Sakurai commenting about "extra features"

[Great Geargia Gateway]

But there have been and are arguments for the merits of skinship. As far as I remember they went:

1) It looks fun.

2) It's supposed to be a chance to relax between the rigors of combat and just chill out with your army.

3) Probably some other ones I missed.

I guess, I've never saw it like that. Then again, if I needed to calm down, re-leave myself or take a break. I could just stop playing and play another game. I play Smash and eat to give my eyes a general rest when I get need to breath.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Great Geargia Gateway

[Ownagepuffs]

But there have been and are arguments for the merits of skinship. As far as I remember they went:1) It looks fun.2) It's supposed to be a chance to relax between the rigors of combat and just chill out with your army.3) Probably some other ones I missed.

If I recall, these were generally arguments for the merits My Castle, which I don't disagree with. My Castle is pretty chill.

That's not the full quote.

"If something optional becomes so obnoxious that the game becomes unplayable, I bid the game adieu and move on with life."

And yeah. There's a lot to love and a lot to hate about Fates.

Well, it's a little redundant. If someone found something unplayably obnoxious then they wouldn't play it because they personally found it unplayably obnoxious. I just felt like addressing the "don't like it then don't play it" argument.

Edit: apologies for going off topic. I'll say no more on it.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Ownagepuffs

[Reflex]

I'm sorry for sounding darude, arrogant or ignorant in anyway, but you just don't say "it's just business at the end of the day." It really makes me think the career that everyone worked for is really not even worth to consider any good, that they don't consider the work for them.

If you know you're wrong, why keep posting wrong stuff?

No seriously, why? Almost everything you said is a straight up lie just to muck up a company's repuation for no other reason than that you don't like a game.

[Great Geargia Gateway]

If you know you're wrong, why keep posting wrong stuff?

No seriously, why? Almost everything you said is a straight up lie just to muck up a company's reputation for no other reason than that you don't like a game.

I'm honest as f***. Unlike other ungr8fuls out there who state there opinions and you know, I give people the benefit of the doubt cause on the internet I probably could be proven wrong, unlike the others thinking they're top s***.

But, they weren't intentionally lies. They were my views on what's going on at this moment inside Intelligent Systems, and it's my opinion, so neither I'm wrong or right.

I could argue that they're chasing the money though; Face-touching, the future children, fanservice out the wazoo, and the marriage system with some same-sex options. Even Pheonix Mode. You can see, it just goes to far. But after they sold over 1million with Awakening, thought they hit the jack-pot... No they actually did. And decided to stray completely from what FE originally was and literally turned it on it's head. After the first thousands of dollars they pulled in on through advertisements with Awakening (which seems to be something they never thought of for the franchise till now), people gained whispers of the Marriage system and fanservice. More sales for Awakening over the past year stacks by newer players for the franchise and the otaku fanbase I believe that made IS make Awakening 2.0... and Conquest... Cause it works and this new fanbase will follow that. Maybe that's what IS thought everyone wanted (Still don't understand face touching though). Now the game probably does have amazing mechanics, but that's just a tip of the iceberg compared to what everyone was apparently waiting for in this new installment. So much, My Castle and Amie got it's own video. There's like, no talk about the core game itself compared to the pandering talk.

Now I didn't say I hate this game, but you can tell I don't like some of the content and where IS leaned this towards. I betchu if I bought this game, I'd probably have a great time, with a new Fire Emblem game finally. So I have nothing personally against IS (I did say 'I bet' threw accusations around). I loved them from Super Metroid to Advanced Wars Dual Strike (I never played DoR). Even liked Awakening to an extent. But I'm so concerned that they're not making the games for the "Fun" that I mentioned. For the sole purpose of getting into career in the first place. I mean was that not what they were doing since FE6 to 12? If they read this, I'd probably or most definitely hurt their feelings. But that's cause I care. I mean, looking at their past games they made recently. Paper Mario, yeah, I thought it was bad compared to the previous. Advanced Wars (Sorry, now this was a lie. It wasn't intentional, but I just didn't do my research) is just missing, but IS decides to make STEAM instead? And IS made one of the best Metroid games imo. Though, 5 last years and think, what would happen if IS stepped up. Around when I was born, they were making amazing games. And now I think somethings wrong. I would like to know everything behind those walls and productions, but I can't. I would like more interviews on their decision making in the gaming industry, but I don't know where to look.

tl;dr: Well, you asked why, so you should probably read it.

