Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 08:39:21 AM
Is Shigeru Miyamoto past his prime?
I guess the better question is, should Nintendo stop relying on Miyamoto as their bread and butter developer/producer? Because it's quite apparent that Miyamoto can still churn out a great game, but my concern is that Nintendo is relying way too much on him, to the point where it may be stifling his creativity. Ever since the Fall of Nintendo with the N64 it seems that they have really been pushing Miyamoto because he was one of the few things that worked. He was already god-like with his NES and SNES games, but it wasn't until the N64 and the departure of major 3rd parties that his games became the REASON to own a Nintendo console. His games, and the various spin-offs they spawned have been, largely, what kept Nintendo afloat. So it's understandable that Nintendo regards him as their precious commodity and the ace up their sleeve.
But is this ultimately a bad thing? I mean, I love Miyamoto as much as the next guy, but even I have to admit that, starting from midway through the N64's life his games, while great, have become stale. They all lack the innovative edge that made his earlier works legendary. Even Twilight Princess, easily his most anticipated game that's been reeleased, has been touted by diehard fans to be great, but still just more of the same Zelda gameplay with no real innovation. His big name franchises have been so overused that almost ALL of them lack the sway they once head, no matter how great they are.
I personally believe it's because his creative energies are spread over way too many projects. Nintendo, as well as his fans, are starting to expect way too much of him, more than he's probably currently capable of. Nintendo fans have become gamers who mostly thrive on Miyamoto games, hungrily waiting for the next installment to one of his big franchises. I think that, in his rush to make sure people have the next big Mario/Zelda/Metroid game, he hasn't had time to do what he does best: Innovate and create new and inspiring IPs in his sleep. Sure, there was the short-lived Pikmin series, but you could tell by the marketing that Nintendo wasn't really putting their stock into those games like they would have in their SNES days, and Pikmin 2 was terribly rushed. There was the phenomenon known as Nintendogs, but of his upcoming major releases the only one that seems to be set to really innovate in it's genre is Super Mario Galaxy--which, again, is another Mario game.
Miyamoto is easily the greatest developer of all time, but let's face the facts: the man's getting older. Should he really be carrying the brunt of the work? I don't think so. In my opinion, Nintendo should really start to focus on new talent. Fresh new faces with different outlooks on gaming and different styles and philosophies to contribute to Nintendo. Take some of the weight off of Miyamoto, and let his creativity flourish like it used to when Nintendo didn't need his games to survive. Sure, it might mean less Miyamoto games, but I think the payoff would be more innovative, hype-grabbing, industry shaking masterpieces of the sort that defined his earlier career.
Post by: Deguello on February 19, 2007, 08:42:35 AM
Post by: The Omen on February 19, 2007, 08:44:12 AM
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 08:52:24 AM
Are Miyamoto and his values becoming irrelevant in today's gaming culture? Case in point: Pikmin. Who makes a game about gardening in today's day and age, when inner city kids are more familiar with concrete than grass?
... But I think that Nintendo's new non-gamer direction has shown Miyamotos values, ideas, and innovations are still a part of what videogamers can be and should be, even if Mario is no longer the culturally significant icon he was before.
In fact Pittboi, you question whether he should be relied upon as much. The fact is that he isn't the core progenitor of Nintendo anymore (though he was for virtually forever). Animal Crossing was essentially someone else's idea, as was Brain Training. Wario Ware, also, came from a different source. And if you pay close attention, you'll start noticing a periphery of producers who are starting to take more and more responsibility for different Nintendo projects.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 09:00:53 AM
Quote
Animal Crossing was essentially someone else's idea, as was Brain Training. Wario Ware, also, came from a different source. And if you pay close attention, you'll start noticing a periphery of producers who are starting to take more and more responsibility for different Nintendo projects.
Yeah, but those are all very niche titles. Nintendo is still relying on Miyamoto's direction for most of its major, system selling games. The exception being Smash Bros. which was mostly Sakurai's work from what I know, though it's still based mostly on Miyamoto's creations.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 19, 2007, 09:01:08 AM
I agree: I think Miyamoto is being pushed so hard into sequeldom that he has no time to try new things. Pikmin may not have been my cup of tea, but that doesn't mean he doesn't likely still have some excellent ideas in him which aren't being used because he's spread so thin right now.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 19, 2007, 09:04:42 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 19, 2007, 09:07:01 AM
I'm sure the man still has ideas. It would be better if someone were just writing them down to implement them at some point.
Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 09:13:22 AM
Quote
I think Miyamoto is being pushed so hard into sequeldom that he has no time to try new things.
This is basically my entire point in a nutshell.
While I think there should be another Zelda game because TP was still technically a Gamecube game, I honestly wouldn't care if the upcoming Metroid and Mario games were the last to appear on the Wii if it meant Miyamoto was freed up a bit to create at least one original, epic game for the Wii with the same magic that he had back in his early days.
Post by: Deguello on February 19, 2007, 09:18:44 AM
Quote
Yeah, but those are all very niche titles.
You cannot fathom how wrong you are, Pittbboi.
Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 09:28:05 AM
The games Kairon listed are all great games, but they're still, well, second-tier on the list of important Nintendo games. The one exception I would say is Brain Training.
All of Nintendo's main, AAA titles are your typical Mario/Metroid/Zelda games.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 19, 2007, 09:29:21 AM
I think we should see a bit less of that, though, what with 3rd parties actually stepping up to the plate this time around and filling in the lineup gaps.
Post by: Nick DiMola on February 19, 2007, 09:31:38 AM
Post by: Artimus on February 19, 2007, 09:35:10 AM
I think it's time to give him a small development studio that he runs and just let him design games.
Post by: trip1eX on February 19, 2007, 09:35:34 AM
Post by: MarioAllStar on February 19, 2007, 09:38:19 AM
Right now, Miyamoto works to make many games better, rather than make one game great. I would like to see that change.
Post by: MarioAllStar on February 19, 2007, 09:50:18 AM
So he technically still has as much influence over the design as he once did. The problem is either (a) he has lost his talent or (b) his talent is spread too thin. I believe it is the latter.
