Serebii Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 No, Sheikah, you're complaining about "rehashes" when these games have very few iterations. It's bizarre and the implication that Nintendo doesn't try new things is also erroneous And I am still correct in the fact that lack of sales is not necessarily an indicator in lack of quality. Comparing it is just a specious argument. Quality != sales and that's that. You're putting Nintendo on a different position to everyone else and expecting them to live up to ridiculous ideals.
Kounan Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 But was it a problem with some games? Nintendo fans are furious because there is no new Zelda game for the console. Games like Super Mario, Smash, Zelda, Mario Kart 8, Donkey Kong, now Mario 3D are some of the games that HAVE to be on every console. It doesn't matter that "only" 30-40-50% of owners buy it, it is still in millions. Yes, they miss other games, but these games have to be on every console and I would add Splatoon from now on.
Jonnas Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Even the 3DS has been pretty barren this year Ah, ok, that I can see. I saw stuff like "the 3DS is pretty dry", and I thought it was bizarre, considering it likely has more noteworthy games than even the N64 at this point.
nekunando Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Ah, ok, that I can see. I saw stuff like "the 3DS is pretty dry", and I thought it was bizarre, considering it likely has more noteworthy games than even the N64 at this point. LOL.. no
Dcubed Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) LOL.. no I'd definitely say it does. For everything that the N64 had going for it, quantity was not one of its strong points (a grand total of just 388 games in all regions combined). It has the smallest library out of any of Nintendo's consoles or handhelds by a long shot (excluding Virtual Boy and Pokemon Mini obviously) and out of the 3rd party games that it did get, not many of them were particularly good. Don't forget that it had virtually no support from Japanese 3rd party developers at all outside of Konami and Hudson and this was an era where the lion's share of good games came from Japan. Edited October 31, 2015 by Dcubed
Serebii Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I'd definitely say it does. For everything that the N64 had going for it, quantity was not one of its strong points. It has the smallest library out of any of Nintendo's consoles or handhelds by a long shot (excluding Virtual Boy and Pokemon Mini obviously) and out of the 3rd party games that it did get, not many of them were particularly good. Yeah, Nintendo's output on the N64 wasn't the best in terms of quantity, and was mostly propped up by Rare's output. They were revolutionary for the most part, granted, but few and far between. If you think the Wii U droughts were bad, think back to those times.
Mr-Paul Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 The 3DS has been my favourite Nintendo handheld - loads of quality there. Wii U's games have been "high quality" but haven't been that exciting. Sure, you want there to be Smash, Mario Kart, etc. on every console, and you can argue that they are the best in their respective series. They're great games. But you want new, exciting stuff too that you'll remember forever. Everything feels smaller scale. There's no Metroid. There's no Zelda yet (WWHD doesn't count) Mario 3D World is great, but doesn't wow like 64/Galaxy did. All the 2D platformers are well polished and good fun, but not groundbreaking in any way. Splatoon is great, the kind of ambitious new stuff Nintendo should be doing but for a game that prioritises online, it's hurt by Nintendo's poor online services! Mario Maker is a brilliant tool, really good. It's great fun to play all these inventive levels. But it's another 2D platform game! It does feel like they've been playing it safe this generation, not quite as much ambition, and it's highlighted moreso by the fact they're supporting the console almost single handedly. Is it significant that my most enjoyed Wii U game is probably Hyrule Warriors? I've enjoyed all the other games I've played on the console too, but nothing has made me say wow like many of Nintendo's classics in the past have. We'll see if Xenoblade Chronicles X changes that.
nekunando Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I'd definitely say it does.. I guess it depends what you're after When I look through my collection of N64 games and compare it to my 3DS games, the N64 wipes the floor with it. In fact, 3 of the best 3DS games are remakes of N64 titles in Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask and Starfox 64 3D. To be honest, very little really stands out to me on 3DS and I have found it to be something of a disappointment. It's strange that the most enjoyment I probably had with it came in my very first game for the system in Pilotwings Resort. Having said that, I find it difficult to see how anything could compare to a console with Diddy Kong Racing, Goldeneye, Wave Race 64, Super Mario 64, 1080 Snowboarding, F-Zero X, Yoshi's Story, Mario Kart 64, Lylat Wars, Pilotwings 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Super Smash Bros, Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Excitebike 64, ISS 98, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Top Gear Rally, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong 64 and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater I'm definitely not saying you're wrong to feel the 3DS has a better catalogue for you, but for me Nintendo were on fire that generation and I loved every second
Sheikah Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I guess it depends what you're after When I look through my collection of N64 games and compare it to my 3DS games, the N64 wipes the floor with it. In fact, 3 of the best 3DS games are remakes of N64 titles in Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask and Starfox 64 3D. To be honest, very little really stands out to me on 3DS and I have found it to be something of a disappointment. It's strange that the most enjoyment I probably had with it came in my very first game for the system in Pilotwings Resort. Having said that, I find it difficult to see how anything could compare to a console with Diddy Kong Racing, Goldeneye, Wave Race 64, Super Mario 64, 1080 Snowboarding, F-Zero X, Yoshi's Story, Mario Kart 64, Lylat Wars, Pilotwings 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Super Smash Bros, Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Excitebike 64, ISS 98, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Top Gear Rally, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong 64 and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater I'm definitely not saying you're wrong to feel the 3DS has a better catalogue for you, but for me Nintendo were on fire that generation and I loved every second Man, agree so much with this. You're so right that the best games on the 3DS are the N64 remakes. :P To the other peeps; talking about total numbers of games on a system is a bit of a stretch. Total number of amazing/wowser/God tier games is what matters.
