I HATE CLOSED-MINDED GAMERS AND GAME REVIEWERS... (METROID: OTHER M)

post=Crystalgate
While the company have a free reign to change their games, the consumers have a free reign to complain about those changes. The "free" works both ways you see.

But a company can lose or gain followers on a seemingly day to day basis. They can't always know what everybody is thinking, and they probably don't always like putting out polls or surveys, because not all of their fans use their website, or are readily available to be inquired about a decision that they may or may not make.

They trust you are a fan of their decisions, and if you don't like it; tough. There were other decisions in the past you did like, because you were a fan, and there may be plenty more. Their decision on Samus was just more widespread, and therefore more shocking. While a lot of people (old followers, perhaps) dislike, they've certainly gained new followers who do. Not bad for a game that's more than 20 years old.

post=Crystalgate

post=Radnen
They trust you are a fan of their decisions, and if you don't like it; tough. There were other decisions in the past you did like, because you were a fan, and there may be plenty more. Their decision on Samus was just more widespread, and therefore more shocking. While a lot of people (old followers, perhaps) dislike, they've certainly gained new followers who do. Not bad for a game that's more than 20 years old.

But if you see it from that perspective, it makes even more sense for disgruntled fans to post negative reviews and posts. It would be within their interest to make the game gain as few new followers as possible so to discourage the company from making further decisions they don't approve of.

Yeah; companies can and do make bad decisions. Probably because they don't invest their time into popular thoughts about their games and ideas via polls and surveys. However, they can't revert their decisions. It's dumb for followers (ex-followers, perhaps) to flame up. What is gained, besides immaturity? The creators of Metroid are banking on the notion that people don't squeal like pigs when something - for once - doesn't go their way.

post=Crystalgate
The review linked to in the OP did far from what you can call "flame up". Heck, has anyone here flamed up?

I'm not saying anyone has, I was just merely reverberating your observation: " make even more sense for disgruntled fans to post negative reviews and posts" which I do see (at other places, not necessarily here or this thread or the review linked in the OP which I never really addressed). The point I'm trying to make is that, call it what you want, if a company makes a poor decision, what can be said really? Complaining won't help any. And I do see complaints here, and they gotta stop. Mitsuhide seems to understand quite well.

I have just now read that review and I gotta say, I see that shit everywhere else. They write a somewhat pleasing article - sometimes completely pleasing - like GameSpot's article for Fable III - and then give it a low score, as if it were pulled from their ass. It's got to stop. If you want to give a game a low score - give it an actually bad review - but if you have nothing totally bad to say, I can't see why you shouldn't give it a good score. Therefore, I think that some reviewers need to grow a pair. But, they write pleasingly so you can go and buy the game, it'd be bad press if otherwise. Here's what I say to that: screw bad press, if a game is truly bad, flag it such, but if there's nothing bad, then don't butter it up to a low score, give it what it deserves.

post=Radnen
I'm not saying anyone has, I was just merely reverberating your observation: " make even more sense for disgruntled fans to post negative reviews and posts" which I do see (at other places, not necessarily here or this thread or the review linked in the OP which I never really addressed). The point I'm trying to make is that, call it what you want, if a company makes a poor decision, what can be said really? Complaining won't help any. And I do see complaints here, and they gotta stop. Mitsuhide seems to understand quite well.

In the very post you responded to I did give you a reason for posting negative feedback, namely discouraging a similar decision from being made again. I can also give you more reasons, sometimes it's just as fun, if not more fun, to discuss bad games as it is to discuss good games. A third reason is to simple vent your opinion which is also often the motive for posting praise. There is no reason as to why the complaints has to stop.

Also, even if we'd accept that the complaints gotta stop, then realistically, so does any praise as well. Under no circumstances is it acceptable that a product may only receive positive feedback. I also have a hard time to imagine any scenario where positive feedback can help, but negative cannot.

post=Crystalgate
Also, even if we'd accept that the complaints gotta stop, then realistically, so does any praise as well. Under no circumstances is it acceptable that a product may only receive positive feedback. I also have a hard time to imagine any scenario where positive feedback can help, but negative cannot.

You are absolutely right again; praise too needs to stop. There's nothing constructive about either praise or complaint.

post=GreatRedSpirit
I'd vent if I spent $60 bucks on Other M. Thankfully there's cheaper alternatives to play such games without leaving such a horrible taste in your mouth

The best choice I find is while individual reviews can't be wholly trusted, you can't go wrong with a general trend amongst various places and aggregate scorers such as metacritic. How is this relevant to the quote? I don't waste $60 on any game - even if I was a fan of previous games until I test the waters by reading up and watching game reviews and previews. I actually don't think Other M is worth $60, no matter who or what. Wii games can't be priced at 360 or PS3 levels. While I'm not a super fan of awesome graphics, great gameplay only gets you so far, and a smaller targeted audience doesn't help either.

http://kotaku.com/5688617/nintendo-trying-to-figure-out-what-went-wrong-with-newest-metroid

This is what happens when there's a negative reaction to a game. Hardly inconsequential.

There's been a lot of silly stuff said in this thread and a lot of people haven't said "WHAT THE FUCK" about it. A truly civilized place. Hats off.

From the kotaku website:

"Mr. Sakamoto did a wonderful job. His partnership with us in promoting the game was stellar. Team Ninja absolutely fabulous. I'm not going to sit here and criticize a style of the game, but have I read the same feedback that said, broadly, that the portrayal of Samus felt different than how the player in the past had internalized the character? I've heard and read the same feedback. Do I think it's warranted or not? I'm not quite sure yet... I don't yet believe that that is the driving factor to the performance of the game."

I can't understand why so many people hate a game made by the co-creator as was intended by him? Maybe everybody didn't "understand"? Game Informer runs articles praising games as art and saying that more intimacy can now be achieved on screen than ever before. I find it totally true, with games like Heavy Rain, we are really seeing this. Perhaps people got the wrong idea about Samus since they weren't use to seeing her in a more complete role. Since stories and characters can now be realized more, I think we are going to see personality traits in these old Characters: Link, Mario, Samus, that weren't present before. Is this change for the better? You can't go wrong with a dude who spearheaded a gaming icon, can you?

Lets rationalize, shall we? A writer can change ideas, or the writer can change. Disagree anybody? No? Good. That means you can't not change change. So, therefore, nothing can be the same forever. Samus was around for 24+ years. The writer could have at any time died in that long stretch, even if Samus lives on. Therefore, its hard to believe the Samus of the old would continue to be the Samus of the new. Marriage, Children, Trauma, these things change writers, and writers change characters.

It was my understanding that pretty much every Nintendo character is there just to serve as a link between the player and the game, and almost nothing more. It's what helped you get involved with the game because it sort of just gave you a model, and you did the rest.

What I'm saying is, if Link, Mario, etc change the way Samus did those series are going to go downhill as well.

EDIT: Maybe they should follow Other M, maybe there should be a Zelda game where Link cries about killing monsters or a Mario game where Mario questions the morals of stomping goombas

Badly written and acted cutscenes to boot