Nintendo Admits to Being Bad at Hardcore Games
- Thread starter Austin MacKenzie
- Start date
I think Reggie has a different idea than us of what a "hardcore" title is. For Nintendo, I'd consider their core franchises hardcore for what they produce. Look at past games like Zelda: A Link to the Past and Super Metroid on the SNES. Those games hold up well even all these years later and still demand a certain level of skill to complete. When people who have been fans of Nintendo's first-party titles think "hardcore" this is what we mean.
Even today, LoZ: Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 are still hardcore entrants into those franchises. New Super Mario Bros. Wii is even hardcore. It's classic Mario gameplay with a decidedly higher difficulty curve when compared to classic side-scrolling Mario games (Japanese Super Mario Bros. 2 not withstanding).
I think games with regenerating health, deadpan AI, and easy-to-get-through 6-10 hour Story Modes have made seasoned gamers soft while allowing the casual players to feel more accomplished for not really accomplishing anything. In reality, we've all been lumped into that blurry middle-ground.
There's hardly a game made anymore by anyone where there's a serious consequence to your progress for sucking at it. I firmly place the core Super Mario games in this category. There's always been a requirement of skill needed to not totally fuck yourself over during gameplay as far back as the original Super Mario Bros. on the NES. They've just gotten softer and more forgiving over the years since Super Mario 64.
A recent title that fits this is Demon's Souls on the PS3. This game hates you and everything about you and doesn't care if you're having trouble. Totally great and we need more games like this.
There was an action-platformer for the Amiga made by Traveler's Tales called Leander. This game is very unforgiving if you can't adapt to it's quirky style. That I would still be tempted to play it almost 20 years later is a testament to it's production. Everything about it catches your eye, the art style, the music, the gameplay, everything. I've been playing it on and off over the years since it came out and can honestly say I've JUST NOW beaten it for the first time.
If it were better known, I'm sure others would feel the same way about it but my point is that there are not enough games from any generation that have the longevity to stand the test of time and warrant gamers to keep going back for the enjoyment of the challenge.
Nintendo, I can safely say, can and should claim this accomplishment.
Even today, LoZ: Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 are still hardcore entrants into those franchises. New Super Mario Bros. Wii is even hardcore. It's classic Mario gameplay with a decidedly higher difficulty curve when compared to classic side-scrolling Mario games (Japanese Super Mario Bros. 2 not withstanding).
I think games with regenerating health, deadpan AI, and easy-to-get-through 6-10 hour Story Modes have made seasoned gamers soft while allowing the casual players to feel more accomplished for not really accomplishing anything. In reality, we've all been lumped into that blurry middle-ground.
There's hardly a game made anymore by anyone where there's a serious consequence to your progress for sucking at it. I firmly place the core Super Mario games in this category. There's always been a requirement of skill needed to not totally fuck yourself over during gameplay as far back as the original Super Mario Bros. on the NES. They've just gotten softer and more forgiving over the years since Super Mario 64.
A recent title that fits this is Demon's Souls on the PS3. This game hates you and everything about you and doesn't care if you're having trouble. Totally great and we need more games like this.
There was an action-platformer for the Amiga made by Traveler's Tales called Leander. This game is very unforgiving if you can't adapt to it's quirky style. That I would still be tempted to play it almost 20 years later is a testament to it's production. Everything about it catches your eye, the art style, the music, the gameplay, everything. I've been playing it on and off over the years since it came out and can honestly say I've JUST NOW beaten it for the first time.
If it were better known, I'm sure others would feel the same way about it but my point is that there are not enough games from any generation that have the longevity to stand the test of time and warrant gamers to keep going back for the enjoyment of the challenge.
Nintendo, I can safely say, can and should claim this accomplishment.
If you ask most self-proclaimed "hardcore" gamers, a "hardcore" game is one that allows them to scream either "BOOM HEADSHOT!" or a profanity into a headset mic at least six times a minute. Or, for the single-player side, it has to have at least 90% brown / grey / brown-grey / grey-brown textures and realistic bloodspray patterns.canadamus_prime said:
What shocks me most is that I didn't know the guy's name was Reggie Fils-Aime. I suppose I'm one of the few who actually can pronounce that correctly. It means "Loved Son".
Anyway, back on subject: DUH! They suck at making hard-code games? I never would have noticed, seriously!
Anyway, back on subject: DUH! They suck at making hard-code games? I never would have noticed, seriously!
This article kind of gets at what my real issue with Nintendo is. Sure they could treat 3rd party developers better and do more to attract them (like, just maybe, creating a system that doesn't really on outdated hardware), but what Nintendo really lacks is creativity. Mario and Zelda are great, but they've been the same games for how many years now? Look at Metroid as an example. It took an outside house to bring one of their most classic and cherished series into the present, and I think it actually gained even more fans in the process. Despite their love of innocation on the hardware side of things, Nintendo is totally lacking any sort of creativity or forward momentum when it comes to software.
I don't see a problem.