Post by: Adrock on February 19, 2007, 09:52:54 AM
At the very least, Nintendo could start hiring and/or supporting established talent who have left 3rd parties. Do something. Miyamoto isn't going to be around forever.
And he's probably past his prime. However, that doesn't mean he's not still good at what he does.
Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 10:05:55 AM
Quote
but someone has to be allowed to emerge at Nintendo and have the last word on their own projects.
That's a great point. I love Miyamoto to death, but if he remains the man to have the last word on just about every Nintendo game, none of the young, up and coming Nintendo developers will ever develop their own style. Sure, Miyamoto's final approval means the game definitely won't suck, but at the same time when he's finally retired, all Nintendo will be left with are a bunch of Miyamoto clones, with only minute variations from their personal styles.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 19, 2007, 10:08:08 AM
I hope the same isn't true for game directors...
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi when he's finally retired, all Nintendo will be left with are a bunch of Miyamoto clones, with only minute variations from their personal styles.
I'd be more afraid that we'll be left with a bunch of devs with no clue how to develop games without supervision.
Post by: Deguello on February 19, 2007, 10:13:31 AM
Animal Crossing is not niche. It has also sold a million copies in America.
Wario Ware is a solid series, with the DS version culling about 500,000 in America. More than two million world wide.
These are not "niche" games.
And speaking of Miyamoto games, his last one, Nintendogs, just shot past 12 million units worldwide. Which is to say, it is more of a cultural impact, and is a bigger series compared to Halo, or Final Fantasy, or Metal Gear Solid. It's extremely popular in Europe, where it single-handedly decided the portable war. Now I know the elite, online-gaming, online-online, hype-fueled, fist-pumping, may not count this as important, but it certainly is. Miyamoto took a game about DOGS and was able to sell it to little girls and old women, two market though worthless and impossible to crack. So I'd say he isn't "past his prime." No sir.
His recent efforts include Wii Sports, which just crested a million in Japan and is the ONLY Next gen million seller as yet. Wii Play he also worked on, and is also going to be a million seller, possibly here too. These titles contain the "innovative edge" you say is missing. Oh and this little game called New Super Mario Bros., which is the best selling Mario platformer of all time in Japan.
Kairon is correct. You seem to centralize Nintendo around Miyamoto like he's the only thing good or important about Nintendo these days. And so you take your opinion of his work since the N64 days and pass summary judgment on everything since, blind to success or accolades earned, awards and earnings glossed over. Why is Pikmin "short-lived?" It has that "innovative edge" you seek, there is no other game like it. It sold moderately well, at least. Why is it glossed over?
You also seem to think Miyamoto and Nintendo made oodles and oodles of new IP during the SNES days. False, to say the least. In fact, Miyamoto did two "new" things on the SNES. Starfox, and Stunt Race FX. Averaged together, both are about as successful, as, say... Pikmin. Which seems to "not count."
The feeling "loss of innovative edge" can basically be explained by the fact that it is hard to top making the very cheat sheets to 3D platformers and 3D Action-Adventure games. If you are using that as the litmus test, has ANYBODY done ANYTHING that innovative since?
You also call for new blood without realizing that there is already new blood, and has been since 2000. You just can't be arsed to notice because you are too busy calling for new blood.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 19, 2007, 10:20:34 AM
I think Nintendo shouldn't spread him around so much but it's not just because he may be able to make something better if he concentrates on one project. I think Nintendo just needs more variety. If he's involved with every title then his influence is everywhere and then everything starts feeling like an EAD game. I love EAD games but I don't want every game to play like that. I think it be beneficial for Nintendo if their individual teams developed their own unique styles. But there is a problem that not every dev is equal. Sometimes they need someone like Miyamoto to oversee things to get things right.
One thing Nintendo should be doing however is planning for a post-Miyamoto future. The guy has to retire someday and even if didn't he would eventually die. Nintendo can't rely too much on him or they'll be screwed the second he's gone. The younger devs need to reach a point where they can make videogame masterpieces without consulting Miyamoto even once.
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 10:23:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
The games Kairon listed are all great games, but they're still, well, second-tier on the list of important Nintendo games. The one exception I would say is Brain Training.
I'm tempted to think that that's your hardcore gamer preferences taking over Pittboi.
Brain Training, of course, was huge.
The Warioware games may be secondary, but they are, in essence, an extension of the immensely valuable Hudson-driven Mario party franchise.
But Animal Crossing is absolutely GINORMOUS if you're actually tracking sales of its DS release. Looking beyond, you'll find that Wii Sports, the Wii's flagship series and killer-app-in-the-box, is connected with Animal Crossing via Katsuya Eguchi.
And then there's no question about the heavy influence of Iwata, who's pushed for titles like Cooking Navi, Brain Training, and really gotten behind the non-gamer push for Nintendo. Worth noting is that Iwata himself is an outsider, from HAL and not Nintendo.
Not to mention, all of these aforementioned "niche titles" sell better than Metroid... and maybe even better than Zelda if you're just looking at the Japanese market.
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
All of Nintendo's main, AAA titles are your typical Mario/Metroid/Zelda games.
I... really don't see any significance in that statement given that Mario and Zelda are EAD's bread and butter and development of these titles are a given and that it's practically always been ERAD making these games anyways... AND with the increasing size of teams, these games are likely to take up a lot of EAD's resources. And of course Metroid is not developed by Nintendo, and has grown ever more Retro's and NST's domain ever since that first critical birthing period.
And of course, since Nintendo is comprised of more than EAD, I think this statement's scope is far too narrow to be of any use here.
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Should he really be carrying the brunt of the work? I don't think so. In my opinion, Nintendo should really start to focus on new talent. Fresh new faces with different outlooks on gaming and different styles and philosophies to contribute to Nintendo. Take some of the weight off of Miyamoto, and let his creativity flourish like it used to when Nintendo didn't need his games to survive. Sure, it might mean less Miyamoto games, but I think the payoff would be more innovative, hype-grabbing, industry shaking masterpieces of the sort that defined his earlier career.
