Amiibo: How they could be used

In my last post I ranted a little bit about Amiibo usage in Hyrule Warriors. In fact it upset me so much, that I intend to boycott all Zelda Amiibos for the time being. Samus will feel a little bit lonely next to my Garp figurine, but so be it. But I'm the last person, who just rants, without providing some sort of thought for solution. So here are my ideas for Amiibo Integration in different games.

Hyrule Warriors:

Yes I know that this game is already released and the Amiibo support is also already revealed, but Hyrule Warriors is the only game, so far, which does it wrong in my opinion. Amiibos should enhance and support a game without feeling mandatory. But in Hyrule Warriors case this is just the case. Weapons have a huge impact on how you play with a character and are a big part of this game. So by binding one weapon exclusively to an Amiibo you create the need to buy this figure. Because it's literally the only way to obtain the spinner weapon.

So how could these figures be used in Hyrule Warriors? There are several possibilities. The first is the way the others are used. Giving you weapons, rupees and materials. Another possible use would be costumes like in Mario Kart. Of course these two possibilities are pretty standard, but they would be nice enhancements.

An even better use would be a variation of the Smash Bros. usage of Amiibos. If you use a supported Amiibo (Link, Zelda, Shiek, etc.) in Hyrule Warriors you call this character to help you. It would attack the enemy, conquer keeps and collect materials for you. You could also equip and train this character and take it to your friends to help them too. And it doesn't have to stop there. If you want added challenge you could summon your character as an enemy. This would increase the challenge, but also yield better loot.

I think this would be a great use of the figures and enhance the game without feeling mandatory.

Splatoon:

The first idea that springs to mind regarding Amiibo and Splatoon would be accessorizes to individualize your characters. We already saw that there are many different inklings, so this would be a nice touch. Buy a Mario Amiibo and get his clothes, cap, mustache, etc. to decorate your inkling with. Maybe you could go even further. Add sigils or emblems to decorate your weapons and headquarters with.

Just don't add weapons or things like that which are tied to Amiibos.

Captain Toad Treasure Tracker:

It was announced earlier that this game will also receive Amiibo support and to be honest I'm not sure how this could work. Captain Toad is a pretty basic game so I don't have many ideas on which you could expand the Amiibo integration. The only idea I came up with would be an integration of Mario Amiibos, which were also characters in Super Mario 3D World. When you use that Amiibo you can race it in several levels and if you beat it in every level you unlock this figure as a playable character in the game. Of course the wouldn't be able to jump, but it would be nice to play as Rosalina.

But... this would be the worst possible integration of Amiibos. Locking up characters behind their figurines is a big no go. However this is the only way of Amiibo integration I came up with. So lets hope that Nintendo is more imaginative than me, or we would get Hyrule Warriors 2.0 with this game. And I would really hate it if I had to boycott the Toadette figurine (which they will announce hopefully). That girl is just to cute.

Yoshis Wooly World:

With Yoshi there are also not so much way of Amiibo integration. A wool version of Amiibos would be to cost intensive to create I guess, and it would also be locked character DLC, which is the worst possible outcome, as I mentioned in the Captain Toad section. So from the gameplay which was shown to us I guess that Amiibos will take the part of second player if you don't have anyone around. Touch the gamepad with your figure and summon a second Yoshi to help you.

Also racing would be another option. Maybe exclusive to the Yoshi Amiibo. When you use the Yoshi Amiibo it will race you on different or all stages. Beat it to receive stamps/medals/concept art. It would add another layer of challenge and long time motivation to this game. You could even save your own record times on your Amiibos, take them to a friends home and laugh at him while he tries to beat you.. or cry if he actually does.

Xenoblade Chronicles X:

So far Xenoblade didn't get conformation for Amiibo support, but I'm pretty sure that from now on nearly every big Nintendo title will get it. So how could it work in Xenoblade? My first thought was optional hunting missions which reward cosmetic awards. The game looks like your Hero will receive a great deal of customization. So this would be a nice integration. Kill the Mariosaurus to produce clothes out of his hide. Something like that would be nice. They could also add a Shulk skin for your character if you own the Amiibo.

Zelda:

Zelda will receive Amiibo support. There is no doubt about it. But how will it look like? Well this question only Anouma can truly answer, but I'll try my best. It's pretty hard, because we don't know anything about this Zelda yet, except that it will be open world and probably have a random dungeon order like A Link between Worlds.

I personally like the enhance difficulty approach which I detailed with Hyrule warriors. Amiibos could summon Shadow Links which hunt you, but also reward a ton of rupee/collectibles.

Of course Nintendo would also need to offer the possibility to summon a helpful Amiibo. This would create a nice offer of choice.

If you have problems with a dungeon or fight you could use Amiibos to help you, but if you're a Zelda pro and want more challenge, then summon some Shadow Links to spice things up.

So these are my basic ideas for Amiibo Use. I think these would enhance the games, but don't feel mandatory. Of course Amiibos are DLC in some way and all this ideas could be integrated into the games directly. I would also prefer this, but so far Amiibos don't look like a ripoff. I bought Samus today and she is well designed and processed. And as long as they keep the benefits of Amiibos a bonus I think these figures will be a nice bonus.

But what are your thoughts about them? Do you like/ don't like them? And how would you like to see them integrated into future Nintendo titles?

And as always

thanks for reading

Amiibo: The good, the bad and the ugly

Splatoon looks awesome!

But enough about my hype for this game. Let's get to the topic I want to talk about.

In this weeks Nintendo direct some of the Amiibo features of other games got revealed and I'm pretty torn about it.

When Amiibo was announced I couldn't really grasp the concept of the figures. How would they add value to our games without being hidden DLC. But their usage in Smash Bros. calmed me. It made sense, added value and wasn't mandatory.

So on Wednesday the specified the Amiibo support of two other games. Mario Kart 8 and Hyrule Warriors. And while Mario Kart 8 falls into the Smash category, although not as good, the problem lies with Hyrule Warriors. In Mario Kart 8 the supported Amiibos unlock costumes for your Mii. It's a nice feature to give your driver a little more personality, and added value for any Amiibo owner. But I wouldn't buy a figure just because of that. It follows the principle of enhancing the game without being mandatory.

In Hyrule Warriors on the other hand Amiibos are hidden DLC. All these fears and bad thoughts I had after the first introduction to the concept reemerged. It's only one game so far, which is not to bad, but we need to let Nintendo know that we're not okay with this or it will expand to more games. If you own a Zelda or Link Amiibo it will unlock an extra weapon for the related character. Different weapons make a huge difference in Hyrule Warriors. You have an entirely different moveset, which turns the character basically into a brand new one. So adding a new weapon, which can only be obtained by buying Amiibos, is the worst this concept could become. DLC. Fans who want to enjoy the whole of Hyrule Warriors now need to buy the Link Amiibo. Nintendo just blatantly lied to us with their their statement that Amiibo will enhance gameplay, but not be DLC.

