Defending the Nintendo of 2012

Kirby

Both sides of this debate have valid points but I have to express my disappointment with Nintendo's first party line up for the Wii-U.

No new Mario game. NSMB wii u is not new. It's recycled in the extreme. It's no surpsie that the 3ds version looks and plays the same. Where is the next mario world, 64, sunshine, Galaxy? Those were fully fleshed out games. They had new mechanics and were must buys for the system. There is nothing on NSMB U that we haven't seen before.

No new Zelda either. Even on the horizon. I realise Skyward sword is only a year old but we should be hearing about the next one in some shape or form. We arent which leads me to believe we are two years away from seeing it. The history of Ocarina and Twilight Princess reveals would back this up.

No new Mario Kart. No new Metroid. No new Starfox. Where are the first party titles???? Pikmin 3 isn't even a launch title. It's coming down the line. I'm a huge Pikmin fan but it won't sell the console to the masses.

There is staggering your IP's strategically and then there is having nothing to show. It's obvious which one it is.

When I hear people refer to the launch line-up as "one of the best line-ups in history" it makes me want to facepalm. There is no system seller there and it's there own fault. A zombie game isn't going to get people queueing round the block no matter how good it is. People aren't going to latch onto nintendo land the same way they did with Wii sports.

There are a couple of interesting looking third party games, but they are risks. There is no risk with the IP's I mentioned when Nintendo makes the games for them. They are always quality. I won't be getting a Wii-U at launch. There just isn't enough reason to. I'm sure a year down the line I'll pick it up when the games start flowing.....but not now.

Mr.Saturn

I imagine a lot of those titles you mentioned are being kept in reserve to stir a sales spike at key points of the year, like Autumn and Christmas (or regional equivalents), or whenever an end-of-quarter conference is on the horizon, in order to have decent figures to bedazzles investors, or, at least, placate them.

Deano7788

I think the choice to go with New Super Mario U rather than a new 3D Mario is down to sales. The Galaxy games sold around 10 and 6.5 million copies respectively while New Super Mario Bros. (both DS and Wii versions) sold 26 million copies each. I think it's quite understandable why they went with the safer option at launch. I'm sure a 3D Mario is in development to some degree and I'll look forward to its arrival.

Kinski

The circle-pad on the 3DS actually takes up a lot of space under the hood, so there's a perfectly good reason why they didn't include a second one i.e. it would result in a bigger unit (and of course push up costs a little). And it really isn't needed; home console-style fare such as OoT and RE: Revelations might be among the best games currently on the system, but ultimately won't be the backbone of any handheld's success (just ask Sony how the PSVita is doing.)

But the WiiU looks to me a misstep. A second screen isn't innovative; it's rehashing an innovation that worked brilliantly on a handheld on a format (home console) to which it's not suited. And if motion controls are an idea with so much potential (as defenders would have it) then why are Nintendo themselves turning their back on them after one generation, in favour of a concept which, IMHO, seems unlikely to appeal much to either casuals or core gamers?

ShadowHearth

These threads make me really laugh.

Xbox thread - I am awesome and better then ps3
Ps3 thread - I am awesome and I am better then Xbox
Wii thread - I am console too!!!

johnny_ultimate

Nintendo haven't completely abandoned motion control (which, I should stress, complement existing control schemes rather than replace them, certainly in their wisest implementations - a motion controlled only future is not a pretty thought) - the Wii-U is still built with Wiimotes in mind. To me, the Gamepad seems destined to work best in unison with the Wiimote - the most exciting utilisation that has been teased so far is one player using the pad as a 'gamesmaster' wreaking havoc in multiplayer. I'm not sold on the Wii-U's longevity just yet, and I certainly agree Nintendo have done a poor job selling it thus far. But I still think there's a lot of interesting things possible if developers are imaginative enough, especially in single player where its uses are less certain.

