Is Nintendo Losing Its Edge?
MonsieurEvil
Join Date: 2002-01-22 Member: 4Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
Join Date: 2002-01-22 Member: 4Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
in Off-Topic
<div class="IPBDescription">For more than just Doomaniac :D</div> <a href='http://www.gamespy.com/counterspy/september03/spy08/' target='_blank'>http://www.gamespy.com/counterspy/september03/spy08/</a>
Interesting article today at GS. I'm not much of a console weinie anymore ( I own an xbox, primarily for sports games at parties), but I grew up on Atari and Colecovision and Intellivision and NES, so my heart still has a place for them. What do you all think about this?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As much as it pains me...
Benjamin Turner, PS2 Editor
Frankly, I probably wouldn't be here today if it weren't for Nintendo. While I was weaned on Atari, it was only through the NES that I became a full-fledged video-game fanatic. When 16-bit arrived I branched out into other systems, but the incredible software for my new Super Nintendo rarely failed to please. Looking back, I can detect the first signs of trouble in 1994, when Nintendo released Donkey Kong Country. While an alright game, it marked perhaps the first time Nintendo promoted graphics over gameplay. Meanwhile, the enjoyably innovative but less obviously high-tech Yoshi's Island was left to flounder ... at least as much as a game can flounder when its subtitle is Super Mario World 2.
Things got worse -- much worse -- in 1996, with the year-late debut of the Nintendo 64. While it blew us all away for the first year or so, its shortcomings (and lack of games) began to become obvious. The decision to stick with a cartridge format proved a huge handicap, as the system just couldn't do some of the neat things that the competition could. It also raised prices for both gamers and developers. Worst of all, in my opinion, was the system's mediocre performance. Games generally seemed to have less polygons than similar PlayStation titles and had terribly blurry textures and sub-SNES quality music. The hardware that had looked so hot in 1996 aged incredibly quickly, and many gamers noticed.
What happened to the magic? Noting the shortcomings of the N64, Nintendo seemed to realize its errors and designed the GameCube accordingly. The GameCube would be easy to program, powerful enough in all the right ways, and would not be the last machine to market. That was all great, but then it made the old N64 mistake of failing to ensure a constant flow of quality software. While the system is not devoid of fun (I actually like it, irrespective of how disillusioned I am with Nintendo), even some of its biggest first-party games disappointed. Super Mario Sunshine was just a rehash of Super Mario 64, while the same could be said for the pretty but surprisingly retread Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker.
Meanwhile, the company keeps pushing lame-o "connectivity" features between GBA and GCN games while all but ignoring the online, multiplayer gameplay many gamers crave. Huh? How is this compelling on the level that games like Kid Icarus, Super Mario Bros. 3, and Super Metroid were? Simply, it's not. Nintendo's software development teams are stagnating while ignoring the desires of contemporary audiences.
As a result, Nintendo's stature in consoles is at an all-time low. The manufacture of new GameCubes has been put on hold because they just aren't selling, and more and more companies are giving up on releasing games for the platform altogether (Eidos is the latest). Nintendo's executives say that they know there's a problem, but have offered little in the way of strategies for fixing it. One of the few concrete things they've said is that the successor to GameCube is coming out sooner, rather than later, but what's the point if it's as lacking in software as its two predecessors? Or if the software is as samey as the current stuff? Make no mistake, Nintendo has lost its edge. Long-time fans can only hope that the stumbling giant will once again find its way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Mario has NOT Left the Building
Dave "Fargo" Kosak, Executive Editor
There's no question that Nintendo has lost market share in the home console arena (Gamecube and Xbox sales combined are only a quarter to a third of the PlayStation 2 installed base.) But has Nintendo lost its "edge?" Is the company creatively dry? Running on fumes until an acquisition? I don't think that's the case at all.
