Battenberg said:
I see what your getting at but it doesn´t seem like your talking about innovation at all here.
Ima take up the example of naughty dog that you gave. I have not played crash or jak so i cannot commend on them, but i would describe neither uncharted or the last of us as examples of innovative games.
Uncharted is basically just a third person shooter version of indiana jones. I am willing to count it´s focus on cinematics as innovation if theyr where realy the first to do that, wich i doubt since stuff like GoW has I think done this before.
Regarding the last of us, it´s definitly a cool game but I cannot see much or any innovation going on there. From it´s gameplay elements, it´s setting (zombie apocalypse) and even it´s story and characters, pretty much all of it is borrowed from stuff thats already been done. You may argue that noones ever done it that good or that the fusion of all these elements hasn´t been done before (wich is debateable but i digress), still there is very little new in this game. It´s a very well polished game with a good story and great characterization but it doesn´t innovate.
From what your saying I can see that you want nintendo to develop new IP´s and I 100% agree with that statement. They do tend to play it safe a bit to much and that´s a real shame cause they can do amazing stuff if they try. You still can´t realy say they don´t innovate because they do it a lot, they just use theyr establised franchises to do it wich is fine with me.
Coming back to my first sentence. From the example you have given me, I conclude you want nintendo to move into a more adult focused direction rather then innovating( from my perspective all the games I mentioned where a lot more innovative then your examples). That is perfectly fine I would agree with you to to a certain extend. To that end I am glad that nintendo takes up developers like platinum games and monolith soft so they do get some new IP´s even if theyr more or less second party.
Bottom line you can rightly accuse nintendo of a lot of things, but not at all for an unwillingness to innovate.