The day I stopped loving Nintendo

[TheMightyEthan]

It's sad but true: the only way to get significant 3rd party support (not counting shovelware) is to be sufficiently compatible with the other platforms that the third parties can release their games multiplat. Otherwise they just won't get the sales necessary to support development of higher quality experiences, especially when the system manufacturer is targeting a casual gamers who simply don't buy as many games to go with the system.

[RockyRan]

I wasn't getting at anything, other than that I've personally found the catalog to be just fine. Maybe it's just the pace at which I pick up games, or the fact that I play a lot more PC games, but I'm fine with the Wii's library. It's not what was promised nor what was expected, but for my needs it's more than enough. I know that's not the case for everyone though.

 

You raise an interesting point there, one that I notice people overlook but is very important to me.

 

Most all the people (perhaps even all the people, save for the clinically insane) who are fine with the Wii always have some other platform to fall back on, being either the PC or PS3/360.

 

Remove the option to own multiple consoles and just isolate each of them. A Wii just by itself is vastly inferior to just a PC, vastly inferior to just a 360, and vastly inferior to just a PS3. That's ultimately my point. The Wii, at best, is a "Side dish" for people. A console with one, two good games a year where you play through it, go "that was fun!" and stick it back in the closet. Neither its hardware nor its software has the lasting appeal and robust library/experience as the other platforms, which is why I consider it a very lacking console. I've come to realize I don't need a "side dish" console when I'm already inundated with very high quality software on hardware I already own.

[Nezacant]

@Yantelope

 

I've never seen that video before. Have you ever seen something you feel as if you should have seen years ago... Like a funny picture that makes you laugh your ass off only to find out everyone on the internet saw it years ago. Then you get hit with that feeling of being late to the party?

 

I just had that moment.

 

Thanks for sharing that.

 

 

 

EDIT: I forgot to mention about how Nintendo created a monster. Nintendo had a deal with Sony to manufacture a CD-ROM drive for the SNES. (Think Sega CD) They even showed the device off at CES one year. The day after they showed it off Nintendo backed out and went to a different company to create it instead. The head of Sony at the time was pissed at Nintendo for this and the company retaliated by creating their own console. Nintendo lead to the creation of their own competition.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Nezacant

[Strangelove]

I never really understood why a lot of multiplatform games couldnt be ported to the Wii though. Im pretty sure a crappy low res version of Dead Space, COD4 or Mirror's Edge could have been on the system easily. Is there anything that those games do technologically that the WIi wouldnt be able to handle?

[TheMightyEthan]

I think it's just that it's more work than it's worth. You would have to generate all new low res textures, new low poly models. You'd probably also have to rework the AI and physics to account for the system's limitations, change the numbers of enemies, etc. Background stuff besides graphics takes a lot more processing power than I think a lot of people realize.

[FredEffinChopin]

I think it's just that it's more work than it's worth. You would have to generate all new low res textures, new low poly models. You'd probably also have to rework the AI and physics to account for the system's limitations, change the numbers of enemies, etc. Background stuff besides graphics takes a lot more processing power than I think a lot of people realize.

 

This, and also the stuff inside isn't the only aspect of the hardware that alienated the Wii from other consoles. Many games would've been silly with waggling awkwardly incorporated, as I'm pretty sure is mandatory for anything that isn't a virtual console game. I could be mistaken about that, but if not, I'd bet a lot of money that that was a major deciding factor in 3rd party developers ignoring the Wii with multiplats.

[Strangelove]

But the Wii still gets CoD and there is a Dead Space game that they had to make from the ground up because theyre completely different games. It doesnt make sense to make a different Wii version.

[TheMightyEthan]

With Call of Duty I guess Activision figures it's worth it. Call of Duty is like the biggest franchise ever in terms of $, so it can probably support the costs of adapting the game where other games might not be able to.

 

As for Dead Space: Extraction, it's an on-rails shooter, not a semi-non-linear game like the others. Also, it's entirely possible that they decided to do an on-rails shooter and chose the Wii for it's light-gun-like controller rather than saying "We need a Dead Space game for the Wii, so come up with something".

 

Any time a company is deciding whether to release a game on multiple platforms it has to do a cost/benefit analysis, and with the Wii the fact that its capabilities are so much different really drives the cost side of that up. That's not to say that it won't sometimes be worth it, just that it's less likely than with more comparable systems.

