Posted March 17, 2014 To be honest, I don't really know or care what the jargon relating to their fitness plans is. I just think it's not the sort of thing they need to focus on. They're not "focusing" on it. It's part of their expansion. It is taking nothing away from their console, handheld or game development. That's even increasing, too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Whatever you call it, I call it a total waste of time. It will be dead in the water. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 I do think that Nintendo would be best off having their QoL stuff compatible many of the devices out there (and upcoming ones). Right now, the devices and software is all over the place (especially if people don't want to bother doing stuff on a PC), so I think there is space for Nintendo to create a cheap console that can bring together data from non-Nintendo fitness decides. Simple interface, social media integration and stuff like that is a must. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Whatever you call it, I call it a total waste of time. It will be dead in the water. I tend to agree. I just cant see how they can compete with all the others players out there. Samsung, Apple, Nike etc etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 I tend to agree. I just cant see how they can compete with all the others players out there. Samsung, Apple, Nike etc etc. Could just be lack of imagination on your part. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Could just be lack of imagination on your part. I think its somewhat dillusional and suicidal to think they can... They are barely 'competing' in their own field. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) They're not "focusing" on it. It's part of their expansion. It is taking nothing away from their console, handheld or game development. That's even increasing, too. So adding online to a game will reduce its focus and what they can put into it but launching completely different products alongside won't drain equally if not more resources? Righto. As for this whole innovation in Skyward Sword thing - am I the only one who, despite how much it kept the same and recycled, found ALBW to actually be far more innovative to the Zelda formula than SS? I enjoyed that much more than SS I think, and I'm really hoping they've got similar beyond the box thinking for whatever Zelda Wii U becomes. (EDIT: Should mention that yes, like others, I did find SS innovative - but also like others whilst I appreciated a lot of the things it/they did like the motion controls - I didn't neccessarily like them quite as much. Appreciating it technically but actually liking it makes a difference that I think a few people have hit on quite well) Edited March 17, 2014 by Rummy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Could just be lack of imagination on your part. So you're saying you need imagination to see it become a reality? :p In the same way one would need imagination to converse with a unicorn, or see pigs flying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Could just be lack of imagination on your part. Describes Iwata's vision for Nintendo. Nintendo cant even compete in the home console market which is there speciality. They are now entering a higely competitive market where big players are who can fund all kinds of innovation. Knowing Nintendo they wont even know what others are doing in that industry as they operate in a bubble. Edited March 17, 2014 by liger05 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Whatever you call it, I call it a total waste of time. It will be dead in the water. I'm not saying it won't, and I don't like the idea of it. But we have no idea whatsoever what it's even going to be. So to say it's dead in the water knowing anything about it is just bizarre! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) I'm not saying it won't, and I don't like the idea of it. But we have no idea whatsoever what it's even going to be. So to say it's dead in the water knowing anything about it is just bizarre! (Grudge against Sheikah much? :p ) Its more that its out of Nintendo`s remit. It`ll be like a white belt stepping into the ring against a black belt all like "I got this"... Edited March 17, 2014 by King_V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Knowing Nintendo they wont even know what others are doing in that industry as they operate in a bubble. What's a Nike? