Nintendo Says Online Multiplayer Is "Not A Focus This Time"

[DjinnFor]

What's with the editorial slant? I haven't owned a Nintendo product since the Gamecube, but I would agree this decision is laudable. If something cannot be done at the quality you require given the time and budget, then you do not add it in.

If a company says X isn't a focus, you acknowledge it and move on, not lament them. Go to a competitor where x is a focus if it bothers you so much. They're being open and transparent on their game and focusing on their priorities; this demonstrates awareness, organization, and effective leadership.

 

[seditary]

Steven sounds bitter.

Nintendo puts in online when it makes sense. One of the few companies that does that instead of wasting time and money putting in useless and unwanted online guff.

 

[Keiichi Morisato]

Nintendo Says Online Multiplayer Is "Not A Focus This Time"

It was a focus last time?

Speaking with because reasons [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/miyamoto-online-multiplayer-isnt-our-focus/], and it looks like he is standing firm on that stance with his latest Mario platformer.

[...]

This certainly does not help the theory that Nintendo doesn't understand the internet, as evidenced by its sub-par online system for the Nintendo Wii. With the rise of online voice chat, and some manufacturers even incorporating video chat services such as Skype, the decision to not add online multiplayer even as an option seems pretty shallow and backward.

Source: Kotaku [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/miyamoto-online-multiplayer-isnt-our-focus/]


Permalink

I think this article is quite misleading. Miyamoto was just talking about Pikmin 3 and Super Mario 3D World. It's a huge jump from miles away saying Nintendo doesn't want to go for online experiences period. Seeing the headline I imagined they would not implement online in Smash Brothers 4 lol.

Certainly, there are genres where online functionality is a must-have: beat'em ups, fps etc.
But there are also genres that don't need online stuff. What benefit would online modes give in Zelda? Hell, waaaay back Mario 64 didn't even have any local multiplayer options and it was perfect the way it is. Same can be said about Mario Galaxy. Not every single game released these days has to shove down social applications everybody's throat and try to 'connect' everybody. Fan communities existed before the advent of online voice chat as well: simply by making the game a good experience. It's good that Nintendo adds online to games where it makes sense (Pokemon, Mario Kart, Smash etc.) as opposed to adding it everywhere mindlessly.

that audience you are talking about only care about SONY or MS, they have no interest in going anywhere, especially since the PS4 and XBO are more powerful, they only care about graphics and realism, not true innovation, yes i do think that the Wii U is quite innovative with it's controller and how lag free it is, and with the added functionality. i understand that the PS4 does the same thing with the Vita, but we will have to wait to see how well implemented it is.

 

[Vyress]

I think this article is quite misleading. Miyamoto was just talking about Pikmin 3 and Super Mario 3D World. It's a huge jump from miles away saying Nintendo doesn't want to go for online experiences period. Seeing the headline I imagined they would not implement online in Smash Brothers 4 lol.

Certainly, there are genres where online functionality is a must-have: beat'em ups, fps etc.
But there are also genres that don't need online stuff. What benefit would online modes give in Zelda? Hell, waaaay back Mario 64 didn't even have any local multiplayer options and it was perfect the way it is. Same can be said about Mario Galaxy. Not every single game released these days has to shove down social applications everybody's throat and try to 'connect' everybody. Fan communities existed before the advent of online voice chat as well: simply by making the game a good experience. It's good that Nintendo adds online to games where it makes sense (Pokemon, Mario Kart, Smash etc.) as opposed to adding it everywhere mindlessly.

that audience you are talking about only care about SONY or MS, they have no interest in going anywhere, especially since the PS4 and XBO are more powerful, they only care about graphics and realism, not true innovation, yes i do think that the Wii U is quite innovative with it's controller and how lag free it is, and with the added functionality. i understand that the PS4 does the same thing with the Vita, but we will have to wait to see how well implemented it is.

Audience? o.o
I was talking about how some game genres don't need online shenanigans whereas others should have them and how Miyamoto was only talking about Pikmin 3D and Super Mario 3D World not going for online, 2 games where it's reasonable to not implement them - unlike what the headline and the article suggests: which would be Nintendo avoiding online as a whole.

I didn't talk about any kind of audience. Or innovation. Only that games can also have a following and appreciate a game together (a fan community) without any implemented online social applications by just having created a very good enjoyable game, for instance like back then when all those online shenanigans didn't even exist on console games.

 

[Dragonbums]

Honestly, the only Nintendo games that benefit from online multiplayer are Pokemon, Mario Kart, SSB, and for some reason Mario Party.

Other than that I don't care.

If I want to play with friends online I go play TF2, or the slew of other AAA games that shoehorn the thing in there for the sake of a selling point.

I don't know why everyone is raging pissed that Nintendo isn't doing it for SM3DW, yet everyone threw a ***** fit about the new Lara Croft game having a multiplayer and saying that it shouldn't of been there in the first place.


