What's the criteria for a New Nintendo IP?

[xaszatm]

The main reason why no one talks about Nintendo's new IPs is because their new IPs don't follow the current trend most AAA "new IPs" go. They aren't these big, bombastic, cinematic games with hours of dialogue. Nor does it share the common gameplay elements of a AAA "new IP" (which is kind of ironic, when you think about it). Nintendo's new IPs are, usually, very casual, and we all know how much gamers like casuals. So their IPs tend to be ignored by the public at large and people assume that no one buys their games.

 

[GodzillaGuy92]

Second, Nintendo franchises DO change. Are you going to sit there and Say Super Mario Galaxy is the same as Super Mario 3D World, or Skyward Sword is the same as ALBTW? However, changes in some games are more subtle than others.

It depends... In Galaxy and 3D World, do you play as Mario in the Mushroom Kingdom and jump on goombas, collect coins, mushrooms, fire flowers, and fight Bowser and/or his kids to save Peach or some other female hostage? And in Skyward Sword and ALBW, do you play as Link starting out in a small town, who then through some disturbance gets thrust into a quest involving the Triforce, the Master Sword, saving Zelda, and defeating Ganon?

If the answer is yes, then that has become pretty bog standard at this point.

I'm talking about the mechanics. Galaxy plays NOTHING like 3D World same with SS and ALBW.

...I'm not sure you grasp what the term "IP" means.

 

[xaszatm]

I don't have to do any weird calculations to know that the Wii U has been out for over 2 years and so far has seen a single new IP: ZombiU. I believe there's also something like 3 new indie games on the eShop.

What's incredible (and yet somewhat tragic) is that in those two years there's not been a sequel to ZombiU. Cheap and lazy, sure, but it's an absolute crime that we've been denied an updated, not rushed version of such an already great game.

Kudos to Nintendo though, they have a single new IP (an Ubisoft game, of all things) and it's the one thing that could ever even get me interested in the Wii U. The problem is that's pretty much it. Imagine what they could do with a few more 3rd party deals like that.

The Wonderful 101 and Splatoon suddenly don't exist anymore?

Everytime I bring up Wonderful 101 people play technicalities and say that doesn't count because technically P* made the game.

Which if we are going that route Kirby and Smash might as well not be Nintendo games either because technically HAL Labratories made the game. Yet despite that they also claim that games like Pokemon are most definitely Nintendo IP's even though technically GameFreak made the games.

There are a lot of handwaving and mental gymnastics when it comes certain actual new IP's from Nintendo.

You should ask them if Uncharted is a Sony game because Naughty Dog made it. Or if Halo is a Microsoft game. Make them squirm.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I don't have to do any weird calculations to know that the Wii U has been out for over 2 years and so far has seen a single new IP: ZombiU. I believe there's also something like 3 new indie games on the eShop.

What's incredible (and yet somewhat tragic) is that in those two years there's not been a sequel to ZombiU. Cheap and lazy, sure, but it's an absolute crime that we've been denied an updated, not rushed version of such an already great game.

Kudos to Nintendo though, they have a single new IP (an Ubisoft game, of all things) and it's the one thing that could ever even get me interested in the Wii U. The problem is that's pretty much it. Imagine what they could do with a few more 3rd party deals like that.

The Wonderful 101 and Splatoon suddenly don't exist anymore?

I forgot about 101, but Splatoon isn't out yet.

I don't have to do any weird calculations to know that the Wii U has been out for over 2 years and so far has seen a single new IP: ZombiU. I believe there's also something like 3 new indie games on the eShop.

In fairness, I'm looking at the new IPs available for PS4 and XBone, and none of them look particularly interesting, except perhaps Bloodborne.

The Order 1886 seems pretty poor, Evolve comes across as a marketing platform, and while the gameplay in Destiny is really very solid, there's nothing particularly enticing about the new brand in terms of setting, plot, character, or unique elements. Dying Light looks potentially fun.

But see here, at least you get variety. Just look at your own resume - "interesting", "pretty poor", "solid gameplay", "potentially fun", etc. At least with a non-Nintendo platform you get to be curious about things and want to try them out, and you get hits and misses like anybody else. With Nintendo it's always "the new Mario game", "the new Zelda game", and it's hard to get excited about them because I've already played 20 games for every IP they own. I want to see them try more new things.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I feel as though I'm honest with my contempt with Nintendo and don't try and make the low hanging 'IP's' argument, but then game companies all over are now getting their own tailor made contempt for various "easily" avoided fuck ups. Sony for becoming the homogenous Big Dog, Xbone for getting all the colourful new exclusives, and Nintendo for the ye-olde sand-pit shallow narratives.

