No Online in Pikmin 3, But Yes to Wii U Achievements

I have no clue what Nintendo is doing with the Wii U. And, unfortunately, I don't think even think they know what they're doing.

I don't see what the big deal is. Why would I even want to play Pikmin with other people?

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

@bennyboy said:

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

Sometimes I just don't know what to do with people who think like this...

@DeF said:

@bennyboy said:

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

Sometimes I just don't know what to do with people who think like this...

Think like what, exactly?

I'm just waiting for the not-too-distant future when there will be this crazy, radical move from a game studio to release something with the bullet point "playable offline" on the download page, and maybe even "also available in disc format at a retailer near you". People will be asking "how can they DO THAT??"

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

@Jensonb: Thanks for the clearing that up. After reading this, I thought some retail 3DS games had implemented the accomplishment system, but it still is just the mii plaza stuff which I have no interest since I don't live in a city.

@S0ndor said:

U-chievements? AchWiivements? U-chWiivements?

Achwiivements is golden.

I would have probably played this game by myself anyway.

It seems like a mistake to not be strict about their achievements. They should have learned that lesson from Sony half-assing trophies at first. Either say no or go all in.

Personally, I hope the next system I buy has a system level opt-out option for achievements. You like them? Great. Don't like them? You'll never see anything about them.

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

@Turambar said:

@TheHBK said:

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

I don't follow. Are you basically saying you want LAN, or....

This was a sarcastic comment regarding his explanation that syncing a game that has many units to consider would be very difficult to do, hence why Pikmin will not be online. However the sarcasm is drawn from the fact that RTS games have had online multiplayer for what is soon approaching 2 decades.

I'm gonna be upfront about it. Achievements don't decide what games I play, but they do give me something extra to do when I'm "done" with a game, which I really appreciate. I also love having this giant history of the games I've played and some of the things I've accomplished in them. If the WiiU had and achievement/trophy system on par with the 360/PS3, I wouldn't have a problem buying a couple upcoming third-party games on it, but if this is all insanely half-assed and entirely pointless, I'm not going to gives those games that chance.

I don't think this will be integrated into the system very well and it's going to be poorly supported. Achievements are just a thing that exists and is expected in games now, Nintendo needs to understand that.

Those guys at Nintendo sure are lazy.

Yes ! I probably wouldn't even play online co op or multiplayer . As long as they deliver with an awesome single player experience . The achievements aren't a must , but is a nice bonus .

@bennyboy said:

@DeF said:

@bennyboy said:

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

Sometimes I just don't know what to do with people who think like this...

Think like what, exactly?

Disclaimer: Sorry this turned out so long. Providing examples made it impossible to keep this short, but I'm trying to illustrate my point a bit here so bear with me.

Hm it's tough to describe. This simplified line of thinking in relation to the games they put out, calling out the graphics as "bad" or claiming the games are "always the exact same" as if that were obvious fact when it definitely isn't. Not liking how a game looks is one thing but nobody can make a serious argument for games like Wind Waker, Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime, Kirby's Epic Yarn, Pikmin, Xenoblade and others having "bad graphics". Their art direction and style is pretty much always spot-on (exceptions: stuff like Kirby's Return to Dream Land which was just bland and boring)

Same goes for the alleged lack of innovation. I can't think of any other company that shakes up their franchises as much and as often as Nintendo does. After Super Mario World you get Yoshi's Island. After that, you get Mario 64 which sets the 3D platformer standard, then Mario Sunshine throws a lot of that out the window and Mario Galaxy brings the level design into a whole new dimension for the series all the while they revitalize the 2D platformer genre with 4-player co-op.

With Metroid, they turn their beloved 2D exploration adventure into a FPS-style adventure format successfully and then make a third person hybrid game with first person elements that blurs the line between free roaming in 3D space and 2D planes.

