Nintendo's 'completely blown' its Wii 2 strategy

[Cube]

And most the games on the other systems from third parties are just yearly updates of existing franchises - it's hardly fresh material. COD, FIFA, Assasin's Creed, F1 and Pro Evo dominate, not exactly ground breaking stuff there.

 

There's loads of successful 3rd party fresh material on the other systems. You've even named one yourself (Assassin's Creed).

[Burny]

There's loads of successful 3rd party fresh material on the other systems. You've even named one yourself (Assassin's Creed).

 

And nearly all of them rely on having a two analogue stick layout, powerful hardware and often enough on having a decent online system provided by the console manufacturer out of the box.

 

With the Wii, Nintendo doesn't offer any of it, although from a control POV, the Wii can be superior for first person games. Nintendo might provide a decent online system on the 3DS, but in many dev's eyes they'll likely fail to provide the first two to a sufficient extend.

 

So if you want large blockbuster games that are not from Nintendo, you're better off with any other console.

[jayseven]

I like to think patch' was, in a roundabout way, just stating the obvious; nintendo's next console will have to be a revolution, and I don't think there's any doubt that it will be. Nintendo has been staunch in their approach -- "we're not sheep, we're trend-setters." Increase in sales for ps3 and 360 consoles (in some regions, thanks Mr. Graph!) has to reflect their mimic-nintendo strategems as much as any non-tendo games' influence.

 

It's been said. Nintendo's R+D is the Area 51 of the gaming world. I have no doubt that their next console will be a clever amalgam of new/old tech in the form of a squat little beast that we never knew we needed in gaming, but will steer the gaming industry once again. If nintendo are anything, it's innovative.

 

Does nintendo need to get going and be first out of the gate with the next generation? Harder to say. The other consoles look like they've got years left and considering they've both just released their motion tech, they're not likely to want to jump ahead too soon. I think it's fairly common-sensical for nintendo to be the first to announce a new home console.

 

Doesn't mean it's needed now, of course!

[Jamba]

And most the games on the other systems from third parties are just yearly updates of existing franchises - it's hardly fresh material. COD, FIFA, Assasin's Creed, F1 and Pro Evo dominate, not exactly ground breaking stuff there.

 

Ummm is there a problem with this? They are all really good games and they sell well Nintendo haven't exactly been being original lately bar Other M.

 

And nearly all of them rely on having a two analogue stick layout, powerful hardware and often enough on having a decent online system provided by the console manufacturer out of the box.

 

With the Wii, Nintendo doesn't offer any of it, although from a control POV, the Wii can be superior for first person games. Nintendo might provide a decent online system on the 3DS, but in many dev's eyes they'll likely fail to provide the first two to a sufficient extend.

 

So if you want large blockbuster games that are not from Nintendo, you're better off with any other console.

 

Well said. 3rd parties need to be on multiple platforms to sell. Nintendo don't care enough about 3rd parties to put themselves there as they actually profit from their hardware.

 

Oh and can I recommend that people actually watch the Bonus Round Episode that goes with this. Patcher's views are actually well balanced and have logic behind them.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Jamba

[Fused King]

You know, I've been thinking (ooeeehhh)

 

When we look at hardware, NINTENDO has truly been revolutionary:

We all know the succesful story of the analog stick and motion sensing.

 

But what have they done on the software side that is truly new and innovative?

I remember Z-targetting....

but I don't really remember a new genre of gaming or anything of the like....

 

So, how do you guys feel about this, because clearly NINTENDO's major franchises, a.k.a. money makers, are not really of the innovative kind. I mean, name 1 game that is truly a category of one because of its gameplay on a NINTENDO console.

 

When you strip down the Mario-, Zelda-, Metroid-, Animal Crossing-, F-Zero-, Star Fox-, Wii Sports-, and many other franchises, none of them are really new, nor do they bring anything revolutionary. In fact, most of them are based on fan service and 'hitting that nostalgia bone'.