Dcubed Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 To the other peeps; talking about total numbers of games on a system is a bit of a stretch. Total number of amazing/wowser/God tier games is what matters. I'm just illustrating a point. The N64 had some real greats, but there aren't a huge number of them. There are probably around 40-50 worthwhile games released for the N64 in total, while I already have more than double that for 3DS personally.
dazzybee Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) That's a bit of a jump, do you not think? Maybe, I don't mean across any series, I mean NEW mario, not for a long time, I'd be surprised. Subjective musings backed up by the fact hardly anyone is buying the thing. Sheikhs favourite thing of equating commercial success with quality.... any argument to try and prove a point... IT IS subjective don't you realise this?! Some people do think Pikmin, and Smash and Mario Kart 8 are some of the series best iterations. Some people do think Mario Maker and Splatoon are new takes we haven't seen before and incredible pieces in their own right. You don't so they're far from their best and to try and prove your point you say - well know one's buying it so it must be true. Like that means anything in this regard. Edited October 31, 2015 by dazzybee Automerged Doublepost
Sheikah Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Dazzybee, do you honestly think that there is no connection between games being very good/desirable/appealing and sales? In that case, why make a game good at all? Why offer bonuses for games getting 90+ metacritic (like we know they do). Common sense and reality go against everything you say.
Dcubed Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) The part that makes me the most sad is when everyone here ignores this game... Perhaps the best game on the Wii U (one of the ones that could only be done on Wii U with the Gamepad/two screens as well) and nobody here ever talks about it Dazzybee, do you honestly think that there is no connection between games being very good/desirable/appealing and sales? In that case, why make a game good at all? Why offer bonuses for games getting 90+ metacritic (like we know they do). Common sense and reality go against everything you say. Garbage sells well all the time, or do you think that games like Madden, Watch Dogs and FIFA are the best that the industry can hope to aspire to? Games that are reviewed well often don't sell well at all. There isn't much correlation between review scores and sales at all and while we're at it, plenty of crappy games get good reviews and plenty of good games get bad reviews - particularly if they have non-standard control schemes (reviewers from the large sites tend to slate games that don't conform to a standard form of play or control layout) or if the reviewer has an axe to grind against a developer/publisher/series in general (giving a game like Shiren the Wanderer to someone who hates rogue-likes to review is obviously going to end up meaning that it's gonna get an unfairly low score for instance). Things aren't nearly as black and white as you seem to believe they are. Review scores don't really amount to much in the grand scheme of things really. Edited October 31, 2015 by Dcubed
dazzybee Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Dazzybee, do you honestly think that there is no connection between games being very good/desirable/appealing and sales? In that case, why make a game good at all? Why offer bonuses for games getting 90+ metacritic (like we know they do). Common sense and reality go against everything you say. I never said there is no connection, but commercial success/failure doesn't mean something is good or bad. I'm sure you have said yourself, but definitely lots of people on here have said if NIntendo's games were on the PS4 for example they'd sell loads more and that people are desperate to play Nintendo's games but don't want to pay for another system for just a few games. For me, this is better evidence that Nintendo do make high quality games. Also, the best evidence is playing them. I genuinely believe Pikmin 3, Splatoon, maorio maker and Smash and mario kart are absolutely incredible games; some f the best of the generation across all consoles. That's the best evidence for me, and just because it isn't popular it's not going to make me change my mind. There are hundreds, thousands, probably millions of examples of things not being popular but still being incredible. And many examples of things being very popular but being awful. They don't go hand in hand and I think it's unfair to use it as an argument against it. There are better ones. The fact that Smash and Mario kart, although are absolutely bets in class are still sequels with no lots of new stuff thrown in; and obviously the big one - the online infratarucrture, which actually hinders all 5 of those games (online Bingo Battle and missions and Pikmin 3 would be in my top 5 games of all time). The part that makes me the most sad is when everyone here ignores this game... Perhaps the best game on the Wii U (one of the ones that could only be done on Wii U with the Gamepad/two screens as well) and nobody here ever talks about it No one bought? Clearly rubbish, change your opinion now!!!!!! (I kid Sheikah!)