Retr0gamer

The WiiU might have a poor launch line up but then every console does. At least the WiiU looks like it will have games worth playing unlike many consoles like the 360 and PS3 to name two which had nothing for a few months. As for not rolling out the big name IPs, we are getting NSMB which isone of nintendos biggest selling franchises and of course they won't roll them out at once, they take a while to develop and it's best to stagger these releases.

super_furry

I think people are downplaying the importance of graphics - especially in getting the top tier developers aboard. The Wii U is going to be on a par with the 360 and PS3 which are really showing their age now - especially when compared with the PC. This time next year the next generation of Sony and Microsoft's consoles will either be out or be imminent and the Wii U is going to look very outdated. It runs the same risk that the Dreamcast did of being caught in between generation and only seen as a half step towards what it the 'true' next gen.

Kinski

The Dreamcast was only "caught between" generations in the sense that Sony just lied about the power of the PS2. The failure of that console was a real loss to that whole generation. I'd wager that the WiiU is a lot more powerful than what the first batch of releases suggest, but will end up trailing well behind the PS720s of the future (but this is just my hunch.)

Retr0gamer

I still worry about the future of the WiiU, all is going to depend on this christmas really. If they get off to a good start it will have a good foothold because at this E3 Sony and MS will more than likely be announcing new machines that will steal Nintendo's thunder. I doubt though we will see new consoles in 2013. 2014 is more realistic. Nintendo have a track record of succeeding with underpowered hardware but it's a dangerous game.

super_furry

I just don't think they'll be able to repeat the success of the Wii. I don't think that the crossover audience that they found and sold consoles to during the Wii era is still there. These are the people, adults that didn't usually buy or play games, that took the plunge mostly on the back of Wii Sports. They wanted a Wii to play bowling and tennis when their friends were over and put the whole thing away when they weren't, buying next to no games other than those that came with the console.

The crossover to the non-traditional audience was a real zeitgeist moment that I think is over now. Nintendo did brilliantly to extend the market and their interest by following up with Wii Fit but after that interest totally died as the same people moved on to iPad and Facebook gaming. I just can't see the same people going back to buy a Wii U.

I hope I'm wrong. I was totally wrong about the Wii in the first place and Nintendo are probably right to continue down the path they're on, especially after their last traditional console - the Gamecube - was such a sales flop.

Kinski

You know, I hope it does flop. Nintendo has oodles of capital; it wouldn't spell the end of them as console makers (indeed, they've stated they'd give up on games altogether rather than give up making new hardware). If the casuals desert console gaming, that's a good thing, and Nintendo can dip into their reserves and go back to really competing for the core audience.

Dozen Wicked Words

Kinski wrote: »

You know, I hope it does flop. Nintendo has oodles of capital; it wouldn't spell the end of them as console makers (indeed, they've stated they'd give up on games altogether rather than give up making new hardware). If the casuals desert console gaming, that's a good thing, and Nintendo can dip into their reserves and go back to really competing for the core audience.

So you are shooting something down and hoping it fails before its even launched, bravo. All entitled to our opinions but that one is just stupid (in my opinion!)

Kinski

dooferoaks wrote: »

So you are shooting something down and hoping it fails before its even launched, bravo. All entitled to our opinions but that one is just stupid (in my opinion!)

I think that a second screen built into a controller on a home console is stupid. And I think that pushing up production costs/sacrificing processing power to incorporate such a stupid feature is stupid. And that Facebook-lite style interfaces are stupid. And that casual-friendly mini-game collections are stupid. So yeah, IMHO, stupid idea for a console from a company with shedloads of cash and the expertise and experience of crafting some of the finest games I've ever played? Damn right I hope it fails and they move on to something better.

Dozen Wicked Words

Kinski wrote: »

I think that a second screen built into a controller on a home console is stupid. And I think that pushing up production costs/sacrificing processing power to incorporate such a stupid feature is stupid. And that Facebook-lite style interfaces are stupid. And that casual-friendly mini-game collections are stupid. So yeah, IMHO, stupid idea for a console from a company with shedloads of cash and the expertise and experience of crafting some of the finest games I've ever played? Damn right I hope it fails and they move on to something better.