 

As much as I love these games, I'd like to see them invent something new from a software perspective, and not from a hardware perspective i.e. including motion sensing in a new franchise.

 

GIVE ME AN RTS FUSED RPG FUSED WITH AN FPS AND SOMETHING NEW!

Edited February 1, 2011 by Fused King

[Cube]

I mean, name 1 game that is truly a category of one because of its gameplay on a NINTENDO console.

 

I don't really know anything quite like Pikmin (well, Little Kings Story feels a bit similar).

 

Oh, and Nintendo do the odd strange genre-defying game. Like Odama.

[Fused King]

I don't really know anything quite like Pikmin (well, Little Kings Story feels a bit similar).

 

Oh, and Nintendo do the odd strange genre-defying game. Like Odama.

 

Hmyes, Pikmin is kind of an oddball.

 

I always saw it as an RTS bar the excessive violence and story with depth.

Had never heard of Odama, thanks for naming that.

 

Well, I guess they are pretty innovative then:bowdown:

[Cube]

Had never heard of Odama, thanks for naming that.

 

I don't think anyone bought it. Surprisingly, there didn't seem to be much demand for a voice-operated RTS game inside a pinball machine.

[Grazza]

Just my humble opinion, but I think innovation's the most overrated thing in gaming, in terms of both hardware and software. Nowadays I see a lot of mainstream games, and a lot of niche games, but I think the latter try too hard to be different (and the former are just too bland). I want inspired games like Wind Waker, but I'm not so keen on the games that seem like the result of a brainstorming session.

 

The best games are the result of what happens naturally when you get the opportunity to take advantage of better hardware. Combine that with imaginative art, top class graphics, stirring music and a visionary story and overworld, and you can't go wrong.

[Jamba]

So, how do you guys feel about this, because clearly NINTENDO's major franchises, a.k.a. money makers, are not really of the innovative kind. I mean, name 1 game that is truly a category of one because of its gameplay on a NINTENDO console.

 

Ummmm Wii Sports, until recently had no competition in that sense. Also if we look outside of this generation then yes their software WAS more revolutionary. Mario 64 was one of the first 3D explorable worlds and OOT was an entire completely connected 3D world. Was the original Donkey Kong the first ever platformer?

 

And can I just say that Metroid Prime is it's own genre. Nothing has tried to replicate it, unfortunately.

 

But yeah recently I don't feel that their design has been coming on leaps and bounds apart from Mario Galaxy. 3rd parties have tried much harder in that respect.

[Beverage]

Just my humble opinion, but I think innovation's the most overrated thing in gaming, in terms of both hardware and software. Nowadays I see a lot of mainstream games, and a lot of niche games, but I think the latter try too hard to be different (and the former are just too bland). I want inspired games like Wind Waker, but I'm not so keen on the games that seem like the result of a brainstorming session.

 

The best games are the result of what happens naturally when you get the opportunity to take advantage of better hardware. Combine that with imaginative art, top class graphics, stirring music and a visionary story and overworld, and you can't go wrong.

 

Brother, this is my EXACT thoughts/opinion too!!!!!!!!!!!... Can't believe it

 

You know, I've been thinking (ooeeehhh)

 

When we look at hardware, NINTENDO has truly been revolutionary:

We all know the succesful story of the analog stick and motion sensing.

 

But what have they done on the software side that is truly new and innovative?

I remember Z-targetting....

but I don't really remember a new genre of gaming or anything of the like....

 

So, how do you guys feel about this, because clearly NINTENDO's major franchises, a.k.a. money makers, are not really of the innovative kind. I mean, name 1 game that is truly a category of one because of its gameplay on a NINTENDO console.

 

When you strip down the Mario-, Zelda-, Metroid-, Animal Crossing-, F-Zero-, Star Fox-, Wii Sports-, and many other franchises, none of them are really new, nor do they bring anything revolutionary. In fact, most of them are based on fan service and 'hitting that nostalgia bone'.

