The future of major third party Switch games will be mid-budget

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

No, it's an open world Zelda game, it's not some wildly different and new game experience. All the games I listed are wildly different. I doubt you even played a game in their genre, let alone the games themselves. And, Divinity OS2 released in 2017, I doubt Zelda is better.

So it's you just assuming it's worse, rather than arguing from first-hand experience, and than presenting it as hard fact. Brilliant!

That's what everyone else is doing in the thread assuming that phone games aren't as good as Switch games when mechanically they have so much more going on than your normal video game while also being vastly different experiences while Nintendo trots out the same franchises for the last 30 years. How does one not know how a Zelda game plays at this point? Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

 

[Yoshi178]

Have you played any of the games I listed?

Have you played The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild? also known as the 2017 videogame of the year

No

at least he admits it. lol

 

[Casual Shinji]

That's what everyone else is doing in the thread assuming that phone games aren't as good as Switch games when mechanically they have so much more going on than your normal video game while also being vastly different experiences while Nintendo trots out the same franchises for the last 30 years. How does one not know how a Zelda game plays at this point? Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

You're the one who brought up phone games being better than Switch games you never even played.

You should maybe stop touting your means of entertainment as superior to that of someone else's. You do this constantly. You're doing it again in this post, and even worse, you're doing it regarding a game you haven't even played.

 

[Silvanus]

Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

Sounds thrilling.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

That's what everyone else is doing in the thread assuming that phone games aren't as good as Switch games when mechanically they have so much more going on than your normal video game while also being vastly different experiences while Nintendo trots out the same franchises for the last 30 years. How does one not know how a Zelda game plays at this point? Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

You're the one who brought up phone games being better than Switch games you never even played.

You should maybe stop touting your means of entertainment as superior to that of someone else's. You do this constantly. You're doing it again in this post, and even worse, you're doing it regarding a game you haven't even played.

I've played a few Switch games and I've played all of Nintendo's main franchises before. Are you going to tell me the newest Mario Kart is vastly different than the last one or Splatoon 2 is vastly different than Splatoon 1 (which I've played)? There's singular games that have changed more than Nintendo franchises; for example, WoW has changed more over its lifespan than Smash Bros and WoW is just one game (and yes, I've played all the Smash games). Saying you have to play the newest Zelda to understand how it plays doesn't make much sense as it's similar mechanically to other Zelda games and adds the open world structure to it that we've seen ad nauseam in 100s of other games. Sure, it could do "it" better than every other game ever but we already have had "it" many times before. The newest massively hyped game is Cyberpunk which is going to be like Deus Ex, which is almost 20 years old. There's a dearth of new gameplay mechanics and ideas in video gaming right now (especially at the AAA level), which is an objectively true statement.

Everyone is literally saying I'm basically trolling saying phone games couldn't possibly better than Switch games when they haven't played them (or anything like them). They are saying their means of entertainment is better than mine without literally any idea how the games I listed play at all.

Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

Sounds thrilling.

The point is there's games out there that are about wildly different subject matter and gameplay mechanics that you have no idea if you'll like them before you try them (because they aren't just like XYZ game that you played before). There's really popular games out there about anything from birds to trains to terraforming planets to building nukes to building a dino park. Whatever niche thing that interests you probably has a pretty awesome game about it. Then, of course, you have the more popular subject matter related games like there's an actually amazingly good Game of Thrones game, a steampunk WWII game with mechs, amazing Battlestar Galactica hidden traitor game, a choose your own adventure style RPG set in a DnD and cthulhu mix of a world that plays like XCOM on crack. That last one is Gloomhaven and it's coming to Steam in early access next month.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Everyone is literally saying I'm basically trolling saying phone games couldn't possibly better than Switch games when they haven't played them (or anything like them). They are saying their means of entertainment is better than mine without literally any idea how the games I listed play at all.

You're the one who took the first shot with that one. And then followed it up by claiming the games on your phone are better than Switch games you never played.

Saying you have to play the newest Zelda to understand how it plays doesn't make much sense as it's similar mechanically to other Zelda games and adds the open world structure to it that we've seen ad nauseam in 100s of other games.

How does that not make sense? You haven't played it. Resident Evil 4 is mechanically similar to The Evil Within, and guess what, they play extremely different.

