I am amazed that nintendo year after year can release the same games over and over again and no1 gets angry at them. But mention Call of Duty or announce a game that looks like it and everyone shits on everything.
How do they get away with rehashing the same ip's and everyone loves them for it?
All i saw from that direct feed was, here are the same games you've played before but they have new names.
Don't get me wrong, i don't mind sequels, but in all fairness shouldn't we expect something new from them too?
In terms of not holding a conference, they have conceded in the "Console Wars." Nintendo is a toy brand
So they are finally letting other people make stuff on their consoles? Yay.
OT: If they want to save money to make more games more power to them. I haven't payed much attention to nintendo recently but at least they seem to want quality gameplay, if nothing else.
I kinda miss the huge conference format, if only for the reactions to new developments. The directs are great, especially during the year, since they are basically little E3 conferences. Either way as long as they have a huge presence at E3 in general, then I'm happy. Plus with directs there are no technical problems, unless there are too many people watching and the direct starts to lag.
I am amazed that nintendo year after year can release the same games over and over again and no1 gets angry at them. But mention Call of Duty or announce a game that looks like it and everyone shits on everything.
How do they get away with rehashing the same ip's and everyone loves them for it?
All i saw from that direct feed was, here are the same games you've played before but they have new names.
Don't get me wrong, i don't mind sequels, but in all fairness shouldn't we expect something new from them too?
In terms of not holding a conference, they have conceded in the "Console Wars." Nintendo is a toy brand
Because Nintendo is one of the few only one focusing on platformers, action/adventure games who focus more on adventure than action, and random genre games like wonderful 101 and Pikmin. We would all be sick of Nintendo if Sony and Microsoft where targeting the same genre, but they aren't. They are still focusing on realistic shooters of some kind or shooters in general. Either military or sci-fi or mix of both.
Nintendo focusing on platformers is no excuse for the repetitive ideas over the years. And to be frank, at least Sony has the console JRPG market heavily attached to it along with its actions titles, so your broad stroke generalization falls flat there. And I'm saying this as a PC Gamer.
Pikmin is a niche franchise so I don't think Pikmin 3 is going to be the savior that everyone is making it out to be. And the Wonderful 101 still has no release date, so their's still no reason to care for it. It also hasn't been heard from in a long damn time.
That and the franchises people do want to see sequels to, Nintendo won't budge on. Like how long do people have to wait for a console Starfox title? Or another 3D Donkey Kong game? A game in the vein of Warioworld for Wario? A Kirby game that isn't in a Yarn based environment? An F-Zero game?
I think what people are sick of seeing is Nintendo constantly doing a back and forth between Mario+Spin offs and Legend of Zelda.
Oh, I'm sorry the Ps3 has an RPG library far larger than the ps2.... oh wait. Most of those RPG's stayed in Japan and didn't really reach the west. Also the rpg's you are thinking about are found mostly on the psp/vita. As for action games that didn't have a gun as the main weapon? A handful at best.
The point that I am trying to make is that Microsoft and Sony are both flooding the market with similar titles in the way the mechanics work. While Nintendo is mostly the only source of platforming, adventuring, and non genre specific games you can get from an AAA producer/developer. With the Indie developers making mostly non-shooting games that sell pretty damn well lets you know that there are too many shooters right now.
I am amazed that nintendo year after year can release the same games over and over again and no1 gets angry at them. But mention Call of Duty or announce a game that looks like it and everyone shits on everything.
How do they get away with rehashing the same ip's and everyone loves them for it?
All i saw from that direct feed was, here are the same games you've played before but they have new names.
Don't get me wrong, i don't mind sequels, but in all fairness shouldn't we expect something new from them too?
In terms of not holding a conference, they have conceded in the "Console Wars." Nintendo is a toy brand
Because Nintendo is one of the few only one focusing on platformers, action/adventure games who focus more on adventure than action, and random genre games like wonderful 101 and Pikmin. We would all be sick of Nintendo if Sony and Microsoft where targeting the same genre, but they aren't. They are still focusing on realistic shooters of some kind or shooters in general. Either military or sci-fi or mix of both.
Nintendo focusing on platformers is no excuse for the repetitive ideas over the years. And to be frank, at least Sony has the console JRPG market heavily attached to it along with its actions titles, so your broad stroke generalization falls flat there. And I'm saying this as a PC Gamer.
Pikmin is a niche franchise so I don't think Pikmin 3 is going to be the savior that everyone is making it out to be. And the Wonderful 101 still has no release date, so their's still no reason to care for it. It also hasn't been heard from in a long damn time.