Zelda had the, so far, ultimate sword fighting game in a game with an expressionist art style after the previous title had a dark, more realistic style and had you turn into a wolf for parts of the game to solve puzzles, explore and fight certain enemies. That games two predecessors were a cartoon-y looking adventure centered around sea-exploration and a dark, doom-and-gloom game that had you repeat the same 3 days over and over again to prevent the world from ending in and around a town whose inhabitants all had individual schedules for those three days, forcing you to keep track of it all while going out into the world.

Pikmin was a unique take on strategy gaming on a console controller, even further improved with the Wii editions of those games. I'm not sure if it was the first game of that kind but I know it spawned games like Overlord and Little King's Story that adopted pretty similar mechanics.

Then look at the games that get less attention: the Mario RPG/Paper series, stuff like Xenoblade which gets praised as one of the best RPGs of the generation, Pandora's Tower, Disaster Day of Crisis (yes it's an unpolished weird mess), Excitebots, the WarioWare games and whatnot. Then there's also the asymmetric gameplay concept introduced with Miyamoto's Pac Man Vs and later Four Swords Adventures that now sees its vision fully realized with the Wii U stuff.

Granted, they could and should do a lot more to liven up their oldschool franchises (especially with Zelda and its structure and the mainline Pokémon titles which I've never played but understand to have very little changes made to them) but Nintendo is definitely not a company you can fault for not innovating (d-pad, the SNES controller layout you're still using today, analog stick, motion controls and touch screen say hi).

Their problem is mostly that they predominantly keep trying different things within their established franchises as opposed to creating wholly new ones. That's how stuff like the Paper Mario or Mario & Luigi RPG games come about. That's also why it so often seems that it's "just the same game again" at first glance. It's extremely hypocritical to criticize them for this and then go and praise "Random Action Game 3" to the high heavens because it has a new mode and runs better than its two predecessors released within three years.

Another issue that I think affects gamers perception of their traditional franchises: presentation. Not graphics and music alone but also stuff like narrative integration and tutorials. The latter is probably the worst flaw that Skyward Sword suffered from. I bet more gamers would've had a better time with the game - even if they weren't the biggest fan of the sword controls - if the game didn't have such tedious tutorials and hand-holding. On the visual front, a 2D Mario tends to look quite boring these days. Not since Yoshi's Island has there been a mainline 2D Mario platformer with a unique visual style à la Kirby's Epic Yarn. That gets reserved for the Paper Mario series pretty much exclusively. Although the new direction for background art in New Super Mario Bros. U is absolutely fantastic - I just wish they'd go all in and re-design the foreground characters and player models in the same hand-drawn style. I bet many people wouldn't even notice if the game played exactly like Mario 3 if it were 100% hand-drawn graphics à la Rayman Origins. Also, the Wii's issue of always looking outdated on a technical level probably made the games automatically feel old. Perceptions plays a big role in all this, I believe.

Note: This isn't a blind-fanboy/defense-force post. I'm well aware that there are issues with the way Nintendo makes games (among them the cited [stupid] reason for Pikmin 3 not being able to support online multiplayer). I simply find it very frustrating when people make these general statements that usually just repeat whatever the consensus is among the cynical anti-community.

If someone doesn't like the games then there's nothing wrong with that. But unwillingness to take a deeper look at them before making these kinds of statements about the company as a whole and all the games they're making is just not okay with me.

Again, sorry for making this post so god damn long. Probably should've spent that time getting some work done ...

@TheHBK said:

@Turambar said:

@TheHBK said:

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

I don't follow. Are you basically saying you want LAN, or....

This was a sarcastic comment regarding his explanation that syncing a game that has many units to consider would be very difficult to do, hence why Pikmin will not be online. However the sarcasm is drawn from the fact that RTS games have had online multiplayer for what is soon approaching 2 decades.

I apologise on Turambar's behalf that you had to explain that.

@TheHBK said:

@Turambar said:

@TheHBK said:

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

I don't follow. Are you basically saying you want LAN, or....

