Satoru Iwata: No "Dark Future" for Nintendo

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Satoru Iwata: No "Dark Future" for Nintendo

When questioned by investors about cutting costs, Nintendo CEO Satoru Iwata expressed his desire to keep the company strong for the future.

It could be easy to look at Nintendo and think that it's in dire straits. While the insane success of the Wii did a fair job of lining the company's coffers, the Wii U hasn't done quite as well. That in mind, inquiries during a recent investor Q&A session questioned whether or not the company had any cost-cutting or workforce reduction plans in the works to shave off some of the expenses that currently have the company operating at a loss.

"If you believe that there is no possibility of Nintendo's results improving, then you would be right about it being necessary to review the structure of the workforce and the company itself to match the scale of the business," replied Iwata. He then affirmed his belief that, despite recent setbacks, "Nintendo has the potential to be a large-scale business" and needs "a lot of muscle" to do that. He did agree that there should be efforts to excise "excess fat" but said that "restructuring the workforce is not the first option" the company wants to look into, even when its profits are one the decline. "I would like you to understand that this is because we do not see a dark future for Nintendo," he said.

This investor Q&A follows recent financial reports from Nintendo which noted that, though the Wii U was still something of a drag on the company's overall performance, its sales had improved. Likewise, with recent software releases like Pokemon X & Y further bolstering strong 3DS sales and the company looking forward to an arguably strong lineup of future software releases, Iwata may be right not to overreact to the doom and gloom predictions some have for the house that Mario built.

Source: Nintendo

Permalink

I must hand it to Mr Iwata, he seems to be a smart guy that understands that every company has it's ups and downs and the best thing to do is learn from it and improve back into profit, not to just fire people which then destroys the employees trust and moral making the situation worse. I tip my hat to you good sir *tips hat*

RicoADF:
I must hand it to Mr Iwata, he seems to be a smart guy that understands that every company has it's ups and downs and the best thing to do is learn from it and improve back into profit, not to just fire people which then destroys the employees trust and moral making the situation worse. I tip my hat to you good sir *tips hat*

On the other hand, they just didn't have games on the WiiU, which was a major problem for the 3DS back then. I'm not sure if they did learn what caused the 3DS to struggle at first.

Still, making your employees sacred cows is a good thing to do. Makes them keep working at their job instead of losing productivity, which is a plus.

EDIT: Meant to mention, it's considered a bad thing in japan to fire employees at all, so that might be another reason why he isn't doing it. That kind of bad PR is not something nintendo probably wants in their homeland.

I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

Because 2D side scroller can be more fan than Elder Scrolls 10? For me it is. Skyrim bored me.

And you talk like there's no 3D games, like Mario, Zelda and Metroid.

I think Nintendo needs to get rid of a large chunk of their executive branch both in America and Japan. Iwata's gotta go. Reggie's gotta go. Others gotta go. They may be the nicer people to be called corporate executives but Nintendo needs younger minds in charge or they'll be in a much worse position next generation than they are now when it comes to consoles.

Full Metal Bolshevik:
snip

Skyrim bored you so all elder scrolls will now bore you?

Anyway, that wasn't my point, my point was that Mario (3D or not) is still just a platformer with very basic game play. Elder scrolls games are huge living world's with shed loads going on, loads to immerse yourself in and be who you want... From looks to skills to personality. My point is elder scrolls offers such an open world, Mario hasn't really moved on since 64... You're still saving an Italian plumber saving an ungrateful Peach from a spiky tortoise by jumping on or over stuff.

Elder scrolls still has you saving the world constantly but the big bad is different, the main story is different, side quests are different... They all boil down to go here, kill and maybe bring back a trinket but the story drives it. Mario has save the princess that's in another castle, not this castle either.... Not this one either.

The scope of games has massively increased but Nintendo is making 64 bit games.

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

It's a bit naive to think Nintendo's entire empire floats on the saliva of 80's and 90's gamers. There really aren't that many of them. Nintendo pulls in plenty of gamers of all ages with their handhelds, it just that the Wii-U isn't finding an audience at all.

And even if Nintendo only makes kids games, it's not like the world is ever going to run out of those.

As long as Nintendo is able to cater to kids, they will be just fine recycling the same three or four super-franchises, because kids don't have the years and years of experience with the same games. With the WiiU, they've definitely stopped trying to compete with mainstream gaming and mainstream gaming is just leaving them behind.

I'm from the 90s and even I don't buy too many games from Nintendo anymore. However, the reason for that is they release exclusively on the 3ds and the Wii U. Also their games never have good discounts until ages later.

Then again, I pretty much migrated to PC gaming due to the much lower cost of titles. In the matter of maybe a year and a half I have almost twice the number of quality titles on my PC as compared to my now neglected Xbox 360, PS Vita, and 3ds. I mean, I own two games on the Vita after owning it for over a year, Three actual cartridge games for the 3ds after owning it for close to 3 years, and only bought one console game (dynasty Warriors 8) for the PS3.