Kounan Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 The part that makes me the most sad is when everyone here ignores this game... Perhaps the best game on the Wii U (one of the ones that could only be done on Wii U with the Gamepad/two screens as well) and nobody here ever talks about it I will jump away from the topic.... I want to get this game, but it is quite low on my list (Zelda, Mario 3D, Captain Toad, Monster Hunter, Yoshi, Lego Undercower, Hyruler Warriors, Donkey Kong, Wonderfull 101, even Devils Third, Xenoblade Chronicles X are all ahead in the list). Am I making a mistake?
Serebii Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I will jump away from the topic.... I want to get this game, but it is quite low on my list (Zelda, Mario 3D, Captain Toad, Monster Hunter, Yoshi, Lego Undercower, Hyruler Warriors, Donkey Kong, Wonderfull 101, even Devils Third, Xenoblade Chronicles X are all ahead in the list). Am I making a mistake? My only issue with it is that it's so unbelievably gorgeous, but you spend your time looking at the GamePad and its downscaled visuals rather than at the TV
Hero-of-Time Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I'm just illustrating a point. The N64 had some real greats, but there aren't a huge number of them. There are probably around 40-50 worthwhile games released for the N64 in total, while I already have more than double that for 3DS personally. You have 100+ 3DS games!? Didn't even think there were that many good games worth buying on the thing. Also, did you just call FIFA garbage? There's a community on here who would strongly disagree with you, me being one of them.
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 You have 100+ 3DS games!? Didn't even think there were that many good games worth buying on the thing. Also, did you just call FIFA garbage? There's a community on here who would strongly disagree with you, me being one of them. The vast majority who call FIFA and the likes of Watch Dogs garbage are the type to never actually play these types of games anyway.
Kaepora_Gaebora Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 @Hero\-of\-Time @Fierce_LiNk You chaps clearly haven't played PES this year then (just saying )
Hero-of-Time Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 @Hero\-of\-Time @Fierce_LiNk You chaps clearly haven't played PES this year then (just saying ) Needs dem team licenses. It would also mean giving Konami more of my money.
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 @Hero\-of\-Time @Fierce_LiNk You chaps clearly haven't played PES this year then (just saying ) I tried the demo and thought it was alright. PES went through a good spell a few years back but I find it too slow and one dimensional. There's something about FIFA and its modes and presentation that instantly makes it more appealing. Every game feels like an FA Cup or Premier League tie, whereas I always see PES as just being a bit too slow for my liking.
Hero-of-Time Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 PES was amazing during the PS2 era but then flat on its face during the next generation, which coincided with FIFA getting its groove back. Once Pro Clubs and Ultimate Team hit, it was pretty much game over for PES.
Hogge Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 You're putting Nintendo on a different position to everyone else and expecting them to live up to ridiculous ideals. Nintendo ARE in a different position than the competition. Unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo have a huge backlog of popular IP's that people are expecting to see, because that's why they liked Nintendo in the first place. Nintendo also do not have equivalents to the big games which are at this point considered obligatory. Finally, Nintendo have at this point killed off their relationships with the other third parties. So Nintendo have one hell of a job in front of them. They need to deliver the stuff that's necessary to live up to their own legacy, they need to guarantee that certain experiences are present, even though they've never done them before and no third party is going to do it (Nintendo GT *ahem*) and they need to make sure that either they'll get ALL big multiplat titles, OR make their own equivalent. And of course, they need to do it so well that people will forget about the abysmal past 15 years (!). The next Nintendo CEO will basically have to be Sydney Bernstein: "Is there something I have which I can put in this hand, so you can forget what you have in the other", should basically be Nintendos new motto. Nintendo build games in ways which are at this point archaic. I mean, just look at the singleplayer mode in Waverace Blue Storm. Replay the same championship three times over, just adding one lousy new track at the end? That was OK in Waverace 64 when that game competed against the very first Ridge Racer. But in 2001, after the release of Gran Turismo 3? Worse yet, Nintendo still thought that s**t was OK last year when they launched Mario Kart 8. And while I love the concept of Splatoon, I think Nintendo botched the execution big time. First off we have the obvious, well spread complaints about the online infrastructure, IE the initial inability to play with your friends or communicate with the people you're playing with. But then we have the limited customization. Why can't I swap my weapon layout without returning to the lobby? And why can't I customise my layouts like in other games? Not to mention the absolutely attrocious drop in quality (when compared to the competition) when it comes to the Legend of Zelda. The claim that Zelda U is aimed to be the best Zelda yet is baffling. Why? Because in the 90's, EVERY Zelda was aimed to be the best Zelda yet, bar perhaps Link's Awakening. It's kind of what's expected in every new entry in every Nintendo franchise. "On par with" shouldn't be an option and "different" should be a secondary concern. So yes, the stuff Nintendo does deliver is of high quality (few bugs, well optimised, good graphics, high resolution, good framerate, low latency, perhaps even market leading in those respects), but what they deliver is wrong. So yes, the demands on Nintendo are perhaps not realistic for a company which doesen't watch what the rest of the industry is doing, nor care what third parties or their customers want, but instead consider the western market as a bunch of lobotomised rodents. But they're not unreasonable, nor can they blame anyone but themselves. And they really do have to live up to these unrealistic demands, and do it immediately, otherwise the NX will fail and the shareholders will hire a CEO that will shut down the console division and make Nintendo solely focus on mobile games *shrugs*.