In the end though, I have to agree with you. It seems like for a lot of people, Miyamoto is coming dangerously close to being used as a crutch. And with everyone conceding to him, there seems a lack of radically different visions being proposed internally in Nintendo. No one seems to be stepping up to take Miyamoto's place, no one seems to be yielding broad and powerful philosophies... except for Iwata.
... this is not to say that he shouldn't oversee things: from what I read, TP would've been an absolute mess (read: third party AAA quality, not Nintendo AAA quality) without his guidance.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 10:27:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
And speaking of Miyamoto games, his last one, Nintendogs, just shot past 12 million units worldwide. Which is to say, it is more of a cultural impact, and is a bigger series compared to Halo, or Final Fantasy, or Metal Gear Solid. It's extremely popular in Europe, where it single-handedly decided the portable war. Now I know the elite, online-gaming, online-online, hype-fueled, fist-pumping, may not count this as important, but it certainly is. Miyamoto took a game about DOGS and was able to sell it to little girls and old women, two market though worthless and impossible to crack. So I'd say he isn't "past his prime." No sir.
His recent efforts include Wii Sports, which just crested a million in Japan and is the ONLY Next gen million seller as yet. Wii Play he also worked on, and is also going to be a million seller, possibly here too. These titles contain the "innovative edge" you say is missing. Oh and this little game called New Super Mario Bros., which is the best selling Mario platformer of all time in Japan.
Nintendogs is a great example of what Miyamoto can achieve with more focused attention. Absolutely amazing AND, important to myself, culturally relevant!
However, I connect Wii Sports in my mind to Katsuya Eguchi, who also worked on the Animal Crossing series. Miyamoto's involvement in this and Wii Play were, to me, more on the side of the controller technology and not the game design.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on February 19, 2007, 10:30:59 AM
When was George Lucas a good director?
I agree about Spielberg though. It seems like every film I've seen of his for the last several years go on for a least half an hour after I expect the ending. A.I., Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, Munich. For every one of those films I was thinking "when is this movie over?" which is something I shouldn't be thinking. The Godfather and Lord of the Rings films go on for three hours and I'm never checking my watch even once with those.Deguello are we talking commercial success or artistic success? To me Pikmin is a major recent success story for Miyamoto because it's as good as his best work while I found Brain Training to be as exciting as school work but it's a huge seller. I don't know what Pittbboi means but there is a big difference there. I would say Miyamoto is past his prime because his best games are behind him regardless of how well they sell.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 19, 2007, 10:33:46 AM
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 10:36:33 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Deguello are we talking commercial success or artistic success? To me Pikmin is a major recent success story for Miyamoto because it's as good as his best work while I found Brain Training to be as exciting as school work but it's a huge seller. I don't know what Pittbboi means but there is a big difference there. I would say Miyamoto is past his prime because his best games are behind him regardless of how well they sell.
Yeah, to me Pikmin WAS a watershed event for Miyamoto fanbois. It was pure, and it was magic... And I didn't like Pikmin 2.
However, I think that if we're gonna judge him we should use Nintendogs to refine our terms. It WAS critically successful, and it WAS commercially successful. The only way we can pooh-pooh it is to judge it on "hardcore gaming" terms, which completely misses the point of the game. I think that Miyamoto's relevance in modern day CANNOT be disputed when faced with success on the order upon which Nintendogs found with critics, academics, consumers... and maybe not even as many hardcore gamers as we're used to.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: segagamer12 on February 19, 2007, 10:37:34 AM
Except I was going to ask who cares abotu innovation! god damn that word gets thrown around like its the end all be all ingrediant for good game. Serioulsy SO WHAT if a *sequel* doesnt change the formula and only changes the story, thats what sequels are, a continueation of an existing game. You dont need to change anyting.
I know I am not alone here and others who agree oughta speak up cuz I am tired of looking lieka lunatic. I HATE the word innovation with a passion, especiialy sicne those who tout it often don't even know what it means or what *they* mean when they say it, all they know is whatever game wasn't *innovatinve* enough for them just means that they didnt like something about it and thatw as the only word they could come up with.
TP not *innovative* hell even arguing that a game doesnt need ot be innonavtive I wont say TP *WASNT* because thats ludacris.
I don't get it. What does a game *have* to do to be considered innovative? Or when is it so essential to innovate that a good game is torn down because it failed to innovate in some area? Holy **** I hate it when people say a game wasn't good cuz it didnt innovate, or say it is just "more of the same" thats what NIntendo *WANTS* you to think.
When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up? I dont get it, EXPLAIN IT to me, what is so dag gum improtant about effing innovation? *HUH!* I don't get it. If a game is good who cares if it didn't do somethign that hasn't been done before. I mean its DEBATABLE if it is even *POSSIBLE* to come up with new ideas in the first place. Because human histroy goes back a long time and as far as I have been told, and can see from my own observations, everyting we see today has been thought up by someone else at one point in time or another.
All I know is I hate it when people use that word and dont understand what they are saying. all i ask is explain to me what is so friggin improtant about being innovative, and *start* with giving me a workable edifnition of the damn word cuz I m sick and tired of it being used when there are beter words to use. Did you find TP repetivive? *SAY THAT* instead. Was it boring? was it because it was too easy? was it because you've played all the previous Zeldas, knowing that they are all basically the same game, and somehow expected this one to stary form the formula in some way? WHAT! I really wanna know.
and before someone chimes in with "rat calm down" or a mod thinks I am flaming, just listen to all the arguments that go on here, it gets old when peopel compain aboug games needing to innovate, but when you mention doing something new like adding multipalyer to a single player game, peopel get all bent out of shape. which is it!?
The discussion started because someone things Miyomoto isnt innovative, yet everytig he does seams to sell millions, so whast the complaint? Was Nintendogs innovative? Did it *have* to be? I dont get it.
I understand needing to make changes between sequels andI think TP had enough new stuff to qualify it being innovative, and in no way was it "more of the same" or did Link turn into a wolf with an Imp on his back in all the previous Zeldas and I missed it?
