The 'Other' Wii U Thread

[Dcubed]

I think it's very easy to understand what people are getting at/want:

 

A "proper" (no minigame/partygame collections) new singleplayer IP developed by Nintendo EAD. Unlike other companies, Nintendo games have a particular feel associated with them and that's what people click with. Xenoblade, Golden Sun or Fire Emblem aren't "Nintendo" games (Xenoblade feels exactly like Xenogears, Golden Sun feels like Chrono Trigger/Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest and Fire Emblem feels like Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre). Nintendo owns these games, yes, but they don't feel like Nintendo games. EAD, Retro and HAL are the subsidiaries that captures the feel of "Nintendo" games. And ever since launching Pikmin none of them has brought any major new (and COMPLETELY ORIGINAL) IPs to the table. So that's what's missing. That's what people want. That "Nintendo" feel, on something completely new. And NO, Steel Diver doesn't count.

 

Edit - Just realized I made this exact same post 2 months ago. Lol, am phail.

 

Case in point

[Shorty]

But that's what makes a Nintendo game. That's why we're here in the first place.

 

Search your heart, you know it to be true.

[Dcubed]

But that's what makes a Nintendo game. That's why we're here in the first place.

 

Search your heart, you know it to be true.

 

If we're gonna go down that route then rightfully, only Nintendo SPD games should count then. They're Nintendo's oldest studio (previously known as Nintendo R&D1) after all. Hell even HAL pre-dates EAD!

 

In no way, shape or form is Pikmin more of a "real" Nintendo game than Rhythm Heaven. That's complete bollocks.

[Shorty]

You're hung up on technicalities and admittedly there's no way I can argue with publishers, numbers, developers and who predates who. I'm not talking hard facts here, unfortunately, I know that must be frustrating for you.

 

This is far more subjective, and circles around the fact that someone can create a character or idea that embeds itself in gaming history, spawns saturday morning cartoons and lunchboxes and leaves us wanting more 25 years later.

 

We, the disillusioned, know what we're missing out on, Oxigen did a great job of detailing it. If we can't be satisfied without it, surely you can see that there's a gap there?

[Dcubed]

You're hung up on technicalities and admittedly there's no way I can argue with publishers, numbers, developers and who predates who. I'm not talking hard facts here, unfortunately, I know that must be frustrating for you.

 

This is far more subjective, and circles around the fact that someone can create a character or idea that embeds itself in gaming history, spawns saturday morning cartoons and lunchboxes and leaves us wanting more 25 years later.

 

We, the disillusioned, know what we're missing out on, Oxigen did a great job of detailing it. If we can't be satisfied without it, surely you can see that there's a gap there?

 

I can understand it just fine and I pointed out that myself on the last page even!

 

All I ask is that people are more specific when they ask for something. Instead of just blanketly stating that "Nintendo's last original game was Pikmin", just ask for what you actually want; A new character driven IP (containing no existing characters whatsoever), developed by EAD (and ideally directed or produced by Shigeru Miyamoto), released worldwide in physical form at retail with a big marketing push.

 

It's all well and good wanting that (hell I'd love to see it myself!), but to tar the whole of Nintendo with the same brush is doing everyone there a great disservice.

[Ike]

(Xenoblade definitely counts. If Golden Sun and Fire Emblem count, so does that)

 

Fire Emblem aren't "Nintendo" games

 

What is this? Fire Emblem is Nintendo. Intelligent Systems is a first party developer. Monolith Soft and Camelot are 3rd party (although Nintendo bought Monolith or something, didn't they?).

 

The original Fire Emblem was released in 1990, if anything Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre feel like Fire Emblem. I'd argue they are similar but not the same.

[Dcubed]

What is this? Fire Emblem is Nintendo. Intelligent Systems is a first party developer. Monolith Soft and Camelot are 3rd party (although Nintendo bought Monolith or something, didn't they?).

 

The original Fire Emblem was released in 1990, if anything Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre feel like Fire Emblem. I'd argue they are similar but not the same.