EDIT: I'm not saying Mario Party had online multiplayer. But if it did, that would be great.

 

[hexFrank202]

Given how voice-enabled online multiplayer was at the center of almost everything that went wrong in generation 7, I don't see why Nintendo needs to tell us the reason.

 

[SecondPrize]

I havn't played much nintendo since the 90s but I always did it with a friend or family member. Even if it's something like a modern "pass the controller after death" these guys need to take advantage of the how fun their games are with buds.

 

[Benpasko]

I havn't played much nintendo since the 90s but I always did it with a friend or family member. Even if it's something like a modern "pass the controller after death" these guys need to take advantage of the how fun their games are with buds.

Nintendo are still champions of local multiplayer. You can get 4 people on a couch and play their games, they're just saying that online isn't a focus for a lot of their games. I'd be willing to bet that games that should have online will still have online, of course.

 

[saxman234]

Why are people condemning a feature that people would enjoy. Split Screen (or shared screen in this cause) multiplayer is great, but some people do have friends elsewhere. Online multiplayer is not just racist 12 year olds yelling in Cod. Look at games like Dark Souls for inventive online implementation in a predominately single player game. Should they be forced to include online, no, but it is a great feature for people that want to play with their friends elsewhere. I am curious to see how Smash 4 multiplayer is. A competitive game like that would benefit so much from a great online system, but I don't know if Nintendo (I guess Namco) really has the experience to pull that off. Actually it would seem almost like a complete wasted opportunity if that game does not have lag free, competitive online multiplayer where you can actually choose which gametype to play (who wants to play time).

 

[SecondPrize]

I havn't played much nintendo since the 90s but I always did it with a friend or family member. Even if it's something like a modern "pass the controller after death" these guys need to take advantage of the how fun their games are with buds.

Nintendo are still champions of local multiplayer. You can get 4 people on a couch and play their games, they're just saying that online isn't a focus for a lot of their games. I'd be willing to bet that games that should have online will still have online, of course.

I wouldn't expect the actual "pass teh controller" to be less fun than it was. I'm just saying I'd own a nintendo console if you could play most of their games with friends online as well as on the couch.
edit- They don't need the kind of tacked-on deathmatch multiplayer many game devs seem to feel is necessary but I think they're pretty fucking stupid not to take advantage of the the advances in technology and infrastructure that have made online multiplayer ubiquitous on every other platform.

 

[FogHornG36]

Its ok, adults that would have bought a wiiu and play super Mario wouldn't have any friends to play with anyway, they most likely would be playing it with themselves or with children they kidnap from the playground.

I can tell that everyone here is jumping up to defend Nintendo without a second thought, but truth is, i would love to play a Mario game online with one of my buddys out of town, even if it amounted to just taking turns like in the old Mario games and watching the other person play while still chating with them.

 

[Ghostface2206]

The article is a bit mis-leading, Mario Kart 8 and Smash Bros. Wii U/3DS are going to have the most involved online multiplayer Nintendo has ever had. Also, Mario Kart 7, Luigi's Mansion 2, Animal Crossing New Leaf, Pokemon X & Y, all of them are handheld games, yes, but they all have really good online multiplayer.

But Nintendo, work on that voice chat, you had it on Wii with Wii speak, I never bothered with that but I know for a fact that there is an official Wii headset for voice chat (I have it, it plugs into the USB ports and only worked with a few games). You launched the official Turtle Beach earforce NL9s and N11s for Wii U, but no voice chat in games yet? What?

You want to know what one of the most disappointing gaming moments of the year for me? Finding out that Payday 2 didn't have LOCAL multiplayer.

 

[kurokotetsu]

OK, I'll say this one more time. The Mario multiplayer experience that has been done untill now is not a good match to online multilpayer experience. Online, each player can take it's route and do their thing, going around the elevel at their pace. Maybe you coordinate, but you are autonomous. That is true in eveyr good online multilpayer, from TF2 to Street Fighter to MOBAs. Mario multiplayer si about being in the same area, and while you are your own in that area, you are not autonomous, if you advance quickly everyone advances quickly or dies, others respawning is based in you fellow players actions. If there weren't for these contraints, it wouldn't be fun to play. In online play those elements, what makes these Mario games fun and chaotic to play would be lost, making it meaningless. If everine is playing at their stride, it is no better than playing independnet games while in the phone. That is not how Mario works. It would be detrimental to the gameplay. You may like the idea, but unless you've played the other mulitplayer Mario's and see how they really work, then just don't say without thinking that it should have it. It wouldn't work. So goo for Nintendo for sticking to their guns in this one.

 

[Duskflamer]

To anyone who thinks Mario with online multiplayer would be fun: Go watch an episode, any episode really, of The Runaway Guys playing a New Super Mario Bros. game. Notice how many times each of them die, how they shout and laugh at each other in the process. Now try to imagine how well they would react to those deaths if the other players were faceless "Player 2 and player 3" on the other end of some internet connection rather than somebody laughing with them on a couch.

