289: My Nintendo Shame

[Danpascooch]

Dpad: Mattel's Intellivision
Analog Stick: Atari 5200
Handheld Gaming: Mattel again
Platformer: Space Panic is sometimes considered the first platformer, but Nintendo did make the first one that satisfies all modern definitions, so sure.
3rd person adventure: Three dimensional third person adventure game is so specific I am having trouble finding out who invented it. There were certainly other 3rd person games before, so it's not exactly a big deal.
Motion Gaming: I don't know who tried it first, but the eyetoy came before the wii, so it wasn't the wii

I think you might be getting "invented" mixed up with "popularized" but even if you mean popularized, many of these are still wrong.

Fine, what I mean by invention is neither actual "invention" nor "popularization" really. What I mean is more like "Pioneered". Like how 50 years from now, no-one but tech nostalgic's will remember Myspace for being the first hit social network site, they'll remember Facebook; OR how Netscape will not be remembered, but Internet explorer will.etc. Nintendo may not have invented those technologies but they sparked the fire; one that is still burning to this day.

Example from my very post? Nintendo experimented with 3D gaming using the abysmal Virtual Boy that will fade into the Annals of history, but Sony will be remembered for their use of 3D in their PS3 games. Sony didn't by any means "invent" 3D gaming. They "pioneered" it. Get what i mean?

I understand, I still don't think they pioneered as much as you think they did, but that view does open it up a bit.

 

[Danpascooch]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

What cracks me up is that Sony and MS are digging in their heels for the 10 year cycle with ps3/360, nintendo will come out with a new console and clean house...again.

And again it will be an incremental improvement over their previous console,
and again it will use proven commodity hardware and development tools and be cheap to manufacture and develop for,
and again it will focus on FUN over any other factor,
and AGAIN the "hardcore" basement dwellers will hate it,
and again Nintendo will make tons of money on re-release/re-imagining their proven offerings while sneaking a few new things in

You can just see Wii HD on the horizon....

 

[Aura Guardian]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

Perhaps if you played it on the Gamecube, you'd play the Wii one since it's the sequel. But seeing how you are ridiculously stubborn, You won't get to experience it.

 

[GiantRaven]

I never understood the complaint about the lack of new IPs with Nintendo. They've never made games about interesting stories but rather fun gameplay. So why do people get extremely angsty about looking at an Italian plumber throughout the course of a platforming game when the important part would still be the same regardless of the visual content.

Also, are things really different in this gaming generation? On all of the older Nintendo consoles the majority of the games I fondly remember were all first-party titles (or by Rare). I've always seen Nintendo consoles as having a select few ridiculously awesome games with the rest not being worth bothering with.

 

[Danpascooch]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

Perhaps if you played it on the Gamecube, you'd play the Wii one since it's the sequel. But seeing how you are ridiculously stubborn, You won't get to experience it.

Why should I? Seriously, what does the Gamecube and Wii one offer other than some basic animations, which are more than offset by the bonus of portability?

Fire Emblem games are all too similar anyway, bringing us back to the original problem, that Nintendo lacks creativity and drive to try new things.

 

[Aura Guardian]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

Perhaps if you played it on the Gamecube, you'd play the Wii one since it's the sequel. But seeing how you are ridiculously stubborn, You won't get to experience it.

Why should I? Seriously, what does the Gamecube and Wii one offer other than some basic animations, which are more than offset by the bonus of portability?

Fire Emblem games are all too similar anyway, bringing us back to the original problem, that Nintendo lacks creativity and drive to try new things.

And we return to my original post. Thanks for playing.

 

[Mr Waffle]

It's almost as if the system itself doesn't have to be good

Pretty sure that's been the case with nintendo since... forever. People would buy a tin can with some lint inside it if it had Nintendo written on the side.

 

[Danpascooch]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

Perhaps if you played it on the Gamecube, you'd play the Wii one since it's the sequel. But seeing how you are ridiculously stubborn, You won't get to experience it.

Why should I? Seriously, what does the Gamecube and Wii one offer other than some basic animations, which are more than offset by the bonus of portability?

Fire Emblem games are all too similar anyway, bringing us back to the original problem, that Nintendo lacks creativity and drive to try new things.

And we return to my original post. Thanks for playing.