 

Monolith Soft is fully owned by Nintendo, a 1st party and hence ARE Nintendo now. Likewise Intelligent Systems is a fully owned 1st party subsidiary of Nintendo (founded by former members of Nintendo R&D1 - so these people have been around since the very beginning of Nintendo's VG making days, before Miyamoto even!)

 

And FE created the SRPG genre, so FFT and TO are indeed FE clones (to use an unfair tone - because they certainly aren't the same at all!)

[Lens of Truth]

The issue with the Wii U for me is that Nintendo have consciously tried to sell it as a 'whole package', rather than on the strength of any one killer app, feature or must-own game. The trouble is that the package has very rough edges.

 

Apart from slowness, a few aspects of the OS feel half-baked. Many core features just aren't standardised; online, chat and audio being the most glaring. Eg Nintendo Land and Mario default all audio to the headphone out on the gamepad when you've got a pair hooked up (as they should), and ZombiU has an easily located option, but Sonic and Batman and I assume many other 'second rank' titles only output the gamepad sounds (like kart engine noise or Alfred on the bat-radio-thingy). Under what circumstance would you ever want partial audio through headphones??

 

Even a selling point like 'Off-TV play' has no standard means of access - it's different in every game, some more obvious than others.

 

To compound all this is Nintendo's policy of conservatism, caution and secrecy (which it must be remembered is newly renewed after showing almost every major franchise ahead of the 3DS' launch fizzled to nothing in PR terms). The feeling around the console is one of uncertainty and it has to be addressed soon. As Grazza says, for this to be a hit with core gamers it needs 'big' games that inspire passion.

 

I know many will eye-roll at this, but Nintendo Land is inspiring passion in a lot of folk on Miiverse and it really is a joyous game. It's brought back game nights with mates, which imo is a good thing, and it's addictive as hell.

 

So it *is* possible to enjoy the Wii U an awful lot but still have PLENTY of concerns! Or do we need another thread for that?

[Ike]

Monolith Soft is fully owned by Nintendo, a 1st party and hence ARE Nintendo now. Likewise Intelligent Systems is a fully owned 1st party subsidiary of Nintendo (founded by former members of Nintendo R&D1 - so these people have been around since the very beginning of Nintendo's VG making days, before Miyamoto even!)

 

And FE created the SRPG genre, so FFT and TO are indeed FE clones (to use an unfair tone - because they certainly aren't the same at all!)

 

Monolith were still 3rd party when they developed Xenoblade, right? Nintendo just picked them up after the EU release if I'm remembering right.

 

Yeah, Intelligent Systems helped develop R.O.B. They do the dev kits as well. Never knew they were involved in the original Metroid until a couple of years ago.

[Shorty]

There's no way Fire Emblem isn't Nintendo, but the original argument is that we want more new IPs, not that there aren't enough already.

[Dcubed]

Monolith were still 3rd party when they developed Xenoblade, right? Nintendo just picked them up after the EU release if I'm remembering right.

 

Yeah, Intelligent Systems helped develop R.O.B. They do the dev kits as well. Never knew they were involved in the original Metroid until a couple of years ago.

 

Nope. Just like that other guy before, you're thinking of Disaster DOC. Nintendo bought the company in April 2007. Xenoblade's development started that very same month...

 

http://www.nintendo.co.uk/Iwata-Asks/Iwata-Asks-Xenoblade-Chronicles/Vol-3-The-Development-Process/2-From-Caution-to-Trust/2-From-Caution-to-Trust-208861.html

 

Yamagami: We started work on the prototype in April 2007. To coincide with that, I got Yokota-san and Hattori-san from the Software Planning & Development Department involved in the project. Yokota-san was a real RPG expert, and I asked him to look at system-related issues in particular, while also combining with Kojima-san from Monolith Soft to work on the project’s overall direction. Hattori-san had experience of writing scenarios for Nintendo titles, so I asked her to take a step back and look over the scenario that Takahashi-san and (Yuichiro) Takeda-san had written from an objective standpoint.

 

There's no way Fire Emblem isn't Nintendo, but the original argument is that we want more new IPs, not that there aren't enough already.