Put yourself in Nintendo's shoes, and look at what you have. You have decades of mindshare invested in core characters, such as Mario, Zelda, or Pokemon. Gamers complain of Nintendo "re-making" the same games over and over, but really the company is just leveraging some really strong brands. I look at a title like Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour, and I see a company using its biggest brands to bust into a genre, then adding its own creative touches. Mario Golf is an instantly accessible game with a lot of cool mini-games and nifty gimmicks to keep you coming back. Sure, it recycles characters -- but it's a strong game on its own.
That's not to say that Nintendo isn't trying to create new licenses: Pikmin was an all-new game, and a really fun one (if short-lived.) Animal Crossing (although based on an earlier game released in Japan only) defies description. There's some creativity happening there.
The WaveBird: Still pretty cool. I'll also maintain that Nintendo's hardware designers are among the best in the business. Okay, the original GBA without the backlight wasn't too slick. But the GameCube is a tight little machine, and the WaveBird is the best wireless controller on the market.
Nintendo's other big advantage is the company's HUGE penetration in the handheld market, a space Nintendo owns and will continue to dominate for the foreseeable future. Here again the company is leveraging its strength, looking for cool ways that players can use their handhelds in addition to their console system. Games like the upcoming Legend of Zelda: Tetra's Trackers showcase this kind of connectivity.
Lastly, Nintendo's got another strength to count on: massive cash reserves and the ongoing popularity of licenses like Pokemon. If it wants to be, Nintendo can be in the game a LONG time.
Of course, the harsh reality is that Nintendo is running up against some brutal competition with DEEP pockets. It's going to be a tough haul. Nintendo is definitely hurt by limited content from third-party developers. But, the company has a couple key strengths -- like I outlined above -- that it's leaning on in some creative ways. In fact, it's the companies with lots of resources who are falling behind in the race who typically come up with the biggest and riskiest innovations. Given Nintendo's ability to create good hardware and its strategic position in the handheld space, that could mean some VERY cool things in the future. Lost its edge? Hardly!<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interesting article today at GS. I'm not much of a console weinie anymore ( I own an xbox, primarily for sports games at parties), but I grew up on Atari and Colecovision and Intellivision and NES, so my heart still has a place for them. What do you all think about this?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As much as it pains me...
Benjamin Turner, PS2 Editor
Frankly, I probably wouldn't be here today if it weren't for Nintendo. While I was weaned on Atari, it was only through the NES that I became a full-fledged video-game fanatic. When 16-bit arrived I branched out into other systems, but the incredible software for my new Super Nintendo rarely failed to please. Looking back, I can detect the first signs of trouble in 1994, when Nintendo released Donkey Kong Country. While an alright game, it marked perhaps the first time Nintendo promoted graphics over gameplay. Meanwhile, the enjoyably innovative but less obviously high-tech Yoshi's Island was left to flounder ... at least as much as a game can flounder when its subtitle is Super Mario World 2.
Things got worse -- much worse -- in 1996, with the year-late debut of the Nintendo 64. While it blew us all away for the first year or so, its shortcomings (and lack of games) began to become obvious. The decision to stick with a cartridge format proved a huge handicap, as the system just couldn't do some of the neat things that the competition could. It also raised prices for both gamers and developers. Worst of all, in my opinion, was the system's mediocre performance. Games generally seemed to have less polygons than similar PlayStation titles and had terribly blurry textures and sub-SNES quality music. The hardware that had looked so hot in 1996 aged incredibly quickly, and many gamers noticed.
What happened to the magic? Noting the shortcomings of the N64, Nintendo seemed to realize its errors and designed the GameCube accordingly. The GameCube would be easy to program, powerful enough in all the right ways, and would not be the last machine to market. That was all great, but then it made the old N64 mistake of failing to ensure a constant flow of quality software. While the system is not devoid of fun (I actually like it, irrespective of how disillusioned I am with Nintendo), even some of its biggest first-party games disappointed. Super Mario Sunshine was just a rehash of Super Mario 64, while the same could be said for the pretty but surprisingly retread Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker.