Sure, it could do "it" better than every other game ever but we already have had "it" many times before. The newest massively hyped game is Cyberpunk which is going to be like Deus Ex, which is almost 20 years old. There's a dearth of new gameplay mechanics and ideas in video gaming right now (especially at the AAA level), which is an objectively true statement.

Yeah, and you can say you don't like those kinds of games. But saying they're worse than the games on your phone when you haven't played them is ill informed, to say the least. And again you're getting all black and white, implying that console/PC games are all samey and stupid and not worth anybody's time, and that now apparently phone (on top of board) games are the most revolutionary thing in entertainment, every new title being completely unique, and making all other forms of entertainment obsolete. Certainly the Switch eventhough you admit to having played only a few games on it.

I can bet you you could give me any discription of one of these phone games and I could find an example from a game from the 90's that does a similar "it". And they're probably great fun to play regardless, but fact is that very, very, very few games are actually unique whether they're on a home console, on a handheld, or on a phone. Even indie games, which are touted as the "creative" environment in gaming fall under certain categories that we've been familiar with for decades.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You're the one who took the first shot with that one. And then followed it up by claiming the games on your phone are better than Switch games you never played.

Something like Through the Ages is a much much more weightier game with far more mechanical depth than say Horizon (which I very much love and have played). I have played other games similar to Zelda (and prior Zeldas) to have a pretty good idea how BotW will play. And there's no way it has the mechanical depth of many of the games I listed, and sure, I may find it more fun to play than say Through the Ages when I give it a shot. There's probably nothing this the gen with regards to video games (that I've played) that can compete with the game design of quite a number of board games. Game design in video games is really really lacking right now.

How does that not make sense? You haven't played it. Resident Evil 4 is mechanically similar to The Evil Within, and guess what, they play extremely different.

I believe our definitions of extremely different are extremely different. From what I've seen of TEW, it's shooting is very similar to RE4 while the overall game has more emphasis on stealth and resource management. Whereas what I would consider extremely different would be the war games like Axis and Allies (standard/classic move units/ships on a map, roll dice, etc.) vs a game like Tigris & Euphrates where it's a war game where all you do is place different colored tiles on the board. Not only are the mechanics completely different but the thinking needed to win is also completely different.

Yeah, and you can say you don't like those kinds of games. But saying they're worse than the games on your phone when you haven't played them is ill informed, to say the least. And again you're getting all black and white, implying that console/PC games are all samey and stupid and not worth anybody's time, and that now apparently phone (on top of board) games are the most revolutionary thing in entertainment, every new title being completely unique, and making all other forms of entertainment obsolete. Certainly the Switch eventhough you admit to having played only a few games on it.

The phone games I'm talking about are digital board games basically and technically video games. Not to mention the touchscreen interface of phones/tablets lends itself perfectly to those type of games as well. The Gloomhaven video game is looking great and more than just a digital conversion of the board game. The turn-based battle mechanics are for deeper than say XCOM (which really only requires the same basic strat for every battle). If a DnD/Cthulhu themed RPG that plays like a much better XCOM interests you, you should check it out. I play video games just like pretty much everyone here, why would I play them if they're stupid or not worth my time? I'm sorry if expect them to get better vs getting worse as the medium carries on. I listed games that have me excited in the E3 Best/Worst thread like say Deathloop, I didn't even list any worst ones as I really only care about the ones that I think look good.

I can bet you you could give me any discription of one of these phone games and I could find an example from a game from the 90's that does a similar "it". And they're probably great fun to play regardless, but fact is that very, very, very few games are actually unique whether they're on a home console, on a handheld, or on a phone. Even indie games, which are touted as the "creative" environment in gaming fall under certain categories that we've been familiar with for decades.

As ignorant as you think I am about say BotW, you're much more ignorant about the games I'm talking about because literally board games have exploded over the last 10-15 years, there really aren't many good old classic ones besides the ones you've probably heard of like a Chess or Axis and Allies. There's no game that plays anything like Tigris and Euphrates, which is from the 90s (which is like ancient with regards to board games) and there's no new game that's like it either. Dominion created a the deck-building genre and that's from 2008, and Magic is not a deck-builder btw, so you won't find a game with the deck-building mechanic from the 90s or earlier. That deck-building genre has exploded and changed so much that Dominion is so plain and it's only 10 years old. You have games like Tyrants of the Underdark that combines the basic mechanic with area control or the Legendary games (Marvel, Aliens, Firefly, Big Trouble in Little China, Harry Potter, etc.) all came about because of Dominion in 2008. You ain't going to find a game like Tzolkin prior to or after it, just look at the board [https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/vx57XnnaY0rym6ERZWZUFsVzql4=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale()/pic1447899.jpg], you move the giant gear every turn which moves your workers along the other gears, there's literally nothing like it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

You ain't going to find a game like Tzolkin prior to or after it, just look at the board [https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/vx57XnnaY0rym6ERZWZUFsVzql4=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale()/pic1447899.jpg], you move the giant gear every turn which moves your workers along the other gears, there's literally nothing like it.