 

But as I mentioned earlier, that argument is flawed. The fact that people here continue to completely ignore the myriad of new IPs that have been released (even the 9 new ones released in just the past year here in Europe alone!) shows that it's not "new IPs" that you actually want.

 

You want something that fits the 4 criteria I mentioned before and nothing else will do.

Edited December 18, 2012 by Dcubed

[Ike]

Nope. Just like that other guy before, you're thinking of Disaster DOC. Nintendo bought the company in April 2007. Xenoblade's development started that very same month...

 

Ah fair enough, to be honest I never really took notice of them until Xenoblade Chronicles. Just noticed they did Dragon Ball Z: Attack of the Saiyans, that was a good game.

[Dcubed]

Ah fair enough, to be honest I never really took notice of them until Xenoblade Chronicles. Just noticed they did Dragon Ball Z: Attack of the Saiyans, that was a good game.

 

They also did Baten Kaitos & Baten Kaitos Origins alongside Tri Crescendo as well. You might be familiar with that one (and if not, then fix that ASAP. They're great games!)

 

To take the argument of Nintendo's influence a step further... They go over the influence of becoming a 1st party within Xenoblade's Iwata Asks...

 

Iwata: I’m very glad you could join. Now I’ve actually got a question today that I want to ask Takahashi-san without any beating around the bush: how did you feel about the idea of creating a game together with Nintendo? Feel free to be frank with your answer.

 

Takahashi: Okay then, I’ll answer without beating around the bush either. It was a huge culture shock.

 

Iwata: In what way? Takahashi: Well, I had originally wanted to complete work on Xenoblade Chronicles much sooner, but once we began, we encountered a lot of difficulties and development ran into trouble. I realised that if I went ahead with all the things I wanted to do with the game, we would have no chance of making the release date that was originally scheduled. So I went to Yamagami-san to discuss the idea of abandoning certain aspects of the game.

 

Iwata: So you judged that sticking to the originally scheduled completion date was your priority.

 

Takahashi: That’s right. It’s something we were very reluctant to do, but we knew that as professionals, we had to adhere strictly to the original schedule for completion. But at that point, Yamagami-san said: ‘Look, you’ve come this far. You should see it through to the end. I’ll convince the others at the company.’ There’s an old Japanese proverb about a cricket trying to swim across a river. At first it’s swimming away happily, but halfway across, it just seems to give up. I’d worked on a lot of games up until that point, and there were times when I’ve done the same. So this time, I was prepared to accept that I wouldn’t be able to achieve all I’d set out to, and was mentally preparing myself to shift directions somewhat. But then Yamagami-san told me to see it through to the end, and I was really taken aback by this experience of Nintendo’s willingness to keep working at something until they’re satisfied the job is really done.

 

Iwata: Well, the fact that the producer made that judgment was surely because he thought that Xenoblade Chronicles was worth seeing through to the point where you were all satisfied that the job was done. Kojima-san, as the director, how did you feel about being told to see it through to the end?

 

Kojima: I thought: ‘Well, there’s no getting out of this now...’ (laughs)

 

Iwata: (laughs) You’ve got no choice but to swim all the way across!

 

Kojima: Right. Takahashi-san’s concept for the game was vast in scale, so frankly speaking, it was pretty tough telling the dev team, who were already tired, that they had to dig in and go right through to the end. But it certainly wasn’t something I objected to, because, in the end, when you consider things from the players’ perspective, it’s incredibly important to see things through until you feel happy that you’ve done all you could.

 

Iwata: Even though you flicked the switch from caution to trust, the creative cultures of Monolith Soft and Nintendo were bound to differ. I’d guess that you must have run into quite a few difficulties on account of this, right?

 

Yamagami: Yes, that was certainly the case. When we make a prototype at Nintendo, the basic game system is of fundamental importance. With this title, Takahashi-san started by constructing the worldview of the game, whereas we at Nintendo wanted to begin by confirming that the game system works, before making certain that the game’s worldview could be realised on Wii. Only then would we start making the actual game. At Nintendo, this is the usual way things proceed. At Monolith Soft, in contrast, they have developed games by starting from a broad, thin base and building on it over time.

