Jump to content

Jotari

Member
  • Content Count

    12960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

7 Followers

About Jotari

  • Rank
    Bring back Chameleons!
  • Birthday 06/16/1993

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Interesting things.
  • Location
    Poland

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    N/A

Member Badge

  • Members
    Tiki

Recent Profile Visitors

17353 profile views
  1. I can't see any reason why they'd specifically need to go. Couldn't they coexist with whatever replacement arc based development you suggest.
  2. It's funny, they reference constantly how the parents could only visit the children on isolated occasions, but they never seem to acknowledge at all that this has happened in a ridiculously short amount of time for the parent. Everything with how it's written is treating the situation like they've grown up at a natural pace and that the infrequent visits were just because they were busy or something. Awakening references quite frequently how weird it is for the parents to have kids their own age, but Fates seems to never do that.
  3. No. At least not as a core game design. I find the Warriors games very vapid and very repetitive. As an aspect of a larger game it can be great however. And one of my favorites actually comes from Metroid, which is an oft not discussed element of the game. It's a slow progress, and it actually doesn't make the game easier per se, but by the end of a typical Metroid game you feel so much more powerful than the start of the game. Especially when you finally get the screw attack (combined with the Space Jump of course) and you can run through almost any part of the game as a flying saucer of death.
  4. Yeah, sorry I wasn't more involved in the most recent rounds. I did check the prompts semi frequently, but nothing ever struck with easy inspiration. And insofar as just forcing myself to write in general, I've been having a hard time even on my personal projects. Kind of feel bad that I didn't contribute at least a little more frequently to help keep the thing afloat.
  5. Well yes, I'm not suggesting I think it's remotely realistic that we'd ever get an actual playable Mickey. Though I actually wouldn't be all that upset if Mickey existed as a Sora Echo. Mickey can be pretty cool in Kingdom Hearts (of course Riku would be way more deserving of that Echo slot, were Echos of DLC character ever even a remote possibility anyway). It being a case-by-case basis is entirely my point. I don't think there's any blanket rule and every character's potential will be judged on a case-by-case basis. I personally would consider Gearlt more likely than any Star Wars characters that technically originated in Video Games.
  6. Their slower leveling up also detracts from the fun to play factor. Even if it makes sense in Radiant Dawn, due to any stat gains they get from a level up is, effectively, 2 points of gain due to the stats doubling. Still though that dopamine rush from actually getting a level up, be it fantastic or crappy, coming less frequently just makes them more boring as units.
  7. Well yes, but I think the same goes for the Kingdom Hearts versions of Disney characters, and judging by the first part of your comment you're in agreement on that point. There's not really a whole lot they can do to stop it. They've already rewritten copyright law once, there's no indication that they intend to or that they can again. People care more about copyright now. That extra twenty years made a difference. That being said, it won't stop Disney from religiously trying to prevent other people from using Mickey's image, as it'll technically only be the Steam Boat Willie incarnation that goes into public domain (to start with). And they still have a registered trade mark over the image, which is different from copyright and doesn't have any real expiry. And I think that shows it was never a rule to begin with. If they want to include a character that technically did not originate in a video game, I think they can. I'm not saying Nintendo is going to throw in any random Marvel or Disney character, but say for example they continued to have close ties with Mike Tyson instead of dropping him when he stopped being world champion. In a hypothetical world with more Punch Out games featuring Mike Tyson, I don't think him being a real person would discourage them from making him a second Punch Out rep (beyond the licensing issues, but this hypothetical scenario is one where that just never stopped). Ultimately the point of my splitting hairs is to show that this is not a limitation for Nintendo. If they want to do something, they will. And I don't think they want to put the likes of Spiderman or, I don't know, King Kong in the game because, while they have appeared in video games, they are not recognizable video game characters. But I think someone like Gearlt from the Witcher would stand a much bigger chance despite originating in a book, because the Witcher games were pretty popular, to the extent that a lot of people might not even know it started as a book series (now this isn't saying I expect or want Gearlt any time soon, just that I don't think he's the most unrealistic choice in existence). TL:DR I think the only rule is that "If Nintendo wants it, they'll do it." And they don't want non video game characters. But if there's a character that's a non video game character on a technicality, that won't stand in their way (provided they get the license).