In the last couple of months Nintendo has been on a roll with DLC. They've done everything right, which you can do right with this concept. Because of that it hurts me to see them doing this. If we don't want Amiibos to become hidden DLC, we, as fans, need to protest against this. Let Nintendo know over the Miiverse. Write them. The spinner should be included without the need to buy an Amiibo. Instead the Amiibos could fulfill their original purpose of enhancing the game without being mandatory. I read the idea of summoning a ghostly helper through the figurines. Or offer special costumes with them. There are many possibilities, but don't make the mandatory DLC. This will probably generate short therm profits, but by doing that you erode the customers trust into your products.

Let's all hope that this is a one time slip up and that there is NOT more to come.

Also the ugly:

picture source:NintendoEverything

and as always

thanks for reading

Quality of Life

Last week Nintendo presented their quarterly report and apart from a most welcome profit report the first news about the quality of life program seeped through. Of course this is only one stone of many, which will in the end make up the quality of life program, but it gives us an outlook of what we can expect. And from a technological standpoint it's very impressive. Satoru Iwata presented the idea of a sensor, which will monitor your sleeping behavior. Your heartbeat, the frequency of your breathing and other things will be recorded and analyzed. And the impressive thing is, that all of this will work wireless. You don't need to hookup yourself to the machine. The collected data will then be streamed into a cloud service and analyzed there. This cloud service will make up the core of the quality of life program. All of this sounds pretty good to be true, but the be also completely blunt, I don't care. I'm a fan of Nintendo, but I'm mostly in for their awesome games. But in our health obsessed society and especially in Japan I can see them doing very well with this service. But it's not for me and I accept that. Because of that I found the reaction of some other Nintendo Fans pretty hilarious. Some comments sounded like they were forced to buy the quality of life service. Just like, if you're a Nintendo Fan you have to buy ALL of their products. Well Nintendo also owns some Love Hotels, so I hope you and your partner are in the mood.

This is, of course, complete bullshit. I'm a huge Nintendo Fan. I absolutely love Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Metroid and all the other franchises. But there are also Nintendo franchises I've never got into. Pikmin or Animal Crossing for example. They just don't interest me. And the same applies to the Quality of Life service, because I'm pretty satisfied with my lifes current quality level.

But this doesn't mean I'm following the news about Quality of Life closely. Because one thing worries me. Satoru Iwata said that this new venture won't affect the traditional games making business. It will be a third pillar next to the handheld and stationary consoles. Hmm when have I heart that the last time? Ohh right... When the DS launched, it should be a third pillar and not a replacement for the Gameboy. We all know how this turned out and this knowledge always lingers in the back of my head, when talking about Quality of Life. What if it is another huge success, just like the Nintendo DS? Will Nintendo then abandon the traditional game sector to fully persuade this more successful market?

To be honest, I don't think so. Satoru Iwata is a game developer. I can't see Nintendo abandoning it's identity under him, but what is a real possibility is they drive back their output in that field. Coupled with the already bad 3^rd party support their systems have (and lets just assume that this stays the same in the next generation) this could turn out to be a huge problem, probably forcing them to abandon (at least) their home console business. And that is something I don't want to see happening. I think one of the main reasons for Nintendo Games to be as good as they are, is their own platforms. Their consoles are tailored exactly for the needs of their own developers. It's a great strength of Nintendo (and of course a weakness in regards to third party developers) and with loosing that Nintendo may take Segas route. And we can agree that no one wants to see this happening.

So in conclusion I think that the Quality of Life service is a good idea and the first information sounds pretty impressive. But I also hope that it doesn't become a huge mega success like the DS or the Wii. A moderate success that turns it into the third pillar for Nintendo, but not the main pillar. This should always be the games business.

And as always

Thanks for reading

The Future of Metroid

 ‘So it has been a while since we released the last one and we’re having discussions internally about what we can do next,’ said Nintendo’s Shinya Takahashi to Kotaku.

‘So at this point we have two different types of Metroid games. We have the Prime style of Metroid game and we have the more traditional style of Metroid game. We feel that we do need to take care of both of these styles of play. And the hope is that at some point in the near future we’ll be able to share something about them’.

Source: metro.co.uk

So it's pretty much a given, that Nintendo works on new Metroid games. Two to be precise. One traditional and one prime style. Why do I think that? Because it would make perfect sense. (Also the blatantly told it to us.) The traditional Metroid in the same style as Super Metroid would fit perfectly onto the Nintendo 3DS, while the Prime Style, with it's fast worlds, would be breathtaking on the Wii-U. Also I'm pretty happy that they acknowledged the Prime Games after removing them from the canon in Other M. So why don't we talk a little about the games and the potential the hold. Why? Because baseless speculation can be lots of fun.

Metroid 3ds:

For a 3ds Metroid the original Super Metroid Style of Gameplay would fit perfectly. Also it has been eleven years since the last true 2D Metroid, Metroid Fusion, was released. Although Metroid Other M was promoted as a true Super Metroid sequel and had a good balance between 3D and 2D Metroid style gameplay, it lacked a lot in terms of exploration. (And don't make me start on the story).

I'm sure a classic 2D Metroid on the 3ds would make a lot of fans happy. It would have a true back to the basics kind of feel. But it could also use the new technologies of the 3ds. Use 3-dimensional backgrounds to give the world depth, adding a new layer of exploration. Street – and Spot Pass could be used to send others codec messages to help or troll people. Kinda like Dark Souls actually.

There are of course many other things they could ad to this game, but I think we can all agree, that a 3ds Metroid in the vein of Super Metroid is a pretty safe bet.

Story wise I would like to explore the roots of Samus as bounty hunter and this game could be a perfect way to show us her first true Mission.  

Metroid Wii-U:

  picture source: http://bluefalcon8.deviantart.com/ 

I think it's pretty clear by now, that the 3ds Metroid could be awesome, but what about the Wii-U one? As someone who's first Metroid was Metroid Prime on the Gamecube I don't have such nostalgic feelings for Super Metroid. It is a great game, even by today’s standards, but it never overwhelmed me in the way Prime did. The first time stepping into the cold wasteland of Phendrana Drifts left me speechless. It was absolutely breathtaking. And such sights can only be created on the big screen.

Metroid on the Wii-U would also kill two birds with one stone. First it would add another ''mature'' game to the consoles library, and second it would give the Wii-U a first-person shooter (although Nintendos classification of First-person adventure used for the Prime series fits better) to compete with the other consoles.

But what should such a Metroid contain in more detail?

Well first the game should take place on one planet again. With Metroid Prime I really enjoyed how connected the whole world felt. Finding new paths that connected the regions with each other truly felt satisfying. And just think what incredible panoramas would be possible with the improved hardware capabilities of the Wii-U. A truly connected alien world full of secrets and ready to be explored. That is the core of Metroid to me.

Of course this world needs to be engaging. I don't want a world the size of Japan, when there is nothing to explore. It is a thin line, but I'm sure that Nintendo is up to the task. A source of inspiration for how to do such a connected world could be the first Dark Souls, which I heartily recommend to anyone.

Storywise I would prefer to continue after Metroid Fusion. I would like to see how Samus coped with everything and how she grew as a character from that. Also please make her a badass again.