Honestly, I couldn't care if you read it or not. Or what you think for this matter. I just can't believe I wrote this for an hour or so, up late.

SORRY FOR DERAILING THE TOPIC AGAIN.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Great Geargia Gateway

[rainbowResonance]

tl;dr: ...

... I just can't believe I wrote this for an hour or so, up late.

SORRY FOR DERAILING THE TOPIC AGAIN.

I share similar concerns with you (except I took Fe:Awk more positively), so I'm actually glad you typed all of that. It's these very same factors that explain why my reasons for finding interest in the new Fire Emblem aren't similar to how they were for previous titles in the series. Developer and publisher priorities shift, and in this case, in some ways to our favor but in many ways against our favor. I can say the same for the FF series. Sakurai's response convey's this to a degree.

Just my opinion, but with social changes and the increasing number of potential consumers (more population) puts a stronger weight on quantity, older minded gamers will be more at risk of being phased out. Options are nice, but simplicity is often an ignored beauty of a game.

Edited August 11, 2015 by rainbowResonance

[arvilino]

I share similar concerns with you (except I took Fe:Awk more positively), so I'm actually glad you typed all of that. It's these very same factors that explain why my reasons for finding interest in the new Fire Emblem aren't similar to how they were for previous titles in the series. Developer and publisher priorities shift, and in this case, in some ways to our favor but in many ways against our favor. I can say the same for the FF series. Sakurai's response convey's this to a degree.

Just my opinion, but with social changes and the increasing number of potential consumers (more population) puts a stronger weight on quantity, older minded gamers will be more at risk of being phased out. Options are nice, but simplicity is often an ignored beauty of a game.

To be honest the post sounds rather silly to me. Like someone who only recently discovered cynicism and is applying it to everything new without applying that new perspective to the old.

For example take the Awakening 2.0 applied to Hoshido by those who haven't played the game. When you compare subsequent Fire Emblem releases, especially handheld ones you'll find that Fates has the most substantial differences. Complete overall of game assets, classes all redesigned, what I think may be the greatest number of unique new classes in a Fire Emblem game, an entirely new weapon type with it's own unique mechanic to set it apart from the old(contrast to the bumbling approach to Knives).

You don't see Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones trotted around as Binding Blade 2.0 and Binding Blade 3.0 or cash grabs. Yet these are games that recycled vast amounts of the content of Binding Blade with little changes to the map sprites and almost all of the animations recycled, they barely touch the game mechanics between these entries and they were each released 1 year after each other. With PoR coming out the year after Sacred Stones and looking more like an early GC game than a late one.

Which ones recycled almost everything about the previous except the story with no changes to the base mechanics other than a few minor features to be released as safe yearly iterations each selling less than the previous? Which one took three years to make and overhauled the mechanics, took risks and overhauled the mechanics while offering an entirely new look and features when they could have made a quick cash-in on Awakening the year after? They may be attempting to appeal to a larger audience but as a long term fan of the series I respect modern Intelligent Systems approach far more than the old approach.

I think anyone with the idea they weren't focused on cash when they released 4 Fire Emblem games between 2002-2005 should have a rethink about how they see IS's handling of the series.

Edited August 11, 2015 by arvilino

[Jedi]

To be honest the post sounds rather silly to me. Like someone who only recently discovered cynicism and is applying it to everything new without applying that new perspective to the old.

For example take the Awakening 2.0 applied to Hoshido by those who haven't played the game. When you compare subsequent Fire Emblem releases, especially handheld ones you'll find that Fates has the most substantial differences. Complete overall of game assets, classes all redesigned, what I think may be the greatest number of unique new classes in a Fire Emblem game, an entirely new weapon type with it's own unique mechanic to set it apart from the old(contrast to the bumbling approach to Knives).

You don't see Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones trotted around as Binding Blade 2.0 and Binding Blade 3.0 or cash grabs. Yet these are games that recycled vast amounts of the content of Binding Blade with little changes to the map sprites and almost all of the animations recycled, they barely touch the game mechanics between these entries and they were each released 1 year after each other. With PoR coming out the year after Sacred Stones and looking more like an early GC game than a late one.