Meanwhile, the company keeps pushing lame-o "connectivity" features between GBA and GCN games while all but ignoring the online, multiplayer gameplay many gamers crave. Huh? How is this compelling on the level that games like Kid Icarus, Super Mario Bros. 3, and Super Metroid were? Simply, it's not. Nintendo's software development teams are stagnating while ignoring the desires of contemporary audiences.
As a result, Nintendo's stature in consoles is at an all-time low. The manufacture of new GameCubes has been put on hold because they just aren't selling, and more and more companies are giving up on releasing games for the platform altogether (Eidos is the latest). Nintendo's executives say that they know there's a problem, but have offered little in the way of strategies for fixing it. One of the few concrete things they've said is that the successor to GameCube is coming out sooner, rather than later, but what's the point if it's as lacking in software as its two predecessors? Or if the software is as samey as the current stuff? Make no mistake, Nintendo has lost its edge. Long-time fans can only hope that the stumbling giant will once again find its way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Mario has NOT Left the Building
Dave "Fargo" Kosak, Executive Editor
There's no question that Nintendo has lost market share in the home console arena (Gamecube and Xbox sales combined are only a quarter to a third of the PlayStation 2 installed base.) But has Nintendo lost its "edge?" Is the company creatively dry? Running on fumes until an acquisition? I don't think that's the case at all.
Put yourself in Nintendo's shoes, and look at what you have. You have decades of mindshare invested in core characters, such as Mario, Zelda, or Pokemon. Gamers complain of Nintendo "re-making" the same games over and over, but really the company is just leveraging some really strong brands. I look at a title like Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour, and I see a company using its biggest brands to bust into a genre, then adding its own creative touches. Mario Golf is an instantly accessible game with a lot of cool mini-games and nifty gimmicks to keep you coming back. Sure, it recycles characters -- but it's a strong game on its own.
That's not to say that Nintendo isn't trying to create new licenses: Pikmin was an all-new game, and a really fun one (if short-lived.) Animal Crossing (although based on an earlier game released in Japan only) defies description. There's some creativity happening there.
The WaveBird: Still pretty cool. I'll also maintain that Nintendo's hardware designers are among the best in the business. Okay, the original GBA without the backlight wasn't too slick. But the GameCube is a tight little machine, and the WaveBird is the best wireless controller on the market.
Nintendo's other big advantage is the company's HUGE penetration in the handheld market, a space Nintendo owns and will continue to dominate for the foreseeable future. Here again the company is leveraging its strength, looking for cool ways that players can use their handhelds in addition to their console system. Games like the upcoming Legend of Zelda: Tetra's Trackers showcase this kind of connectivity.
Lastly, Nintendo's got another strength to count on: massive cash reserves and the ongoing popularity of licenses like Pokemon. If it wants to be, Nintendo can be in the game a LONG time.
Of course, the harsh reality is that Nintendo is running up against some brutal competition with DEEP pockets. It's going to be a tough haul. Nintendo is definitely hurt by limited content from third-party developers. But, the company has a couple key strengths -- like I outlined above -- that it's leaning on in some creative ways. In fact, it's the companies with lots of resources who are falling behind in the race who typically come up with the biggest and riskiest innovations. Given Nintendo's ability to create good hardware and its strategic position in the handheld space, that could mean some VERY cool things in the future. Lost its edge? Hardly!<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Comments
All the Mario games and the ones that went with them ruled. Then I slowly grew older and the Playstation came out, along with the N64..the junkie that I was, I bought the N64 first, and after a year of playing "kiddie" games, I was disappointed. Were there no "mature" games? By this time the Playstation games that were released were getting great reviews and I bought a Playstation as well, comparing the games I realized that for young players, the N64 was awesome, but I guess it didn't stay that way. I've never touched the gamecube. I tried the dreamcast, it wasn't all that. I have a PS2 atm, I love it. I love how I can play the PS games on it. I couldn't play the 50+ something games I bought for my SNES on the N64, but I guess that would've been hard to do. Can you play the 20 something games I bought for 100 bucks for the N64 on the gamecube? No sir..so as it stands now, I'm sticking with Sony, cause I really do believe Nintendo is losing it.
