On Remakes and Nostalgia

Recommended Videos

Pingieking

New member
Sep 19, 2009
1,362
0
0
SikOseph said:
The comment 'talking to [Mario fanboys] is like talking to people who believe in God' is spot on. It is true of all fanboys, and God fanboys have been doing it longest - not subjecting your beliefs to rational scrutiny. Analogy win. Hope you didn't apologise.
Quoted for Truth.

DrDeath3191 said:
And you're really going to emphasize story and gameplay on the same level of importance? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy narrative in games as well. However, you should remember the medium we're discussing. We're not talking about movies, novels, or plays. We're talking about games. Therefore, the gameplay must always take full position of importance. Following shortly thereafter should be level-design that compliments the gameplay, not the story. In fact, narratives in games are rather unimportant in the whole scheme of things. Yes, they may give you a compelling reason to continue playing. But if the game itself is not enjoyable to play, then what's the fucking point?
I will politely disagree. With the exception of one game (Shatter, because the music was so awesome) I have yet to find any game with no story to be enjoyable for more than 30 minutes, regardless of the gameplay quality. I am also perfectly able to deal with slightly flawed (but not broken) gameplay for good narrative. With the exception of platformers, most single player component of games live or die by their narrative. In most genres gameplay and story goes hand in hand. I think it's wrong to say that narratives aren't important when there's an entire genre of games based on it's narrative.
 

Caligulove

New member
Sep 25, 2008
3,029
0
0
I'm beginning to enjoy these Extra Punctuations on the same level as the Zero Punctuation videos they're in conjunction with- if not more.

Just can't get better when you have more great content. Especially when you don't always agree with the author on every note. (this one was pretty spot on though)
 

similar.squirrel

New member
Mar 28, 2009
6,021
0
0
yourbeliefs said:
samaritan.squirrel said:
I really can't understand this antipathy towards this new Mario game. Hasn't every Zelda game follwed what is essentially the same formula as it's predecessors with a new gimmick or two?
Even with the transition into three dimensions, they kept the core gameplay, and those games would have worked in the old top-down format.
Look at the DS iterations of Zelda. Quite similar to the SNES/Gameboy era. Utilizing the stylus, but essentially unchanged.
Adding new elements to a much-loved formula is okay.

What I'm worried about is Mario Galaxy 2. Couldn't they think of a new setting?
I understand your Zelda comparison, but I think Yahtzee's big beef with it (as well as mine) is that this is basically the first new console side scrolling Mario game in over 14 years, but this game really brings NOTHING new to the Mario series in terms of innovation or new gameplay. This game should have at LEAST been more robust than SMB3, but it isn't. There's less suit powers, many of the levels blatantly rip off elements of previous Mario games, and the additions of Wii waggles, Toad escort missions, and multiplayer seem to degrade the experience more than anything. I mean hell, the plot and mission style is a direct copy of SMB 3. If this game had come out for the N64 or even the Gamecube, these issues would be a bit more tolerable. But in this day and age, it just seems to come across as lazy and falling back on "Nostalgia" as an excuse to not try and make any real improvements to the formula, which the Mario series is in DIRE need of.
I'd say the multiplayer is quite a nice addition. Unless that's been done before [GBC remake of Super Mario with the link-cable doesn't really count]. And, inverting the space-arguement, where can they go with two dimensional platforming?
I suppose adding a Braid-ish element may have worked. Some new mechanic. being able to alter the way the scenery reacts or somesuch.

Still. The game seems to be treated with undue derision.
 

DrDeath3191

New member
Mar 11, 2009
3,888
0
0
Pingieking said:
SikOseph said:
The comment 'talking to [Mario fanboys] is like talking to people who believe in God' is spot on. It is true of all fanboys, and God fanboys have been doing it longest - not subjecting your beliefs to rational scrutiny. Analogy win. Hope you didn't apologise.
Quoted for Truth.

DrDeath3191 said:
And you're really going to emphasize story and gameplay on the same level of importance? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy narrative in games as well. However, you should remember the medium we're discussing. We're not talking about movies, novels, or plays. We're talking about games. Therefore, the gameplay must always take full position of importance. Following shortly thereafter should be level-design that compliments the gameplay, not the story. In fact, narratives in games are rather unimportant in the whole scheme of things. Yes, they may give you a compelling reason to continue playing. But if the game itself is not enjoyable to play, then what's the fucking point?
I will politely disagree. With the exception of one game (Shatter, because the music was so awesome) I have yet to find any game with no story to be enjoyable for more than 30 minutes, regardless of the gameplay quality. I am also perfectly able to deal with slightly flawed (but not broken) gameplay for good narrative. With the exception of platformers, most single player component of games live or die by their narrative. In most genres gameplay and story goes hand in hand. I think it's wrong to say that narratives aren't important when there's an entire genre of games based on it's narrative.
Not always. Most 'stories' are nothing more than mere excuses for a player to enter different firefights, or what have you. The reason that these stories seem good is because the gameplay it leads you to is good. Almost the entire FPS genre is a good example of this. Then there are puzzle games. The narratives for these, even when present, tend to be lacking at best. But people still play them. Why? Because they're fun. And who says you have to play more than 30 minutes at once at all? Hell, I rarely do that even when a good story is present. As I said, I have no real problems with narrative in games, but if the narrative overshadows or even approaches the level of focus that gameplay does, then the game as a whole suffers.
 