Which ones recycled almost everything about the previous except the story with no changes to the base mechanics other than a few minor features to be released as safe yearly iterations each selling less than the previous? Which one took three years to make and overhauled the mechanics, took risks and overhauled the mechanics while offering an entirely new look and features when they could have made a quick cash-in on Awakening the year after? They may be attempting to appeal to a larger audience but as a long term fan of the series I respect modern Intelligent Systems approach far more than the old approach.

I think anyone with the idea they weren't focused on cash when they released 4 Fire Emblem games between 2002-2005 should have a rethink about how they see IS's handling of the series.

Oddly enough Binding Blade is the one who gets called out for being "Dark Dragon 2.0" rather then Blazing Sword or Sacred Stones being Binding Blade 2.0 and 3.0. Despite the fact that Sacred Stones itself did change a few things, well mostly by borrowing features from Gaiden. I feel the GBA era is the most stale of all FE, yet you see people defend those 3 games the absolute most. Edit: Er I should say defend Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones most.

They are solid games yes, but they are the least original when it comes to FE overall.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Jedi

[rainbowResonance]

Which ones recycled almost everything about the previous except the story with no changes to the base mechanics other than a few minor features to be released as safe yearly iterations each selling less than the previous? Which one took three years to make and overhauled the mechanics, took risks and overhauled the mechanics while offering an entirely new look and features when they could have made a quick cash-in on Awakening the year after? They may be attempting to appeal to a larger audience but as a long term fan of the series I respect modern Intelligent Systems approach far more than the old approach.

I think anyone with the idea they weren't focused on cash when they released 4 Fire Emblem games between 2002-2005 should have a rethink about how they see IS's handling of the series.

IS's risks and approach to Awk is actually a major factor in why it's my favorite FE game. Perhaps the way I worded my argument was too much of a blanket statement on their older titles. Something in terms of company priority just doesn't seem right when going from the design of Fe:Awk to the design of Fe:Fates as opposed to from Fe:SD/NMotE to Fe:Awk to me.

It doesn't mean I won't enjoy Fe:Fates, especially considering its ambitious merits. We'll see what happens based on how the company deals with critism. They have mentioned themselves that they contracted with a storywriter to address the story critism from older fans on Fe:Awk. How much control IS has over the situation is also somewhat vague. Nintendo could be pulling more strings this time around.

Edited August 11, 2015 by rainbowResonance

[Reflex]

Oddly enough Binding Blade is the one who gets called out for being "Dark Dragon 2.0" rather then Blazing Sword or Sacred Stones being Binding Blade 2.0 and 3.0. Despite the fact that Sacred Stones itself did change a few things, well mostly by borrowing features from Gaiden. I feel the GBA era is the most stale of all FE, yet you see people defend those 3 games the absolute most. Edit: Er I should say defend Blazing Sword and Sacred Stones most.

They are solid games yes, but they are the least original when it comes to FE overall.

It's a powerful drug in the mind called Nostagia. See: Everyone wanting to keep FF7's combat exactly the same after it was announced it was being changed.

[Loki Laufeyson]

, this is a narrow minded view.

No it isnt. Its a healthy one. If something is so horribly obnoxious in a product, dont purchase it and save yourself the trouble. Take the film, Pixels for example. That is a pile of feces atop an even bigger pile of shit. But instead of dwelling on it, i let my wallet do the talking and didnt bother with it. For the optional content argument, I understand that Mii DLC in Smash is optional. So i dont buy it at all. I dont need it. I move on with my life. An unhealthy viewpoint is the one that dwells so much on a subject, it becomes toxic to the person and those around them. (see: Some of the salt in this thread and elsewhere in the fandom) Speaking with your wallet has a bigger affect on the actual game devs. You arent spending your money on their product for this reason, they may actually remove this feature from their product in the future. Breathing fire all over other people who may enjoy this feature is...really unhealthy.

[Thor Odinson]

I'm going to half-agree, half-disagree on that since

If you vote with your wallet, and the product does really well anyway, the devs won't know shit

if the product doesn't do well, then the devs will know something is wrong, but not which exact thing is wrong. They could potentially remove something they did right instead if they think that's what is wrong. Which, I mean, if you don't like the thing definitely don't buy the thing, but voting with your wallet only gives a vague idea that there IS something wrong and if you really have concerns that you care about and want addressed, it's not enough.