Claiming there's literally nothing like a board game that has a board, cards, pieces to move around, dice, and I'm assuming turns feels like a bit of a stretch. No matter how indepth it may be it'll still remind me of Trival Pursuit or Monopoly simply due to how it's transmitted to me. And I am ignorant about board games, but then I never claimed that my games were better.

Something like Through the Ages is a much much more weightier game with far more mechanical depth than say Horizon (which I very much love and have played). I have played other games similar to Zelda (and prior Zeldas) to have a pretty good idea how BotW will play. And there's no way it has the mechanical depth of many of the games I listed, and sure, I may find it more fun to play than say Through the Ages when I give it a shot. There's probably nothing this the gen with regards to video games (that I've played) that can compete with the game design of quite a number of board games. Game design in video games is really really lacking right now.

So are you equating a game's worth or enjoyment to how mechanically indepth it is? You say you might find something like BotW more fun to play than a mechanically deeper game, than why wouldn't BotW be "better"? A game like Shadow of the Colossus isn't that mechanically deep, Journey and Inside is just you walking. It's the simpliest designs that usually harbour the most solid results.

I believe our definitions of extremely different are extremely different. From what I've seen of TEW, it's shooting is very similar to RE4 while the overall game has more emphasis on stealth and resource management.

The shooting in HZD is also very similar to that of Max Payne 3 (over the shoulder, left to aim, right to shoot). There's even a dodge dive. I'll give you that RE4 and TEW are actually quite similar, yet when you play them they're really not, if only because one of them is very good and the other is garbage.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Claiming there's literally nothing like a board game that has a board, cards, pieces to move around, dice, and I'm assuming turns feels like a bit of a stretch. No matter how indepth it may be it'll still remind me of Trival Pursuit or Monopoly simply due to how it's transmitted to me. And I am ignorant about board games, but then I never claimed that my games were better.

Tzolkin doesn't have cards or dice. Also, Tzolkin is a game we've played probably like 25 times now and none of us have felt like we've ever played it right/well/efficiently. So, yeah, it doesn't play like any other game. A lot of board games don't use dice at all to eliminate the obvious randomness of rolls. If you go into any the board games I listed thinking it's going to be like Trivial Pursuit or Monopoly, you'd be in for quite a rude awakening. They are both really basic roll and move games that are really only mechanics used in simple kids games or family games. Now if I listed like Talisman (a really bad move), which is also a roll and move game, you'd be right. I've played lots of board games and video games to know board games are in a much better place right now. Video games were better than board games 80s and 90s for sure.

So are you equating a game's worth or enjoyment to how mechanically indepth it is? You say you might find something like BotW more fun to play than a mechanically deeper game, than why wouldn't BotW be "better"? A game like Shadow of the Colossus isn't that mechanically deep, Journey and Inside is just you walking. It's the simpliest designs that usually harbour the most solid results.

Better mechanics equate to a higher ceiling. There's inherent things that both mediums do better/worse than each other. The stuff that Shadow does extremely well would be really hard to pull off on a board game. Enjoyment obviously determines how good the game is. I'll play a simpler game I like more over a complex game I don't enjoy as much. Also a game shouldn't have anything it doesn't need from a design standpoint (like Shadow, Journey, Inside) but most video games use kitchen-sink design and just think more is better.

The shooting in HZD is also very similar to that of Max Payne 3 (over the shoulder, left to aim, right to shoot). There's even a dodge dive. I'll give you that RE4 and TEW are actually quite similar, yet when you play them they're really not, if only because one of them is very good and the other is garbage.

Shooting is pretty similar in pretty much every game with shooting (1st or 3rd person even).

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

That's what everyone else is doing in the thread assuming that phone games aren't as good as Switch games when mechanically they have so much more going on than your normal video game while also being vastly different experiences while Nintendo trots out the same franchises for the last 30 years. How does one not know how a Zelda game plays at this point? Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

You're the one who brought up phone games being better than Switch games you never even played.