[Vargras]

I think the biggest thing was that the GameCube had a pretty strong library - Luigi's Mansion, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Super Mario Sunshine, Windwaker, Metroid Prime, and several others. Then they came out with the Wii, and the best they've had so far that can compare is Super Mario Galaxy 1&2, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Twilight Princess, and Metroid Prime 3 (no, Other M doesn't get listed - because it was fucking terrible and ruined everything that made Samus who she is).

 

I mean, it still seems like a strong line-up, sure. But to me, it just seems to sorta pale in comparison to what the GameCube had. That, and the GameCube's controller was so damn comfy. Seriously, I could game with that thing for HOURS.

[Yantelope]

EDIT: I forgot to mention about how Nintendo created a monster. Nintendo had a deal with Sony to manufacture a CD-ROM drive for the SNES. (Think Sega CD) They even showed the device off at CES one year. The day after they showed it off Nintendo backed out and went to a different company to create it instead. The head of Sony at the time was pissed at Nintendo for this and the company retaliated by creating their own console. Nintendo lead to the creation of their own competition.

 

This thing?

 

Yeah, a lot of people don't remember that Sony actually made some of the chips that were in the SNES. Shame that Nintendo was so shortsighted and tried to stick with cartridges. I understand the manufacturing implications but it was still a ridiculous decision and they paid for it.

 

As for that FF video, I remember seeing the screen shots of it in Nintendo Power back in the day and being very excited. I didn't actually get to see the video until many years later on youtube. It was a really strange feeling finally seeing a video you'd seen pictures of as a child years ago and forgotten about.

 

As far as library on the Wii goes. I own about 50+ Xbox games I think. About 10 or so PS3 games and all of 3 Wii games. Partly because I borrowed SMG from my sister and didn't need to buy it.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Yantelope

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

Well, I own some 30-35 Wii games ranging from decent to amazing. Just because you personally only found 3 games you wanted doesn't mean the system doesn't have its gems.

 

 

I think the biggest thing was that the GameCube had a pretty strong library - Luigi's Mansion, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Super Mario Sunshine, Windwaker, Metroid Prime, and several others. Then they came out with the Wii, and the best they've had so far that can compare is Super Mario Galaxy 1&2, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Twilight Princess, and Metroid Prime 3

 

You listed 5 games for each system and concluded that the Gamecube had a stronger library? There's been this movement to romanticize the Gamecube's library over the Wii's, making it sound like "the good ol' days" or something. The Wii's library is easily as good as the Gamecube's, and in my opinion, better.

[Yantelope]

Well, I own some 30-35 Wii games ranging from decent to amazing. Just because you personally only found 3 games you wanted doesn't mean the system doesn't have its gems.

 

You're absolutely right but this thread is about when each of us personally stopped loving Nintendo. If you still love them that's fine. I'd just rather spend $60 on Batman: AA or ME3 than spend $50 on Donkey Kong Country.

 

GameCube's first party library was good. Third Party sucked. I had 13 GC games all of which were exclusives. Only 3 of them were 3rd party games.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Yantelope

[Johnny]

I know we've talked about this before on Twitter, but I honestly feel the same way about Xbox and PlayStation. Sure, I'd like to play Halo and Gears, or maybe Resistance and Uncharted, but those exclusives aren't enough to make me buy the consoles, especially when I've got a gaming PC to play multi-plats. It's why I think some sort of platform convergence is in the cards for the future.

The pessimist in me is pretty certain that each company's pursuit of individual profit won't allow for platform convergence any time soon. The guy with the upper hand will always refuse.

 

It would, however, be pretty neat.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

@Vargras: There's also Baten Kaitos, Baten Kaitos Origins and Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem. The Wii has no good RPGs released in the Americas outside of Sakura Wars V(I know Eternal Darkness isn't an RPG). : \

 

Guess that could be directed toward P4, too.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Saturnine Tenshi

[Strangelove]

I have about 75 PS3 games if I include dlc games and i still havent completed my collection of good games on that system. There still some I dont own or that havent come out yet. I can almost guarantee there are over 100 really good games on the PS3 and 360 and way more on the PC.

I dont think I could find a hundred good games on the WIi and Gamecube combined. Thats honestly what I feel.

