Games « Trinest Talks

James Noir is just like any other 3DS title, in that it has a great idea behind in, for example Steel Diver but fails to execute it, once again Steel Diver. So with video game rants been the flavour of articles which I’ve been publishing this past month, I decided to continue them into holiday season with James Noir.

The game was originally anticipated for the systems launch, but slowly it ended up been a game for the holiday season, with it launching in November. So how did it end up stacking up? That is the question which many people who are wary of what the system offers and the games available would like to know. Even those who see it as another Ubisoft title, one which could quite possible be shovel ware. The resulting answer however isn’t as clear cut as peoples gaming prodigious, no it is a complicated answer which ends up making this article even more worth the read.

I wanted to get this game since it was announced, and like many felt that Ubisoft would be picking up the gauntlet which so many developers left behind on the original DS system which amazing puzzle games which ranged from games having detailed emotion swinging stories such as any of CiNGs works, to games like the Phoenix Wright series and Professor Layton, full of puzzles and brain teasers which made the system worthwhile. Well in a way Ubisoft does continue the legacy of a strong puzzle/adventure game on Nintendo handhelds, however on the other it falls short. The main observation I find is that if the game came out when it was originally scheduled, aka around launch, then it would of been one of the best games for the system. However with the title launching alongside big hitters such as Mario Kart 7 and Mario Land 3D. (wow lots of Mario ay?) The title ended up falling short behind more detailed and thought out games released later in the year.

Well we have established that the game wasn’t as magical as what was once thought, but does the game offer the player anything? Well redeeming qualities are not the games strong suit, with it feeling like a tech demo unpolished to just have the game finally out, which has been the case with many of Ubisofts titles of late such as From Dust and the next downloadable title from them I am Alive. Anything besides puzzles in this game are attached to the title to a degree that it seems it just ticks a box for the game to have it, rather than offering anything solid. However that said, I did enjoy the overall story line which was that you are a contestant on a prime time game show which revolves around an old FBI friend coming to you about various murders which you guessed it- have puzzles at the scene. This overall back and forth between the game show and the FBI friend was probably one of the main things in the title which was done well. While the end twist is a bit predictable, at the end of the day the journey to get to that twist was quite magical and well worth the time.

Speaking of time, the game isn’t really that long. Depending on what puzzles you pick, and how good you are at solving them, you can knock the game over relatively quick. However I don’t believe this is a downside to the title.
The major issues I have with the game, for me which where enjoyment altering where mainly the controls in some stages of the game. When the game used 3D environments the puzzles which used this style where quite annoying to control at times, and were not cut and dry like the rest of the titles controls. The games verity in puzzles also at times had you completing “X puzzle type 4 or 5”, which was quite a disappointment, however in that regard there was a good amount of puzzle types for the player anyway, and they were much different at times then the puzzles you would usually find in say Layton or another puzzle solving title.

Overall I did find the title enjoyable, however if players don’t know what they are going into when picking up this title I feel they will not appreshate the title as much as I did or if they where more informed about the style of the game. Picking up this game at full retail price would be a bit of a disappointment as well, so if you wish to get this game at some point I recommend getting it when it hits an appropriate price point you are willing to part money if it doesn’t reach your expectations. However overall I’d say it would of been in the top 10 games on the system (and probably still is with the lack of games on the system) around launch, but since bigger named titles from Nintendo have appeared on the system I feel it has lost that position.

It is time for another video game article, or just an article in general- with content been lacking the past few weeks I thought it would be best to return on a big bang, by sharing my opinions on some of the top video games which came out this holiday season. Now the Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword.

Skyward Sword is the next game in The Legend of Zelda series. Like Mario Kart 7 the game promises a lot of new ways the game will interact with the player. It is also highly acclaimed and it is also a lie, like Mario Kart 7 there are issues with the game, and it comes down to “the game is fun to play, but at the end of the day it is designed like crap”. Which means another article roundup which goes deep into the latest from Nintendo to see what just went wrong?

While fans will disagree with me on the “there are issues” front, there quite certainly are issues, and one of the major issues is one which has been dismissed many times and even proven “false” by fans. That is the Motion Controls.