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Regarding Quality of Life, the reason I'm sceptical about that is because Nintendo only takes existing technology and pairs it up with their software/hardware. What I mean is that if Nintendo was a science lab, I'd be excited that they might invent something new; but obviously they're not, so Quality of Life is probably going to be something that you can buy elsewhere in another form. Let's say, for example, that the focus of Quality of Life is going to be "getting to sleep" (I say that because I can think of very little else that it could be.) Calming you down, relaxing you etc. Nintendo might be able to invent a cool piece of software to go with it (in the same way StreetPass facilitates wireless interaction better than I've seen anyone else do it); but Nintendo doesn't have the monopoly on software, processors or the health technology itself. If you really want it, you'll be able to get it elsewhere. That's what I think at the moment, but let's see what it turns out to be. What the hell? Pachter might know about business, but he clearly knows sweet f.a. about video games, and even less about Nintendo. He's great entertainment value though. Yeah, I meant to bring this up last night. I don't dislike Pachter but I think he's just plain wrong about this. GBA had A, B, L + R - I just can't fathom how anyone could think that's not significantly better than a smartphone. Has he played Metroid Fusion/Zero Mission, I wonder? They used L for aiming, R to access missiles, A to jump and B to blast - great controls, but you had to wrap your hands around the whole handheld. Not everything can be reduced to an "Angry Birds" type concept - in fact, platformers have been simplified when ported to iOS. If I honestly thought there was $1billion in making a Mario game for smartphone, I'd want Nintendo to do it (just as a cash cow), but I tend to agree with @Serebii that you'd actually have to get very lucky. It was a good video, though, and I do like listening to all three of them, but there's a world of handheld gaming that is too good to lose just because smartphones are the "in" thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 GBA had A, B, L + R - I just can't fathom how anyone could think that's not significantly better than a smartphone. Has he played Metroid Fusion/Zero Mission, I wonder? They used L for aiming, R to access missiles, A to jump and B to blast - great controls, but you had to wrap your hands around the whole handheld. I was playing some Zero Mission the other night and I thought "there's no way I could play this on a phone/tablet" as I briefly considered backing up the ROM and putting it on my phone. RPG's you can sort of get away with but they are still a pain to play. Speaking of RPG's. Dragon Quest X became available on mobiles recently. "hey, that sounds good, I can play some while on the bus, or during lunch"... No thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 I just think technology moves so fast and what others can offer in the health and fitness industry technology wise will be far superior to what Nintendo can do. They are not going to go high end. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 No thanks. That just looks like a direct port with virtual controls, and no effort to make it suitable for a touch interface. Here's a better example Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 That just looks like a direct port with virtual controls, and no effort to make it suitable for a touch interface. Here's a better example Some games, ones made for mobiles from the ground up can work. Angry Birds, turn based strategy games or slow moving games are fine. There's no way on earth could touch screen controls be precise enough for a proper FPS experience let alone something like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze! I can't imagine the hell of playing a traditional platformer on a phone. As I side, the barrel or mine cart levels could be a blast on a phone and easily adapted to be fun as they are single touch games, but the idea of playing SMB3 on a phone as a Nintendo classic is horrible. It would destroy the game! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 (Grudge against Sheikah much? :p ) Its more that its out of Nintendo`s remit. It`ll be like a white belt stepping into the ring against a black belt all like "I got this"... Haha, no, just so happens I'm frequently baffled by his comments. But the thing is, we don't know what it is so how do we know it's out of their comfort zone? Who's to say it won't be a tablet which plays software like brain training and sudoku and such? Plus they have done one (if no THE) biggest singular fitness software ever released so it's not like it's completely alien to them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 If they were doing a tablet, I'd be saying exactly the same thing. They would be destroyed by the competition which has had years of a head start and produce cheap tablets through subsidisation - getting people to sign up to Google/Amazon services. Some games, ones made for mobiles from the ground up can work. Angry Birds, turn based strategy games or slow moving games are fine. There's no way on earth could touch screen controls be precise enough for a proper FPS experience let alone something like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze! I can't imagine the hell of playing a traditional platformer on a phone. As I side, the barrel or mine cart levels could be a blast on a phone and easily adapted to be fun as they are single touch games, but the idea of playing SMB3 on a phone as a Nintendo classic is horrible. It would destroy the game! I reckon they could quite easily put together a Mario runner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 That just looks like a direct port with virtual controls, and no effort to make it suitable for a touch interface. Here's a better example Yeah, I am aware. I nearly didn't post it. But yours doesn't look much better to me either. The Dragon Quest I port was still a pain to play with touch screen controls and that had a touch interface. The rest of the game? Great. In fact it's probably the best version. The Sonic 1 & Sonic 2 ports. Fantastic. Let down by imprecise controls. I brought it up on here to suggest an alternative to the 3D update but I was shot down due to the fact it was touch screen based controls despite it being the better overall package. 