That and the franchises people do want to see sequels to, Nintendo won't budge on. Like how long do people have to wait for a console Starfox title? Or another 3D Donkey Kong game? A game in the vein of Warioworld for Wario? A Kirby game that isn't in a Yarn based environment? An F-Zero game?
I think what people are sick of seeing is Nintendo constantly doing a back and forth between Mario+Spin offs and Legend of Zelda.
Oh, I'm sorry the Ps3 has an RPG library far larger than the ps2.... oh wait. Most of those RPG's stayed in Japan and didn't really reach the west. Also the rpg's you are thinking about are found mostly on the psp/vita. As for action games that didn't have a gun as the main weapon? A handful at best.
The point that I am trying to make is that Microsoft and Sony are both flooding the market with similar titles in the way the mechanics work. While Nintendo is mostly the only source of platforming, adventuring, and non genre specific games you can get from an AAA producer/developer. With the Indie developers making mostly non-shooting games that sell pretty damn well lets you know that there are too many shooters right now.
I don't think you're wrong in your opinion that the people you're quoting are wrong, but I don't think you're getting your point out with enough words. Allow me to make more words.
Let's analyze the concept of the franchise.
A franchise is the result of high demand for a product. High demand resulted in people desiring sequels to IP's. Companies make more games with said IP because the community has shown that they want it. This is true of every successful IP; GTA, Zelda, Halo, Pikmin, Assassin's Creed, COD, MW, Resident Evil, Mario-anything, and so on.
Compared to most developers, Nintendo has a startlingly high quantity of successful IP's.
Now let's look at the statement "I am amazed that nintendo year after year can release the same games over and over again and no1 gets angry at them. But mention Call of Duty or announce a game that looks like it and everyone shits on everything." Your profile (DTWolfwood) states that you've made over 3,000 posts in this forum. How could you not have noticed that this is not the case. If anything, Nintendo gets the most flak (undeserved) for this.
There is effectively one Zelda game per console cylce. There have been two Luigi's Mansion games. There were 3 Pikmin games. Over the span of 9 years. Similar statements can be said of almost every Nintendo AAA game. Some of the people playing a new game in one of these supposedly rehashed franchises weren't even born before each of the successive games. Meanwhile, every COD game came out in one generation. As such, it's easier for an IP to feel "rehashed" as there are fewer tools to work with in attempting to make a franchise-continuing game feel fresh, new, etc. And, even in the same franchises, a number of Nintendo games are vastly different. You may accuse the Zelda games of having similar stories, but that's something virtually every game in any franchise can be accused of. And yet, the last three console Zelda's were Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, and Skyward Sword, and at a screenshot glance, it would be very hard to believe that they were in the same franchise if it weren't for the garb of the main character. Meanwhile, if I look at many of the shooters that you refer to, it would be hard to believe that they weren't in the same franchise, if it weren't for the garb of the main character.
Furthermore, Nintendo is virtually the only developer that can make a game such as SSB, something only capable for a developer with numerous successful IP's. You may want to bring up PSAS, but virtually each of those IP's come from separate developers.
But sure, Nintendo is a toy brand.
Specifically, the toys known as video games.
On one hand I did miss the crowds and applause of a live show. The Direct just seemed so sterile. So lifeless compared to the press conferences. On the other hand, I appreciated just how straightforward it was. No marketing execs trying to force buzzwords or special athlete appearances. Just Iwata saying "here is a game, here is some gameplay, here's when it comes out."
It also helped that every single game presented for longer than 20 seconds in a montage was exclusive to Nintendo and had functioning gameplay footage.
The Direct this year disappointed me at first. It lacked the sort of punch the Sony conference had. But my post-E3 wish list is made almost entirely of Nintendo games. Perhaps Nintendo was onto something with the whole "short and simple" presentation this year. Maybe something in this style, just done live, would be the best idea for next year.
I am amazed that nintendo year after year can release the same games over and over again and no1 gets angry at them. But mention Call of Duty or announce a game that looks like it and everyone shits on everything.
How do they get away with rehashing the same ip's and everyone loves them for it?
All i saw from that direct feed was, here are the same games you've played before but they have new names.
Don't get me wrong, i don't mind sequels, but in all fairness shouldn't we expect something new from them too?