And we also return to my original argument that the Wii doesn't offer any substantial 1st party games that are new and different, while at the same time offering less hardware capability than the other consoles.

Nintendo's been in the business for a long time, they don't have an excuse for this. They chose to cater to a new unstable fan base for a quick payout that is going to cost them long run, hopefully it's a mistake they learn from as their new fanbase flocks to the next fad.

 

[Aura Guardian]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

They made a console with inferior capabilities, almost nonexistant online play, and crappy third party support that leads to things like "Wii Carnival Games" instead of creative IP's

How the hell are they not to blame?

Nintendo doesn't care about that. They are a business. They focus on the crowd that wasn't so damn picky. And the result is...they are successful. Blame the fans. Plus...Nintendo focuses on local and most importantly...fun.

Beats me.
I know they don't care about "that" ("that" being online play, third party support, and creative IP's)

so explain to me, when you yourself just said they don't care, that they aren't to blame for these problems? There is no originality in the titles coming out for the Wii, and your interpretation of "fun" is subjective.

Fun last time I check was having a good time playing a game. With or without friends. With online being implemented in a lot of games, fun is not competition to be the best. Now-a-days, there is no originality in titles coming out for ANY system. And when it does. It flops because of the mainstream titles. This has been going on for a while.

You do know what originality means right? It means doing or trying themes, stories, or gameplay that have not been done before, it means fresh new IPs.

PS3 has things like Little Big Planet which have experimented with user generated content as the driving gameplay force, that's creative

360 has things like the Fallout series experimenting with completely open worlds, and Braid redefining storytelling.

There are new IP's coming out ALL THE TIME for these consoles, but with Nintendo it either features a character that has been around over a decade, or it is DOA. Seriously, think about new franchises that have risen for the PS3 and 360 since they launched, there are more new franchises than I can count.

But with Nintendo, it's the same old stuff, or it sucks, with unacceptably low exceptions.

PS3 has LBP but there has been other games that have user created content.
Fallout isn't a new IP just to let you know.
Nintendo made have a lot of IP give or take about 20, but they can make games. Not just publish

Fallout is new for consoles, it used to be PC only.

Tell me about these new IP's Nintendo has made for the Wii.

And I mean things with actual stories and/or structure, Wii Sports and the like don't count.

Someone never played Fire Emblem,Battalion Wars, Muramasa and Sin and Punishment.

I love Fire Emblem, and it offers absolutely nothing on the Wii that it doesn't offer on the DS which is portable, and which I love.

Perhaps if you played it on the Gamecube, you'd play the Wii one since it's the sequel. But seeing how you are ridiculously stubborn, You won't get to experience it.

Why should I? Seriously, what does the Gamecube and Wii one offer other than some basic animations, which are more than offset by the bonus of portability?

Fire Emblem games are all too similar anyway, bringing us back to the original problem, that Nintendo lacks creativity and drive to try new things.

And we return to my original post. Thanks for playing.

And we also return to my original argument that the Wii doesn't offer any substantial 1st party games that are new and different, while at the same time offering less hardware capability than the other consoles.

Nintendo's been in the business for a long time, they don't have an excuse for this. They chose to cater to a new unstable fan base for a quick payout that is going to cost them long run, hopefully it's a mistake they learn from as their new fanbase flocks to the next fad.

Why do you think people play games like Super Mario Bros, Call of Duty, The Legend of Zelda, Halo? Why do you think companies make these games and it's sequels? People enjoy them. Do they care if it's unoriginal. No. Only Nintendo is the one at fault where as other companies do this to but it's ok for them since it's not Nintendo. I mean Assassin's Creed was "original" right?

I never understood the complaint about the lack of new IPs with Nintendo. They've never made games about interesting stories but rather fun gameplay. So why do people get extremely angsty about looking at an Italian plumber throughout the course of a platforming game when the important part would still be the same regardless of the visual content.

Also, are things really different in this gaming generation? On all of the older Nintendo consoles the majority of the games I fondly remember were all first-party titles (or by Rare). I've always seen Nintendo consoles as having a select few ridiculously awesome games with the rest not being worth bothering with.

Beat me.