Skyward Sword introduces some brand new motion controls and one of the games which really should have come out years ago instead of now. The motion controls it uses have been around for quite some time from a peripheral called the Motion Plus and the Wii Remote Plus. However they haven’t really been used to their advantage in many if not any title, so Skyward Sword was the game to say “hey Motion Controls can be in hardcore games tooo”. Which Nintendo did prove their point that motion controls can be used to a traditional game, however the issue lies with the end product not with the idea.

For the most part, motion controls work- there is no arguing that. Even though fans backlashed media outlets who said otherwise and even made their own videos showing how accurate at times the controls can be. With the basic premise that whatever you do in your living room is copied to the screen. The simple fact is that the technology isn’t perfect and this is by now quite old technology, especially with the motion plus been an attachment from years gone by. The technology in the Wii Remote Plus is basically the same, which means old technology which just can’t really interpret what you’re doing 100% at times. Anyone who says otherwise is clearly blinded in this instance. The technology isn’t perfect I guess is the key message here. Which means when this imperfect technology is used for a traditional game with many functions which need to be replicated for control there is going to be times where it just doesn’t get what you want to do. I’m not saying this happens all the time, but it does happen and people dismissing that it doesn’t happen is the issue with Skyward Sword. When controls are mapped quite similar to other things you can do, it can get a bit muddled up and you might end up doing the wrong thing. I find it also loses the centre sometimes too, which can be an issue when centre is now much lower or higher then how you have been playing for the last half hour or so and suddenly you go to do something which ends up resulting in you throwing your bomb on top of yourself or something.

Moving on from motion controls which isn’t quite an issue as it doesn’t happen all the time and can mostly be fixed with resetting calibration is the new way the game works. There are two new ways the game works and I’m going to talk about the over world first. As the over world has been used in a similar style before with the Nintendo DS titles been the main culprits of using this style. What this style is, is an over world which isn’t really there, Spirit Tracks over world was just planes of fields which had simple monsters scattered around and a train running through it. Phantom Hourglass of course took Wind Wakers approach to having a huge ocean. Skyward Sword takes things one step further by limiting the over world on land to segmented areas which are accessed by the sky. The sky of course is filled with rocks which get collectables thrown to them from the land below. There really isn’t much in the sky to explore and the main primary location you go to in the sky is Skyloft a friendly little town which is pretty basic but amazing in its own right. There doesn’t seem much real feel of community in the town outside of the primary story interactions or the basic side quests which get thrown out once in a while. In sort, it is no Majoras Mask.

At the end of the day there really isn’t much substance in this over world style, with previous games which had a similar limited over world- dare I say it, having much more substance. It really is at the core a simple minimalistic point A to point B over world, which does seem fine but limits the overall player exploration to major areas well as minor areas. Which also makes the game feel out of place when we move onto the second new thing Skyward Sword features which is essentially the “underworld” aka the “area which isn’t in the sky” basically been “anything you can touch is one big dungeon”.

There are a few issues with this style of game play which is present primary because of other design decisions. Such as the limited over world and quite possibly the most annoying thing to mankind Fi. However more on that later, for now the underworld is the dungeon idea.

It isn’t really a bad idea at all, in fact I would love it if more Zelda games tried to encapsulate this idea. However the execution in Skyward Sword comes down to the fact that if the underworld (really probably the best way to describe it in this instance) is an extended dungeon why are the temples so huge at times and other times so small. There doesn’t seem to be a point in what makes one landmark considerably huge where another is considerably small. For me level design should try and make the temples more building style, as well as having more locations within the temple not specifically related to ending up at the boss room. My other problem with the execution in Skyward Sword can be shown much more prodomadly later in the game where many of the locations time is spent solving massive puzzles or problems which take a considerable amount of time only to get to another area which isn’t the area your primary heading too, but is still quite considerably huge.

Overall the areas just needed more variety and culture within them. This would of made them more interesting, a few more towns, shanty’s whatever- it would have been more differentiated.
As for Fi, her design is essentially someone who has played the game before and likes to spoil bits for you.

The latest 3DS title which is worth buying is a shock among many fans who thought the system would remain a paper weight, an actuarial game you say? Yes the 3DS seems to have games and Mario Kart 7 is the first one from Nintendo which isn’t a remake or a tech demo. So that should mean we should expect good things from Mario Kart 7? Wrong, it is a bastardised version of Mario Kart Wii and Mario Kart DS. The two titles in the franchise which have a strong stigma of been playable and enjoyable attached to them. In short good games, so when they were mashed together it just didn’t happen- they became a shadow of what just went by and took primarily the bad things from the two titles instead of the good things.

