#1 Posted by pyrodactyl (2180 posts) -

I remember a time when Nintendo made groundbreaking games. I don't mean visually, although their games looked impressive in their day, no, I mean Nintendo use to put out the biggest games. Most major mario, zelda, pokemon and metroid games were breathtaking in terms of scope.

Now it feels like they only build big games on old blueprints. Reusing templates from the past to make expensive games or focusing on small concepts to build new franchises. It's not from a lack of money though. The company is sitting on disgusting amounts of cash and don't seem to spend it on anything except R&D for their hardware.

I miss the Nintendo who took a chance on the legend of zelda, mario 64, metroid prime and I guess what I'm saying is: put out a great console pokemon game already, you fuckers.

#2 Posted by Zekhariah (697 posts) -

@pyrodactyl:

I'm not sure that is completely fair - the Wii saw a large number of new titles in addition to the traditional franchises relating to motion control. Zelda's new control scheme in the last outting was enough to ruin the game for me even.

For Wii U they have just released a couple titles. Considering how they seem to be caught with their pants down on developing for a non-standard def system it may just be a matter of time before more unique games hit. Nintendo land at least showed potential - even if none of it really displayed a attractive single player bent.

Since Nintendo does not seem to care about much about their finances or extra things they could do to sell more units, I'm not sure its worth worrying about them.

#3 Edited by Regal (434 posts) -

I think it is more of a hardware question than we'd really like to think. To really break new ground on big titles you need modern hardware (on smaller indie-type games this isn't really necessary for innovation). I remember the N64 being really powerful when it came out and did things I'd never seen before.

With the entry of Microsoft into the console market, I think Nintendo realised that they weren't going to be able to hold that market. The Gamecube came out more powerful than the playstation but less so than the Xbox.

It was with the Wii that they decided to be one console cycle "behind" the competition in terms of hardware, and instead innovate in terms of motion controls. When the others moved on to HD consoles, Nintendo stayed put. Same thing with the Wii U. It is effectively on the level of an 360 or PS3 - eight year old hardware (ancient in gaming).

Mario 64 gave you a 3D environment you'd never seen before. Ocarina of Time likewise, with an expansive open-world in 3D with a day and night cycle etc. Whatever the next big step is of this kind, it won't happen on a 360 or a Wii U. When near photo-realistic rendering of lights and shadows are made possible through ray-tracing and such (perhaps on the PS5, Xbox Two) I doubt Nintendo will be leading the charge.

I doubt Nintendo will ever get back in the ring when it comes to hardware again. I guess what I want is for them to only focus on handheld hardware and instead make their console games for the PS4 and X1.

Of course that won't happen. But I think it is very likely to happen the next time around. Either that or they get out of consoles all together.

#4 Posted by BigJeffrey (5074 posts) -

Smash Bros 2014, you wii see the ambition

#5 Posted by PlipO (141 posts) -

Nintendo are probably seriously assessing their place in the games industry because they fallen drastically after a monumental resurgence and they are going to pummeled by the two big monsters in the coming months. If this were a Japanese Giganta monster movie, it would be over in five minutes because the Nintendo would get smashed to oblivion within a few seconds and the other two would pretend to fight but make an off screen agreement to share the bounty.

I believe they will learn from their arrogance and lack of vision and come back strong than ever but it take them about twenty four months and they need serious hardware and a new attitude to games that appeal to peoples' dark fears and desires.

#6 Edited by Nictel (2429 posts) -

They haven't, they are still doing the same thing they did 20 years ago. I think that there lies the problem, they are still doing the same thing they did 20 years ago.

Look at Reggie being super excited over a new mario game and I don't think that is faked, I really think they think people get excited over a new mario game. Then there is their SLOW SLOWER SLOWEST development cycle. In the time we got 4 big Zelda releases (not counting the portables) we got 7 major Halo releases. In the time we got 2 mario kart games we got 5 Forza Motorsport games. And now I am going to personally cry: the Metroid franchise is linked to 12 games, the Castlevania franchise to 38. Granted not all of them are brilliant but it does show the lack of commitment from Nintendo to produce games in their core franchises. We've gotten 3 Pikmin games, would any other company produce it we would have gotten 12 by now. Sometimes I think that they are too busy playing their own games.

#7 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

2002.