 

[Trivea]

Good for Nintendo. I feel one of the biggest things that have fucked up gaming in the past several years is the obligatory addition of multiplayer features simply for the sake of having multiplayer.

Agreed. I have nothing against multiplayer as an option (where it makes sense), but in the past years it's gone from "multiplayer is an option" to "multiplayer is all people want and I guess we'll bang out a single player campaign for the twelve people in existence that don't like multiplayer", no matter how wrong that idea is.

OT: I'm torn between being completely neutral about this announcement and actually being kind of happy about it. I never play online which is where the neutrality comes from, but the happiness comes from actually disliking online play and having decided against playing games where it's mandatory, or practically so. I avoided playing TF2 for the longest time until I actually had a band of people I knew big enough that we could get a full game together without having to play with any strangers.

Also, bashing Nintendo for not having committed online play for everything seems misguided. Any of their games suited to multiplayer really do seem better as local than online. Mario Kart's not really a lot of fun by yourself, and really, what would be the difference between playing online Mario Kart alone and just playing against the computer?

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Speaking with because reasons [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/miyamoto-online-multiplayer-isnt-our-focus/], and it looks like he is standing firm on that stance with his latest Mario platformer.

No, it wasn't "because reasons", that Kotaku journalist was just talking out of his ass. No game has been syncing and tracking hundreds of entities over an internet connection, contrary to what that article says (and no, MMOs don't count, because those require MASSIVE and expensive servers, hence the first "M" in the acronym).

Now granted, he doesn't have the "It'd be damn-near impossible to do it right with that many moving characters" excuse for Mario, but I don't feel his point is any less valid. When did gamers become so misanthropic that we're afraid to actually sit in the same room as other people? The internet is a great thing, I love online play as much as the next guy, but so is chilling-out in the same room with a bunch of friends.

 

[Hero of Lime]

given how many games ram 'online multiplayer' down your throat like its the only mode that matters.

i'm ok with this.

Yup, this is what I came to say basically. After E3 2013's "let's make everything about online co-op and social integration!" from everyone else, it's nice to see Nintendo focusing more on quality single player experiences.

I liked the Tingle Bottle in Wind Waker HD, but anything more in regard to online Multiplayer in Zelda games is unwelcome for me.

 

[Steven Bogos]

Speaking with because reasons [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/miyamoto-online-multiplayer-isnt-our-focus/], and it looks like he is standing firm on that stance with his latest Mario platformer.

No, it wasn't "because reasons", that Kotaku journalist was just talking out of his ass. No game has been syncing and tracking hundreds of entities over an internet connection, contrary to what that article says (and no, MMOs don't count, because those require MASSIVE and expensive servers, hence the first "M" in the acronym).

Now granted, he doesn't have the "It'd be damn-near impossible to do it right with that many moving characters" excuse for Mario, but I don't feel his point is any less valid. When did gamers become so misanthropic that we're afraid to actually sit in the same room as other people? The internet is a great thing, I love online play as much as the next guy, but so is chilling-out in the same room with a bunch of friends.

Two years ago, I moved to Japan. A lot of my friends still live in Australia. It's not a matter of that I don't like "chilling out in the same room" as my friends, but it's physically impossible in a lot of instances.

It's inexcusable to not offer online multiplayer AS AN OPTION. If it's an option, you can still play local co-op. These things are not mutually exclusive. Why can't we have both? Is that too much to ask?

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Speaking with because reasons [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/miyamoto-online-multiplayer-isnt-our-focus/], and it looks like he is standing firm on that stance with his latest Mario platformer.

No, it wasn't "because reasons", that Kotaku journalist was just talking out of his ass. No game has been syncing and tracking hundreds of entities over an internet connection, contrary to what that article says (and no, MMOs don't count, because those require MASSIVE and expensive servers, hence the first "M" in the acronym).

Now granted, he doesn't have the "It'd be damn-near impossible to do it right with that many moving characters" excuse for Mario, but I don't feel his point is any less valid. When did gamers become so misanthropic that we're afraid to actually sit in the same room as other people? The internet is a great thing, I love online play as much as the next guy, but so is chilling-out in the same room with a bunch of friends.

Two years ago, I moved to Japan. A lot of my friends still live in Australia. It's not a matter of that I don't like "chilling out in the same room" as my friends, but it's physically impossible in a lot of instances.

It's inexcusable to not offer online multiplayer AS AN OPTION. If it's an option, you can still play local co-op. These things are not mutually exclusive. Why can't we have both? Is that too much to ask?

Yes, because the exception to the rule means a damn. Quick question: How much would it cost in development to add a functional (as-in not lagged to shit) online multiplayer mode, especially for a connection from Australia to... anywhere, and compare that to the number of sales they'll lose from not having the online multiplayer (even just "AS AN OPTION"). I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that the cost of development is higher than the loss of sales from not including the feature.