Don’t get me wrong, Mario Kart 7 is a good game, but just like many other releases this holiday season especially from Nintendo fall to the simple factor of “you will enjoy it, however tech and design wise- it is a huge disappointment”.

Let’s start off with the new features in the game which are meant to be the biggest things to come to Mario Kart since the banana was introduced. I think you know what I’m referring to, the swimming and the flying- the thing Nintendo says will revolutionise the series. So the big question is does it?

Overall I was happy with the new flying and swimming features. However my big complaint here is that I don’t believe they were fully taken advantage of as core features. Flying seemed to be more gliding and essentially gave a few second boost to what normally a bunch of boosts on a slope would give you lift from. What I’m trying to say here is that the feature really could have not existed at all and it would of still given the game the overall basic functionality that the feature promises. Moving on to the swimming I felt it was more in tack than the flying portions of the title. However for the most part levels took it as an opportunity to have “underwater sections” rather than give it any reason of purpose to existing. Again the feature fell short and didn’t really grasp any desire to want to go underwater, it more the fact the level was going there so you have to go there. However I do have to commend the best parts of the swimming function was when there were just little holes in the level and you would fall through into a whole massive world under the track. Or in some of the retro levels with beaches you could go out much further before you died, with an underwater section existing alongside the level it seemed to add a new dimension and twist to the game. It was a shame that these functions didn’t always add depth to the edges of the map and instead were treated as a gimmick. Essentially I wanted the ability to jump back into the race even if I fell to the ocean bellow, maybe more caves and alcoves designed to get to the player back on the main track, or even include short cuts- that would have really enhanced the feature enough to be subtle and amazing.

While I’m talking about the levels I want to talk about the levels in general, there is one word which the kids throw around a lot which I think fits perfectly- they suck.

My primary issue with the levels is the new ones just feel unimaginative and quite boring. There isn’t really many levels which I can defiantly with 100% certainty say I like. For me the winners were the sprints, which are a new feature to Mario Kart 7 where levels are not just the run of the mill 3 lap tracks. There is only a few sprints in the game, which is of course Rainbow Road, which I believe is the best Rainbow Road ever in a Mario Kart game, it isn’t boring and flat like the SNES one, and also isn’t over the top like the Wii and DS ones had become. It also has a moon and a planet you race on, clearly that alone should make it a top track in anyone’s books. The other sprints are of course the Wuhu Island levels, of which are two an island loop and a mountain loop. These have had mixed reactions from fans, but at the same time I believe these are strong levels in Mario Kart 7. The only complaint I have with them is maybe they could have had more variety in music. Such as Smash Bros style music system where levels can have multiple music tracks. My other favourite levels include Melody Motorway, which I think is pretty creative and Shy Guy Bazaar. The rest range from been acceptable to downright boring, such as the predictable levels such as Alpine Pass. Also Koopa City which is called Bowsers something a rather in America is also a good level, but I feel it’s out of place in a Mario game and feels more like FZero then Mario Kart. On the path of small complaints and nit-picking I believe Rosalina’s Ice World has the biggest issue in the whole game, the music you see sounds more like Pokémon then Mario.

Retro Levels are amazing, okay maybe not. First impressions have always been “best retro lineup in the whole series”, but slowly people have been saying “but these where the worst levels in their respective games”, so it occurred to me, maybe they are so good because the new levels are so bad? It’s refreshing after playing hours of the new levels to move onto the retro cup which has much more solid race tracks. Besides Mushroom Gorge which I hated on the Wii for the same reason as Alpine Pass, aka it is predictable, boring and generic. The retro lineup features solid tracks such as Coconut Mall, Walugi Pinball, Kalimari Desert and Maple Treeway. I even enjoy Dino Dino Jungle and Airship Fortress at times.

Moving on to the motion controls, I feel while I’m dismissing the levels I should mention them. There is only one option to use motion which is in the first person mode, which is quite different to the third person motion controls which the Wii version offered. This new first person mode feels a bit odd and works at some points in the game, but in others it doesn’t. It limits the view the player gets much more drastically than the third person mode, which wouldn’t be a problem if motion controls where quite “easy” to achieve. In that line of logic what I’m trying to say is if you tilt the 3DS ever so slightly you will be running into a wall when you have a good combination cart customization. I feel as if the paths in the levels are not as wide as the Wii version, which is a problem with motion controls as tight cornering is almost impossible at times.