Granted, sand pits are fun and there's a lot you can do in a sand pit with an imagination and a cool group of friends, but in all honesty I'm not 10 any more and I'm asking for more... depth as ambiguous as that is to say. The old staples are good and fun but they're not going to make me think very hard.

Maybe I'll buy a Wii-U when they've made a great successor to the Metroid Prime series (there has been no other Metroid since Corruption, I'm positive), but until then I'm sitting on the fence of contemptible disinterest.

But then I'm an absolutely unpleaseable Id these days with only Shovel Knight on the horizon for PlayStation and 'Ori and Blind Forest' catching my eye.

In a parallel universe there's an Evolve that's a single player game with the focus as playing as the monster and I'm happy.

 

[gLoveofLove]

I acknowledge that they create new IP, that's fine. But I what I really want to see is them putting more resources into and focus onto them. I was really impressed with how much coverage and focus splatoon and codename steam is getting. They spent a lot of time at e3 showing them off and actually little time on the old zelda and mario, i really enjoyed that (even more so because i also liked the look of the games).
So basically, what i want to see the most is the new IPs on the front-lines. It's just a basic fact of human nature that people are going to be more excited for a sequel to a beloved franchise than a new IP: so it's up to Nintendo be more excited for their new stuff and put their confidence, time, and resources into them to get gamers excited.
But then that's just my personal preference, and some people might be content with the current balance Nintendo has.

 

[ccggenius12]

I acknowledge that they create new IP, that's fine. But I what I really want to see is them putting more resources into and focus onto them. I was really impressed with how much coverage and focus splatoon and project steam is getting. They spent a lot of time at e3 showing them off and actually little time on the old zelda and mario, i really enjoyed that (even more so because i also liked the look of the games).
So basically, what i want to see the most is the new IPs on the front-lines. It's just a basic fact of human nature that people are going to be more excited for a sequel to a beloved franchise than a new IP: so it's up to Nintendo be more excited for their new stuff and put their confidence, time, and resources into them to get gamers excited.
But then that's just my personal preference, and some people might be content with the current balance Nintendo has.

I can definitely see the merits to your point of view, but I imagine that they're concerned with the counterpoint. The new IPs are going to be hyped more by everyone else simply by virtue of being new, If they DON'T hype the old stuff people will assume they're just phoning it in and cashing in on brand recognition. It's a problem that really doesn't have a right call, and I'm just going to file it under "haters gonna hate".

 

[Rednog]

Here's the thing... I would like a new Nintendo action adventure or platformer... that's not Zelda or Mario. I want some fresh characters and settings.

That's what I assume people mean when they say 'Nintendo just makes the same games over and over'. Even when they make a new game like a fighter, or a racer, or a puzzle game, it'll just be wearing the skin of the same old IP. It'll either be Mario, Zelda, Kirby, or Donkey Kong themed, or a mixture of those. And the IP's that they have they hardly ever bother to shake up even a little, they're just completely rusted shut in an iconic stasis.

First, http://playeressence.com/nintendo-has-made-71-brand-new-franchises-since-2001/

Second, Nintendo franchises DO change. Are you going to sit there and Say Super Mario Galaxy is the same as Super Mario 3D World, or Skyward Sword is the same as ALBTW? However, changes in some games are more subtle than others.

Nintendo publishing it really really isn't Nintendo "making" brand new franchises. If we really associated publishing as making a new IP Valve would be the king of new IPs, but being the money man behind the scenes really isn't the same as putting a new idea out there. Even if you did...there be some horrendous shovel ware in that pile.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Here's the thing... I would like a new Nintendo action adventure or platformer... that's not Zelda or Mario. I want some fresh characters and settings.

That's what I assume people mean when they say 'Nintendo just makes the same games over and over'. Even when they make a new game like a fighter, or a racer, or a puzzle game, it'll just be wearing the skin of the same old IP. It'll either be Mario, Zelda, Kirby, or Donkey Kong themed, or a mixture of those. And the IP's that they have they hardly ever bother to shake up even a little, they're just completely rusted shut in an iconic stasis.

First, http://playeressence.com/nintendo-has-made-71-brand-new-franchises-since-2001/

Second, Nintendo franchises DO change. Are you going to sit there and Say Super Mario Galaxy is the same as Super Mario 3D World, or Skyward Sword is the same as ALBTW? However, changes in some games are more subtle than others.

Nintendo publishing it really really isn't Nintendo "making" brand new franchises. If we really associated publishing as making a new IP Valve would be the king of new IPs, but being the money man behind the scenes really isn't the same as putting a new idea out there. Even if you did...there be some horrendous shovel ware in that pile.