 

Iwata: So there were differences in your fundamental approaches to making games.

 

Yamagami: Yes, that’s right. With a title as large in scale as this one, in particular, we couldn’t tell how long it would take to build things up from the broad base at the start of the project right through to its completion. What’s more, I wasn’t able to fully judge what exact goals Xenoblade Chronicles was aiming for. So I requested that they make something of more or less the same quality as the finished product, even if it was just one chapter. This caused Kojima-san some consternation.

 

Iwata: Kojima-san, were you put in an awkward spot when Nintendo requested that you create something in a way that differed from your usual approach?

 

Kojima: I wouldn’t say that I was placed in an awkward spot. But a lot of the design staff at Monolith Soft have always been the kind of people who build things up by continually adding more and more. For this reason, while they do have an image of the final version in mind, they tend to do things at a gradual pace.

 

Iwata: A lot of artists continue to add more and more to their work, as the more effort they put in, the better it becomes.

 

Kojima: Yes, that’s right. Before Yamagami-san said he wanted us to just make the first chapter, I had wanted to work in the usual manner, doing things slowly but surely. I didn’t want to force the staff to work in a manner to which they weren’t accustomed. That’s why I initially replied that it was going to be tough just making that first chapter. But Yamagami-san pressed the point, so I decided that we had no choice but to give it a go.

 

Iwata: And when you gave it a go, how did it work out? Kojima: Well, it rather pains me to say this, but it turned out to be a much easier way to do things! Iwata: (laughs)

 

Kojima: We just attempted to create a single map, but it turned out well. When we actually did it, it was brought home to the staff very clearly and concretely that this was the kind of target we could work towards.

 

Iwata: Being able to visualise your target is incredibly significant, especially with a game on this scale.

 

Kojima: Right. It also made us aware of how much time we’d need to spend to produce one section, which was really great. But it was pretty gruelling all the same! (laughs)

 

Yamagami: When that first chapter was made with Kojima-san’s cooperation, I could look at it and say: ‘And the final product will be even better than this!’ That is to say, I got an image of what the end result would be like. I think it was incredibly important for both Nintendo and Monolith Soft to both be able to share this common image.

 

Iwata: Okay, let’s hear from Hattori-san next.

 

Hattori: Okay. Iwata: When Yamagami-san initially told you that he wanted you to cast an objective eye over the scenario, how did you feel about it? Hattori: At first, I wasn’t sure what to do. Takahashi-san has a lot of long-standing fans, and Yokota-san had also told me how fantastic he was. Iwata: So you heard from Yokota-san, the huge RPG fan, how fantastic Takahashi-san was, then Yamagami-san told you that you had to match him...

 

Hattori: That’s right! (laughs) And seeing as Takahashi-san is someone who’s paid his dues and has vast experience, I really wondered just what I’d be able to do. But in fact, the very first time I visited Monolith Soft and had the game structure explained to me while being shown that model, my heart really started racing.

 

Iwata: So you were really excited by it too.

 

Hattori: Yes, I was! (laughs) There was the fact that you could steadily climb further up the giant’s leg, and the fact that you could go to any part of the landscape you could see. It was a structure which really fired your sense of adventure, and it really did excite me. So I began by asking Takahashi-san all sorts of questions, so that I would share the same conception of how the game’s worldview could be realised.

 

Iwata: So Hattori-san’s role was to look at the scenario and make comments about it from an objective position, taking into account the perspective of players who might not know much about the world Takahashi-san was creating. Did she ask some questions that were wide off the mark?

 

Takahashi: No, no, not at all. I was actually really grateful for her input. There were a lot of instances where I’d be writing the scenario and be deeply engaged in taking things in a particular direction, and while I’d be really excited by it, Hattori-san would point out that she couldn’t really understand what we were getting at. One case in point is the game’s ending. Initially, we’d come up with what we felt was an ending with a rather explanatory feel. But in fact, she told us that even with this explanation, she couldn’t really understand it. When she pointed this out to me, I could see what she meant. There were things that seemed perfectly clear to us, but which were actually tricky to understand for players who didn’t have previous knowledge. If you’re referencing things that people know nothing about, it’s really a meaningless exercise, isn’t it?

