Yeah...there were so few years between Pikmin, Mario Kart, Smash, and many others. Please tell me how many Cock of Duty and Assassin's Creed games we've had in the last 5 years alone.Vivi22 said:
Nintendo Confirms Work is Underway on New Consoles
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
By that logic, Activision doesn't rehash either because there hasn't been a new Spyro or Crash game in like 5 years. But of course, that doesn't change the fact that CoD is an annual franchise, just like Pikmin 3 coming out 9 years after 2 doesn't change the fact that there's been 8 Marios (9 if you count NSLU as a separate game) over the last 9 years.Kenbo Slice said:
There are a lot of people who buy consoles to play games commonly found on PC and on steam simply because that is how they prefer to play them. Plus the consoles provide services and benefits that, while doable with a PC, require significantly less work to get running.Lunar Templar said:
If anything, home consoles are not directly competing with the PC as much as they are directly competing with TV set top boxes that occupy that off-hours portion of our life. This is something a lot of pro-PC people (including myself up until recently) didn't think about when talking about consoles vs PCs.
Edit: as for nintendo being the only console worth purchasing thanks to unique games, I've yet to see this notion manifest in better sales...
I'm just saying, Nintendo is the only one out there with exclusive titles I find desirable enough to warant buying the console, not that I'm going to get one.Colt47 said:
I'm on PC not because I think it's better 'mechanically', but because it's more cost effective, all the games I'm generally interested in are 3rd party and those are cross platform now, and that's where all my friends are.
I mean I'm still rocking a controller for games like MGR and Dark Souls, cause your playing them wrong if your not. (yeah, I said it, what.) So I'm not coming from a 'PC Fanboy' perspective, just, ya know, some one who's been in this since the Atari 2600 and after viewing the current land scape doesn't see the need for consoles with out any good exclusive titles to make them desirable.I mean really, for me Blood Borne and Killer Instinct are it for both consoles as far as reason to buy one. and with both I have suitable alternatives, in the form of Dark Souls 1 and 2 and the greatness, the GLORIOUS SPECTACLE that are BlazBlue, Guilty Gear and Skull Girls for my fighter fix.
So yeah, I've pretty much hit the point where a console needs to prove it self worthy via it's line up. Not specs, not a myriad of features I'm never going to use, give me a reason to be excited your stupid looking box exist because of the games I can only get there, or don't waste my time.
You know, I sometimes get tired of people saying Nintendo is gonna crumble.
They're still getting huge sales on their IP, heck, even their oldest games are still being played and talked about to this very day, especially if you take their Virtual Console thing into account.
I've met people who still talk about Mario, Link, and Kirby, do you think 30 years later people will still be talking about say... Sergeant Paul Jackson from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare? The nameless protagonist from Sunset Overdrive? the Rabbids from Raving Rabbid? who who temporary took some of the spotlight away from Rayman?
I don't really think so, why? because Nintendo's characters have something that not many video game characters have; timelessness.
Nintendo has almost never had to worry about 'getting with the times' because most of their characters and settings never had to resort to pop cultural references or modern spins, Nintendo always simply did their own thing even before they took up video games, and they've been around since 1889! I don't know of many companies that lasted this long.
Even when Nintendo does occasionally 'get with the times', it's usually in response to certain advancements in technology, and even then, most of the time they're the ones that made the trends other game companies are following. Yeah, You Xbox fans remember Kinect? yeah, Microsoft made it in response to the Wii's motion controls.
Frankly, I always considered Nintendo to be a video game company equivalent of Disney, another that's been around for long time for reasons similar to that of Nintendo. And I've never heard anyone talk about Disney crumbling from what bad moves they made, so why should we say such things about Nintendo?
Heck, even if Nintendo does somehow collapse, their games have such a massive and loyal following that someone with the skill and dedication will likely take action to make more Mario or Zelda games to keep the legacy alive.
Far as I'm concerned, I'll sum up my idea of how long Nintendo will likely be around with this;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0H6R7xRytk (please start at 0:06)
They're still getting huge sales on their IP, heck, even their oldest games are still being played and talked about to this very day, especially if you take their Virtual Console thing into account.
I've met people who still talk about Mario, Link, and Kirby, do you think 30 years later people will still be talking about say... Sergeant Paul Jackson from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare? The nameless protagonist from Sunset Overdrive? the Rabbids from Raving Rabbid? who who temporary took some of the spotlight away from Rayman?