Like I mean, if it's something you just don't care about then, voting with your wallet is an enough indicator of "lmao fuck this shit", like in the case with Pixels, but I assume many of us do actually care about Fire Emblem, which is why just voting with wallet may not suffice in this case.

However, yelling at fellow consumers does literally does jack shit. If enough people voted with their wallet at least the devs will get some idea that something is wrong at least, but guilting and blaming people who do enjoy things do absolutely nothing to solve that. The most useful way is to take it to the devs themselves (in a respectful and civil manner) that clearly address why things are an issue. Obviously this is a bit harder for us non Japanese speakers since we don't know if any of the devs know English well enough. It's kinda like a bug report. Sometimes we don't know shit's wrong unless you tell us where it's wrong. And as good as I am at breaking my own program, I don't catch everything.

It also doesn't mean we can't have civil discussions on certain issues raised, but sometimes people really forget the civil bit.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Thor Odinson

[Jedi]

It's a powerful drug in the mind called Nostagia. See: Everyone wanting to keep FF7's combat exactly the same after it was announced it was being changed.

Well thats a different case entirely, thats a remake. Not an expansion to the series, which has never remained consistent.

It's banking on nostalgia, which I think gives it some room to be nostalgic.

I personally think if you're going to revamp something you need to keep certain things true to the original. I don't want to see FF7's combat system become something like FF13's for instance.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Jedi

[Loki Laufeyson]

I'm going to half-agree, half-disagree on that since

If you vote with your wallet, and the product does really well anyway, the devs won't know shit

if the product doesn't do well, then the devs will know something is wrong, but not which exact thing is wrong. They could potentially remove something they did right instead if they think that's what is wrong. Which, I mean, if you don't like the thing definitely don't buy the thing, but voting with your wallet only gives a vague idea that there IS something wrong and if you really have concerns that you care about and want addressed, it's not enough.

Like I mean, if it's something you just don't care about then, voting with your wallet is an enough indicator of "lmao fuck this shit", like in the case with Pixels, but I assume many of us do actually care about Fire Emblem, which is why just voting with wallet may not suffice in this case.

However, yelling at fellow consumers does literally does jack shit. If enough people voted with their wallet at least the devs will get some idea that something is wrong at least, but guilting and blaming people who do enjoy things do absolutely nothing to solve that. The most useful way is to take it to the devs themselves (in a respectful and civil manner) that clearly address why things are an issue. Obviously this is a bit harder for us non Japanese speakers since we don't know if any of the devs know English well enough. It's kinda like a bug report. Sometimes we don't know shit's wrong unless you tell us where it's wrong. And as good as I am at breaking my own program, I don't catch everything.

It also doesn't mean we can't have civil discussions on certain issues raised, but sometimes people really forget the civil bit.

Oh sure. Like, game reviewers can discuss a feature and people upvoting the review highlighting how they dont care for this feature is usually what devs look for. I feel like they may be browsing youtube videos and junk and see peeps going "man i dont like skinship" and take it into consideration. Especially if someone said "Im not gonna buy this game because of skinship." So...leaving a comment and voting with your wallet actually counts.

Its just i feel like calling something like saying one's piece and moving on to the next (or Wallet Voting), narrow-minded, is just...so inaccurate and actually kind of foul. Considering thats what most people who may not like a feature are going to do.

[Kaede Ryusaki]

Oh sure. Like, game reviewers can discuss a feature and people upvoting the review highlighting how they dont care for this feature is usually what devs look for. I feel like they may be browsing youtube videos and junk and see peeps going "man i dont like skinship" and take it into consideration. Especially if someone said "Im not gonna buy this game because of skinship." So...leaving a comment and voting with your wallet actually counts.

Its just i feel like calling something like saying one's piece and moving on to the next (or Wallet Voting), narrow-minded, is just...so inaccurate and actually kind of foul. Considering thats what most people who may not like a feature are going to do.

Your argument on wallet voting counting was based off of a hypothetical scenario ("I feel like," "can".)

Also, how does criticizing a popular decision (in this case, walletvoting) make the opinion inaccurate on its own? Reasons for walletvoting being only partially effective were given, and the way you did it, the only rea son criticizing walletvoting is bad is because a lot of people do it. Sure, the opinion can be narrow-minded, but at least give reasons for it.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Your argument on wallet voting counting was based off of a hypothetical scenario ("I feel like," "can".)

