Shigeru Miyamoto: Nintendo Needs a "New Franchise"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

EvilRoy:

Usually the complaint is that Nintendo itself, as in Nintendo the developer, doesn't do much new. Listing a bunch of games that are only in some way associated with them doesn't really disprove that. If anything it gives the impression that Nintendo is fairly bad at coming up with new ideas, but is really good at paying other groups to do it for them.

At which it then becomes quite silly when you stop viewing things in isolation, and actually hold the rest of the industry to this same standard which apparently we're supposed to hold Nintendo to.

How many new PS3 exclusives did we get this gen if we only allow for games developed by Sony's internal teams? No Naughty Dog, no Guerilla, no Media Molecule. We've got the upcoming Rain and Puppeteer, a bunch of PSN downloadable titles and... The Last Guardian? Does that even count?

Microsoft? All their notable exclusives have come external studios. If we exclude Rare, Bungie, Epic, Lionhead and 343, what have we got left? I cannot think of a single 360 exclusive that was internally developed at Microsoft, new IP or otherwise.

Even moving to third-party publishers, how many actually develop new IP in-house, and how many just own a bunch of other studios they get to make games for them? Looking at EA, we'd have to discount DICE, Bioware, Pandemic (RIP), Visceral and everyone else. That'd just leave us with EA Sports. Not exactly a paragon of original IP or creativity, are they?

Also, holy sequels batman. I'd give Bayonetta a pass since they were picked up after the first one, but you can still tell the old adage 'If it's worth doing once, it's worth pumping out as many as possible' is alive and well.

Their games regularly sell over the 5-6 million mark to this day, often times much, much more. Like, 20-30 million.

If you created an instalment in a series that went on to sell over 30 million copies, are you saying you wouldn't want to then make a sequel? Even if you had ideas on how to expand the gameplay and add new mechanics to it? You'd be principled enough to forgo that entirely to make an original game instead?

I doubt it. I very much doubt it.

It's not that Nintendo doesn't do anything new, or that they don't have games, it's that some aren't interested in them. Earlier in the thread someone commented how Mario Galaxy 2 wasn't initially it's own game, but an expansion of the first (or something to that effect) I think that's what many people see when they play Nintendo games. Games that feel similar to another game, but at the same time not quite the first game. Other systems/publishers do it too. I mean look at Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed II trilogy, Sony's God of War, MS's Gears of War. More of the same, with just enough to make it different. Not too different, but not too new. Playing it safe is what it's called. The main difference is that Nintendo has been at it abit longer than the other two. Hey, but we loved those Zelda's, Metoriods, and Marios. All the systems/companies need to try new things, breaking the safe play by numbers games they're sticking with. Sure there will be failures. Not every game can sell millions upon millions of copies, and part of the problem is us the consumers. We too are afraid of something new. We claim to want original and unique IP, yet we don't try those new products. We jump back to our own comfort zones. Can't place the blame on the market, we've contributed to the problem as well. Try new games and we'll get new games? Maybe. But someone needs to make the first step/leap of faith.

Two God damn words.

Mario FPS

Do it Miyamoto... do it and make it your last big contribution to gaming before you retire. I know you can do it, and think of everyone's reaction when it actually is good. The impact that would have on gaming would be something to see.

It would also make this gif even more appropriate

image

TBH I don't care what it is, just let it be good. As the always dependable NDF members have pointed out, to say Nintendo doesn't make new IP's is false, they do... they just tend to never measure up to their flagship titles. So they exist, but pointing them out is almost pointless if not for just the sake of argument.

I would love to see them return to the days of super mario 64, Star Fox 64, and Metroid Prime. I know they can do it.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

EvilRoy:

Usually the complaint is that Nintendo itself, as in Nintendo the developer, doesn't do much new. Listing a bunch of games that are only in some way associated with them doesn't really disprove that. If anything it gives the impression that Nintendo is fairly bad at coming up with new ideas, but is really good at paying other groups to do it for them.

At which it then becomes quite silly when you stop viewing things in isolation, and actually hold the rest of the industry to this same standard which apparently we're supposed to hold Nintendo to.

I can only respond to the statement as it was phrased. If you want to change to focus, you can, but I probably won't be along for the ride. Besides, other companies might lack creativity, but no other company is as proud of or defended for such a lack of creativity as nintendo.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Also, holy sequels batman. I'd give Bayonetta a pass since they were picked up after the first one, but you can still tell the old adage 'If it's worth doing once, it's worth pumping out as many as possible' is alive and well.

Their games regularly sell over the 5-6 million mark to this day, often times much, much more. Like, 20-30 million.