#8 Edited by MEATBALL (3319 posts) -

Around the time they became dooooooooomed.

#9 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@nictel: Wait so now people are complaining Nintendo don't release enough of their franchise's games in a short time?

Well, now I've really heard it all when it comes to Nintendo.

The biggest mistake Nintendo have made in recent years is the Wii U. Also, naming. Their naming schemes are fucking ridiculous, the Wii U is easy to confuse with the Wii and none of their 3DS games say 2DS on them, so cue confusion when Momma Bear goes to buy a '2DS' game for her son.

I still don't know why Nintendo felt they had to make the 2DS. it is a hair cheaper than the original 3DS and they didn't even have any competition in the original 3DS' price point because the Vita cost more, what else is there? The people that play games on smartphones probably won't be tempted by a slightly cheaper but shittier 2DS because they will still have to pay $40 for games. There's no way the 2DS should cost more than $99, it is the definition of a cheap product, I will be shocked if Nintendo aren't turning a big profit on that device. At $99 it would absolutely fly off the shelves.

But whatever, it's not for me. XL all the way.

#10 Edited by NMC2008 (1237 posts) -

I dunno but I slowed down my caring about Nintendo when the N64 came out. I buy their consoles for other games, and the only games I like of Nintendo's are Punch Out, Zelda & Metroid. Things have gotten progressively worse up till now, NOW, the care is all gone as my Wii U sits here with an owner whom has ran out of fucks to give about it.

#11 Posted by Nictel (2429 posts) -

@sooty: Yes (excluding mario) because other companies also produce bad games but they make up for it by producing more. I just want a good Metroid game and a good Zelda game to forget the horrors of Metroid other M and Skyward Sword.

#12 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Well - the most ambitious efforts these days (open world games, MMOs, online multiplayer sandboxes) are so foreign to Nintendo, I just don't think they're willing or able to compete. A few examples of games on the horizon I think are ambitious...

Neither do I see Nintendo going in any of these directions with any of their existing franchises, nor do I expect them to come up with new franchises doing anything as ambitious as these games do. Metroid and Zelda have the most potential in terms of bringing forth ambitious projects, but I really don't see anything groundbreaking happing on the Wii U front ever.

Wii U certainly has the potential for awesome core games, but I don't see it as capable of pushing the envelope the way PS4, Xbox One and PC will indubitably do in the next couple of years. We will likely see bigger better more badass versions of Zelda and Metroid Prime - which is awesome really, but that's not what qualifies as ambitious in my book.

Now if Nintendo lets the Retro guys make Zelda Prime, transporting Zelda-style dungeoneering into first person, and pulling it off successfully - now that'd be ambitious!

#13 Posted by BabyChooChoo (4630 posts) -

I dunno. I just want a new fucking Metroid.

#14 Posted by Abendlaender (2832 posts) -

@babychoochoo

You and me both.

#15 Edited by Kill (298 posts) -

As much as the Wii U showed a lack of foresight and arrogance on Nintendo's part after the Wii, I don't want future kids to grow up in a world without Nintendo first-party titles. As much as they have stumbled and fallen over the years with their hardware, Nintendo always comes out fighting with their games. Their internal ambitions haven't changed, they've just grown complacent being so consistently good at what they do and not realising the world has slowly moved on without them.

Once Nintendo pulls a Sony and cedes power to Nintendo of America/Europe, we'll start seeing a modern and revitalised Nintendo not in the grip of a dated Japanese elite. Until then, Shigsy and Iwata will keep putting out the same-old high quality but familiar titles hoping people start to care again.

#16 Posted by falserelic (5463 posts) -

When they decided to stop making alot of games, except the kiddy ones.

#17 Posted by BisonHero (6674 posts) -

@falserelic said:

When they decided to stop making alot of games, except the kiddy ones.

Not so secret truth: their games have always been "kiddy" games meant for young people. The vast majority of games in the 80s and early 90s were inoffensive in a similar manner. They continue to want to make what is effectively an electronic toy, suitable for children but well made enough that adults can appreciate it.

It's debatable whether that is still profitable for them, and there's the separate issue that the last time they really innovated in most of their franchises was in the switch from 2D to 3D.

#18 Edited by thatdutchguy (1273 posts) -

They began to suck when the Wii launched.