Comparing that to purchasing probably over a dozen games for the PC in the stretch of two years... yeah.

omega 616:

Full Metal Bolshevik:
snip

Skyrim bored you so all elder scrolls will now bore you?

Anyway, that wasn't my point, my point was that Mario (3D or not) is still just a platformer with very basic game play. Elder scrolls games are huge living world's with shed loads going on, loads to immerse yourself in and be who you want... From looks to skills to personality. My point is elder scrolls offers such an open world, Mario hasn't really moved on since 64... You're still saving an Italian plumber saving an ungrateful Peach from a spiky tortoise by jumping on or over stuff.

Elder scrolls still has you saving the world constantly but the big bad is different, the main story is different, side quests are different... They all boil down to go here, kill and maybe bring back a trinket but the story drives it. Mario has save the princess that's in another castle, not this castle either.... Not this one either.

The scope of games has massively increased but Nintendo is making 64 bit games.

Elder Scrolls? You mean the game series that continues to make it's "ocean" shallower every iteration of it? I agree with you except it is a poor example. The game that has combat no matter what role you do, consist of whack a mole? While Mario shtick might be platforming, at least it is actually good at it. I would agree with you in that Nintendo does rely on it's staple IP's a little to much but what company doesn't when it still makes then money. It's not like we see the industry short of indie developers actually innovating.

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

The assumption that Nintendo's only fanbase are 30 year olds on nostalgia googles are baffling.

Especially when a large number of critics against Nintendo are in that very age group.

There is also a pretty good chance that a good chunk of children do not know what the Elder Scrolls is. The most they probably know about it is Skyrim.

ThePuzzldPirate:

omega 616:

Full Metal Bolshevik:
snip

Skyrim bored you so all elder scrolls will now bore you?

Anyway, that wasn't my point, my point was that Mario (3D or not) is still just a platformer with very basic game play. Elder scrolls games are huge living world's with shed loads going on, loads to immerse yourself in and be who you want... From looks to skills to personality. My point is elder scrolls offers such an open world, Mario hasn't really moved on since 64... You're still saving an Italian plumber saving an ungrateful Peach from a spiky tortoise by jumping on or over stuff.

Elder scrolls still has you saving the world constantly but the big bad is different, the main story is different, side quests are different... They all boil down to go here, kill and maybe bring back a trinket but the story drives it. Mario has save the princess that's in another castle, not this castle either.... Not this one either.

The scope of games has massively increased but Nintendo is making 64 bit games.

Elder Scrolls? You mean the game series that continues to make it's "ocean" shallower every iteration of it? I agree with you except it is a poor example. The game that has combat no matter what role you do, consist of whack a mole? While Mario shtick might be platforming, at least it is actually good at it. I would agree with you in that Nintendo does rely on it's staple IP's a little to much but what company doesn't when it still makes then money. It's not like we see the industry short of indie developers actually innovating.

Elder Scrolls is a Fantasy Adventure game so complaining about combat being existent no matter what role one does is sort of like spiting the sky for being blue. The only true fact in your statement is that they had to make the game simpler in order for it to work well with a console controller, as they have only 12 or 13 input buttons compared to 87 - 104 inputs on a keyboard. Unless a game is more like an old fashion turn based game, or has the ability to pause to access a menu of options (Damn, I miss Hybrid Haven on N64), they have to simplify the game systems in order to incorporate a controller interface. Also, I did go back and play the previous elder scrolls games and Skyrim still handles the best out of the box.

Colt47:

Elder Scrolls is a Fantasy Adventure game so complaining about combat being existent no matter what role one does is sort of like spiting the sky for being blue. The only true fact in your statement is that they had to make the game simpler in order for it to work well with a console controller, as they have only 12 or 13 input buttons compared to 87 - 104 inputs on a keyboard. Unless a game is more like an old fashion turn based game, or has the ability to pause to access a menu of options (Damn, I miss Hybrid Haven on N64), they have to simplify the game systems in order to incorporate a controller interface. Also, I did go back and play the previous elder scrolls games and Skyrim still handles the best out of the box.

It's not the problem of it having combat, if anything, that is a good thing, I just mean the fact the the combat hasn't gotten any deeper since Daggerfall(except even worse cause of less options) in that you run up to enemies and mash the attack button. It's not like it doesn't happen to have many games it could rip off, Chivalry, Mount and Blade, War of Roses. Considering that most quests lead you to collect something which leads to battles or it outright asks you to kill something, I would consider that a problem.

I just think it is silly that looking new is more important than playing new, that new ip's that play exactly the same as old ones is considered in higher regard than games that actually play new. Mario is still king in his genre taking it to new places. Using Elder Scrolls as a sign of Nintendo's stagnation is outright silly.