 

Iwata: Right. If you handle these things the wrong way, they’ll go right over some players’ heads.

 

Takahashi: Another issue pointed out by Hattori-san which I can clearly remember concerns the girl named Fiora, the childhood friend of Shulk, the hero. There’s a scene where she’s fast asleep and you touch her hand. Hattori: Ah, that part! (laughs)

 

Takahashi: This was initially a scene where Shulk touched her cheek to communicate his feelings for her. But Hattori-san pointed out that suddenly touching a woman’s cheek while she’s asleep could be construed as being a little creepy.

 

Hattori: Well, the two of them aren’t lovers, after all. That’s why I thought it would be a little surprising for someone you weren’t in a relationship with to suddenly touch your cheek while you were sleeping. It would spoil the innocent, naive nature of their love, and would make you think: ‘Wait! Shulk’s being a bit forward, isn’t he?’ (laughs)

 

Takahashi: I felt she had a point, and in the end we modified it so that he holds her hand. There were various cases like that, which was really interesting.

 

Yamagami: In that way, we gave Takahashi-san our objective take on the scenario, by being conscious of how the world which he had conceived could be made easier for players to understand.

 

Iwata: That sounds just like the relationship between a writer and their editor.

 

Yamagami: That’s exactly what it was.

 

Takahashi: It’s natural that when you are working on something by yourself, there will be parts which conform to your own personal tastes. Whether it was an emotional or structural aspect, all sorts of unbalanced sections like this were picked up on by Nintendo, for which I was really grateful.

 

Iwata: A writer’s role is to create something sharp and striking. An editor takes a step back and aims to adjust the writer’s work so it’s heading in the right direction, suggesting things like: ‘This is clear, but this isn’t coming across’, or ‘If you want this to be clear, perhaps you should think about adjusting this’. When the writer and editor have a good relationship, then things go in the right direction. So I think we can say that this time round, you ended up with a good relationship.

 

Takahashi: I agree. Thanks to this process, I believe that we’ve made a game that will be enjoyed by both RPG fans as well as a more general audience.

 

To read that and say that it's not a Nintendo game, where Nintendo had no influence over the title is ridiculous! Even just taking the first paragraph into account and looking at Xenogears (which was only really half a game, as they crapped out on the 2nd disc) and Xenosaga, the difference in terms of how successfully Takahashi's vision was realised in Xenoblade in comparison to those 4 games is immense!

Edited December 18, 2012 by Dcubed

[RedShell]

@Dcubed, you are the smartest person on these forums.

I guess that could be taken as an insult but I assure you, I mean it in the best possible way.

Never leave this place.

[Shorty]

You want something that fits the 4 criteria I mentioned before and nothing else will do.

 

You're right, you just presented it too sarcastically. Here's your 4 criteria reworded in a less condescending manner:

 

1: You want a new, character driven game. That's the thing you love from Nintendo. It's not that you don't like RPGs, tactics driven fantasy, racing games, minigames, brain teasers, motion controlled sports or pet simulators, it's just that's not what's going to make you lay down your cash on a new console today.

 

2: 2... actually I can't reword this. Because I don't think a worldwide release has ever been important to me, at all. That Gamecube Freeloader's gathering dust, after all. Marketing is also largely irrelevant in my own decision making.

 

3: Again I'm not sure downloadable games weighed into this at all. But sure - you prefer a physical game in your hand. It feels better, there's no hefty download times, less risk of losing it if your downloads are deleted in 10 years time and the files are no longer being hosted. And maybe your broadband package isn't that great, 10GB/mo caps or a slow rural downspeed. You can't lend a downloaded game to a friend or sell it when you're hard up. On the other hand, you accept that downloadable games may be the future, and if it's a game you really want, you'll get it by whatever means.

