Nintendo's Amiibo Figures Are Not Quite as Detailed as First Advertised

[KazeAizen]

You must be a real joy at parties with your ability to detect sarcasm. Also your first sentence literally makes no grammatical sense even by internet standards and that is saying something.

Nintendo isn't circling the drain. They haven't been doing fantastic but anyone with a brain knows they aren't in that dire straights. As for your comments regarding the figures I can't even begin to describe how condescending and repulsive those are.

If they give these kids high quality works of art, it will be wasted on them. These figurines will not hold up to wear and tear and its wasted money to put in details that little kids won't even care about.

The only people who would care are the 20-30 somethings who grew up with Nintendo and are die hard fans looking for nostalgia.

You can cry all you want, but kids don't give a shit. And these figures were meant for kids just like Disney infinity and Skylanders.

These are not for display, their purpose is to be a game piece meant to stand up to the crap kids put these figures through. Kids break things, that is a fact. They will be left out, and stepped on. They will be chewed on. They will be bent, crushed, and grated through rough housing or fights over the things.

If kids were careful and treated everything with the up most care befitting a die hard adult collector, we wouldn't have spill proof sippy cups.

And yes, Nintendo is fucked just like the rest of the consumer electronics market ranging from consoles to phones to TVs. No one wants to admit it, but its true. The people making the most money are those who make the parts that go into consumer electronics and that's because 2 out of the 3 were anti competitive for years.

and yes, making light of the GNAA's entire attack on women in gaming by reinforcing the "lol gamers hate women" lie is in bad taste. Especially if it drags a scandal into an unrelated topic. I am not the only one who called him out on that. Especially after GNAA threatened to take it much further and actually make use of the personal information they found to get people hurt in real life.

Its on the same level as those random comments on unrelated news articles talking about how Obama is the muslim antichrist for no reason. Its just dragging something controversial into a place where it shouldn't be.

.....I get this distinct feeling we are actually on the same side about this stuff but the way we both talked it came off as kind of rude and condescending.

 

[ajr209]

If you are going to cut corners in a way that will cause the prototype of your product to be noticeably better than the finished retail product for F***s sake DON"T show the prototype because you will only make people feel cheated and potentially sour them on your brand.

Being a prototype literally means it's not going to be the final version. You should have expected that what they showed was going to change for better or for worse.

The point



your head

If a company isn't going to make sure their final product is as good as it's prototype then it is a stupid idea to show the public or press the prototype. This is no the pre-internet being everywhere days when people would have had to dig through half a dozen issues of nintendo power to be able to compare. The fact that side by side comparisons can be done so easily even without sites doing the comparisons themselves means companies can't afford to pull that crap anymore. the problem of people thinking the prototype looks better would have been solved by simply not showing people outside the company the prototype. The problem I'm pointing out is not that people think ill of the final product but that they would have had no reason to think ill of the product if they had not had their hopes raised by seeing a better version of it (I'm not approaching this from a they're screwing customers angle but instead from a they're screwing themselves angle because they could have put out the cheaper looking product without the public having anything better to compare it to and thus having no reason to think what they will be buying looks cheap) and that this is not the first time the industry has done this lately.

 

[Flammablezeus]

The Link one looks pretty bad. I don't get why they made the stand so thick and yellow and then moved it to the front of the figure making it the focus of attention over the figure it's actually holding up.

 

[TitanAtlas]

Thething is, "Do they look Bad?"

I can certanly say, they look good has well...minor differences, but they look rather nice, and have functions to them no?
I certanly will get my Bowser figurine <3

 

[Lunar Templar]

Not seeing any note worthy difference, I blame the piss poor lighting. Not that it matters, they still look good.

 

[ajr209]

If you are going to cut corners in a way that will cause the prototype of your product to be noticeably better than the finished retail product for F***s sake DON"T show the prototype because you will only make people feel cheated and potentially sour them on your brand.

Being a prototype literally means it's not going to be the final version. You should have expected that what they showed was going to change for better or for worse.

Hat



your head

If a company isn't going to make sure their final product is as good as it's prototype then it is a stupid idea to show the public or press the prototype. This is no the pre-internet being everywhere days when people would have had to dig through half a dozen issues of nintendo power to be able to compare. The fact that side by side comparisons can be done so easily even without sites doing the comparisons themselves means companies can't afford to pull that crap anymore. the problem of people thinking the prototype looks better would have been solved by simply not showing people outside the company the prototype. The problem I'm pointing out is not that people think ill of the final product but that they would have had no reason to think ill of the product if they had not had their hopes raised by seeing a better version of it (I'm not approaching this from a they're screwing customers angle but instead from a they're screwing themselves angle because they could have put out the cheaper looking product without the public having anything better to compare it to and thus having no reason to think what they will be buying looks cheap) and that this is not the first time the industry has done this lately.

