Contest Stats and Discussion - Part 1350

LinkMarioSamus posted...

It's almost like Nintendo makes games people like! Though that could be due to the demographic Nintendo typically targets with their games, that being younger children probably up to the age of, like, 12? Not saying those are the only people who are into Nintendo, I'm a huge Nintendo fan (d'oh), but those are the people Nintendo games are primarily geared towards. My first Nintendo system was the GameCube and thus I have stupidly fond memories of the console. Lots of people feel similarity about whatever their first game system was, especially if it was a Nintendo one.

One theory I have is that Nintendo is just better at mantaining its franchises running than any other company.

We talk about how Assassins Creed died, Mass Effect died, Fallout died, Telltale died... well, you know who never dies? Nintendo franchises.

With a site that loves nostalgia, it's not a competition. Non-nintendo series have to use new games to compete because they rarely last more than a single decade.

ZeldaTPLink posted...

well, you know who never dies? Nintendo franchises

*Insert montage of all the s*** Nintendo has dumped on the wayside

Lightning Strikes posted...

Not beloved in the broader context of the franchise maybe. ut we're still talking about critically acclaimed games that people like and sell millions of copies. There has never been a Zelda Dark Age. I don't think anybody here will say you can point to a period of Zelda and say it compares to 2007-2014 FF in terms of decline from the peak.

See, this is the dumbest part. Wind Waker and Twilight Princess both won a lot of GOTY awards. But then you look at their competition and it makes sense, ESPECIALLY in terms of GameFAQs popularity but even in general to a lesser extent.

MechanicalWall posted...

*Insert montage of all the s*** Nintendo has dumped on the wayside

I know. But they keep going, and going, until something like BotW happens.

It helps that Nintendo is both a console manufacturer and game studio, and intends to stay as those forever. They need to keep pumping out those Mario and Zelda games indefinitely if they want to live. So they do, and they stay strong in their fanbase. No other company has a fanbase as old and thriving as Nintendo. Other studios are transitory, Nintendo is eternal.

Actually you know what was perhaps the weakest era for Nintendo

2003-2004. Post first-year Gamecube, pre-DS, when the GBA was literally carrying the entire company like the 3DS was 2013-2015.

And what happens in that era on here? FF/Square dominance other than E3 2004-boosted Link.

I’m surprised we haven’t seen a new Kid Icarus. Uprising seemed like it was a successful revival and then Nintendo just quit giving a s*** I guess? Uprising was like 8 years ago and as far as I know no new game has ever been mentioned

I remember IGN's retrospective on Nintendo at E3 and how they recounted 2003 having virtually NOTHING of interest.

ZeldaTPLink posted...

One theory I have is that Nintendo is just better at mantaining its franchises running than any other company.

We talk about how Assassins Creed died, Mass Effect died, Fallout died, Telltale died... well, you know who never dies? Nintendo franchises.

With a site that loves nostalgia, it's not a competition. Non-nintendo series have to use new games to compete because they rarely last more than a single decade.

Yeah Nintendo is basically the Disney of the gaming industry. Surprise surprise, look who's dominating the film industry.

They announced Zero Mission at that E3! That was really it though. At least the Wii U years saw some excellent software output even though the sales weren't great.

I feel Nintendo's dominance on this site only really lands on like four franchises. Zelda Mario Smash and Pokemon (whose games have been trending down, characters are ok)

I can't help but imagine what it would look like if they had properly maintained series like Mother or Kid Icarus or F-Zero. The top 64 characters on this site would probably just be the Smash roster at that point.

charmander6000 posted...

While true, we weren't too far away from Brawl winning the last GotD. Heck, the game that did end up winning likely never comes up in "GotD type" discussions.

i feel theres less support for ultimate. Brawl was coming off the melee hype. Also brawl was standing on its own. Ultimate is heavily overshadowed by BOTW.

MechanicalWall posted...

I can't help but imagine what it would look like if they had properly maintained series like Mother or Kid Icarus or F-Zero. The top 64 characters on this site would probably just be the Smash roster at that point.

Using Leon's 2018 stats we have 29 of the top 64 being playable in Smash (included both Pokemon Trainer Red and Charizard) along with a few who made cameos through assist trophies, costumes or spirits (Mega Man X, Alucard, Zero, Big Boss, Knuckles, Waluigi, Shadow the Hedgehog, The Boss)

Ultimate now may well be stronger than Brawl then. However, this time it’s crowded at the top while Brawl just had to worry about FFX and rallied MM.