Ah, so you see a massive failure of the console encouraging Nintendo to pump tens of millions more into a new console? Of course, that's exactly how it worked when they moved from Gamecube, a relative failure to the next console, the Wii, isn't it? Or did they just tinker around the edges with the hardware and introduce a new control scheme, my memory must be hazy on that one.

Kinski

dooferoaks wrote: »

Ah, so you see a massive failure of the console will encourage Nintendo to pump tens of millions more into a new console? Of course, that's exactly how it worked when they moved from Gamecube, a relative failure to Wii isn't it? Or did they just tinker around the edges with the hardware and introduce a new control scheme, my memory must be hazy on that one.

That's premised on the idea that the casual audience will take to the Wii like they did the WiiU, and there's a big question mark there. If they do, Nintendo will be laughing all the way to the bank. But if they don't, it will be very bad for Nintendo, but good for games. If their strategy fails, they'll have little choice but to "pump tens of millions" into a console that appeals to the core gamer (assuming they really are committed to producing new hardware.)

The Wii was a massive commercial success. But as a "revolutionary" platform for games? Maybe, but for all the wrong reasons. Among core titles developed for the Wii, IMO only Skyward Sword benefited from having motion controls. One bloody game (I'm excluding games which used the Wiimote like a lightgun such as the brilliant S&P2).

I think a hugely-talented games company are currently following the wrong path, and the success they've enjoyed is tempting others down the same route, with Kinect and Move-type bull****. Like 3D movies, the sooner this **** just goes away the better.

Dozen Wicked Words

Kinski wrote: »

That's premised on the idea that the casual audience will take to the Wii like they did the WiiU, and there's a big question mark there. If they do, Nintendo will be laughing all the way to the bank. But if they don't, it will be very bad for Nintendo, but good for games. If their strategy fails, they'll have little choice but to "pump tens of millions" into a console that appeals to the core gamer (assuming they really are committed to producing new hardware.)

The Wii was a massive commercial success. But as a "revolutionary" platform for games? Maybe, but for all the wrong reasons. Among core titles developed for the Wii, IMO only Skyward Sword benefited from having motion controls. One bloody game (I'm excluding games which used the Wiimote like a lightgun such as the brilliant S&P2).

I think a hugely-talented games company are currently following the wrong path, and the success they've enjoyed is tempting others down the same route, with Kinect and Move-type bull****. Like 3D movies, the sooner this **** just goes away the better.

I'm not saying whether its right or wrong, or even suggesting it would be a successful strategy, I was pointing out that after their last failed console, the Gamecube, they didn't pump tens of millions, they reused large parts of the hardware they already had. So why if this console fails would they do it differently this time? I don't think they would do anything differently, and if they changed their emphasis, I would worry it would be to the detriment of "core" "non-casual" games and gamers and they would look to become even blander and everything for everyone.

Dont be at yourself

Nintendo are a reflection of Japan itself -- a wonderfully resourced, incredibly skilled company with a fantastic tradition that is completely ambivilent to global trends and changes. That is both its biggest strength and its biggest weakness.

There was a time when Nintendo was at the forefront of the industry - leading it, and shaping its very future. However, ever since the Playstation (and latterly Xbox) arrived and elevated gaming from the realm of kids and teenagers to that of clubbers, students and adults, Nintendo has not so much taken a back seat, as jumped into another car and sped off in another direction.

Nintendo often talk about abandoning the 'red ocean' hardcore to go after the untapped 'blue ocean' mass market -- and it's certainly paid off with the Wii. Its greatest successes have been casual titles like Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wii Fit, Mario Party and so on. But for the majority of Wii owners, these are the experiences that are played once or twice, when the family are home for Christmas, and then put back in the cupboard. Are these people going to buy in to new hardware again? How many of these bought more than a couple of games for their Wii in the first place?

