[@NekoMizu]
Fighting games are actually a great example of what I'm talking about. Big name ones like, say, Tekken, have pretty much recycled exactly the same one-dimensional mechanics for ages now, while some of the very unknown fighting games that came out in the last years (Chaos Code is a great example and one of the best fighting games I've ever seen) have very innovative and interesting combat styles for the characters, and one of the best fighting game series out there (Melty Blood) started out more or less as a doujin game. Several other fighting games have similar patterns of recycling gameplay, and only adding balance changes or mechanics when they're needed (to be fair, there's no point rebalancing something that isn't broken; chess would be terrible if people changed the rules after all this time), but they usually try to evolve their stories more than a lot of franchises I see out there. Tekken is an example of them not evolving it (I'll be fair, Tekken 6 was a bit more innovative story-wise, but that series really has just stagnated for over a decade now in terms of gameplay; interesting new fighting styles but the core gameplay of that game means everyone is pretty much the same anyway), and again it's big name. The same went for Soul Calibur until they brought out Soul Calibur V (best in the series, and as far as I'm concerned the best 3D fighting game period) and made all the fanboys cry because they were actually using imagination again (apparently fans don't like innovation).

The issue I mentioned with Nintendo is more of a problem with franchises that focus on the same protagonist each time, like Mario, Kirby, etc. Why bring out virtually the exact same game over and over again with slightly upgraded graphics (as far as I'm concerned, if a game is good it shouldn't matter if it's 8-Bit or 1500-Bit graphics)? It's less of a problem with, say, an RPG series that gives you a whole different set of characters or world each time, since at least then even if there's similar elements the plot will be different. I can understand them wanting to bring out a new Mario game for each console so the new gamers can play them, but 20 similar Mario games on a single console? That's just extortion as far as I'm concerned, unless they actually take the time to create a new plot, which only happens very occasionally (Paper Mario is probably one of the few Mario games with an interesting story, and that's mostly because Count Bleck was such a unique antagonist for Nintendo to try).

I could go into a video game developer rant here if I wanted, but then I'd need to start talking about DLC and all that wonderful business, so I'll hold that particular train wreck back for now. That's not even getting started with how fast they're bringing out new consoles before they even make the most of current ones. Seriously, who the fuck cares if the graphics on the next console are so good you can see the characters' nose hairs?

[quote=@ModeGone]
Charisma is neutral.  It can be good, getting people to agree to do something wonderful.  But... well...  There's plenty of examples of it being used poorly or horribly.
[/quote]
Well said. I'd like to think of myself as the type who uses charisma for good.

Yeah, there's a big problem with video games that come from the internet because the internet is largely flooded by a lot of very superficial and degenerate people who just want to troll things or bash them without any sort of understanding of what they're even talking about. This applies to games, and pretty much everything else as well. There's also the whole problem of a lot of big name companies having fans who think they can do no wrong and would more or less buy their shit even if it condoned the holocaust. These types of people flood the internet with negative views of pretty much anything that isn't whatever they're a fan of, which leads to people coming into something uninformed often just assuming the worst of a project before they even try it out.