They've stereotyped themselves as the kiddies console (despite exclusive RE releases..... which will more than likely appear on other platforms when the Gamecube gets shelved).
In fact from a background in console retail, I can tell you that the Gamecube is actively promoted in stores as the choice for the "family" due to its wide range of children's titles.
I don't think their constant milking of the same 3 licenses is going to help them anymore - the Sonic and Tomb Raider franchises have certainly seemed to have fizzled out. Couple that with the increase in mediocre titles across the gaming world, and most consumers really aren't willing to part with their cash on substandard titles.
The best thing for nintendo to do now would be to simplify their coding and open their market up just like the Playstation did several years ago - a flood of low cost games that fill shelves and inevitably produce varied new licenses. Playstation CD format was cheap to manufacture, something that could passed onto the consumer - whereas up until the day it was pulled off shelves, Nintendo games were going for full price. Popular PS games ended up in the platinum range, and became even more noticeable to the consumer as well as a "safe" gaming investment. Nintendo as yet have not implemented an equivalent - rather unfortunate when they tilt their console towards younger gamers.
A console is only as good as its games, and Nintendo are sorely lacking. Their next console will arguably be make or break time - failing that they'll be reduced to domination of the handheld market...
why? Because despite sega setting up the network and having it all ready to go nintendo never released the modem or Broadband Adapter meaning there was no way to play a title that was almost entirely developed to be played online <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
after the DC I was really starting to look forward to online console gaming -.-
I don't care what anyone says, Samus can kill the Master Chief.
Then again...I am a console man, I have a Computer, PS2, GC, GameBoy (Now that is big N's true flagship now) Pocket, GameBoy Original (That's right, a space shuttle is smaller then it).
When I want online games, I look to the computer. When I want deeply engrossing single-player games, I look to my consoles. Eternal Darkness, Metroid Prime, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy series, Final Fantasy Tactics, Rogue Squadron's, I love my consoles and my PC.
I held a constant hate of all things Sega until the Dreamcast.
But even now I can see them slipping... the NES and the SNES had gigantic amount of classic games. The 64 had a few, but it wasn't the 'classic' console I was hoping it too be. The Gamecube is great, but I can count the number of must have games on 1 hand.
As sad and painful as it is for me to say, Nintendo simply cannot compete with the power Sony and Microsoft both have. Jesus, they could both run their consoles at a loss and it wouldn't harm them. But look at what happened to Sega.... (Viva la Dreamcast)
*sigh*
They even lost Rare...
I miss the old 2D days. When games were impossible, but fun as hell.... C'est La Vie.
I find a considerable amount of games for the Gamecube really entertaining, but I agree that the console is suffering from low quantity of releases overall. I think I read somewhere that Nintendo would make sure to focus on the casual gamers for their next release. The casual gamers are those who buy the Gameboy Advance, in this context. Small, comfortable to play on, no hassle and theres many good games that are great fun without being too demanding on your time.
I think that is where Nintendo's core business area is. And don't forget, unlike american and european businesses who go "OMG we lost .5% market share in Q1, let's hurry and fire 10000 so we can drive up share prices again", they focus a bit more on long term. Besides, Nintendo has shown a remarkably knack of making lots of profit through many years.
The market for "casual" gaming is there, it is large and Nintendo seems to be the only ones seriously tapping into it. Microsoft makes pc games just on a console, which is the sole reason I dont have an Xbox. Its just not much of a difference. The Sony lies somewhat in the middle with the odd title to amuse me. I still have my heart with Nintendo, but they are not the dominators of anything consoles as they were once. I enjoy different kinds of games, casual gaming need is best handled by Nintendo. Cool dude games are best handled by the PS2 (the Xbox seems to overlap in that area, but Im not buying one of those behemoths!). Serious gaming is still done on the PC, however.