TheGreenManalishi

New member
May 22, 2008
1,363
0
0
Space is a big thing and anything you try after space is just going to be not moving forward but shuffling sideways, if not outright stepping backwards. And it seems Nintendo agreed, and have decided not to let it bother them.
Surely it's admirable of Nintendo to make the best of a bad situation (granted, one they created for themselves) by revisting what made the Mario franchise good in the first place instead of rehashing Galaxy?

Oh wait...
 

Yog Sothoth

Elite Member
Dec 6, 2008
1,037
0
41
OMFG, RAGE....!

Thundercats is way cooler than He-Man.... only an idiot would suggest otherwise! Gawd...!
 

TarkXT

New member
Sep 7, 2009
54
0
0
Am I the only one who wants the next super mario game to be a grim and gritty noir setting with other popular nintendo characters?
 

Pingieking

New member
Sep 19, 2009
1,362
0
0
DrDeath3191 said:
Not always. Most 'stories' are nothing more than mere excuses for a player to enter different firefights, or what have you. The reason that these stories seem good is because the gameplay it leads you to is good. Almost the entire FPS genre is a good example of this. Then there are puzzle games. The narratives for these, even when present, tend to be lacking at best. But people still play them. Why? Because they're fun. And who says you have to play more than 30 minutes at once at all? Hell, I rarely do that even when a good story is present. As I said, I have no real problems with narrative in games, but if the narrative overshadows or even approaches the level of focus that gameplay does, then the game as a whole suffers.
And now we encounter the biggest problem that lies within both of our positions; games are too big of a medium to be generalized the way that we are attempting to do so.

I don't enjoy most FPS games because there's no sense of achievement for coming out of that crazy firefight. If I'm not interested in the progression of the story then I see no reason to bother with shooting that guy in the face. You, being a different sort of gamer than I am, are perfectly happy shooting guys in the face for no reason other than the fact that the mechanics to do so is well designed and brings you joy.

Games are not inherently good or bad if the developers choose to focus on the gameplay or story aspect of the game; the main problem is how they are presented. An RPG can have the most polished gameplay in the history of the universe, and yet still suck if the story is crappy (just imagine playing Final Fantasy using the narrative of L4D). A puzzle game can have no story what-so-ever, and is still great because the gameplay is awesome. On the other side of the coin, an RPG is capable of hiding flawed gameplay behind a great narrative. A puzzle game with great gameplay can certainly be improved with the addition of great narrative. The importance of each one is completely dependant on what the developers want their games to be. You can hardly make an interactive movie with no story, nor can you make a good platformer without properly implementing the jumping mechanics.

EDIT: About the 30 minutes playtime thing, I was referring to total playtime, not one sitting. The most I've ever gone was probably about 30~40 on Plants VS Zombies and Pixel Junk Monsters. Both of which have great gameplay, but I just find them to be boring because I know that there's nothing more than a number waiting for me at the end.
 

yourbeliefs

Bored at Work
Jan 30, 2009
781
0
0
samaritan.squirrel said:
yourbeliefs said:
samaritan.squirrel said:
I really can't understand this antipathy towards this new Mario game. Hasn't every Zelda game follwed what is essentially the same formula as it's predecessors with a new gimmick or two?
Even with the transition into three dimensions, they kept the core gameplay, and those games would have worked in the old top-down format.
Look at the DS iterations of Zelda. Quite similar to the SNES/Gameboy era. Utilizing the stylus, but essentially unchanged.
Adding new elements to a much-loved formula is okay.