 

4: What you'd really like, is a new game developed by EAD/Miyamoto. You love the other games, too. It's just that nobody does it better....

Edited December 18, 2012 by Shorty

[Daft]

I said in my opinion Pikmin was the last classic IP and I emphasis the classic, as in that was the last original IP that gave me that 'Nintendo feel'. Because of that quality Pikmin belongs to the same family as Mario and Zelda.

 

Obviously this is completely subjective but to me it's a similar difference between Pixar and Disney Animation films. Disney Animation ain't bad, they just aren't Pixar and I'm not really bothered to see the films they make - although I'd watch them if they were on TV.

[Dcubed]

You're right, you just presented it too sarcastically. Here's your 4 criteria reworded in a less condescending manner:

 

1: You want a new, character driven game. That's the thing you love from Nintendo. It's not that you don't like RPGs, tactics driven fantasy, racing games, minigames, brain teasers, motion controlled sports or pet simulators, it's just that's not what's going to make you lay down your cash on a new console today.

 

2: 2... actually I can't reword this. Because I don't think a worldwide release has ever been important to me, at all. That Gamecube Freeloader's gathering dust, after all. Marketing is also largely irrelevant in my own decision making.

 

3: Again I'm not sure downloadable games weighed into this at all. But sure - you prefer a physical game in your hand. It feels better, there's no hefty download times, less risk of losing it if your downloads are deleted in 10 years time and the files are no longer being hosted. And maybe your broadband package isn't that great, 10GB/mo caps or a slow rural downspeed. You can't lend a downloaded game to a friend or sell it when you're hard up. On the other hand, you accept that downloadable games may be the future, and if it's a game you really want, you'll get it by whatever means.

 

4: What you'd really like, is a new game developed by EAD/Miyamoto. You love the other games, too. It's just that nobody does it better....

 

Sorry, I'm so used to being sarcy that I start to do it unknowingly at times!

 

But I do think that the downloadable part of it comes into the equation. Speaking as a marketing grad here (not to big myself up as an expert, but it's to do with the psychology of "products" compared to "services" - so it's something that is widely recognised in my field), a physical retail release has a sense of legitimacy that downloadable titles lack by nature of their delivery method. For many people, downloadable titles aren't "worthy" of attention in the same way that retail releases are. You only need to look at various top 10/25/whatever console game lists and see how little importance is given to downloadable titles (oftentimes even being relegated to a seperate list for downloadable titles only or with the game's commentary being more focused on the DD service itself, rather than the game's actual content).

 

Likewise, having a game being given a worldwide release and a big marketing push also adds an air of legitimacy that lesser known titles may lack.

 

While I personally think these factors are unfair to consider against judging these games, I also believe that they do matter to a certain group of people and should be considered when thinking about which games would "count" in the minds of these people.

Edited December 18, 2012 by Dcubed

[Shorty]

Ha, this is awesome. This is what a healthy debate is all about! Feel much safer in this thread :p

 

It's worth stating the obvious one more time, none (or very few) of us is anti-Nintendo, or we wouldn't be here. Perhaps there's a skewed idea of what Nintendo and Original IP means, but there is also a noticeable shift in the way what we know and love has been delivered over the last 5 years, hence disillusionment. This thread exists to ask "what would bring you back to Nintendo?" and nothing could be more subjective than that.

[Cube]

A big new in-house IP would also have to displace one of the main games from their current franchises. Nobody wants that to happen.

[dazzybee]

I said in my opinion Pikmin was the last classic IP and I emphasis the classic, as in that was the last original IP that gave me that 'Nintendo feel'. Because of that quality Pikmin belongs to the same family as Mario and Zelda.

 

Obviously this is completely subjective but to me it's a similar difference between Pixar and Disney Animation films. Disney Animation ain't bad, they just aren't Pixar and I'm not really bothered to see the films they make - although I'd watch them if they were on TV.

 

To go off on a tangent, I will say that the Princess and the frog is absolutely amazing!

 

To stay on topic, I think most people will agree with you. I absolutely love the wii range (sports, resort, fit etc) and especially Rhtyhm Heaven (and Jam with the band); but they're not absolutely classics like Pikmin.