But I actually agree that the Wii library is better than the Gamecube. People see the Gamecube in a very holy light because for the most part the games that got sequels on the WIi were better. Its the general consensus that SMB Melee was better than Brawl, Wind Waker was better than Twilight Princess, and Metroid Prime was better than both the sequels and Other M. Not to mention ReMake and Eternal Darkness.

But that being said, I think overall the Wii has had way better games and more of them than the Cube.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

Oh, forgot Fire Emblem for Wii. Also forgot it for Gamecube. There was also the Skies of Arcadia release and Tales of Symphonia for Gamecube. This is just touching RPGs, of course. I haven't really found a game on Wii that truly enthralled me. SMG tried, and it was a commendable attempt. Just never got there. And Sakura Wars V launched on PS2 at the same time as the Wii, so I couldn't justify the Wii version.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

The Wii has no good RPGs released in the Americas outside of Sakura Wars V(I know Eternal Darkness isn't an RPG). : \

 

Guess that could be directed toward P4, too.

Little King's Story, Monster Hunter Tri, Tales (as you said), Rune Factory Frontier, Muramasa The Demon Blade, and the upcoming Dragon Quest X. I'm not saying these are all everybody's cup of tea, but to suggest there are "no good RPGs" for the Wii is disingenuous.

 

 

 

 

I dont think I could find a hundred good games on the WIi and Gamecube combined. Thats honestly what I feel.

 

Metacritic lists nearly 200 games in "the green" for Gamecube, same for Wii. Not saying these are definitive, but it's the best "standard" of quality we have right now.

[Strangelove]

I wouldnt consider Monster Hunter Tri or Muramasa rpgs. At all. Theyre way more hack n slash. Their stories are basically nonexistent too.

Youre also forgetting Xenoblade Chronicles and The Last Story. Ive heard nothing but good things about Xenoblade.

Also, this gen I think the DS and PSP dominated jrpgs.

 

Also, iOS has over 300 green games on Metacritic.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

MHT and Muramasa are both RPGs. Of course, this gets into the whole debate of what makes an RPG or whatever, but they're both clearly action RPGs.

 

As for XC and TLS, we're talking about US releases.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

MHT and Muramasa are RPGs. I don't like either of them, but they are. Forgot about those.

 

But yeah, there aren't any RPGs on the Wii I want to play. I just assumed my posts didn't need an opinion tag. P: Arc Rise Fantasia had potential, but a couple particularly glaring design issues and Ignition's dub ruined it.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Saturnine Tenshi

[Vargras]

Well, I own some 30-35 Wii games ranging from decent to amazing. Just because you personally only found 3 games you wanted doesn't mean the system doesn't have its gems.

 

 

I think the biggest thing was that the GameCube had a pretty strong library - Luigi's Mansion, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Super Mario Sunshine, Windwaker, Metroid Prime, and several others. Then they came out with the Wii, and the best they've had so far that can compare is Super Mario Galaxy 1&2, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Twilight Princess, and Metroid Prime 3

 

You listed 5 games for each system and concluded that the Gamecube had a stronger library? There's been this movement to romanticize the Gamecube's library over the Wii's, making it sound like "the good ol' days" or something. The Wii's library is easily as good as the Gamecube's, and in my opinion, better.

 

It was an opinion, more or less. Do both systems have strong libraries? Of course they do. I simply feel GameCube had the better library of the two.

 

Again, simply my opinion. You have every right to disagree with it.

 

EDIT: Forgot Ikaruga for GameCube. How I loved that game.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Vargras

[Yantelope]

Ikaruga was a DC game!

[Mister Jack]

I bought a 3DS. Worst gaming purchase of my life. And now they have that ridiculous second stick add-on that should have been there in the first place? I feel like they're really losing touch by trying to hold on to an audience that is steadily abandoning them in favor of their smartphones.

[CorgiShinobi]

Oh snap, time to get back! *pops neck*

 

I'm gonna combine everyone's comments into a giant gumbo pot, so dig through this if you're interested in picking a subject.

 

If Nintendo is going to become another Sega, then that means all the trappings of the Saturn would have to be repeated by the Wii U. Yant scratched the surface of the Saturns problems, but it goes a little deeper. For example, the gigantic launch failure. A "surprise" early release, exclusive retailers, and no third party support for four months (at least Nintendo has some). People talk about Sony's PS2 being the Sega killer, but the first PlayStation wiped the floor with the Saturn. However, not because of technology, but because of (quite frankly) retarded business strategy.

