Why are sequels and spinoffs called 'rehashes' when Nintendo makes them?

Why are sequels and spinoffs called 'rehashes' when Nintendo makes them?

bump

This literally xenoverse 2 tier of sequel

Because people are angry and hate Nintendo, while still wanting their IP's for their amazing PS4 Pro.

Dude nothing they added is deserving of a brand new game, this is all dlc tier shit, it's the exact same engine with no really upgrade in quality.

This is worst then yearly cod.

That's understandable. Nintendo are the worst when it comes to hardware.

Because it's basically Splatoon: Championship Edition

>nothing they added is deserving of a brand new game
You mean apart from the fact that it's on an entirely different system?

LAN and Spectator mode are pretty nice.

>different hub
>different clothes
>different weapons
>different supers
>different graphics
>different controls
>different single player campaign
other then that its pretty similar :)

You're aware it's got an entirely new hub, entirely new single player campaign, entirely new specials across the board as well as new maps and new mechanics for pre-existing weapons, as well as new weapon types and new customization options?

How exactly is this not worth a sequel? Because it reuses assets and engines? Something Nintendo has always done and so have numerous other game companies?

If the assets and engine ain't broke, why put the effort into making new ones when you can just build a newer and better iteration of the game instead?

>maruo
>mario spinoff
>sequel to spinoff
>sequel
>spinoff of spinoff
>luigi spinoff
>sequel to luigi spinoff
>mario rpg
>spinoff of mario rpg
>sequel
>sequel
>sequel
>mario sports spinoff
>sports spinoff
>sports spinoff
>sequel to sports spinoff


Rinse and repeat with zelda

WE GOT SO MANY EXCLUSIVES :P

Explain how it couldn't just be DLC.

Me and my friends have pretty regular kart / smash tournies where we meet up, drink and play vidya

and its nice

the switch and its sequels seem to offer that again

but more

its just a different audience to the sit at home alone crowd

to Sup Forums, if a sequel changes a lot, it ruins the series, regardless of how well the changes are implemented

And if a sequel just gives you more new material with only slight mechanics changes, it's a rehash

its a different console

I haven't seen anyone refer to Splatoon 2 as a rehash. In fact, it looks like they're going to change a lot for the worst.

it's a different console and they wanted to rebalance the game by changing or removing the old specials

the first game was centered around 3 or 4 extremely powerful specials, and those are all gone in this one

>expecting another single player campaign, hub, and just as many new specials for dlc
You're being unreasonable.

>change a lot for the worst
Such as... what, for instance?

explain how removing the Bubbler is a bad thing
>here have at least 10 free points on the objective senpai

splatoon 2 looks like rehash

metroid trilogy were actual sequels.

learn the difference.

Invincibility specials were sometimes necessary to regain lost map control. From what we have seen, Splatoon 2 has not fixed the shit snowbally map design of the first game.

Now DLC is okay?

>looks like rehash
Then you haven't been looking very much at all if you truly think that.

>let's change and remove old things across the board and add a shit tonne of new shit in its place, including new mechanics for old weapons that change how you use them

>IT'S A REHASH

Nigger Metroid Prime 2 and 3 look like they have the exact same gameplay as the first, the only difference is a change of setting and weaponry to a casual onlooker. It's only those that have played it or looked closer at them that can tell the subtle differences in progression structure and approach to puzzles and combat.

>new splatoon coming out
>r34 and r34 sfm is still mediocre as fuck

this is how we know nintendo is dying, nobody even wants to fap to their franchises anymore

But invincibility specials also let you snowball harder.

Honestly dude, I've come back on Walleye enough times to know you don't *need* the Bubbler or Kraken to retake areas, and I really hated panic buttons

>dlc is ok as long as nintendo isnt doing it

>I haven't seen anyone refer to Splatoon 2 as a rehash

I've seen it quite often referred to as looking like just an enhanced port, or being pretty much the exact same, wondering if it'll even bother to have a new single player mode. And this is from lucky faggots who got to play it in person.

Meanwhile non-retarded people can look at the trailer showing off all the new shit and see why it's a numbered sequel.

>it's paid DLC
people complaining about DLC being free for years then suddenly paid
>it's a new game
people complaining about Switch exclusivity and sequelitis

don't argue there is no winning with these fucks. people just can't admit Splatoon got lucky it was successful on a dying console and Nintendo wants a more refined version on a console that can support local multiplayer and will actually sell.

They weren't that difficult to deal with in all honesty. The instant startup was really annoying, though when every single non-echo special had startup lag.
The real evil is quick respawn and stealth jump.

Because Sup Forums is full of Sony fanboys who will never like anything Nintendo does

Look at GTA4 and 5, THATS a sequel.
The witcher 2 and 3 THATS a sequel

This is worse then annual cod tier.

Because the Wii U is fucking dead

>GTA4 and 5

Didn't they simplify the driving physics and AI to the point that the cops only need to tap your bumper to force your tires to turn?

They also removed going inside of buildings and made the multiplayer p2w garbage.

>Witcher 3

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're essentially invalidating 70% of sequels on the market then for not being different enough.

Literally of the content is different, with buttloads of new options and assets added on top of the pre-existing ones.

Just because the core gameplay and the underlying engine is the same doesn't make it any less of a sequel you fucking retard.