 

[bakonslayer]

I agree with a lot of this article. To compare this to television, Nintendo started as the Simpsons with cutting edge themes and ideas, characters to fall back on, and a large appeal. Recently, they have devolved to Family Guy, relying on cheap gags and most importantly ham-fisted nostalgia trips to appeal to the lowest common denominator: everyone. Of course, that isn't Nintendo's problem or fault, and this piece is not putting the blame on Nintendo, the problem is with us, the users and consumers. Just as Family Guy continues to be a wasteland of uncreative and growthless nostalgia, so does Nintendo because we allow it to. We do not challenge Nintendo as a developer, we challenge Sony and we challenge Microsoft all the time, however we do not challenge Nintendo.

Kirby's Epic Yarn and Donkey Kong Country Returns do absolutely nothing to revitalize or revolutionize prior EPs, continue any kind of running plot, or apply technology in any kind of new way. Donkey Kong Country sure as hell did. Kirby and The Crystal Shards sure did. But why should we expect Nintendo to push any envelopes? Not now, over 4 years into a console generation, riiiight? Nintendo as a developer should be held to the same standards as M. Night Shyamalan is as a director. As his films start failing the consumers in quality, we stop watching. As Nintendo's games start failing us as consumers, we will eventually have to stop playing, and as Nintendo fans that is the worst possible outcome. THAT is why this is so crucially important.

Briana's article NEEDED to come out now, not two years ago, it is more plain to see now than it ever has been that we, as consumers, are failing to keep Nintendo a competitive and cutting edge company like we DESERVE it to be. Nintendo has had four years to come out with games for its newest console and it has not met the match set by its closest competitors. We owe it to ourselves as gamers and the medium owes it to itself for a flagship company like Nintendo to come out with the very best games that push the envelope in every single category, but it is My Nintendo Shame to have waited four years for something to happen that may never happen. Gaming doesn't need a quixotic software development company like Nintendo. But gaming DESERVES a dynamic and exciting company like what Nintendo used to be.

TL;DR: Where is the Wii's Pikmin?

On the upside Nintendo's DS has been FANTASTIC. But I guess that is why we have a new handheld before any news on a new console comes out... You can extrapolate from that what you will.

 

[blarghblarghhhhh]

I know this article is about the wii but I think your forgetting about alot of great ds games. Dragon quest alone was beefy enough to take up the entire year with. throw in pokemon, puzzle quest 2 and a handful of others and your good to go.

On the upside Nintendo's DS has been FANTASTIC. But I guess that is why we have a new handheld before any news on a new console comes out... You can extrapolate from that what you will.

ninjas.... there everywhere.

 

[Pseudopod]

You know what I care about in a console, first and foremost? I care about it having fun, well designed titles, and the Wii has plenty, more than I've had time to play. The Wii doesn't provide the multiplayer experience that my PC does or the shiny HD capabilities of my PS3, but that's not why I own it. Nintendo makes highly polished games that are very enjoyable and provide experiences that I can't duplicate on my other platforms, plus it's the best console I have for playing multiplayer in the same room as friends. I also don't understand why making and promoting "casual" games is a bad thing if it promotes a wider acceptance of gaming. Nintendo has not shown any signs that they're going to totally abandon Mario and Zelda for Wii Sports expansions. I'm happy as long as they still make games that I like and nothing is forcing me to buy any of the ones that I don't.

 

[duchaked]

YUP

but sigh as far as I'm concerned, Nintendo has retired Zelda and other old favs and shut down...in a sense

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Motion Gaming: Nintendo

WRONG! Sorry, I love doing that. ^^

Anyway, TRUE motion gaming, where you use your body to affect the game's environment was the Eyetoy by Sony. Duck Hunt and it's ilk still used, more or less, a controller. Yes, the Eyetoy was bad. It was HORRIBLY bad. But, Sony did it first.

It wasn't SO bad. Anyway, yes i should've clarified that I meant specifically that Nintendo pioneered Accelerometer-based Motion gaming that lead to the boom in Motion gaming proper. From iPhone motion games to Kinect to Move, the Motion gaming revolution (for better or for worse) would not have begun if the Wii hadn't blown everything else out of the water back when it launched. Kapicsh?

