Summary:
Simply put, I suggested I may be reading it wrong giving the implication you should basically correct me if I was wrong. Instead of a post totally giving me conformation of if I was right or wrong I get a useless explanation (to me at least) on how games are planned. I reply basically saying that does not support what I believe you were saying and was completely off basis of what was being said. You then reply to what comes off sort of like a possible smug like retort for not reading and as if it was not worth the time as you knew what I was saying already making it not worth the time. I reply with a sort of, "whatever" kind of reply implying it is still off base a bit with an extended revamp of what I was saying expanding on a portion of your post. Also adding in a comment of a, "Why bother making canned messages. When you can just edit your post to be clear so you don't have to constantly post again. Considering posts are keyed out in terms of skim reading" (Not in those exact words, but basically the meaning behind it was that). The conversation continues to loop and becomes utterly pointless to me as you seemed to be deluded off of what was originally said turn it all into a super cluster furk of nothingness for both ends.
Nothing more needs to be said on this as it keeps looping and I am yet looping again to explain what I was saying throughout this whole silly episode of posts. That and we sort of covered it in ways already.
Here's my review:
OP:
Nintendoland couldn't have taken that long to make.
NintendoLand has been in development for a long time. Believe it or not, it's an original idea and those take a while to plan and make.
Graphic-heavy games are actually less time-intensive, as you can have graphic artists working on the textures while making the game code, halving the time.
-Nintendoland in development a long time.
-it is an original idea, which needed various stages of planning to go into it.
-graphic-heavy games take less time to make, because artists are working on the art while the developers are planning and coding.
I believe I am reading what your trying to say right. Though no, just no. You're wrong in so many ways. Art is still art and is put out on another person unless it is indie regardless. The only time anything would be more time consuming in terms of coding would be if your just telling the hardware to light up the screen with little bland Atari style sprites. Because you're having to tell the machine in which area of all those pixels on screen the location you want it to light up. As far as graphical models and imagery, skins, and/or textures that are designed are still needed to be coded in. They have to be told how to move, and the overall be coded to act in the overall physics engine designed for the games world. In the long run a more graphical game takes more time to code out due to the complexity of the harder physics engine coding. Yet no one seems to hardly make their own engines anymore so less time consuming on that end. Either Unreal, Havok, or whatever used with a little spit, blood, and bubble gum to patch it all up to fit in whatever little tweaking is needed on the engines. (You still need a backbone engine for a 2D game and they are sold & bought too for these types of games. Not saying other wise, but 3D is more complex and time consuming to make. Also, yeah I know some of the 3D modeling/animation style software out there does bundles some movement coding inside the model files. Yet just because it is animated does not mean the game coding does not have to call upon something for it to move or even display the images needing to be rendered on the screen).
As for original games, sure it may be longer in terms if they coded out a new game engine. Yet in terms of the time needed all depends on the skill of the staff in terms of coding, team size, reasonable noting, budget, et cetera. This is not an indie developer we are talking about. They plan stuff out, give the teams the say so in what they need to accomplish and they do it. Not like their sitting around in some basement or whatever building the game they way they want it to the dot. As my point being they don't have free control over the outcome as some higher up is wanting it a planned way, so it could come out quicker, slower, or the same time as an none original IP. (Specially if not using their own original game engine). Not saying a small add in or change can not happen, but your not going to see something like, "Lets change the games story or add one" on some bloody whim. (Oh and I am not saying they should rush stuff either. Even if they are some crazy awesome code monkeys).
-i am wrong
-art is art, will never be done by the coder.
-code is only more time consuming is when trying to use low-level things
-need to code in movement etc.
-engines control movement etc.
-movement etc. control in engines not good enough
-original games only take longer when they need a new engine(, or come out on a brand new console with a brand new controller)
Planning, it occurs before you put your fingers on the keyboard.
http://en.wikipedia....ationship_model is one of the more popular ways of planning a software title.
-i think i was trying to say that all you said about the programming is moot since the planning is what i was referring to in this particular case: nintendoland.
O Rly? As the kids say. Guess you missed the point of my second paragraph. Yet if you wish yes you can even pseudocode it up for the outline of the program. Though that was not exactly the overall point............
-pseudocode is good enough
Honestly didn't read your post, I just knew one of you would find some complaint with what I said, so I had that reply ready. Don't want to argue it because it's down to each individual game, not as simple as I put it.
-admitting to it not being as simple as put for all games.
Uhuh...... 
There is this thing called an edit button is this was so called to be true. Easily changing what you said without taking your time to have to write out this supposed canned message....
Depends on the game? It is ultimately the same in the end in terms of the 3D functionality. Only thing that makes the coding any longer would be the amount of content thrown into the game such as armor, weapons, et cetera. Yet usually a smart programmer just copies and pastes things if the so called new item needs say a new if statement, switch case, and/or arrays are needed & of course which is more efficient at the so called given time. (Given you can do the same things multiple ways. Even if the code is not as refined. Of course that is not good to extend it on forever). Then just toggle the entry values to whatever is needed and boom done. Only need an artist to make the texture change so the programmer can call in the files needed to be displayed. Of course what I am saying makes it sound much smaller of a job with your Wikipedia diploma, and regardless of how refined the code is we are still talking thousands of line of code & tons of multiple files all being called here and there without each file to then in turn be called into your file which consists your main();. Anyway....