#19 Edited by jeanespinosa21 (87 posts) -

The problem is nintendo isn't grabbing kids the way they used to, back in the day i would see a mario game and i couldn't wait to play it! Now kids are like 8 years old they don't want to play mario they want COD. If you see who the biggest defenders of nintendo are it's usually people in their 20's or 30's who loved these games as a kid and remains loyal to nintendo for those games that give them that warm and fuzzy feeling. Also they lost big time last gen. Yes they sold more but the reason for that was they made a system for people who don't game hardcore. In doing so they eliminated the whole my friends play online on this console so ill get this console. Nintendo has really slipped up big time as much as i love them i wish they would go the sega route and just sell games. In any case nintendo is not going anywhere because their 3ds is bringing in mad money.

#20 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -

When they quit making games I wanted to play. Do they even make games anymore? Hell, I thought the Wii would be great for Mario Golf. An F-Zero game, sure, they'll make that. Right? I got Skyward Sword, but in truth, it seemed lost in translation. Now I seem to want a Wii U just to play an HD remix of an old ass Zelda game. I'm a sad clown indeed.

#21 Edited by Viking_Funeral (1817 posts) -

The last groundbreaking game that Nintendo had was Pokémon.

In a way, they're kind of like Disney at the turn of the century. Their best bet is to buy a Pixar, or some other company where people innovate. Then drive that into the ground with Cars sequels. Or whatever fits in this metaphor.

#22 Posted by jeanespinosa21 (87 posts) -

@viking_funeral: i still see pokemon trying to invent, the new one looks different from the others but i still think they stick to handheld and leave the console war.

#23 Edited by L33T_HAXOR (307 posts) -

I think around the time that New Super Mario Wii outsold the Galaxy games by a huge margin. Has Nintendo done anything remotely ambitious or exciting since SMG2?

#24 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4418 posts) -

They still have a lot of money, just wait till they're really backed into a corner and you'll start seeing some cool shit

#25 Posted by Veektarius (4920 posts) -

Innovation or not , Nintendo games would be 50% better if they went with some kind of emotionally honest writing instead of patronizing instruction text.

#26 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -

I think it's safe to say that they don't have the same strategy as before. Now, most of the games you're looking for on their home console are made for the 3DS.

#27 Posted by Brodehouse (10071 posts) -

@sooty: I'm waiting for the 2DS XL.

Online
#28 Edited by Chaser324 (6648 posts) -

Skyward Sword is the exact place where I fell off of the Nintendo train. I played three hours of it, and then disconnected my Wii and put it in a box. It wasn't even a bad game necessarily, but I just couldn't manage to make myself care at all about it no matter how badly I wanted to.

I think the 3DS is a solid piece of hardware, and I still like a lot of the stuff they're doing in that space. However, on the console side, they've completely lost me.

Moderator
#29 Edited by MonkeyKing1969 (2894 posts) -

I think Nintendo is the same as it ever was, it is still run in the spirit of the NES of 1983.

But. being that same is their biggest problem too. They want to be/run like a toy company. Being a toy company sounds terribly romantic, like Geppetto in his workshop carving wood, unlike their competitors who are 'media companies'. Yet, a toy is a toy is just one thing a game can be, and remember teh story fo Geppetto...his creation wanted to be a real boy. -Sometimes, I think Nintendo games want to be real 'big boy' video games too, but they can't be that too often. I think what Nintendo does is fine, it works for them, they are often very profitable at what they do for families and kids However, not everything they do is suited to take a gamer from cradle to adulthood. As their core audiences gets older, Nintendo do not cater to them as well as they cater to new children or new casual gaming families.

The best example is 2DS. That system as Jeff said is not for us, not for the update you system every 18 months Nintendo handheld owner. The 2DS is a profit generator. It is less expensive to manufacture, it is likely to be more reliable since it doesn't fold, so they can sell it at a remarkable profit. It will sell very well, it will offset the losses of Wii U somewhat, and it will end up under many holiday trees, bushes, and wreaths around the world. But, it IS NOT for current owners, and it is not some slick "great deal" for anyone but Nintendo. The device exists to make money and expand 3DS software sales among an expanding base of customers. I don't say that as an accusation, I say it as a reality of business.

