.
It’s their Blue Ocean strategy. They don’t want to compete directly against Sony and a trillion dollar company called Microsoft. Since the last time they did that it almost took the company under. They make a profit on each Switch sale since the first one was sold and they offer an entirely different gaming catalog that targets a different audience.
nintendoeverything.com
Najstarsze