You should maybe stop touting your means of entertainment as superior to that of someone else's. You do this constantly. You're doing it again in this post, and even worse, you're doing it regarding a game you haven't even played.

I've played a few Switch games and I've played all of Nintendo's main franchises before. Are you going to tell me the newest Mario Kart is vastly different than the last one or Splatoon 2 is vastly different than Splatoon 1 (which I've played)? There's singular games that have changed more than Nintendo franchises; for example, WoW has changed more over its lifespan than Smash Bros and WoW is just one game (and yes, I've played all the Smash games). Saying you have to play the newest Zelda to understand how it plays doesn't make much sense as it's similar mechanically to other Zelda games and adds the open world structure to it that we've seen ad nauseam in 100s of other games. Sure, it could do "it" better than every other game ever but we already have had "it" many times before. The newest massively hyped game is Cyberpunk which is going to be like Deus Ex, which is almost 20 years old. There's a dearth of new gameplay mechanics and ideas in video gaming right now (especially at the AAA level), which is an objectively true statement.

I think you might actually really enjoy BOTW. It does some very interesting things mechanically that allow you to solve puzzles by thinking outside the box in a way that most other games (and all previous Zelda games) don't allow.

Here's an example:


Instead of doing the puzzle the "intended" way he takes all of the metal items from his inventory and uses them to create a path for the electricity to link 2 nodes instead of powering the second node. Something that makes sense, but most people wouldn't think of because most games wouldn't give you the mechanical freedom to do that.

So yes, while mechanically something like Splatoon 2 is basically exactly like Splatoon 1, but with more features, BOTW actually plays quite differently from other Zelda games and has quite a bit of mechanical complexity not found in other games. So I do think you're wrong to say that you know how BOTW plays just because you've played previous Zelda titles.

 

[BrawlMan]

Most definitely, on my phone I can play Sentinels of the Multiverse, Through the Ages, TerraMystica, Baseball Highlights 2045, Tigris and Euphrates, Ticket to Ride, Small World 2, and plenty of other great games. The Switch definitely doesn't have better games than my phone, it's ludicrous thinking the Switch has a better library. Plus, I can play a multiplayer without the Switch bullshit and it's free.

I'm... genuinely unsure whether you're taking the piss or not.

Are you? You must be.

Here's screenshot from my phone

Board games are currently killing video games in game design and mechanics right now. I don't understand why everyone thinks I'm being hyperbolic or trolling or whatever. Have you played any of the games I listed?

Well, Switch's selling point of mobile gaming is done better on phones that are less than $100 so the Switch has something unique compared to PS4/Xbone, but the unique element itself is executed very piss-poor.

You genuinely believe that games on your phone are better than those available on handhelds/ Switch?

That's just ludicrous.

Most definitely, on my phone I can play Sentinels of the Multiverse, Through the Ages, TerraMystica, Baseball Highlights 2045, Tigris and Euphrates, Ticket to Ride, Small World 2, and plenty of other great games. The Switch definitely doesn't have better games than my phone, it's ludicrous thinking the Switch has a better library. Plus, I can play a multiplayer without the Switch bullshit and it's free.

Dementia must be setting in. It's your opinion, even if it sounds dumb.

Have you played any of the games I listed?

No, and I don't care. It's your money and time, you do you. Just go off like Moviebob who claimed mobile games were the next thing and crush the AAA industry. That turned out to be a bunch of bullshit. Especially with all the shitty micros and gambling manipulation makes a majority of them off putting (not all mobile games do this, but it is a rarity now). And then greedy corps like EA, Acti-Blizz, and Ubisoft use the worse parts of the mobile gaming industry. They can all fuck off.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I think you might actually really enjoy BOTW. It does some very interesting things mechanically that allow you to solve puzzles by thinking outside the box in a way that most other games (and all previous Zelda games) don't allow.

Here's an example:


Instead of doing the puzzle the "intended" way he takes all of the metal items from his inventory and uses them to create a path for the electricity to link 2 nodes instead of powering the second node. Something that makes sense, but most people wouldn't think of because most games wouldn't give you the mechanical freedom to do that.