What I'm worried about is Mario Galaxy 2. Couldn't they think of a new setting?
I understand your Zelda comparison, but I think Yahtzee's big beef with it (as well as mine) is that this is basically the first new console side scrolling Mario game in over 14 years, but this game really brings NOTHING new to the Mario series in terms of innovation or new gameplay. This game should have at LEAST been more robust than SMB3, but it isn't. There's less suit powers, many of the levels blatantly rip off elements of previous Mario games, and the additions of Wii waggles, Toad escort missions, and multiplayer seem to degrade the experience more than anything. I mean hell, the plot and mission style is a direct copy of SMB 3. If this game had come out for the N64 or even the Gamecube, these issues would be a bit more tolerable. But in this day and age, it just seems to come across as lazy and falling back on "Nostalgia" as an excuse to not try and make any real improvements to the formula, which the Mario series is in DIRE need of.
I'd say the multiplayer is quite a nice addition. Unless that's been done before [GBC remake of Super Mario with the link-cable doesn't really count]. And, inverting the space-arguement, where can they go with two dimensional platforming?
I suppose adding a something a Braid-ish element may have worked. Some new mechanic. Still. The game seems to be treated with undue derision.
You don't have to re-invent the wheel, but you can at least try some other well-tried things to spice it up a bit. For one, if you're going to have 4 characters, you could differentiate them somehow so some levels could dictate who you end up using (a la SMB 2.) You could have areas that only multiple players could reach (a la LBP.) Or, as you said, you could have mechanics that change the entire gamestyle, a la Braid.
The Mario games are held to a higher standard in terms of 2d platforming since they are to 2d platforming what the Doom games were to FPSes. So to see a Mario game come out that is really LESS robust than other platformers out there and even less than previous Mario games (some of which are nearly 20 years old) comes across in a very negative light.

So to summarize, the reason people are so pissed is because we expect more from Nintendo and the Mario series than what NSMBW provides.
 

Byers

New member
Nov 21, 2008
229
0
0
Hardcore_gamer said:
squid5580 said:
Story is and remains equally as important as gameplay
This line deserves a round of applause. You sir are my new internet hero.
I think the idea of the story begin as important as the gameplay to be a load of crap. If it were, then the original Doom games (the games story is almost none) would not have an active community even 16 years after it's release.
Doom was popular because it defined the FPS genre, and pushed the envelope of what could be done in gaming.

It's like one of those experimental prog rock records from the 60s that inspired countless musicians and came to be a defining influence of some truly great bands, but judged musically on its own isn't all that good.
 

DrDeath3191

New member
Mar 11, 2009
3,888
0
0
Pingieking said:
DrDeath3191 said:
Not always. Most 'stories' are nothing more than mere excuses for a player to enter different firefights, or what have you. The reason that these stories seem good is because the gameplay it leads you to is good. Almost the entire FPS genre is a good example of this. Then there are puzzle games. The narratives for these, even when present, tend to be lacking at best. But people still play them. Why? Because they're fun. And who says you have to play more than 30 minutes at once at all? Hell, I rarely do that even when a good story is present. As I said, I have no real problems with narrative in games, but if the narrative overshadows or even approaches the level of focus that gameplay does, then the game as a whole suffers.
And now we encounter the biggest problem that lies within both of our positions; games are too big of a medium to be generalized the way that we are attempting to do so.

I don't enjoy most FPS games because there's no sense of achievement for coming out of that crazy firefight. If I'm not interested in the progression of the story then I see no reason to bother with shooting that guy in the face. You, being a different sort of gamer than I am, are perfectly happy shooting guys in the face for no reason other than the fact that the mechanics to do so is well designed and brings you joy.

Games are not inherently good or bad if the developers choose to focus on the gameplay or story aspect of the game; the main problem is how they are presented. An RPG can have the most polished gameplay in the history of the universe, and yet still suck if the story is crappy (just imagine playing Final Fantasy using the narrative of L4D). A puzzle game can have no story what-so-ever, and is still great because the gameplay is awesome. On the other side of the coin, an RPG is capable of hiding flawed gameplay behind a great narrative. A puzzle game with great gameplay can certainly be improved with the addition of great narrative. The importance of each one is completely dependant on what the developers want their games to be. You can hardly make an interactive movie with no story, nor can you make a good platformer without properly implementing the jumping mechanics.
In regards to the RPG, why is the Mario RPG franchise so popular? The story is hardly rivetting (though it is funny at times). It certainly wouldn't win a Pulitzer. So why are they heralded as some of the best RPGs ever made? Gameplay. The game is actually fun to play, not necessarily to watch. Stories are fine, but if the underlying interactivity of the game is flawed, the game fails. Because that is what makes games what they are: gameplay. Otherwise, you could very easily have made that a book or a movie.
 