ZeldaTPLink posted...

One theory I have is that Nintendo is just better at mantaining its franchises running than any other company.

We talk about how Assassins Creed died, Mass Effect died, Fallout died, Telltale died... well, you know who never dies? Nintendo franchises.

With a site that loves nostalgia, it's not a competition. Non-nintendo series have to use new games to compete because they rarely last more than a single decade.

I would agree with that. I think the biggest reason is that Nintendo takes their time with each game in a franchise. You rarely see more than 1 of each franchise on a single console. Most of the time it is just 1 per generation per franchise. That gives them time to make each game play and feel very different from each other.

On the other hand, it seems when most other publishers land on a hit game, they try to pump out a samey trilogy before the generation ends. Leads to declining reviews and people just don't care as much when they are very similar games in a short time frame.

Of course there are exceptions. The DKC trilogy on the the SNES immediately springs to mind. NSMB dropped two games in 2012, which was probably a mistake that overflowed the market with 2D platformers. But it is generally pretty true.

MechanicalWall posted...

I feel Nintendo's dominance on this site only really lands on like four franchises. Zelda Mario Smash and Pokemon (whose games have been trending down, characters are ok)

I can't help but imagine what it would look like if they had properly maintained series like Mother or Kid Icarus or F-Zero. The top 64 characters on this site would probably just be the Smash roster at that point.

Do you mean saleswise or critically? Because Sword and Shield sold extremely well and got better reviews than most gen 6 and 7 games.

LeonhartFour posted...

Speaking of...

1. 69.12%
2. 85%

Well, I don't know how to read exactly a 69.12% against Minecraft (probably I just expected more just 'cause).

The second result looks good at first, but considering Mario beat MK11 by slightly more than that, it doesn't look so good right now.

Granted, both Dota 2 and MK11 are divisive and anti-voted, but I'd take MK11 > Dota 2 without hesitation.

Lightning Strikes posted...

Ultimate now may well be stronger than Brawl then. However, this time it’s crowded at the top while Brawl just had to worry about FFX and rallied MM.

I mean, it went 50/50 with Melee and only got 52% on TP! Fallout 3 did well on it, too. There were 5-10 games that could've gotten 45%+ on Brawl and Melee in 2010, and there's probably the same amount this time for Ultimate.

There are probably more games that can actually beat it though.

raptor36000 posted...

Do you mean saleswise or critically? Because Sword and Shield sold extremely well and got better reviews than most gen 6 and 7 games.

Just in terms of contest strength

X and Y were the weakest Pokemon games in 2015 by a massive margin

Leonhart4 posted...

I mean, it went 50/50 with Melee and only got 52% on TP! Fallout 3 did well on it, too. There were 5-10 games that could've gotten 45%+ on Brawl and Melee in 2010, and there's probably the same amount this time for Ultimate.

There are probably more games that can actually beat it though.

Yeah I meant the latter, the winner of Brawl/Melee was never under threat until the final even though the likes of TP and Fallout 3 were not far off it. However this time Smash could end up as low as fifth with no rallies.

theRepublic posted...

Of course there are exceptions. The DKC trilogy on the the SNES immediately springs to mind.

Even then, DKC3 is largely considered the worst of the trilogy (though it was the one I owned as a kid, so I love it).

Lightning Strikes posted...

They announced Zero Mission at that E3! That was really it though. At least the Wii U years saw some excellent software output even though the sales weren't great.

I really miss the original Wii's Eshop music, Mii music, and weather and news music themes.
Current eshops shops (and UI features) are so dull. I miss the retro tv curved shape screens from the Wii as well.

For me it was always DKC 2 since I had that game.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

Being an iterative multiplayer series that builds on itself, Smash tends to have its individual games lose popularity over time (being "usurped" by the newest game in the franchise), but those individual games have demonstrated some impressive intra-Nintendo strength in their heyday.

Melee - This is almost certainly still the strongest GameCube game. Doubt that will ever change.

Brawl - Was the strongest Wii game for years. It beat Twilight Princess directly in a games contest. Can it do that again? No, but it raised the Nintendo banner highest for years.

Smash Wii U - Is BotW considered a Wii U game? If so, this is the #2 for that console. If not, it's the clear #1.

Ultimate - Relative to other games on its console, this is probably the weakest Smash since 64. Obviously, that says a hell of a lot more about BotW and Odyssey than anything else.