Nintendo will probably stop trying to chase two segments and concentrate on one again, casua gaming. Ok, Nintendo lost the round with the N64. They seems to be staggering in round 2, but Im not counting them out yet. Just look at their HQ, for crissakes, ready to burst with profits made by their pokemonsters.
I'll die with an N product in my home. Metroid Prime is classic, Eternal Darkness is fun and GCube has some good titles that I just can't afford
I'm not supprised at all that the games Nintendo churn out get bought by nobody. People who grew up on Mario are now in the late teens or older. Who do they make Mario games for? 10 year olds who don't know what Mario is, or young adults? People have grown out of Mario. Same thing happened with Sonic.
My friend has a Gamecube and it is just... boring. Most games, other than Nintendos, are available on other platforms e.g. Burnout, Timesplitters, off the top of my head. That leaves the Nintendo games, which are just incredibly childish, Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros.
Gamecube tried to shake off the "kiddy" label with Resident Evil. A game which was out about 6 years ago for PS1. Now, I don't see Nintendo bringing out hese "violent games," instead it brings out Mario racing, F-Zero... etc etc etc.
Well, I probably won't be buying a console for a long time... Maybe in a few years, when you can pick a PS2 and games up for dirt cheap.
I'm not suprised Gamecube is failing. It puts too much faith in their mascot games, and it's just falling flat. They lack new ideas and companies providing "violent games" will never go with them.
Edit: I will add that Nintendo had the pricing strategy right. £150ish for a new console release is very reasonable. A playstation on release is £250. But I would rather pay that extra money for the quality of games.
SEGA SEGA!!!
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let's not go fanboys now shall we? It invevitably drags any discussion down in the mud.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm not supprised at all that the games Nintendo churn out get bought by nobody. People who grew up on Mario are now in the late teens or older. Who do they make Mario games for? 10 year olds who don't know what Mario is, or young adults? People have grown out of Mario. Same thing happened with Sonic.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess people have grown out of Mario in the same was as they have grown out of Superman and Spiderman? Nah, poor execution of release is what I blame. A good game is a good game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->My friend has a Gamecube and it is just... boring. Most games, other than Nintendos, are available on other platforms e.g. Burnout, Timesplitters, off the top of my head. That leaves the Nintendo games, which are just incredibly childish, Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I think the problem is that people of today are somewhat scared of things they deem "Childish". The western gaming world is on a mad "simulation trip" where any games that doesn't measure up to the paradigm of Realism is instantly discarded. Which is a shame, since playing a computer game can be enjoyable in numerous ways.
What is the problem with childish I ask? Are the gamers afraid their friends might spot them having fun with a Nintendo game? Or is it basically just that no one likes jumping around in gorgeous looking worlds anymore? I do. I just discovered Yoshi's Island in it's rerelease for the GBA SP. God dag nabbing awesome game!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Gamecube tried to shake off the "kiddy" label with Resident Evil. A game which was out about 6 years ago for PS1. Now, I don't see Nintendo bringing out hese "violent games," instead it brings out Mario racing, F-Zero... etc etc etc.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Problem is mostly that Nintendo tries to have it's cake and eat it too. I think they should have focussed EITHER on one or the other. Now they are losing both.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I'm not suprised Gamecube is failing. It puts too much faith in their mascot games, and it's just falling flat. They lack new ideas and companies providing "violent games" will never go with them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We do agree here. Nintendo has been lazy, or unsuccesful in getting more good games out.
yeah, i grew up on super nintendo, SMB and zelda all the way
the last consol i have bought was an n64 and i dont plan on going back to any
the PC is just so much better
Well to me it's the equivillent of watching a child's TV program, would you watch the Tweenies? Big colourful graphics and storylines a 5 year old could follow. With a simple storyline you just lose interest and stop playing.