This was a sarcastic comment regarding his explanation that syncing a game that has many units to consider would be very difficult to do, hence why Pikmin will not be online. However the sarcasm is drawn from the fact that RTS games have had online multiplayer for what is soon approaching 2 decades.

I apologise on Turambar's behalf that you had to explain that.

@Turambar said:

@Shtinky said:

@TheHBK said:

@Turambar said:

@TheHBK said:

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

I don't follow. Are you basically saying you want LAN, or....

This was a sarcastic comment regarding his explanation that syncing a game that has many units to consider would be very difficult to do, hence why Pikmin will not be online. However the sarcasm is drawn from the fact that RTS games have had online multiplayer for what is soon approaching 2 decades.

I apologise on Turambar's behalf that you had to explain that.

I don't think there's any need for me to apologize for sarcasm not carrying on the internet.

I think when he said: "Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.", in reference to StarCraft, it was pretty obvious he was being sarcastic, because we all know that game is widely played online.

Again, we're having to explain it to you -_-;

I'm fine with the optional achievement, considering most multiplatform games are going to have them is very likely that the WiiU version will have them as well.

Was anyone actually expecting Pikmin 3 to have online play? It would have been nice but whatever.

Finally, their excuse seems kind of lame, but on the other hand I'm no game programmer so I don't feel entitled to call Nintendo idiots or lazy for not adding that feature. Sure lots of RTS on the PC have online play, but I don't know if they have to build a different on-line platform for a game like that to work on a console (is there a console game with a huge number of units? most FPS have like 20 players), also I don't know how sophisticated (or not) the AI of the Pikmins is and I don't know the max number of units that available.

So maybe they are lazy, maybe they don't have the people with experience to program something like that, maybe they don't care about online play for this game, maybe they didn't had the time, maybe is all of that.

@bennyboy said:

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

And do what exactly? If you are of the opinion that all they've made are crap games without any true innovation for years, why the eff do you CARE what they do at all?

I mean if CBS is now (okay a few years ago) a flood of comedies about Long Island schlubs married to women out of their league and police procedurals named by throwing darts at the alphabet....and those don't appeal to you (and in fact you sneer at them)...just watch something else. Why the eff would you care? No one forces you to put any time or money into them. Even if you LOVED CBS once, I don't see why you'd care. It's certainly not to see old shows back, they've in your own words (not yours, but the person I was responding to) made that same thing repeatedly without innovation over the years. So it's to see new stuff....which any number of other channels are providing.

Well there is one obvious reason you'd care, and that's just fanboyism where your gallbladder burns with all the bile built up over the years that the consumer electronics firm you put your faith into isn't the one on top. Because why point out Nintendo in such dark terms and not EA's Madden, or the whole music genre Activision succeeded in strangling, let alone Tony Hawk, and maybe CoD.

EDIT - It's where I believe those that have asked for Nintendo to go 3rd party truly reside. Not actual fans, lapsed or not, but in general just those whose bacon burns that their system of choice is not on top. I mean the truly stupendous offerings of Sega since they've gone 3rd party point to how awesome that would be for actual Nintendo fans.

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

Not like I was selling my tits to play some co op pikmin over the internet, I'm fine with a new game! Nintendo either delivers amazing singleplayer games, or amazing multiplayer games, sometimes even both. I'm fine either way.

I'd like to know more about the selling of your tits.

@Gregomasta said:

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

Not like I was selling my tits to play some co op pikmin over the internet, I'm fine with a new game! Nintendo either delivers amazing singleplayer games, or amazing multiplayer games, sometimes even both. I'm fine either way.

I'd like to know more about the selling of your tits.

I would like to know as well... On that note, what amazing multiplayer+singleplayer games have they put out?

@Shtinky said:

@Turambar said:

@Shtinky said:

@TheHBK said:

@Turambar said:

@TheHBK said:

That sucks. Same damn reason I can't play starcraft online. Too many damn little units with location having to be synced. Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.