If you created an installment in a series that went on to sell over 30 million copies, are you saying you wouldn't want to then make a sequel? Even if you had ideas on how to expand the gameplay and add new mechanics to it? You'd be principled enough to forgo that entirely to make an original game instead?

I doubt it. I very much doubt it.

I would certainly and immediately go for the easy money. I would not, however, include a series with six installments as part of a list expressing my creativity in new IPs.

EvilRoy:
Usually the complaint is that Nintendo itself, as in Nintendo the developer, doesn't do much new. Listing a bunch of games that are only in some way associated with them doesn't really disprove that. If anything it gives the impression that Nintendo is fairly bad at coming up with new ideas, but is really good at paying other groups to do it for them.

But here's a fun question: what's wrong with that?

I don't see a lot of folks up in arms that Sony pays outside companies like Naughty Dogs to produce things like Uncharted or The Last Of Us. In fact, Sony barely produces any games of its own, it pays other people to make them too. Ditto MS. Yet Nintendo is seemingly the only one of the Big Three who deserves flak for having the smarts to pay not only their own people, but also other studios' people to make games.

If you're paying other talented folks to create good exclusive IPs, how is that in any possible way a BAD thing? I'm confused as to what's seemingly wrong with Nintendo paying talented people to make good games when that's exactly the same thing the other two consoles do.

As it was said earlier: when you hold everyone to the same ridiculous standards that people hold Nintendo to, NOBODY looks good.

CriticKitten:

EvilRoy:
Usually the complaint is that Nintendo itself, as in Nintendo the developer, doesn't do much new. Listing a bunch of games that are only in some way associated with them doesn't really disprove that. If anything it gives the impression that Nintendo is fairly bad at coming up with new ideas, but is really good at paying other groups to do it for them.

But here's a fun question: what's wrong with that?

I don't see a lot of folks up in arms that Sony pays outside companies like Naughty Dogs to produce things like Uncharted or The Last Of Us. In fact, Sony barely produces any games of its own, it pays other people to make them too. Ditto MS. Yet Nintendo is seemingly the only one of the Big Three who deserves flak for having the smarts to pay not only their own people, but also other studios' people to make games.

If you're paying other talented folks to create good exclusive IPs, how is that in any possible way a BAD thing? I'm confused as to what's seemingly wrong with Nintendo paying talented people to make good games when that's exactly the same thing the other two consoles do.

As it was said earlier: when you hold everyone to the same ridiculous standards that people hold Nintendo to, NOBODY looks good.

Its not a bad thing, I'm trying to say is that it isn't what is being complained about. People complain that nintendo makes apparently no effort to expand their flagship franchises, beyond the scheduled sequels. That is the lack of creativity being referred to. This action relieves that particular lack of creativity.

It doesn't even really make sense in general to compare nintendo to either sony or microsoft, because nintendo is first and foremost a game company, whereas sony and microsoft are very large corporations that simply have game divisions. But people do anyway, so there you go.

EvilRoy:
Its not a bad thing, I'm trying to say is that it isn't what is being complained about. People complain that nintendo makes apparently no effort to expand their flagship franchises, beyond the scheduled sequels. That is the lack of creativity being referred to. This action relieves that particular lack of creativity.

It doesn't even really make sense in general to compare nintendo to either sony or microsoft, because nintendo is first and foremost a game company, whereas sony and microsoft are very large corporations that simply have game divisions. But people do anyway, so there you go.

Which is my point exactly.

If you're going to compare them, it should be done on the same standards. It's nonsensical to compare two entities with separate standards. They're not children, one of whom is a genius and the other two are dunces (thus "making it okay" to be mad at the smart kid for that C but not the dumb kids). They're all corporations and should be judged on an equal field of play.

Aiddon:
thing is EVERY company needs new franchises, but no one is commenting on that. Furthermore, has a LOT of new IPs....but of course a LOT of people handwave them as not counting because they're on the eShop, or they're on handhelds, or they look colorful or some other B.S. excuse. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see what they've cooked up.

The Artificially Prolonged:
Nintendo? New IP? Excuse me I just need to check the sky is not falling :P

Seriously this good news in my book. A new face from Nintendo would be a bit of fresh air and mix up the new Zelda, Mario, Metroid cycle.

Because when Nintendo makes a new franchise you'll more than likely get something legitimately different as opposed to just a reskin of another franchise. People milk that tired, flawed, and easy-to-dismantle excuse of "Nintendo has no new franchises!", blissfully ignorant that A) Yes, Nintendo DOES make new franchises quite frequently such as Xenoblade, or Dillon's Rolling Western, or Pushmo, or Sakura Samurai, it's just that most people try to ignore those for arbitrary reasons. Like Miyamoto said, GAMEPLAY makes a new series, not characters or a name. A new franchise has to be LEGITIMATELY new, not just a reskin.

