The Nintendo Conundrum

[Sly Reflex]

I was having a chat with Tromadogg last night about Nintendo, 3rd parties and rival platforms. I think we came to the conclusion that the cream of Nintendo games actually harm certain Nintendo consoles because 3rd parties in the most cannot even begin to compete. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but in general why would a company even waste time making a game for a Nintendo console if the game in question they wanted to make shared common ground with one of Nintendo's big games.

Say you're making an adventure game in the template of Zelda. How good is it going to have to be to usurp a Zelda game? There's only one game I can think of that came close and that's Beyond Good & Evil, even then it a lot different.

Take a series like Wipeout. As much as I love Wipeout, the F-Zero games on the NGC obliterate them in quality and fun.

Even bad outings like Mario Sunshine and Mario Kart: Double Dash are still better than anything else any other dev can offer at the time.

Sometimes you hear people asking Nintendo to make games for other consoles for whatever reason. Wouldn't that damage the devs that cannot match Nintendo's punch? How would something like Animal Crossing, Pikmin or Pokemon do on a platform where the demographic is noticeably different take to those games?

Chip in what you think, even if you don't like Nintendo. That means you, Nag.

[DANGERMAN]

I think it's that people go to Nintendo consoles for certain games, and certain types of games. Yeah COD did well on the Wii but I think people go to the 360 and pc for fps games, ps3 for whatever, each system has a market, albeit with massive overlap in some cases. With Nintendo, I haven't played every platform game since Galaxy but I'm willing to bet none have bettered it, yet Sonic and Rayman have both done well on Nintendo platforms.

The biggest one is the 3DS, Nintendo have a couple of rpgs, a Fire Emblem once every 5 years, a Mario & Luigi every other year, but it's the go to console for jrpgs. There's types of games that can do well on Nintendo consoles but the problem is that with no other similar market there's no safety net for if it fails to hit, and with the WiiU the potential reward is way too small for the risk

[Manicm]

Nothing beats a nintendo in house developed game, there are just in a league of there own.Yep mario kart can get a bit tiresome at times and in the past a few havent gained true momentum but the newer one looks better than the previous wii one.

They have tried to branch out a bit, i loved the Mario Football game, loads of fun 2 player and Mario tennis another favourite of mine. I don't see them as kiddy but as a leap back to my youth. Everytime nintendo get a triple A title out even when the cube was struggling they sold in the bucket load. I will get a wii u at some point, but its going to take a big game to push me to get one, at the moment the 3ds is a great console, just needs some retro goodness imagine Mario All Stars on the 3ds or the Metroid Prime game both of those would sell in the bucket load.

[HandsomeDead]

It really worries me that no-one wants to step up and do a similar game to a Nintendo one but with a different take on it. I would absolutely love for someone to come across and stick a Zelda-beater or Mario-beater on a Nintendo console because then that would make Nintendo up their game more and we'd all win 'cos we'd have more awesome games.

Michelle Ancel and his team at Ubisoft have had hearty swings at Nintendo what with Beyond Good & Evil and the recent Rayman games and I don't know why more don't try. Is it because they are scared of failing against the Nintendo games? Well that fucking sucks because it says to me that there is a lack of passion in the games industry somewhere; there should be more going after the crown. I mean if you do make the next legitimate Mario you are set for ages.

Of course you have 'install bases' and 'target demographics' that the industry likes to talk about but that shit bores the Hell out of me and makes my eyes roll out of my sockets. Just make cool games. Build it and they will come... it may not always work but it's a healthy place to start, I think.

[Craymen Edge]

Is it because they are scared of failing against the Nintendo games? Well that fucking sucks because it says to me that there is a lack of passion in the games industry somewhere; there should be more going after the crown. I mean if you do make the next legitimate Mario you are set for ages.

I think you could make the best Zelda clone or 3D platformer ever for a Nintendo machine, and even if the next Zelda and Mario games were 1 out of 10 abominations they'd still outsell it by a factor of 10s. Probably more. People are going to buy the big name Nintendo franchises regardless, and I think it would take at least a generations worth of rubbish from N to make inroads into that.

Personally, I grew up gaming on personal computers, and don't have that childhood attachment to Nintendo a lot of people do. Although I appreciate the quality on show in a lot of their games, I don't really care for the characters.

For some reason the Mario platformers don't really interest me (but I love the RPGs), and I never cared for the Zelda formula until BG&E and Okami. As such, Nintendo consoles are low priority unless there are a sufficient number of really interesting non Nintendo-verse games out there.

[Bob]

I think Nintendo, more than anyone are masters at creating games that are easy to pick up and play but also incredibly rewarding with lots of options for advanced players. That is something that is so hard to achieve but time after time Nintendo nail it. Pick up a pad, see what the buttons do and finish the first level without any problems. No tutorials, no patronising, no barriers to entertainment and fun.

Now I am not a big fan of Nintendo, I played a load of SNES games in my youth but was always primarily an Amiga child. Since then, no Nintendo console has really set my world on fire. The N64 for me, is probably the most overhyped thing known to man. However their ability to get straight to the point, straight into the fun is something that I think everyone could learn from when games are trying to appeal to a wider audience by shoving tutorials down our throats that tell us left stick is for walking.

Saying that, overall I disagree with the point of the thread. That Nintendo games are better. I think they can eat a dick and choke doing it, just to be immature. They do have something that sets them apart from everything else though, which I think sometimes is just as important.