In terms of not holding a conference, they have conceded in the "Console Wars." Nintendo is a toy brand
Here's the thing that I think you and many others asking the same question about Nintendo as you don't understand:
The only thing it seems if that, that actually changes with Call of Duty games is graphics. I've played and watched enough Call of Duty games to know that, if people play one or two of them, they've played them all in a sense. You get generic war story and/or generic war espionage story, you see generic enemies, you shoot them, save the day yeah. End of story, but really it all comes down to the latest multiplayer, which barely changes from the previous one, and that is really what people are buying the game for, and one of the main reasons each installment gets people to buy it, is out of fear that soon the community of the previous game will dry up and they won't find people to play with, which causes a vicious circle, because the previous game's multiplayer does dry up, because people bought the next installment out of those fears.
Now look at Nintendo. Their games while they keep pinging on the same franchises, they make changes. Zelda may have the same core/basic story each time, save Zelda yada yada, but the setting even when most of them are Hyrule, change. The landscape changes, there are always new, colorful, thought out, and likeable characters. They incorporate enemies new and old into each installment.
Graphically, in comparison, Call of Duty is stagnant. It basically traverses a straight line from the early age of little past basic polygonal graphics, to slightly more "realistic" each time.
Now look at Zelda, it has three base graphical styles, with sub-variations as graphic tech and color pallets improved.
Zelda games while they have their core items and mechanics, each game tends to add a few new items and one or two new mechanics. Also as I mentioned that they tend to have some core story points, beyond the surface, they all have different stories, but also they all have been intertwined, even with the franchise now having grown into incorporating three different timelines/alternate realities.
The way I see it, Call of Duty is what rehashing is. Zelda is far from rehashing, very far, well it isn't rehashing. It is near-perfect frachise structuring to where each new installment while they make it feel familiar it still feels fresh. The key is the people that think it is rehashing, only look at the surface. They only look at the core elements, and think it is rehashing, they don't look at the surrounding changes that interconnect with those core elements to keep the games fresh.
I could go much deeper with the other franchises, Mario being the lead one, but I don't really have the time. I will say however that the closest Nintendo has come to true rehash, is the whole New Super Mario Bros series, Wii to Wii U, but even then Nintendo is showing that it doesn't take them too long to turn it all around and bring something fresh, that being the whole New Super Luigi thing going on soon, which will be more than just playing as Luigi.
On a final note, I think the reason Nintendo gets more leeway from many gamers is they are one of the few companies that get that many gamers don't want just multiplayer and that many many more don't even care about multiplayer, at most they somewhat like and tolerate same screen co-op.
Note when looking through the back-catalog of Nintendo games, most of them are single player with same/split screen co-op, with very few of those single player games having the modern sense of "multiplayer" along with them. When Nintendo thinks and develops modern sense "multiplayer" they make it the premise and the entire game(the Mario Karts, various sports, Parties, etc), while you can play single with a computer, it ends up being more fun with more people playing, because they are the games specifically designed for multiplayer.
You see, that is the problem with other game companies, they try to cram it all into a game, when they should be making multiple branching styles of games that each get proper attention and work done on them, and that leads to the point that 95%, probably higher, of Nintendo games actually have proper development times. Look at the large console level Zelda titles, they respectively get at least three to five solid years of development time, while games like Call of Duty get spit out in a year.
It also helped that every single game presented for longer than 20 seconds in a montage was exclusive to Nintendo and had functioning gameplay footage.
You see that's the thing about Nintendo, they aren't afraid of people seeing what the game looks like and making comments, because they know that they have a fan-base that will buy it and love it, even if it has some kind of flaw that Nintendo might not think of. Nintendo seems to always feel confident in what they do, and they have fun with it.
The vast majority of the other companies seem to be scared of the work they do, and have no confidence in it, "We can't show them game-play, because what if some of them don't like what they see and don't buy it. Yeah, we have to show cut-scenes because they tend to look the best because they have the best rendering, that will make them think the game is that good, so they will buy it on that. That will bring the higher margin of people that buy it day one."
It also helped that every single game presented for longer than 20 seconds in a montage was exclusive to Nintendo and had functioning gameplay footage.
You see that's the thing about Nintendo, they aren't afraid of people seeing what the game looks like and making comments, because they know that they have a fan-base that will buy it and love it, even if it has some kind of flaw that Nintendo might not think of. Nintendo seems to always feel confident in what they do, and they have fun with it.
The vast majority of the other companies seem to be scared of the work they do, and have no confidence in it, "We can't show them game-play, because what if some of them don't like what they see and don't buy it. Yeah, we have to show cut-scenes because they tend to look the best because they have the best rendering, that will make them think the game is that good, so they will buy it on that. That will bring the higher margin of people that buy it day one."