Maybe because quite a few of them are not well known? Or not a franchise yet? Or not directly made by Nintendo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_franchises
They make new games through other developers, and those developers do often make squeals, but that does not make it a Nintendo franchise. That would mean Nintendo owns the copyright but does not make the game. Xenoblade would be a Monolith Soft franchise, Pushmo is by intelligent systems, Sakura Samurai is by grounding inc. technically Smash Bros was a HAL laboratory franchise.

I want to take a crack at listing Nintendo franchises as well:

-Mario
-Zelda
-Donkey Kong
-Metroid
-Star Fox
-Fire Emblem
-Pikmin
-Custom Robo
-Pokemon
-Kid Icarus
-Kirby
-Advance Wars

That's it, that's all I got, but it's not a bad variety honestly. We don't need constant new IPs that run their course after 3-4 games, it's not a bad thing that Nintendo has a table of franchises that they update and add too, especially since each one plays pretty differently from one another.

And also what do Sony and Microsoft have? Sony couldn't even scrape together a roster for their fighting game without turning to third parties, and Microsoft just has Halo, which they didn't even create.

zalithar:

Maybe because quite a few of them are not well known? Or not a franchise yet? Or not directly made by Nintendo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_franchises
They make new games through other developers, and those developers do often make squeals, but that does not make it a Nintendo franchise. That would mean Nintendo owns the copyright but does not make the game. Xenoblade would be a Monolith Soft franchise, Pushmo is by intelligent systems, Sakura Samurai is by grounding inc. technically Smash Bros was a HAL laboratory franchise.

As the debate above shows, most companies don't actually have their major titles developed in-house such as Uncharted, The Last of Us, Ratchet and Clank, etc. And if Nintendo owns the copyright, ITS THEIR GAME. No buts. You can't put asterisks on something and try to say it doesn't count in order to try and perpetuate a sloppy argument that can be dismantled in seconds. Nintendo makes and publishes a TON of new ideas. So stop trying to pretend they don't.

I bet they'll buy the rights to Croc, an IP that very few people know of. But I'll freak out if Im right

They have a lot of good and varied franchises. They just choose to not do anything new with a good number of them.

Star Fox*? F-Zero? Pikmin? Advance Wars? Custom Robo? Earthbound ('Mother' series)?
Nahh. Best to let those rot, so they can focus on shitting out another batch of "New" Mario, Pokemon, and Zelda games.

(*Re-releasing Starfox 64 verbatim doesn't really count as doing anything new.)

Still, I'm curious to see if this new franchise is going to be an actual game or just more dross like Nintendogs.

I actually reckon they should make a fuckin' Zelda or Metroid right to get them out of the money sink they're stuck in at the moment. Then revive old franchises like Lylat Wars (No Fucking Landing!) and then bring in some new ones.

Atmos Duality:
They have a lot of good and varied franchises. They just choose to not do anything new with a good number of them.

Pikmin? Earthbound ('Mother' series)?

Just wanted to point out that Pikmin 3 was announced quite a while ago and the creator of Mother said that he was very much done with the series, with the third one intended to be the end. Doesn't excuse the lack of an international release, but the reason there aren't any more Mother games is that the creative team feels that they are done.

For my money, I would love a new Star Fox game, and I would have thought the Wii would have had some interesting play schemes for an on-rails space shooter, but oh well.

Pretty funny since they seem to fight original franchises at every turn.
A fighting game with new characters? Naw let's just drop a few characters into it with a limited budget.
Hey a Yarn prince trying to save his kingdom? Naw let's put Kirby in it.
A planet with dinosaurs and a pair of fox aliens saving the day? Naw let's put Star Fox in it.

I'm sure there's more, but they've HAD chances to do something with a new character and instead slapped another mascot over it.

ShogunGino:

Just wanted to point out that Pikmin 3 was announced quite a while ago and the creator of Mother said that he was very much done with the series, with the third one intended to be the end. Doesn't excuse the lack of an international release, but the reason there aren't any more Mother games is that the creative team feels that they are done.

For my money, I would love a new Star Fox game, and I would have thought the Wii would have had some interesting play schemes for an on-rails space shooter, but oh well.

Pikmin 3 has an official announcement? How the hell did I miss that...

Atmos Duality:
They have a lot of good and varied franchises. They just choose to not do anything new with a good number of them.

