ORIGINAL: ginjirou

The higher the scores are, the bigger the difference between scores.
Score of 1-5 basically means the same: the game is shit.
But the difference between 8 and 9 is huuuge.
So with such high scores as halo and Metroid Prime got, 0.7 means alot, especially since this is the average score by reviewers.

K. But it isn' t a Halo killer .... the multiplayer ..... lol ...... [/bisho]

Haha, true the multiplayer is awful.

Metroid DS Multi-player kills Halo in the control, speed, maps department tho.

I hope they are working on the same system multi-player for Wii Metroid. That would be awesome.

ORIGINAL: Virtua fighter 5

Metroid DS Multi-player kills Halo in the control, speed, maps department tho.

I hope they are working on the same system multi-player for Wii Metroid. That would be awesome.

nub.

Great reply. You obviously know all about it then.

Miyamotyo go back and do pikmin games whil the big boys create HALO3 and Blue dragon 2.

Miyamotyo go back and do pikmin games whil the big boys create HALO3 and Blue dragon 2.

I would rather play Pikmin over Blue Dragon any day.

K. But it isn' t a Halo killer .... the multiplayer ..... lol ...

Yeah the multiplayer sucks but the single player is better.

I would rather play Pikmin over Blue Dragon any day.

You' ve played Blue Dragon? How was it?

You' ve played Blue Dragon? How was it?

Nope I haven' t played but its an RPG so I wouldn' t like it. I am not a big RPG fan at all. Thats just me.

Maybe you haven' t been playing the right RPG' s?
Lots of RPG' s takes some time to get into. But it' s a wonderful genre, so you should try to find some titles you might like and give them a chance.

Maybe you haven' t been playing the right RPG' s?
Lots of RPG' s takes some time to get into. But it' s a wonderful genre, so you should try to find some titles you might like and give them a chance.

Well I have played several Final Fantasys. I have tryed to get into them but they never really appealed to me. I will give Blue Dragon a chance though, who knows I might actually like it. Is it Final Fantasy 13 that has got rid of the turn based battles? I might like that one.

FF12 you fool!, ff13 does have some sort of turn based fighting but its meant to be much more cooler, they are aiming for advent children style fights....

FF12 you fool!, ff13 does have some sort of turn based fighting but its meant to be much more cooler, they are aiming for advent children style fights....

Cool, I might check that out.

Oh wait I liked Pokemon blue and that was an RPG but that was a few years ago.

I would rather play Pikmin over Blue Dragon any day.

Thats your problem

Miyamotyo go back and do pikmin games whil the big boys create HALO3 and Blue dragon 2.

Do you have an overwhelming hate for Nintendo or something? At least they come up with a new concept every time they make a new franchise. If being a big boy means playing the same thing every time, I' d rather play some pikmin

Nintendo hardly has a monopoly on innovation, I don' t even consider them innovative today at all. They were the most innovative 10-15 years ago, but now they' re not. These days, they' re just doing the same crap they always did. Nintendo games are always way too simple. It' s not enough to have a good idea, you also need a good exectution. The raw mechanics of most Nintendo games are basic and boring. They keep remaking the same games over and over without changing any gameplay elements. Even Pikmin is still following the same rudimentary philosophy of Nintendo games. Collecting stuff! Every fucking Nintendo game is built upon the idea of collecting something. Have you noticed that? That' s why they' re kiddy, it' s not due to they' re lack of violence or their visual style. If you take away the stuff you' re supposed to collect in any Nintendo game you' d eliminate 80% of the gameplay in most cases. The only exception is SSB, which still has things to collect but it doesn' t ruin the game. Modern games do not focus their main element of gameplay on collecting junk, not the best ones at least.

Nintendo hardly has a monopoly on innovation, I don' t even consider them innovative today at all. They were the most innovative 10-15 years ago, but now they' re not. These days, they' re just doing the same crap they always did. Nintendo games are always way too simple. It' s not enough to have a good idea, you also need a good exectution. The raw mechanics of most Nintendo games are basic and boring. They keep remaking the same games over and over without changing any gameplay elements. Even Pikmin is still following the same rudimentary philosophy of Nintendo games. Collecting stuff! Every ***ing Nintendo game is built upon the idea of collecting something. Have you noticed that? That' s why they' re kiddy, it' s not due to they' re lack of violence or their visual style. If you take away the stuff you' re supposed to collect in any Nintendo game you' d eliminate 80% of the gameplay in most cases. The only exception is SSB, which still has things to collect but it doesn' t ruin the game. Modern games do not focus their main element of gameplay on collecting junk, not the best ones at least.

Of course, for everything else, there' s also driving things, shooting things, etc.. IMO, there are so many games of a certain genre that are pretty much the same with all the other games of that genre. I liked some mediocre game like Deus Ex: Invisible War because it was partially innovative in making an FPS that puts you on some futuristic city instead of in a system of dark chambers shooting aliens (Doom 3, Quake 4, Halo, whatever). I liked Quake 4 because of the realistic-ness (i really don' t think that' s a word) of it. The people actually knew how to salute officers (WOW) and you traveled in groups almost all the time. Doom 3 i especially thought was repetitive, and Halo is in a gray area.

Also, I' d like to point out the irony of Quez-whatsit saying Nintendo is for immature people while he spouts out profanity and insults. If you want maturity, you usually talk in a civilized manner, don' t you think?

Nintendo hardly has a monopoly on innovation, I don' t even consider them innovative today at all. They were the most innovative 10-15 years ago, but now they' re not.

Nintendo are too Innovative these days. Every single game Nintendo releases lately, seems to have some kind of Brand new feature or gameplay elemenet. I' ld love to see a company who are anywhere close to Nintendo. The only other comapnay was SEGA but now it' s just Nitnendo.


Edit
BTW.. (actually, im gonna make a new thread on what i was about to say)

Nintendo are too Innovative these days. Every single game Nintendo releases lately, seems to have some kind of Brand new feature or gameplay elemenet. I' ld love to see a company who are anywhere close to Nintendo. The only other comapnay was SEGA but now it' s just Nitnendo.

That crap that they have been making may be innovative to some, but to most it just seems like a half baked game where you twirl the wiimote around like a retard. When ever they make a game where i can use it as a sword(Not like in zelda where you swing it and it goes the same direction it would if i just pressed a button) and it actually work the way i use the wiimote, that would be innovative

I think the use of the word innovation is very confusing.
Let' s just never use that word again. Instead, let' s talk about if the products are good or bad. Who cares if they' re innovative or not?
Nintendo might or might not be innovative, but it doesn' t matter. What matters is the quality of their creations. The amount of fun you have by playing their games.
Innovation has lately become a confusing marketing term. The word should be banned.