 

Then we got to the Dreamcast, a really neat console, but at this point Sega was a three-legged horse. Any advantage gained by their competitors would be disastrous. Well, I think we have this covered: the emergence of DVDs. In a way, the death of Sega was the result of a DVD player, not a gaming console. If anything else, there was also piracy due to, as previously stated, how ridiculously easy the process was to play CD copies.

 

Now, most everything else said has been mainly opinion, if not a little oracle forecasting. I don't have much right to override those types of things, but I have my own as well.

 

I still stick to the "your expectations" route. Again, I constantly see a trend online where older gamers seem to expect Nintendo to "grow up" with them. In essence, that Nintendo should conform to a select age group's interests and alter their franchises to such interests. Adding blood, getting more violent, exploring sex, and so forth. That's where Sony and Microsoft come in, but Nintendo doesn't need to do such frivolous things.

 

We've grown up, and while I wouldn't call Nintendo themselves "kiddy," they're the gaming company that's there for the younger audience. Now, Sony and Microsoft do have kid oriented games, but it's not where they excel. Mario & Co. reign supreme with children. While we had the NES or SNES, the newer generations have Wii/Wii U. You might cry out, "Oh woe is they for they know not of the 8-bit!" True, but Mario is Mario. I once volunteered at an elementary school about two years ago, and there I was the "old kid" that watched over the playground. I got to hear some conversations, most I've left to be forgotten to oblivion, except for one.

 

"Dude, have you played Super Mario Galaxy?" Immediately after the question, an onslaught of excitement filled the conversation. I've played Super Mario Galaxy, it's a great game. To these kids though, it was like a nirvana their television emitted into their young minds. So yeah, they've probably never played Super Mario Bros., Super Mario World, Super Mario RPG, Super Mario 64, and probably Super Mario Sunshine, but Mario is Mario. I began with Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins, and now there are those who may start out with Super Mario Galaxy.

 

Tradition vs. Innovation. That's what I hoped would be talked about a bit more, especially if we were to talk about Nintendo games. In a sense, Nintendo games fuse those two qualities of gaming into one. You could say Mario is still collecting coins, and other items, but where is collecting them? The Zelda "formula" rarely changes, but where are we and what's the story? Kirby still absorbs enemies, but what new powers has he developed?

 

I've already explain the audience issue, but there's still something that needs to be clear: the "casual" audience has always existed. The NES was also a really popular Nintendo console, never forget that. To this day, you'll still have older folk calling video game consoles "Nintendos," though now we get the occasionally "Xbox." There were non-gamers who wanted to see the hub-bub about the "Nintendo Entertainment System." In fact, one of my neighbors was a child who's family did exactly that. She is in no way a gamer, but she has had her NES, Super Mario Bros., Punch-Out, and Kirby's Adventure with her for many years. With the Wii, Nintendo simply began the process of harnessing the potential consumer base.

 

I don't consider the Wii a fad. Truthfully, a video game console can't really be a "fad." It can have excitement surrounding it's name, popularity, and overall enjoyment. That's all in the consumers' mindset, but fads are primarily a concept, something that's hip because "it's hip." A video game console can actually be fun by being played, not be an item that sits around and is "cool." (i.e. Beanie Babies, Furbies, and especially Pet Rock) The casual market can fun with their Wiis, but it's not the same as a gamer's enjoyment.

 

For example, another neighbor of mine has a Nintendo Wii, but seriously, she has two games for it. Still, it's "fun" for her. Of course, she and her friends want to come over and play Mario Kart. Thanks Mario, you bring the girls to the yard.

 

This leads to the real point I want to make: the Wii U. Nintendo can still retain a casual market with the console, and in reality, that's why we have a Wii U. Market retention, and etc. Still, as I've said before, there are signs that Nintendo is beginning to put more focus into the core market that has been slipping away. The ability to have an external HDD seems to speak, "If you want a few games, flash memory; for everything else, connect your large hard drive!" I can't say much else as anything else would be speculation, but about Apple...

