|
|
Post by Wildcat on Nov 16, 2008 22:42:25 GMT -5
Kudos to you, erikaston, for presenting a solid rebuttal. Branding is a side of the argument I had looked over, and indeed, DK Jungle Beat did take many creative licenses with the DK brand name. However, I will add one small thing - that it was not Donkey Kong Country Jungle Beat. It was as if Nintendo started all over, which is something the franchise has done a few times (DK Arcade to DKC to DK'94 to Mario Vs. DK to DKJB to DK:KoS, etc.). But I must admit, you provided some much needed insight to this discussion. Thanks.  |
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Nov 16, 2008 22:47:15 GMT -5
(though whoever said that character design and gameplay are unrelated isn't thinking straight) What are you talking about? Character design and gameplay are completely unrelated. That's why you can stick Mario in an RPG. The character design is the same, but the Gameplay is different. It can be reverse too. Doki Doki Panic had the same gameplay as Super Mario Bros. 2, but it had different main characters. Pretty much you can slap Mario characters on any type game and it'll automatically become a part of the Mario franchise. THAT'S the power of characters VS gameplay. Man this has gone incredibly off topic. Oh well, there isn't much news on the real topic anyway. |
|
BeamClaws
Balloon Fighter
Beam claws closes the gap with his excellent foot speed!
Posts: 934
|
Post by BeamClaws on Nov 16, 2008 23:46:57 GMT -5
No, in Mario RPG, there were platform sequences. Also, if you don't have character desgn, ou don't know what abilito put into the gameplay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Nov 17, 2008 5:06:01 GMT -5
Wait, what? I don't disagree with you Erikston, but why is everyone suddenly on board when your argument is a much clearer version of what's been argued already?
People complaining that there aren't more characters/items/locations is the same as complaining that there aren't deeper brand associations. I would have thought a game that focuses entirely on the strength, agility and versatility of the main character of the series, Donkey Kong, would be a significant strengthening of the brand.
Yes, brand associations are important, but we've established that Jungle Beat didn't "reset" the Donkey Kong Country series - it just diverged from it.
And again, this DOESN'T explain why this very same argument doesn't apply to Diddy Kong Racing, which was set in an entirely different location (that, despite a post on the previous page, didn't keep ANY of the DKC style), with an entirely different cast of characters, none of the music, not even the same style of character design. OK, we have Diddy Kong, bananas to collect and a Kremling character. But we've already established that Jungle Beat has quite a few ties with the DKC series too. Why is Diddy Kong Racing wholeheartedly accepted as part of the Donkey Kong Country "brand", but Jungle Beat is wholly rejected?
But treating today's brand values with yesteryear's is folly. Your argument suggests that familiarity with the brand is what has upset people with Jungle Beat, but then you cite SMB2 and Zelda II (both major-selling games, I'll add). But both featured many characters and items as their prequels. SMB2 was a bigger departure, but you had all the characters, mushrooms, even the music. The brands for both of these games were transplanted into new gameplay...
So you could say your argument hinges on changes in gameplay being a major brand recognition factor for popularity with fans. After all, that's all that could have hurt Zelda II, the big shift in gameplay perspective. But we are already avoiding the gameplay factor, because quite a few DKJB "haters" admit to quite liking the game, just not the lack of characters. And then you have to admit Super Mario 64 isn't really a Mario game because it wasn't 2D, etc. etc.
And we go round and round in a totally ludicrous circle with no answer because an answer cannot exist. I feel like I'm arguing with people who are arguing with themselves, and my head hurts.
