What's with the shield against criticism Nintendo gets?

[Watcheroftrends]

I think it's because Nintendo has created living, breathing entities in gaming culture. People like Mario as a character, and by association they like Mario games. Really, though, I don't think Nintendo ever makes a truly "bad" first-party game. I would agree that some of them maybe fall into the category of good rather than great, but they're still good. If people have fun, then regardless if a title doesn't become a timeless classic, it's still going to get favorable reviews.

That said, Mario Galaxy is a great game. I would agree that a story can make games more appealing, especially in the RPG genre, but Mario is more about imaginative and satisfying game-play than anything. Besides, with the way Nintendo handles art direction, I think a serious story would take away from the wonder and awe at how unique the environments are. In some ways, the levels convey an emotion themselves - no words required.

 

[AudienceOfOne1]

F*ck Nintento, F*ck Mario and F*ck the Wii.
The only thing Nintendo has going for it is very good marketing skills and lots of nostalgia

 

[John Stalvern]

I don't know, because they've been doing it so long that people forgot?
I haven't really had your experience, I hear Nintendo criticized all the time. I've recently begun to visualize it (and this isn't very proper of me) as a special needs child; most don't really want to openly get on it's case because... it's just the way it is.

 

[PorkChopXpress]

Ah Virtual Boy...I had fun with that system.

 

[WOPR]

Now based on the title, I know what you're thinking. "Oh shit. Another anti Nintendo zealot who's never played anything past the N64 trying to flame Nintendo." That's not the case here. I'm asking why Nintendo today gets a free pass on doing things that other game companies get chastised for. I've actually played and owned all the Nintendo consoles up until current with the exception of the DS and the Virtual Boy. I've noticed that anytime a first party Nintendo game comes out these days there's usually nothing but critical appraise from reveiwers. For example Super Mario Galaxy 2 is one of the highest scored games of all time. Why? Now what I'm about to say isn't opinion, but fact. SMG2 uses several bosses that are literally ripped from SMG1. And it's literally the same intro story as the first one :"Every hundred years, a comet passes over the Mushroom Kingdom and rains down magical stars and stardust."

Yet this game somehow got mass critical acclaim. I can't name another company that can get away with copy/pasting bosses and levels and calling them "new". Reveiwers gave shit to Darksiders for being too similar a whole bunch of games. Another thing that people give Nintendo leeway on is lack of innovation for most of it's games. The first DK game we see on console in 11 years goes right back to being a side scrollers. The first main series Kirby game we see in 10 years is also a console side scroller. Any other company who'd make a side scrolling video game and charge $50 would be called lazy.

Now in no way am I calling any of Nintendo's games bad, but no reveiwer seems to call them out on this stuff, yet are more than ready so give hell to games like Yakuza 3 for being to similar to it's previous generation predecessors. In my opinion anyways.

What do you think. Does Nintendo get a seemingly free pass on some critisism?

Nintendo has the "get out of criticism free" card
Valve has it's own time frame
Blizzard collects souls
and Halo/CoD have a bunch of idiot reviewers that have obviously never even touched a computer because they think halo/CoD are god FPS games

I don't think anyone else could get away with this
look at all the crap people give Sonic
and no one says anything about Mario
is this really just because Sonic 3 lost to Mario World? because they're doing the same freaking thing

on that note

Zelda has the same people same items same crap
Pokemon is the same game it was in the 90's just better looking with less original monsters

now anyone notice how much flak other adventure games (Zelda-like games) get after the first 2 or 3?

and anyone hear of monster rancher? I thought that was better then Pokemon but no one knows of it because it's NOT POKEMON

...freaking Nintendo
now I should note I like some of their games

final note: has anyone noticed that Nintendo's last ORIGINAL game, was GREAT
but was never given a sequel? (I'm referring to Eternal Darkness)

 

[WOPR]

F*ck Nintento, F*ck Mario and F*ck the Wii.
The only thing Nintendo has going for it is very good marketing skills and lots of nostalgia

I agree with the first two
but the wii did do some things right

more correctly

Ubisoft, Eidos, and SEGA did some things right with it

 

[k-ossuburb]

Case in point:

That Super Mario Bro's 25th anniversary edition that was just a direct port from the original without even bothering to change anything.

 

[Thundero13]

People do complain about how Nintendo games are repetitive, also it's not a secret that bosses were ripped from Galaxy 1, the whole galaxy is devoted to them, also nobody else ever has made a sidescrolling game for $50 these days, I think the reason more people can get over all these things for Nintendo is because they're the only people making games that are different, everyone wants to get the best fps's and such, looking them all up and complaining about the small differences but if you want a platformer then Nintendo's your only option.

 

[Skarvig]

The first DK game we see on console in 11 years goes right back to being a side scrollers. The first main series Kirby game we see in 10 years is also a console side scroller. Any other company who'd make a side scrolling video game and charge $50 would be called lazy.

You know what happend to Sonic after he tried not to be a side scroller? I think we all know. And guess what, Team Sonic finally wants to go back to 2D side scrolling. That's a good thing.

