Topic: Nintendo to Announce New Titles for Core Gamers at E3

[vudu]

I can't think of a game released recently by Nintendo that was a spinoff of an existing series that would have been worth creating a new franchise for.

Tingle's Balloon Fight. 

Also, Brawl totally didn't need all those damn characters shoe-horned into it.

[NWR_insanolord]

Ian probably hates Tingle's Balloon Fight double, because not only does it shoehorn a character from an existing franchise into a game, the game is part of another existing franchise. It's a sequel and a spinoff at the same time!

[Ian Sane]

But you know what, Nintendo isn't stopping themselves from making new IPs and games as you imply. Brain Training, Nintendogs, Wii Fit, even EBA and all the games that access Miis are examples of Nintendo continuing to create new characters and product, and in even more inventive ways than conventional wisdom would expect.

Yeah but this still maintains the theory that Nintendo thinks core gamers just want sequels and spin-offs.  Aside from EBA all of those games are targetted at non-gamers.  That's the whole point!  Most of their creative energy is targetted at the newcombers and casuals.  The "core games" like this newspost is about is pretty much all sequels and spin-offs.  Hell I can't even think of Wii "core game" that isn't.  There probably is at least one but I can't think of any off the top of my head.

I can't think of a game released recently by Nintendo that was a spinoff of an existing series that would have been worth creating a new franchise for.

I can't either which is kind of scary.  It seems the only time they put a real effort into a core game is when it is specifically designed to be a sequel.  Yeah Link's Crossbow Training really wouldn't make a good franchise on it's own.  But why is THAT one of the only unique ideas Nintendo is coming up with that isn't specifically targetted at non-gamers?  On the Cube Pikmin wasn't just some throw away filler title.  It was obviously designed to be a major release.  With the Wii it's like when Nintendo sits down to make one of their A-titles it's either a sequel or a non-game.  With all the spin-off stuff it's been more the B-title concepts.  It's not like they started on some clear A-title core game concept and then decided to put Mario in it.  So far the major core games have been sequels that were clearly from the get-go conceptualized as sequels.  Nintendo did not start some space game and then turned it in Super Mario Galaxy.  No, they sat down to make a new Mario game.  Right now when they present a major new concept the end result is non-gamer stuff like Wii Sports and Wii Fit.  If Miyamoto was inspired by his garden now instead of 7 years ago I don't think it would have resulted in Pikmin.  It would have been Wii Garden because that's the audience Nintendo focuses their new ideas on.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I will play some RE4 Wii when I get home.

Or we can Brawnline.

[Kairon]

If Miyamoto was inspired by his garden now instead of 7 years ago I don't think it would have resulted in Pikmin.  It would have been Wii Garden because that's the audience Nintendo focuses their new ideas on.

So... the answer is blame Miyamoto. He is, after all, the guy behind Wii Sports and Wii Fit and Zelda: Crossbow.

[Slade]

He's also the reason that most Nintendo series have the same stories continuously recycled.

[NWR_insanolord]

He's also the reason that most Nintendo series have the same stories continuously recycled.

This is true, he's the one that designs the game and then only creates a new if necessary. He doesn't put much importance on story or characters, only the gameplay. That method, putting gameplay first, ahead of everything else, is why he makes so many amazing games, and it's why I'm such a huge fan of his.

The only new IPs we've gotten since Pikmin are things that Japan had before Pikmin (Advance Wars, Fire Emblem, Custom Robo, Animal Crossing) or Touch Generations games. I'd love to get some new ones, but I'm happy as long as Nintendo keeps making great games, regardless of what series they're in.

[animecyberrat]

I don't care about sequels, I for one LIKE sequels, what I *DON'T* like is when the sequel is too different from the previous installments it would have made more sense to make a new character/story instead. I also don't mind the spin offs, cuz I don't play them.


I hated Mario Kart at first simply because it tainted my perception of Mario games, it took the seriousness and danger out of them and tamed them too much for my tastes. But it was a fun as hell and game thanks to my enjoyment of the Super Mario Bros. Super Show, I forgave them. But I have harder time with Golf, Baseball, Soccer, Tennis, cuz I don't care for those sports to begin with.


But what happened to all the Chibi Robo love? That was a new franchise that could mnake for a decent Wii game, lackluster sales be damned it would appeal to the hardcore and the casuals if done right.

[Ian Sane]

This is true, he's the one that designs the game and then only creates a new if necessary. He doesn't put much importance on story or characters, only the gameplay. That method, putting gameplay first, ahead of everything else, is why he makes so many amazing games, and it's why I'm such a huge fan of his.