And dear god, I thought I was the only one who cared about Hybrid Heaven for the 64! XD

ThePuzzldPirate:

Colt47:

Elder Scrolls is a Fantasy Adventure game so complaining about combat being existent no matter what role one does is sort of like spiting the sky for being blue. The only true fact in your statement is that they had to make the game simpler in order for it to work well with a console controller, as they have only 12 or 13 input buttons compared to 87 - 104 inputs on a keyboard. Unless a game is more like an old fashion turn based game, or has the ability to pause to access a menu of options (Damn, I miss Hybrid Haven on N64), they have to simplify the game systems in order to incorporate a controller interface. Also, I did go back and play the previous elder scrolls games and Skyrim still handles the best out of the box.

It's not the problem of it having combat, if anything, that is a good thing, I just mean the fact the the combat hasn't gotten any deeper since Daggerfall(except even worse cause of less options) in that you run up to enemies and mash the attack button. It's not like it doesn't happen to have many games it could rip off, Chivalry, Mount and Blade, War of Roses. Considering that most quests lead you to collect something which leads to battles or it outright asks you to kill something, I would consider that a problem.

I just think it is silly that looking new is more important than playing new, that new ip's that play exactly the same as old ones is considered in higher regard than games that actually play new. Mario is still king in his genre taking it to new places. Using Elder Scrolls as a sign of Nintendo's stagnation is outright silly.

And dear god, I thought I was the only one who cared about Hybrid Heaven for the 64! XD

I know, Hybrid Heaven seems to have gone to the same place that Beyond Good and Evil did... only without the HD remake to keep it going. =(

I have no doubts Nintendo will be around for a long time to come. Ofcourse I also acknowledge that Nintendo is a GAMING company who actually cares vs Sony or Microsoft who second as gaming companies. Plus Japan. People who discredit Nintendo only think State side usually, and forget Nintendo is stronger on the east side.

Another strength of Nintendo is their ability to not flip out. They have issues or bad idea, they recover, partially due to not acting like its the end of the world (as opposed to Microsoft's butthurt response to Xbox One hate prior to their change)

People need to realize that not making jillions of dollars doesn't mean you are failing. People need to stop thinking like Activision.

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue.

People who don't understand how Nintendo keeps going first tend to forget that Nintendo tends to make money when selling the console alone, and second, typically have little knowledge of the variety of games you can only play on Nintendo consoles. They miss entire series like Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Monster Hunter,or Harvest Moon, etc. to say nothing of the variety of really small series you can find if you keep an eye out.

They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

Sure, they keep using their most popular IPs for background -- just like every other game company on the face of the earth. I mean, I find it kind of funny you call this a criticism and then have a line where you talk about Elder Scrolls 10. However, unlike most, the long-standing IPs they use are just background. Pick up any FIFA game and what are you playing? Soccer. Pick up any CoD game and what are you playing? A first person shooter. Pick up any Mario game and what are you playing? A 2d platformer? A 3d platformer? A weird mix of the two ala Paper Mario? Maybe it's a sports game? But if so, is it soccer, tennis, golf, baseball, or some selection of games from the Olympics or something? Maybe it's a kart racing game. Maybe it's a brawler. It could be party game, or even a board game. Or maybe it's some weird one-off tetris like thing, like Dr. Mario.

That's the thing though, that "same dead pony" can vary wildly as to what you're actually playing. And what unites them is that you can be pretty sure that a Mario game is going to be a pretty fun example of a game in that genre -- assuming that there's already genre of game there and that the "dead pony" isn't creating a whole new style of game -- like it did for 3D platforming.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

Meh. My thought is why play Elder Scrolls 10 when I've already played Elder Scrolls 4 through 7?

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

1) 2D side scrollers are better then any TSE game.

2) TSE only continues to matter because of the mod community, NOT the vanilla game

3) Nintendo's fan base is a lot wider then JUST 'generation NES'

4) Had to laugh when you brought up Metroid. Since I'm pretty sure we won't be seeing another one for a long time considering the massive backlash against Other M, I'd wager at least 6+ years before the next one. IF we get one at all :/

5) I kinda hate the 3D LoZ games just sayin (The fact it's basically just been LttP over an over again doesn't help ether)

6) Mario is kinda boring to

7) Pokemon is still fun though

semi silly list a side, yeah, Nintendo's got more then just 'Gen NES' lining their pockets, actual kids play the systems, and well, every age group from what I understand. Why do you think the Wii sold like it did? you really think that was JUST the 30 somethings like me? MAYBE if it had the same fail rate the 360 had/has/??, but then it would have exploded sales wise like it did, and would have gotten a hell of a lot more back lash and a fix a fuck of a lot sooner then the 360 crowd did. Assuming they actually DID get a fix >.> I'm kind a fuzzy on that.