Gameplaywise a return to the Prime style is more than welcome in my book. Backtracking could be toned down of course, but without cutting out the ''good'' backtracking through new areas and paths available later in the game with special upgrades. But something like the artifact hunt in the first game doesn't need to exist. Also they could incorporate a system, where Samus only can carry so many upgrades and has to change her suit to fit the needs of the mission. For exampe: She could have her power beam, but also her Wave, Plasma, Ice, Sonic, Poison, etc..., beams. But she can only equip three of them at a time. Each of this beams could have different upgrades to hunt and find in the fast world. Or course there needs to be a system, where one can change Samus equipment without to much trouble. The classic save stations would be perfect for this job.

So right now we have: A big, connected alien world with lot's of secrets which you want to explore.

A better Story than Other M. (Which shouldn't be to hard)

And probably some new gameplay tweaks.

But what about the game pad? As a Wii-U Game Metroid clearly needs to incorporate the game pad. Luckily the Metroid franchise offers some natural ways of incorporating it. The first thing that comes to mind is, of course, the scanner. Scanning things and having their information displayed directly on the game pad, would remove a lot of hassle. The player doesn't have to pause the game every time he want's to read some information. Information such as a bosses weakspot could also be displayed on the second screen. Also it would create some feeling of danger, which suits an unexplored and possibly dangerous alien planet. While you're reading up on some information your enemies may already surround you. I think this could create a tense atmosphere befitting for an environment in a Metroid game.

Another thing which could be incorporated through the game pad is a closer interaction with Samus ship. In Metroid Prime 3 Samus could control her ship, but it felt really indirect and was confined to special scenarios and areas. But with the Wii-U this could be massively expanded. Being able to call you shipe at any given Moment in time opens up dozens of new possibilities. The game pad would work as hub for that, possibly showing you an overhead map of the surrounding area. It could give the game a really strategic feel and, if it's incorporated right, enrich the classic metroid formula.

And last but not least another idea of mine.

I don't know if some of you are familiar with Metroid 1.5. If now than here is a link to bring you up to date: http://metroid.wikia.com/wiki/Metroid_1.5

Metroid Wii-U could pic up on this idea, but instead of a ship I would prefer a full alien planet as location. Think of the world as a gigantic laboratory. This would provide a lot more variety. The main pillar of this concept is, of course, the A.I. Antagonist. The distinctive personalities would ad depth to the gameplay and also make every play through unique. They would force you to adapt to different tactics constantly, probably shaping the planet around you. The ''Killer'' needs a different approach than the ''Child'' if you want to survive. Also here is how the gamepad could be used. Maybe a small part of the A.I. kept it's sanity in tact and with Samus arrival it took the chance and downloaded itself into Samus Varia Suit. Through the game pad the player now takes control of this A.I. Hacking security consoles, changing patrol patterns, manipulating information of the enemy, which prompts the other A.I. personalities to react in different ways, etc...

I think there is a lot of untapped potential in this idea and Nintend surely is able to create something truly special from that.

I would love to see a new ''true'' Metroid (I really really can't count Other M) on the Wii-U (and yes I know that the definition of ''true'' Metroid differs from fan to fan), and if it would be an adapted version of the Metroid 1.5 idea, I could die happy.

Exploration

Strange alien worlds

Tactical Combat

These are the three pillars of Metroid in my opinion. If Nintendo follows those I don't see what could go wrong.

What would you like to see in a new Metroid? What are you expectations? It doesn't matter if its on the 3ds or the Wii-U. What are your wishes and hopes for Samus Arans next adventures?

And as always

Thanks for reading

Female characters in gaming

Women in video games is a sensible topic. I once wrote that I think the best way to spark a rational discussion about this topic, would be to show examples, good and bad, of women in video games and whats behind them.

And as a white, straight guy from the middle class, who would be better for that job.

First we need to find out what a strong female charakter is. Because strength has many different nuances. A loving mother caring for her family and securing the future by raising her children is just as strong as a female knight fighting for her country. It's just that not all the different faces of strength are immediately visible.

In the last couple of years we had some strong female characters. Ellie (The Last of Us), Elizabeth (Bioshock Infinte), Lara Croft (Tomb Raider 2013), Nilin (Remember Me), Chell (Portal). And that is just a selection from AAA games. But as a (primarily) nintendo gamer, let's talk about some of their characters.

Princess Peach:

Peach often is used a symbol figure of the damsel in distress trope and in general bad female characters. And it's true, but not because Peach is a bad female character, but because she is barely a character at all. No character in the main Mario games is more than a cardboard cutout. And they don't need to be. It doesn't matter if Mario needs to save Sprixies, Peach, Daisy, his castle or whatever. The Story in the Jump'n'Runs don't matter, because there is barely any story at all. Of course you can criticize this fact, but by doing so you entirely miss the point of the games.

If you want characterization you need to look for the Mario rpgs. And in them Peach isn't just the damsel, even if she often occupies this role there too. But here she often has an active role. In Super Paper Mario and Super Mario RPG she even becomes an active member of your party. Her talking down the smug chameleon in Super Paper Mario is one of the more hilarious video game moments. And if you truly want a great depiction of the princess you should check out the Super Mario comics from Nintendo Power. The nostalgia critic did a great episode about them.

So to make Peach a good character, she would first need to develop a character.

Princess Rosalina:

Now that is good example for a female character.

I know that many of you may now scratch your heads and ask: But doesn't she need to be saved in Super Mario Galaxy? That is true, but why does that make her weak or a bad character? Nobody can do everything on their own. That's why we have specialists for pretty much everything. Rosalina isn't a damsel in distress, but a supporting character. And a pretty great one given the circumstances of the game she comes from. She is the mother of stars. Guiding them while they are still Luma and watching over them. She controls the birth of new galaxies. That is pretty powerful if you ask me. It's true that without Mario she couldn't retrieve the Power Stars, but without her Mario could never reach the center of the universe. Both need each other. Does that make them weak or bad characters? I would say no!

Even her backstory, paints the picture of a strong women. Does she miss her home? Of course she does, but she chooses her new life. As mother of the lumas she holds the future of the galaxy in her hands.

In my eyes she is a pretty amazing character.

Samus (Other M):

This on the other hand is a pretty terrible female character, because she is the opposite of Rosalina. On the first glance Samus seems strong, but at her core she is shown as submissive and weak. I'm not saying that submissive characters are bad, although I wouldn't choose them as my main character, but the dissonance between how the creator wants us to see Samus and how we see her, makes this iteration of her a bad character. The game shows us that Samus, during her time in the galactic federation, was often singled out. Giving thumbs down instead of up and such things. Maybe we should think that this shows her strong spirit, who doesn't confirm to norms, but it just makes her look bratty. We also learn that she holds Adam Malkovich in high regards. Such high regards that she shuts down her own brain completely, when he is in charge.

The truly bad thing about this game is that Samus doesn't show any signs of initiative at all. She only reacts to the actions her male comrades perform. She never acts. But the game still wants us to believe that she is a strong, independent women, when everything it depicts shows in the other direction.

Princess Zelda:

Now Princess Zelda is not ''one'' character. She has many iterations. Some of the them better, some of them worse. My favorite is the one from Skyward Sword and on her I want to set my focus. In Skyward Sword Link and Zelda have a really close relationship. But, and that is the important part, they both have their tasks, which they couldn't complete without the other. Link may be the hero, but Zelda is just as important to defeat Demise. She gives you the time to grow by keeping the Imprisoned locked away. They both need to fulfill their destiny and they both need each other to accomplish that. Zelda in this game is a warm an cheerful character, who outgrows herself with time. Just like Link. They just have different progression paths.