Well you might even ask, why even use the motion controls at all? Well I find them to be much more fluid then the slider. Which just feels wrong when playing the game for long periods of time, you will find you will slip off or can’t really get the slider to point in the right direction at times after long periods of play. In the end I would have been much happier if there was a way to play third person and have the motion controls in place.

So we have covered motion controls, levels and the new level features. Lets move on to another big hitter, the community functions. I believe this is a great step for Nintendo when it comes to online games. That been said it is overly disappointing after all the hype associated to the function, when all it does is make a room with limited customization features which sets the features as locked to the room once decided. It’s really disappointing how it is set up. However like I said before, a step in the right direction.
Also while I’m nit-picking, does anyone really play the 3DS with 3D on anymore? I know I don’t, and after hearing that Mario Kart 7 was meant to be “super awesome” when it came to 3D, I just knew I had to try it. Well it was even more disappointing than any other game I’ve played with 3D functions. Even James Noirs crossed eyed hyper set 3D is better than this. At least in that game it seemed to have a purpose. But in this, it’s either so good it doesn’t seem like it’s on at all, or it’s so bad that it just doesn’t make anything pop in a meaningful way.

Overall I feel that Nintendo should make a franchise which tries to be a successor to the Mario Kart range, because it’s getting time for a reboot and fast. Maybe make a game which is more all-stars or Mario but an array of third party characters like Fortune Street is. Which I’m disappointed isn’t taking over the Mario Party franchise. That aside, before I finish off, one major annoyance was the shooting items back for me. I found I couldn’t do it for a long time for some reason, then today I did it once and I don’t know how- because I just did the stuff I’d usually do when trying it. Maybe it was because I was more impaintaint with the feature and did the “move” over and over.

With another Zelda gaming coming any day now, the series has become a topical buzz on the internet. The anticipation is growing for a title which sets its story back a few years to be a prequel to Ocarina of Time in a roundabout way. It has a nasty little problem with the introduction of possibly alien technology in a certain area which for a Zelda game is approaching on slightly a bit to advance, at least a bit to advance when you consider in a few more centuries Ocarina of Time happens. Ocarina of Time was a very bare and baron game technological wise, with the series also been centred especially in the early games as some middle ages quest, with latter titles such as Sprit Tracks and Phantom Hourglass starting to approach some sort of crazy middle ages industrial era hybrid.

So the question is, as Zelda games ever so slightly start to add technology which might seem alien in the early titles start getting added into the series- how could Nintendo create a Zelda game which is set in the 21st Century with our modern day laws, cities and organizations. I remember years ago reading a fan fiction which proposed this exact idea, while it ended up going a little crazy like all fan fictions do the idea was the same- how would a 21st Century Zelda title work?

The gameplay and core elements of the story would have to change slightly there is no arguing there, but is the abandonment of these values enough to make this title feel Zelda? Possibly no, however with the series been placed around many time travel elements, as well as magic I feel as if this crazy idea could work in some ways.

If the game could work with some magical elements and time travel, the next main goal is a ghastly one at that how would the main three characters be defined in the 21st Century? Who would Link be, or Zelda, or Ganondorf? Well one mistake would be to have the evil villain be an extensive rich monopolistic business man, that is defiantly going a bit too crazy. I believe the best way to protect the sanctity of characterisation in the series in a modern setting would be to make all three main characters; Link, Zelda, Ganon. As childhood friends who go to school together. As this is a Zelda game a modern setting the game would clearly have the multiculturalism and races which previous titles have. So the believability that these characters would find themselves drawn to each other in a modern setting isn’t that hard to believe. I also think that keeping the characters as children would benefit such a title then compared to having full grown characters. For one a full grown character would come off as a bit crazy and a bit depressing to be running around saying the end is near with swords. However keeping them as kids allows the childs imagination in describing areas and events to flow through the story. The locations can alter without having to physically of altered, just because this kid believes that this ledge is a high unsalable wall, doesn’t mean in the real map that it is. The world can be altered and changed without much effort. What I’m saying is the kids are just playing, yes possibly they are really saving the world- and it might come off a bit corny or unbelievable in that regard, but I believe the only way to make a serious attempt to try and latch onto a modern day Zelda would be to explore this option. As for where time travel comes in, the characters could find themselves taken back in time through portals created by the series gods to allow them to obtain spiritual stones which would have long been gone.