They could have revealed the prototypes at first and then later on they realised it was too expensive to have them that detailed in the end and thus made the necessary changes. That's called iteration, it's what you do after a prototype.

Also production of physical goods is very different from digital stuff.

once again

the point
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head

Iteration is why you DON"T show the general public your prototypes. You keep that stuff in house till you get your shit together. Initial design sketches are one thing, no one expects anything to look like it's design sketches, but once a prototype/demo/trailer/etc is out there that company has set expectations. That is why it's a dumb move to release a prototype BEFORE they are reasonably certain they can afford to have their finished product be roughly on par with it. And if you can't you don't release the prototype. Through being selective about when and whether or not they show off the prototypes they can control expectations and keep anyone from getting soured on their brand, something very important for a company that sells units largely on the legacy of its brand. Nintendo has been around long enough to know better and jumped the gun anyway.

 

[Lt. Rocky]

They look remarkably like those Mario Kart toys they released in '99..

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

My guess is that they initially planned for them to look like the promo materials, but the cost to mass produce them with that level of detail wound-up costing a bit more than was worth for a $13 figurine.

 

[Dragonbums]

I mean, you gotta understand that they are mass marketing towards kids most likely. The same can be said for the Skylander toys. Most parents aren't going to shell out $30+ dollars per figure because of quality.

Get what you pay for and all that.

 

[ajr209]

If you are going to cut corners in a way that will cause the prototype of your product to be noticeably better than the finished retail product for F***s sake DON"T show the prototype because you will only make people feel cheated and potentially sour them on your brand.

Being a prototype literally means it's not going to be the final version. You should have expected that what they showed was going to change for better or for worse.

Hat



your head

If a company isn't going to make sure their final product is as good as it's prototype then it is a stupid idea to show the public or press the prototype. This is no the pre-internet being everywhere days when people would have had to dig through half a dozen issues of nintendo power to be able to compare. The fact that side by side comparisons can be done so easily even without sites doing the comparisons themselves means companies can't afford to pull that crap anymore. the problem of people thinking the prototype looks better would have been solved by simply not showing people outside the company the prototype. The problem I'm pointing out is not that people think ill of the final product but that they would have had no reason to think ill of the product if they had not had their hopes raised by seeing a better version of it (I'm not approaching this from a they're screwing customers angle but instead from a they're screwing themselves angle because they could have put out the cheaper looking product without the public having anything better to compare it to and thus having no reason to think what they will be buying looks cheap) and that this is not the first time the industry has done this lately.

They could have revealed the prototypes at first and then later on they realised it was too expensive to have them that detailed in the end and thus made the necessary changes. That's called iteration, it's what you do after a prototype.

Also production of physical goods is very different from digital stuff.

once again

Flying hat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head

Iteration is why you DON"T show the general public your prototypes. You keep that stuff in house till you get your shit together. Initial design sketches are one thing, no one expects anything to look like it's design sketches, but once a prototype/demo/trailer/etc is out there that company has set expectations. That is why it's a dumb move to release a prototype BEFORE they are reasonably certain they can afford to have their finished product be roughly on par with it. And if you can't you don't release the prototype. Through being selective about when and whether or not they show off the prototypes they can control expectations and keep anyone from getting soured on their brand, something very important for a company that sells units largely on the legacy of its brand. Nintendo has been around long enough to know better and jumped the gun anyway.

Except, like, you totally can show the public a prototype to test the general reaction they have to the product.

You think Nintendo did a bait-and-switch with the figures. I think they realised how expensive it was to make them that detailed only after they initially revealed them. Ever heard of "mistakes"? It's what humans (and large companies) do sometimes, you shouldn't be in the mind set that companies are always evil and doing evil things.

I'll remind you that we're debating over plastic figurines meant for kids. This entire conversation was dumb. Wanna be friends?