Another good Zelda is the one from Spirit Tracks. Arguably the most ''active'' Zelda. Without her many tasks would be impossible. She accompanies you through the game. Supporting Link all the way till the end. And it doesn't end here. Twilight Princess Zelda is the ruler of her country, sacrificing herself for the best of her country, because she believes that Midna and Link can save Hyrule. In Ocarina of Time Zelda, disguised as Shiek, guides you through the tasks ahead of you. And in Wind Waker Tetra is a badass pirate captain.

Of course at the end of the most games the princess gets captured, and I also would enjoy a break away from this tired trope, but for me it doesn't devalue her character.

Also in the end of most games Zelda plays a pivotal role in defeating Ganon. Because Courage is nothing without wisdom.

This are just four pics from many, many female characters. The game industry grew tremendously in the last years. But it is still a young industry. With time changes will happen, but brute forcing it is not the way.

A game creator should be able to choose whichever character he sees most fitting for the narrative and purpose of his game. And we shouldn't be to quick to jump to conclusions. Just because a girl has big breasts, doesn't mean that she is a bad character.

TL;DR: Big tits ≠ bad character.

and as always

thanks for reading

All aboard the Hypetrain

Games media 101: Be a fan by all means, just not a fucking fanboy. Check your erections at the door and do your job objectivly. - Marcus Beer ''The annoyed gamer''

I think this sums my thoughts on hype up perfectly. The whole games industry is build on hype nowadays. It's a downward spiral which only can end in another crash, because one day the industry won't be able to sustain its own weight anymore.

Now to make things clear. I'm not against someone getting excited for the newest Halo/Uncharted/Zelda, but I'm against this blind hype that dominates the industry nowadays. Please get excited for new games that interest you, but don't get blinded.

But Hype is now an integral part of the game industry. New game get's announced ---> Hype gets built---> game releases and (most of the time) ---> doesn't meet expectations.

It would be so simple to solve this problem by telling your customers the truth, but I can also understand the publishers. I know this sounds controversial at first glance, but I can understand the publishers desire to build Hype in such a front loaded industry. If it wouldn't be for the fact that they themselves created this industry. They laid out the railroads for the Hypetrain, but forgot the brakes.

So now let's talk about Hype, why it's bad and what it means for the industry.

The tricky part about hype is that his toxic effects aren't immediately visible. Aliens: Colonial Marines sold over one million copies. Even through all the backlash it received immediately. And this is an extreme example. Destiny and Watch Dogs sold much more, but I'm not so sure if this will apply to their sequels. Normally you'd expect a new ip to grow from one installment to the next, but when your first game was overhyped and therefore disappointed many gamers, I'm not sure if that is possible.

But the question is. Can todays game industry survive without hype?

The industry today is extremely front loaded with an immense decline in values. Most retail games don't sell for their full retail price for even a month. After that the steam sales start to hit. We, the customers, aren't wiling anymore to pay the full price for games. Even for those who offer more than a five hour long campaign.

So the only way the publishers knew to respond was by creating overhyped games. Because if you hyper your audience enough the won't be able to wait a month. They need to have the game right now. Hype is a safety net for the publisher. Big Hype generates high pre-orders. And Pre-orders mean guaranteed sales on day one.

Hype, pre-oders, review embargos... They all revolve around the mythical day one sales. If you can't break even on day one, you fail. Coupled with unrealistic expectations (Tomb Raider was considered a flop with 3.4 Million sold copies) this can only lead to another crash. One day one of this hyped games will ''flop'' (even if it's only by the definition of the publishers) and what then? The only answer the publishers currently know is to make everything even bigger. And I'm pretty sure that I will live to see the day when everything collapses under its own weight.

The other offenders in this whole hype building are the customers. We are also responsible. Hype and fanboys go hand in hand. And both destroy games. For others and themselves. Because a fanboy will defend his game till the bitter end. He won't allow any rationale discussion, but only his opinion. Even worse than that are the disappointed fanboys. They turn their former excitement for a game into pure hatred. Because the game didn't live up to their expectations it is utter garbage.

Both versions are pretty toxic and not fit for any discussion. And they're both created through hype. In an age where we get buried under thousands of free to play games, 0.99 cent apps on our phones and steam sales, games have lost their value. Games turned into another product to passively consume. We need to start consume games actively again. Don't buy into the publishers lies. Be critical, but by all means get excited. Love your hobby. A healthy industry can only thrive long term with critical customers.

Hype makes everyone blind and we, the customers, need to break through this circle. Because the publishers won't do anything till it's to late.

So don't believe the hype.

Does anyone even remember which game this slogan was used for?

And as always

Thanks for reading  

Game Reviews

And once again I'm pushing my thoughts about hype back a little bit to talk about something completely different.

In recent times I often found reviews, I've read on different sites, lacking. I also tried to write some game reviews on my own and for that I came up with a code of ethics when writing a review... or to put it better, because I'm no news outlet, but instead a lone lunatic in the wide fields of the internet, some points which I deem important when reviewing a game.

These are points, from which I think that they are important cornerstones when writing a review, and which, in my eyes, have sadly been lacking in reviews from many websites.

1. Be objective:

Of course this is a no brainer. Or at least, it should be. But with the recent controversy in video game ''journalism'' I wouldn't be so sure anymore.

To put it bluntly. No one is truly objective, but we all can try our best. Just question everything you wrote. Let it rest for a night or two and read it again. Put yourself into the shoes of someone, who doesn't have any ties to the game. What would he see?

I'd like to summarize this point with the phrase: Don't be a fan; Don't be a hater.

Question everything, but don't overthink it. Sometimes a gun is just a gun and not a statement about the lax gun laws in the united states of America. In fact, most of the time it is just a gun.

Another point that plays into this is the rise of social commentary in games journalism. While I agree that this should be discussed, a game review is the wrong place for that. It shouldn't matter if the main character is female or male. All that matters is the game!

Even if you decide for yourself that you deem this game ''bad'' because of some social issues you have with the presentation or the story, it isn't your place as a objective reviewer to devalue it because of that. Super Mario doesn't get better or worse just because Peach's role is that of a damsel in distress. What makes the game good or bad is the level design, the mechanics, the presentation, the sound, how well it runs, bugs, ... Not the social issues that you may, or may not, see in this work.

Now that doesn't mean you shouldn't talk about that, but it means that it shouldn't impact your review. Because none of the standpoints in this debate are absolute. What you can, and should do, is start a rationale discussion if you think it's important and necessary.

But for the actual review: Stay objective. Rate the game and the game alone.

That's also why I'm against video game websites running ads of games that they review. Even if you have your own separate PR-Department and tell everyone that it's its own separate division, it will influence your writers, when the ad money begins to dry up because of unfavorable reviews. Because it's still one company under which roof you all work together!