I don't follow. Are you basically saying you want LAN, or....

This was a sarcastic comment regarding his explanation that syncing a game that has many units to consider would be very difficult to do, hence why Pikmin will not be online. However the sarcasm is drawn from the fact that RTS games have had online multiplayer for what is soon approaching 2 decades.

I apologise on Turambar's behalf that you had to explain that.

I don't think there's any need for me to apologize for sarcasm not carrying on the internet.

I think when he said: "Can't wait until the tech is there to play these kinds of games online.", in reference to StarCraft, it was pretty obvious he was being sarcastic, because we all know that game is widely played online.

Again, we're having to explain it to you -_-;

Wait... explain it again. Third time's a charm.

@huser said:

I mean if CBS is now (okay a few years ago) a flood of comedies about Long Island schlubs married to women out of their league and police procedurals named by throwing darts at the alphabet....and those don't appeal to you (and in fact you sneer at them)...just watch something else. Why the eff would you care? No one forces you to put any time or money into them. Even if you LOVED CBS once, I don't see why you'd care. It's certainly not to see old shows back, they've in your own words (not yours, but the person I was responding to) made that same thing repeatedly without innovation over the years. So it's to see new stuff....which any number of other channels are providing.

I love that CBS comes up so often now that GB is part of them.

@mrpandaman said:

@huser said:

I mean if CBS is now (okay a few years ago) a flood of comedies about Long Island schlubs married to women out of their league and police procedurals named by throwing darts at the alphabet....and those don't appeal to you (and in fact you sneer at them)...just watch something else. Why the eff would you care? No one forces you to put any time or money into them. Even if you LOVED CBS once, I don't see why you'd care. It's certainly not to see old shows back, they've in your own words (not yours, but the person I was responding to) made that same thing repeatedly without innovation over the years. So it's to see new stuff....which any number of other channels are providing.

I love that CBS comes up so often now that GB is part of them.

Actually, completely unintentional. Just a similar refrain of "laziness" could be made there, but most people have the good sense to realize there are other options rather than wasting time wishing ill on them.

While the online reason seams to be BS, their could actually be a technical reason. Ether-way,I never saw the series as one to have online play. Maybe Co-op though that could become a problem if it expects too much precision. As for achievements, I agree. I want to play through the game because I enjoy it, not for getting achievements in hopes of enjoying it.

The disappointment doesn't come from the fact that Pikmin 3 won't have online co-op. It's the inane excuse that is given as to why it won't have online co-op. The excuse is ridiculous and completely unacceptable in 2012/13.

The disappointment doesn't come from the fact that Pikmin 3 won't have online co-op. It's the inane excuse that is given as to why it won't have online co-op. The excuse is ridiculous and completely unacceptable in 2012/13.

@huser said:

@bennyboy said:

@huser said:

@Tarsier said:

@DeF said:

@DoctorWelch said:

I'm sorry Nintendo, but if we can play Starcraft across an internet connection, I'm pretty sure we would be able to play Pikmin.

Definitely true. It's a weird excuse. More believable would've been that they simply decided against it if it didn't make sense for the game.

they are lazy. thats what it comes down to. thats why they dont make games with good graphics, they just think up some stupid gimmick that a lot of people will fall for and then continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation. . they need to learn a huge lesson this generation. . i sincerely hope they do

Why? If they "continue releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation", what do you care if they learn a lesson or not?

And frankly, I'll take art design over pushing polygons anyday.

So that they'd stop "releasing the same crap games they have for years with no true innovation"?

And do what exactly? If you are of the opinion that all they've made are crap games without any true innovation for years, why the eff do you CARE what they do at all?