Moving on to the map, the location would be a small country city which has become the capital of the land. I believe that the land around this city would be walled off but still easily accessible for children, with the surrounding areas to be ruins of times gone by where only monsters sprawl the land. Or maybe not, maybe the land is vast but baron, the point is that the ruins in these areas would be the dungeons and it would be up for the kids to travel to these locations to find the various stones and magical artefacts which would bring back the Triforce.

Centring back to the adults in this world and how they would react to the kids (specifically Link) running around in town. The elements of most Zelda games is the town is a centre for bustling shops and interaction. In this idea I feel as if this could still happen, with the Adults just been aware of what Link is doing (at least to them, he is obviously a kid been a kid, playing around etc.) so they would humour him and that wouldn’t change any of the core elements from previous series in that regard. Another angle which could be explored could be if Link comes home with certain elements or ancient stones that he gets grounded, or they get taken off him. Also when Link gets the legendary green tunic, he is a boy after all which means closed minded people in the town might react differently to Link then. Remember in this idea he is still a kid and in a modern setting over parenting is quite the common scenario, it could be an interesting angle to explore even in a title which isn’t set in modern settings.

Also I think at this point many of the old ways would have dried up, even the royal line if it still existed wouldn’t have a clue as to what they once believed in, basically the whole world has become atheists. The only problem is if a game did exist with these elements when the Triforce is reunited and everyone goes back to believing in the Gods this is basically saying atheism is wrong and I believe in this day and age that could be some tricky footing to be on, even though currently more people are religious then others I believe any “this is right” or “that is wrong” in regards to religion in a title would be a bad move. Despite that I believe that a modern day Zelda would have many avenues to explore, especially with how it interacts back with the previous titles and lore. I for one wouldn’t mind a title which explored these elements in the future.

It has probably been the finest month for Nintendo fans who indulge themselves in the news as well as rumours through the internet. From the rumour which the device was going to get a circle pad attachment, as well as a future redesign to the circle pad accuracy been a real thing. The end result seems to be a perplexed emotions and loss of direction from both the fans and the company itself.

What we know for starters is very little, but what we fear has grown to a considerable list. With the 3DS console already having a shaky path, it doesn’t seem like the future is any smoother. While we know that the Circle Pad provides a few more control options and attaches to the 3DS in the ugliest bulky way, does this represent the whole situation Nintendo has put themselves in? A flurry of disjointed decisions to try and restore the brand image of the system after riding off the success of the original DS line, choices such as keeping the original line on life support while launching the 3DS and the slow trickle of any games at all, as well as the huge price tag and the fact that 3D just plan sucks what more could there be?

Regardless of what Nintendos original intention was with the Circle Pad, it has now become a frenzy of bad publicity relating to what if anything would be the future of the 3DS system. Especially when the Circle Pad originally was rumoured alongside a future redesign, as well as rebranding of the 3DS system. There is becoming a zero confidence in the company when reading forums and other websites relating to video games because of the announcement of the Circle Pad.

While at the end of the day the original intention was probably a harmless “an extra option if need be”, and keeping it limited to possibly just Monster Hunters. It has risen to the fear of it been a requirement for future titles, as well as when the inventible redesign will most likely include the additional control methods within the system. Even if Nintendo says that it wouldn’t be required, when 3D also isn’t technically required in games, only one or two games have launched without 3D support for the 3DS. With the original selling point for the 3DS been the 3D factor which failed to ploy the mainstream attraction to the system like the DS had, the new selling point will obviously be about the control methods and styles, sort of going back to the whole “touch” angle, but instead “it has buttons”. Returning to the confusing angle of buttons isn’t going to attract the mainstream audience which since the PlayStation generation have been geared to simpler games and of late motion controls.

It seems Nintendo is going in circles for problems to its latest console launch which where relatively simple when you look at them. Just release some games, advertise the thing outside of random people just looking at the device with seedy smiles and lower the price. Heck the majority of these things have been completed, bar the games thing- which looking into 2012 onwards the system was set to have more support from Nintendo and third parties. Which maybe if we think about it, should of the system just have launched a year later?