Honestly the way I see it is that your average consumer who partakes even a little bit in the hobby of video games has exploded(just like during the PS1/N64 Era when Sony walked on in) that your average consumer honestly believes that Nintendo should be able to compete against one of the world's largest software manufacturer and one of the world's largest electronic manufacturer. That is one of the major factors that gives Nintendo a bad rap when it comes to their technology despite how innovative it actually is.

The other factor of the consumer base is that simply it has grown both in size and in age. Video games aren't simply seen as a child's toy in the west but a full on hobby. So while the market has expanded there have been more platforms that one can play a video game and with the current generation of children they aren't really playing games on a console anymore. When I did have a job the number one source of video game entertainment their parents let their children play one(as they always asked me to repair the bloody things) was their cell phone, or tablet. In other words, parents are too cheap to buy their kids a full blown console or computer and it is just easier with the average aptitude of a parent when it comes to technology to just let them play with their phone because it keeps them on that leash.

Suffice to say that as much as I love Nintendo still haven't learned their lesson from the N64/PS1 era even when they have marketed towards the right demographic for their console and still are masters that if a child wanted to have video games as a hobby be the most accessible and teaches them how to play without being patronizing. Some factors they can control but there is just a good deal that they can't. They still need refocus their efforts on marketing and make the case for people to buy a Wii U or 3DS not over the other consoles but mobile games.

Lunar Templar:
snip

It's not about tes, it's about the scale of what games can be... Would you rather me say planet side 2? Infamous? Prototype? Gta? Far cry? My point is games are able to be huge world's with shit loads in them and loads to do.

The only games I see that have that ability in Nintendo's house are pokemon and zelda but they keep pumping out hand held versions of pokemon and zelda. Imagine a pokemon game like far cry 3... Long grass and caves all over a huge open island, little settlements dotted around for poke-centre's and shops. How cool would that be on a console like the ps4 or even better pc? I think that would be a wicked game! Instead they release a game with content cut out of it so they can make two versions of the same game and they do it on a handheld.

They stick to this jrpg style of turn based combat taking place in instances... A trainer spots you, waddles over, the screen fades to an mmo style instance, spouts some trash talk, a duel takes place, more chatting, pop out of the instance and off you go. BORING!

I can't really comment on zelda as I have never really played it but I think if was a little more like diablo or torchlight it could be an awesome game as well.

Nice declaration though, all 2D side scrollers are better than tes! FACT! Keep telling yourself that....

omega 616:

Lunar Templar:
snip

It's not about tes, it's about the scale of what games can be... Would you rather me say planet side 2? Infamous? Prototype? Gta? Far cry? My point is games are able to be huge world's with shit loads in them and loads to do.

The only games I see that have that ability in Nintendo's house are pokemon and zelda but they keep pumping out hand held versions of pokemon and zelda. Imagine a pokemon game like far cry 3... Long grass and caves all over a huge open island, little settlements dotted around for poke-centre's and shops. How cool would that be on a console like the ps4 or even better pc? I think that would be a wicked game! Instead they release a game with content cut out of it so they can make two versions of the same game and they do it on a handheld.

They stick to this jrpg style of turn based combat taking place in instances... A trainer spots you, waddles over, the screen fades to an mmo style instance, spouts some trash talk, a duel takes place, more chatting, pop out of the instance and off you go. BORING!

I can't really comment on zelda as I have never really played it but I think if was a little more like diablo or torchlight it could be an awesome game as well.

Nice declaration though, all 2D side scrollers are better than tes! FACT! Keep telling yourself that....

If a big, open world game for a Nintendo console that is different sounds interesting to you, Nintendo recently got Monolith Soft to make Xenoblade Chronicles for Wii after they left Square for not doing anything more with the Xenosaga brand. It is a MASSIVE game that takes quite a long to time to explore the overworld with an immense number of sidequests to do (the only other Wii game that I think could be compared was Monster Hunter Tri). And the sequel they are planning for Wii U currently called 'X', which has a pretty excellent gameplay trailer, IMO, that expands Xenoblade's world with a more powerful console:

But I get it, there just haven't been enough things Nintendo to make you interested. Mario games are hit or miss for me, I'm kinda sucky at Metroid games, even the better ones, Pokemon hasn't interested me for quite a while, I am horrible at strategy games so Fire Emblem is out of my league, I never got too into Kirby though I have not problems against it, and while Zelda is my all time favorite series, I understand why people may not be interested. I just really enjoy the formula of the overworld and dungeons thing that Zelda does.

