This article illustrates how badly GameSpot fails to understand Nintendo and its fans.
Yes, Nintendo is releasing another 3D Mario, Mario Kart, and Smash Bros. First off, Iwata HIMSELF said these could be "expected" -- which is why he announced titles like Monolith Soft's new game, Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem, and Yoshi's Land -- which thus far looks similar ONLY to Kirby's Epic Yarn, which isn't even the same franchise. And really GameSpot, if you're complaining about second games in a series coming to a console... I have TONS of Microsoft and Sony franchises to point out to you that appear on their respective consoles with much more frequency.
Secondly, yes -- the characters that appear in many of Nintendo's games remain similar. Is that really all you pay attention to -- what the characters look like? Nintendo fans understand that it's the actual style of gameplay that distinguishes games from each other, which Nintendo CONSTANTLY does -- even in its "safest" franchises. Just TRY to suggest to hardcore Smash Bros. players that Melee and Brawl are the "same old experience". Or that Mario Galaxy is anything like... well, any other game out there. And finally, about Zelda -- we get it that you didn't like Skyward Sword, but how you failed to see how the overall structure and design of the game was different than the previous ones is just mind-boggling. Most of the similarities -- specific items, names and characters, and story elements -- are all cosmetic, which is exactly my point.
As a Nintendo fan I was quite excited after the surprise January announcement. Its timing, Iwata's remarks, and the overall tone suggests they're listening to their fans. That's who the broadcast was directed towards, anyway. I suppose what you want is for Nintendo to branch out and expand the boundaries of gaming by offering new experiences to new people?-- oh wait. It did, and it's called the Wii.
I don't know what you want anymore, GameSpot. I get the sense that you're just not fans of Nintendo nowadays -- which makes no sense, because you purport yourselves as true gamers, and tons of people clearly still are fans of Nintendo. Honestly your personal opinions of Nintendo do not matter much to me -- but if you don't care anymore, either quit all the whining about how you miss Mario being "new" to you personally, or wake up and realize that there are concrete reasons why Mario can always remain "new" for a lot of people. You're clearly not one of them, and the articles expressing how you wish Nintendo would make you happier for your own personal reasons that have nothing at all to do with ME are all getting extremely tiresome while I try to browse your site for news and information that is actually worthwhile.
...Gah. That's what I get for coming back to this site. My fault I guess. I'll just go back to IGN.
Of course not -- honest reviews are important. But I'm not sure that the statement "this particular puzzle game is not great" is that true -- many other reviewers seemed to like it.
Obviously, not everyone likes everything -- each gamer has their own personal preferences, and I understand that reviewers do too. But it seems like GameSpot too often penalizes games for their conscious design choices and less often actual *flaws* in game design. If this game really isn't that great, why wasn't anything caught when it was reviewed for 360/PS3/PC? It's either a case of being biased in one case, or not thorough enough in the other.
OK sure, different editor -- but the site does tons and tons of reviews; surely there are standards. A 2.0 difference for basically the same game is simply unacceptable. How are we as gamers supposed to make a judgment when GameSpot can't even be consistent with itself? I have no idea if I should listen to Jane or Carolyn.
It seems like GameSpot editors let their personal gaming/genre preferences affect their reviews too much. I realize reviewing games is not easy, and this balance is somewhat delicate -- but GameSpot's been doing this for years; they should've figured it out by now.
Thank you, GameSpot, for your very representative survey and making a premature and almost fanboyish conclusion in the HEADLINE of the article. I learned a lot.
PoindeJ's comments