Want to know my favourite Frogger game? No it isn’t as cut and dry as my favourite Rampage game (World Tour by the way), but it does show and highlight where the series should head, and rather where it keeps returning. It is put plainly Frogger Toy Trials. It might be over eccentric with a kid running out of luck and picking the short straw and getting a frog out of all the other cool Animal toys he could have, but it keeps the traditional mixture of Froggers gameplay, while giving it a crazy story and directional aspiration which no other Frogger game has achieved.

The goal and heart of the Frogger design at the end of the day, is the mission to hop around to finish the level and avoid obstacles. Many, if not all of the sequels to the title have always been essentially the same, which in some ways is good- but it has seen many releases over the years on a variety of platforms with no real evolution. Konami like the Lost in Blue (Survival Kids) Series neglects the Frogger series with just experimentation and no clear aspirations for any future title bar the same.

For me, a grand bigger scheme Frogger should take inspiration from Morris Gleitzman an Australian writers “Toad” series. Which the series includes titles such as the original Toad Rage as well as sequels Toad Away and Toad Heaven plus the more recent novel Toad Surprise. Why should Konami look at these books? Because for the most part this is everything Frogger stands for, an inspirational animal which just wants to explore the world, while experiencing close calls with the outside world.

The overall aspirations of a Frogger game should centre around one Frog and give it a heroes design. Konami should make us care for this frog, and create a 3D world which lives and breathes but with the disastrous effects for our little Frog. The game could open with our Frog trying to cross as road in the desert, but looking around the road is filled with cars and tracks, maybe a hawk or two trying to come down and eat our Frog- the point is, it’s a breathing world with disasters for the frog, and he doesn’t know where he is going- only that it will be an amazing adventure.

Over the past month Nintendos latest handheld the 3DS has gained lots of attention. However the attention the device has seen isn’t the good kind, with the majority of press lashing out at the device, and questions raised about the direction Nintendo went with.

I think the downfall of the 3DS, started long ago, the first issue would have been the original DS. The now nicknamed “phat” version of the original device had a list of issues. Design wise it wasn’t anything to write home about (honestly, I prefer the prelaunch E3 DS) and it was also riddled with screens with a very low range backlight, I also believe not including WPA (even at the time was a much recommended WiFi standard) would also shoot the console in the foot.

While it was successful at the time, and paved the way for the DS Lite, a much nicer and well regarded handheld. Some might say- what should have been released originally for the most part. Despite my WPA complaint (which I will explain why shortly while it should have been included) the system was the peak of the DS rain. A console which drove the sales of the system and the games at the time allowed it to enter the realm of the “casual” to be a highly successful device there as well. Yes it was successful, but the small mistakes after the DS Lite will lead the 3DS to be a misguided handheld- a lost sheep with no shepherd.

Nintendo will then go onto to make their biggest mistake leading up to the 3DS. The mistake is simple, yet at the time- possibly thought as the best thing they could do. What was it? It was the creation of the DSi line of systems. While Nintendo could possibility have done with a revision at the time, the “1.5” appearance of the system will end up destroying many of the chances the 3DS will have at gaining traction- especially in the early years.

The first major issue I feel was removing the DSi range from the original DS firmware, Nintendo should of issued an update for the older devices which made the firmware just a little bit more appealing while gearing the DSi one as a “plus” version of the firmware, especially if the device was going to have the same specifications it ended up generating.

The WPA functionality should have been included in the systems for games by removing the Wifi settings from the game cart instead of keeping limited to each game cart. Nintendo drilled themselves into a hole for people who are progressive and use current technology not stuff from the 50s by not giving the system the control of the settings until it was too late and a generation later.

One thing I do believe which was one right with the DSi range, was at the time- the marketing. The ideal that the device was to be a more entertainment eccentric DS would do wonders for its sales, I still see the devices around today- especially over the earlier DS models such as the Lite and the Phat.

However the second major issue with the DSi Line, and one which isn’t just simple nit picking was something Nintendo did much more recently with it. For the most part, the DSi Line is still a functioning profitable arm for Nintendo, so what did they do? Nintendo instead of discontinuing the line straight away, decreased production and ended up slashing the price- with the price slash been so meniscal and pointless.

While the DSi Line was still on sale far after the 3DS launch, I feel as if this did the worst impact to the 3DS from a sales perspective. You look at the system alongside the original DS and the Lite, it is quite obvious they are completely different devices. However if you look at the 3DS alongside the DSi range, I can see how it’s possible for market confusion- with both devices been almost identical in style, and pushing much of the simular features, bar 3D.

