With regards to the N64, Rare stepped up to the plate on that one and delivered a lot of new IP's so the fact tha Nintendo didn't provide many wasn't an issue. Banjo-Kazooie, Jet Force Gemini, Perfect Dark, Conker.
I agree completely on this. I think that the real big change this generation that a lot of observers are ignoring (especially in their rush to join the blame Nintendo bandwagon) is that this generation started with Nintendo really, really thin on second parties. Rare on the N64, with GE, PD, B&K, B&K2, CBFD, BlastCorps, and DKR64 averaged more than a game a year during that generation. Obviously, history has shown that Nintendo made the right choice in selling their stake in the company, but if the Rare of the 32-64 bit age was making Wii games, the difference would be night and day.
And the GC also showed what a mix of less grand efforts by closely affiliated parties could do. Rogue Squadron II at launch made a huge impact, and diehard Nintendo gamers also had Eternal Darkness to look forward to, and the growing of Retro with the Prime series.
With the Wii, Nintendo's second party resources seem to have started out dwindled by the GC era. But they're slowly building back up with collaborations with companies like Next Level Games and Monster Games. I only hope that Retro doesn't go the way of Rareware anytime soon.
Why is that people want to see Nintendo make new IP's but don't care about third parties?
I think they want the exclusitivity.
T_T. The Wii has plenty of third party exclusives... T_T
My gripe with Big N is they are penny-pichers to say the least. They could have made the WII a bit more powerful (at least as powerful as the Xbox 360) and took the lose on hardware and make it up on software. Also they could invest into other developers, the lack of RPG's (genre that I LoooVee) is still rather sad.
I don't think anyone can really argue Nintendo's conservative fiscal nature. I personally think that it's Nintendo's conservative financial endeavors that keeps them so agile and ready to risk at a moment's notice developing something totally unexpected, but it also means they don't expand or attack anywhere near as quick as more voracious and aggressive competitors.
You know... I gotta wonder, what in the world is Monolith working on? T_T
Sadly Khush's post was too late and we ran out of cookies.
Does that mean you like the post or you didn't?
She liked it. Either that, or she ate the last cookie.
Which brings me back to my earlier point. "Is that what is needed? Just something different even if it might be gameplay used in other games?" Is that what this new IP wishing is about? Just making up a new world and characters?
I think in a way it might be. Ironically, I suspect that gamers who specialize in one or several fields at the exclusion of others are developing higher thresholds for excitement, essentially becoming desensitized to the games. When we ask for new IPs, even if all that means is a Space Marine... WITH HAIR... that's just us asking for something, anything to dress up games we used to like, but that we can no longer enjoy.
I mean, it's just a crackpot theory I've thought up now, but maybe longtime gamers risk reaching a point where they can no longer suspend disbelief and have fun in a game, they need to be given higher and higher levels of fantasy in order to overcome what have become cynical and dulled senses. I mean, this is a large reason why I don't play Pokemon anymore. And my dulled gaming senses, I'm willing to bet, are probably what made me so unimpressed with Majora's Mask. I immediately "saw through" that game, thinking the masks a mere key/fetch mechanic, and thoroughly unfazed by the time-travel mechanics.
But it isn't because Nintendo is "wasting" an new IP on a non-game or anything like that.
...
New IPs are being used for non-games but NOT epic ones.
Guh? It sounds to me like you're arguing that Nintendo IS "wasting" new IPs on games that don't suit you?
Can everyone agree that innovation and originality has long been a part of Nintendo's identity?
...
Were sequels that are practically the same game something that was often identified with Nintendo?
I agree completely. That's why I'm absolutely flabbergasted that so many people loved the cosmetic makeover that Majora's Mask was, and ignore the utter brilliance of Phantom Hourglass' design, layout, and gameplay. I simply, cannot, understand it.
Of course, I think Nintendo HAS been in a holding pattern for several franchises for various reasons... and ironically, all these franchises got their start in the 32-bit/64-bit era....
Ian brings up an excellent point about Mario Party and Animal Crossing.
Yeah, Mario Party and Animal Crossing, I can't argue your stance on these games. I don't think Nintendo half-assed these efforts in any way shape or form, but they're clearly approaching these series with a different mindset. My eyes glaze over whenever I see Mario Party 8, and I'll admit that though I love AC, it definitely isn't a reinvention at all. But can I ask you what you think about another game I think qualifies for this category? Pokemon?
I think Nintendo is reintroducing the same base concepts in these three franchises because they intend to recapture markets that are continually flushed with new consumers. You know, there's always new kids, and if you don't give them Pokemon, someone will give them Digimon or Monster Rancher instead and you'll lose an entire generation. And Animal Crossing, in my opinion, is actually still at the starting block, I feel that the game hasn't actually established itself in the market at all, that it's consumer base is still being discovered, hence why it's still the same game. And well.. okay, so Mario Party was shameless milking. But I do know people who still love the latest game even though I couldn't care less.
Maybe it's a good sign then that Nintendo hasn't announced Mario Party 9?
Topic: Is Nintendo losing touch with its roots? (Read 28529 times)