 

[wii_about_guide]

This is a rather sad piece, although it does seem odd you wrote it in the best year the Wii has had. But it's true, Nintendo has not been producing games of the caliber they were in the pre-Wii days, and I say this both as someone who genuinely likes the Wii and as something who has never shared the fanatic enthusiasm for Nintendo of some gamers. I feel like Nintendo just needs some new ideas and new blood, but I don't know if that's going to happen.

 

[GodKlown]

regardless of the complaints that this article is "too late", I think it is still relevant. sure, the Wii has been around for a few years, but there are still people asking for their first Wii.

I can sympathize with the statement made in this pilot article. I grew up with Nintendo back in the mid-80s with the NES and was excited about the SNES when it came out. The Wii struck me as more of an appeal to the younger generation, as Microsoft and Sony appeal to an older market. I can't say I know of many people my age (who don't have children) who own and actively use the Wii. Perhaps Nintendo is one of those milestones we all outgrow at some point in our lives. Maybe you are reaching that milestone, Briana. Nintendo is to console gaming what Zynga is social network gaming... fine for short periods of time, but doesn't hold a candle to more mature fare.

very good work, by the way! look forward to future installments.

 

[Logic 0]

That article was annoying to read because you reminded me of those "fans"

Spoiler: you know, the picky ones.

Nintendo isn't to blame.

Give this man a medal for he has the courage to say the truth.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

What cracks me up is that Sony and MS are digging in their heels for the 10 year cycle with ps3/360, nintendo will come out with a new console and clean house...again.

What do you mean again?

It hasn't "cleaed house" since the SNES. The PSOne beat the everliving hell out the N61 in sales and the PS2 gave Gamecube an even worse slapping.

Nintendo hasn't been on top since 1996. Nice try man.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Yeah... Makes sense.

I have only ever owned Nintendo consoles, so I know what you're getting at here. But I've almost always owned a decent PC alongside it.

And while that's not so great these days due to lazy PC ports, It usually covers up most of what's deficient about Nintendo's systems these days.

Of course, when it comes down to it, some of the things you mention are explicitly to do with 3rd Party support.

Assassin's creed? That's not Microsoft or Sony, that's Ubisoft.

Take away 3rd party games, and Sony & Microsoft start looking quite sad indeed.

Which I guess is the main issue at hand.

Nintendo's first party stuff is usually great, but they have huge problems with 3rd party titles.

Conversely, first party titles for Microsoft and Sony are both much less common, and a lot less predictable in quality, but they have MUCH more 3rd party support.

Nintendo, unfortunately, in wanting to be different, has made life even worse for 3rd parties.
They were already pretty bad in some regards, but in creating a system with such vastly different aims, they've forced third parties to essentially create Wii exclusives, or not create Wii games at all.
I'm sure you can see where that led.

I don't respect Nintendo for their games. I'm FAR too young to have Nintendo infused in my very essence like many gamers here do. I never owned (or for that matter have ever SEEN) an NES or SNES.

Here's what i DO respect Nintendo for. From the purely hardware/concept perspective Nintendo INVENTED Video Gaming.

D pad: invented by Nintendo
Analog stick: invented by Nintendo
The four buttons (A,B,X,Y) system: Nintendo

Spoiler: more

Handheld Gaming: Nintendo
Platformers: Nintendo
Third person adventure games: Nintendo (Mario 64)
Motion Gaming: Nintendo
The "Defeat monster to rescue Princess" concept [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.257698-The-Gaping-Hole-at-the-heart-of-Gaming] that runs 60% of the story games industry : Nintendo

Need any more?

Oh wait. one last one: Virtual boy predicted the rise of the 3D fad.

They deserve Credit and all the respect in the world.....just not for their software, imo.

Dpad: Mattel's Intellivision
Analog Stick: Atari 5200
Handheld Gaming: Mattel again
Platformer: Space Panic is sometimes considered the first platformer, but Nintendo did make the first one that satisfies all modern definitions, so sure.
3rd person adventure: Three dimensional third person adventure game is so specific I am having trouble finding out who invented it. There were certainly other 3rd person games before, so it's not exactly a big deal.
Motion Gaming: I don't know who tried it first, but the eyetoy came before the wii, so it wasn't the wii

So really Nintendo has:

Platformer, and arguably was the first one to use 3d 3rd person perspective for an action game, but I wouldn't call that an "invention" and four buttons

I think you might be getting "invented" mixed up with "popularized" but even if you mean popularized, many of these are still wrong.