True, there aren't many Western RPGs (which you seem to enjoy a lot) for Nintendo consoles, but I kinda think that had something to with the Wii not having the same technical specifications as PS3/360. Those kinds of games are like FPSs in that they rely heavily on a certain sense of spectacle. Different kinds of spectacle, of course (detailed destructive shootouts for FPSs and serene, polished landscapes of Western RPGs), and Wii didn't have the power to make spectacles comparable to PS3/360. I hope that since Xenoblade is now a sought-after cult classic (Gamestop has price gouged it for about $65 used) that it'll spawn a larger interest in those kinds of games on Nintendo systems.

Dragonbums:

omega 616:
I'm not sure how Nintendo keep going to be honest, I've only ever wanted 2 Nintendo products. A Gameboy and a version of pokemon red/blue. They keep dragging out the same dead ponies, pokemon, Mario, metriod, zelda etc but the 80's and 90's kids go fucking wild for them every time... Will be a sad time for Nintendo when that generation dies off.

I just can't see them pulling in new audiences with games from there grandparents generation, today's kids aren't going mad for the modern version of pong aka tennis games. Infants might play Mario as babies first game but I doubt it will last, why play a 2D side scroller when the elder scrolls 10 is out?

The assumption that Nintendo's only fanbase are 30 year olds on nostalgia googles are baffling.

Especially when a large number of critics against Nintendo are in that very age group.

There is also a pretty good chance that a good chunk of children do not know what the Elder Scrolls is. The most they probably know about it is Skyrim.

I agree with Dragonbums here. Their problem is maintaining the 30+ year olds for whom Mario is older than they are. Kids are experiencing Mario new and still love him.

Therein lies Nintendo's problem. The majority of console gamers are 30+ years old. Without new IPs and 3rd party support, it's hard to maintain clients who are being offered a lot of other things elsewhere.

Nintendo appears to be aware of this and is working on it now. We'll see what they do.

omega 616:

Lunar Templar:
snip

It's not about tes, it's about the scale of what games can be... Would you rather me say planet side 2? Infamous? Prototype? Gta? Far cry? My point is games are able to be huge world's with shit loads in them and loads to do.

The only games I see that have that ability in Nintendo's house are pokemon and zelda but they keep pumping out hand held versions of pokemon and zelda. Imagine a pokemon game like far cry 3... Long grass and caves all over a huge open island, little settlements dotted around for poke-centre's and shops. How cool would that be on a console like the ps4 or even better pc? I think that would be a wicked game! Instead they release a game with content cut out of it so they can make two versions of the same game and they do it on a handheld.

They stick to this jrpg style of turn based combat taking place in instances... A trainer spots you, waddles over, the screen fades to an mmo style instance, spouts some trash talk, a duel takes place, more chatting, pop out of the instance and off you go. BORING!

I can't really comment on zelda as I have never really played it but I think if was a little more like diablo or torchlight it could be an awesome game as well.

Nice declaration though, all 2D side scrollers are better than tes! FACT! Keep telling yourself that....

They are. I couldn't GIVE me a TES game, but I've bought a crap ton of side scrollers :p What I deem worth my money = better. go ahead, argue that, I dare you >:)

As to the 'size and scale' of a game, that's kinda of part of the fail state of AAA gaming. Every thing needs to be big and open and big and flashy and did I mention big? Which is bull shit, ever game on the god damned planet does not NEED to be this big huge open world 'thing', your Pokemon suggest? Yeah. You'd ruin the franchise with that,it works perfectly fine as it is now and doesn't NEED fixing just cause you don't like it. Also, it uses a 'JRPG combat system' cause, ya know, IT IS a JRPG :P, just sayin, and it'll NEVER come out on a non Nintendo system, ever, you should really know that by now. So you and every one else on about that should really just give it up now.

A 'Torchlight' style Zalda game >.> hmm ... nope, can't see that 'working' they way you do. Zelda games are about the dungeons, which are just big ass puzzles, boss fights might not take much thinking, but the dungeons can, and turning it into a 'Torchlight' would rob it of what is really 'its thing', and ruin it by making it ANOTHER mindless hack and slash. Honestly, I have Warframe for that, not a 'dioblo clone' clearly, but more fun, and better use of my time far as loot gathering goes. Plus, Nova, just Nova, for its ability to let you wipe entire mods, buy picking off the weakest one it it >:D

You say 'they bring out the same dead pony's' every time but really that so bad? Considering your suggestions would rob them of their Identity and make them just another open world game or diablo clone. Sure each game is like the last, but how many 'Zelda clones' are there? Two, maybe Three depending how you look at LoK, spring to mind (all being better then LoZ but not the point)

