Game Companies who have made quality games as of now

[Harvey]

1 hour ago, SlipperySlippy said:

From the top of my head Metroid: Federation Force, Other M, Paper Mario: Sticker Star, 1-2 Switch, Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon, Fire Emblem Fates: Revelation, Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity, etc.

Except the problem is that none of those games are actually bad and are finished games. Its just that they feel mediocre and lack that Nintendo feel.

Also you might want to check on revelation scores as the game is the highest rated of the three.

Even shadow dragon is good but not your typical good fire emblem game.

I know this is your opinion but I can't think of a lot of Nintendo games that are rated as the worst game ever made and all.

 

[Slumber]

10 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Except the problem is that none of those games are actually bad and are finished games. Its just that they feel mediocre and lack that Nintendo feel.

 

I'd say Other M is straight up bad. Sticker Star, too.

Games being finished doesn't mean they're automatically good. Hell, there are several UNfinished games that could be considered downright masterpieces.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Slumber

[Harvey]

1 minute ago, Slumber said:

I'd say Other M is straight up bad. Sticker Star, too.

Games being finished doesn't mean they're automatically good. Hell, there are several UNfinished games that could be considered downright masterpieces.

Well me personally, while I haven't played other m, looking at it, I am not getting vibes that say its bad. While I didn't like sticker star that much, it had some interesting stuff happening.

 

[Nobody]

Funnily enough, neither Other M, Federation Force or Gates to Infinity were developed by a nintendo studio.

That said, I hear most of other M's problems come from its script, which was written by Sakamoto, who is a Nintendo employee, so I guess that one counts. Team Ninja only did the gameplay.

I wouldn't nominate Nintendo anyway, since some of my least favorite games were developed internaly by them.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Nobody

[Slumber]

6 minutes ago, Harvey said:

Well me personally, while I haven't played other m, looking at it, I am not getting vibes that say its bad. While I didn't like sticker star that much, it had some interesting stuff happening.

 

Other M single-handedly scared Nintendo away from making more Metroid games. That game was complete character assassination for Samus Aran.

The gameplay was fine. Solid. Nothing spectacular. But everything else about the game drags it down so much that it doesn't even matter.

Imagine if Corrin wasn't Corrin, but was Marth or Roy, or some other beloved FE character the whole time. Game was the EXACT same. Fates would get soooooo much more shit than it already does, even though most agree that it's mostly fine from a gameplay and design perspective.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Slumber

[Lerandel]

Yep, Sakamoto was who designed Other M and defended the game's decisions.

As for companies who made quality games as of now? Rockstar, Nintendo, the Enix branch of Square Enix who makes Dragon Quest games, Sony, and Sucker Punch comes to mind.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Falcom despite I only have played two games yet.
But Trails of Cold Steel I + II were masterpieces, and seriously I never heared a as amazing soundtrack as in this duology.

[Harvey]

2 hours ago, Slumber said:

Imagine if Corrin wasn't Corrin, but was Marth or Roy, or some other beloved FE character the whole time. Game was the EXACT same. Fates would get soooooo much more shit than it already does, even though most agree that it's mostly fine from a gameplay and design perspective.

Uhh,,,I know you're trying to make a point but keep in mind that this is IS we're talking about here and not Nintendo. While IS has made flaws in some FE's, I don't think any of them can compare to Other M.

Really though, Other M suffered from the story side of things and its because of its story that the gameplay kinda suffered otherwise, it would have been a fine game of its own.

I have a rather odd feeling with Atlus. For some reason, I don't like the company and part of this is because of how they made Tokyo Mirrage Sessions adding FE characters with little to no effort. And yet when it comes to their Shin Megami games and such, they make sure that nothing happens.

The other issue is how many people praise them more so than Nintendo for whatever reason. I'm still surprised that its still around and it hasn't gone bankrupt though that doesn't seem apparent since Persona 5 made them a fortune. This is me personally though.

I bought Devil Survivor and I still haven't touched it. I do have interest in trying out Radiant Historia but I'm not sure if I'll like it.

Don't really understand why people value Atlus more than anything else honestly but I digress.

 

Edited July 27, 2017 by Harvey

[Nobody]

28 minutes ago, Harvey said:

I have a rather odd feeling with Atlus. For some reason, I don't like the company and part of this is because of how they made Tokyo Mirrage Sessions adding FE characters with little to no effort. And yet when it comes to their Shin Megami games and such, they make sure that nothing happens.

The other issue is how many people praise them more so than Nintendo for whatever reason. I'm still surprised that its still around and it hasn't gone bankrupt though that doesn't seem apparent since Persona 5 made them a fortune. This is me personally though.

What does any of that has to do with the quality of their games, which is the purpose of this topic?

Anyway, if for some reason I had to pick between Nintendo and Atlus, I'd pick Nintendo, but IMO Nintendo has way lower lows than Atlus, which is what you're asking in this topic. Also, Nintendo is a much bigger developer than Atlus.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Nobody

[Harvey]

20 minutes ago, Nobody said:

What does any of that has to do with the quality of their games, which is the purpose of this topic?