Post by: ShyGuy on February 19, 2007, 10:39:40 AM
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 10:40:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up?
That is an EXCELLENT question.
... uh... which I'm not sure if I have an answer to. LOL.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 19, 2007, 10:47:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up?
That is an EXCELLENT question.
... uh... which I'm not sure if I have an answer to. LOL.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Sega does make a good point and I think people focus too heavily on innovation and new IPs. While they definately have their place, sometimes the tried and true is the best experience. Yeah you can have your goofy, stylistic games with gimmicky gameplay features up the ying yang which may even be good, but most of the time there feels like there is something missing, something fundamental that makes a game great. We also need to differentiate between a knock off sequel and a true sequel as well, there are many games that feel more like an expansion while others feel like a fresh adventure because they add enough "new" to the tried and true formula to make them special (The mario series and Zelda series definately fall into this category).
Take Zelda: TP for example, yes it borrows from previous games but it builds quite a bit on the formula as well. You have an even more expansive and interactive world, in addition to brand new additions to the Zelda series such as the unique wolf feature, a flying segment, and even a snowboarding segment all of which fit pretty well. In addition to that you have a solid mixture of both old and new puzzles along with weapons. Not to mention some very unique boss fights that build once again on the formula from previous games. I'd say Zelda: TP has many innovative features but on the flip side it doesn't mess with the formula to the point of decreasing the fun which is a huge risk for ever changing things when they are not broken.
Post by: Strell on February 19, 2007, 10:58:13 AM
F*ck this question.
Why it is even being asked is beyond me.
Neither is Nintendo as a developer. You point me toward some good games in the last few years that measure up, because I've seen a handful at best, and even that might be stretching it.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 19, 2007, 11:28:29 AM
You can still be incredibly talented and still be past your prime. Being past your prime just means your talents have peaked and it's all downhill from here. It may be a slow descent downhill and you may be so talented that even past your prime you still dominate your field but you're past your prime nonetheless.
"When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up?"
Personally I just want things to feel fresh enough that I don't feel like I'm going through the motions, like I've already experienced what the game is offering. Staying within the formula isn't a bad thing but there has to be some changes for it to remain interesting. This is why I typically don't like cookie-cutter sequels. If you've played Mega Man 4 then you've pretty much played Mega Man 5 and 6. If you're played any Bomberman game you've pretty much played all of them. A good series is when you can't miss a game or you'll feel like you're missing out on something important. Usually this requires some new elements to the formula with each game and sometimes a big change is needed to keep things going. Spacing releases and keeping franchises from being overexposed also helps. Keeping the quality up is important too. A spin-off isn't that bad but lousy spin-off games hurt. Things also stay fresh if new scenarios and settings are introduced (Nintendo is weak on this part as often storylines and settings are reused).
Post by: Pittbboi on February 19, 2007, 11:44:56 AM
Quote
To me Pikmin is a major recent success story for Miyamoto because it's as good as his best work while I found Brain Training to be as exciting as school work but it's a huge seller. I don't know what Pittbboi means but there is a big difference there.
That's exactly what I mean. Sometimes huge sellers aren't indicators of what makes a game great. A good example would be music. Britney Spears has some of the biggest selling albums ever, but does that mean her music is up there with the best? Of course not. Games like Brain Training sold well because Nintendo focused them on a huge market of people who usually don't play video games. They fall outside of the typical market. That's why I consider them niche. Nintendo's main games that are built from the ground up to appeal to "gamers" (not hardcore gamers, but people who play games) are still Miyamoto's franchises for the most part.
Quote
When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up?
Good question. I guess, for me it's when a game franchise seems trapped in the generation that created it. I think for the most part, despite it's minor upgrades, Zelda still falls into this category. It's still a great game, but it comes from a time when the storytelling was still new to videogames, and in some aspects it shows. I don't want to turn this into another Zelda thread, but it's storytelling, characters, setting, soundtrack and fighting are some examples, for me, of where Zelda needs to update.
Post by: blackfootsteps on February 19, 2007, 12:02:38 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 19, 2007, 12:08:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: PittbboiQuote
To me Pikmin is a major recent success story for Miyamoto because it's as good as his best work while I found Brain Training to be as exciting as school work but it's a huge seller. I don't know what Pittbboi means but there is a big difference there.
That's exactly what I mean. Sometimes huge sellers aren't indicators of what makes a game great. A good example would be music. Britney Spears has some of the biggest selling albums ever, but does that mean her music is up there with the best? Of course not. Games like Brain Training sold well because Nintendo focused them game on a huge market of people who usually don't play video games. They fall outside of the typical market. That's why I consider them niche. Nintendo's main games that are built from the ground up to appeal to "gamers" (not hardcore gamers, but people who play games) are still Miyamoto's franchises for the most part.Quote
When is it ok for a sequel to stay within the formula of its predacessors and when it is manadtory to change everything up?
Good question. I guess, for me it's when a game for the most part seems trapped in the generation that created it. I think for the most part, despite it's minor upgrades, Zelda still falls into this category. It's still a great game, but it comes from a time when the storytelling was still new to videogames, and in some aspects it shows. I don't want to turn this into another Zelda thread, but it's storytelling, characters, setting, soundtrack and fighting are some examples, for me, of where Zelda needs to update.
TP definately changed up the storytelling like wind waker before it, so I do not see that as a problem whatsoever. Characters, not sure what you want here, besides the big 3 (Zelda, Link and Ganon) there are always unique and different characters. Soundtrack is still amazing and has enough different to make for some memorable tunes. Fighting is fine, but I agree it may need some slight reworking here and there. Setting, Hyrule is still an amazing place and maintains freshness with some familiar and some new. Personaly though I would not mind to see an expanded Hyrule, that encompases areas not yet explored.
In regards to Ganon, I hold the same opinion about him as I do Bowser, you need him and he is definately part of the magic that is Zelda. Not to mention he is establisheed in the canon of he series as being the ultimate evil that will forever be interlinked with Link.
