Nintendo Fanbase Stupidity General - Rants on the explosive fanbase

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Does Nintendo have a bad fanbase

  • Yes

    Votes: 915 93.2%
  • No

    Votes: 67 6.8%

  • Total voters
    982
I'm just saying, I can't understand anyone who would be scared of Sonic going mostly gameplay again after I played Adventure 2 and saw cutscenes from the 2006 game.

Shit looked dumb as fuck and not worth the effort of caring about.
Have you played Mania? It had like an animated Intro and an ending. It was the best sonic game since the 32X.
 
Zelda theorists are dumbasses. Not only did Nintendo make it obvious BotW has references to all games and timeliness but they flat out said they wanted to avoid all timeliness shit by putting it so far in the future.

All the old games are obviously legends and fables in the world BotW takes place in.

Timeline and Canon autists are the worst thing to happen to Zelda. These story obsessed faggots are very out of place with Nintendo they should play Sony shit.
Though I will say that one big mistake Nintendo had made was even answering that one question asking if BOTW takes place after Ocarina, because if they really wanted to truly ignore the timeline, not giving a definitive answer on that is one of the first places to start. Far in the future it may be, but they still somewhat gave it a 'time.'

What I'm thinking with Nintendo however is that they opted to use the 'legends and fables' for the older games because they are probably going to want the freedom to retcon stuff in the future soon. They've done it before- obvious Christian symbolism from the first game got made up to mean something else, the Silver Arrows being the only things that could kill Ganon got replaced by Light Arrows, and the Master Sword with it's multiple origin stories replaced the Silver and Light Arrows as the thing that could finish off Ganon. 'Legends and Fables' gives them an opening to ditch whatever they feel like, over trying to work through Zelda's fossilized history.



I think Nintendo threw these storyfags and canon hags a bone when it gave them the Hyrule Historia. Unfortunately it made them expect Nintendo to cater to this timeline crap when all it really likely was, was to get these people off their back. It also means they will insist on treating all of the games as literal set-in-stone history that actually 'happened' despite enough of the games declaring that from an in-universe perspective, the Hyrulian people considered the older games' events to be myths, tales, and legends.
 
That's exactly what a Sonic game story should be IMO.
People keep confusing killing a big bad as a story, that's the game objective.

Starting from point A and going to point B to kill C isn't a story. You're progressing through the stages of the game, that's not a narrative structure that a written story or a script uses.
 
Zelda theorists are dumbasses. Not only did Nintendo make it obvious BotW has references to all games and timeliness but they flat out said they wanted to avoid all timeliness shit by putting it so far in the future.

All the old games are obviously legends and fables in the world BotW takes place in.

Timeline and Canon autists are the worst thing to happen to Zelda. These story obsessed faggots are very out of place with Nintendo they should play Sony shit.
Agreed 100%

I've played nearly every mainline Zelda game around the time it was released since SNES(Besides Skyward Sword because I hate motion controls). Let me tell you, if your top concern was where it falls in the timeline all those years, there might legit be something wrong with you that you need to get checked out. Like you may be on the spectrum. I'm not just saying that as a joke, like, if you can't enjoy the games and not think of the timeline, you might be autistic.
 
Last edited:
Though I will say that one big mistake Nintendo had made was even answering that one question asking if BOTW takes place after Ocarina, because if they really wanted to truly ignore the timeline, not giving a definitive answer on that is one of the first places to start. Far in the future it may be, but they still somewhat gave it a 'time.'
Nintendo: "This game takes place 10,000 (or whatever, I don't remember) years after all the other games.
Retards: "But does it take place after Ocarina of Time?"
Nintendo: https://youtu.be/TEoTQB7h3NQ

Zelda hardcores are legit toddlers and retards if this was a legitimate question asked.
 
Nintendo: "This game takes place 10,000 (or whatever, I don't remember) years after all the other games.
Retards: "But does it take place after Ocarina of Time?"
Nintendo: https://youtu.be/TEoTQB7h3NQ

Zelda hardcores are legit toddlers and retards if this was a legitimate question asked.

Yep, it was. This even has a link to that interview.
 
I'm waiting for BOTW2. What's annoying though are all the new theory videos that are trying desperately to to tie this game directly to Ocarina, despite it looking more like it has much more stronger ties to Skyward Sword.

Floating Castle? Must be somehow linked to Ocarina.
Possible time travel? Must be tied to Ocarina.
Spirit Hand? Through convoluted logic and heavy wishful thinking- Ancient Glowy hand ->Ancient Hero->Spirit of the Hero-> The Hero of Time must be involved somehow!

Even though this game has floating islands hiiiiigh above the clouds, a robot that looks like it could easily fit both BOTW and Skyward Sword, and somewhat Skyward Sword-esc time-shifting abilities by the Glowy Hand. Even a possibility of traveling 10,000 years back into the past, which fits more with Skyward Sword's traveling back towards it's ancient times that were thousands of years into the past rather then a mere seven years like in Ocarina.

It wouldn't be as annoying if these types of people didn't show that they always have a perpetual hardboner for this one Zelda game from their childhoods. They always go back to this game being 'revolutionary' for Zelda even though the only 'revolutionary' thing it really did was rehash the plot from A Link to the Past and make it 3D. Even the 3D was weak, we had Quake I and II, and Half-Life that were already out by then, and they still did 3D way better.
And of course the most likely answer, time travel is in because it is fun, just like both Zora and Ritu are in, because they are fun, koroks are in because they are fun.

It's also vastly inferior to Divinity Original Sin 2.

If you want a turn based SRPG, get DOS2.
For PC. Get DOS2 for PC, console controls just can't compare.
 
I've always considered Zelda games to be entirely their own thing, like different dimensions.
The need to make everything part of some continuity seems really silly
 
Well, you wouldn't be too far off the mark, since most of them (except for Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks) are self-contained.
Phantom Hourglass and Spirit tracks
OOT and MM
Legend of Zelda and Adventures of link
Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons
Link to the Past and Link Between Worlds

There's yet to be an actual trilogy in having games be connected.
 
It's a different era entirely and also a different graphic style.
You go down to sunken Hyrule, which was the OoT Hyrule, see the statue of Link that they build and have a big fight in whatever the church building in OoT was called. The games were definitely connected, regardless of graphic style.

You can also say that Link's Awakening was linked to LttP. No clue on Link Between Worlds, I didn't play it.
 
You go down to sunken Hyrule, which was the OoT Hyrule, see the statue of Link that they build and have a big fight in whatever the church building in OoT was called. The games were definitely connected, regardless of graphic style.

You can also say that Link's Awakening was linked to LttP. No clue on Link Between Worlds, I didn't play it.
Temple of time in WW was not the same temple of time from OOT.
 
Back
Top Bottom