The fundamental problem here isn't what Nintendo is doing, but that you don't understand what their doing. They don't NEED to make those kinds of games to make money, they never have, they are the masters of excellence through simplicity and deceptive depth, see: The Pokemon meta game, that's a deep damned rabbit hole there. So why should they change? Also, incase you've some how NOT noticed. No they do not take risks with their IPs, they know what works for them, but they DO take absolutely MONSTERIOUS risks with the hardware. last time the gamble paid off, this time, not looking like it will, but they ARE the only ones with the stones to actually TRY something new, really because they can, can't say the same for Sony/MS/ or the PC :p

Lunar Templar:
snip

Argue that? Okay! 2D games are technically inferior to 3d games, so are worse. Enjoyment wise, it's subjective. What you deem is better value is subjective but as for technical engineering, 2D games are from the 80's 'cos 3D wasn't able to be done

People complain that cod is the same game every year and then claim Nintendo is great but they have been doing the same thing for my whole life, Activision looked at Nintendo and thought "we need to get in on that action".

What was the last big thing for cod? A dog, for Mario its a cat suit... Huge leaps in innovation.

Again you miss my point, it's about scale! Mario is stuck in a by gone era indie devs pump 2D side scrollers out at a pace of knots. With what Mario is, each game should be over a thousand hours... Cloud berry Kingdom has random levels and gimmicks, it's more innovative than Mario.

As for my idea of pokemon failing, it wouldn't. People have been begging for a pokemon mmo for years, someone has even made screen shots of it. My idea is a half way house. I know pokemon won't come out on anything else, never said it would.... I said on other consoles it would be great, it would just never happen.

The only thing impressive about Nintendo are its fanboys 'cos it's games haven't kept up with the rest of the market.

Might want to check your keyboard, seems to caps random words.

(just to clarify, 3D games probably did exist in the 80's but they don't compare with today's games)

omega 616:

Lunar Templar:
snip

Argue that? Okay! 2D games are technically inferior to 3d games, so are worse. Enjoyment wise, it's subjective. What you deem is better value is subjective but as for technical engineering, 2D games are from the 80's 'cos 3D wasn't able to be done.

The PC is 'technically superior' to a console, yet, it's still an after though for a lot of devs :p best tech =/= best games.

People complain that cod is the same game every year and then claim Nintendo is great but they have been doing the same thing for my whole life, Activision looked at Nintendo and thought "we need to get in on that action".

What was the last big thing for cod? A dog, for Mario its a cat suit... Huge leaps in innovation.

*shrugs* as mentioned in my list earlier, don't play Mario games anymore, even the 2D ones. Pretty much just Pokemon and Metroid anymore. ya know >.> when they getta around to making another Metroid game that doesn't suck. They still owe us a good one for Other M ...

Again you miss my point, it's about scale! Mario is stuck in a by gone era indie devs pump 2D side scrollers out at a pace of knots. With what Mario is, each game should be over a thousand hours... Cloud berry Kingdom has random levels and gimmicks, it's more innovative than Mario.

As for my idea of pokemon failing, it wouldn't. People have been begging for a pokemon mmo for years, someone has even made screen shots of it. My idea is a half way house. I know pokemon won't come out on anything else, never said it would.... I said on other consoles it would be great, it would just never happen.

given that all the Pokemon games now have online capability, in fact with the improvements to the GTS, and the fact that you can now battle pretty much any random passer by (there's a window in X and Y that fills with random people when you connect) what would the point of an MMO be, exactly? only thing X/Y are missing to that end is other peoples player character wandering around in your game world, and that's hardly a loss imo.

The only thing impressive about Nintendo are its fanboys 'cos it's games haven't kept up with the rest of the market.

and that's different for other fanboys ... how? No really, point out how Nintendo's fanboys are worse then other fanboys, cause I see no difference in how they act, over say, PC fanboys.

and you can drop the '3D is better then 2D' crap any time now. There is now and always will be room for 2D games, some style of game are just better in 2D, Platformers to be sure, and fighters, you can not convince me or anyone else that actually knows about fighters that a 3D fighter is better then a 2D fighter. Hell RPGs don't really lose anything by being in 2D, and haven't gain much by going 3D.(No, I don't like WRPGs much, most the ones I've played have been boring as fuck)

The newest thing for Mario was actually a whole-sale revolution in 3D platforming with Galaxy 1. Since then, he's taken a break with Galaxy 2 and NSMB and the like. The next console based 3D Mario game will be the next major step forward for his franchise, as it has been.

Zelda as a hack n' slash would be one of the dumbest things Nintendo could do. Worse than the CD-i. "Oh, I realize Zelda has always been about action-adeventure with a focus on puzzle solving with some combat. But who needs that? COMBAT EVERYTHING! Puzzles? Psh. Boring. HAVE MORE WAVES OF ENEMIES!" Sounds like crap.

The Pokemon game you mention functionally would not work. You play as the trainer, but you also have to control the Pokemon in the battles, so it cuts to a battle map? How would that make sense? You might not like JRPGs, but the fact that it sells like hotcakes should tell you that quite a few people do. The idea for a map sounds cool, but Nintendo has already started working in the direction with 3D being added in X and Y.