 

As much as I love these games, I'd like to see them invent something new from a software perspective, and not from a hardware perspective i.e. including motion sensing in a new franchise.

 

GIVE ME AN RTS FUSED RPG FUSED WITH AN FPS AND SOMETHING NEW!

 

This comment + Grazza's comment = Hitting the nail on the thinnest head one thousand times while blind and blind-folded!!!

 

EDIT - Fixed

Edited February 2, 2011 by Beverage
Automerged Doublepost

[Burny]

When you strip down the Mario-, Zelda-, Metroid-, Animal Crossing-, F-Zero-, Star Fox-, Wii Sports-, and many other franchises, none of them are really new, nor do they bring anything revolutionary.

 

The thing is, we can say that as well for practically any game. It's not necessarily a bad thing either. What great gaming innovations were there lately, other than mass market rhythm games, motion controlled games and trainers disguised as games controlled with bathroom scales?

 

And remove Wii Sports from that list, it's actually a revolutionary game that brought gaming somewhere it hasn't been before.

 

But yeah recently I don't feel that their design has been coming on leaps and bounds apart from Mario Galaxy. 3rd parties have tried much harder in that respect.

You mean they have done what? For the most part, they have taken games about shooting people from an ego perspective into different settings and added a couple of different weapons. Or they have taken games about killing stuff from a 3rd person perspective into open worlds placed in different ages. A lot of fun, but not much different from what they have done before.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Burny

[Jamba]

You mean they have done what? For the most part, they have taken games about shooting people from an ego perspective into different settings and added a couple of different weapons. Or they have taken games about killing stuff from a 3rd person perspective into open worlds placed in different ages. A lot of fun, but not much different from what they have done before.

 

Oh shut up. Your bias of your game preference has stopped you from actually thinking.

 

Let's have a look at the Wii shall we: deBlob, Zack n Wiki, No More Heroes and Red Steel (less so here) all made a good effort and trying to achieve something a bit new with the hardware. Nintendo's games whilst good would have been just as good on another system.

 

And the DS: Rhythm Heaven, Project Rub, Hotel Dusk, Another Code, Professor Layton, Trauma Centre and Scribblenauts are all 3rd party games that really use the features of the DS.

 

And yes I do think that games like Assassins Creed (new for this generation) should be recognised for their innovations as they are a different experience, hell I'd put Uncharted in that category for sure.

 

Echochrome, Braid, Portal and many more are examples of shiny new game design and mechanics that Nintendo isn't really willing to explore any more. Don't even get me started on gems like Crush on PSP...

 

But as people have said, this isn't about innovation, it's about not getting bored of the same old shit. And frankly Nintendo is boring me right now and I'm getting sick of their incremental design updates to games where the franchise power alone would allow them to explore.

[Burny]

Oh shut up. Your bias of your game preference has stopped you from actually thinking.

You mean the bias, that lets me play anything from the occasional simulation (Il2 Sturmovik), to RPGs (preferably western), the occasional shooter, some of the games you mention, up to Wii Sports? I'll admit that I don't like fighting or sports games much, my play time is far too limited to play everything I would like to and the only franchise I'm attached to is Zelda. Still, terribly biased, isn't it? :p

 

Rhythm Heaven is a first party game, just fyi.

 

Echochrome, Braid, Portal and many more are examples of shiny new game design and mechanics that Nintendo isn't really willing to explore any more. Don't even get me started on gems like Crush on PSP...

And Wii Sports isn't an example of a shiny new mechanic that Nintendo was willing to explore? Nintendogs wasn't such an example either then? Not much gamer's games, but rather unparalleled.

 

Sure this is about my bias towards Nintendo? Sure it wasn't you stopping to think in favor of a bit rage-typing?