[Jonnas]

It came out a couple of months before Pikmin.

 

I stand corrected, then. I could swear it was released in 2002.

 

What is this? Fire Emblem is Nintendo. Intelligent Systems is a first party developer. Monolith Soft and Camelot are 3rd party (although Nintendo bought Monolith or something, didn't they?).

 

The original Fire Emblem was released in 1990, if anything Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre feel like Fire Emblem. I'd argue they are similar but not the same.

 

Camelot is actually 2nd Party. Besides Golden Sun, they also made the Mario Tennis series and a few Golf titles.

 

(And thank you, regarding the second point. Fire Emblem is nothing like FFTactics)

 

I think it's very easy to understand what people are getting at/want:

 

A "proper" (no minigame/partygame collections) new singleplayer IP developed by Nintendo EAD. Unlike other companies, Nintendo games have a particular feel associated with them and that's what people click with. Xenoblade, Golden Sun or Fire Emblem aren't "Nintendo" games (Xenoblade feels exactly like Xenogears, Golden Sun feels like Chrono Trigger/Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest and Fire Emblem feels like Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre). Nintendo owns these games, yes, but they don't feel like Nintendo games. EAD, Retro and HAL are the subsidiaries that captures the feel of "Nintendo" games. And ever since launching Pikmin none of them has brought any major new (and COMPLETELY ORIGINAL) IPs to the table. So that's what's missing. That's what people want. That "Nintendo" feel, on something completely new. And NO, Steel Diver doesn't count.

 

Edit - Just realized I made this exact same post 2 months ago. Lol, am phail.

 

You're hung up on technicalities and admittedly there's no way I can argue with publishers, numbers, developers and who predates who. I'm not talking hard facts here, unfortunately, I know that must be frustrating for you.

 

This is far more subjective, and circles around the fact that someone can create a character or idea that embeds itself in gaming history, spawns saturday morning cartoons and lunchboxes and leaves us wanting more 25 years later.

 

We, the disillusioned, know what we're missing out on, Oxigen did a great job of detailing it. If we can't be satisfied without it, surely you can see that there's a gap there?

 

When I say the "new IPs" demand bugs me, this is what I'm talking about. DCubed's 4-point description is almost perfect (and I would thank it I had any left ), because that demand tends to be nitpicky with everything.

I've noticed Oxi_Waste didn't mention Gamefreak, but I'll assume they're also included (They actually released a new IP some time ago, too. A platformer for the GBA, in fact)

 

I must also mention that when DCubed says "retail game", he may as well include only those released on home consoles, too. Handheld games are almost always ignored. Even Pokémon has a tendency to be forgotten when mentioning Ninty's big franchises.

 

Speaking of handhelds, how do you feel about revived/re-hauled franchises like Kid Icarus? That sure feels like a new franchise altogether.

[Agent Gibbs]

If we are going for healthy debate, and nobodies likely to shoot me down with a "their hands are tied" response.....can we discuss this ludicrous Age restriction ban in europe on the eshop

 

I understand its german law and that noe are based in europe, but they cannot just bury their heads in the sand and accept a situation that puts them at a serious disadvantage to their main competitors!

Supposedly even the law they are blaming for this even states it must be time restricted or technologically restricted (aka pin locked/age verification/blood sample/iris scans whatever)

 

So if that's the case Nintendo need to firstly look into options, and secondly publicise that they are looking for a solution rather than the blanket statement

 

Everything else that is wrong with the Wiiu (and there are post launch teething problems like slow OS) is forgivable as its early days, but this just is so far seeming to be a permenant thing and if i'm honest its a major bug bare for me that's really killing my enthusiasm for nintendo.