But the old NES was just...awesome. All the games, it would take forever to list them. And so so many were classics. Oh man, I grew up on NES. Actually, I did have an atari before I had a NES, but I was so young I didn't understand the concept. I barely remember falling into a pit in the ET game and not being able to get out, but that's about it.
Well to me it's the equivillent of watching a child's TV program, would you watch the Tweenies? Big colourful graphics and storylines a 5 year old could follow. With a simple storyline you just lose interest and stop playing. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You make a categorical mistake. A game is a story for the mind and the body, and a childish game in my opinion would be one where you would be encountered with extremely simplistic gameplay, in other words, gameplay a 5 year old could follow. Such as match the colours or find the hidden duck behind the 5 geometrical shapes. That would be childish.
But a game like Zelda is in no way childish in it's offerings of entertainment. Sophisticated challenges to your visuo-motorical skills is offered, just as with Yoshi's Island. I think people mistake "childish" with simplistic when it comes to games. In fact, Yoshi can be really hard at times. A game is more than just a grown-up story wrapped around a core gameplay. When you categorize games as you do, on their appearance alone, you make a mistake. That is not the same to say that you'd like the games, but you discard them of the wrong reasons.
Edit: Afterthought... Maybe it's just that I associate "cute" graphics with being childish.
Nintendo really is more or less out of the picture, at least to me. If I go to a gaming store, yes there is a GameCube section, but it's usually way back in the corner and there's not much there. The GBA section is doing just fine; but for home consoles, PS2 and Xbox are king.
Nintendo went from games that kept me glued to games that I don't really care to play in the first place. When it comes down to it, maybe one out of every 10 of us will even consider getting a GC for those few precious 'decent' titles; the rest will go the safe route and get another console, because they know there's a large flow of fun titles for it, something not guaranteed with the Cube.
As for childish.. that's fine. Stylistic 'cool' games like Devil May Cry and Halo perk my attention, but a new Mario game grabs my interest just the same, and the draw of Metroid Prime was almost irresistable. Rehashing classic icons works fine IF you can make a good new game that features them; and the problem is that Nintendo simply squashes them into a new package, with nothing terribly innovative.
More on topic, Nintendo aren't dying, but they ain't gonna be feasting on the lion's share of the console market, not without serious 3rd-party support <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: Afterthought... Maybe it's just that I associate "cute" graphics with being childish. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you do, and many other as well. The question is we mind or not. And if enough people discards a game for being too childish alone on looks, well that's harsh reality that the game developers must face and try to figure out how to solve. My guess is that you are somewhere in your teens, where it matters a lot to distance oneself from the whiny adolescents. I'd definitely not touch Mario when I was 15 years younger <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Perhaps that is the crux of the matter: Nintendo is in a "low" period of creativity. They can not see beyond their succesful franchises and are unable to breathe fresh air into the genres in ways that make people want to play their game. No matter how well crafted a Mario game is, it will still signal "Oh, not another Mario for crissakes" to many punters.
So it isn't because Nintendo has to reinvent the saucer, they might just take a fresh look on their "brands" and try and come up with something new to catch the fancy of us novelty chasing westerners.
Hell, even my mom is addicted to Super Mario Bro's. She's always playing it when I get home from school. No doubt that Nintendo used to own all comers in the console game, but PS2 has seriously stolen their sunshine. When I look at the games on PS2 that I like and the games for GC, it's waaaaaay stacked in favor of PS2.
Personally, I think these are the steps the big N should take to begin their climb back to the top:
1. Buy Sega, and fire most of its management.
2. Increase third party support, I don't know how, but they've got to do it.
3. The GBA player for the GC was a good idea, they should expand on it. Perhaps with the next system they should include discs with an Emulator
and the entire library for the SNES and NES (maybe N64 too). This would mean of course that they'd have to soften their anti-emulation stance.