Snoopster

New member
Dec 17, 2008
124
0
0
oh good his voice is back 2 normal - anyway,
mario, ur only good for cheap handheld shit so long as something actually changes each time
(come on nintendo, I want to be a fan but don't try my patience)
never been a big fan of zombie gamesso I can't really coment but how different is it from any other crazy shoot up the hoards game?
 

malestrithe

New member
Aug 18, 2008
1,818
0
0
The weird thing is I do not like the nostalgia train on old franchises, I do not mind it as well. The practice is much older than we think. back in the Victorian era, the practice for a writer was to write the book in a serialized form, kind of like how certain comic books are done nowadays. Then 6 months after the last chapter was complete, the serials are collected and turn into a novel. It is also common practice for writers to come back to their works and constantly update them. Charles Dickens, in addition to releasing pretty much the same story over and over again, would also make changes to the ones he already had. He did this for nothing more than making a quick buck on the nostalgia of his readers.

How do historians and literary critics handle these reissues: they consider the last version that the original author made to be the most definitive version of it. Like it or not, when historians look at Star Wars in the future, most will consider the version where Greedo fired first to be superior to the one from the 70's. It is also a good thing: The Richard Donner cut of Superman 2 will be given more weight than the theatrical release. There are exceptions, like most consider the 1819 version of Frankenstein the last word over the 1831 edition, but the rule generally applies to the most books, movies and so on.

Hell, the movie industry is built around nostalgic memories as well. In the 90's we had nostalgia for 70's, in the 80's, it was the 60's, and so on back down the road. Now we have to go through 80's nostalgia.

This is nothing new. In the future, they will forget about the derivatives and focus on the older stuff instead. That us unless the derivatives are made by the original designers.
 

DarkPanda XIII

New member
Nov 3, 2009
726
0
0
Heh, funny. Though I think Yahtzee is a big enough name in the area that people are now aware of how far he'll go.
 

BlueInkAlchemist

Ridiculously Awesome
Jun 4, 2008
2,231
0
0
Yahtzee Croshaw said:
"..I responded - in retrospect, a little too hastily - with 'yeah, it's like talking to people who believe in God.'"
It's been proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the people who vehemently defend a given console or game company (Nintendo in this case) have little if any functional difference from the fundamentalists of a given religion.

Granted, most of them aren't going to try and blow themselves up or murder doctors interested in the preservation or quality of life, but that's because most of them are incapable of leaving their parents' basement for one reason or another.

Note here that I'm discussing fundamentalists. People who are capable of thinking outside the confines of a single myopic point of view - whatever that point of view might be - tend to be more open to discussion and willing to debate certain topics.

Of course, to some people, belief in a higher power automatically makes the believer a fundamentalist, but those people subscribe to the single myopic point of view that all followers of a deity figure are stupid, stunted individuals incapable of thinking of themselves. Just like the fundamentalists on the other side of the argument see the detractors as stupid, stunted individuals who are damned for all eternity.

If both sides of the argument were capable of seeing these similarities, realize that this sort of petty bickering gets humanity as a whole absolutely nowhere and managed to begin an intelligent discourse on the best ways to apply the lessons of history to humanity's future, I think we'd see a lot less violence and hate.

I wandered a bit off-topic and I apologize for that.

TL,DR: Nintendo fundies are just like Christian or Muslim fundies.
 

Brotherofwill

New member
Jan 25, 2009
2,566
0
0
I completely disagree about the importance of story in games. On my list it would be maybe around the 6th item of preference in the grand sheme of things.

I think we need some serious reworking of the medium of games. We need someone like Walter Benjamin (as an example) that digs into the core and tries to do or say something radical about gaming. I have almost never read any intelligent discussion or analysis of the state this industry and its development is currently in. Even on the Escapist the discussion almost always remains superficial. What we need are game philosophers. Experiments like the ones about the Elephant level, anything that pushes gaming or challenges a little bit. Really appreciate this column, its probably the most interesting thing to read on this site. Making dick-jokes and sandwich references doesn't really help though.
 

Mr. GameBrain

New member
Aug 10, 2009
847
0
0
In my opinion New Super Mario Bros Wii seems to be targeted at the new audience and not serious gamers, (thats why the super guide is there, which inherately is kind of pointless as a feature for us gamers, but for a non-gamer its probably quite handy).
The Mario brand is very strong, and Nintendo probably have already cooked up a new Mario game, (or at least have the initial ideas for it), but are not going to let anyone know about it till they increase their fanbase, (think of how fundementally similar Mario bros 2 (the japanese version) and Super Mario World were to their direct predecessors).

Galaxy 2 however may be suprisingly different, look at what happened with the transisition between Super Mario World and Yoshi's Island. In this day and age a change like that wouldn't really work, time and money are much tighter these days, and the game could end up becoming such an organisational mess, it will be delayed, and then it will be made out of date, (think of the "Duke Nukem Forever" effect!).

I personally don't mind Valve's decision on Left 4 Dead 2, I'd rather have a few slices of toast when I'm hungry, than wait for the cake and starve, (bad joke I know, but you can see what I mean!).