Really? I have to do this shit AGAIN?

the point
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head

Go back and actually READ what I said instead of just having a knee jerk reaction. I never said Nintendo did a bait and switch, What I actually said was that I noticed the difference in quality and that I wouldn't have noticed any lack of quality if I hadn't seen the prototype and chances are most other people wouldn't have either, but that other people might. I'm not approaching it from the angle of a jilted consumer (already said this several times) but from the angle of what a dumb PR move it was. Sure it was a mistake and if it was a younger company still trying to feel their way through the industry I'd still say it was a dumb move but a fairly expected dumb move. But this is Nintendo, a company older than any person on the planet. THEY KNOW BETTER. This might not cost them anything in way of sizable amounts of sales but it will make people wary of their promotional material which is not a good thing for a company that relies so heavily on the reputation of its brand (already said this).

"Wanna be friends?" You just spent several posts either ignoring or grossly misrepresenting everything I've said and then paint me as some raving anti-corporate nut (despite the fact that I've taken umbrage with them NOT shadily hiding how better their prototypes are) and then toss out some disingenuous olive branch in a way that paints me as someone who started an argument about something they ought not care about (I would remind you that it was you who initially engaged me not he other way around and continued to argue with me despite the fact according to you "This entire conversation was dumb").
I don't like it when people do things like that that and I don't particularly care for people who do those sorts of things either.

 

[ajr209]

If you are going to cut corners in a way that will cause the prototype of your product to be noticeably better than the finished retail product for F***s sake DON"T show the prototype because you will only make people feel cheated and potentially sour them on your brand.

Being a prototype literally means it's not going to be the final version. You should have expected that what they showed was going to change for better or for worse.

Hat



your head

If a company isn't going to make sure their final product is as good as it's prototype then it is a stupid idea to show the public or press the prototype. This is no the pre-internet being everywhere days when people would have had to dig through half a dozen issues of nintendo power to be able to compare. The fact that side by side comparisons can be done so easily even without sites doing the comparisons themselves means companies can't afford to pull that crap anymore. the problem of people thinking the prototype looks better would have been solved by simply not showing people outside the company the prototype. The problem I'm pointing out is not that people think ill of the final product but that they would have had no reason to think ill of the product if they had not had their hopes raised by seeing a better version of it (I'm not approaching this from a they're screwing customers angle but instead from a they're screwing themselves angle because they could have put out the cheaper looking product without the public having anything better to compare it to and thus having no reason to think what they will be buying looks cheap) and that this is not the first time the industry has done this lately.

They could have revealed the prototypes at first and then later on they realised it was too expensive to have them that detailed in the end and thus made the necessary changes. That's called iteration, it's what you do after a prototype.

Also production of physical goods is very different from digital stuff.

once again

Flying hat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head

Iteration is why you DON"T show the general public your prototypes. You keep that stuff in house till you get your shit together. Initial design sketches are one thing, no one expects anything to look like it's design sketches, but once a prototype/demo/trailer/etc is out there that company has set expectations. That is why it's a dumb move to release a prototype BEFORE they are reasonably certain they can afford to have their finished product be roughly on par with it. And if you can't you don't release the prototype. Through being selective about when and whether or not they show off the prototypes they can control expectations and keep anyone from getting soured on their brand, something very important for a company that sells units largely on the legacy of its brand. Nintendo has been around long enough to know better and jumped the gun anyway.

Except, like, you totally can show the public a prototype to test the general reaction they have to the product.

You think Nintendo did a bait-and-switch with the figures. I think they realised how expensive it was to make them that detailed only after they initially revealed them. Ever heard of "mistakes"? It's what humans (and large companies) do sometimes, you shouldn't be in the mind set that companies are always evil and doing evil things.

I'll remind you that we're debating over plastic figurines meant for kids. This entire conversation was dumb. Wanna be friends?

Really? I have to do this shit AGAIN?

Another flying hat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your head

Go back and actually READ what I said instead of just having a knee jerk reaction. I never said Nintendo did a bait and switch, What I actually said was that I noticed the difference in quality and that I wouldn't have noticed any lack of quality if I hadn't seen the prototype and chances are most other people wouldn't have either, but that other people might. I'm not approaching it from the angle of a jilted consumer (already said this several times) but from the angle of what a dumb PR move it was. Sure it was a mistake and if it was a younger company still trying to feel their way through the industry I'd still say it was a dumb move but a fairly expected dumb move. But this is Nintendo, a company older than any person on the planet. THEY KNOW BETTER. This might not cost them anything in way of sizable amounts of sales but it will make people wary of their promotional material which is not a good thing for a company that relies so heavily on the reputation of its brand (already said this).