Post by: Bloodworth on February 19, 2007, 12:27:32 PM
And Metroid? Metroid was never Miyamoto's project. He was influential in getting Retro on track with Metroid Prime, but aside from that, his involvement has been pretty insignificant. If anything proves Nintendo can do good things without Miyamoto, it's the Metroid series.
Post by: The Omen on February 19, 2007, 12:31:09 PM
It's like Martin Scorsese. The guy has now made classic films in 4 decades. You know how many times the discussion of him being past his prime has come up? As early as 1983! Yet 25 years later, here he is again, back in the public eye for no other reason than that they came back to him. Watch Mean Streets from 1973, then watch The Departed. Both are Scorsese through and through. (yes, I know The Departed is a remake, but it's been absolutely Scorsese-ized)
To get this back on track somewhat, all of Miyamoto's games are an extension of himself. If we no longer find his traits or quirks endearing, is that his fault, or is it our own built up immunity?
Post by: son of lucas on February 19, 2007, 12:31:12 PM
So what was Miyamoto's prime then? His NES days of creating Super Mario Bros., and The Legend of Zelda? Or his N64 days of creating Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time?
Post by: Bloodworth on February 19, 2007, 12:31:59 PM
Post by: Djunknown on February 19, 2007, 02:06:48 PM
Quote
I wont say TP *WASNT* because thats ludacris.
Did you mean ludicrous? I know spelling isn't your thing, but I can't let that one slide. Ludacris is the rapper we know and love representing the "Dirty South" and 'disturbing the peace'. Ludicrous is the adjective. [/off topic]
Quote
Also, Nintendo has been raising up new directors and teams since Majora's Mask. They have been well aware of the need not to rely just on Miyamoto.
I think that right now, the public faces we see, hear, and read from Nintendo are as follows: Iwata and Miyamoto (Anouma, when they're talking about the next Zelda) from NCL, Reggie, Kaplan, and George Harrison from NOA. The names from NOE and NAL evade me at this time, but you get my point.
If we could hear more from the designers, programmers, artists, even from NCL's board, then we'd could equate Nintendo to more than just the names I mentioned above. I just learned from this thread the man responsible for Animal Crossing!
I agree with both sides of the argument: Miyamoto isn't as (obviously) culturally relevant like in times past. If you talked to a 'non-gamer' about who made Nintendog's, could they answer? Also, he's pretty much done it all. Numerous accolades and praise from the public and developers alike, what more can he do?
If they are to groom Miyamoto's successors, part of it is to let them take the spotlight more. Once it trickles down to us the fans, then the rest will follow.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 19, 2007, 02:49:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DjunknownQuote
I wont say TP *WASNT* because thats ludacris.
Did you mean ludicrous? I know spelling isn't your thing, but I can't let that one slide. Ludacris is the rapper we know and love representing the "Dirty South" and 'disturbing the peace'. Ludicrous is the adjective. [/off topic]Quote
Also, Nintendo has been raising up new directors and teams since Majora's Mask. They have been well aware of the need not to rely just on Miyamoto.
I think that right now, the public faces we see, hear, and read from Nintendo are as follows: Iwata and Miyamoto (Anouma, when they're talking about the next Zelda) from NCL, Reggie, Kaplan, and George Harrison from NOA. The names from NOE and NAL evade me at this time, but you get my point.
If we could hear more from the designers, programmers, artists, even from NCL's board, then we'd could equate Nintendo to more than just the names I mentioned above. I just learned from this thread the man responsible for Animal Crossing!
I agree with both sides of the argument: Miyamoto isn't as (obviously) culturally relevant like in times past. If you talked to a 'non-gamer' about who made Nintendog's, could they answer? Also, he's pretty much done it all. Numerous accolades and praise from the public and developers alike, what more can he do?
If they are to groom Miyamoto's successors, part of it is to let them take the spotlight more. Once it trickles down to us the fans, then the rest will follow.
Well if you got Nintendo Power the last few months before Zelda they had monthly interviews with various staff behind TP. There are some talented people with Nintendo and interviews from NP showed that things are no longer "Miyamoto" only in influence.
Post by: Caliban on February 19, 2007, 04:00:04 PM
Should he be let alone developing new IPs, while the newer kids play with the old toys? Yes.
Post by: IceCold on February 19, 2007, 05:39:38 PM
QuoteWell. Now the "typical market" is niche.
Games like Brain Training sold well because Nintendo focused them on a huge market of people who usually don't play video games. They fall outside of the typical market. That's why I consider them niche
QuoteAs much as I would love for that to be true, the article is wrong. I believe Takao Shimizu and Yoshioki Koizumi from Tokyo EAD are handling the director duties. Takashi Tezuka is overlooking the game with Miyamoto, though Shiggy did say that he was going to focus a lot on the game. Speaking of internal talent, these two are prime examples. They directed Jungle Beat too, and have now been given the reigns to the Mario franchise.
This Wikipedia article is interesting. Mario Galaxy is his first time to take the director role since Ocarina of Time (1998) and Mario Artist (1999).
Post by: KDR_11k on February 19, 2007, 06:30:34 PM
That aside Zelda has strayed more and more from the core idea that created the first game: Being alone and lost in a strange world. Modern Zeldas guide you everywhere instead of just telling you some vague directions to the first dungeon and letting you find the rest yourself.
I think Miyamoto should be more in full charge and less in an advisor position. Give him the freedom he needs to make his games as good as he can instead of letting him come up with an idea and somebody else in charge of making it work.
Post by: Adrock on February 19, 2007, 06:31:26 PM
Quote
IceCold wrote:
Of course Nintendo recognises that Miymaoto won't be there forever, and if you did your research on its internal studios, you'd know that they are developing a lot of great young talent.
I've read up on Nintendo's internal teams. The thing is that Miyamoto is still holding these younger guys by the hand. He has had free reign over his games and the opportunity to release games when they were ready. I think what many people in this thread are trying to say is that the so-called new talent don't seem to have that same freedom. They all answer to Miyamoto. Are they really being trained or have they developed an over-reliance on Miyamoto's guidance? I wonder if Eiji Aonuma can handle Zelda by himself with minimal outside imput or if he's just Miyamoto's Robin.