So yes, while mechanically something like Splatoon 2 is basically exactly like Splatoon 1, but with more features, BOTW actually plays quite differently from other Zelda games and has quite a bit of mechanical complexity not found in other games. So I do think you're wrong to say that you know how BOTW plays just because you've played previous Zelda titles.

I feel like I'm either going to really like BotW or hate it honestly. One of the things that concern me is how spread out the content seems to be. There's over 120 shrines for example and they might come off as something to checkoff your chore list, which many open world games fall into. I know about the systemic-ness of BotW from watching the Game Maker's Toolkit about Systemic Games [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnpAAX9CkIc]. I definitely feel Japanese games seem to be behind the curve in that regard and BotW having such elements is pretty great. Why isn't there a JRPG with such a system like Zelda like how Divinity Original Sin uses the elements to play off each other (casting a rain spell then an ice spell to freeze the water causing enemies to slip on it)?

Dementia must be setting in. It's your opinion, even if it sounds dumb.

Have you played any of the games I listed?

No, and I don't care. It's your money and time, you do you. Just go off like Moviebob who claimed mobile games were the next thing and crush the AAA industry. That turned out to be a bunch of bullshit. Especially with all the shitty micros and gambling manipulation makes a majority of them off putting (not all mobile games do this, but it is a rarity now). And then greedy corps like EA, Acti-Blizz, and Ubisoft use the worse parts of the mobile gaming industry. They can all fuck off.

Moviebob was half-right as AAA games merely turned into mobile games basically. It's quite funny how a buddy at work commented on how Golf Clash (since we had like 2 months of downtime) has better loot than Anthem. AAA games fail at such simple and basic things these days. Maybe you're the one developing dementia from playing video games as certain types of games do damage the brain leading to an increase chance of getting dementia while board games are linked to lowering your chances of getting dementia by 15% (no joke either, both studies are out there). You should generally not comment on stuff you don't really know anything about.

 

[BrawlMan]

I think you might actually really enjoy BOTW. It does some very interesting things mechanically that allow you to solve puzzles by thinking outside the box in a way that most other games (and all previous Zelda games) don't allow.

Here's an example:


Instead of doing the puzzle the "intended" way he takes all of the metal items from his inventory and uses them to create a path for the electricity to link 2 nodes instead of powering the second node. Something that makes sense, but most people wouldn't think of because most games wouldn't give you the mechanical freedom to do that.

So yes, while mechanically something like Splatoon 2 is basically exactly like Splatoon 1, but with more features, BOTW actually plays quite differently from other Zelda games and has quite a bit of mechanical complexity not found in other games. So I do think you're wrong to say that you know how BOTW plays just because you've played previous Zelda titles.

I feel like I'm either going to really like BotW or hate it honestly. One of the things that concern me is how spread out the content seems to be. There's over 120 shrines for example and they might come off as something to checkoff your chore list, which many open world games fall into. I know about the systemic-ness of BotW from watching the Game Maker's Toolkit about Systemic Games [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnpAAX9CkIc]. I definitely feel Japanese games seem to be behind the curve in that regard and BotW having such elements is pretty great. Why isn't there a JRPG with such a system like Zelda like how Divinity Original Sin uses the elements to play off each other (casting a rain spell then an ice spell to freeze the water causing enemies to slip on it)?

Dementia must be setting in. It's your opinion, even if it sounds dumb.

Have you played any of the games I listed?

No, and I don't care. It's your money and time, you do you. Just go off like Moviebob who claimed mobile games were the next thing and crush the AAA industry. That turned out to be a bunch of bullshit. Especially with all the shitty micros and gambling manipulation makes a majority of them off putting (not all mobile games do this, but it is a rarity now). And then greedy corps like EA, Acti-Blizz, and Ubisoft use the worse parts of the mobile gaming industry. They can all fuck off.

Moviebob was half-right as AAA games merely turned into mobile games basically. It's quite funny how a buddy at work commented on how Golf Clash (since we had like 2 months of downtime) has better loot than Anthem. AAA games fail at such simple and basic things these days. Maybe you're the one developing dementia from playing video games as certain types of games do damage the brain leading to an increase chance of getting dementia while board games are linked to lowering your chances of getting dementia by 15% (no joke either, both studies are out there). You should generally not comment on stuff you don't really know anything about.