Its got nothing to do with it. Its just my odd attitude that makes me wonder how such a niche company like Atlus can get attention that has more admiration than someone like Nintendo even though back then, they made a lot of bad games. 

 

[Jedi]

2 hours ago, Reimu Hakurei said:

Falcom despite I only have played two games yet.
But Trails of Cold Steel I + II were masterpieces, and seriously I never heared a as amazing soundtrack as in this duology.

Hopefully you can play the Sky trilogy and some Ys soon!

[Locke087]

I wouldn't name Nintendo as a whole consistently always good they've produced some pretty bad things (see Wii Music) I would just sayt their are individual teams that Nintendo has that very consistent namely, Zelda Team, Mario Team, Retro Studios, Monolith Soft, and Intelligent Systems (Sticker Star and Shadow Dragon aren't really bad games and their more outliers then commonalities). 

Really it's the same as Sony has some good studios in some bad studios and some studios that finally get a good direction and make good games now (I.E. Guerrilla with Horizon Zero Dawn). Naughty dog is really consistent quality though I'd argue some of the Jak games aren't up to snuff.  But Quantic Dream has made exactly one good game and that game Heavy Rain is kind of weird.  But they have a quite a few good teams another belt like Sucker Punch(Infamous, Sly), and Media Molecule (though Dreams has been in purgatory forever and it's not looking that good). 

Publishers really can't have a completely clean catalog and none do individual developers can but with years of history it's hard to be a 100% hit studio even then that's debatable with every developer.

[TheWill]

22 hours ago, Nobody said:

What does any of that has to do with the quality of their games, which is the purpose of this topic?

The title is asking for companies who have made quality games, the topic instead clarifies to list companies with a consistent track record and the subject material is already quite blurred since what makes something 'quality' is personal subjectivity. Are we using fan reception as a baseline for quality or are we looking at whether the game accomplishes what it sets out to do? 

I think Tokyo Mirage session is a horrible game in relation to how it was initially advertised. As in, a game that bridges the gap between Fire Emblem and the Shin Megami Tensei series, which I think the first trailer prompt was borderline false advertising. The game itself however, is quite appealing to JRPG fans and from what I hear, a pretty successful game, which is furthered by the fact it's a Wii U exclusive. I suppose a better example would be Super Smash Bros. Brawl. As a fighting game, the games functional, but does have critical game flaws that made it a huge downgrade from its predecessor. Despite this, the game was actually intended to appeal much more to the casual crowd, which Brawl had definitely accomplished.

[Nobody]

29 minutes ago, SlipperySlippy said:

The title is asking for companies who have made quality games, the topic instead clarifies to list companies with a consistent track record and the subject material is already quite blurred since what makes something 'quality' is personal subjectivity. Are we using fan reception as a baseline for quality or are we looking at whether the game accomplishes what it sets out to do? 

I think Tokyo Mirage session is a horrible game in relation to how it was initially advertised. As in, a game that bridges the gap between Fire Emblem and the Shin Megami Tensei series, which I think the first trailer prompt was borderline false advertising. The game itself however, is quite appealing to JRPG fans and from what I hear, a pretty successful game, which is furthered by the fact it's a Wii U exclusive. I suppose a better example would be Super Smash Bros. Brawl. As a fighting game, the games functional, but does have critical game flaws that made it a huge downgrade from its predecessor. Despite this, the game was actually intended to appeal much more to the casual crowd, which Brawl had definitely accomplished.

Yeah, and I'm not forcing people to say Atlus, if they think Atlus made bad games, that's their opinion. TC was the one that found weird that people were nominating Atlus. I never said I found it weird that people weren't nominating Atlus.

What I'm contesting is him finding weird that people are nominating Atlus more than Nintendo. Like, is it really that weird to think Atlus has a more consistent record than nintendo? I don't even understand what you're trying to say in this post tbh

Edited July 28, 2017 by Nobody

[Harvey]

41 minutes ago, Nobody said:

is it really that weird to think Atlus has a more consistent record than nintendo?

Well it kinda is since many people claim that TMS is more of an Atlus game than it is a Nintendo game despite the fact that Nintendo was the one that started the idea behind the game.

Also, Atlus is a smaller company compared to Nintendo. To say that a smaller company manages to make consistently good games compared to Nintendo who make more than just RPG games, that honestly feels an understatement.

And people keep praising Atlus like its the best company out there to work with or something.

 

[TheWill]

36 minutes ago, Nobody said:

Yeah, and I'm not forcing people to say Atlus, if they think Atlus made bad games, that's their opinion. TC was the one that found weird that people were nominating Atlus. I never said I found it weird that people weren't nominating Atlus.

What I'm contesting is him finding weird that people are nominating Atlus more than Nintendo. Like, is it really that weird to think Atlus has a more consistent record than nintendo? I don't even understand what you're trying to say in this post tbh

Sorry, what I was trying to say was the original topic at hand is pretty confusing and subjective. It wasn't really in relation to the topic you were discussing, just something that prompted me to put the threads initial topic discussion into question. I've only played Atlus's more 'successful' series (Persona, Dept. Heaven, Devil Survivor) and I've enjoyed most of them, so I'm not knowledgeable on the topic.