It's a game of back and forth you hear often on Video Game fourms.
* Person says Nintendo doesn't make New IPs, all they do is rehash the same characters, over and over
* Nintendo fan lists New IPs that were developed or published by Nintendo
* Person says all those games don't count for reasons x, y, and z
The question as to whether Nintendo introduces New IPs each generation like its contemporaries do or not has sort of been an ongoing debate in the gaming community, one that doesn't look like is ending anytime soon. Nintendo's known for its roster of highly recognizable, and merchandisable mascot characters, and that's both a blessing and a curse. Having arguably the biggest icons in the Video Game industry gives you a leg up for when third party developers aren't always there to help out. But that also means that those characters tend to overshadow the rest of your catelog, and that can pose a problem.
This is where the "Nintendo has no New IPs" stigma sort of stems from. Because Nintendo hasn't introduced a new Mascot that has reached the popularity status of Mario, Pokemon, or Link, outside of arguably Splatoon's Inklings, that obviously means there's no New IP at all. Only, that isn't the case. Any hardcore Nintendo fan such as myself will tell you that Nintendo actually does publish and develop numerous New IP each console, nearly as many as Sony and Microsoft.
On the Nintendo Switch alone, Nintendo has published
1-2 Switch
ARMS
Nintendo Labo
Snipperclips
Astral Chain
The Stretchers
Ring-Fit Adventure
Sushi Striker
Good Job!
And the console's only 3 years old.
The problem is that when people list such games, they're automatically brushed off as "doesn't count because..." and proceeds to list off reasons why they aren't considered, such as they're not for the "core" gaming audience. They're not as high budget as the biggest Nintendo games. They weren't developed completely in-house. They didn't sell well. They're too niche. or They're not good games.
But if we apply all of these criteria's to Nintendo's contemporaries such as Sony, in that case, Sony is arguably just as bad as Nintendo supposedly is. Only Horizon, and Dreams were both high budget, critical and commercial successes for them this gen in terms of new IP. The other ones Sony introduced this gen were either commercial failures, got mixed reception, much lower in budget and scope relative to other PS4 exclusives, or were made by non-Sony owned Studios, There's still Ghosts of Tsushima coming, but even then, it's not out yet, and only brings it up to 3 games. And Microsoft might as well not even be competition if we apply any of these rules to them.
Obviously, I'm exaggerating here, both Sony and Microsoft have introduced plenty of New IP if you remove those arbitrary restrictions. My question is. Why is it only Nintendo who has to be judged by these pointless standards, when they seemingly don't apply to the other two?
* Person says Nintendo doesn't make New IPs, all they do is rehash the same characters, over and over
* Nintendo fan lists New IPs that were developed or published by Nintendo
* Person says all those games don't count for reasons x, y, and z
The question as to whether Nintendo introduces New IPs each generation like its contemporaries do or not has sort of been an ongoing debate in the gaming community, one that doesn't look like is ending anytime soon. Nintendo's known for its roster of highly recognizable, and merchandisable mascot characters, and that's both a blessing and a curse. Having arguably the biggest icons in the Video Game industry gives you a leg up for when third party developers aren't always there to help out. But that also means that those characters tend to overshadow the rest of your catelog, and that can pose a problem.
This is where the "Nintendo has no New IPs" stigma sort of stems from. Because Nintendo hasn't introduced a new Mascot that has reached the popularity status of Mario, Pokemon, or Link, outside of arguably Splatoon's Inklings, that obviously means there's no New IP at all. Only, that isn't the case. Any hardcore Nintendo fan such as myself will tell you that Nintendo actually does publish and develop numerous New IP each console, nearly as many as Sony and Microsoft.
On the Nintendo Switch alone, Nintendo has published
1-2 Switch
ARMS
Nintendo Labo
Snipperclips
Astral Chain
The Stretchers
Ring-Fit Adventure
Sushi Striker
Good Job!
And the console's only 3 years old.
The problem is that when people list such games, they're automatically brushed off as "doesn't count because..." and proceeds to list off reasons why they aren't considered, such as they're not for the "core" gaming audience. They're not as high budget as the biggest Nintendo games. They weren't developed completely in-house. They didn't sell well. They're too niche. or They're not good games.
But if we apply all of these criteria's to Nintendo's contemporaries such as Sony, in that case, Sony is arguably just as bad as Nintendo supposedly is. Only Horizon, and Dreams were both high budget, critical and commercial successes for them this gen in terms of new IP. The other ones Sony introduced this gen were either commercial failures, got mixed reception, much lower in budget and scope relative to other PS4 exclusives, or were made by non-Sony owned Studios, There's still Ghosts of Tsushima coming, but even then, it's not out yet, and only brings it up to 3 games. And Microsoft might as well not even be competition if we apply any of these rules to them.
Obviously, I'm exaggerating here, both Sony and Microsoft have introduced plenty of New IP if you remove those arbitrary restrictions. My question is. Why is it only Nintendo who has to be judged by these pointless standards, when they seemingly don't apply to the other two?