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 07:02:33 PM
Quote
Games like Brain Training sold well because Nintendo focused them on a huge market of people who usually don't play video games. They fall outside of the typical market. That's why I consider them niche
You remind me of the Tendo people in Earthbound. They built a fence around their village and called it a "cage" that contained the dinosaurs.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on February 19, 2007, 07:04:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: AdrockQuote
IceCold wrote:
Of course Nintendo recognises that Miymaoto won't be there forever, and if you did your research on its internal studios, you'd know that they are developing a lot of great young talent.
I've read up on Nintendo's internal teams. The thing is that Miyamoto is still holding these younger guys by the hand. He has had free reign over his games and the opportunity to release games when they were ready. I think what many people in this thread are trying to say is that the so-called new talent don't seem to have that same freedom. They all answer to Miyamoto. Are they really being trained or have they developed an over-reliance on Miyamoto's guidance? I wonder if Eiji Aonuma can handle Zelda by himself with minimal outside imput or if he's just Miyamoto's Robin.
Yeah. There's a whole bunch of Nintendo people being given more duties, but they all seem to harken to the Miyamoto philosophies, and we haven't seen anyone truly idealogically independent aside from nitnendo CEO Iwata himself.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: TrueNerd on February 19, 2007, 07:19:15 PM
QuoteYou beat me to it. The greatest game that Nintendo or anyone has ever made, Super Metroid, was one that Shiggy had very little to do with.
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
I'm not sure Miyamoto was ever relied upon as the "bread and butter" producer. He created Donkey Kong, Mario, and Zelda and got super-star status from there. He provides valuable feedback to Nintendo's teams, but with NST, HAL, Retro, Intelligent Systems, Eguchi, Aonuma, Iwata, etc., Nintendo's hardly going to fall apart without him.
And Metroid? Metroid was never Miyamoto's project. He was influential in getting Retro on track with Metroid Prime, but aside from that, his involvement has been pretty insignificant. If anything proves Nintendo can do good things without Miyamoto, it's the Metroid series.
Wasn't there a thread recently where someone posed the question as to whether or not Nintendo's greatest mistake was making Miyamoto take on a supervisor role and leave his lead designer role behind? So which is it? Is Nintendo relying on Miyamoto too much or not enough?
With all that being said, Pikmin was the best new franchise introduced last console generation.
Post by: Adrock on February 19, 2007, 08:47:33 PM
Metroid is still handled by series co-creator Yoshio Sakamoto. He has supervised almost everything Metroid related, including the Prime games. I think Metroid II was more Gunpei Yokoi's work, who also happens to be Metroid's other creator. That said, I don't think Nintendo as a whole is really fostering internal up and coming designers. It strikes me as odd that Masahiro Sakurai is finally getting his shot at free reign (with Super Smash Bros. Brawl) after leaving Hal Labs.
I seen new talent emerge at many 3rd parties. For example, Tetsuya Nomura began as an artist at the lowest level, but now, he's in charge of big name titles like Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy. Hironobu Sakaguchi isn't even with Square Enix anymore, but the series is as strong as ever.
At the same time, there are teams like Kojima Productions. Hideo Kojima has tried for like the last 7 years to move away from heading the Metal Gear series, but every time, his team begs him to return. That's a problem because what is that team going to do after Kojima. I think the same scenario applies at Nintendo. These people are equipped to design games, otherwise they wouldn't be working with these companies. The question is whether they can handle projects on their own and still uphold the same quality without senior members holding their hands.
Post by: Requiem on February 19, 2007, 09:06:40 PM
You guys think that Miyamoto isn't crazy about his games? That somehow, since he's not hacking code that he's not thoroughly involved in the process? Do you really think that he doesn't have the authority he needs? This is Nintendo's lead man; the go-to-guy, if you will. Sure he is being spread "thin" in order to insure each game is touched by brilliance, but that doesn't mean he won't up-end a table if he doesn't like what he sees. He is in the perfect position, and it is a position that he needs to be in.
Also, this man was born to develop games. Do you really think that with the Wii's new degree of interaction, that he isn't constantly thinking about the next big game? There maybe a time where he gets an idea that is too brilliant for any other person to develop it, and as a result he develops it. That's great! With his status, he can do whatever he wants!
But back to the original question......WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING! Wait till he retires to bring up such a question!
Post by: Dasmos on February 20, 2007, 12:05:41 AM
Miyamoto will have plenty of development teams ready to take over his reign when he leaves. The fact that he is advising and "holding the hands of" many Nintendo development teams is to teach them. You don't teach someone to swim by throwing them into the deep end and hope they swim. They need guidance at first, they need to be told when they aren't on the right track (e.g Retro and Metroid Prime). You can't comment on if they can survive without Miyamoto because is yet to be seen, anything suggesting to the contrary is baseless rubbish.
QuoteOh wow, because that isn't subjective.
Originally posted by: TrueNerd
You beat me to it. The greatest game that Nintendo or anyone has ever made, Super Metroid.
Post by: oohhboy on February 20, 2007, 12:37:07 AM
Shiggy still is and remains one of the best game designers out there with the widest and deepest portfilo of anybody.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 20, 2007, 02:27:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceColdQuoteWell. Now the "typical market" is niche.
Games like Brain Training sold well because Nintendo focused them on a huge market of people who usually don't play video games. They fall outside of the typical market. That's why I consider them niche
Quite true, old bean! Seriously, when Wii Sports just sits there in the Japanese top 5 week after week, you know the market is changing. Much like "casual gamers" made Madden, Grand Theft Auto, and a zillion movie liscences mainstream in North America, "non gamers" are making Brain Training, Wii Sports and Animal Crossing mainstream in Japan - and it's spreading here, Brain Training was one of the top 10 games in North America for 2006.