Star Fox*? F-Zero? Pikmin? Advance Wars? Custom Robo? Earthbound ('Mother' series)?
Nahh. Best to let those rot, so they can focus on shitting out another batch of "New" Mario, Pokemon, and Zelda games.

There is a new Pikmin game coming out this very month.

As for Advance Wars, that is simply a GBA-specific entry in the larger Nintendo Wars franchise, which has seen games released on everything up to and including the Wii with Battalion Wars. The Nintendo Wars franchise has been going for years before Advance Wars, and will no doubt continue for years after it as well.

And Shigato Itoi has said that he has no desire to make a new Mother game. The series is his baby. If he's done, he's done.

EvilRoy:

I can only respond to the statement as it was phrased. If you want to change to focus, you can, but I probably won't be along for the ride. Besides, other companies might lack creativity, but no other company is as proud of or defended for such a lack of creativity as nintendo.

Lack of creativity? This is the company who, alongside Sega with Jet Set Radio, popularised the entire cel-shading aesthetic in gaming. The company who managed to follow the likes of Super Mario World and Mario 64 with arguably the two greatest platformers ever made with Super Mario Galaxy. The company who decided to give motion controls a bash, and ended up with the Metroid Prime Trilogy and Skyward Sword.

Nintendo adds more gameplay innovations and creative mechanics between successive iterations of a series than most developers manage in the entire lifespan of a franchise. Mario started off as a 2D platformer, then pretty much invented three-dimensional movement with 64, then added gravity-free planetoid platforming on top of that in Galaxy. How is that not creative?

zalithar:

Maybe because quite a few of them are not well known? Or not a franchise yet? Or not directly made by Nintendo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_franchises
They make new games through other developers, and those developers do often make squeals, but that does not make it a Nintendo franchise. That would mean Nintendo owns the copyright but does not make the game. Xenoblade would be a Monolith Soft franchise, Pushmo is by intelligent systems, Sakura Samurai is by grounding inc. technically Smash Bros was a HAL laboratory franchise.

And those developers are all owned and financed by Nintendo. Monolith, Intelligent and HAL are all names given to Nintendo studios. They may have once been independent, but they are now completely owned and directed by Nintendo. Not only that, but it's a well known fact that Nintendo often sends its own developers to oversee production of games at those studios, as happened with Retro, in order to make sure those games meet their quality standard.

You're basically arguing semantics. Monolith, Intelligent and HAL are all Nintendo in the same way Bioware are now EA.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

There is a new Pikmin game coming out this very month.

You've already been ninja'd here.

As for Advance Wars, that is simply a GBA-specific entry in the larger Nintendo Wars franchise, which has seen games released on everything up to and including the Wii with Battalion Wars. The Nintendo Wars franchise has been going for years before Advance Wars, and will no doubt continue for years after it as well.

I know, I've played the Super Famicom version well over a decade ago.
I'm using the common English localized name for the sake of recognition and simplicity.

Right now, I am doubting if it will continue in the near future, given how Japan basically rejected Dark Conflict/Days of Ruin. (I'm guessing it was "too western" for their tastes. The gameplay was fantastic.)

Or Metroid for that matter, after Other M.

And Shigato Itoi has said that he has no desire to make a new Mother game. The series is his baby. If he's done, he's done.

Also ninja'd.

C'mon, guys, old franchises are what have kept you going! In fact, if anything, most of your new ideas have been what have harmed you. Why wreck a good thing?

Just give us Mario with a new gimmick and pretend it's innovation. It's worked before.

Aiddon:

zalithar:

Maybe because quite a few of them are not well known? Or not a franchise yet? Or not directly made by Nintendo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_franchises
They make new games through other developers, and those developers do often make squeals, but that does not make it a Nintendo franchise. That would mean Nintendo owns the copyright but does not make the game. Xenoblade would be a Monolith Soft franchise, Pushmo is by intelligent systems, Sakura Samurai is by grounding inc. technically Smash Bros was a HAL laboratory franchise.

As the debate above shows, most companies don't actually have their major titles developed in-house such as Uncharted, The Last of Us, Ratchet and Clank, etc. And if Nintendo owns the copyright, ITS THEIR GAME. No buts. You can't put asterisks on something and try to say it doesn't count in order to try and perpetuate a sloppy argument that can be dismantled in seconds. Nintendo makes and publishes a TON of new ideas. So stop trying to pretend they don't.

Those aren't "Sony" franchises they're exclusive to Sony. difference. Uncharted, The Last of Us, Jak and Daxter, and Crash Bandicoot are all Naughty Dog games.