4. Stop trying to tie the their console with the GBA. Sure, having some extra features for one or two games by using a GBA is fine, but they're taking
it too far.
5. Don't try to be an all-in-one media center like the others.
6. Get the online thing sorted out, I would suggest just doing it like sony did, where you can use any provider.
Of course, since I'm not likely to be hired as a consultant anytime soon, I doubt any of this will be done <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: Afterthought... Maybe it's just that I associate "cute" graphics with being childish. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you do, and many other as well. The question is we mind or not. And if enough people discards a game for being too childish alone on looks, well that's harsh reality that the game developers must face and try to figure out how to solve. My guess is that you are somewhere in your teens, where it matters a lot to distance oneself from the whiny adolescents. I'd definitely not touch Mario when I was 15 years younger <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm 19 and I hardly ever judge a book by it's cover, especially a "book" which costs ?40.
I'm not trying to convert you into changing your opinion, I am just giving my opinion that GC games are too childish for most older people. I don't think this has anything to do with advertising, I feel that the games are actually aimed at younger people due to their content.
A lot of Nintendo games seem to have no replay value and the game gets repetitive very easily. This is probably due to the fact that Nintendo's biggest games are nothing new and we've all seen it done before.
Along with these "cute" graphics, comes a "cute" game. I got bored playing Mario because it was all too sweet and goody-two-shoes, along with a lot of other GC titles. Same thing with Animal Crossing, I couldn't do anything but help people and be nice to people, even after hitting them with a butterfly net!
I mean, it might be a decent enough game... But when it comes to paying ?40 for a rehash Nintendo game I wouldn't bother.
As for Resident Evil, I have heard it is good. But all they have done is give a facelift to an old game. My friend has the 2nd Resident Evil for GC and he doesn't like it much (he's a big Resident Evil fan too.) But that's off topic <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
as for resident evil 2... that's a weird one. GC res evil 1 was totally remastered with new parts added, some parts changed and it generally gets gasps of awe from anyone watching every time =3
zero is the same with some cg that would make your head explode if you watched it more than once... but then there's RE2... *blink*
RE2 was one of the best in the series; it seriously ties together a lot of the story and it's huuuuuge. But unlike 1 & 0 they actually just ported this one with almost no changes at all. That's right, it basically has playstation graphics and doesn't have much extra in it at all o.O
concerning stuff like replay value, it's not really a nintendo problem but just a modern day game problem. I can't think of any recent single player games I'd feel like playing again after I complete it. I mean look at a big name like Metal Gear Solid; it gives you a bandana or a stealth suit or other stuff and lets you play again but whats the point? It's still the same silly game and you know what's going to happen; it's like sitting in a cinema to watch the same film twice in a row but in the second showing you have a different flavour of popcorn -.-
Woah... I completed Metal Gear Solid (1) about 9 times, I loved the extras at the end. I also liked finding the secrets. Metal Gear Solid is one of my all time favourite games. I played Metal Gear Solid 2 at a friends and got stupidly bored with it though.
Yet at the same time I can't pick out a game on my shelf that screams "play me! I am teh rox!!".
Heh, my growing dissatisfaction with new games led me to NS, which had the ingredients I was looking for.
Thats all as an aside....... back on topic, I don't think the situation is as extreme as bankruptcy, although I do think Nintendo want to look at promoting third party support before they are *forced* to.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
i remeber doing very simialr things for theese games
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i remeber doing very simialr things for theese games <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
sheez, underdog.
can you say ++++++?
you missed like 6 or so.
.... ok no more spam from me.
and yes, nintendo is starting to feel a bit limp.
Shigeru Miyamoto...that man is such a friggin genius, i'm glad M-san and K-san (Hideo Kojima) get to work together on MGS: Twin Snakes.
the big N ain't dyin, it's just experiencing the periodic die-back of a societal growth.