That's true, but you get into an awfully tangled mess if you go down that road.

Look at EA. How many games do they make?
Now step back for a moment and think about who actually makes those games.

We just had an article about layoffs at Maxis. Now, maxis is wholly owned by EA, but it was once a separate thing.

Or look at Activision. They publish Call of Duty, but the studios that make it, (treyarch and infinity ward) have distinct identities. So did activision make call of duty, or is it the work of the studios involved, even though they are wholly owned by Activision, and make whatever Activision tells them to make.

Now consider Nintendo.
Smash Bros. and kirby are made by HAL laboratories. Technically that's a seperate company. But... Nintendo owns them, and they even share staff.

Pokemon is the work of Game Freak. And yet, this is also a company owned by Nintendo, and in fact, Nintendo staff are directly involved with some aspects of it's development. (Just look at the credits and compare it to Nintendo 'internal' productions).

Now note that all of the following are seperate studios, with their own distinct identity, They nonetheless are wholly owned by Nintendo, and again often share staff and resources with the 'main' company.

They are 1-up Studio, Monolith soft, Intelligent Systems, Nd Cube, and Retro studios.

Given how they work, these are independent of Nintendo in name only.

They are not much different than the official internal development teams such as EAD and SBD which are internal to Nintendo.

So, if they are wholly owned by Nintendo, share resources and staff, but happen to have a distinct name and identity, are they part of Nintendo or not?

By that same token, is Maxis seperate from EA?
Is treyarch not the same thing as Activision?

Where do you draw this line, really?

What is part of a company, and what isn't?

 

[JagermanXcell]

Well it seems that Xenoblade X, Splatoon, and Wonderful 101 seem to fit the criteria perfectly.

Nintendo is saved. /thread

Real talk though, I wouldn't mind (what was mentioned above) a new platformer starring NOT Mario and the Marioverse. Otherwise they've satisfied me new IP wise. Especially since their current "samey" games still manage to retain quality and fun, in a console generation that seems to be straying away from quality and fun ironically.

 

[Evonisia]

I basically agree with the point, I guess. My major concern when it comes to Nintendo IPs is that other companies are learning how to make some of their sub-main IPs obsolete.

I mean really, what is the point of 2D Mario games when Ubisoft got Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends to do what they do except better in pretty much every single way? When they announce New Super Mario Bros. Wii U I'll just shrug my shoulders and pray for Rayman Begins.

I mean, yeah but you liking Rayman over 3D World is entirely subjective. That isn't to say that Rayman ISN'T the better platformer this gen than Mario, but what new is it going to bring to the table mechanics wise 3 games down the line? Is it going to be the same thing with better hand drawn visuals? Or are they going to shake it up and try out something new with the same characters?

I mean, of Wii U owners I know a butt ton more of people who have 3D world than Rayman, and it didn't help that other consumers outright refused to buy it due to the delays and holdback bullshit Ubisoft pulled on Wii U owners during the consoles summer drought where people got the console to PLAY Rayman.

3D World is a 3D platformer, and a mostly good one at that. The 3D Mario games have what? The ever-changing Sonic franchise to compete with? The latest Rayman games are best compared to the series they clearly ripped off i.e. the New Super Mario Bros Wii games. Either Ubisoft were being genuine sweethearts or they were being dicks in that decision.

 

[Casual Shinji]

In fairness, I'm looking at the new IPs available for PS4 and XBone, and none of them look particularly interesting, except perhaps Bloodborne.

The Order 1886 seems pretty poor, Evolve comes across as a marketing platform, and while the gameplay in Destiny is really very solid, there's nothing particularly enticing about the new brand in terms of setting, plot, character, or unique elements. Dying Light looks potentially fun.

On the one hand, you could argue that at least Microsoft and Sony are trying to bring new IPs, and that'd be a valid point. On the other, though, I don't think it's really fair to tip the scales against Nintendo so much, when the landscape all-round relies on old IPs so much, and the rivals' offerings aren't that great anyhow.

Besides, there'll be Splatoon soon.

I don't think you'll see anybody deny that Sony and Microsoft don't rehash IP's either, especially this gen. But then you don't have people complaining about people complaining that they don't have enough new stuff. This only happens with Nintendo.

 

[Casual Shinji]

3D World is a 3D platformer, and a mostly good one at that.

Except for that frikking save system. Goddammit, Nintendo!

 

[Guffe]

Well Splat00n is releasing soon, that should count!
There's also a new StarFox game before that, and he's been dead so long it should count as a new IP.
ZombiU was great fun and so was Wonderful101.