Halo is not an Xbox franchise, it's a 343 franchise (now, was Bungie).

dismantled in seconds? yeah...right. Have fun with the lolipop guild, and the queen of hearts because your in a land of make belief. When did they do any of the damn work (besides the few overseers, kinda like the pyramids)?

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

And those developers are all owned and financed by Nintendo. Monolith, Intelligent and HAL are all names given to Nintendo studios. They may have once been independent, but they are now completely owned and directed by Nintendo. Not only that, but it's a well known fact that Nintendo often sends its own developers to oversee production of games at those studios, as happened with Retro, in order to make sure those games meet their quality standard.

You're basically arguing semantics. Monolith, Intelligent and HAL are all Nintendo in the same way Bioware are now EA.

If their not Nintendo their not Nintendo. Is Mass Effect an EA franchise? No it is a Bioware franchise.
It is nice to see Nintendo themselves take on a full new IP (I should have mentioned that I do like Nintendo, they're just in a rut). Sony and Microsoft should take on their own IP at some point, it's been a while. The last one I know of from Sony is the Legend of Dragoon (about 2000), and that wasn't a franchise.

Edit: put a sentence from something else in there.

zalithar:

Those aren't "Sony" franchises they're exclusive to Sony.

Halo is not an Xbox franchise, it's a 343 franchise (now, was Bungie).

dismantled in seconds? yeah...right. Have fun with the lolipop guild, and the queen of hearts because your in a land of make belief. When did they do any of the damn work (besides the few overseers, kinda like the pyramids)?

....No, I didn't need to dismantle that in seconds because YOU dismantled it with the above quotes. Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, and The Last of Us ARE Sony franchises. They could get anyone else to make entries in those and their creators couldn't do anything. Kinda like how MS is allowed to have 343 make Halo 4; because THEY owned Halo, not Bungie or 343. This isn't hard, you can just go to the Wikipedia pages and confirm this.

Capitano Segnaposto:

Well, why change something that doesn't need to be changed? I greatly enjoyed the Nintendo Titles of the past few years. Animal Crossing New Leaf many would complain is the same old thing, but they changed many aspects of the core game that most people won't see instantly. Same with Skyward Sword and to a much lesser extent: New Super Mario Bros U.

Because some of us aren't content with playing in the same worlds again and again, no matter how well they're made.

I love Nintendo games because they put fun before everything else, but I want to see them put that skill into new IP's instead of ones I've already experienced numerous times before. No matter what they add to a Zelda game, it will always be a Zelda game, same with Mario and the rest of the old faithfuls.

My favourite Nintendo game of the last fifteen years is Luigi's Mansion because, short of the titular Luigi, it was a complete departure from anything Nintendo had ever done before and it was so much fun; and I'm pretty sure the only reason Luigi got the starring role was because it was a launch title and they couldn't put Mario in it because people would expect the next Mario 64.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

EvilRoy:

I can only respond to the statement as it was phrased. If you want to change to focus, you can, but I probably won't be along for the ride. Besides, other companies might lack creativity, but no other company is as proud of or defended for such a lack of creativity as nintendo.

Lack of creativity? This is the company who, alongside Sega with Jet Set Radio, popularised the entire cel-shading aesthetic in gaming. The company who managed to follow the likes of Super Mario World and Mario 64 with arguably the two greatest platformers ever made with Super Mario Galaxy. The company who decided to give motion controls a bash, and ended up with the Metroid Prime Trilogy and Skyward Sword.

Nintendo adds more gameplay innovations and creative mechanics between successive iterations of a series than most developers manage in the entire lifespan of a franchise. Mario started off as a 2D platformer, then pretty much invented three-dimensional movement with 64, then added gravity-free planetoid platforming on top of that in Galaxy. How is that not creative?

It should have been obvious, excruciatingly obvious, in context, but I was referring specifically to franchises rather than game mechanics. Moreover, although one might laud these innovations, taking a look at a timeline and the sheer number of wholly unimpressive games released between them and it appears more that nintento simply practices the fine art of throwing out random ideas until one sticks.

@ CriticKitty

Beg to differ, friend. For a start the games you've listed have appeared on Nintendo consoles but are not new Nintendo IP , and thus aren't in context of the news post. What most of them are is second/third party publisher titles.

Wii Fit was created with casuals in mind, but doesn't appeal to the kind of gamers Nintendo need to buy into Wii U. Don't forget that casuals won't stay long with games or spend as much money over time. I totally agree that Nintendo need something new, because plugging the same usual IP year after year isn't too healthy.

Overall, I doubt its enough to save Wii U now.