No doubt, the Wii catalogue has plenty more to offer (and I'm proud to have worked at Nintendo on some of the titles singled out already in this thread), but the likes of Xenoblade, Pandora's Tower are the complete opposite end of the scale: targeting the very niche, hardcore gamer.

Basically: Nintendo have, in my eyes, failed to find the balance between mass market appeal and deep, rewarding gameplay. The very best games of this generation couple broad appeal & accessibility with well-designed and well-polished gameplay experiences. Where are the Wii equivalents of Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, GTA4, Red Dead Redemption, LA Noire, Heavy Rain? They don't exist. This crucial swathe of the market -- the one that pays the bills and keeps the lights on at Sony and Microsoft -- are outright ignored on Nintendo platforms.

So Nintendo are in trouble with the Wii U. They'll have a tough time enticing the casual audience to upgrade from the Wii (especially as they're now competing with smartphones, tablets, facebook games, and so on), and their catering to the traditional hardcore is now so focused and so niche, that the audience likely isn't there to support the console. It speaks volumes that their marquee hardcore franchise for the Wii U is Bayonetta - a game that was a commercial flop due to its niche appeal.

Retr0gamer

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Where are the Wii equivalents of Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, GTA4, Red Dead Redemption, LA Noire, Heavy Rain? They don't exist.

Other Uncharted and Heavy Rain all of those games are third party games and Heavy Rain is kind of pants. Sony and especially Microsoft don't create very many games unlike nintendo. Nintendo's real challenge is courting the third parties to support the WiiU and to do this they have to attract gamers with disposable income. Then again Nintendo might not even be upset by if they don't, the only games that really sold on the Wii were first party titles.

Also Bayonetta was far from a commercial flop, it just wasn't as successful as Sega wanted it to be, Platinum were more than happy with how it sold.

Kinski

dooferoaks wrote: »

I'm not saying whether its right or wrong, or even suggesting it would be a successful strategy, I was pointing out that after their last failed console, the Gamecube, they didn't pump tens of millions, they reused large parts of the hardware they already had. So why if this console fails would they do it differently this time? I don't think they would do anything differently, and if they changed their emphasis, I would worry it would be to the detriment of "core" "non-casual" games and gamers and they would look to become even blander and everything for everyone.

That's a possibility, but I just think that could happen even with the WiiU. Nintendoland is probably a bid to introduce people who lapped up NSMB games to Nintendo's other main franchises. Will we get games as intelligent, challenging, and creative as Galaxy 1&2 for the WiiU, or will we get dumbed down versions of Zelda and Metroid? And just look at how they've treated some of their franchises recently - farming out a new 2D Metroid to a developer that didn't have a clue how to do one, and rebooting Pilotwings as a WiiSports Resort-style thing.

At least the Wii had a clear delineation between casual and core titles. Wii Sports Resort is casual, Xenoblade is core. But it did have a major problem with the layout of the controller, necessitating awkward attempts at mapping traditional control schemes onto the Wii Remote. At least with the Wii U, all the buttons and sticks are there, and are where they should be, so that won't be a problem.

If they produce Galaxy and Skyward Sword-type games, and throw in the odd Bayonetta, then I'll eventually buy-in. But my fear is that this will be a console on which we see Nintendo attempting an uneasy marriage of core and casual style play in their games.

Dont be at yourself

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Other Uncharted and Heavy Rain all of those games are third party games and Heavy Rain is kind of pants. Sony and especially Microsoft don't create very many games unlike nintendo. Nintendo's real challenge is courting the third parties to support the WiiU and to do this they have to attract gamers with disposable income. Then again Nintendo might not even be upset by if they don't, the only games that really sold on the Wii were first party titles.

To be fair, both Sony and Microsoft have brought loads of titles to market -- either directly through first-party development, or through tight partnerships with others. Their hand can be seen in the likes of Uncharted, Halo, Gran Turismo, Forza, Gears of War, God of War, Singstar, Kinectimals, Geometry Wars, Journey, Fable, Killzone, Flower, Heavy Rain, etc. Each of Sony and Microsoft have invested huge resources in developing a well-rounded catalogue with a broad appeal and depth of quality. And they've given 3rd party developers the tools and support to do the same.