If BotW is doubling up for comparisons on the Switch and Wii U, we can double up LoZ:TP for the Gamecube too and remind ourselves SSBM would beat LoZ:TP.

LoZ:TP may beat SSBB now but we don't have a lot of supporting data for it. Wii U HD remake and the assumption SSB-games drop when the next edition releases...main points here, right? That could overturn their 53-47 match but I'm not certain of it.

I also wouldn't take for granted LoZ:LBW beats SSB43DS. Probably, but I always thought the 3DS-version of SSB4 was getting under-played in strength considering how available and portable it was versus the Wii U (plus the series had good-working online play for the first time with the 3DS-version).

Lightning Strikes posted...

There has never been a Zelda Dark Age.

The years surrounding Skyward Sword are basically it. Post-TP gave us very underwhelming DS games, then SS, and ALBW was good but it wasn't a huge release by any means.

So if you consider TP was 2006 and BotW 2017...well we can call it the Dim Period for Zelda at least.

(Personally TP still ranks low for me so it jumps out to me more)

Also, more to the point of SSBU/SMO:

SM64 >> SSB
SSBM >>> SMS
SSBB > SMG1/SMG2/NSMBW
SSB4WiiU >> SM3DW
SSB43DS >> SM3DL

We've not had Mario really beat Smash in over twenty years. This could break the mold, but Mario needs to shoot his shot.

HaRRicH posted...

Also, more to the point of SSBU/SMO:

SM64 >> SSB
SSBM >>> SMS
SSBB > SMG1/SMG2/NSMBW
SSB4WiiU >> SM3DW
SSB43DS >> SM3DL

We've not had Mario really beat Smash in over twenty years. This could break the mold, but Mario needs to shoot his shot.

Well, this is his chance. Odyssey had the benefit of being a very early Switch game, had that fantastic trailer, and was very well-received. It could be the Breath of the Wild vs. Twilight Princess equivalent of compared to Galaxy, which would give it a shot.

Zelda conversations always make me nervous because of how much I hate BOTW. I did not want to hate it, but I do. Can never talk about it though because you get the usual fools on the internet "Lolz, u naver played da gaem! whos s***ty alt is this???"

My top fave Zelda's (in no real order)
Twilight Princess
Link to the past
Ocarina of Time

Honorable mentions

Zelda 1
SS
WW
LA

I wouldn’t say I hate it, but I don’t think it was very good either. Kinda sad because I started out liking it a lot and then after doing 1 DB the rest of the game is just the same repetitive boredom in a world that is about 1000 times larger than the content it actually has

theRepublic posted...

I would agree with that. I think the biggest reason is that Nintendo takes their time with each game in a franchise. You rarely see more than 1 of each franchise on a single console. Most of the time it is just 1 per generation per franchise. That gives them time to make each game play and feel very different from each other.

On the other hand, it seems when most other publishers land on a hit game, they try to pump out a samey trilogy before the generation ends. Leads to declining reviews and people just don't care as much when they are very similar games in a short time frame.

Of course there are exceptions. The DKC trilogy on the the SNES immediately springs to mind. NSMB dropped two games in 2012, which was probably a mistake that overflowed the market with 2D platformers. But it is generally pretty true.

Yeah Nintendo rarely has more than two games in a series per console/handheld. The only ones that come to mind are Kirby and Pokemon (and Mario depending how you split the spin-off series).

Nintendo also has the luxury to not over-saturate a series. In a 6-7 year console cycle they can release 1-2 of their money making series along with a few of their smaller series and they won't need to repeat until year 5.

ZeldaTPLink posted...

Even then, DKC3 is largely considered the worst of the trilogy (though it was the one I owned as a kid, so I love it).

I knew I should have elaborated. That is exactly what I was going for. Both DKC and NSMB had multiple games in a short timeframe, largely to the detriment of each franchise.

It is just that Nintendo rarely does that with most of its franchises.

Man, there has been virtually no movement in Odyssey's match. You generally only see matches this static when there's SFF involved.

Leonhart4 posted...

Man, there has been virtually no movement in Odyssey's match. You generally only see matches this static when there's SFF involved.

Would this mean bad things for Odyssey then?

I think Octopath and Undertale would have fared a bit better against Odyssey. Shovel Knight advancing was likely the worst case scenario for its xstat value...not that we'll be seeing most of these games again anyway.

pjbasis posted...

The years surrounding Skyward Sword are basically it. Post-TP gave us very underwhelming DS games, then SS, and ALBW was good but it wasn't a huge release by any means.

