-He says he doesn't like 3D because it adds almost nothing to the gaming experience. And when Nintendo themselves say that all of the games on their system can play fine without the 3D, it just shows how little 3D actually does.BiH-Kira said:
-He has played Red Steel 2, he reviewed it in fact. He said it did motion controls fine, but he pointed out that one game that functions fine with it does not mean motion controls are the way to go. One good game does not make up the rule for motion controls, it makes up the exception, something he pointed out.
-He has given reasons why he doesn't like new games in old franchises: because he is generally opposed to sequels. Further, its not so much that he thinks the games are say the worst games ever made, rather he hates the mentality behind them, giving gamers the same game with the differences minut enough to warrent DLC but not full price. If you want proff of this, look no further then his review of Mario Galaxy 2, where he says the game is enjoyable but admitadly feels samey and copy-pastes levels and fights from previous Mario games. To answer your question BTW, while I haven't played the galaxy series, I'll say this about CoD (series is okay, but I could care less about CoD): at least CoD 4 was set in modern era while CoD 3 was set in WW2, so at least the similar mechanics are being tested in different scenarios.
-He doesn't like the current rumours circulating around. Is he not allowed to have an opinion on them? Its one thing to disagree with ones opinion, its another to say they shouldn't have one. Otherwise every site that posts these rumours and adds even a hint of opinion or speculation is wrong in your books, even the ones that have a positive reaction to the rumours.
-This goes back to what he has said about motion controls. Sure, there are tons of possibilities with it, but who is actually going to impliment them? Further, how many games out there are actually going to benefit with this feature? Sure, perhaps there are certain genres out there that can benefit, but what about the ones that don't? Do they simply fall to the way-side or are they forced along a path? This is his problem, not that some games may have this control scheme, but that there will be several that don't need it and only serve to show how little the control adds to the game. If you take a look back at his reviews for Galaxy 1 and No More Heros 2, he points out that despite the fact that these games are championed as some of the best games on the Wii that they are in fact games that would've worked better on other systems.
-This was an article about Nintendo. Why would he bring Sony or Microsoft into it? It would be like doing an article that talked about the issues of shooters and complaining that it doesn't mention the issues of other genres such as platformers or puzzle games. Further, it would be one thing if he was complaining about an innovation that may not do well but at least has good intentions or original thought, but he isn't. Its not like the screen on the controller is something new. Ignoring the Dream Cast, remember when Nintendo would allow users to connect their GBA to their Game Cube and use that as the controller? Sure no touch capabilities but it is roughly similar in execution.
-Good intentions do not make up for bad results. Just because Nintendo has made some good games (personally I'm not a big fan, but some stuff is okay), has started certain gaming trends, and used to have good intentions with their creations does not excuse them from criticism.