2. Respect:

Now that is something I see lacking in many pieces about games. Respect for the medium. Respect for the game that was crafted. And not just for the games, but also for your audience. How can you expect them to listen to you, if you threat them like children or, even worse, like an enemy. I know that the internet creates hateful individuals, I truly do, but when has fighting hatred with even more hatred ever worked? Fight fire with fire an you'll burn the whole building to the ground.

So show some respect. Video games deserve it and your audience at least deserves someone who doesn't look down on them.

Video games are many things. To some they're works of art. To others they're portals into different worlds to escape their everyday life. Some find life long friends through them, and others love. Some people want them to tackle social issues and others just want to have fun. Games can be all of this and are all of this. For that we should respect them.

3. Get excited, but don't get hyped:

This is actually the central statement of my upcoming thoughts about hype. As a reviewer you should obviously love what you're doing. That is important, but it's also important to keep a professional distance. That is actually pretty hard. If you get invited to exclusive preview events, get studio tours and meet the developers, it's hard to keep a distance and not get hyped. I get that.

But it's one of the most important things and if you truly want to be a good reviewer, you need to master this challenge. You owe your audience that. You owe them a truthful and objective review. It's ok for a reviewer to get excited, but he should never ''Believe the Hype!''

Question the intentions of the developers. Ask yourself. Why are they doing this? Ask them. Why are you doing this? Never straight out accept the answers of the PR-Department for why they're canceling the single player.

Sorry, but I couldn't hold back on that one.

4. Be open for criticism, but don't let the haters get the best of you.

You'll always attract some haters. I think this is the basic rule of the internet, or even life itself. If you create something, someone will hate it. And that's ok. Because of this, the world is as diverse as it is. If there would be something everybody likes, then why should we produce something different?

So just ignore the haters. If they don't like you or your product (reviews) they will go away and if they're just trolls they will go away when you ignore them. Trolls thrive on attention, so don't give them any.

But stay open for criticism. Don't dismiss a well thought out and polite counter view to your points. Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't mean you have to change your views. But it can be a welcome opportunity to view your points from a different angle. Listen to the points your discussion partner makes, and bring forth your own. But don't shut yourself in and dismiss all criticism. If you do that, you'll set yourself on a dangerous road to fanaticism. And then you'll reach a point where only your opinions and the ones from people, who agree with you, matter. Then every counter argument will sound like hate in your ears, no matter how valid and well said it is. And this makes you an unpleasant and downright toxic person for everybody else.

Not all criticism is a direct attack at yourself. I even would go so far as to say, that less then 10% is.

Because of that you should welcome an (intelligent) discussion and not condemn it from the start.

And if you don't reach some common ground in the end , politely end the discussion. It's ok to have different opinions. Just stay polite and don't lash out at people. That just makes you seem like a giant douche.

These are the four cornerstones on my way to approach video game reviews. Of course I'm not a ''professional'', but I grew up with video games and genuinely care for them. And because of that I think we deserve reviewers and journalist who feel the same. But we also deserve professionalism. We deserve reviews free of agendas and unneeded luggage. We deserve good, objective and honest reviews. Because in the end all that matters is the answer to the question: Is this game fun?

What are your thoughts on this topic?

And as always

thanks for reading

New 3DS

I originally planned to post an opinion piece about hype today, but Nintendo doesn't agree with my plans, or so it seems.

Because today Nintendo announced the New Nintendo 3DS and the New Nintendo 3DS XL and I'm a little bit torn. But first let me tell you about the facts.

The new 3DS has some nice improvements over the original one. First it now has ZR and ZL shoulder-buttons and a second circle pad. The second circle pad is located next to the A/B/X/Y buttons and much smaller, but it seems to handle quite nicely. It will be supported through games like Super Smash Bros. 3DS, Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate and the newly announced Xenoblade Chronicles, which is exclusive to the new 3DS.

Apart from that the new models has a slightly bigger screen and an improved 3D effect. Through facetracking it will now be possible to see the 3D effect from different angles. So no more straining the eye, or at least it will be greatly dimished.

The next improvement comes with an integrated NFC reader on the lower screen. So Amiibos can be used without the adapter, which Nintendo will release for the older 3DS-Systems.

The last improvement is the one that creates the dilemma for me. The new System has an improved CPU. At first I didn't think that this is a problem. Faster loading times while browsing the net, the Miiverse and the e-shop sounded like a nice bonus for the buyers of the new model. But then Nintendo also announced that Xenoblade Chronicles for 3DS would be exclusive to the new model. And that's the problem.

With that Nintendo creates a rift between owners of the original system and the new one. So if I want to play the new game I have to upgrade my System in the middle of its life cycle. It's ok to release revisions of your hardware, but when you begin to exclude the owners of the original to (maybe) force them to upgrade, we have a problem. Nintendo did many things right in the last couple of months, but this doesn't make them immune in this case.

If you want to play Xenoblade you have to buy the new system. And if this applies to more games from now on I see a big problem. The games business is front loaded. And by the constant revisions and now with the release of an 1.5 version of their hardware in the middle of its life cycle Nintendo conveys an image, that their first releases aren't worth it. Why should I buy the next handheld from them when it releases, if I may not be able to play all games developed for this hardware? Who says that the won't release a revision like the New 3DS again, so that I have to upgrade again in the middle of a life cycle to be able to play the newer games?

With the 3DS-XL I didn't feel excluded. It provided improvements, but I can enjoy all the features of it on my original 3DS. But if want to enjoy Xenoblade I have to pay 180 bucks to upgrade. All the other things I could enjoy on my original 3DS through the use of adapters and so, and that is ok, but gating games is not. How would the reaction look like if, for example, Microsoft releases a new X-Box One after two years and says, that if you want to play Halo 5 you better upgrade. The shitstorm would be unbelievable. I'm a big Nintendo fan and I'll often and gladly defend them when they get flak for some shit, like it happens so often, but as a fan I'm also the first to criticize them if they do wrong. And with the exclusivity of Xenoblade they did wrong in my opinion. I just hope that this stays the only game that is exclusive, but I don't really have much faith.

Also this will create massive confusion with the costumer. People who don't see the difference between the Wii and the Wii-U will buy Xenoblade for their children and when it doesn't work on their 3DS systems... well lets just say that this doesn't shed a good light on Nintendo in the eyes of the normal customer.

TL;dr: 

The New Nintendo 3DS has some nice improvements and overall sounds pretty good, but by making Xenoblade Chronicles 3DS exclusive to this new version of the system Nintendo creates a rift. And the only way to cross this rift is with money. If this applies to more games in the future Nintendo conveys the picture that it's not worth to buy their hardware at release, but to wait till the definite version releases 2-3 years later. To improve your hardware with revisions is ok, but don't gate actual content like games behind the new version.

A little news bit to end this post on a positive note. Amiibos will release this winter and cost 12 bucks a piece. I think this is a fair price and I can't wait to get my hands on Samus.

Here's also a pic of the twelve amiibos which will be available with the launch of Super Smash. Bros for Wii-U.

And as always

thanks for reading

Picture Source: Nintendo

Mario Kart 8 DLC

Yesterday Nintendo announced that they're planning to release DLC for Mario Kart 8. And the reaction has been mostly positive so far. At least on the sites and forums I frequent recently.