|
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Nov 17, 2008 9:13:11 GMT -5
And we go round and round in a totally ludicrous circle with no answer because an answer cannot exist. I feel like I'm arguing with people who are arguing with themselves, and my head hurts. I feel your pain. |
|
|
|
Post by Sqrt2 on Nov 17, 2008 9:42:10 GMT -5
The lack of DKC characters/references wasn't the main bugbear for me to be honest. It was the control scheme. But now that it's being released with a wiimote control scheme, I might actually get this (as long as they don't expect me to pay the same price as a full-price Wii game). ;D I'm still hoping for a DKC/DK64-esque DK game for the future, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Wildcat on Nov 17, 2008 10:32:47 GMT -5
Never said I was on board with erikaston. I just felt at the time that he presented a solid enough rebuttal that made more sense than what was presented before. Again, more valid points on your reply, Fry. I'll see how the argument goes from here, I guess, before I reply again...because I don't have much else to add at the moment. XD
|
|
|
|
Post by Manspeed on Nov 17, 2008 18:30:28 GMT -5
It really isn't. It just has Diddy in it. If anything, it's a represention of the general Rareware "brand", given that it's also tied to Banjo and Conker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Nov 17, 2008 19:40:38 GMT -5
Wait, what? I don't disagree with you Erikston, but why is everyone suddenly on board when your argument is a much clearer version of what's been argued already? I'm not 'on board' with the argument, I just acknowledge it is the strongest argument for 'that' side, as, as you've already said, its much clearer. The brand argument he made does, for example, give Diddy Kong Racing an 'out', as it is argued that, entirely based on name, 'Diddy Kong' is different to 'Donkey Kong' and so its okay to have different things. Now, of course, its a flawed argument, as the brand 'Donkey Kong' has changed significantly before, and also because everyone is going to associate a 'Diddy Kong' brand with a 'Donkey Kong' brand anyway. But at the very least, it presents an argument that isn't reliant on annoying fanboy terms like 'universe' and 'canon'. |
|
|
|
Post by Manspeed on Nov 17, 2008 21:02:28 GMT -5
I really don't know why I didn't think of the term 'brand' earlier. All I could think of was 'series' and 'franchise'.  |
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Nov 17, 2008 21:30:06 GMT -5
Like a different word means anything anyway. It's the same argument with different words.
What was said before is being said again only with marketing terms.
I swear a lot of you only understand gameplay mechanics and marketing. You're like calculators. No art.
|
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Nov 17, 2008 22:07:17 GMT -5
I swear a lot of you only understand gameplay mechanics and marketing. You're like calculators. No art. So, you're saying gameplay and marketing don't matter? I guess that's why all those movie games sell so well. |
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Nov 17, 2008 22:16:01 GMT -5
Its not that we don't understand the concept of 'characters', its just that pretty much every time you discuss whether a character should be in or not in a game its subjective and opinionated. A good argument on gameplay mechanics would discuss whether they work, whether its appealing for a particular audience, etc, etc. A good argument on marketing would be much the same. The best possible argument on characters? "hey dudes diddy should be in this game cos hes teh coolest" "na hes not and he shouldnt be in" "ya huh" "uh uh".
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Nov 17, 2008 22:46:05 GMT -5
So, you're saying gameplay and marketing don't matter? Absolutely not. I'm simply saying that most people here care more about those factors, and very little on story and characters. |
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Nov 18, 2008 5:18:02 GMT -5
I play games for gameplay. I play games for the challenge. Developers strive for unique and innovative gameplay.
Developers also strive for popular and unique IP, and I am totally on-board with that. But new IP should open up avenues for you, not limit you. The bongos were a unique piece of branding, tied directly into the Donkey Kong series. The gameplay could have been achieved with other characters, sure - but the feeling of throwing a giant ape through the air and pummelling enemy Kongs wasn't just window dressing - it was exhilarating in its own right. Without Donkey Kong in the lead, Jungle Beat just wouldn't have felt like that same combination of weight and grace.
But adding in other stuff for the hell of it? Would having Diddy trailing behind you help at all? Would switching one animal buddy for another help at all? Maybe it would have been just as exhilarating to ride down the snowy mountainside with Rambi, but I enjoyed riding that giant mountain goat just as much - and now I have a bunch of new animal buddies I hope to see used again in future games.
Donkey Kong Country completely reset the Donkey Kong franchise. It tore down most ties with the arcade series, introduced a bunch of new characters, etc. etc. Seriously though - Rare could have stopped being so "original" and used Donkey Kong and DK Junior instead of bringing in Diddy. They could have thrown in some girder stages. Why did they introduce Necky when they could have used Nitpicker? Why Klaptrap when they had Snapjaw?
You say you love the characters... but you don't. You love this tiny little group of characters and are completely closed off to any new characters being introduced to the franchise now Rare's not involved. What if Jungle Beat characters start showing up in future instalments of the main series? Will you warm to them then? I actually thought most of the character/enemy designs in DK64 were terrible, and does anyone like the character designs in Barrel Blast? Are they worse or better than the ones in Jungle Beat?
I really don't know what you're doing, Koopaul. You seem to have argued yourself into a corner, but you're still fighting away! You seem to assume you're the only person who loves the Donkey Kong series and characters, even though we've probably proven by now that your closed-minded attitude to the series qualifies you as a Rare fanboy rather than a DK fanboy.
|
|