Also, how does criticizing a popular decision (in this case, walletvoting) make the opinion inaccurate on its own? Reasons for walletvoting being only partially effective were given, and the way you did it, the only rea son criticizing walletvoting is bad is because a lot of people do it. Sure, the opinion can be narrow-minded, but at least give reasons for it.

I really think you misunderstood what i was saying, considering your post makes absolutely no sense.

[Dark Holy Elf]

I really hope game devs aren't basing decisions based on YouTube comments or video gaming will be in the toilet by 2020.

Walletvoting is, I suspect, really effective as a verdict on the entirety of a purchase, like a pierce of DLC, a movie, or the entirety of a game. It is terribly ineffective if you dislike some aspects of a game, and like others, because you can't really send a good message about what parts you do and don't like with it. It would be interesting if FE-amie were a DLC thing because then we'd be able to much more easily communicate whether it's a desired feature or not. (And I'd be very, very curious about the numbers...)

[Thor Odinson]

I really hope game devs aren't basing decisions based on YouTube comments or video gaming will be in the toilet by 2020.

I don't know about the rest of the industry but my game programming professor has openly dissed the quality of youtube comments so there's hope for the industry

...maybe?

[iZallen]

I don't know about the rest of the industry but my game programming professor has openly dissed the quality of youtube comments so there's hope for the industry

...maybe?

If they really wanted a message to get to us, they'd mail us it deliberately instead of posting somewhere obscure such as Youtube..

[Ownagepuffs]

No it isnt. Its a healthy one. If something is so horribly obnoxious in a product, dont purchase it and save yourself the trouble. Take the film, Pixels for example. That is a pile of feces atop an even bigger pile of shit. But instead of dwelling on it, i let my wallet do the talking and didnt bother with it. For the optional content argument, I understand that Mii DLC in Smash is optional. So i dont buy it at all. I dont need it. I move on with my life. An unhealthy viewpoint is the one that dwells so much on a subject, it becomes toxic to the person and those around them. (see: Some of the salt in this thread and elsewhere in the fandom) Speaking with your wallet has a bigger affect on the actual game devs. You arent spending your money on their product for this reason, they may actually remove this feature from their product in the future. Breathing fire all over other people who may enjoy this feature is...really unhealthy.

Just to clear the air, I did not mean it as an insult. The problem with the wallet vote argument is that it's made on the basis of a purchase being a black and white decision. You either like something in its entirety or dislike it in its entirety. If you dislike if, don't buy it. If you like it, but it. But that's not how it is.

Edit here: to use myself as an example, I just bought Fates, 3 routes and all. But this purchase doesn't let them know what I support and don't support. That can only come from discussion.

Narrow minded was a pretty bad term to use in retrospect, I agree.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Ownagepuffs

[eclipse]

Just to clear the air, I did not mean it as an insult. The problem with the wallet vote argument is that it's made on the basis of a purchase being a black and white decision. You either like something in its entirety or dislike it in its entirety. If you dislike if, don't buy it. If you like it, but it. But that's not how it is.

Edit here: to use myself as an example, I just bought Fates, 3 routes and all. But this purchase doesn't let them know what I support and don't support. That can only come from discussion.

Narrow minded was a pretty bad term to use in retrospect, I agree.

It wasn't a message to the developers. It's a decision on how I spend my time. I can either use my free time to complain that some company isn't catering to MY needs (in whatever roundabout fashion I choose), or I can use my free time to find things that truly interest me. I think the latter is a better use of my time, which is why I'll gladly drop a series if it no longer appeals to me.

In other words, let the developers do what they want, because I'm not interested in making them conform to me. I'll find my own path. . .or forge one of my own.

[Irysa]

You're qualifying "time spent critiquing" as being neccessarily negative or undesirable with that statement. Clearly, some people get something out of such discussions, else they wouldn't occur.

Additionally, I think the connection you make between "critique" and "insistence that they conform to my whims" is tenuous at best. There is a definite middle ground of dissapointment that does not superimpose upon their own creative freedom.

[eclipse]

You're qualifying "time spent critiquing" as being neccessarily negative or undesirable with that statement. Clearly, some people get something out of such discussions, else they wouldn't occur.

Additionally, I think the connection you make between "critique" and "insistence that they conform to my whims" is tenuous at best. There is a definite middle ground of dissapointment that does not superimpose upon their own creative freedom.