I feel as if the marketing of the 3DS was far the worst idea possible, especially from a sales perspective. The idea was clearly to show some hip people enjoying the device, but what people saw were creepy strangers playing with a device which looked exactly like the one they already had. When considering what the 3D was to enhance the experience, even early adopters questioned what it had to offer, so what does that leave the rest of the world who are not nerds with? The end result is clearly a console which makes the 3D seem like an add-on, an extended DSi- regardless at how hard Nintendo will try, that stigma shall remain for quite some time on the 3DS. Even worse is when a similar stigma is suddenly attached to the Wii U after its unveiling in public eyes.

If we continue the discussion about 3D, for me it is horrible, half the time it hurts my eyes plus gives me headaches and the other half of the time the games 3D ghosts. The 3D seems horrible inclusion, remember last time Nintendo did a 3D handheld? The Virtual Boy? It failed- and so will this, for the simple fact no one wants 3D, and when they do want it- it’s just a fad, a fashion fad with horrible repercussions. I would have much rather Nintendo tried to give us better graphics- for the simple fact it is going to be what people want from their handhelds now. HD graphics, buttons not touch and full console games, are going to be the selling points for handhelds, especially with phones and other smaller devices catching the market.

In the end 3D gave us that little bit of enhancement, which was so meniscal and pointless rather than the big guns explosion to everyday gaming Nintendo was hoping for.

Another issue with the 3DS, was its high price tag. Especially with the next Playstation Portable- the Vita having a similar price tag when it launches, it comes with the question “Does this really give the value for the asking price”, the answer for most was no. With the price cut putting the device at the prices it should have been from day one, it begs the question why didn’t the fat cats cut their bank accounts for successful launch beforehand.

With the majority of system sellers poised for 2012 not 2011, and the current line-up of games riddled with holes Nintendo has a major battle ahead for them to get this puppy back on track. A new marketing campaign, discontinuation of the previous handheld devices and a majority of its games could be what the system needs to stand on its own.

Picture this; an amazingly well presented spirited Gameboy Color game. It contains gameplay which engulfs the player and keeps them entertained dispute the systems limitations. Now picture the game had a generation hiatus, a little room to breathe, now picture that when the game was finally back into your heart that it has come an over populated basic and imaginative shell of what it once was.

The funny thing for me was I was introduced to the series with the first of these empty shells. My first experience with the “Survival Kids Series” was Lost in Blue for the Nintendo DS. However I went back and looked as I was anticipating the title to its routes, I experienced the Gameboy part of its series and grew attached to it. I learned what the game was, and how it should be portrayed, however imagine my disappointment when Lost in Blue wasn’t anything which expanded what I had felt and seen on the Gameboy.

It is no means a bad series once it returned, but by no means is it anything great. With the DS “line” feeling it an increasing experiment in trying to please both fans and trying to develop a game which retains the games routes and works with the engine. It feels for the most part that Konami had found a way to sell the beta concepts of what the game would be as three separate games. With each one still never fixing the horrible AI, and graphic wise it wasn’t amazing as the sprites from the Gameboy games.

However there was a glimmer of hope for the series, with the Wii title release not so long later been a much more deserved follow up to the original series. However the title still retained many of the problems the DS titles did, and didn’t improve on the games mechanics one bit at all. Once again it was a dusty shell, trying to imitate their own series, instead of been its own.

The problem with the game is the executives probably saw “kids” in the original title and felt the title was just that, a kids game. Instead of handling the series with its core elements; survival, exploration and mystery. Simular mechanics which at the end of the day surround the popular series Zelda by Nintendo. Which is why it is so shocking that the games are quality wise, years apart, even more disgusting when compared with the treatment the series gets from Konami, if only it was Castlevaina or Contra it wouldn’t be treated like a shovel ware title.

The best thing Konami has done for the series of late was to rename the title to Lost in Blue. For two reasons, one they can release whatever crap they want and it will never tarnish the Survival Kids name and two, the name gives the series a fresh breathe and a way to move on.

What should have been done with the title should have been to make it a “gritty”, “hardcore”, survival simulator. Or at least stray more towards that absurdity.