However, I think you could easily go further with this. Don't just have them available at stores, but for any games with gameplay, let people download that alpha/beta/demo at home.
Nintendo did talk about this. They think that isn't a good idea.
The booths at E3 and Best Buy are a controlled environment where problems can easily be fixed by the stuff, while a downloadable demo can't and they fear that the user will be put off buy a buggy product.
Or something like that. I will look a bit to see if I can find the article I read.
Yeah, it seems like they are sick and tired of E3 being reduced to a dick-measuring contest between two insecure frat boys while Nintendo is using it to promote GAMES. Sure the Direct wasn't as theatrical as Sony and MS' pressers, but it didn't need to be. They let the games speak for themselves, not using stupid CG trailers, or letting drama determine how the audience felt. Their Direct has hit 1 million views on Youtube, so it was quite successful. I'd rather they keep doing Directs and show games at THEIR choosing instead of letting E3 dictate things.
I really don't know why people are upset at how they went about E3.
It's like we have short term memories or something. If I recall, Nintendo said multiple times MONTHS AGO that they aren't really going to hold a big conference at E3. What I saw on Nintendo Direct was exactly what I expected, and I was satisfied.
Everyone getting all pumped for Kingdom Hearts and all that, let me ask you something.
They said this game is in development. How far in are they actually into the game? Yes we saw a trailer, but that could've just been a small little gameplay snippet that they made specifically for E3. They could for the most part still be on concept art and model building. How long will we actually get that game? It could come out 2 years from now.
Same with a lot of other trailers. They were just that. Trailers. There was no gameplay footage no nothing.
That's what Nintendo showed. All the games that they showed us have significant portions of the game complete. These weren't flashy CGI trailers. This was actual gameplay from games that will be coming out either this year, or early next year.
This is why Nintendo doesn't really bother with E3 anymore. The time they spend wasting their time on big CGI trailers and catering to CEOs and gamers is the time that could've been spent actually working on the game. Hell, when Iwata did the Nintendo Direct, the man even stated he did it on a Sunday. Probably just got him and some random cameraman to put the stand up and make sure he's centered and hit record. After that he dropped it off to like a team of 6 and told them to get this done by 7:00 a.m Pacific Time. And lets' be honest here that doesn't take to long. It's basically Iwata talking, then a transition to a trailer. That's it.
Then Iwata, Miyamoto, and him meet up with Reggie in the US and they can freely spend their time holding bananas and putting Pikmin on their head knowing that back in Nintendo headquarter Japan, they have a full crew clocking in hours polishing said games.
So I hope they continue to do this. They can slap some game booths at E3 and that's it. No need to waste time trying to be flashy. You want games? Here play games. They continue to make Nintendo directs and E3 for them will just simply be a demo convention more than anything.
Let Sony and Microsoft have their 6 days of glory.
Nintendo's first party titles are rarely 'the same' at least in the way that Call of Duty is. Granted, the objectives are always the same, as well as the means of accomplishing them, and the control schemes rarely change. But, other than that, no they don't make the same games. It actually takes Nintendo time and effort to make their games, unlike Activision who literally release the same game year after year.
If you want to levy a criticism Nintendo's way, complain about their overt concerns with marketability and 'innovation'. It's always the usual suspects, and Nintendo always tries to shoehorn in some kind of gimmick to promote sales (Cat Mario for example). I saw an article from one of the Pokemon producers saying they'd never make Pokemon Snap 2 for the Wii U. This is a game that a fair enough amount of people want, that could put the gamepad peripheral to good use instead of shoe-horning it in, Snap had one previous release so it's not like it's an over-used concept (leaving the fact that it's Pokemon aside). Yet Nintendo won't make it. What they will make is the umpteeth Pokemon hand-held sequels. The same goes for F-Zero. Lots of people just want a good, solid F-Zero game. But Nintendo's hung up on the idea that it has to be marketable, that it has to have some weird innovation. A company with a far smaller fanbase would have valid complaint. But Nintendo, there are literally millions of people who would buy their products no matter what. Sony and Microsoft would kill to have that kind of brand loyalty.
These concerns also hurt their relationships with third-parties. Development costs are already sky-high, to the point that the industry cannot turn profits and therefore sustain itself. A company that makes designing for auxillary peripherals like a motion controller or gamepad isn't going to be an attractive prospect for a company with already steep manufacturing costs.