There are a lot of game producers out there. If Nintendo have decided that they don't want that hardcore demographic then its their choice. Just so long as stop pretending with all that MadWorld rubbish (or maybe that was thrid-party developed, if so then SORRY). They can do what they want to in my opinion, just so long as, in the words of Yahtzee, they remember that they're a video game company and not FisherPrice. (Thinking of Wii Play here)
There are a lot of game producers out there. If Nintendo have decided that they don't want that hardcore demographic then its their choice. Just so long as stop pretending with all that MadWorld rubbish (or maybe that was thrid-party developed, if so then SORRY). They can do what they want to in my opinion, just so long as, in the words of Yahtzee, they remember that they're a video game company and not FisherPrice. (Thinking of Wii Play here)
If that's what makes a "hardcore" *sarcastic air quotes* game, then I'll stick with Nintendo and other so-called non-"hardcore" *again sarcastic air quotes* games.The Rogue Wolf said:
It is true that most of nintendo's games are very fun. But they are also very lacking in a hardcore type manner. Nintendo has been remaking the same games over the past decade, and although they are very fun, people with newer ideas would kill to have a job at nintendo. I say that people are right on both subjects but nintendo needs to decide for itself.
let me begin by saying i am nintendo fanboy my first game system was an NES i grew up on mario 3 which i stand by as saying is the greatest game ever created when played on the nes (it isnt the same on the wii or gameboy)but those games dont need to be really complex that is why they are so great mario was simply get from point A to B and dont touch this that or the other and it was great. now for the negatives nintendo has never been big on hardcore gamer games so this isnt really big news. also to produce a hardcore game that the hardcore gamer is going to want over ps3 or xbox 360 then they would need A. better graphics then the wii is capable of produces B. you would need to be able to create a game that goes over 8 hours at the bear minimum which the wii has only done a handful of times where the ps3 and xbox are ushing 100
It's not about "hardcore", it's about having games with substance!
Jesus Christ, I don't think I can take any more Mario or Zelda.
Jesus Christ, I don't think I can take any more Mario or Zelda.
I just don't get the terminology of Hardcore and Casual. To me it always meant the type of gamer, and no that doesnt mean FPS players are Hardcore and people who play Cooking Mama aren't. What I meant is the amount of devoted time to playing games. Spend twenty minutes every other day you are doing it casually. Spend 4+ hours a day you are probably a hardcore gamer who should be doing homework instead of gaming so long haha.
But Nintendo has always tried to play safe routes willing to put out sequels to money makers which from corporate point is perfect. But as a gaming community grows and better technology is available Nintendo always seems to do bare minimum. Need a comparison compare the 360 and PS3's versions of Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 to the Wii version and tell me otherwise. Nintendo will always make a profit but its going to keep its kiddy game image. No thats not a slap at Metroid, Zelda and other games who have decided to cater more mature stories to the audience.
I just think in the next development in their system they need to try to do more then the bare minum. I don't want an updated wii this time. I want a step like from the cartridged N64- to the Gamecube something a little more substantial than what we got.
But Nintendo has always tried to play safe routes willing to put out sequels to money makers which from corporate point is perfect. But as a gaming community grows and better technology is available Nintendo always seems to do bare minimum. Need a comparison compare the 360 and PS3's versions of Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 to the Wii version and tell me otherwise. Nintendo will always make a profit but its going to keep its kiddy game image. No thats not a slap at Metroid, Zelda and other games who have decided to cater more mature stories to the audience.
I just think in the next development in their system they need to try to do more then the bare minum. I don't want an updated wii this time. I want a step like from the cartridged N64- to the Gamecube something a little more substantial than what we got.
I just wanted to say that you need to be careful when playing with the strikeout. Some words, likeHeart of Darkness said:
OT:Nintendo can be bad at hardcore games all they want. Since no one can define what hardcore really is anyway, that means that they cannot define what Nintendo is bad at. Therefore there is no problem. Problem solved! Erm...not that there was one...
I think Nintendo undermines itself. they have created their own version of hardcore games. like Zelda & Star Fox. and look how well they pull those games off.Their version of Hardcore are what we consider as the AAA titles that keep us loyal to the company. They arent really "Hardcore" per se, but i think you guys know what I mean and don't need to explain.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Well, then, I can blame people who misinterpret my posts as guilty of misreading. Whether or not my words come out differently due to the strikeout is not my concern nor my problem.muffincakes said:
Besides, I can still clearly see the G and not the
Exactly what you said. Who cares if they make by definition 'hardcore games', if they're good then that's awesome! Don't aim to make 'hardcore games', because the most hardcore games turn out to be nothing more than FPS clusterfucks.LeonLethality said:
Besides, I want to be able to play Mario Kart on a Black Wii (which is more badass than anything in gaming.)
That's because you don't actually stop and think about it. Cakes are often made to be decorative, some more-so than others. In fact, a cake will sometimes be the centerpiece of a buffet, on display until they eventually cut into it later in the night. But at that point, it's been cut into and eaten, thus it's no longer being a decorative centerpiece.(whitty name here) said:
It also helps if you look at the quote in reverse: You can't eat your cake and still have it.
So, Nintendo says they don't make hardcore games. Stop treating as an admission of guilt. It's simply a major developer saying they don't specialize in a certain genre. This is like Bethesda "admitting" that they don't make football games or Firaxis "admitting" they don't make first-person shooters. It's simply a case of one company saying that it's not what they do, not Nintendo saying this is the biggest flaw in their company.