are autistics more interested in super mario?

Post Reply New Topic

Lol. Generic Wargame X? That's actually a pretty good name for what seems to sell really well these days. I like variety in my games though. I don't play generic, bland fps that have no effort or creativity put into them. Thankfully, that filth is nowhere near my collection. That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy older shooters, or games like Bioshock that deviate from the unbelievably hackneyed norm, but I've never owned a single CoD, and I'm proud to admit it. It's games like that, which are to blame for stagnation in gaming. I like it when game companies take risks, and put effort into their products, instead of the same old garbage that has flooded the market. I enjoy a variety of genres, but I own very few modern fps. I certainly wouldn't be content playing the same thing over and over again. I guess I just never understood the common mindset this gen.

Anyways, as far as I know, there's no correlation between autism and liking the Mario games. Mario's easily one of the most iconic videogame characters of all time. I love Mario games actually. They're never too difficult, but can be pretty challenging to complete 100%(get all stars, coins, etc). I do it every time, and though it takes a while, I know I'm getting my money's worth.

Zelda and Metroid are also overused. They'll probably continue to make games for that series until the end of time. Just like Mario. Just like Pokemon.

I think to be fair to all of these games... they're still good. I tend not to play many of them but whenever I've tried a Call of Duty or a Mario or anything like that they've been very good games. It's unfortunate that sequels and rehashes have swamped the market but nobody has to play them.

If I don't want 500 CoD games or generic shooters, I only have to play one of them. And that will satisfy. Fortunately there are few games out there that try to do things a bit differently, either with a heavy focus on story or a new take on gameplay. One that caught my attention recently was The Darkness 2. I never played the original but it's a mix of standard FPS and a whole bunch of supernatural powers. The developers look like they've really put in the effort to make the powers and FPS compliment each other. You guys should look it up on youtube if you're interested.

"GoldenEye 007: Reloaded" is a FPS made by Activision. It has graphics and gameplay VERY similar to Call of Duty. But I've heard very little about it since it doesn't have "Call of Duty" in the game title. If it did people would have been lining up outside Gamestop and Best Buy stores on the day of its release.

Why would it garner a lot of interest if it's just a Call of Duty ripoff? You expect something to be successful just because it copies another games formula? If you see two similar products you go for the more safer bet. The popular one. Especially if you're interested in the online play. It's common sense.

Goldeneye 007 was extremely popular on the N64.

I don't think there's anything wrong with sequels if they keep moving the series in new and interesting directions. New games altogether can be creative, but just as often they can be ripoffs as well and introduce nothing new. The problem I have with games like Call of Duty is that none of them ever stray from what is considered "safe". Not that other series are completely exempt from this; I found Zelda: Twilight Princess to be quite a bit of a sell out(I'm sure there are those that will disagree with me). Overall, though, I feel that Nintendo has been the most innovative lately when it comes to gameplay design.

That was a long time ago. The newer one seemed like a cheap movie tie-in sort of thing. Besides, doesn't even compare to the popularity of CoD these days.

@Boxman108: Nintendo? Really? I can't think of anything they've done lately that could be described as innovative.

I don't mind going over to my cousin's house, and playing CoD online with him, since we can do splitscreen and both join the same match. We can talk while we play it, and have a good time. Online matchmaking by itself just doesn't do it for me. I always thought that social bonding was the point of multiplayer. If I play with a bunch of random people online, I just don't get that, so it defeats the whole purpose for me. Another message board I frequent hosts Uncharted 3 Game Nights, and I like going to those, because I can connect with my message board friends, even though we usually end up doing matchmaking together. I'll never play Uncharted 3 online, by myself. Unlike the Uncharted games though, CoD has a terrible single player mode, which makes it worthless to me. In fact, I'd call it the most overrated series this gen.



I agree that sequels should keep expanding the horizons of a series, rather than playing it safe. I wouldn't call Ninty the most innovative in game design lately, unless you're a fan of motion controls(I'm not). I think Sony's first party studios are taking the most risks to provide new and unique IPs. But, I respect Ninty for a different reason. They have found the perfect balance between tradition and modernization with their long established IPs. Another problem of this gen, is that devs of existing series often try to take a series in a radically new direction simply to cash in on popular market trends, when the existing formula for said series might have worked just fine. If you look at a series like Resident Evil, I'm sure you wouldn't be surprised that a lot of fans were unhappy with RE5, and have their doubts about RE6.

However, Ninty has never compromised its formula for Mario or Zelda to try and cash in on what's popular. They know what their fans have always liked, and they know what has worked for a very long time now. They don't throw all that away like yesterday's trash. They honor it, and build on it. They add little touches to the formula to keep it fresh, and appealing to a modern audience, but its core has remained the same. That's why you see plenty of elements of classic Mario games in the 3d ones. That doesn't mean the series isn't evolving. Super Mario Galaxy is a fine example of how to change just enough that we feel like we're playing a whole new game, while staying true to the series's roots. If you look at the Zelda series, they change up the art, the setting, the story, and a bunch of other things at least once a gen, but there are a lot of elements that Zelda fans can always expect to be there. Ninty of course realizes that they aren't going to outdo themselves every time they release a new game, but at worst, they can release a game that's kind of meh compared to other games in one of their series, but still enjoyable to play. That's not to say they haven't ever outdone themselves, and most Mario and Zelda games are at least good. Nintendo's a company that's evolving too. They're just not sellouts like many other major companies, and for that, I salute them.

I would say that as far as software goes, both Super Mario Galaxy and Skyward Sword have been very creative, though admittedly very specific to their series' rather than to their genres as a whole. Motion controls, liked or not, seemed to have made just enough of an impact to get Sony and Microsoft on board with their own Moe and Kinect. I don't have as much to say about the WiiU's tablet controller, as it's already been done with all the new phones and 3DS, but at the very least it's the first to be done on a console and seems to be a compromise for those who don't favor motion controls.

The motion controls have largely been a gimmick. There aren't many games that have used it and used it well. A couple of good ones did come out recently though, such as Skyward Sword (though in that case the controls weren't even really necessary). The motion controls have been a colossal failure on the PS3 and 360.

I'm interested to see what the Wii U controller will be like but it's just another gimmick. It doesn't really add anything significant to playing a game. It's hardly innovative.

I'm probably mild aspergers or related, and love the good Super Mario Bros. games, but I wouldn't THINK it would be related to the autism spectrum disorder at all...but what do I know

Most big COD fans probably don't know how similar Goldeneye Reloaded is anyways. They think they have to wait for a year or two for another COD game when there already is one(sort of).

The only major difference I saw is you complete some of the mission objectives with a smartphone like hacking computers and taking intelligence photos.

Ironically I had the same problem with that Goldeneye game as I did with Nightfire, also by Eurocom. They were both pretty good games, but in both the end of the game wasy WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too hard.

I liked the previous Bond game better by...Treiarch or whatever their name is. Could actually finish that, and it seemed much better all around. Of course it was designed around modern hardware which helps too, but still, it just seemed better and was easier too.

I had to play through Goldeneye Reloaded on hard(007) difficulty. Otherwise, I wouldn't earn any PSN trophies for completing all the mission objectives in each area or getting through the game.

Oh man, I would have played that on the easiest setting, and still couldn't finish the final boss. Was okay up until then I think. Actually I don't know for SURE it was the final boss...

I played it on the Wii. Would have gotten the current gen version, but I bought it in 2010 before there was one. It was the first and only FPS on the Wii I genuinely wanted (and thankfully it supports the classic controller so it played just fine-silky smooth like you'd expect).