I agree with the Pokemon aspect. Although to be fair it seems to be Tajiri and Sugimori more than Nintendo themselves. Keep in mind that while we associate Nintendo with Pokemon they are very loyal second party developers.
I agree. I would love Pokemoon Snap 2. And hot damn would it be a great game to showcase the WiiU tablet's full potential (the table is the camera, how cool is that!)
Lately however they have become more and more hostile to having any sort of Pokemon game on any home console. Let's be honest here the Gamecube Pokemon games Pokemon XD and Coliseum at least had a sort of plot to it with characters, bosses, a slightly explorable world, and catching Pokemon. The newest Pokemon game on the Wii however was basically a lesser version of Pokemon Stadium 2.
I wouldn't be surprised if they never make a game for the WiiU. Granted we are getting a Pokemon Conquest 2 for the 3DS, and they do have the Pokemon Mystery Dungeon series, but I have a feeling that are just tired of hearing about console this console that for a game they have said multiple times don't belong on the consoles due to their original vision of the game being portable.
I'm not saying this as a way to excuse no Pokemon Snap. I'm pretty sure Nintendo could make them do it with enough pressure, however it seems that Nintendo has no desire to push it's weight on Gamefreak in that regard because Gamefreak gives them a lot of money with their games anyway.
You see that's the thing about Nintendo, they aren't afraid of people seeing what the game looks like and making comments, because they know that they have a fan-base that will buy it and love it, even if it has some kind of flaw that Nintendo might not think of. Nintendo seems to always feel confident in what they do, and they have fun with it.
The vast majority of the other companies seem to be scared of the work they do, and have no confidence in it, "We can't show them game-play, because what if some of them don't like what they see and don't buy it. Yeah, we have to show cut-scenes because they tend to look the best because they have the best rendering, that will make them think the game is that good, so they will buy it on that. That will bring the higher margin of people that buy it day one."
What? I don't even know what you are talking about. Did you quote the wrong person, or did you just quickly reply to my comment with a comment that has no context?
Because, I sure don't get what you are saying.
Edit: The only thing I can think of I guess is that you are saying that Dead Island was like what I was taking about in my final paragraph.
That and the franchises people do want to see sequels to, Nintendo won't budge on. Like how long do people have to wait for a console Starfox title? Or another 3D Donkey Kong game? A game in the vein of Warioworld for Wario? A Kirby game that isn't in a Yarn based environment? An F-Zero game?
I think what people are sick of seeing is Nintendo constantly doing a back and forth between Mario+Spin offs and Legend of Zelda.
Nintendo's whole reason for going full-steam with the Direct is because they're fed up of having to try and present one conference to three different groups: Gaming media, investors and gamers. Before we all break out the joy lube for Sony's conference, let's not forget that the first half of it was filled with utterly laughable stuff like "We're going to bring across entertainment that gamers really want... like TV, films and music tailored specifically for gamers."
Right from the start of the Direct, it was nothing but games, games, games. Even more importantly, unlike Sony or Microsoft, they didn't try and fob people off with CGI trailers. Every single game announcement came with footage of the games running in action. They obviously tailored this Direct for the gamer audience, and I think unrealistic expectations aside, it worked.
I hope they keep doing this in future. Because I'd much rather watch more Directs where the focus is games, games, games, rather than watching crusty old marketing executives awkwardly try and jerk off gamers and investors at the same time.
I agree with you on this wholeheartedly. Marketing types and share holders make conferences pretty bad usually and I think Nintendo's move was a good one.
And completely off topic but since you are known around these here forums as an "enthusiastic" Nintendo fan could you recommend me any great games for the 3DS? I'll be buying one soon and I only have a couple games in my soon-to-be library right now but I know there are tons more good games for it out there.
You see that's the thing about Nintendo, they aren't afraid of people seeing what the game looks like and making comments, because they know that they have a fan-base that will buy it and love it, even if it has some kind of flaw that Nintendo might not think of. Nintendo seems to always feel confident in what they do, and they have fun with it.
The vast majority of the other companies seem to be scared of the work they do, and have no confidence in it, "We can't show them game-play, because what if some of them don't like what they see and don't buy it. Yeah, we have to show cut-scenes because they tend to look the best because they have the best rendering, that will make them think the game is that good, so they will buy it on that. That will bring the higher margin of people that buy it day one."
What? I don't even know what you are talking about. Did you quote the wrong person, or did you just quickly reply to my comment with a comment that has no context?
Because, I sure don't get what you are saying.
Edit: The only thing I can think of I guess is that you are saying that Dead Island was like what I was taking about in my final paragraph.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
