"massivegrooves" <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote in message
news:428DE21F.6090609@massivegrooves.net...
>
>
> Boody Bandit wrote:
> > "massivegrooves" <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote in message
> > news:428D1559.9050304@massivegrooves.net...
> >
> >>
> >>RnR Lesnar wrote:
> >>
> >>>I'm pretty impressed by the new Zelda game.
> >>>
> >>>RnR Lesnar
> >>>
> >>
> >>The new Zelda game had been shown, or shown to some degree already. It
> >>is a decent looking game, MUCH better looking than Wind Breaker ;)
> >>It looks as though Nintendo had nothing...pretty poor showing for them
> >>at the biggest event of the year.
> >
> >
> > I can't believe there is zero voice acting in the game.
> > I also can't believe that I can't believe there is no voice acting in
the
> > game.
>
> You would think that at this stage they could get that in there ;)

I just don't understand why Nintendo appear to always be stuck in a time
warp.

> > This is why I am so hard on Nintendo, they simply don't get it.
> > Did you hear Miyamoto's comments on the 360 and PS3?
> > They are headed in a different direction (technology) while we are going
> > after a different audience.
>
> I laughed several times at his comments. He or they (Nintendo) don't
> seem to get where things are headed, whether he likes it or not...agrees
> or disagrees. Things are headed toward an all-in-one-unit for home
> entertainment and eventually everything along those lines including PC
> functions (some of this already but not completely yet.) Him or Reggie
> forget now, but it was the G4 interviews (which have been quite good,
> Sessler with Allard from Xbox was equally good as these Nintendo ones)
> and they talked about what you mentioned, going after a target audience
> of something like 11-20 yr olds etc.. Am I mistaken or have there not
> been numbers out there that put the average age of gamers quite a ways
> outside his target bracket? They say they are not "kiddie" based yet in
> the one interview (the Reggie one) this is brought up by the interviewer
> and he says something like "we have mature games, like (he hesitates a
> little) RE4...(hesitates a lot more) and well we have most of the big
> games from the other developers/publishers." They just don't get it,
> don't have a freakin' clue. If they want to stay glued to the younger
> gamers fine, do it...admit it but don't try to fake it.
>
> While we still know little about Nintendos "Revolution" so far there is
> nothing revolutionary about it. Unless it is the being able to download
> all the old games, which to me is just beyond weak. Most of that stuff
> has been re-released already on handhelds or available by other means.
> If you want to release this stuff again then do a disc like the Arcade
> Treasures or Namco Museum (think those are the right titles.) And really
> what thrill is there in playing these old titles on new improved
> hardware...none that I can see.
>
> You can only milk those same charcters/franchises so much, and I think
> this might be the point that many of the die-hard Nintendo fans finally
> wake up and realize WTF is going on. Sitting around waiting for those
> couple of great games a year, if that, is lame...especially when the
> other two are putting out so many more. Nintendo is not IMO the end all
> of game developers as they may have once been or once considered. Plenty
> of other companies out there that are putting out as good if not better
> games and with much more frequency. Maybe the "Revolution" will turn out
> to really be something great, but at this point and with what Nintendo
> has done with the last two consoles I seriously doubt it. They look like
> they will remain where they are right now, last place. They have the
> handhelds, which that new Gameboy Micro is lame...how many more versions
> of this same damn thing are they going to release. Is this the answer to
> the PSP, is that what it is supposed to be?
>
> The biggest event of the year and they really showed up with nothing at
> all. Almost looks like they brought out that version of the Revolution
> just to not be totally embarrased after seeing that the others had what
> they did to show off. They shouldn't have even bothered if they had
> nothing more to offer or show IMO. All it did was make them look bad,
> and they definitely didn't need that. So they showed Zelda and
> Nintendogs, which is so lame and something that has already been done
> before. Another version of the Gameboy...zzzzzzzzzz.

Damn dude, you absolutely nailed it!
Nintendo is not evolving with the times.
I think it's a damn shame.