#30 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11908 posts) -

The last time I cared about a Nintendo game released on one of their consoles was Super Mario Galaxy 2. That being said, the 3DS has some fantastic games. (The second half of) Super Mario 3D Land is fantastic and I will continue to call Fire Emblem Awakening my preemptive game of the year.

#31 Posted by Littleg (70 posts) -

I realise they both say 'Mario' in the title and largely involve jumping on people's heads, but Mario Galaxy and Super Mario 3D Land seem pretty unique games (going on what other people say, never played 'em). With their last two home consoles they've struck out in totally unique-at-the-time (motion/touch screens) directions that other companies have scrabbled to catch up with. They're the first company to bring 3D to a handheld device that's actually worth anything. I don't think they are totally without ambition.

That said, I agree that, given Nintendo were the company that made me a gamer as a kid, I'd like to see more from them these days. @regal talked about their 'Blue Ocean' strategy where they stopped trying to compete with Sony/Microsoft on hardware, but I do think that has meant that for those of use who grew up with Nintendo and therefore as a result are, well, grown up they haven't matured with their audience and are sticking to a core cutesy design for the most part.

When the WiiU was first presented, it was discussed as a focus more on the core gamer market, but that's a conflicting message when you don't have the games or developers on board in advance and the hardware (touch screen aside) is neither new nor exciting.

#32 Posted by ajamafalous (12030 posts) -

The Wii

#33 Posted by squiDc00kiE (360 posts) -

@pyrodactyl: I don't know how old you are, but a lot of those feelings come with age. The magic of games just doesn't hit the same way it used to when you get a little older.

#34 Edited by SomberOwl (695 posts) -

I agree with the Pokemon thing. This needs to come to consoles. It will be a best seller and move consoles. Right now they're just saturating the franchise, adding the dumbest things. I was so excited when I heard about Pokemon going 3D on the 3DS. But every time I hear about a new feature they're adding I get less excited and probably wont even get it now. I liked the simplicity of the first 2 games (red, blue, gold, silver). Now its all numbers and stats and dumb Pokemon quite frankly. Mega evolutions? really? In my opinion they're ruining the franchise.

What I would like to see is a full on console Pokemon game using the first, second and maybe even the third generations of Pokemon. Have it be Open world, and cut out any of the dumb garbage thats been in more recent games.

#35 Posted by Missacre (566 posts) -

@pyrodactyl: I don't know how old you are, but a lot of those feelings come with age. The magic of games just doesn't hit the same way it used to when you get a little older.

I'm 26 and Nintendo is still my #1 gaming company. It feels exactly as it did for me when I was playing NES games. Also, Nintendo are the only ones that seem to want to make a gaming console first, media center second, which is why I'm sticking with PC+Wii U this gen. The other two just don't do it for me. Hell, their consoles are marketed as media centers. They seem to be focused more on social networking than on games.

#36 Posted by Quarters (1748 posts) -

I've never liked Nintendo much(though the SNES was rad because of third party support), but I think the Wii U is where it's just starting to get sad. I feel like this situation is akin to a hypothetical one where the Sega CD came out at the same time as the PS1 and N64. A slight step up from the previous gen, but not anywhere close to the next gen.

#37 Posted by Bribo (605 posts) -

@seppli said:

Well - the most ambitious efforts these days (open world games, MMOs, online multiplayer sandboxes) are so foreign to Nintendo, I just don't think they're willing or able to compete. A few examples of games on the horizon I think are ambitious...

Neither do I see Nintendo going in any of these directions with any of their existing franchises, nor do I expect them to come up with new franchises doing anything as ambitious as these games do. Metroid and Zelda have the most potential in terms of bringing forth ambitious projects, but I really don't see anything groundbreaking happing on the Wii U front ever.

Wii U certainly has the potential for awesome core games, but I don't see it as capable of pushing the envelope the way PS4, Xbox One and PC will indubitably do in the next couple of years. We will likely see bigger better more badass versions of Zelda and Metroid Prime - which is awesome really, but that's not what qualifies as ambitious in my book.

Now if Nintendo lets the Retro guys make Zelda Prime, transporting Zelda-style dungeoneering into first person, and pulling it off successfully - now that'd be ambitious!

Five of those games you listed are sequels, but your other points stand.

It's hard to know what Nintendo will do now they've caught up with (barely) current gen consoles, but all signs point to them being as stagnant and risk-averse as any other major publisher.