I just think people don't think the same way as Nintedo. I mean they even said Splat00n was first going to be a Mario "paintball-ish" game. But then they came up with so many new ideas to the game they had to make new characters for it, because Mario didn't suit it. Nintendo also said they usually start by thinking about a story and what the silver lining should be, and then to make it more cost efficient, if it suits one of the old characters, that might become the next instalment in that series. This is all from the different Nintendo Directs of last year, so it's not even outdated info.

What's counted as a new Nintendo IP anyway?
Because most games these days are made by several studios working together aren't they?

Could Bayonetta2 be seen as a new Nintendo IP? //jk

 

[Evonisia]

3D World is a 3D platformer, and a mostly good one at that.

Except for that frikking save system. Goddammit, Nintendo!

Details. Still, it's better than whatever passes for entertainment from the Sonic franchise as of late, yes?

 

[Casual Shinji]

Except for that frikking save system. Goddammit, Nintendo!

Details. Still, it's better than whatever passes for entertainment from the Sonic franchise as of late, yes?

I've never played a Sonic game in my life, and something tells me I should be very grateful for that.

 

[gLoveofLove]

I acknowledge that they create new IP, that's fine. But I what I really want to see is them putting more resources into and focus onto them. I was really impressed with how much coverage and focus splatoon and project steam is getting. They spent a lot of time at e3 showing them off and actually little time on the old zelda and mario, i really enjoyed that (even more so because i also liked the look of the games).
So basically, what i want to see the most is the new IPs on the front-lines. It's just a basic fact of human nature that people are going to be more excited for a sequel to a beloved franchise than a new IP: so it's up to Nintendo be more excited for their new stuff and put their confidence, time, and resources into them to get gamers excited.
But then that's just my personal preference, and some people might be content with the current balance Nintendo has.

I can definitely see the merits to your point of view, but I imagine that they're concerned with the counterpoint. The new IPs are going to be hyped more by everyone else simply by virtue of being new, If they DON'T hype the old stuff people will assume they're just phoning it in and cashing in on brand recognition. It's a problem that really doesn't have a right call, and I'm just going to file it under "haters gonna hate".

Well my solution to that would be to just make less of those existing franchise games so each game can get more. That is, it WOULD be my solution if the WiiU didn't have such awful third-party support and didn't need games so desperately. So I would gladly see less frequent installments in franchises if it meant more variety within them. Hey guys remember when New Super Mario Bros was announced? It had been like 14 years since a 2D mario platformer. Everyone was so pumped. Man that was good....

 

[themistermanguy]

Here's the thing... I would like a new Nintendo action adventure or platformer... that's not Zelda or Mario. I want some fresh characters and settings.

That's what I assume people mean when they say 'Nintendo just makes the same games over and over'. Even when they make a new game like a fighter, or a racer, or a puzzle game, it'll just be wearing the skin of the same old IP. It'll either be Mario, Zelda, Kirby, or Donkey Kong themed, or a mixture of those. And the IP's that they have they hardly ever bother to shake up even a little, they're just completely rusted shut in an iconic stasis.

First, http://playeressence.com/nintendo-has-made-71-brand-new-franchises-since-2001/

Second, Nintendo franchises DO change. Are you going to sit there and Say Super Mario Galaxy is the same as Super Mario 3D World, or Skyward Sword is the same as ALBTW? However, changes in some games are more subtle than others.

Nintendo publishing it really really isn't Nintendo "making" brand new franchises. If we really associated publishing as making a new IP Valve would be the king of new IPs, but being the money man behind the scenes really isn't the same as putting a new idea out there. Even if you did...there be some horrendous shovel ware in that pile.

Refer to my Codename: KND example. Just because it was produced outside Cartoon Network Studios, doesn't make it any less of a Cartoon Network original series. CN owns the copyright, the idea for the show was sold to them, they oversaw production, it's THEIR show. Same with a game like Chibi-Robo. EAD didn't make the game, but that doesn't change the fact that it was created specificaly FOR Nintendo, Nintendo oversaw production, they paid for the development, The IP is trademarked by them, It's THEIR game.

Also, because you never heard of it, doesn't make it shovelware.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Well my solution to that would be to just make less of those existing franchise games so each game can get more. That is, it WOULD be my solution if the WiiU didn't have such awful third-party support and didn't need games so desperately. So I would gladly see less frequent installments in franchises if it meant more variety within them. Hey guys remember when New Super Mario Bros was announced? It had been like 14 years since a 2D mario platformer. Everyone was so pumped. Man that was good....

Though considering how 3rd parties as of late are being outright incompetent and boring I'm starting to think Nintendo ain't missing out on much. Heck, if ya have a 3DS and Wii U you're pretty much set for content.