Aiddon:

zalithar:

Those aren't "Sony" franchises they're exclusive to Sony.

Halo is not an Xbox franchise, it's a 343 franchise (now, was Bungie).

dismantled in seconds? yeah...right. Have fun with the lolipop guild, and the queen of hearts because your in a land of make belief. When did they do any of the damn work (besides the few overseers, kinda like the pyramids)?

....No, I didn't need to dismantle that in seconds because YOU dismantled it with the above quotes. Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, and The Last of Us ARE Sony franchises. They could get anyone else to make entries in those and their creators couldn't do anything. Kinda like how MS is allowed to have 343 make Halo 4; because THEY owned Halo, not Bungie or 343. This isn't hard, you can just go to the Wikipedia pages and confirm this. You just proved yourself wrong with no(<-did you have more to say here?)

Do you realize the bias your exuding by continuing to argue fervently? They own the copyright that is all. They made it illegal to for the original creators to use their own ideas. I wouldn't call that ownership, I'd call it theft at worst, and insurance for a signed contract at best (With Nintendo, most likely the later). Every game I named for Naughty Dog franchises were made by Naughty Dog, Though ICO, Shadow of the Colossus, Mod Nation Racers and other such titles were actively developed by Sony Computer Entertainment (Team ICO is a division of SCE Japan Studio). Also Halo got listed under 343 Industries, under Microsoft Studios. Notice that? I thought you might be right on Halo and that I had typed faster than I thought, but no. Halo is under 343 while Microsoft holds copyright.

Not to mention that I put forward a counter argument, and you referenced your original argument to refute the counter to that argument. Do you see why you can't do that? just to make it quicker; because than my counter argument still applies to your argument.

Nintendo ... please just make Banjo and Kazooie a platformer again.

Zachary Amaranth:
C'mon, guys, old franchises are what have kept you going! In fact, if anything, most of your new ideas have been what have harmed you. Why wreck a good thing?

Just give us Mario with a new gimmick and pretend it's innovation. It's worked before.

If anything, they should try something new, but still keep on with their other franchises as normal. I think a lot of people that ask for Nintendo to do something new with their existing franchises, just want a new game with new everything, because seriously, if they take an existing franchise and make a core game in it that is changed too drastically, then is it going to really feel like part of that franchise.

That is the thing about Nintendo that I like, when they say they are going to do something, they usually do it(in a development sense). When they say they are going to make a Mario platformer, that is what they make, and lately they do add new twists and powers and stuff, but it is still a platformer.

Unlike EA with games like Dead Space(Horror game with shooter elements), DS2(Horror shooter), DS3(Shooter).

Other than that, Nintendo also makes games that use their characters outside their normal games, and it works damn near every time. They take franchises places where if others did it, they would die, or end up on life-support.

Mario does different stuff all the time in many styles of games and Nintendo succeeds with them. Where as Sega with Sonic, he is still feeling the effects of the horrific experiments they preformed on him.

For the most part, I think many developers are just jealous of majority loyal fandom that Nintendo has. I really think system specs are a minor point on why many developers and publishers are being snobby towards Nintendo and saying they don't want to develop for the Wii U, they are trying to bring Nintendo down, because the way Nintendo carries itself is different from theirs and rather than change and share in the love that Nintendo gets, they want to eliminate them.

What I find sad and hilarious is that floundering companies that are finding it hard to get acceptance from their fans and seeing a possible looming gaming crash because of what they've done, are trying to eliminate the one company that brought the industry out of the ashes after the first crash. I'm not saying there is a crash possible in the near future, but if anybody would be to blame for a new gaming crash, it wouldn't be Nintendo that caused it.

CriticKitten:
I figured this thread would be full of people sneering at the idea that Nintendo ever does anything "new".

I was right.

So I figured I'd just casually drop a list of games and franchises that Nintendo's either released on their console exclusively and/or at least marginally contributed to (even if it was just being in the publisher's seat) within the last decade or so. And just to make it hard, I didn't pick out any that were Mario, DK, Zelda, Kirby, Pokemon, or Metroid games.

The Pikmin franchise (1-3)
Advance Wars / Battalion Wars franchise (6 games across 4 consoles)
Baten Kaitos (2 games)
Several Fire Emblem games (I believe it's around half a dozen)
The Wii Sports franchise (2 games)
The Wii Fit franchise (2 games, third coming)
The Super Smash Bros franchise (3 games, fourth coming)
Endless Ocean (2 games)
Xenoblade Chronicles (as well as an upcoming game, possibly from the same franchise)
The Last Story
Pandora's Tower
The Wonderful 101
Both Lego City games
Bayonetta 2
A few Kid Icarus games
The Golden Sun franchise (3 games)
Nintendogs
Several Animal Crossing games
World of Mana franchise (3 games)
Elite Beat Agents
A few games in the Professor Layton series
Rhythm Heaven series of games (2-3 games IIRC)
A few games in the Dragon Quest series

....and I'm sure I've missed a bunch of 'em, but that's all I care to list. I think it makes my point well enough. Man, that crazy Nintendo. They never try anything new.