nekunando Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 The vast majority who call FIFA and the likes of Watch Dogs garbage are the type to never actually play these types of games anyway. I haven't played anything on PS4 or XBOX One but my brother has both FIFA 15 and PES 2015 on PS3. For me, PES 2015 is probably the best football game since PES 6 on PS2 while FIFA has grown extremely tiresome and lacking in enjoyment. I've been critical of FIFA for years, though
Sheikah Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) Garbage sells well all the time, or do you think that games like Madden, Watch Dogs and FIFA are the best that the industry can hope to aspire to? Games that are reviewed well often don't sell well at all. There isn't much correlation between review scores and sales at all and while we're at it, plenty of crappy games get good reviews and plenty of good games get bad reviews - particularly if they have non-standard control schemes (reviewers from the large sites tend to slate games that don't conform to a standard form of play or control layout) or if the reviewer has an axe to grind against a developer/publisher/series in general (giving a game like Shiren the Wanderer to someone who hates rogue-likes to review is obviously going to end up meaning that it's gonna get an unfairly low score for instance). Why do you think games that you think are 'garbage' sell well? We are left with two options. The first is that people are bizarre and enjoy playing shit games to torture themselves. The second is that people actually get a lot of enjoyment from those games and you are being a snob. The truth is that it doesn't matter if Nintendo make polished games, because if they're not making games that elicit the same level of excitement and appeal as those 'bad' games then they are doing something wrong; people really want those 'bad' games, thus they buy them, thus they sell systems. The thing is, Nintendo used to make more original games with epic appeal. Games like Mario 64 and OoT did things games never did before and pushed the boundaries. People would buy the console based on those great titles; they had real appeal. Now you look at their games and just see mostly the same games you have already played loads of. It's just so...meh, for me. And for loads of others...you see people jumping ship all the time. Things aren't nearly as black and white as you seem to believe they are. Review scores don't really amount to much in the grand scheme of things really. I personally dislike review scores for a number of reasons that I won't go into again. That said, yes, games that yourself or critics personally did not call out as a masterpiece can still sell well. But again, even if you don't like them, they appeal to people - which is why they sell, and the systems with them. Ask yourself this - why do Nintendo games not appeal in a similar way to shift so many units? Can it really be that they have the perfect games as the 10/10 scores may suggest? Or could something be missing if they are not captivating many a gamer, old and new? While I don't like scoring, to respond to your point, there is no doubt it has considerable influence on sales. If a game scores very highly then it is more likely to do well than if scored low. We already know this is true because a number of publishers offer developers big bonuses tied to metacritic scores. If it wasn't the case then why bother? They must offer these incentives based on market research; they must know that if their game is revered by critics, it will most likely go on to sell quite a lot more. Conversely, this is also the reason why they will have embargoes right up until release on buggy/shitty messes; because they know review scores do impact game sales. Really though, critic scores are just a small slice of the truth. What's really important is where the gamer puts his money, because that's the thing he wants to play, isn't it? Something about those games has appeal, even in cases where games do not score well, if a lot of people rush out to buy them (and also to buy the system to play it). TL;DR: Sales are intrinsically linked to a combination of factors but we cannot ignore that a large part of this is whether the game is exciting, fresh and entertaining. When you look past the small pool of Nintendo fans for life, gamers are only going to hold interest with the same sorts of sequels for so long. Edited November 1, 2015 by Sheikah
Recommended Posts