Right back at ya. And for the record I don't like crap like Anthem. And as I said earlier there are good mobile games but there are rarity compared to when there were starting to release quality ones when iPhones and Androids are getting really popular and more affordable around 2010-2013. I don't know every single thing about mobile games, but I know bullshit when I see it. Once again your money your time. Your way of gaming is not superior everybody else just because you discovered the "truth". Mine is not either. I get no benefit from a majority of mobile games. Nor do I have a major love for most triple a games. I've got to the point years ago where I just play games I know I'm going to enjoy or interest me. There are plenty of games developed or published outside of the unholy Trinity. It's a matter whether you're going to bother to find them or play them. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play Pac-Man championship edition 2.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Tzolkin doesn't have cards or dice.

That picture you linked of the board has cards and dice lying next to it. Unless that's just randomly placed there I'll assume those cards and dice are actually used in playing the game.

Better mechanics equate to a higher ceiling. There's inherent things that both mediums do better/worse than each other. The stuff that Shadow does extremely well would be really hard to pull off on a board game. Enjoyment obviously determines how good the game is. I'll play a simpler game I like more over a complex game I don't enjoy as much. Also a game shouldn't have anything it doesn't need from a design standpoint (like Shadow, Journey, Inside) but most video games use kitchen-sink design and just think more is better.

So then you agree that assuming a game, in this case Breath of the Wild, is worse than one of your board games is jumping to conclusions. Because that game (or any other game) could do things a board game can't.

Ad no game is not going to having anything it doesn't need. Even SotC might have Colossi it might not have needed, or ones it should've had to make the game better. Games aren't made by machines after all.

The shooting in HZD is also very similar to that of Max Payne 3 (over the shoulder, left to aim, right to shoot). There's even a dodge dive. I'll give you that RE4 and TEW are actually quite similar, yet when you play them they're really not, if only because one of them is very good and the other is garbage.

Shooting is pretty similar in pretty much every game with shooting (1st or 3rd person even).

Yeah, and yet you can't tell me those two games play similarly despite similar shooting mechanics.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Right back at ya. And for the record I don't like crap like Anthem. And as I said earlier there are good mobile games but there are rarity compared to when there were starting to release quality ones when iPhones and Androids are getting really popular and more affordable around 2010-2013. I don't know every single thing about mobile games, but I know bullshit when I see it. Once again your money your time. Your way of gaming is not superior everybody else just because you discovered the "truth". Mine is not either. I get no benefit from a majority of mobile games. Nor do I have a major love for most triple a games. I've got to the point years ago where I just play games I know I'm going to enjoy or interest me. There are plenty of games developed or published outside of the unholy Trinity. It's a matter whether you're going to bother to find them or play them. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play Pac-Man championship edition 2.

I wasn't implying you liked Anthem, just mentioned it as an example of how bad AAA gaming has gotten that a mobile golf game has better loot. I don't think the games I'm talking about on my phone would be considered "mobile" games, they are all digital board games (outside of Gold Clash). I called them phone games because they're on my phone and available for phones obviously, they are also available on Steam as well most of the time (you pay like $10 and that's it). I wasn't referring to those type of games that like Liam Neeson and Arnold Schwarzenegger have advertisements for.

That picture you linked of the board has cards and dice lying next to it. Unless that's just randomly placed there I'll assume those cards and dice are actually used in playing the game.

The dice were from a different game on the side that I didn't notice as the picture was the best look at the board itself with the gears. Most games that I actually play that have dice don't actually have you roll the dice as they are usually used for counters or something. It does have "tiles" to represent buildings you construct but that's definitely being overly semantic about it as cards could easily be used in their place. The reason I said it doesn't have cards is because you don't draw them or play them like you do in most games with cards.

So then you agree that assuming a game, in this case Breath of the Wild, is worse than one of your board games is jumping to conclusions. Because that game (or any other game) could do things a board game can't.

Ad no game is not going to having anything it doesn't need. Even SotC might have Colossi it might not have needed, or ones it should've had to make the game better. Games aren't made by machines after all.

Sure, maybe BotW is that good but my main point is that the Switch doesn't have the library to compete with my $80 phone's game library. It doesn't make much sense to pay $300 for a piece of hardware for 1 game (or a small handful).

That's also probably true. Most games have 10s of hours of content that they don't need or mechanics that cause 10s of hours of wasted time as well. Editing any kind of work is very important with video games lacking very far behind compared to pretty much everything else.

Yeah, and yet you can't tell me those two games play similarly despite similar shooting mechanics.