Mario Kart DLC is something a lot of people asked for. Especially considering the... not so optimal battle mode. It only makes sense for Nintendo to respond to that and give the people what they want. Each Pack will cost roughly 8 bucks and if you buy both of them at the same time, you'll get a discount. So 12 bucks for sixteen ''new'' (yes some of them will be reworked retro tracks) courses, eight new karts and six new drivers is a fair price. Also you get 8 different colors for Yoshi and Shy Guy if you buy both DLC packages. Nintendo has been experimenting with DLC for quite some time now. The overpriced level packs for New Super Mario Bros. 2, the Season Pass like, already made Cups in Mario Golf for 3DS and the full blown addon like Super Luigi U. And if that Mario Kart DLC or something like Luigi U. are their sweet spot I'm totally fine with that. Also the dates on which the DLC will be released (November 2014 and May 2015 respectively) show that they started working on this new tracks only after the core game was released.

So all in all the DLC sounds pretty awesome, but I'm still going to complain anyway. Now I don't want you to get me wrong. I will buy both packs and I will absolutely love them. That I'm sure about, but I still think Nintendo could have done better.

Characters:

Buying both packs will get you six new characters. Cat Peach, Tanuki Mario, Dry Bowser, Isabella, the Villager and Link. Honestly this is the only gripe I have with the DLC. Why do they add Link and Animal Crossing characters. The answer is obviously Amiibos, but I'm not sure how I should feel about this. Yes it's cool that you can race as Link, but I'm afraid that this opens the floodgates. Why can't I drive as Samus, Fox or Captain Falcon? With this Nintendo moves Mario Kart in the direction of Smash Bros. And I'm not sure I like it. Having Mario characters race each other for fun is one thing, but for example, with Samus it just doesn't feel right.

It's just strange to play a real Metroid Game and after that have Samus squeeze herself into a much to small kart (Just look at link) and drive around colorful courses.

I full understand anyone who absolutely loves the idea and I can see why you're probably pretty excited about this DLC, but I personally would have preferred if Mario Kart would stay Mario Kart.

The only character I truly am excited for is Dry Bowser, because he's just Metal as fuck. Yes I needed to say that.

If I could choose which DLC characters I would want, it would be something like this:

Pack 1 (Minions Pack): Boo (Light), Kamek(Medium), Dino Piranha (Heavy)

Pack 2 (Koopa Pack): Dry Bones (Light), Bowser Jr. (Medium), Dry Bowser (Heavy)

Pack 3 (Kong Pack): Dixie Kong (Light), Diddy Kong (Medium), Funky Kong (Heavy)

That would be my humble suggestions for characters.

Karts:

I don't have much to say about the new karts. I only saw the blue falcon so far and I like it. It's a nice nod towards the neglected F-Zero franchise and it fits Mario Kart 8's anti-gravity theme.

Courses:

First let me say, that it's awesome to get new courses. The ''old'' ones didn't get stale for me yet, as I only reached 3000 points in online races so far, but I can see it happening if you play the game extensively. So new course are always welcome. And the inclusion of the Zelda and Animal Crossing franchise opens up cool possibilities, but Nintendo doesn't seem to restrict it to these franchises.

On the screenshots released so far you can spot a course which is obviously located in Mute City and one which seems to be inspired by Excite Bike. It's really cool and I'm hoping for a Zelda Course in which you either race through Hyrule City and the castle, or around Death Mountain.

But does it really need this? It's only another step in the direction of Nintendo Kart. Mario Kart 8 showed us that there are no boundaries in the Mario series for creative courses. Or would you have thought something like Mount Wario or the Water Park would be possible, before seeing them? Adding these other franchises adds more possibilities one might say now, but I'm not so sure. I would rather say that it adds more boundaries.

Now you have to do a Zelda course each time. You have to do your Animal crossing race track. And some things just don't mix. You can't have a water park esque course on the shores of lake Hylia.

Maybe I'm just too skeptical and negative, but I'm just not a fan of the nintendo kart idea. But even I have to admit, that this is a DLC done right. It's a really good deal and I'm sure it will be top notch quality wise. And they even got pre-orders right for me. The Yoshi and Shy Guy skins are not really a pre-order bonus, because you get them even when you buy the packs separately and it doesn't matter when you buy them.

You should never feel the need to pre-order something. If you pre-order it should always be on your own accord. It's a sign of your trust in that developer. You should never feel the need to pre-order just so you can get an exclusive DLC. And for getting that right I applaud Nintendo. But I think this is a topic for another day.

TL;dr: 

12 bucks for 16 new courses, 8 karts and 6 characters is a phenomenal deal and if you did enjoy Mario Kart you should buy it. I would prefer that Mario Kart stays Mario Kart and doesn't turn into a racing version of Smash Bros., but I get why others are excited by this very thought. Also only pre-order games on your own accord as a sign of trust to this developer, but never because the bribed you with exclusive content.

And as always

Thanks for reading

Picture Source: Nintendo

Oh the Horror...

I could talk about the whole Zoegate scandal, but honestly I don't care. So let's talk about horror games.

The reveal of Silent Hills generated some buzz, and while I'm interested in Kojimas take on horror, I'm also sceptical. Not because I don't trust Hideo Kojima, but because I don't think that big AAA Horror games work very well. The last “AAA” Horror Game that worked for me was Dead Space 1 and you could argue that it wasn't really AAA. Every other big horror game fell flat on the horror aspect. My hope now rides on the shoulders of The Evil Within, but the previews I've seen don't fill me with much confidence.

But why do AAA horror games don't work?

Horror is a niche genre. It's that simple.

True Horror doesn't have a mass appeal. The ordinary human just doesn't like beeing scared. And how do you expect to get back all your investments on fancy graphic engines, motioin capturing, voice work and marketing, if you can't sell your product to at least two million people? The answer is simple. You can't! And that is why you focus test the hell out of your product to find the biggest mass appeal. That's why RE 6 was a watered down, action mess.

The solution to this is simple and I already talked about in another blog post. Know your audience! I just don't think that horror games work on the current AAA market. But luckily we live in a time, where digital distribution makes it possible to produce smaller games. I think horror games coud thrive best in this environment. Just like Call of Juarez Gunslinger or FarCry Blood Dragon.

If you buy an AAA game for 60 or 70 bucks you expect a minimum value and play time, or you won't be satisfied. And rightfully so. But a long game time works against the ideals of horror games. The longer you play, the more you get accustomed to the situation. It becomes familiar. You know what to expect. And that's the greatest enemy of horror. There is a german saying: In der Kürze liegt die Würze, which means, roughly translated of course, keep it simple.

Fear is a basic human emotion. Normally it's a short an powerful impulse that wears down over time when we grow accustomed to the situation. Slender worked so well, because it didn't take more than half an hour to play and complete the game. But if you make your game an AAA experience you can't say stop after an hour. You have to provide more content. You have to provide variety. Different locations and different enemies. My fist encounter with a Necromorph in Dead Space was memorable. And this intensity remained for the first 1-2 hours, but after that, and with the inclusion of new monsters, they became just an nuisance. Isn't that the death of horror if your audience reaction is: Eh not those monsters again... BORING!