Edited February 1, 2011 by Burny

[Tissue Town]

Nintendo will make games that will sell to the masses. They especially love games that don't cost a lot to make. They tend to off load the more "hardcore" franchise games to other devs. Mario Kart wii and New super mario bros will continue being made for each new console as they sell and sell and sell despite the fact that they are practically the same game as their previous iteration.

Nintendo will most likely be the first to announce a new console considering how ancient the Wii is, especially compared to now official competitors of Kinect and Move. Whilst Move is sort of in the background, Kinect has sold very impressively, and despite the fact that most of the games are shit and it costs the same as a Wii.

 

Tis why being loyal to these companies are absurd as ever. They are incredibly corporate and do not care about it's puny loyal consumers. As long as they take your money, as much as it can take, then that's all they care about. I'm just sorry I didn't buy any shares 5 years ago. Oh well. ARM are quite an investment I hear.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Tissue Town

[Jamba]

Sure this is about my bias towards Nintendo? Sure it wasn't you stopping to think in favor of a bit rage-typing?

 

I didn't say anything about bias towards Nintendo, I was talking about the type of games you play, which account for about half of the market on non-Nintendo platforms (i.e. fighting and sports, does this include the killing game you talked about?).

 

I'll give you Wii Sports and Nintendogs, 2 of the small percentage of new IPs that Nintendo has made in the past 6 or 7 years. But compare that with the very large number of titles that hardly used the features of their console to any great extent and it is disproportionate. They rely heavily on established mechanics and tried and tested formula, using the IPs' reputation to allow it to sell.

 

That's good for sales but gives me little reason to buy them. My favourite games on the DS are all 3rd party and my Wii got sold because I didn't want to play anything it had to offer accept for MG2.

 

(P.S. Thanks about Rhythm Heaven btw, that's a happy surprise!)

[Fused King]

And remove Wii Sports from that list, it's actually a revolutionary game that brought gaming somewhere it hasn't been before.

 

That's from a hardware perspective, not a software one.

Replace the motion sensing with buttons, and what have you got: Sport minigames.

 

The revolution in software I'm talking about is a new genre or a mixture of genres OR something completely unheard of.

 

Wii Sports was just sports....

 

Or does your winky MacWink mean sarcasm?

[Jonnas]

deBlob,

 

Lolwhut? What are you talking about? It's a great game, but the way it uses the Wiimote is hardly one of its strongest points.

 

And the DS: Rhythm Heaven, Project Rub, Hotel Dusk, Another Code, Professor Layton, Trauma Centre and Scribblenauts are all 3rd party games that really use the features of the DS.

 

...And Nintendogs, Elite Beat Agents, Phantom Hourglass*, Spirit Tracks*...

 

Anyway, this argument is silly. Innovative or not, Nintendo hasn't stopped making good games. If you think some of them are bland, I assure you, there are those that aren't.

 

*Unrelated, but this argument that every Zelda game features the same locations, the same themes, etc. is pretty lousy. The Zelda games often use the same dungeon/item/boss system, yes, but the same towns, races, setting... Unless we're talking about TP, I don't see it.

[Fused King]

Well, let me just say this: Some games I got to play over the years were absolute amazing, others were just fun, but, to me, NONE of them stunned me with their underlying mechanisms.

 

They all came down to stuff we have been playing since the dawn of games, ....................

 

No, I must contradict myself and concur with Grazza, actually.

 

GAME OVER

[Jonnas]

I'll give you Wii Sports and Nintendogs, 2 of the small percentage of new IPs that Nintendo has made in the past 6 or 7 years. But compare that with the very large number of titles that hardly used the features of their console to any great extent and it is disproportionate. They rely heavily on established mechanics and tried and tested formula, using the IPs' reputation to allow it to sell.

 

(P.S. Thanks about Rhythm Heaven btw, that's a happy surprise!)