I agree and games following this design method often turn out better than games that focus on story first.  But it makes me wish he could just do both right.  Retro sure as hell is capable of both.  Miyamoto's stories tend to be not only weak but a bit sloppy with continuity issues galore.  I admire the gameplay-first mentality but he COULD put a little more effort into the story.  What we gets often seems very lazy.

Pikmin however seems to be doing okay.  It's continuity thus far is air tight and they went all out with details in Pikmin 2 about all the creatures and treasure.  The storyline isn't complicated but it works and makes a whole lot more sense than whatever the hell Zelda's continuity is now.

[animecyberrat]

With Zelda there is no continuity and I don't think there ever was meant to be, hence the title "Legend of Zelda" It is a myth, like Peter Pan, Robin Hood, King Arthur , whatever, there is no "right way" or "wrong way" to tell the story.

[Ceric]

With Zelda there is no continuity and I don't think there ever was meant to be, hence the title "Legend of Zelda" It is a myth, like Peter Pan, Robin Hood, King Arthur , whatever, there is no "right way" or "wrong way" to tell the story.

I would agree until Majora's Mask and especially Wind Waker where they did put clear cut continuity in Zelda.

[Morari]

As for the casuals. A new Mario Party is a sure bet and maybe Nintendogs - a title I'm just amazed Nintendo has waited this long to release. Talk about a guaranteed mega hit.

I'd buy Nintendogs on the Wii in a heartbeat. My fiance would love it if nothing else...

[animecyberrat]

WW was the first one to admit there was no continuity. Or that was how I remembered it.

[Dirk Temporo]

This is all the same sh!t we've heard from Iwata and Reggie time and time again, yet we still have nothing to show for it.

[NWR_insanolord]

WW was the first one to admit there was no continuity. Or that was how I remembered it.

Wait a minute, didn't Wind Waker say (major spoilers to anyone who hasn't played the game and may not be completely accurate since I haven't played the game in a while) that it was the same Hyrule as OoT and the reason it was flooded was because it was a last resort to stop Ganondorf? When you got the three pearls you went under the sea to the frozen Hyrule Castle and it was the same castle as OoT! If I'm remembering that correctly it's damn strong continuity. Of course, since Twilight Princess is supposed to be the same world as OoT, it may be screwed up a little.

[animecyberrat]

I never got that far, but even so, the world is always the same, the Link is not. The two NES games were connected and the 2 N64 games were connected but the rest are all different versions of Link.

[Smoke39]

That's how I remember it, insanolord.  And I thought TP was supposed to take place between OoT and WW.

Rat, WW fixed the continuity by indicating that Link was more of an archetype than a single person, giving the continuity a greater scope and allowing the games to exist as a single universe in spite of all the changes.

[stevey]

Luigi's mansion 2, Animal Crossing wii, and Pikmin 3 are a must since they been more or less confirmed. The Legend of Zelda, The adventures of Malon would be nice too, even thought it wouldn't be released until late 09 at the earliest....

[animecyberrat]

THAT IS WHAT I WAS SAYING! That they are not the SAME LINK every game.

[Smoke39]

That has nothing to do with the games linking up into a single continuity...

[animecyberrat]

With Zelda there is no continuity and I don't think there ever was meant to be, hence the title "Legend of Zelda" It is a myth, like Peter Pan, Robin Hood, King Arthur , whatever, there is no "right way" or "wrong way" to tell the story.

I never got that far, but even so, the world is always the same, the Link is not. The two NES games were connected and the 2 N64 games were connected but the rest are all different versions of Link.

[Smoke39]

Those two pairs of games aren't the only ones which are connected.  They're the only ones that star the same Link.  The games aren't the same story being retold; WW implied that they were all connected, just with larger periods of time between games than we originally thought.

[animecyberrat]

but they ARE the same story being retold, it is always, or almost always, Gannon invading Hyrule. Link saves the day.

[Smoke39]

It's the same basic premise, but each game is a different instance of a continued struggle, not a retelling of the same instance.  Your original argument was that there's no continuity, not that the majority of the games used the same premise of Link stopping Ganon.

[animecyberrat]

just stop please. Continuity implies a CONTINUING of the STORY, not a retelling of it. They never say THIS Gannon is a descendant of that Gannon, they always make it out as if it is always the SAME GUY. That little blurb in WW is not enough to fix this. My argument still stands and most others have agreed but somehow if I am saying it must not be true.