Nintendo, by comparison, have aggresively courted the casual shilling with their Wii Sports/Fit/Play line-up, re-hashed their Mario and Zelda franchises, and brought lots of JRPGs and other niche titles to the hardcore. The breadth of experiences across the first-party catalogue just isn't there, and that in turn has led to a narrower focus amonst 3rd party publishers.

Also Bayonetta was far from a commercial flop, it just wasn't as successful as Sega wanted it to be, Platinum were more than happy with how it sold.

Right. Flop is maybe a little too strong, but when a game is that critically acclaimed and struggles to break the million units sales mark before being relegated to the bargain bins, then it's not quite up there with the best in terms of 'killer apps' for a console launch.

I'm sure that most people on here love Bayonetta; but the truth is that the average Joe browsing the shelves in Gamestop has little interest in it. And ultimately, it's the average Joe in Gamestop that decides a console's success.

johnny_ultimate

TBH, I don't necessarily want Nintendo games to be 'core' in the way its usually defined. The one thing Nintendo always has going for them is how distinctive their voice is - equivalent to Pixar in film. What would be the point if they're just making the same sort of games everyone else is making? They do their thing, and they do it remarkably well. Any self-proclaimed "hardcore" gamer should recognise the brilliant design and depth of Galaxy or Skyward Sword. Metroid remains a franchise committed to the long-term, enthusiast gamer - I can't imagine Samus will be absent from the Wii U lineup for long, although hopefully more Prime or Super than Other M (which, TBH, I still thoroughly enjoyed despite the control eccentricities and the story being a load of arse).

I also don't think accessibility negates depth and challenge. 3D Land is a great example. At first it's too easy: anyone could play it, regardless of experience. But when the game opens up in its second half it's as brilliantly challenging as anything the company has ever made. Nintendo alone IMO are able to walk this tightrope - making games accessible without relegating those who expect more. 150CC or online in Mario Kart 7 are further examples of this, or the huge amount of difficulty calibration available to players of Kid Icarus (the sliding difficulty scale being one of this year's most underappreciated innovations). There are all games from the last twelve months or so too. Nintendo are peerless in their ability to make games that appeal to very different player bases. A 'casual' gamer won't see the end of Dark Souls, but they'll see an ending to Mario 3D Land, whereas the game will continue on for the committed. The best Nintendo games allow you to get what you want out of them without discriminating against those who don't want to 100% or pour twenty plus hours into every game they play.

Nintendo need to stand out. We need a company that are making AAA games that are different than the AAA games we get on the other consoles. Yes, the Wii U launch line-up doesn't convince the 'hardcore' that it's an instant buy. I'd be genuinely surprised if there aren't games for everyone by this time next year, though.

Magill

If Nintendo actually built a machine that could keep up with the other 2 technically... it would be awesome... if you could get your CoD's, BF's, Dark souls, skyrims on an nintendo... there simply would be no need for me to have a PS3 or Xbox... they have by far my favorite exclusive franchises but there are simply far too many multiplatform games that we didn't see on the wii so for the most part, it's been a seriously underused console. If the wii u had of come out instead of the wii... it would have been amazing.

My biggest fear is that they'll once again be left behind when the next gen consoles come out.

hightower1

Magill wrote: »

If Nintendo actually built a machine that could keep up with the other 2 technically... it would be awesome... if you could get your CoD's, BF's, Dark souls, skyrims on an nintendo... there simply would be no need for me to have a PS3 or Xbox..

I'd disagree tbh mate, simply becuase Nintendos 1st party franchisees and characters are childish. Mario, zelda, starfox etc...I mean , if we are to talk plainly.... they look like things that wouldnt be out of place on the disney channel? :o:o

That holds no interest for me since I turned past the age of 10, I like guns, ferraris, life and death uncharted moments, basically adult themed things. Nintendos whole vision seems childish.