I don't really think so, why? because Nintendo's characters have something that not many video game characters have; timelessness.
Nintendo has almost never had to worry about 'getting with the times' because most of their characters and settings never had to resort to pop cultural references or modern spins, Nintendo always simply did their own thing even before they took up video games, and they've been around since 1889! I don't know of many companies that lasted this long.
Even when Nintendo does occasionally 'get with the times', it's usually in response to certain advancements in technology, and even then, most of the time they're the ones that made the trends other game companies are following. Yeah, You Xbox fans remember Kinect? yeah, Microsoft made it in response to the Wii's motion controls.
Frankly, I always considered Nintendo to be a video game company equivalent of Disney, another that's been around for long time for reasons similar to that of Nintendo. And I've never heard anyone talk about Disney crumbling from what bad moves they made, so why should we say such things about Nintendo?
Heck, even if Nintendo does somehow collapse, their games have such a massive and loyal following that someone with the skill and dedication will likely take action to make more Mario or Zelda games to keep the legacy alive.
Far as I'm concerned, I'll sum up my idea of how long Nintendo will likely be around with this;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0H6R7xRytk (please start at 0:06)
Did you purposefully try to find the least-memorable characters for that comparison? Because it certainly looks that way.Misterian said:
Sargeant Paul will only ever appear in that one game, Sunset Overdrive was far from amazing and might not get a sequel and the rabbids games were all mediocre party games for Wii. How's about some actually iconic characters, like Cloud, Master Chief or Lara Croft? Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon and Banjo? Sonic, Gordon Freeman, Pac-Man, even Duke Nukem. Most aren't as old as Mario, but still quite old and still fairly well-remembered, even the ones that haven't seen a new release in years and years.
All hardware is obsolete the second it's released. And that's not the point of consoles; they're not supposed to be bleeding edge, they're supposed to be EFFICIENT.Glaice said:
1. You're post wasn't a "rant" but it was "jerkish" in natureRemus said:I could run a game at 1080p/60FPS too if I limited my poly count to 1/10th of the competition.Whatislove said:Just so your rants can be more accurate in the future.Remus said:
I think you mean the next console will have "slightly below PS4* specs", since, the Wii U is more powerful than the PS3.
Also, by the current count of games on each console, I'd say that better technology doesn't even equal better performance, since the Wii U has more games running at 1080p/60fps than both the Xbone and PS4 combined
You could just save up and get yourself more than 1 console, it is possible to own both a Wii U and a PS4/Xbone (or all 3, plus a pc, ps3, x360, 3ds, and vita like I do!).
Fanboys are funny when they're angry, ya know that? And yes I'm calling you a fanboy if you're calling my post a rant. TBH I liked Nintendo at one point - many years ago, their "innovations" were cool and were imitated by the other companies. All the cool games were being released on their systems. What happened? They went more Disney than Disney. They self-censored to the point of irrelevance. Rather than letting other publishers come in and release games on their system, they locked them out completely, thus limiting the audience to 5 yr olds who have never been allowed near a controller at this point, or 50 yr olds who are nostalgic for the Super Mario Bros/Duck Hunt combo pack. The demographic isn't shrinking. They've just moved on. So then Nintendo abandoned Moore's Law completely, refusing to reasonably upspec whenever a new console is released, further limiting the games hat can be created for that system. You may enjoy Mario, but when I look for games, I look for an experience I've not yet had, an enthralling story, visually stunning area in which to kill things, compete, explore, build on, or whatever. I've saved the princess multiple times across multiple platforms. This time, she can save her own damn self, or perhaps hire Liam Neeson.
2. I'm 32 and still like classic games, retro style games, and AAA. I had as much fun with Rouge Legacy and Shovel Knight as much/or more than Ass Creed Unity or Last of Us.
3. What's wrong with wanting wholesome, family friendly content? A game doesn't have to have blood, murdering hookers, or evil protagonists that I'd rather kill than play as (GTA V) to be fun or compelling.
Yeah, some of the censorship is silly (mainly in the 80s), and they should be more open to 3rd Parties, but that's the same criticism they've had for 20 years.