So if you consider TP was 2006 and BotW 2017...well we can call it the Dim Period for Zelda at least.

(Personally TP still ranks low for me so it jumps out to me more)

I think of LoZ:LBW as the turning point. It won GotY-awards here and elsewhere, so it's hard to call that too dim of a spot.

KamikazePotato posted...

I think Octopath and Undertale would have fared a bit better against Odyssey. Shovel Knight advancing was likely the worst case scenario for its xstat value...not that we'll be seeing most of these games again anyway.

I dunno, I feel like SK = HK projects a pretty reasonable score for SMO on BotW.

shane15 posted...

Monika was the first and probably last time i ever picked based on a rally. Luckily i only took her 2 rounds.

To this day I have no idea who that character is or why anyone thought it would result in a rally. Is it just one of those Board 8 circlejerk games?

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

To this day I have no idea who that character is or why anyone thought it would result in a rally. Is it just one of those Board 8 circlejerk games?

The game she's in took the internet by storm a few years back and to top it off it was free. You can't really explain why people like her unless you actually play the game.

I was a frequent poster on GameFAQs, LL and I browsed Reddit a lot around the time of that contest. I don't recall that game "taking the internet by storm", unless it was a weird 4chan circlejerk. Even then those usually filter down to other sites.

pjbasis posted...

The years surrounding Skyward Sword are basically it. Post-TP gave us very underwhelming DS games, then SS, and ALBW was good but it wasn't a huge release by any means.

So if you consider TP was 2006 and BotW 2017...well we can call it the Dim Period for Zelda at least.

(Personally TP still ranks low for me so it jumps out to me more)

This is a stretch. Both skyward sword and link between worlds were very well received critically and LBW was well recd. by the fanbase (unlike skyward sword). We also got OoT3d and Majora3d which were complete remakes as well. All of these games are also well rated on metacritic and sold very well.

HaRRicH posted...

I think of LoZ:LBW as the turning point.

It was hard to see it as a turning point because it was a sequel to an old game that was purposefully retro. The NEW directions for Zelda were mostly misses.

raptor36000 posted...

Both skyward sword and link between worlds were very well received critically

Basically every FF game can say the same thing but people still accept a dark age for those!

Yeah, it's more fan reception and legacy than sales or critical scores. FFXV sold amazingly well out of the gate, for instance.

Ocarina, Majora, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princes are all Top 20 games in terms of contest strength, and they came out during 1998-2006. In comparison, the time period of 2007-2016 is a barren wasteland for Zelda. You didn't see another true game of note (A Link Between Worlds is strong but not THAT strong) until Breath of the Wild.

raptor36000 posted...

This is a stretch. Both skyward sword and link between worlds were very well received critically and LBW was well recd. by the fanbase (unlike skyward sword). We also got OoT3d and Majora3d which were complete remakes as well. All of these games are also well rated on metacritic and sold very well.

Yep, exactly this. Zelda’s low points are not low. Final Fantasy on the other hand had original XIV and Lightning Returns nearly kill the series.

DoctorJimmy133 posted...

Would this mean bad things for Odyssey then?

not really

smash has been bleeding.

i might even put mario as favourite next match

twilight princess and skyward sword are the worst 3d zelda games.

Steve_Jobs_Son posted...

twilight princess and skyward sword are the worst 3d zelda games.

I like Twilight Princess. I agree that Skyward Sword is the worst though

Mario won the IGN contest? Hell yeaaaaaahhh glad he got to beat that blasted elf somewhere!

pjbasis posted...

Basically every FF game can say the same thing but people still accept a dark age for those!

This is actually wrong.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/final-fantasy-xiv-online
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/lightning-returns-final-fantasy-xiii

That’s a numbered entry and a main console game. Both were financial and critical failures. Meanwhile, Zelda’s low point:

https://www.metacritic.com/game/ds/the-legend-of-zelda-spirit-tracks

Still a really good, well received game!

KamikazePotato posted...

Ocarina, Majora, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princes are all Top 20 games in terms of contest strength, and they came out during 1998-2006. In comparison, the time period of 2007-2016 is a barren wasteland for Zelda. You didn't see another true game of note (A Link Between Worlds is strong but not THAT strong) until Breath of the Wild.

Because there was only one console release in that time.

gamefaqs is really one of the weird LoZ strongholds

by all accounts Mario and Pokemon should beat LoZ everywhere else on the internet