  8. I would say that "rule" has not been stuck to consistently. A full list of examples I can think of: *The obvious, Castlevannia, Kid Icarus and that one Hercules game have elements that originate in folklore and mythology (and more specifically a novel that is only 30 years older than the character of Mickey Mouse who will soon also be in public domain) *Megami Tensei (which is semi distinct from Persona, but is still the origin for several of Joker's moves) started as a series of books. *The assist trophy Doctor Kawashima is a real, still living, person. *R.O.B is a video game peripheral and not actually a video game character in origin. *I'm pretty sure Togepei and Ho-Oh technically first appeared in the Poemon anime before appearing in any video games. Maybe Marill too (yes, this is incredibly technical, Pokemon is still a game series, I know, the point of this is to show there are no hard rules). *The design for the Proximity Mines in Super Smash Bros 64 comes directly from the 1995 movie Golden Eye (which were featured in the 1997 game of the same name, but did not originate there). *And most damning of all, James Bond was on a poll for Super Smash Bros. melee. https://www.nintendo.co.jp/n01/n64/software/nus_p_nalj/smash/PostResult2.html Yes, they literally considered adding James Bond to Super Smash Bros. (people loved Golden Eye 1997). They didn't end up doing, but he was there, he was on the poll and he got votes. Look they're not going to make him a playable character, but there's absolutely no decent reason for them avoid having the Kingdom Hearts design for Mickey as a spirit in a hypothetical Sora DLC. They don't have to have him as Kingdom Hearts has plenty of characters, but there's no reason to actively avoid Mickey. It doesn't corrode any standard that's already set and even if it did, it in no way encourages or makes inevitable the inclusion of characters like Shrek or Iron Man. And for the sake of completeness, here are some examples when they actually have avoided using real world content. *The Proximity Mines were later altered from their James Bond appearance to a scifi appearance (though considering they kept their original design in the Japanese version of melee and only changed it when localizing overseas, I think licensing might have been more a factor than wanting to remove movie content). *Mike Tyson is not a spirit despite appearing in Punch Out (though once again considering they had retconned Tyson out of Punch Out with a remake years earlier, this is most likely down to licensing). *Moonriver and Fly Me To The Moon are not soundtracks in Smash Bros. despite being signature songs in Bayonetta 1 and 2.
  9. Now that Hegemon Edelgard is out and is super powerful, I'm thinking it's time they give us another Radiant Dawn banner and grant us some inheritable beast effective weaponry. Or just some more beast effective prfs if distinct inhertiable weapons is just a thing that doesn't happen any more (I assume the Flame Lance isn't inheritable?). There are a few beast effective weapons already, but not that many. Would be nice to have a distinct hard counter for Edelgard. Because wow not only is her player phase offense immense, but she's really bulky too.
  10. I never knew that. Now I'm really disappointed that never happened. Sounds like it could have been a tonne of fun. Guess we'll just have to accept the watered down multiplayer of 358/2 Days.
  11. Well technically Echoes had class changing too with the use of Pitch Forks to put any character into villager (and thus any non lord class). Of course it's a bit of a stretch to include Mage Valbar in the game on that basis. As even with reclassing, characters still have pretty defined defaults in the games between Archanea and Shadows of Valentia. Three Houses characters do also have default classes based on their appearances as enemies, but it's much less defined compared to previous games with all characters starting in your playable army as villagers. There's definitely suggestions with characters proficiency and relics and stuff, but they do have more freedom to work with when it comes to Three Houses characters compared to previous games. The default Hana being a flying knife unit, I think, would seem a lot more weird compared to Petra appearing as a flying knife unit (even though Knives don't appear in Three Houses, but she's a hunter, so it works imo). Flying Hana wouldn't feel all that much like Hana, but flying Petra still feels like Petra despite her never actually being a flying unit by default in Three Houses. At least in my view. And I pick Petra as an example as she's one of the few times they've used it to be creative. They've by and large usally been rather pedestrian in their Three Houses interpretations. I think Lindhardt could possibly be the most uninspired appearance in the game. Holy Knight sucks as a class in Three Houses, but it's still a thing that exists. And if they weren't going to give Linhardt a pony, they could at least have referenced his crest by introducing Heal Touch as a skill in Heroes. Instead we get what feels like the nine millionth obvious demote infantry healer. Got a bit off topic hating on Heroes Linhardt there. The TL;DR is that Shadows of Valentia has reclassing too, but reclassing in Three Houses is a different beast to previous games and that should be taken advantage of to reach better class balance in the series.
  12. I know what Sakurai said. That's why I said this. Doctor Kawashima is in the game and he's a real person. An appearance based on his appearance in a video game, but still a character quite definitively a character who did not originate in a video game. I don't see the argument that Disney characters are any different here as being accurate. Mickey is not running around using a Keyblade in any other properties not is Donald Duck is not depicted as a court magician. These are video game interpretations of the same characters. And in the next ten years they will all be in public domain anyway. Dracula as a literary character is only about thirty years older than Mickey Mouse. And no, letting some artwork of Mickey Mouse holding a key blade in the game will not suddenly cause Shrek and Spongebob to appear as the next DLC characters. Nintendo don't need to hold off on Kingdom Hearts content to stop Shrek and Spongebob getting in, If they don't want them in then they simply don't put them in. Letting a .png of Mickey into the game obligates them to put in other characters in as much as putting Doctor Kawashima in the game obligated them to put Tony Hawk or Mike Tyson in the game (which is to say it didn't).
×
×
  • Create New...