Edit: as for the general topic here, Nintendo has brought Miyamoto in the forefront partially because superstar developers have become a trend in recent years. How many of us knew names like Naka, Kojima, Ancel, Molyneux, or Itagaki 10 years ago? Even 5 years ago? In terms of actual game development, I don't think he's as involved as we think. Take Zelda - reading about Twighlight Princess, it seems like all Miyamoto did was playtest the game every few weeks. He gives a lot of important suggestions but the day-to-day work of the projects is being handled by others like Aonuma or Tezuka.
Post by: ryancoke on February 20, 2007, 02:58:04 AM
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 04:11:08 AM
Quote
Well. Now the "typical market" is niche.
I disagree.
The selling power of PS2 and the fact that the MS was able to surpass Nintendo in just one generation with a "hardcore" system like the Xbox should be proof of the power of the "typical market".
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great feat that Nintendo was able to introduce an entire new market to the industry, but at the same time, if you go after a different market by making games to cater directly to them and they bite, you can't call them the new industry focus market until longevity is proved. The market isn't so much changing, gamers still want the same kinds of games they've always wanted. It's just that Nintendo has now focused on a new market with a particular branch of their games.
I'm reminded of a particular toy fad of the 1990s: the tamagotchi. Technically a "game", that thing took the world by storm and sold over 40 million units and spawned several copycats that went on to sell like crazy themselves. According to the logic being applied to Nintendo's new bunch of non-gamer games (Nintendogs, especially), the tamagotchi should have "redefined" the gaming market and every game should have been made in the same vein of the tamagotchi because no other "game" at its time sold as well or introduced as many non-gamers to the market (the same could STILL be said of it). Nobody was claiming the market was "changing" then, and sure enough, when people got tired of them, the tamagotchi was just about forgotten. It was a fad.
Nintendo's catering to a different market with its non-gamer games, but that market isn't the new-gamer market, it's the non-gamer market. Fads will come and go, non-gamers will come and go whenever something pops up that appeals directly to them, but gamers will always be a primary focus of the gaming industry, people who play games. Niche games can be successes, Nintendo has proved that and the tamogotchi proved that years before them, but if they fall outside of that primary market I still just consider them niche games.
Anyway--I agree mostly with Adrock. To me it seems more like Miyamoto's more than just holding the young developer's hands. If that's the case then why is he still doing that for developers who have been with Nintendo almost as long as he has? Where's Miyamoto's next Pikmin, and why is it taking so long? I'm one to believe it's because he's busy holding everyone else's hands on their projects.
Quote
If we could hear more from the designers, programmers, artists, even from NCL's board, then we'd could equate Nintendo to more than just the names I mentioned above. I just learned from this thread the man responsible for Animal Crossing!
I agree with this, too. Nintendo could definitely let more developers take the spotlight if they are indeed trying to raise new talent. They might have done so in Nintendo Power but, then again, that's not exactly introducing them to the gaming community at large.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 20, 2007, 04:45:00 AM
I think as a creative person it would eventually become more difficult to come up with new ideas. Plus what if someone doesn't see an artist's work in the correct order? If he saw the new stuff first then wouldn't he like that the best and then think the early works weren't as good because it wasn't as fresh to him? But there have been times where I have not been familiar with an artist's work and didn't think much of it and then later was introduced to early stuff and thought it was fantastic. No current trend or public perception affected that.
"So what was Miyamoto's prime then? His NES days of creating Super Mario Bros., and The Legend of Zelda? Or his N64 days of creating Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time?"
I'd argue it was from Super Mario Bros. to Ocarina of Time. Yeah it's over ten years but the work of that period is amazing. It seemed like almost every year Miyamoto was involved in one of the greatest games of all time. If I was to pick a smaller period of time I would say it would be the late 80's/early 90's. Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World, A Link to the Past. Yeah.
Post by: Deguello on February 20, 2007, 05:02:33 AM
Quote
Nintendo has proved that and the tamogotchi proved that years before them, but if they fall outside of that primary market I still just consider them niche games.
What, so Nintendogs doesn't count because you say so? Shut up Pittbboi. They are not niche, just like the Sims aren't niche. Niche = obscure and small, not wildly successful and the best selling Handheld game this gen. Your opinion about whether Nintendogs is a "game" or not or whether it falls into your opinion of the "primary market" or not is frankly immaterial and irrelevant. It's not up to you, twerp. Nintendogs IS a video game. You can call it a fad if you want, but "fad" was thrown around in 1998 when Pokemon was released here. Not saying Nintendogs will follow suit, but statements like that have been very, very wrong before.
You are just flailing about with no point now. It's not worth correcting you or arguing with you, because you'll always retreat into opinion, or come up with new crap that doesn't make any more sense than the previous post. If you can't muster up a competent argument as to the topic other than your own opinion, then it all becomes opinion. And if it is all opinion, then it is my opinion that this thread is full of stupid and should be locked.
In fact, let's codify this challenge:
In order to prove that Miyamoto is "past his prime," you have to demonstrate all of the following things:
1. The games he directs receive no accolade or achieve no consensus in the market as quality.
2. The games he directs have no market value or market impact.
It can't be "Well I think his games got stale over time and I don't personally think he is as good anymore."
If you want an example of a game director who IS past his prime, take a look at Yuji Naka. He isn't even in charge of his own creation anymore, and the last game he was personally involved in was Billy Hatcher, which bombed commercially, critically, and failed with the masses too. He exists now as a little footnote from 1991-1997.
IF you can't prove this bold claim, then I will be very tempted to lock this thread.
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 05:26:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
You are just flailing about with no point now. It's not worth correcting you or arguing with you, because you'll always retreat into opinion, or come up with new crap that doesn't make any more sense than the previous post. If you can't muster up a competent argument as to the topic other than your own opinion, then it all becomes opinion. And if it is all opinion, then it is my opinion that this thread is full of stupid and should be locked.