 

Elite Beat Agents, Hotel Dusk, Another Code, Disaster, Endless Ocean and Wii Fit are also new Nintendo IPs, actually (lots of people make this mistake of "Nintendo has no new IPs". Even Sakurai.)

 

Epic Yarn, Metroid Other M and Wario Land aren't part of an old, tested and true formula. Games like ExciteTruck, Sin and Punishment 2 and DKC returns arguably qualify as well. And the best use of the Wiimote thus far was in WarioWare (IMO)

 

I may be coming across as a Nintendo fanboy, here, but I do think it's unfair to say that "some of the company's games are bland and uninspiring, therefore all the games by this company must be". There are good examples, you're just not citing them.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Jonnas

[darksnowman]

Wii Sports was just sports....

 

Just cos you hate sport it doesn't make Wii Sports a run of the mill game.

[Jamba]

Anyway, this argument is silly. Innovative or not, Nintendo hasn't stopped making good games. If you think some of them are bland, I assure you, there are those that aren't.

 

Oh I'm sure there are those that aren't and a lot of the games you mentioned do innovate, I'm just in a place where I don't give a rats for the nostalgia anymore and as so much of Nintendo's selling point is based on that, I am quickly going off their games.

 

*Unrelated, but this argument that every Zelda game features the same locations, the same themes, etc. is pretty lousy. The Zelda games often use the same dungeon/item/boss system, yes, but the same towns, races, setting... Unless we're talking about TP, I don't see it.

 

I think most of the portrayal of those "elements" has been quite varied but the section I've bolded just has to change. I really enjoyed the DS Zeldas but this was the worst part, only really forgiven due to the limitations of the system.

[Burny]

(i.e. fighting and sports, does this include the killing game you talked about?).

No, fighting includes any press-up-up-left-down-do-rain-dance-to-kick-enemy-into-the-nutts-type of game, while sport is any annual shoot-ball-with-foot game and the likes. 3rd person games about killing stuff is more or less anything for me that's not an RPG, where you run around in a third person perspective and, well - kill stuff. God of War, Assassin's Creed, Brutal Legend (ok, this one's half strategy), Uncharted, you name it.

 

They rely heavily on established mechanics and tried and tested formula, using the IPs' reputation to allow it to sell.

As does everyone else for their large projects, which is my point. Even the few genuinely new large games like Assassin's Creed just take tried and tested formulas (open world) and add a couple of mechanics of their own. And when you boil it down to it's core: It's just a different game about killing stuff in another impressive open world environment. :p

 

I also think that Nintendo could really start to shake up a couple of their game's formulas a bit (mostly Zelda), but I don't exactly see where comparable developers are more inventive (with the exception of LBP maybe). Unless we're talking indies, who are outdoing all the big ones in that regard.

 

That's from a hardware perspective, not a software one.

Replace the motion sensing with buttons, and what have you got: Sport minigames.

The revolution in software I'm talking about is a new genre or a mixture of genres OR something completely unheard of.

Wii Sports was just sports....

Or does your winky MacWink mean sarcasm?

No, I'm absolutely serious about Wii Sports. Sport minigames where there before, but Wii Sports is a game build completely around the hardware, so you can't separate it. The pick up and play nature of Wii Sports for local multiplayer wasn't there before and it was revolutionary.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Burny

[Goron_3]

There's loads of successful 3rd party fresh material on the other systems. You've even named one yourself (Assassin's Creed).

 

Yeah i find it funny he named on, and then also named F1 2010 given it's the first one to even come out on 360...

[Fused King]

No, fighting includes any press-up-up-left-down-do-rain-dance-to-kick-enemy-into-the-nutts-type of game, while sport is any annual shoot-ball-with-foot game and the likes. 3rd person games about killing stuff is more or less anything for me that's not an RPG, where you run around in a third person perspective and, well - kill stuff. God of War, Assassin's Creed, Brutal Legend (ok, this one's half strategy), Uncharted, you name.

 

I very much agree with this.