999 got released on iOS today. Without the puzzles. Wha? Mobile gaming has it's place but you can't just take games available on handhelds and drop them onto a mobile device. They are different experiences, mobile games are meant to be distractions while I wait for the bus to show up. I don't then get home and decide "hey, I'm going to play Flappy Bird all afternoon". I know I'm talking about personal preference here, but I don't actually know anyone who does this. Most mobile games end up as fads anyway. Sometimes I'll boot Sonic Dash* if I'm bored but that usually only gets played 10 minutes. A game similar to NES Remix could work. Give people a sample of the game but be like "Hey, buy a Wii U and download this game from the eShop"! Put the Pyro minigame from WarioWare on mobiles and point people towards WarioWare. That's something I would like to see. Mario 64 DS had a bunch of cool mini games that could work. I think Dreamworld from Pokemon Black/White would have worked great on mobile. * Don't know why, I hate it. No I'm not paying £34.99 to unlock Rouge the Bloomin' Bat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 but Little Big Planet?! Really? It was an awful platforming game We've discussed this before and I really don't understand your viewpoint on LBP. Ignoring the creative aspect, I felt that it was a robust (but not perfect) platformer, sure it's controls were a little soft but never game breaking, and some great level design - design that exceeds Nintendo's own recent 2D platformers. I've only briefly read through some of your posts @dazzybee and @Sheikah (there's lots of them!), hopefully I've not got the wrong end of the stick with your arguments. Recently I've found that Nintendo haven't been the creative force they're given credit for (those Game of the Year awards for Mario 3D World are nothing short of a joke, click bait, when you stack Mario and Zelda against Last of Us or Journey it's clear Nintendo have absolutely no desire to progress in the industry; they're stuck in a rut and that's so frustrating for fans. What they do is great fun but it's not been truly creative for years. They desperately need to expand into new territories; Japan isn't a creatively barren country; so why is Nintendo entirely focussed on the rinse-and-repeat business model I scathe EA for? A mix of new IP and existing franchises work in every other media. Why are the same producers working on churning out those old faces? It's all well and good talking about Wii Sports - Nintendo's last big new IP - and how influential it was... but that's nearly 8 years old. In that time Sony and Microsoft have released countless new IP, some spawning series, others not (but at least they've tried...). Their creative output, their support of new ideas simply dwarfs that of Nintendo's - there is absolutely no way to argue otherwise. I'm surprised key figures aren't leaving the company, it must be like working for the McDonalds of the gaming industry. I don't think anyone wishes Nintendo simply drop their mascots but, really, its about time Nintendo worked on new IP. There's no excuse for it not to happen, one new IP every couple of years should be minimum (although, of course, this process shouldn't be forced but certainly encouraged). I just think technology moves so fast and what others can offer in the health and fitness industry technology wise will be far superior to what Nintendo can do. They are not going to go high end. I've written about this elsewhere, but Wii Fit is a far superior package to anything across other consumer products; fit watches and smartphones simply monitor whilst Wii Fit actually provides a well balanced routine and leads you on from there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 ...Recently I've found that Nintendo haven't been the creative force they're given credit for (those Game of the Year awards for Mario 3D World are nothing short of a joke, click bait, when you stack Mario and Zelda against Last of Us or Journey it's clear Nintendo have absolutely no desire to progress in the industry; they're stuck in a rut and that's so frustrating for fans. What they do is great fun but it's not been truly creative for years... Sorry but I can't help but view this as utter tripe. I don't mean to offend personally but to me that's absolute nonsense. Just because it's Mario, it doesn't mean that it isn't creative. The level design has such a wide breadth of creativity in it. Some truly fantastic levels! This is the creativity in Mario games. The levels themselves! You're thinking about it so obtusely that you're not actually seeing just how creative it's being! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Sorry but I can't help but view this as utter tripe. I don't mean to offend personally but to me that's absolute nonsense. Just because it's Mario, it doesn't mean that it isn't creative. The level design has such a wide breadth of creativity in it. Some truly fantastic levels! This is the creativity in Mario games. The levels themselves! You're thinking about it so obtusely that you're not actually seeing just how creative it's being! I agree. Many of the levels in 3D World were imaginative, creative and just downright awesome. The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds is also similar. Great ideas within it. The Last of Us, however. Gameplay was meh. Story was good. Presentation was great. I have been maintaining that it'd make a much better movie than a game. Good thing it has a movie coming out. The fact that so many continually want every game to be a "game changer" and to "progress the industry" is ridiculous. Games are meant to be fun. If a game is fun, then who cares if it doesn't change the industry? Recently I've found that Nintendo haven't been the creative force they're given credit for (those Game of the Year awards for Mario 3D World are nothing short of a joke, click bait, when you stack Mario and Zelda against Last of Us or Journey it's clear Nintendo have absolutely no desire to progress in the industry; they're stuck in a rut and that's so frustrating for fans. What they do is great fun but it's not been truly creative for years. They desperately need to expand into new territories; Japan isn't a creatively barren country; so why is Nintendo entirely focussed on the rinse-and-repeat business model I scathe EA for? A mix of new IP and existing franchises work in every other media. Why are the same producers working on churning out those old faces? It's all well and good talking about Wii Sports - Nintendo's last big new IP - and how influential it was... but that's nearly 8 years old. In that time Sony and Microsoft have released countless new IP, some spawning series, others not (but at least they've tried...). Their creative output, their support of new ideas simply dwarfs that of Nintendo's - there is absolutely no way to argue otherwise. I'm surprised key figures aren't leaving the company, it must be like working for the McDonalds of the gaming industry. I don't think anyone wishes Nintendo simply drop their mascots but, really, its about time Nintendo worked on new IP. There's no excuse for it not to happen, one new IP every couple of years should be minimum (although, of course, this process shouldn't be forced but certainly encouraged). I argue otherwise. Nintendo put their new ideas into existing franchises. You don't need to throw it into a new IP just for people to think it's new. That's just ridiculous. Key figures aren't leaving the company because they're doing what they enjoy and have creative freedom. Again, a lack of a new IP doesn't mean lack of creativity. Look at many of the new IPs on the other formats. They may be new IPs, but do they actually do much new? New story & characters, but many of them have similar gameplay to so many games that have come before. Which leads me to my next point. Since Wii Sports, Nintendo have published, financed and created a plethora of new IPs. Some have done well, others have not. Need I break out the list again? Edited March 17, 2014 by Serebii Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Sorry but I can't help but view this as utter tripe. I don't mean to offend personally but to me that's absolute nonsense. Just because it's Mario, it doesn't mean that it isn't creative. The level design has such a wide breadth of creativity in it. Some truly fantastic levels! This is the creativity in Mario games. The levels themselves! You're thinking about it so obtusely that you're not actually seeing just how creative it's being! Too right. The funny thing with 3D World was that Nintendo would throw in a new idea in a level and it would just be in that level, then on to the next new idea. Like the Mario Kart level, it was really fun, fast and different, then it was over. Lesser developers would have come up with one of those things and stretched the concept out over an entire world until you were bored to death of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted March 17, 2014 Which leads me to my next point. Since Wii Sports, Nintendo have published, financed and created a plethora of new IPs. Some have done well, others have not. Need I break out the list again? Please do. You said that many IPs on other platforms have similar gameplay to other games. I'd like to know some new IPs that Nintendo published/financed that don't have similar gameplay to others. I haven't been following gaming news when it comes to Nintendo lately, so your list may ignite my love for the company again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