You might have a point about invented vs. popularised, but let's keep a bit of perspective here, because your counter-examples are a little flawed:

Dpad: The Dpad has ergonomic considerations that aren't reflected in the 16 direction control disk of the intellivision. To say they're the same thing is a bit like saying ALL game controllers with any kind of direction control are equivalent. And the dpad as it's considered in a modern context is definitely Nintendo's doing. But, granted, there are several very similar devices around. (including some which probably exist due getting around to patents - eg. The directional controller on the Playstation, and that on the Sega Master system

Analog stick: Oh, now really, the Atari 5200? That may well be an analog joystick, but again, it's hardly comparable, since it's not really a thumbstick, but more of a traditional joystick that requires the whole hand to use.
And if you're talking joysticks, you might as well note that the joystick is a computing device copied from the mechanical sticks used to control aircraft probably as far back as the 1920's.
So... Either you acknowledge the unique aspects of the n64 stick, or you forget the issue altoghether, because the idea is more or less ancient.

Handheld gaming: I'm not sure what you're specifically referring to here. The Game boy is from 1989, and was certainly something unusual at the time, but you are correct that mattel had been making handheld electronic games since 1976. The Game and watch series wasn't released until 1980. Again though, it depends on specifics.

3rd person adventure: I'll just avoid this one. As you say, it's a little complex, and all rather depends on what you mean.

Motion gaming: True. It wasn't the Wii. The technology goes back forever, but not in a gaming context.
The Wii uses accelerometers, which, technologically speaking, date back to the 1970's. The Eyetoy is digital image recognition, which is a much younger technology.
But, in a gaming context, it's hard to say.
Tilt based replacements for joysticks go back to the early 80's at the very least, but to call them motion gaming wouldn't really make sense, as they were just a different way of designing a traditional joystick.
The Nintendo Powerglove comes to mind (1989), which certainly had (limited) motion sensing capabilities, but it wasn't strictly speaking Nintendo that made it, and at the time they didn't really know what to do with it, so it failed quite quickly.
Sega had some weird contraption around the same period, but again seemed to prefer trying to replace conventional control with it, rather than anything specifically designed for it.
It's of course important to note that the powerglove itself is essentially a low-budget VR glove.
VR never really took off, but nevertheless, several systems existed for quite a while.

Four buttons: four button system? That was PSOne, the early Nintendo consoles didn't have that system, they had two buttons, and the N64 still used two primary buttons.

I can be wrong but didn't the snes had 4 buttons a,b,y,x and as far as i remember that was WAY before the psone

That's correct. The PSone is the direct result of the failure of the Nintendo CD expansion that Sony was working on for them.

The design of the PSone controller is in fact, a direct rip-off of the SNES controller (the changes made seem particularly like they were done just to reduce the chances of lawsuits)

The Snes controller has:

1 dpad
Start + Select buttons
2 shoulder buttons
4 face buttons (X, Y, A, B)

The Psone controller (before it's various upgrades)
1 - 8 way directional controller (it's physical design is slightly different to what would be called a dpad)
Start + select buttons
4 shoulder buttons (perhaps it's one obvious innovation)
4 face buttons (Square, Circle, Triangle, Cross)

Here's some images for comparison. (Note the shoulder buttons, partularly on the Snes controller, are difficult to see in these images)

Spoiler: Super Nintendo Controller. Introduced Nov. 1990

[http://s370.photobucket.com/albums/oo149/KuraIthys/forum%20images/?action=view&current=526626879_d640d8f3dd.jpg]

Spoiler: First generation Sony Playstation Controller. Introduced December 1994

[http://s370.photobucket.com/albums/oo149/KuraIthys/forum%20images/?action=view&current=PS_Controller.jpg]

The fact that Nintendo ditched it's own design while everyone else still uses derivatives of it doesn't take away from them having come up with it to begin with, now does it?

Trouble is, few people bother to do the research, and thus fail to notice things which predate their own experience. (and even if you do do the research, it's easy to miss certain more obscure things)

In any event, who did what isn't so important.
Although it does seem funny how often things get copied, once someone makes them popular.