Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The downfall of National Geographic

jjpryor.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 121 posts

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#101

Post by hospitalJail »

pharrington wrote: post #88
hospitalJail wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a strong claim. Especially when Nintendo marketed to us as a child. We might just be accepting it because we have nostalgia for the characters. I remember people saying TP was the greatest game of all time. That aged poorly too.

The strong claim is that I, and most people, actually enjoy what we say we enjoy? That is dangerous levels of cynicism.

Yes. You might be enjoying it due to deep seated nostalgia developed from Nintendo marketing to us as children.

I don't know why I play every Zelda game. I feel the compulsion to do so.

I didn't even like BOTW but I felt the need to beat it.

Look at people's obsession with Disney, the grown adults who go to disney like its their job have some sort of mental illness, why is it so hard to think that Nintendo didn't do something similar? They both market primarily to children, who have no concept of corporate mascots.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#102

Post by JohnFen »

jimmychoozyx wrote: post #99
JohnFen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Traditional media has become replaced by Social media But there is nothing that I've seen that fills the niche that NG filled at all. If you just want a shallow look at another place, then yes, there is plenty of that online. But that wasn't NG's thing. It's not just NG. We have lost quite a lot of really valuable things, never to be replaced with anything comparable.

I'd argue that Vice News's website-news articles partially filled the void of NG, with their travel adventure content. It was basically the web-form of a magazine.

Could be! I'm not familiar with their travel-adventure stories.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#103

Post by ghaff »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #63
g8oz wrote: post #8

"...And at the same time, the group that started the magazine, the National Geographic Society, which used to run on a budget of millions, now has 1.6 billion dollars in its piggy bank." What on earth are they doing as a non profit to justify keeping that stash safe from taxation?

I think savings like this are typically used as an endowment? they can hold on to it and operate off of the interest (would love if someone can confirm/deny this).

That's what I would assume. Also, while significant, $1.6B wouldn't put it especially near any of the top US university endowments.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#104

Post by moolcool »

hospitalJail wrote: post #101
pharrington wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strong claim is that I, and most people, actually enjoy what we say we enjoy? That is dangerous levels of cynicism.

Yes. You might be enjoying it due to deep seated nostalgia developed from Nintendo marketing to us as children. I don't know why I play every Zelda game. I feel the compulsion to do so. I didn't even like BOTW but I felt the need to beat it. Look at people's obsession with Disney, the grown adults who go to disney like its their job have some sort of mental illness, why is it so hard to think that Nintendo didn't do…

If nostalgia is as powerful as you say, why are new sonic games so unpopular? Also, I loved BOTW, but I never played any Zelda games as a kid.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#105

Post by pharrington »

hospitalJail wrote: post #101
pharrington wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strong claim is that I, and most people, actually enjoy what we say we enjoy? That is dangerous levels of cynicism.

Yes. You might be enjoying it due to deep seated nostalgia developed from Nintendo marketing to us as children. I don't know why I play every Zelda game. I feel the compulsion to do so. I didn't even like BOTW but I felt the need to beat it. Look at people's obsession with Disney, the grown adults who go to disney like its their job have some sort of mental illness, why is it so hard to think that Nintendo didn't do…

Speak for yourself then. I liked BotW so much that the first time I beat it (going to Hyrule Castle after only doing 2 Divine Beasts because I wanted to see how good the equipment there was that the side characters were talking about), I immediately replayed the Ganon fight and went back to playing the rest of the game for its own sake. At this point I have over 600 hours in it, and still haven't even done all the side quests since I have so much fun just exploring Hyrule and finding different ways to kills mobs.

TotK jacks up the gameplay creativity to an entirely new level, and has the strong driving story that alot of people complained was missing from BotW. There's also a TON more to explore, which I won't elaborate on to avoid spoilers.

The only 3D Zelda I played before BotW was OoT. I'm enjoying the games on their own terms.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#106

Post by cagenut »

jimmychoozyx wrote: post #99
JohnFen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Traditional media has become replaced by Social media But there is nothing that I've seen that fills the niche that NG filled at all. If you just want a shallow look at another place, then yes, there is plenty of that online. But that wasn't NG's thing. It's not just NG. We have lost quite a lot of really valuable things, never to be replaced with anything comparable.

I'd argue that Vice News's website-news articles partially filled the void of NG, with their travel adventure content. It was basically the web-form of a magazine.

vice that just declared bankruptcy after torching a billion in VC to fill that void. the void is back.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#107

Post by Kye »

moolcool wrote: post #51
hospitalJail wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the larger organization, there are microcosms inside each company.

But OOT was a AAA title already, and there were already several wildly successful Zelda games before OOT too. There's so many reasons why Zelda is, if anything, a counterexample to this phenomenon.

I wondered about that line too. As big a hit as OOT was, it just barely beats LTTP once all the re-releases are considered. The original NES game was comparable. Link's Awakening (1993) stopped just short of 10 million, beating them all.

Then there's Breath of the Wild (2017) running laps around them at 30 million. The sequel just came out and it's already at 10 as of numbers released in the first week.

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#109

Post by Kye »

HelloMcFly wrote: post #82
hospitalJail wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the two most-recent Legend of Zelda games are the two best that have ever been made. Idk man, I glanced at /truezelda the other day and it seems like TotK has ruined BOTW for people. I was already disenchanted about 20 hours into BOTW, climbing yet another green hill to see another green hill with the same enemies as the last hill. I did beat the game with 70 or 80 shrines. I dread shrines. I admittedly played every…

I don't think a place like /truezelda would capture common sentiment, do you? This is a place where there will be stronger opinions, more engagement, and more nostalgia too. At any rate, I don't own a Switch, I've only played the games with my nephew. I'm only observing the commentary I see from friends and family around me, and the less Nintendo-dedicated reaction. Side note: have you played Tunic? You may like that…

Lenna's Inception, too.

https://lennasinception.com/

Re: The downfall of National Geographic

#110

Post by chinchilla2020 »

ghaff wrote: post #89
lachlan_gray wrote: post #54

I found a heap of their magazines from the 60’s and 70’s in the recycling at my university, and boy are they a good read. I think one reason they used to be so good (speculating) was that the internet didn’t exist. It was a medium where you could regularly learn out about distant things like peculiar mountain goats or an arctic tribe and get a firsthand report of it. Now there’s no shortage of interesting things like…

The internet didn't exist and travel, perhaps especially exotic/adventure travel, was a much more rarified thing--so National Geographic was this window into a world that the vast majority of people would never encounter anywhere else.

exotic/adventure travel is even more rare nowadays. The rise of social media has funneled most travelers towards a few high-infrastructure hotspots like Bali, Yellowstone, and Barcelona. Historically, travel was performed much more 'blind', rather than following the internet-registered locations and reviews.
Post reply on HN