I mean if CBS is now (okay a few years ago) a flood of comedies about Long Island schlubs married to women out of their league and police procedurals named by throwing darts at the alphabet....and those don't appeal to you (and in fact you sneer at them)...just watch something else. Why the eff would you care? No one forces you to put any time or money into them. Even if you LOVED CBS once, I don't see why you'd care. It's certainly not to see old shows back, they've in your own words (not yours, but the person I was responding to) made that same thing repeatedly without innovation over the years. So it's to see new stuff....which any number of other channels are providing.

Well there is one obvious reason you'd care, and that's just fanboyism where your gallbladder burns with all the bile built up over the years that the consumer electronics firm you put your faith into isn't the one on top. Because why point out Nintendo in such dark terms and not EA's Madden, or the whole music genre Activision succeeded in strangling, let alone Tony Hawk, and maybe CoD.

EDIT - It's where I believe those that have asked for Nintendo to go 3rd party truly reside. Not actual fans, lapsed or not, but in general just those whose bacon burns that their system of choice is not on top. I mean the truly stupendous offerings of Sega since they've gone 3rd party point to how awesome that would be for actual Nintendo fans.

Well yeah, it's precisely the reason you gave, and I don't see a problem with it. People care because they are fans and want the franchises of a company they've come to love to succeed. It's a bit analogous to sports I guess, in that if a basketball team like the Lakers is in shambles for example, the fans don't simply stop caring about the team and move onto another team that's playing better. I think the willingness of Nintendo's fanbase to be more vocal about their misgivings towards the company speaks well to Nintendo's track record, since only a company like Nintendo that has made great games in the past would be able to inspire such unrest about unrealized potential. You probably don't see as much criticism about those other things you mentioned because people don't care about them as much (although i recall plenty of shitstorms over Tony Hawk and CoD and music rhythm games as well).

nintendo are the trolls of 2012

@beaubaxterrosser@gmail.com said:

The disappointment doesn't come from the fact that Pikmin 3 won't have online co-op. It's the inane excuse that is given as to why it won't have online co-op.

Every game doesn't have to have online multiplayer or co-op. I get pissed when single player games are given multiplayer and co-op gameplay, much like Dead Space or Mass Effect. I didn't think they were needed.

@Claude said:

@beaubaxterrosser@gmail.com said:

The disappointment doesn't come from the fact that Pikmin 3 won't have online co-op. It's the inane excuse that is given as to why it won't have online co-op. The excuse is ridiculous and completely unacceptable in 2012/13.

Every game doesn't have to have online multiplayer or co-op. I get pissed when single player games are given multiplayer and co-op gameplay, much like Dead Space or Mass Effect. I didn't think they were needed.

I don't think many are arguing that. The big problem people have is the stupid nonsense excuse that was given. Is it that hard for Nintendo to just say "That wasn't something we wanted to include in this title" or something similar?

In some respects, I think the developer's vision should count for something - we can't rely on focus groups to tell developers what to make. Their direction is important in creating our gaming future, and that's a risk many are willing to take.

On the other hand, achievements are irrevelant. Just put them in your fucking games Nintendo and standardize whatever limited notion of "online" you may have. Don't be all high and mighty, telling people what you think they think - just put it in and people who care will get them and those who don't wont. Sony realized their mistake fairly quick - don't make the same (literally, the same) mistake.

@Claude said:

@beaubaxterrosser@gmail.com said:

The disappointment doesn't come from the fact that Pikmin 3 won't have online co-op. It's the inane excuse that is given as to why it won't have online co-op.

Every game doesn't have to have online multiplayer or co-op. I get pissed when single player games are given multiplayer and co-op gameplay, much like Dead Space or Mass Effect. I didn't think they were needed.

I agree with you but you don't find the excuse, that a game like Pikmin "couldn't be done online" a little (to put it gently) questionable?  I mean Miyamoto must know about Starcraft right? And he must know that a lot of us know about Starcraft as well right? I'm just confused as to how he thought we'd buy that answer and why they didn't opt for the much more palatable "we didn't feel it was right for the game". Then again, it was probably much more adorable when he said it.