 

The 3DS... it feels so out of place. The Nintendo DS was such a great equalizer with the entire Nintendo market. Grandson and grandma could very well have their own Nintendo DS, but the 3DS... Apple could begin their gaming push by filling in the gap. I wanted to address this however because I don't honestly believe Apple could take Nintendo's casual market because the Wii U will be the home console whereas Apple can only (for now) compete as a handheld. Even an iPad couldn't compete with the Wii U.

 

Sorry for the little tangent at the end, but I've never really had to think about Apple dominating Nintendo. It's a little ludicrous, especially with the lack of focus on gaming on Apple's part.

[RockyRan]

I can't imagine anyone wanting Nintendo to "grow up". Light-hearted, child-friendly (but not child-aimed) is pretty much the only thing I want to stay constant with Nintendo forever, especially now when too many gamers/developers are infatuated with the "macho" movement of uber-gorez and shitty storylines that take themselves too seriously. With that said, though...

 

Tradition vs. Innovation. That's what I hoped would be talked about a bit more, especially if we were to talk about Nintendo games. In a sense, Nintendo games fuse those two qualities of gaming into one. You could say Mario is still collecting coins, and other items, but where is collecting them? The Zelda "formula" rarely changes, but where are we and what's the story? Kirby still absorbs enemies, but what new powers has he developed?

 

What you're describing are superficial changes. The "feel" (setting, storyline, etc.) of the game might change, but the game itself, the core of it, remains woefully stale for years before they feel the need to to do anything new. Each and every game should be significant enough to stand on its own without the need to recycle old ideas and dress them up as "nostalgia!". I never want to "acquire" the boomerang in Zelda ever again, nor do I want to see double hookshots. Those are things that should've stayed in their respective games. Things like the Beetle Bomb in Skyward Sword is what they need to keep doing, across its entire inventory, not just a couple of items.

 

I don't believe the audience Nintendo is going after is exactly the "casual" audience you're describing. Casual gamers don't traditionally buy hardware just to game. They play Peggle on the computers they already have and Angry Birds on the iPhones they already own. They just play games on devices they HAPPEN to own, hence the "casual" name. The fact that Nintendo convinced these kinds of gamers to buy dedicated gaming devices is an amazing feat in and of itself, but it's not a sustainable model because they haven't changed that casual gamer mindset. Attach rates are woefully low, Nintendo's apparently been very unhappy with the performance of their piece of hardware after their casual craze, and there's no real evidence that Nintendo will be able to sustain this model at all. Hell, despite the Wii craze, when all is said and done it won't have beaten the PS2's worldwide sales by the time the Wii dies (which will be pretty much the instant the Wii U is released given Nintendo's past in not supporting previous hardware very well as well as the big dip in hardware sales these past few years).

 

Nintendo's trying to go the "market retention" route. There's absolutely no evidence that they'll actually succeed. In fact, it didn't even work at all with the 3DS because many people didn't even know that the 3DS was a "next-gen handheld" and thought it was simply yet another DS upgrade. It's very possible that people will have the same confusion with the WiiU. They'll look at the console name and presentation and think "didn't I already buy a Wii?" It doesn't show me that Nintendo's ready or willing to take the next step and up the ante. They look hesitant, with one foot out the door and the other in the comfy position they want to retain. To me, linking their next-generation consoles with the previous ones so closely looks to me like they don't know how to "do the next thing". Nintendo definitely wants to bring back the core gamer with the Wii U, but will they even be able to? After focusing so much with casual titles and presentation of their products, are they going to be able to catch up to the rest of the gaming industry to deliver a wow-inducing game that pushes the boundaries of technology like they did during the SNES days? It's hard to say and I honestly don't think they can pull if off.

 

As much as I disliked Nintendo's direction and execution with the Wii, at least it was focused. The Wii U and 3DS don't look focused at all. It's trying to appeal to both markets at the same time (and not really succeeding at either), trying to offer new novelty tech but with big caveats (one-touch touscreen and one-tablet limit on the Wii U, low horsepower and poor online on the 3DS, etc.), trying to bring in more third party but not doing it well enough to differentiate itself from other competitors (who the hell is going to wait to buy Arkham City on the Wii U when they can play it this instant on hardware they already own?), and generally just giving very mixed messages in terms of what they're even trying to accomplish with their products. It's as if Nintendo knows their previous audience from 2006-2010 isn't sustainable, but they simply don't know in which direction to go.