[Sambob]

Its all well and good saying developers should just make a mario beater, but developers cant really take that risk, you are potentially talking millions of dollars in production values spent on trying to take down one of if not THE most established franchises in the world and a series that is comprised of games that are consistantly commercially and critically the best games released.

Whats crazy is that there are huge gaping holes in the Wii-U's catalogue that really could be targeted and arent being but then again you could look at risks and say that as Ben mentioned gamers target certain consoles for their gaming expectations and youve got to take a big risk, monetary wise as well as sometimes the existence of a company, to try to reverse that trend.

[HandsomeDead]

I'm not saying they'd make a Mario beater with one game. It would take a while to establish the new series but if they stuck it out on a good game everyone making cared about then how would it not end up good and have the media talking about it?

They spent mad cheese on that Final Fantasy XIII engine and made three games with it only a handful of people want so I don't think my proposition is any more mad than that. I'd say it's a lot less mad.

[HandsomeDead]

No current game success story was born from not taking a risk. #truth

[DANGERMAN]

No current game success story was born from not taking a risk. #truth

Call of Duty?

edit: Fifa, New Super Mario Bros, Just Dance

[Hendo]

Call of Duty was born out of a risk though, COD4 was the first major success of that series and they had to fight Activision to make it in a modern setting because World War 2 was the status quo at that point.

[DANGERMAN]

I know that's wheeled out to say COD MW was risky, but I think it's overstated. The WW2 shooter was becoming stale, the genre had been creeping closer and closer to modern day, MoO had Vietnam games out. The might have faced some resistance but I don't agree that taking an established franchise and making another sequel to it, this time with more modern guns, is that big of a risk imo

[Sly Reflex]

Goin back to what Bob said, I felt the same. I only ever played on a SNES 2 or 3 times nothing really blew me away there at the time. N64 I played on quite regular despite not having my own, but I never really got into any of the games.

The first Nintendo console I owned was a GBC I bought to play Pokemon Yellow. I had 3 games on the GBC. Pokemon Yellow, Pokemon Silver an Tetris. The real eye opener came when the GBA came out. For the first time I managed to get some real time with games like Super Mario World, Zelda: A Link to the Past, Yoshi's Island, Mario Kart. When I compare these to the games I were play there's really no competition to which were the better games.

When the NGC arrived I ended up buying an N64 so I could play the stuff I missed out on because of the Master Quest disc on Wind Waker. Blurry as fuck as it was, most of the game were still great, without equal even, sadly some of which we're never likely to see the likes of again.

I'd never really considered myself devoted to Nintendo or a fanboy to them. I do however have a massive respect towards how good their output is in comparison to others. Like others, they have their trips and stumbles, but over all their catalogue is a solid one that won't go as stodgy as others output over the years.

[illdog]

Do you think its a case that no-one wants to take the risk of tying to make a triple A Nintendo beater or a case that nobody can actually do it? Surely most (i said most) developers set out to make the best game they can hoping that it blows up and that will then be a stepping stone to bigger success as the series coninues?

Obviously Nintendo have time on their side, established series with beloved characters and in most cases (I said most) the new entries improve on their predecessors. It is a pretty tough act to follow but also a great success to aspire too.

[Craymen Edge]

Do you think its a case that no-one wants to take the risk of tying to make a triple A Nintendo beater or a case that nobody can actually do it? Surely most (i said most) developers set out to make the best game they can hoping that it blows up and that will then be a stepping stone to bigger success as the series coninues?

Obviously Nintendo have time on their side, established series with beloved characters and in most cases (I said most) the new entries improve on their predecessors. It is a pretty tough act to follow but also a great success to aspire too.

They also have a ton of money and can afford to work on a game for as long as it takes.

[Sambob]

Probably a bit of both dizzog.

And Craymen, you have to ask yourself which came first with Nintendo, did the attitude to make it right bring the money or does the money allow you to get it right, again Id say its somewhere in between.

Nag, my sweet Nag, I think thats just gaming nowadays. Established IPs are the shit right now, and whilst I dont disagree with what you are saying about Mario sales trouncing a potential successor I cant really see why thats exclusive to Nintendo, I really think its an established franchise thing. If a better game than Fifa came out now that nobody had heard of, it wouldnt outsell Fifa, some brand new JRPG isnt going to challenge FF14, not off the bat at any rate.

[Sly Reflex]

I don't think people would buy Nintendo games on other consoles. Not on a grander scale anyway. Obviously the people that buy the games on Nintendo consoles would be all over them, but I sure that a lot of the titles would be buried by stuff like CoD and GTA.

[HandsomeDead]

I wouldn't underestimate the audience for Nintendo games. Remember Mario Kart Wii and NSMB (DS and Wii versions) sold as much as a CoD entry and even games like Donkey Kong Country Returns sold around the same as something like Battlefield 3 (at least at retail).

You do have Nintendo fans flapping their gums about how they are the underdog but there is a massive amount of people that buy Nintendo games and don't go on forums and message boards so sometimes their games don't seem that prevalent but in they really are in the real world. I think Nintendo games would still shift masses amounts of copies if they were on another system.

[Pikman]

Sure? I thought I'd take a look at the top of the top list on Metacritic, it suggests otherwise to me. I think that of the genres they are good at, they are still the best at...

Mind you, Animal Crossing can die a death as far as I'm concerned, I'd sooner go to Pick Your Own fruit in real life

[Pikman]

I'd say so, I only buy their consoles because it's the only way to get my hands on their games - and I enjoy them more than many others. (I've enjoyed quite a few PS3 exclusives too, maybe I just like the Eastern games more).

Why buy one of their consoles if you could get the same on something else AND get the other games?