 

[Recron]

There is no shield, Nintendo has no free pass Nintendo get called out on this all the time by a lot of people, some people call them out some people don't. you've clearly only seen the latter.
the reason some people don't complain is because the games are damn fun and they got what they wanted, most fans don't want the games to be changed too much and what is changed is enough for them should Nintendo be criticised for giving the fans(or at least most of them) what they want?

And the whole Kirby thing it seems to me that you were implying that Kirby 64 the crystal shard, or any Kirby game was identical to the new Kirby's Epic yarn if this is not the case then ignore the following, Kirby is my favourite franchise and I've played almost every game, I have only had a short experience with Kirby's epic yarn at a convention because it wont be out here in the UK till next month but from the 2 levels and one boss that I have I can say that no they are nothing alike except from the fact that they are side scrolling games.

 

[MetalDooley]

They're generally seen as more kid games. I mean, what was the last thing they published that was a 15 or 18 game (or the non-UK equivalents)?

And they brought most of us into gamingdom as kids, no one criticises nostalgia.

Disasteray of Crisis had a PEGI 16+ rating which is the equivalent of a UK 15 rating

 

[Yoder13]

It's called nostalgia. It's difficult to criticize the giant who brought many of us into the gaming fold.

There are some critics out there, but I think people are hesitant to roast that sacred cow as they say.

Agreed!

 

[Flamezdudes]

To me, it just seems like they're just recycling all the same stuff all the time, there is hardly anything original in what they do anymore. It's just the same old milking of franchises.

 

[spartandude]

Yet this game somehow got mass critical acclaim. I can't name another company that can get away with copy/pasting bosses and levels and calling them "new". Reveiwers gave shit to Darksiders for being too similar a whole bunch of games. Another thing that people give Nintendo leeway on is lack of innovation for most of it's games. The first DK game we see on console in 11 years goes right back to being a side scrollers. The first main series Kirby game we see in 10 years is also a console side scroller. Any other company who'd make a side scrolling video game and charge $50 would be called lazy.

Now in no way am I calling any of Nintendo's games bad, but no reveiwer seems to call them out on this stuff, yet are more than ready so give hell to games like Yakuza 3 for being to similar to it's previous generation predecessors. In my opinion anyways.

What do you think. Does Nintendo get a seemingly free pass on some critisism?

you make a good point

i remember when SMG 2 reviews came out and reviewers were giving it amazing socres while StraCraft 2 also came out shortly after and was often marked down for being too similar to the original which was released 12 years ago!
while im not a nintendo hater (but tbh there only a few games for the wii im remotley interested in) it does seem odd how the wii gets largely shielded from criticism
i think its because they've done new things with the Wii and the DS but now other companies have brought out motion controls so it will interesting to see how they hold up now

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

My guess? Nostalgia. People grew up with the big N, so they get sensitive about the franchises they played as a kid.

I find your avatar amusingly appropiate, given that you are criticising nostalgia.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Huh. I wasn't aware that side-scrollers were strictly worse than full range environments...

Actual discussion aside...
If one is talking about the general press and criticism coverage, then I'd hate to be the first to break this to you, but video game reviews in popular/mainstream gaming media have been FAR too kind to big publishers for as long as I can remember.

I mean, remember what happened the last time one of them gave us honest journalism with Kane and Lynch?
Nintendo has very deep pockets, and those pockets translate directly into advertising revenue for many journalists.

Most other "non-affiliated" journalists I've seen and read *do* criticize Nintendo for remaking the same stuff over and over, or at least admit to the nostalgic appeal when they do talk about these products.

I've been criticizing Nintendo as fairly as I can for the last 5 years, but my little mewlings would never garner any significant attention, and even if they did, it wouldn't even come close to scratching a gaming monolith like Nintendo.

 

[Motakikurushi]

I grew up with Nintendo, so what they're doing now makes me hate them even more. I stopped playing my DS a year ago and I stopped playing my Wii 2 years ago, and never have I looked back on that decision. Maybe if they started making video games again and not releasing one or two awful exclusive titles a year for their massively flawed console.

As for the issue of copy-paste games, the main reason for disgust over Mario Galaxy 2 is that the gameplay mechanics, design, hell, everything, is the same. Why pay money for another copy of the same game? Just compare the differences between Assassin's Creed 1 and 2, and Mario Galaxy 1 and 2. The contrast is astounding.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

The first DK game we see on console in 11 years goes right back to being a side scrollers. The first main series Kirby game we see in 10 years is also a console side scroller. Any other company who'd make a side scrolling video game and charge $50 would be called lazy.

You know what happend to Sonic after he tried not to be a side scroller? I think we all know. And guess what, Team Sonic finally wants to go back to 2D side scrolling. That's a good thing.

You'd have a point if Legend of Zelda, Mario, and many other side scrolling games didn't successfuly make the transition already...

 

[kmyalxe11]

And all the Halo games were vastly different /sarcasm

All of the consoles copy things from other games they designed. Nintendo isn't any worse for it.