Lunar Templar:
snip

People want a pokemon mmo 'cos they want to be in the pokemon world? Not some stripped down, shitty version of pokemon world. Instead of tiny little sprites and awful graphics, you play the anime version of the it... Better graphics, smooth animations, better battling system etc as it is run on something with some power. Think of stadium but expanded to have a world and even better graphics.

I didn't say Nintendo fanboys are worse, I'm saying Nintendo are such a bad company that it's only impressive thing are its fanboys. I think it's impressive that they can keep adding tiny little things to ancient games or give them an HD coat of paint and still sell them to fanboys.

I said 2D games are technically inferior, I didn't say they didn't have there place in gaming or are bad games.

omega 616:

Lunar Templar:
snip

People want a pokemon mmo 'cos they want to be in the pokemon world? Not some stripped down, shitty version of pokemon world. Instead of tiny little sprites and awful graphics, you play the anime version of the it... Better graphics, smooth animations, better battling system etc as it is run on something with some power. Think of stadium but expanded to have a world and even better graphics.

so .. like X/Y, but with a chance of getting flattened by a wild encounter and more people around to get in the way of getting shit done? oh joy ... Sorry, but with X/Y existance I simply don't a real need for a Pokemon MMO anymore, since it's functional there save a few minor, inconsequential details.

I didn't say Nintendo fanboys are worse, I'm saying Nintendo are such a bad company that it's only impressive thing are its fanboys. I think it's impressive that they can keep adding tiny little things to ancient games or give them an HD coat of paint and still sell them to fanboys.

I said 2D games are technically inferior, I didn't say they didn't have there place in gaming or are bad games.

yup, they're SO terrible >.> you do know that, even with the WiiUs 'failure to launch' they're still in better shape then MS or Sony right? The Wiis sale did leave them ridiculously well off so they can afford to screw up like they have with the WiiU. Again, just cause you don't like what their doing, it does not mean they are 'a terrible company' or 'their games suck' at the end of the day, all it really means it you no longer consider them worthy of your money, and really, that's all it means.

Lunar Templar:
all it really means it you no longer consider them worthy of your money, and really, that's all it means.

Is that all it means?

They have never been worthy of my money, any Nintendo games I've played was second hand or at a friends (with the exception of pokemon blue).

Speaking of pokemon that's your opinion but I've read many opinions that say the opposite, including the guy who made mock up screen shots.

To be honest, you sound like a fanboy. You would rather have a 3ds version of pokemon rather than a fully realized world, "Yeah, I prefer inferior games. I like devs that squander potential". It does just sound like a child saying "Yeah, well I didn't want it anyway! I like it this way!"

omega 616:

Lunar Templar:
all it really means it you no longer consider them worthy of your money, and really, that's all it means.

Is that all it means?

They have never been worthy of my money, any Nintendo games I've played was second hand or at a friends (with the exception of pokemon blue).

Speaking of pokemon that's your opinion but I've read many opinions that say the opposite, including the guy who made mock up screen shots.

To be honest, you sound like a fanboy. You would rather have a 3ds version of pokemon rather than a fully realized world, "Yeah, I prefer inferior games. I like devs that squander potential". It does just sound like a child saying "Yeah, well I didn't want it anyway! I like it this way!"

Just pointing out that you are being a bit of a hypocrite in calling Lunar Temple a fanboy, since all you are acting like is a Nintendo anti-fanboy. You are basically attacking Lunar for not agreeing with you on what makes a good game.

RicoADF:
I must hand it to Mr Iwata, he seems to be a smart guy that understands that every company has it's ups and downs and the best thing to do is learn from it and improve back into profit, not to just fire people which then destroys the employees trust and moral making the situation worse. I tip my hat to you good sir *tips hat*

I think a similar set of questions earlier in the year had him basically respond the same. He actually said that firing people would lower their moral and would essentially just be a short term game. In plane English this guy is like Jesus to the business world. At least the Western business world since I'm reasonably certain that someone like Donald Trump wouldn't have much problems firing thousands of employees if his profits started to fall. Everyone goes through expansions and contractions in business. That is how the world works. The Wii and 3DS were a major expansion for Nintendo and the lackluster numbers of the Wii U are essentially balancing the scales. Nintendo doesn't expand and absorb the way most companies do (I'm looking at you EA). They seem to have a business model that makes sure they don't go out of business which, while not as profitable I'm sure, is not a bad model to have in my opinion.

I'm sure more units will push soon. Bayonetta 2 drops next year which people are considering buying a Wii U for alone. Zelda I'm sure will be making a return. Smash Bros. gets its fourth game so there's another reason. Hell if Platinum keeps on pumping out games like Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta exclusively for Nintendo then there's more future units.