Like I said, our definition of different is different. The Tzolkin game I've mentioned is on its most basic level a worker placement game but I've never played it "properly" because it plays so different. Whereas I can see a couple minutes of Vanquish gameplay or RE4 gameplay or R6 Siege gameplay and get how those games play without even touching a controller at this point. Whereas you're going to need any new board game explained to you and play it a couple times to get the gist of how it plays because most of them are very different from each other. Sure there's some games/rule-sets that get rethemed like there's a dragon combat game called Attack Wing that uses that same rule-set as X-Wing (Stars Wars ship combat game) for example. Whereas that's like the majority of AAA games nowadays, all the sequels, all the copycat design (open world, battle royale, looter shooters, etc.), just plain lifting combat systems like every game copying Arkham combat for about a decade. Even indie games get a hard-on for certain designs like everyone trying to make 2D Souls games or roguelikes or Dark Souls roguelikes. Even new IPs aren't usually much different than what we've already played like Cyberpunk is literally just trying to be a better Deus Ex with regards to game mechanics and level design.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Right back at ya. And for the record I don't like crap like Anthem. And as I said earlier there are good mobile games but there are rarity compared to when there were starting to release quality ones when iPhones and Androids are getting really popular and more affordable around 2010-2013. I don't know every single thing about mobile games, but I know bullshit when I see it. Once again your money your time. Your way of gaming is not superior everybody else just because you discovered the "truth". Mine is not either. I get no benefit from a majority of mobile games. Nor do I have a major love for most triple a games. I've got to the point years ago where I just play games I know I'm going to enjoy or interest me. There are plenty of games developed or published outside of the unholy Trinity. It's a matter whether you're going to bother to find them or play them. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play Pac-Man championship edition 2.

I wasn't implying you liked Anthem, just mentioned it as an example of how bad AAA gaming has gotten that a mobile golf game has better loot. I don't think the games I'm talking about on my phone would be considered "mobile" games, they are all digital board games (outside of Gold Clash). I called them phone games because they're on my phone and available for phones obviously, they are also available on Steam as well most of the time (you pay like $10 and that's it). I wasn't referring to those type of games that like Liam Neeson and Arnold Schwarzenegger have advertisements for.

That picture you linked of the board has cards and dice lying next to it. Unless that's just randomly placed there I'll assume those cards and dice are actually used in playing the game.

The dice were from a different game on the side that I didn't notice as the picture was the best look at the board itself with the gears. Most games that I actually play that have dice don't actually have you roll the dice as they are usually used for counters or something. It does have "tiles" to represent buildings you construct but that's definitely being overly semantic about it as cards could easily be used in their place. The reason I said it doesn't have cards is because you don't draw them or play them like you do in most games with cards.

So then you agree that assuming a game, in this case Breath of the Wild, is worse than one of your board games is jumping to conclusions. Because that game (or any other game) could do things a board game can't.

Ad no game is not going to having anything it doesn't need. Even SotC might have Colossi it might not have needed, or ones it should've had to make the game better. Games aren't made by machines after all.

Sure, maybe BotW is that good but my main point is that the Switch doesn't have the library to compete with my $80 phone's game library. It doesn't make much sense to pay $300 for a piece of hardware for 1 game (or a small handful).

That's also probably true. Most games have 10s of hours of content that they don't need or mechanics that cause 10s of hours of wasted time as well. Editing any kind of work is very important with video games lacking very far behind compared to pretty much everything else.

Yeah, and yet you can't tell me those two games play similarly despite similar shooting mechanics.

Like I said, our definition of different is different. The Tzolkin game I've mentioned is on its most basic level a worker placement game but I've never played it "properly" because it plays so different. Whereas I can see a couple minutes of Vanquish gameplay or RE4 gameplay or R6 Siege gameplay and get how those games play without even touching a controller at this point. Whereas you're going to need any new board game explained to you and play it a couple times to get the gist of how it plays because most of them are very different from each other. Sure there's some games/rule-sets that get rethemed like there's a dragon combat game called Attack Wing that uses that same rule-set as X-Wing (Stars Wars ship combat game) for example. Whereas that's like the majority of AAA games nowadays, all the sequels, all the copycat design (open world, battle royale, looter shooters, etc.), just plain lifting combat systems like every game copying Arkham combat for about a decade. Even indie games get a hard-on for certain designs like everyone trying to make 2D Souls games or roguelikes or Dark Souls roguelikes. Even new IPs aren't usually much different than what we've already played like Cyberpunk is literally just trying to be a better Deus Ex with regards to game mechanics and level design.