*eyeroll*

People, the notion that they don't "make a lot of new properties all the time" is pretty clearly not true. And even if you accept that notion as true (when we know it isn't), there's a simple answer as to why they spend so much time making games for their most popular franchises: a lot of the new material they make doesn't sell nearly as well or get nearly the same level of critical praise. If Activision stopped making Call of Duty tomorrow and started making more new IPs, some of us would be happy, but a great deal more people would be bitching about how they want more CoD and wouldn't buy those new games.

Simply put, you only sell what you know the customer will buy. A lot of folks who buy Nintendo consoles do it because they want to play games from those franchises. They're big unit-pushing franchises. Don't irrationally hate Nintendo for something that every other publisher does and would continue to do in the same situation.

Now I will say this, Nintendo does have one rather large flaw that IS worth bitching about: they're still REALLY bad at advertising their games. Hell, you probably didn't know most of these existed, so it's fairly understandable that you'd be uneducated about how many different things Nintendo has tried to bring in to differentiate their fleet of games. Nintendo really needs to work on advertising their products better, instead of just picking a few select games to brag about and not advertising the rest.

Covarr:
Or you could stop abandoning your existing franchises. F-Zero GX HD would be absolutely wonderful, even if it offers absolutely nothing new... and a new Star Fox game that actually plays like the first two without any stupid game-changing gimmicks or being an entirely different genre would be fantastic.

They're not abandoning those franchises.

Miyamoto is on record as saying that he doesn't have any fancy new ideas for F-Zero and doesn't want to put out any game without trying to bring some new dimension to the table (and it'll be harder to nail a unique feel for F-Zero now that Mario Kart has started moving into that territory). I imagine Star Fox is in the same situation.

I'd rather they take their time and make something solid.

Ive never heard of most of them. Sounds less like they make no new IPs and more like they don't market the damn things...... Are they all on Wii U? Hmm... *rubs chin*

Gatx:
I want to take a crack at listing Nintendo franchises as well:

-Mario
-Zelda
-Donkey Kong
-Metroid
-Star Fox
-Fire Emblem
-Pikmin
-Custom Robo
-Pokemon
-Kid Icarus
-Kirby
-Advance Wars

That's it, that's all I got, but it's not a bad variety honestly. We don't need constant new IPs that run their course after 3-4 games, it's not a bad thing that Nintendo has a table of franchises that they update and add too, especially since each one plays pretty differently from one another.

And also what do Sony and Microsoft have? Sony couldn't even scrape together a roster for their fighting game without turning to third parties, and Microsoft just has Halo, which they didn't even create.

Most people believe the PS2 to be the best console of it's generation, possibly one of the best consoles ever, and it wasn't because of it's first party games. I couldn't even name one, but that thing had godlike third-party support and we got some truly spectacular games out of it. Granted, there was a whole bunch of shit games too, but there's a simple solution to that, let the consumers not buy them.

RicoADF:

Ive never heard of most of them. Sounds less like they make no new IPs and more like they don't market the damn things...... Are they all on Wii U? Hmm... *rubs chin*

Most of those are on multiple Nintendo consoles like the Wii and DS.
But Nintendo does have a huge problem with not advertising some of there games. I mean heck they rarely play some ads down here advertising their products, and none of their commercials down here actually even show the Wii U in them. The only advertisements we do get down where I live are for the big name Nintendo games with Mario in the title. We don't even get Zelda ads! >.>

OT: Always nice to step out of your comfort zone and make something new.

Sonic Doctor:

For the most part, I think many developers are just jealous of majority loyal fandom that Nintendo has. I really think system specs are a minor point on why many developers and publishers are being snobby towards Nintendo and saying they don't want to develop for the Wii U, they are trying to bring Nintendo down, because the way Nintendo carries itself is different from theirs and rather than change and share in the love that Nintendo gets, they want to eliminate them.

What I find sad and hilarious is that floundering companies that are finding it hard to get acceptance from their fans and seeing a possible looming gaming crash because of what they've done, are trying to eliminate the one company that brought the industry out of the ashes after the first crash. I'm not saying there is a crash possible in the near future, but if anybody would be to blame for a new gaming crash, it wouldn't be Nintendo that caused it.