Nintendo has been in this console business longer then anyone else and they've always adapted. Sure they trip and stumble sometimes but when they figure it out and get it right they get it very right. Like for instance reaching out to the indie community. Reaching out to those guys is a long term investment which can yield big profits.

omega 616:

Full Metal Bolshevik:
snip

Skyrim bored you so all elder scrolls will now bore you?

Anyway, that wasn't my point, my point was that Mario (3D or not) is still just a platformer with very basic game play. Elder scrolls games are huge living world's with shed loads going on, loads to immerse yourself in and be who you want... From looks to skills to personality. My point is elder scrolls offers such an open world, Mario hasn't really moved on since 64... You're still saving an Italian plumber saving an ungrateful Peach from a spiky tortoise by jumping on or over stuff.

Elder scrolls still has you saving the world constantly but the big bad is different, the main story is different, side quests are different... They all boil down to go here, kill and maybe bring back a trinket but the story drives it. Mario has save the princess that's in another castle, not this castle either.... Not this one either.

The scope of games has massively increased but Nintendo is making 64 bit games.

Eh, you should probably take a closet look at the Mario games, their brilliance lies in the level design. Nintendo is very good at making simple game mechanics that can heavily altered by the level design. They often get a lot out of very little, i think a lot of designers could learn a lot from those games, i know i have.

But aside from that, sometimes people want to play something different, sometimes a simple yet challenging platformer is what you need. I don't just want to immerse myself in a 3D world, i want to play all kinds of different types of games...

omega 616:
snip

You really need to get over your self, and this rather irrational hate for Nintendo just because they aren't making games you want to play, Nintendo has its player base, you are clearly not in it, and here you are pretty much demanding they throw away all they're proven formals, to appease you. Entitled much? Cause that's how you sound, like a spoiled child not getting their way.

Cause in case you haven't noticed, they don't need you or your money.

Now, are we done here, or would you like to waste MORE of my time with your non-sense as you seem less interested in any actual discussion and more in hurling unfounded insults cause I don't agree with you, which means, much like Nintendo is for you, you are no longer worthy of my time.

omega 616:

Speaking of pokemon that's your opinion but I've read many opinions that say the opposite,

And there are plenty of people online who will say the literal opposite of that. So that neither soldifies your claim as fact, nor disqualifies Templars opinion either.

You would rather have a 3ds version of pokemon rather than a fully realized world,

How judgemental. And if not, a tad bit elitist. "Oh, you like this simple game, but care not for this higher tech game? What a pleeb"
Pretty high and mighty of you.

What does that make of those who enjoy the hell out of indie games?
Pokemon is inferior in every sense be default because they don't blow the big bucks like Bethesda does on Skyrim?

"Yeah, I prefer inferior games. I like devs that squander potential". It does just sound like a child saying "Yeah, well I didn't want it anyway! I like it this way!"

Who are you to judge what's an inferior game? Who are you to tell if some dev is squandering their talent?

Satoshi is living his dream. Since he was a kid he always wanted to make a game that captured the spirit of bug catching as a kid.

I'm pretty sure the folks at Gamefreak can do an open world. Of course that doesn't matter if it's complete shit.
You have companies that do open world, and companies that like to do turn based strategies. No, one is better than the other.
Please. It's your subjective point of view. Don't try to put this out as fact.

omega 616:
-snip-

There are still people who think that Nintendo's continually growing success is on the backs of the same audience they had back in the NES days?

Let's set aside all of the obvious points that would prove this wrong, the fact that you're rather blatantly anti-Nintendo, etc, and just look at the most simple and basic proof of how stupid this argument is.

If what you say is true, if indeed the Nintendo brand is lifted solely on the backs of its nostalgic fans from the 80s, then that should be easy to prove: the Wii could not possibly sell more units than the NES, and the Wii's highest demographic should be male gamers aged in their 30s.

Now let's check reality: The Wii has over 100 million unit sales vs the NES's 61.9 million, and the highest demographic sales for the Wii are males aged 6-11 and females aged 25-34. Both of which directly disprove your assertion that Nintendo is held afloat entirely on the backs of 30-year-old males who cling to their nostalgia and refuse to grow up.

In fact, extending that across gaming as a whole, it's pretty common to see a lot more of the younger and more feminine audiences everywhere. They're becoming rapidly growing demographics....and to date, only Nintendo is directly targeting them.

So, ignoring all of the other evidence proving you wrong and the number of other solid arguments in this thread proving you wrong, if you just look purely at the numbers, they clearly prove that your entire argument is based on a complete fallacy. And once you point that out, the rest falls down like a house of cards, since the rest of your post is strictly subjective, and there's not an objective fact anywhere to be found.

 Pages 1 2 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
Registered for a free account here