So all I?m getting from this is that you don?t like and ergo have no interest in the Switch nor stake in its success? Is that accurate?

 

[BrawlMan]

I wasn't implying you liked Anthem, just mentioned it as an example of how bad AAA gaming has gotten that a mobile golf game has better loot. I don't think the games I'm talking about on my phone would be considered "mobile" games, they are all digital board games (outside of Gold Clash). I called them phone games because they're on my phone and available for phones obviously, they are also available on Steam as well most of the time (you pay like $10 and that's it). I wasn't referring to those type of games that like Liam Neeson and Arnold Schwarzenegger have advertisements for.

That is fine and all, but games like the ones that are actual games on mobile hold no interests to me. I'd be more interested on some of the games on my TI-83. I am glad you cleared the difference, but that does not help the crap that is still out their. If you're not interested in the Switch, no a problem for me. There a lot of games coming out on it that I am going to enjoy.

 

[sXeth]

No, it's an open world Zelda game, it's not some wildly different and new game experience. All the games I listed are wildly different. I doubt you even played a game in their genre, let alone the games themselves. And, Divinity OS2 released in 2017, I doubt Zelda is better.

So it's you just assuming it's worse, rather than arguing from first-hand experience, and than presenting it as hard fact. Brilliant!

That's what everyone else is doing in the thread assuming that phone games aren't as good as Switch games when mechanically they have so much more going on than your normal video game while also being vastly different experiences while Nintendo trots out the same franchises for the last 30 years. How does one not know how a Zelda game plays at this point? Whereas try guessing what one of the most anticipated board games of 2019 Wingspan (about attracting birds to your nature preserve) plays like.

Since you mention it, Breath of the Wild actually plays pretty dramatically different to the Zelda formula. Its still an action game where you play in a place named Hyrule, as guy named Link, and eventually fight Ganon. But mechanically and structurally its an abnormality to the series beyond the basic niche of also being an Action-adventure thing in somewhat fantasy setting.

Almost entirely to its detriment, in my opinion (because open world blob with repetitive puzzles, and collectahon setup is pretty dull comapred to the more structured Metrodivania dungeon crawler experience). But yeah, that statement alone kind of indicates a lack of research even, nevermind firsthand experience.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

So all I?m getting from this is that you don?t like and ergo have no interest in the Switch nor stake in its success? Is that accurate?

I've always said I want Nintendo to compete with Sony and MS to make a console that's a primary gaming system, which Nintendo has failed to do since the Gamecube. Deciding between Sony and Nintendo's 1st party games would be a rather tough decision. I don't have anything against the Switch in concept but when you don't have a better library than my phone, why am I paying a $300 premium for a small handful of games?

Since you mention it, Breath of the Wild actually plays pretty dramatically different to the Zelda formula. Its still an action game where you play in a place named Hyrule, as guy named Link, and eventually fight Ganon. But mechanically and structurally its an abnormality to the series beyond the basic niche of also being an Action-adventure thing in somewhat fantasy setting.

Almost entirely to its detriment, in my opinion (because open world blob with repetitive puzzles, and collectahon setup is pretty dull comapred to the more structured Metrodivania dungeon crawler experience). But yeah, that statement alone kind of indicates a lack of research even, nevermind firsthand experience.

I know the differences from previous Zeldas as I linked to Mark Brown's Systemic games video a few posts ago. It's pretty much Zelda with the systemic game elements and the open world structure. And, those elements are found in many many games these days so hardly new and unable to grasp how the game will play. And I even said the following in reply to Dirty Hipsters talking about how BotW might fall into the trap of "chore lists" in open world games:

I feel like I'm either going to really like BotW or hate it honestly. One of the things that concern me is how spread out the content seems to be. There's over 120 shrines for example and they might come off as something to checkoff your chore list, which many open world games fall into. I know about the systemic-ness of BotW from watching the Game Maker's Toolkit about Systemic Games [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnpAAX9CkIc]. I definitely feel Japanese games seem to be behind the curve in that regard and BotW having such elements is pretty great. Why isn't there a JRPG with such a system like Zelda like how Divinity Original Sin uses the elements to play off each other (casting a rain spell then an ice spell to freeze the water causing enemies to slip on it)?