Star Lord

hightower1 wrote: »

I'd disagree tbh mate, simply becuase Nintendos 1st party franchisees and characters are childish. Mario, zelda, starfox etc...I mean , if we are to talk plainly.... they look like things that wouldnt be out of place on the disney channel? :o:o

That holds no interest for me since I turned past the age of 10, I like guns, ferraris, life and death uncharted moments, basically adult themed things. Nintendos whole vision seems childish.

To be perfectly honest, it sounds like you've not played the games simply because of the look of the characters. And if that is the case, then you honestly are cutting yourself off from some simply amazing game experiences based solely on their appearance!

(And Wind Waker/DS Zelda games aside, the others aren't 'childish' looking)

Retr0gamer

hightower1 wrote: »

I'd disagree tbh mate, simply becuase Nintendos 1st party franchisees and characters are childish. Mario, zelda, starfox etc...I mean , if we are to talk plainly.... they look like things that wouldnt be out of place on the disney channel? :o:o

That holds no interest for me since I turned past the age of 10, I like guns, ferraris, life and death uncharted moments, basically adult themed things. Nintendos whole vision seems childish.

I feel sorry for you if you feel that way. It's like not watching Pixar films because they feel childish. To be perfectly honest nintendo franchises like Chibi Robo, Mother 3, Hotel Dusk, Another Code and Xenoblade are far more mature than stuff like uncharted, call of duty, mortal kombat and GTA which are in fact utterly childish.

Magill

hightower1 wrote: »

I'd disagree tbh mate, simply becuase Nintendos 1st party franchisees and characters are childish. Mario, zelda, starfox etc...I mean , if we are to talk plainly.... they look like things that wouldnt be out of place on the disney channel? :o:o

That holds no interest for me since I turned past the age of 10, I like guns, ferraris, life and death uncharted moments, basically adult themed things. Nintendos whole vision seems childish.

ahh im not saying they are everyone's favorite exclusives, hence why i said there would be no reason for "ME" to have an xbox or ps3. For me, uncharted did nothing... i actually got bored half way through uncharted 3 and haven't gone back to it. The PS3 has a decent range of exclusives of course, but nothing i personally couldn't live without.

If i could have Zelda, Mario, metroid and a few more random exclusives like xenoblade along with all the other multiplatform games (Which lets be honest.. are what most of us play on the ps3/xbox) that don't appear on Nintendo consoles... then i'd be happy with just an Nintendo.

For me, nice light hearted, well designed games like Nintendo big IP's are a welcome change to the usual games i play.

K.O.Kiki

Magill wrote: »

If Nintendo actually built a machine that could keep up with the other 2 technically... it would be awesome... if you could get your CoD's, BF's, Dark souls, skyrims on an nintendo... there simply would be no need for me to have a PS3 or Xbox... they have by far my favorite exclusive franchises but there are simply far too many multiplatform games that we didn't see on the wii so for the most part, it's been a seriously underused console. If the wii u had of come out instead of the wii... it would have been amazing.

My biggest fear is that they'll once again be left behind when the next gen consoles come out.

The WiiU has been confirmed to be more powerful than PS3/360 already...


I don't get where so-called "hardcore" gamers get off thinking that "casual" users play the Wii once or twice a year.
My sister is not a hardcore gamer. Neither are my neighbours nor my uncles.
They still play Mario Kart or whatever at least twice a month, for 2-3hr sessions.

The only difference is that they don't buy as many games as some of us... though TBH it seems to make them appreciate what they're playing MORE.
Which... is exactly what I used to be like when I was young...

Magill

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

The WiiU has been confirmed to be more powerful than PS3/360 already...

You didn't read my post properly then ?

Ol' Donie

Just a small aside, but surely i cant be the only person in the world who held off on arkham city because i want to play it with the wii u controller?