The game needed a new image, and keeping everything and trying to modernise it or whatever they had done wasn’t going to pass it. Many of the game design techniques such as areas which separate themselves into one thing, for example a “swamp area”, a “beach area”, a “volcano area” weren’t going to cut it. They might have worked great back in the day on the Gameboy, where technical limitations could make each area exciting, but these days it would be impossible to convey an enjoyable survival experience keeping that strategy, especially when the major problem is it removes the exploration element or makes it quite basic.

Like Minecraft through its game development before its final release, the game should of through its development before release encapsulated more and more exciting and interesting elements of nature which just blur together to create an amazing experience. I’m not saying Konami would have to make the games land mass completely random, but least adding more variety and unique experiences within the exploration as well as making it more deeper- maybe some items can only allow you to access a certain area? Let’s get some thick jungles happening with some amazingly condensed areas which you have to cut through. Instead of having jungles huge open fields with some jungle textures on the side and some rolling logs to make it “exciting”.

I always through another element which should have been a no brainier to of been added would have been an unoccupied village. It would provide warmth and shelter to our would-be survivors and the resources which would have been left behind no doubt would provide ample amount of applications to survive with. Maybe some power lines with just a little bit of power in them lying around, extra dangers of been zapped. Crazy stuff like that- is what Lost in Blue should have been.

The entertainment expo has gone and passed for another year. With many enjoying the possibilities that E3 2011 would hold prior to the expo, many gamers coming out of it- felt dirty, relentless and quite underwhelmed. For while the expo offered some great new items, many where more of the same and others where just bland.

For the most part, Sony and Microsoft stuck with their strategies which they have been pushing for the past few years. With no major console in the future from either of the companies (expect Sony with its new portable), it seemed like quite a dry year. With what fans will call the big kicks from Microsoft been the next generation Halo trilogy starting, and from Sony- their new portable the Sony Vita. None of them offered anything to really write home about, with the extensive range been especially with the Vita, a portable PS3- which while might be good for some, for others shows the same old repeated, dumbed down- to a portable if you will.

This isn’t just “competition bashing” because I’m a Nintendo fanboy, oh no. Nintendo was also guilty of providing a mediocre response this year. The winner of this E3, would have to be the Nintendo Wii U, the companies brand new system. However it isn’t a victory- more of a white flag, compilation prize. With the systems controller, after rumours providing gamers exactly what it was before the conference, when it came time for the revel, many already new exactly what was going to happen. The controller isn’t something gamers can hype themselves up for the experience to play, unlike the Wii Remote before it, and the 3DS only recently. With the 3DS sales, especially with the horrible launch primary driven by curious gamers wanting to experience the joys of 3D.

Speaking about 3D, it seems that whole direction has turned out to be a waste of time. While the PS3 offers some 3D experience, it seems that’s primary been forgotten- and other companies are not willing to bring the experience to the big consoles no more. Even Nintendo’s Wii U, lacks 3D in anyway- especially with the tablet screen, it could have provided gamers with a 3D experience right there in the hands.

But the lack of 3D expanding isn’t a concern, mainly because it is really at the end of a day a horrible gimmick. No what is a concern is the E3 line up consisting of more than the same. While there where new IPs at E3, they seemed to have been buried, with the best new IP offering probably been from Ubisoft for the Wii U. With Killer Freaks from Outer Space, however the game is primarily still quite newly developed, and more than likely will change over the coming year/s into either something to be proud of, or something which just creates a niche following like the original Red Steel. E3 also had some amazing reboots of series gone by, however most reboots where of games which have seen the light of day only recently, which created a stale enjoyable stench from them.

The 3DS, had some great offerings as well, this year Nintendo started showing off what is new to the 3DS, instead of remakes from the 64. Which really complete the 3DS line up into the next few years, titles such as Luigis Mansion 2, Super Mario 3DS and much more. The system had a solid line up which no doubt after the batch of ports, will breathe fresh air into the system, especially with gamers upset about the amount of ports the system was receiving.

For me however, the shows winner wasn’t a game, or one of the brand new consoles shown. It was the tech demo for Zelda HD. It doesn’t amount for any future game at this stage, however if the past Zelda tech demos for the Gamecube and N64 are to be believed, what we see next on the Wii U when it comes to a Zelda game will be a technology marvel for the system. With previous tech demos highlighting current limitations, but only by the developers- with especially the Zelda tech demos becoming an amazing console experience with much more enhanced graphics than before. If you think the tech demo showed something amazing and worth playing, then my god you will wet your pants when Nintendo accuracy puts some resources together to make a game.