4. The Wii and Wii U are only a few of the underpowered systems Nintendo has made, and probably did it for the lower middle class to afford. The GameCube was more powerful than the PS2 (which sold more). The N64 had better specs than the PS1 (which sold more) and the SNES was basically on par (or less so) than the Sega Genesis, and the SNES sold better. So it isn't all about specs and 1080p. The Wii KILLED the Xbox 360 and PS3, which people seem to forget that Nintendo won the 7th Generation and has tons of bank to try new things and make mistakes. They are more financially stable than Sony is even with the Wii U issues.
The DS and 3DS have graphics like an N64 and sell better than the Vita, which is the same price with PS2 or higher level with all the share play with PS3 and 4
5. IF you want a compelling story, Far Cry 4 is going to disappoint you
Going in order of your respondsZachary Amaranth said:
-We agree! Company's continue to innovate! The fact that people had to think about this is really scary!
-The Wii appealed to the broadest audience possible and sold 20 million more consoles than Sony or Nintendo. What they did is alienate the "hard core gamer", which wasn't the best move, but as far as your "failures to appeal to the broader market" is false
Historically, they took lots of chances with mature content and new design elements to include a larger audiance. Mortal Kombat (even with the censorship) Conker's Bad Fur Day, Golden Eye (real world looking first person shooters on consoles weren't a thing)
-While you maybe correct on the amibo numbers, Nintendo isn't "in trouble", they are having a "rough patch". Sony is "in trouble" (and not from the hack on their studio business). The PS4 is helping them, but they've made many more bad decisions and had more problems in other markets, and lost a lot on the PS3
Nintendo also banked a lot of money from great sales and lowering production costs all along, and they could survive these loses for another decade (not sure of my number there, I read that article earlier in the year.
-Back to our first bullet point, this story was...honestly useless and poorly titled. I don't know if I'll go on "click bait" but its was obviously a slow news day.
Not trying to knock them (hell, I admit to being a blatant fanboy of Nintendo), but didn't they say that they're just going to get out of gaming in general if they have to stop console production?Colt47 said:
If they did I wouldn't be surprised. The real question after that is who thinks that they got thrown under the bus.DarklordKyo said:
On the other hand wasn't Nintendo a 3rd Party Publisher before?
Or was that just some weird deal they had with Atari when it came to Donkey Kong & a Super Mario Brothers game that purely took place in a sewer.
In any case Nintendo was a business before it got into gaming & it'll be a business if it ever gets out of gaming.
I hope by "work underway" they mean "we're starting with the naming process first."
Here's some awful options to get started:
Wii U2
New Wii U
Wii V
Nintendou
Buddy Game Friend
UDS
Wii 3U2
Project Liftoff (prototype name, not for market)
Here's some awful options to get started:
Wii U2
New Wii U
Wii V
Nintendou
Buddy Game Friend
UDS
Wii 3U2
Project Liftoff (prototype name, not for market)
I was under the assumption that they never stopped working on new consoles. At least not entirely. Designing a product on a hardware and software level, creating and testing it, and putting it to market is a process that takes years. I'd assume at least part of the company is on it from the day the previous console launches.
True, though I never said they'll close down period (I am aware of some of the various ventures beforehand, like the Hanafuda cards, taxi service, and love hotel chain).RatGouf said:
All I can say is BWC,BWC BWC and it has motion controls for the love of god make it a bit more precise than a air mouse or the newer TV remotes.NO IR CRAP!!!!
So, since Nintendo has been revising past technology with their latest consoles, this next one will bring back R.O.B. the Robot.
The dollars can show a lot of things, but it won't always show you who's best. You've mentioned four games, of which one is generally a buggy piece of shit if not trash, one caters to people who treat themselves and others like trash, in addition to being trash itself, and two are about bloody sports; If I want to watch a bunch of people compete to see who can do the best improv injury, I can just turn on the telly and watch any sports game for about five seconds, complain about how sports is now 100% about the money and 0% about the game, and then go turn on my DS and play Mario, a game that, while yes it is the same iterations over and over again, consistently works, consistently looks good, and most importantly, is consistently fun. Yes CoD and AC and all those others at least go to the trouble of trying to innovate every year - it doesn't work. I would rather have five games with the original AC's mechanics than the shite we ended up with. That's what Mario and Legend of Zelda and Metroid and Pokemon all have over most other games - they consistently succeed at accomplishing what should be the core goal of any game produced: They're actually fun to play, and I actually want to play them again instead of wiping my memory of the past five hours.bug_of_war said: