Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"The humorous thing is that Ian is asking Nintendo to be Sony and MS"
I have never said I wanted that. I ask for Nintendo to make more of an effort to resemble the Nintendo that made me a fan. The Nintendo that was not just a brilliant game developer but was also a competent console maker that had tons of variety and third party support to spare. There was a time when Nintendo consoles didn't have whole genres represented by only one or two games. There was a time where if one exclusive got ported or the Nintendo console missed out on a game it didn't matter because it was the exception instead of the rule. If I liked Sony and MS I wouldn't be here.
Artimus stop putting words in my mouth and telling me what I think.
The writing is right there on the wall, I'm just reading it.
You tend to mean well but you have a fundamental misunderstanding of both Nintendo and the NES/SNES generation. Nintendo has never been a great business company, they've been a great product company. The number of great first party games made for the Gamecube, if we consider increased production requirements now, is on par with the SNES. You say whole genres weren't represented by one or two games, but there are facts you are ignoring:
1. Wrong. A lot of genres WERE owned by one or two games. Platforming was almost entirely Mario World and DKC. RPGs were Final Fantasy II and III. Racing was Mario Kart. These games defined the entire genres they were part of. There were other well known games, but there are today too. Look across the systems and compare how many worthwhile games come out in genres each year. Not that many. And pretty much no systems gets them all. Nintendo is weak on FPSs, but it does have TimeSplitters. Microsoft is weak on RPGs and platformers. Sony have the msot balanced lineup but nothing they have compares to Wind Waker. Who can match Metroid Prime? AKA the highest rated game of the generation. Put that with Resident Evil 4.
In the SNES and NES games Nintendo had no competition! The were on top. SEGA was like MS now: doing good but never able to actually win this generation. They had the most systems from the start, so third parties defaulted to them. The Gamecube is as good in our time as the SNES was in its, as far as system design/architecture goes. You blame Nintendo for cartridges, but look at it from their reasoning. Did they do it because they were cheaper? Nope! Why? Because load times hurt the gaming experience. The only thing you can do with a CD you can't with a cartridge is FMV. And ask any Xenogears player how much FMVs improve a game. The SNES RPGs prove that FFVII's FMVs are sparkling innovations, not really improving the game. But Sony pulled out all the stops and won. Nevermind they introduced a (two-generation) world of load times. Nevermind their system actually had less power. Nintendo's only mistake was believing too strongly that people would just follow, versus trying to lead them. They clearly aren't doing that again, they're trying to lead them.
You can say Nintendo is different, but it just isn't true. They never had to get third party support until the N64. So they didn't even know how! And this time they tried and they got great exclusives but missed some generals. You can argue against the disc size, and maybe that was a mistake. But would you rather fifty FMVs or no load times?
In truth, the only argument isn't that Nintendo is wrong, but that thye're not enough like Sony and Microsoft. But Nintendo does not want to be like them. Plain and simple. You can dislike that but that is what they want. You don't own them, they don't make games just for you. You forget they are people who only get one life. Why should they spend it working on things if it doesn't appeal to them? To save you 300 bucks? Ridiculous. It's amazing that Nintendo is one of the only companies in the world that focuses on making a profit how it wants, versus as much money as possible any way it can. Nintendo has always made a profit, but when's the last time you heard their developers say they made a game as quick and cheap as possible? I bet you could find a few people at EA who might say that.
Ian, you literally have no ground. Because Nintendo is sick and tired of complex controls meaning intelligent game design. Having fifty buttons isn't going to make playing Madden anymore fun or immersive. If anything the current controller designs allow for autonomous game design. Just add more buttons. Just make more presses. The entire point of video games is to immerse you, to let you be something you aren't. Buttons are not the ideal way to do that, says Nintendo. And honestly, it's kind of true. Pressing a button hardly makes you feel like you're really killing Ganon.
If you don't like what Nintendo is doing, fine. But that does not mean they are wrong. That does not meaning they cannot improve the immersive game experience. You want this generation, essentially. Nintendo doesn't. Fine. But don't go off on your high horse of hindsight syaing it's a mistake that will doom them. They're tired of buttons, they're tired of this faux-game experience. They want games to be more immersive, more fun, more intuitive in THEIR way. What right do you have to tell someone their definition of that is wrong? None. You might disagree when I say apples are better than oranges, but you have no right to say I'm wrong. Your definitions differ, but if they're wrong then maybe you are too.
Nintendo is tired oft his status quo. It doesn't work for them business wise or creativity wise. And they feel the risk is worth the possible creative gold mind it could end up as. I'm sorry that doesn't mesh with your vision of the right way, but so what? You can still buy the other systems. And no, maybe you can't get Nintendo games on them, but if that's the problem with them my previous post is 100% correct.
Topic: G4 Interview with Iwata Reveals New Details (Read 54136 times)