It sounds like I struck a nerve. Good.

This topic is long past the point of critique - it's outright complaining at this point, and that IS a giant waste of time.

That middle ground involves moving on, which you haven't done, judging by your actions. Your posts in this topic are evidence of this. IMO, your time would be better spent finding someone or something that makes you happy, instead of replying to random people on the Internet about a game company that doesn't care about you.

BTW, that last sentence goes for. . .well, lots of things in RL, not just the Fates subforum and an interview with a singular developer.

[Irysa]

It sounds like I struck a nerve. Good.

Not in the slightest. If anything, you're the one who sounds particularly outraged over this point. I do recall you making the same kind of unfounded accusation in the the SMTxFE forum though the last time I responded with "I disagree with your outlook on the merit of these discussions", so this is beginning to make a pattern.

This topic is long past the point of critique - it's outright complaining at this point, and that IS a giant waste of time.

Nah, critique involves developing on ideas about improvements, whilst complaining neccessitates simply pointing out negatives. I think in due part to the sheer length of the my average posts in these threads I've overall maintained the former. If I was shitposting like RJW about this everywhere, I'd agree.

That middle ground involves moving on, which you haven't done, judging by your actions. Your posts in this topic are evidence of this. IMO, your time would be better spent finding someone or something that makes you happy, instead of replying to random people on the Internet about a game company that doesn't care about you.

BTW, that last sentence goes for. . .well, lots of things in RL, not just the Fates subforum and an interview with a singular developer.

Discourse is exactly how many people move past things though, and I've actually made numerous posts explaining this, even in this very thread. Personally, I think I've gained a lot from posting about various "pointless" (totally arbitrary anyway, mafia is equally pointless f.ex) topics on the internet, because I get a better idea about myself and others through it. I mean, it's literally happening right now. Consider this, a significant portion of SF used to spend a ridiculous amount of time on tierlist threads which were simply non stop arguments about the most irrelevant points, and clearly people must have wanted to do it at the time. I think on another note that I've also managed to internally develop an idea about "psuedo-cultural" media through this thread, that I've discussed elsewhere in detail (since it would be OT here).

It's somewhat amusing that your outlook on this boils down to "ignore things that you don't like", just like Sakurai. If it applies so strongly here, isn't it hypocritical to post in the thread "complaining" about "complainers"? Obviously you're a moderator, but you're not neccessarily obligated to post along those lines providing rules aren't being broken. I conceded that I was derailing the thread earlier so I stopped posting about that particular tangent, but people are currently posting about the philosophy behind Sakurai's argument.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Irysa

[RJWalker]

If I was shitposting like RJW about this everywhere, I'd agree.

:\

I only do that on Reddi where it's fun.

[arvilino]

Just to clear the air, I did not mean it as an insult. The problem with the wallet vote argument is that it's made on the basis of a purchase being a black and white decision. You either like something in its entirety or dislike it in its entirety. If you dislike if, don't buy it. If you like it, but it. But that's not how it is.

Edit here: to use myself as an example, I just bought Fates, 3 routes and all. But this purchase doesn't let them know what I support and don't support. That can only come from discussion.

Narrow minded was a pretty bad term to use in retrospect, I agree.

From what I've seen Nintendo take feedback but its typically player feedback from those who have played the game. While we're still awaiting the club Nintendo replacement an Iwata Asks for Paper Mario Sticker Star shows that IS take the responses to the quesionnaires for registering the games into account.

Though that isn't to say they don't bother with any one else(otherwise they'd have never made Awakening), but in those cases they typically make decisions to appeal to players who may not have played the previous game on a large scale and elements that would increase the appeal rather than listening to an individuals demands.

The "I don't like the idea of this game or the series if it follows this direction," group are different, personally like Eclipse I don't see why they really bother. There isn't really anything to suggest that Nintendo would specifically look into the opinions of individual non-players especially within a space where you don't even need to own the game to participate. Just take a look at a certain someone making a nuisance of himself on GameFAQs for 10 years because he thought IS had betrayed him with Sacred Stones onward, what kind of impact has that kind of mindset/behaviour resulted in? Nothing to the games, but a person wasting his time getting himself more and more wound up and taking it out on a board for a series he long stopped liking.

Edited August 14, 2015 by arvilino