@bennyboy: Except I don't think that's the reason for most people when they express that desire. I think most people that want to see some type of comeuppance on the part of Nintendo are people that were NEVER fans and simply want to see something they don't like fail (and hurt the fans of that brand). There were 150 million PS2's sold and now the Xbox is coming on. Plenty of people that have no vested interest in the success of Nintendo and would rather it shuffle off because it threatens in some way the brand they've hitched their mindshare to. The pissing matches based on consoles sold and attach rates is proof there is a sizeable fraction of the game-website-visiting community that actually cares about that nonsense.

To take YOUR analogy. Sure Lakers fans are going to bitch when their team isn't playing to snuff (ie winning 'chips), but I reckon the VAST majority of people dumping on the Lakers at any given point, especially on the internet, are fans of OTHER teams (well maybe moreso Celtics fans). They crow at the Lakers losing and rubbing it in the face of their fans. Because while Lakers fans might complain and want a certain player gone if they aren't winning, I don't think they ever really desire a squad (even with players they don't like, or playing a style they find unappealing) to fail, not if they are real fans. They buy in, invest in the ebb and flow of each game, and thus set themselves up to get gut punched and take the heartache that comes when a team that was never good enough finally gets knocked out.

EDIT - Frankly, most fans that have kept up with NIntendo games already know that the games HAVE changed, sometimes remarkably. Someone elsewhere has already posted the minutia of that evolution.

Miicomplishments?

@Gregomasta said:

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

Not like I was selling my tits to play some co op pikmin over the internet, I'm fine with a new game! Nintendo either delivers amazing singleplayer games, or amazing multiplayer games, sometimes even both. I'm fine either way.

I'd like to know more about the selling of your tits.

I would like to know as well... On that note, what amazing multiplayer+singleplayer games have they put out?

Yawn,

Achievements are lame.

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

@mrpandaman said:

@Gregomasta said:

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

Not like I was selling my tits to play some co op pikmin over the internet, I'm fine with a new game! Nintendo either delivers amazing singleplayer games, or amazing multiplayer games, sometimes even both. I'm fine either way.

I'd like to know more about the selling of your tits.

I would like to know as well... On that note, what amazing multiplayer+singleplayer games have they put out?

There'll be no selling of tits, sorry guys. For games I'd have to say stuff like Mario Party/Tennis/Kart is often a MP experience, while stuff like Zelda/Donkey Kong is often pure SP. Then there's stuff like Smash Brothers that combines the best of both in my opinion.

Aww.

...something I really don't know that much about.

Whatever. I'm not buying a Wii U anyways. Problem solved.

Nintendo mods weren't able to create Miis for all the Pikmin within an acceptable 30 minute window of starting a coop game so they had to scrap multiplayer.

Yawn,

Achievements are lame.

Who wanted or expected online Pikmin?

I wouldn't have had so many incredible experiences in games if achievements didn't exist.

You want to say that's just corporate incentive bullshit? That's alright, because achievements are pretty rad.

@WickedFather said:

@Roodog said:

Yawn,

Achievements are lame.

I'm sad that Nintendo have succumbed to the crap that are achievements. Roll up pointless collectable litter.

...And their isn't collectible litter in Nintendo games already? Finding 100 Skulltulas, or almost 100 heart pieces? Or 242 stars in Mario Galaxy 2? The stuff is already there. It's just a matter of using it to keep a record so other people can see that you managed to 100% Galaxy 2, or got full health in a Zelda or whatever. And it's not like shitty Assassin's Creed achievements with flags, or Alan Wake with its thurmoses where it literally is just achievement bait. Stuff like hearts, or stars or whatever have a direct impact on gameplay. Just now, hey there's a record that you did it.

Seems to me that achievements on the WiiU are going to be a bust and won't matter since Nintendo isn't making developers put them in WiiU games.