But the new monsters fill up that spot, don't they? Yes and no. Yes they're frighting at first, but in the back of your mind the image of the first enemy lingers. With becoming just simple cannon fodder they destroyed the picture of all monsters in the game. If they can be killed that easily, then everything can.

With your horror game you want to keep the player on the edge of his seat the whole time. At no time he should feel safe or relaxed. You don't want him to get accustomed. Yes I've said that a lot in this post, but it's important. You can keep him from growing accustomed with different means. Change the environment and the monsters constantly. Keep the game short. Create an environment in which he can't trust nothing(Eternal Darkness comes to mind). These all work if executed properly, but I think the best, and most cost efficient, way would be a short game.

For 10 bucks no one will complain if your game is only about two hours long. Well but some may complain, but they always do. With that you can keep the horror fresh without spending thousands of dollars on different locations and so on.

So that's my opinion on horror games and a possible future in which they could thrive. I just don't think that a game can carry true horror over an extended period of time in today’s industry. Of course you may disagree, so what are your thoughts on this subject? Are you huge fans of horror games? What was the last game that truly chilled your bones from start to finish?

Well anyways... thanks for reading

and... boo 

The future of 3D Mario

The last week I've been busy playing the shit out of Mario Kart 8 and it's truly a blast. The courses are really imaginative and rich in variety. And that got me thinking. Why doesn't Nintendo stretch this variety onto the Mario Jump'n'Run Titles.

The New Super Mario Bros. Series, although excellent in quality, has been stagnating since basically the first game. Also Super Mario 3D World suffered from the same problem. Now don't get me wrong. 3D World is an excellent Game, a perfect Jump'n'Run and the levels are filled with creativity. But to me many of the still felt bland. Artistically speaking. We always have some Ice levels, desert levels, grass levels, etc... and they use the same basic set for all of them. All the ice levels feel the same. Maybe this is a problem of the smaller courses mentality of 3D World, but for a next 3D Mario in the Spirit of Mario 64, Galaxy or (the underrated) Sunshine I wish for the same sort of creativity and diversity as in Mario Kart 8.

First of all I hope they go back to big courses like in Mario 64 and Sunshine. Galaxy was great, but many of it's Course were basically just obstacle courses with a star at the end. 3D World was even more of a step in that direction, so I hope they go the opposite with the next big tittle. I want courses where you can run around and explore. And also I hope they go away from the drawing board approach of the generic forest, sea, desert, etc. levels.

So again. What does this have to do with Mario Kart 8? Well many Mario Kart 8 stages with their background details and lively atmosphere got me thinking about how they would look if they were courses in a 3D Mario and that thought got me rather excited. Take Mount Wario as an example. It's one of the biggest courses in Mario Kart and it displays an amazing variety. You have an icy mountain summit, an ice cavern with a river running through, a damn for creating electricity, a winter forest and a ski resort. Each part could house amazing puzzles, adventures and a power star if Mount Wario were a course in a 3D Mario. And it doesn't stop there. Dolphin Shoals is a standard tropic beach course at the first glance, but it also houses an extended underwater cavern with a sea monster and rapids. What I want to say with that is, that even when a course may seem like something generic you can still find a fresh twist. Bone Dry Dunes is a standard desert, but through the different lightning and bones it didn't bother me.

Of course this is all about the aesthetic, but to me this is the only thing that needs to freshen up with Mario Games. Mechanically wise they're always near perfect. Give me levels like waterpark, sweet sweet canyon or cloudtop cruise as Mario 3D courses. Todays game industry is mostly build on hype. That is a sad fact, but it's the current reality. With the same levels as always you can't make peoples jaws drop. 3D World was an awesome game, but it was also just 3D Land 2. The Wii-U deserves a truly unique and full fledged Mario Jump'n'Run. I just hope that the creativity and variety of Mario Kart spills over into the development of that title.

So, to put it short. Give me big levels with lots of things to explore, give me excellent Jump'n'Run gameplay (that fact is a given), and give me creative, fresh and diverse courses. That is what I want from the next 3D Mario.

What are your thoughts about this? What do you expect/want from the next 3D Mario Jump'n'Run? Do you want Galaxy 2, 3D World 2 or something completely new?

Smash Direct

Just some quick thoughts about the Super Smash Brothers Direct.

First of all. It was great! I'm seriously hyped for this game. For both versions. And that already brings me to the main point of this post. You can read the actual news and announcements for Characters, Stages, Items and so on on other sites, but I will talk about the separate release dates for both versions and why this is a good thing.

So the 3DS Version of Smash Bros will be released in Summer, while the Wii-U Version will launch in Winter. And of course the Internet is all over this, although the negativity is far less than I would have anticipated. Many say that Nintendo is cannibalizing the sales of the Wii-U Version with that move.

I say it's the opposite. Releasing the 3DS and the Wii-U Version at the same time would have been sales cannibalization. They would have to compete against each other, while the release we have now gives both versions enough room to breathe. I think many people will get the 3DS and the Wii-U Version and I see the 3DS game as kind of an appetizer (While still being a full fledged game of course). Also a winter release will surely give the Wii-U a good push during the holidays.

Now this assumption only works if the Wii-U Version has some extra content. Of course the core of the game will be the same, but like the 3DS Version, which gets the Smash run exclusive, the Wii-U Game needs some unique selling point.

Call me optimistic, but I think that's exactly what they're going to do in the time between 3DS and Wii-U release. They will work on some extra mode. Probably some single player. It only makes sense. They can't change the characters, trophys and items after the release of the 3DS Version and it would increase the appeal of the Wii-U game and encourage buying both versions.

So I expect Nintendo to release some infos on Wii-U specific modes and extras at E3.

Also yeah for Zero Suit Samus.

Ps.: Let's start a petition to rename the for Glory mode into ''Final Destination, No Items, Fox only''

...and yes I know that this joke has been told probably a million times in the last hours.

What's the Problem with mediocrity

I normally don't give anything about metacritc, but a thread I saw in the last days has sparked my interest. The Op in this thread claimed that with a Metascore of 80 InFamous: Second Son had failed. In which kind of world do we live where this score is considered a failure. Why are we so afraid of mediocre games? Why is a 9/10 for a hyped game like GTA 5 worth a death threat to the reviewer?

There are many factors at work here and I think we are all to blame. The Reviewers, the consumers and the Industry itself. The Game Industry has become an industry of superlatives. It's bigger than ever and at the same time blander than ever. And with that we have separated the market into two extremes. Triple A Games and Indies. There is nothing in between anymore. Small or Big, but where is the medium size.

In the eyes of the big publishers everything has to sell in the millions or it's not worth doing at all. Game Reviewers can change their rating system to a 4 Star rating, cause a nowadays a big game rarely gets something lower than 7/10.

And the customer is afraid. Afraid that his 70€ game purchase might not be worth it. Afraid that he could regret his Pre-Order. Afraid that the game might not live up to the hype. You're afraid of wasting your money and time. And that is totally legitimate, but that also narrows down your possibilities. Surely you could get burned, but you might find a gem inside the fire.

But enough with this pointless words. Let's talk about some things that could be done.