"Wanna be friends?" You just spent several posts either ignoring or grossly misrepresenting everything I've said and then paint me as some raving anti-corporate nut (despite the fact that I've taken umbrage with them NOT shadily hiding how better their prototypes are) and then toss out some disingenuous olive branch in a way that paints me as someone who started an argument about something they ought not care about (I would remind you that it was you who initially engaged me not he other way around and continued to argue with me despite the fact according to you "This entire conversation was dumb").
I don't like it when people do things like that that and I don't particularly care for people who do those sorts of things either.

Uh huh, well that's a shame. Sorry to hear that.
*Stealthily clicks the ignore button*
I was hoping you would drop this debate but you clearly don't want to.

And you're still doing the same crap that set me off with your last post.
If your previous post hadn't been so overtly disingenuous I'd be cool about the whole thing, but it was so I'm not. I don't like it when people do things like that that and I don't particularly care for people who do those sorts of things either.

 

[NoeL]

Shame there's no retail image of the Samus figurine. I'm definitely going to get one regardless of quality (I don't care about figurines, I just want my own Smash Pokemon!) but I was curious to see how much of a quality drop there was. If she turns out to be painted matte yellow instead of metallic I'd be pretty disappointed though.

 

[Maze1125]

So I assume then, that in spite of your defense of the product, you also won't be buying these?

No, I will be buying these, because I have children and they're going to absolutely love them.

 

[144_v1legacy]

So I assume then, that in spite of your defense of the product, you also won't be buying these?

No, I will be buying these, because I have children and they're going to absolutely love them.

In other words, they aren't for you, these cheap kids-toy-looking things are for your kids. I know. Verlander and I finished this conversation already.

 

[Karthesios]

My guess is that they initially planned for them to look like the promo materials, but the cost to mass produce them with that level of detail wound-up costing a bit more than was worth for a $13 figurine.

Does make sense, a good quality figure isn't cheap to produce. Even with the slight downgrade in quality, I'm pretty sure I'll pick up at least a couple of these (Link, Samus to name a couple). Even if I think of the word "amoeba" when I think of the name.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

My guess is that they initially planned for them to look like the promo materials, but the cost to mass produce them with that level of detail wound-up costing a bit more than was worth for a $13 figurine.

Does make sense, a good quality figure isn't cheap to produce. Even with the slight downgrade in quality, I'm pretty sure I'll pick up at least a couple of these (Link, Samus to name a couple). Even if I think of the word "amoeba" when I think of the name.

Dammit! Now I'm gonna start making that association! >_<

 

[ultrabiome]

the main problems i see are confined to the humanoid characters - textures, faces and swords - and paint detailing. DK and yoshi look fine, pikachu and kirby look fine as long as the eyes are painted symmetrically, samus looks a little more plastic, but still looks good (search online for a video/pic of it). it's only the tiny details that seem to have lost some precision, like peach's face and hands, link's and marth's swords, etc.

problem with the poses is they are supposed to mimic the "main" trophy from smash bros, which makes for some hard choices when some of the trophies are practically in the air.

i'd totally pay like $20 for the "deluxe" versions of some of them, others are almost perfect without.

 

[spartandude]

Well that's a shame, I was considering to by a Samus model for display but these do look pretty cheap compared to what was previously shown. Although the lighting in the new photos might be making them look a bit worse.

 

[ajr209]

If you are going to cut corners in a way that will cause the prototype of your product to be noticeably better than the finished retail product for F***s sake DON"T show the prototype because you will only make people feel cheated and potentially sour them on your brand. This seems to be a lesson the industry is having difficulty learning *cough watchdogs cough*. If I had only seen the finished product it wouldn't have occurred to me that there was anything wrong with them since they're about as detailed as most comparably priced action figures I've seen but next to the prototype they look just cheap. You know how transformers toys nowadays have the full version for like fifteen dollars and then they have the smaller less detailed ones for half that price? Well that's what popped into my head when I saw those pics, except at least with the transformers there's the option of getting the more detailed ones.

The thing is, Watch Dogs looked only slightly worse then the original E3 trailer on the version they originally planned to release, back when it was supposedly a PC focused title. Its why people were so pissed that they hid features in the code.

How much of a difference there actually was doesn't change that it was enough to be noticed by many people and that it was presented as this is how it will look not this is how it will look...on PC. My point was if they hadn't shown promotional material that was noticeably better than what was eventually sold people would have no reason to think there was anything wrong with it. I was just using watchdogs as an example and I still feel it was a good one because it plays so heavily into how a company can shoot itself in the foot with this sort of thing.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Why is no-one whining that the Hamburger at McDonlads doesn't look as god as in the picture?

Some people do.


But if you're asking why people aren't complaining about burgers in a thread about figurines... well... I think you can figure that one out on your own.