Actually, another thing I find funny about the pubs who are bitching about the Wii U is that they also tend to have one other thing in common: they have a lack of titles for the 3DS. Think about it, when was the last time you saw a MAJOR Western publisher aside from Warner Bros. release a title for the 3DS? EA has nothing for the 3DS, neither do Activision or Ubisoft. I don't care what they think about power, if you pass up a system with a 32 million install base you'd have to be a moron. I don't what's going through Ubi, EA, and Acti's heads, but they need to get their crap together. Speaking of which, Acti might be in for something earth-shattering:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/07/us-vivendi-activision-idUSBRE9660DA20130707

Uh oh

Ishal:
Two God damn words.

Mario FPS

Do it Miyamoto... do it and make it your last big contribution to gaming before you retire. I know you can do it, and think of everyone's reaction when it actually is good. The impact that would have on gaming would be something to see.

The possibilities are endless!

Metroid RTS - If you can push a 3 Altar Chozo Ghost all-in by the 6:20 mark, IdrA will just ragequit.

Golden Sun WRPG - I used to be an Adept like you, then I took a Ragnarok to the knee.

Star Fox space sim - Why fly a Hyperion Vanguard when you could be in an Arwing?

Earthbound MMORPG - You thought I was going to use Pokemon for this one, didn't you?

Pokemon... whatever Monster Hunter is - BECAUSE YES

Fire Emblem 4X - Who hasn't thought Total War would be twice as awesome with some magic and dragons? Also, Nintendo would get it right the first time. I'm looking at you, Stardock.

Legend of Zelda with Wiimote plus sword control - Try in vain to slash your way through a bland tech demo for terrible '1-1' wiimote sword control that doesn't actually work. It's funny because it's a joke game that could never actually get made. Right?

Donkey Kong visual novel - Carefully set the right flags to advance as you try to woo one of 37 lovely monkey ladies while avoiding the pitfalls and jumpmans of everyday life in monkey high school.

F-Zero interactive storytelling experience - Quick-Time-Event your way through an enthralling, deeply personal story as you follow Captain Falcon suffering through a crippling FALCON PUNCH addiction that turns dark when domestic abuse and guilt threatens to rip him and his family apart. Chock full of POLYGONS and EMOTIONS.

I don't think its wrong to say. . .introducting a new IP a generation and playing off that is a bad thing The issue everyone is STILL bitter ex-girl/boyfriend about is that IP was The WiiPlay/fitness games. Just as gaming IPs need to step up aimed at your core audience as well as to just juggling your core franchises. It makes them feel special. this is a long term relationship, if not a marriage, always being giving something aimed at you to make you feel special and important is hardly a cry.

ShogunGino:

Atmos Duality:
They have a lot of good and varied franchises. They just choose to not do anything new with a good number of them.

Pikmin? Earthbound ('Mother' series)?

Just wanted to point out that Pikmin 3 was announced quite a while ago and the creator of Mother said that he was very much done with the series, with the third one intended to be the end. Doesn't excuse the lack of an international release, but the reason there aren't any more Mother games is that the creative team feels that they are done.

For my money, I would love a new Star Fox game, and I would have thought the Wii would have had some interesting play schemes for an on-rails space shooter, but oh well.

Starfox really doesn't have anywhere else to go. They tried action adventure, then Halo-clone plus Starfox, and then Starfox+SOCOM or pre Xcom revival stuff and none of it quite worked. Moreover the slots the story in a corner.

I think they mean they want Nintendo to do its variation on Gears or God of War or whatever is popular with tis vaunted level of polish and depth but wide accessibiliy ignoring those games may actually by their nature not expandable in that way, appealing to the creative/decision making culture, or appeal to the primary decision making market. That they are seemingly excluded fron Nintendo console presence makes the company further frustrating to the consumer. Attempts to make appealing ones haven't helped (Conduit 1&2 and red Steel) especially mixed with demands to meet their interface reqs

Hazy992:
What about all that IP you're just sitting on and are doing absolutely nothing with? There's a plethora of Nintendo titles that actually DO deserve sequels. What about a new Star Fox game (and I mean new not a remake)? What about a new F-Zero?

well seeing as the last latest star fox game on console wasn't that good (and I mean assault never played command) we still got a while on that I would love to get the basic idea of star fox 2 that was canned and put it into a new one this generation and the F-Zero they stated previously that they are having troubles trying to figure out where to go with that series so that's on hiatus till they find out what to do
O.T. well if it turns out interesting it might move the wii-u from a maybe buy to a future buy

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here