Publishers: Know your audience

Not every game or genre is fitted for Triple A Gaming and that's okay. The yearly cycle of games like Call of Duty was born because there is a crowd for it. I don't blame the publishers for milking CoD or Assassins Creed, but I blame them for trying to make every game Call of Duty. You would have to be a total brickhead to actually think that this works. It's simple greed that drives these men and women. Why should we be satisfied with one Call of Duty when we can have 2 or 3 or 10. But every sane person knows that you can't grow forever. One thing that grows forever is cancer. Think about that.

As long as this mindset dominates the industry I don't see games breaking out of this cycle of Triple A or Indie. This brings me back to my initial statement. Know your audience and dimension your game appropriately. If you bring something like Hitman back it's pretty simple. Look at the sales figures of the old games and take these as a base for your assumptions. If the last game sold 2 Million than make a game which can be profitable with 2 Million copies sold. If the game then surpasses your expectations you can increase the budget for the next iteration.

I know I simplified the problem here, but my core point stands. A survival horror game won't sell as much as a first person shooter, so you can't justify the same costs for this kind of game.

The second point I would like to see return are medium priced games. I, for example, own Deadly Creatures for the Wii. It's an original game, which is mediocre in every aspect. But I'm not mad because it's price was 30€ when it was released. Why did this kind of games die out? It may not make large amounts of cash, but it will still sell even if it's only mediocre. Because it doesn't hurt if it's not a masterpiece. It's the same thing with steam deals. You're not mad when a game you got for a reasonable price turns out to be just solid. Indies show that this works. Games like Limbo are great, but I wouldn't be willing to pay full price for them. But for the price they're being sold I have no second thoughts about buying.

I'm not defending bad games here, nor do I want you to accept them, but Sonic Lost World or Knack aren't bad games. They're just overpriced for the value they actually provide.

Reviewers: Believe nothing

Believe the Hype. That's what IGN had to say about Titanfall. In a time where 10 out of 10s get thrown around like leaves in autumn it's hard to survive with anything except that. This review industry gives us the picture that nearly all games are either masterpieces or trash.

GTA 5: Masterpiece

Titanfall: Masterpiece

Super Mario 3D World: Masterpiece

When nearly all big games get an 8/10 at least, the 7 or 6 out of 10 feel the blow. InFamous is seen as a piece of crap by some people because of that. What we need is a healthy review culture which uses the whole skala. That means that a 5 out of 10 is not a catastrophe, but a solid game with some bigger flaws, but it still can be enjoyed by genre fans nonetheless.

I, for example, would rate Yoshis New Island with a 6 out of ten. It's a good Jump'n'Run without really new ideas and a solid, but weaker, sequel to the Original.

If game reviewers want to be taken seriously they need to step up their game. It's not enough to hand out a ''bad'' score to a big game once in a while. The Review spectrum needs to be broadened. 9 out of ten has to mean something again, because right now it only speaks to me: Well that game doesn't suck.

Consumer: Tolerance is the key

But for this to work we, the consumer, need to change too. Right now many gamers have a live or die mentality. A game is either a glorious masterpiece sent from the high heavens or a piece of crap no one can, and should, enjoy. Stop that. Find some middle ground. And also give smaller games, which fit a genre you enjoy, a chance.

The Industry is big enough to house everyone. But right now we're all cramming ourselves into one corner and one day we just won't fit anymore. And when that happens I will probably play Deadly Creatures.

The Wii-Us Problems - What can be done

So the Wii-U has some issues. I think there is no need to deny that. Although I'm happy with the system, it looks like I'm one of few. And you know what. The people criticizing the Wii-U are absolutely right. Even for me the console feels not fully thought out. The Gamepad is still lacking proper use, apart from Off-TV, which is indeed amazing, but no full justification for the controller. While the Wii-Mote justified itself through the stellar controls of Metriod Prime 3, the self explanatory nature of Wii Sports and in it's later life cycle through Skyward Sword.

The Wii-U has many flaws. Some which can't be tackled and some which can. Let's talk about the things Nintendo can change, because talking about the unchangeable facts of the system won't help nobody.

The Gamepad and Games:

This is a short point, because it's the most obvious. Bring some games that utilize the gamepad in a meaningful way. Donkey Kong Country:Tropica Freeze is probably the best game I've played in a long time, but it doesn't even try to use the gamepad. Apart from the graphic it would have been possible on the Wii or the Gamecube or the Playstation. If you want your console to be unique, then use it properly to make unique games.

Also more games in general wouldn't hurt either, although the Wii-U has build up a healthy library of games already.

Online – Virtual Console:

Get your shit together. I'm sorry, but there is no nicer way in saying this. Get your huge virtual console library onto 3DS and Wii-U. Even if there are some licensing issues with 3^rd party content from that time, that is no excuse for not porting all of your own titles. There are still no Nintendo 64, or Gamecube games on the Wii-U VC. Like I said above. Use the huge pile of software you're sitting on.

Online – Unified account system and Cross Buy:

Online is a key part in todays console market. Nintendo has started to embrace it, but not nearly enough. The Miiverse is great, but it's not enough. What we now need is a unified account system. Tieing your purchases to the hardware is one of the dumbest things ever. Even in the Wii period and even more in the period of Wii-U and 3DS. Just tie it to a got damn account. You even have a perfect account system in place with club nintendo.

They already started to work on this problem via Nintendo Network Id, but apart from bringing your 3DS and Wii-U together not much has happened.

Even though it would be so easy. Just look what your competitors are doing. It's ok to not run after every trend in this industry, but at when Sony does something right, there is no shame in copying it.

I'm, of course, talking about crossbuy. Iwata stated in an interview that he wanted the Wii-U and the 3DS to become like brothers. Well that would be the first step. Unify most of the virtual console for both platforms. NES, SNES, GBA Titles could be ported to both Wii-U and 3DS. And if you buy, for example, Super Mario Bros. 3 for the Wii-U, you also get it on your 3DS. Add the possibilities of migrating your save files from one platform to the other and you have a huge plus for both of your platforms. Even bigger than Playstations Cross-buy because you have the stronger library than sony could ever have.

This may not be a reason to buy a Wii-U but it surely would help both, the Wii-U and the 3DS, because Owners of one platform may have an easier time deciding if they should buy the other. Also it would help your image with gamers.

Advertisement:

Just do it. I rarely see a spot for the Wii-U or one of it's games, while Sonys ''For the gamers'' commercial was every where throughout the holidays. Get the people to know that there is a new Nintendo console an tell them what it's all about (after you figured this out for yourselves of course.)

Price:

Cutting the manufacturing costs, so that by holiday 2014 you can sell Wii-U Bundles for 250€ would surely help as well. Even more if neither Sony nor Microsoft perform a price cut in their first year on the market, although the X Box One might get one soon.

This would be some points which Nintendo could work on to rise the overall attractiveness of the console. I think they could manage that till fall and with the stream of high quality software which releases then (Bayonetta 2, Smash Bros., Hyrule Warriors, possibly X, Call of Duty, Asassins Creed) the Wii-U would be an attractive product to get for Christmas 2014.

So what are your thoughts? What measures can Nintendo take to bring the Wii-U back on track again? Can the console even do that? Or is the Wii-U doooooomed!!!