-edit your message so you don't have to defend your stance on something
-all 3d games have the same development time
-only way a game takes longer to make is if you have many items to put numbers in for, which can be avoided by copy and pasting.
-wikipedia diploma
-thousands of lines of codes
-changes in texture need programmer involvement(?)
meow!
I didn't edit because it's true. Nintendoland was in development for a long time. The person I was talking at implied it took 5 seconds to make.
I figured she was just saying because it doesn't have super multi hyper global extrapolas texture it took no time to do, which I think is wrong.
-no edit because felt it was still true in this case.
-assumption about op
LOL I am not arguing that the game was in development for a long time. Where do you pull this crap from? Because my original disagreement with you was aimed at the fact you are stating because a game is 3D is is less time consuming to develop because of an art team. In the end 2D & 3D imagery are composed by artist unless we are not wanting a game to look like something from Atari. Making the crazy binary strings to talk to the hardware to light up little pixels on the screen. 3D world games require higher grade physics programming making the coding much more complex while 2D worlds are less complex to code in as they are linear making things less complex to develop. Which I composed my post also saying of course this could be bought and just modified a bit. Being as engines are sold all the time. Hell, I even stated I may be reading your post incorrectly to some degree, but you never even refuted said claim. Instead you turn it into some how leading to explaining to someone of longevity avoiding what was overall said.....
Java scripting and coding using those web design languages are we. I mock you in this extent because you say one thing and contradict the other things you say. That or just completely ignore the fact of what is said and sort of phase it into something completely off of the topic at hand with no disregard as possibly being invalid usually with some kind of retort. Oh and I am not going to say I am this amazing programmer that is so godly better than another. Yet, I am skilled in multiple languages other than the standard C++ (edit: standard for most game design. Unless we are talking possible mobile games which can be Java and not scripting) and from how I read most of all your stuff it sounds like complete moot. (Oh and yeah, I will say in advance I have noticed I have said some much more sharp tongue things the last couple of posts. Happens sometimes upon no sleep for a few days and will say I take responsibility for said actions in regards if I did misread something. However, I still stand by what I am reading at the time as contradictory, misleading, uneducated in said topics, oblivious, and et cetera from my understanding via reading of your said posts.
If they have said store for DLC in game I was unaware of this. If true and transactions are made via an in-game purchase not from said eShop I find Nintendo to be idiotic. As they are basically opening the door to a more none controlled flow of media and money lose in terms of business of electrical goods. Which I suppose Nintendo can not really be prompted on their logic in terms of third party or online distribution as they fail at both. Also, yes I was insisting the such on the such of an application via Nintendo as it would need approval in terms to get put in the eShop and possibly a form of said agreements upon said usage if smart. Surely you do not imply I suggested that Nintendo have no control over what is displayed in their own shop without some details included. Oh and I also original stated that you were not really correct on the fact that you stated a firmware upgrade was needed towards development of a Origin third party store to be made and placed on the eShop. Being as that is how your said post read, but of course some how that changed into more moot saying, "Nintendo allows micro transactions"......... Well no duh.
It seems to me every time I respond it either is not read or some how simplified into another matter that is completely off base of what is being said. Considering has reoccurred multiple times I honestly am to impatient and tired to even bother carrying on a one way conversation leading in loops. I can find my infinite loops in programming thank you very much.
-not arguing about nintendoland taking time to make
-original argument = 3d games take less time to make(don't know where you got that from, I'm sorry for making it seem like I said that, all games take at least 2 years to make, and should really take more imo if they have any hope of being good games)
-2d is simpler (again not sure how this came up, maybe it was the NSMBU mention?)
-i only do javascript, and various web languages. (only web language i like is php
because it was free when i learned it)
-i contradict myself
-bend what you say or ignore it.
I was, when you said I was wrong.
So you're saying you quoted me to talk about something unrelated to what I said?
Sorry for the confusion.
I didn't mean to say an art team makes things go faster.
What I meant is if you have a dedicated team for the art, you're going to be able to have the art being done at the same time as the programming of gameplay.
I assumed possibly wrongly that the person I quoted was simply saying because nintendoland looks simple, it took no time to make.
I was saying just because it's non got superduper texture art work, it probably still took a long time to make.
New ideas take longer to make than a call of duty every year.
watchdogs was 2 years in the making at e3 2012.
a new cod comes out every 2 years.
That's probably a poor example too, but I'm not trying to say what I say is right, I'm just throwing up some anecdotal evidence to support my text.
Yeah I do oversimplify things, because nobody wants to read technical babble, and I want to write it even less so.
-restating i was talking about nintendoland taking more than 3 seconds to make
-art being made at the same time as plans, codes, etc.