 

you see this gen the 360 has been my lead console, with my PS3 on a level with the Wii in thatplayed only exclusive games on them and then in the case of the ps3 watched bluerays. But i've leaned more towards the ps3 of late, the 360 has nothing i like in the way of exclusives other than halo and well ODSt and whatever the otherone was didn't interest me, so Halo 4 i've yet to buy, and the HUD has become an abomination, i don't like the tiles as such, they work on phones but on a games console its like 90% adverts and you have to look for the stuff you want hidden around. The only thing that kept me with the 360 is timed exclusives and actual DLC (i'm looking at you skyrim) if they went, my 360 would be sold

 

So with the WiiU i was hoping to with this gen only buy one console, the off tv play ticked all boxes for me, and the thought of decent thirdparty software coming held my hopes up, but this e-shop nonsense is terrifying! if i were a dev i'd avoid releasing DLC on the console, and as a consumer i do not relish the idea of having to set downloads on the go after 11. It just serves to make me feel i won't get the third party game for the next fallout, the next TES, etc etc that are often DLC heavy and pegi 18! Thats assuming they don't get turned off from the console full stop

 

Nintendo aren't doing enough in general to help/aid the wiiU, advertisements and shop penetration are low, the media is berating them and now ludicrous restrictions mean they are far from on par with Online, which was already a joke

 

I'm becoming disenfranchised with all this

Edited December 18, 2012 by Agent Gibbs

[Shorty]

Yeah this is by far the worst thing I've heard about the console so far. If a downloadable game comes out and I'm off work, and I really want to play it, with the choice being wait 11pm on the Wii U or grab it immediately on 360/PS3, I know where I'm going to go.

 

Isn't there a parental lock system in place in the Wii's software? 360 has a PIN system (can't remember if the PS3 does). I imagine it's easy to disable downloads and display any message so this has been their solution until they come up with something solid which will involve a system update. I'm very surprised there was nothing in place from the start.

[Dcubed]

When I say the "new IPs" demand bugs me, this is what I'm talking about. DCubed's 4-point description is almost perfect (and I would thank it I had any left ), because that demand tends to be nitpicky with everything.

I've noticed Oxi_Waste didn't mention Gamefreak, but I'll assume they're also included (They actually released a new IP some time ago, too. A platformer for the GBA, in fact)

 

I must also mention that when DCubed says "retail game", he may as well include only those released on home consoles, too. Handheld games are almost always ignored. Even Pokémon has a tendency to be forgotten when mentioning Ninty's big franchises.

 

Speaking of handhelds, how do you feel about revived/re-hauled franchises like Kid Icarus? That sure feels like a new franchise altogether.

 

Aww I feel so wuved!

 

As for the handheld situation, I think you're also partly right here. Even longstanding entries in series like Zelda often go ignored (as what happened in this very thread), but it's not that strong really. Handhelds are at least treated with respect by Nintendo fans in general, but the media flat out pretend that they don't exist all together really. They never win any awards of GOTY nominations because the big media sites see them as lesser games. That undoubtedly has some influence on people's opinions of handheld games in general, but certainly not to the same extent as Sony's handhelds (where everything is seen as a B/Z Team effort, or certain 3rd party titles.

 

As for your last point, that's also something that I consider myself. Kid Icarus Uprising is basically a new IP really. It shares almost nothing in common with the first 2 games in terms of gameplay and Pit is pretty much completely unknown outside of the real hardcore fantasy who've played the NES or (even rarer!) GB game.

 

Also that's the way Nintendo generally work in terms of coming up with game concepts. They create completely disparate prototypes and slap on the character that they feel best fits it (KIU was almost a new Starfox game, but Sakurai had an attachment to the original Kid Icarus and wanted to re-invent the series with an all new cast of characters). So for all the complaints about them making sequels, a lot of these games could've just as easily have been new IPs (Kirby's Epic Yarn is another good example as it was originally an original IP called Fluff's Epic Yarn, until late into development when the team were stuck and were struggling to make the game fun. Adding in Kirby and the trappings that come with him turned out to be the shot in the arm the game needed)

Edited December 18, 2012 by Dcubed

[Daft]

I'd love to see a more 'retro' Zelda game on handheld like Link's Awakening or Oracle of Seasons/Ages. I loved those and would spend so much time just exploring. I guess we aren't going to get Zelda games like that anymore. Maybe a 4 Swords, but it's not really the same thing.