In fact, let's codify this challenge:
In order to prove that Miyamoto is "past his prime," you have to demonstrate all of the following things:
1. The games he directs receive no accolade or achieve no consensus in the market as quality.
2. The games he directs have no market value or market impact.
Well, don't take this as a criticism, but I have to agree with Dequello here Pittboi. I feel sort of weirded out because Nintendogs is being dismissed out of hand despite its absolute domination, and because EAD is being pointed out for doing what they've always done since their inception. Wanting new IPs is one thing. Wanting Mario to be outsourced outside of Nintendo is completely something else.
Unless of course your point is NOT that Miyamoto is past his prime, but that Nintendo is misusing him. The second of the two points in your initial posts is much more understandable, and I think there's actually a good and fertile discussion on that topic and think that this thread should be about that, but if you're going to propose that Miyamoto himself is "past his prime" then I wonder if you have any specific points to that effect?
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: segagamer12 on February 20, 2007, 05:30:09 AM
This guy is resoponible for the Game and Watch, teh D-Pad, the gameBoy *AND* Metroid, ammong other things. To give the wrong man credit for his work, especially when he left the company in shame after his first major failure, and died not long after, is to compeltely deam the work the man did. It's one thing to say Shiggy is past in prime, but to use a game he didn't even create as an example of his greatness, thats wrong. I respect Miyamoto as well, a lot, enough in fact to try and spell his name correctly!
It was also mentioned but not fully elebroated on, but Pokemon, which is one of, if not the, most popular and sucessful Nintendo franchises out there, and it wasn't created by nor had Miyamoto had anything to do with its creation. Now if you are going to continue to argue that Miyamoto is past anything, start with making sure that *his* games are at least credite4d as *his* and the games that aren't make sure their creatores are given thier credit so that you can make an argument or point that has facts in it.
I am sorry, but like most people here, I grew up playing Mario, Zelda, Star Fox, Donkey Kong, and may other games made by this man you are trying to discredit. And I continue to see him create magical experiences for the young people today. Not to mention that Nintendogs, one of the *best* selling games on the DS, which is also his creation, is still very much a game. Also you said that Tamgachi, and Nintendogs, don't qualify for whatever your argument is, because they didn't change the fundametals of gaming, WTF is that about? Are yous aying that once a great game comes out *every* major game afterwards has to copy it? Because that is how I read your post, as did others aparently based on the responses.
Now subject at hand, No I do not think he is past his prime because he continues to make magical experiences for people today just like he did when I was a kid. I agree with Yuji Naka, he received as much critical accliam and commercial sucess during his time as anyother great developer, but he has even stated himself he does't have the heart for it anymore. Now he is undersifferent cisumstances though, his company got kicked around and dragged through the mud one to many times and failure after failure will eventualy drag a man down.
Post by: Adrock on February 20, 2007, 05:41:33 AM
Post by: Maverick on February 20, 2007, 05:52:22 AM
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 06:00:29 AM
Quote
What, so Nintendogs doesn't count because you say so? Shut up Pittbboi. They are not niche, just like the Sims aren't niche. Niche = obscure and small, not wildly successful and the best selling Handheld game this gen. Your opinion about whether Nintendogs is a "game" or not or whether it falls into your opinion of the "primary market" or not is frankly immaterial and irrelevant. It's not up to you, twerp. Nintendogs IS a video game. You can call it a fad if you want, but "fad" was thrown around in 1998 when Pokemon was released here. Not saying Nintendogs will follow suit, but statements like that have been very, very wrong before.
What the heck are you talking about? Niche doesn't just mean obscure and small--look the word up. I'm not calling these games niche because they're obscure and small, in fact I've said before that it's a great feat that Nintendo was able to make these games the successes they indeed are; I call these games niche because they're developed from the ground up to appeal directly to people you wouldn't necessarily consider gamers. Pure and simple, so I don't know what you're grasping at but it definitely isn't my opinion. Calm down, it isn't that serious.
I never said Nintendogs wasn't a game, or that it didn't count--I said it was a different kind of game. I likened it to the tamagotchi, and it definitely is an evolution of that concept, and it is of my opinion that because of that it could be attracting the same market. The very same market that fled the tamagotchi the second it became uncool. Because of that I'm reluctant to say that the market is changing, but I'm definitely NOT saying that the games don't count outright. You have your example with pokemon of a game that became much more than a fad, and I have my example with tamagotchi of a game that started as a fad, remained a fad, and died as a fad.
Quote
And if it is all opinion, then it is my opinion that this thread is full of stupid and should be locked.
When has this thread ever been anything more than my opinion? And isn't that one of the points of forums? The title of this thread is a question, not a statement of fact.
Quote
In order to prove that Miyamoto is "past his prime," you have to demonstrate all of the following things:
1. The games he directs receive no accolade or achieve no consensus in the market as quality.
2. The games he directs have no market value or market impact.
I couldn't disagree with this challenge more. A person can demonstrate all of these qualities with their work in their respective fields and STILL be considered past their prime. Being past your prime just means that your best work is behind you--not that all of your current work sucks. Someone had the perfect example earlier with the film industry. Steven Spielberg is considered by a lot of people (including himself) to be past his prime-- that his best movies are behind him and he probably won't top his earlier work. however, with that said, he is STILL considered to be a premier movie director--deservedly so-- and why? Because he STILL makes great movies.
Your example with Yuji Naka is the unfortunate tale of someone who is more than just past his prime: His career is teetering just above dead. Shigeru Miyamoto is nowhere near ever meeting that same fate, but that doesn't mean his best work isn't behind him. Some people will agree that he is, some people won't. The very concept is a matter of--here's that word again-- opinion. In fact, I think Ian likened Pikmin to Miyamoto's best work while someone else said that Pikmin wasn't their cup of tea. This thread is a discussion of who thinks he is and who thinks he isn't and why, and how his position at Nintendo could be affecting his personal performance. It was never a thread where I tried to turn my opinion into fact.
Quote
IF you can't prove this bold claim, then I will be very tempted to lock this thread.
This "bold claim" is merely a question to incite discussion. And in fact near the beginning I stated that I don't think Miyamoto is past his prime, but his current position at Nintendo could definitely be hindering his own creative energies. I didn't jump in this thread with "NINTENDO IS PAST HIS PRIME AND I'M GOING TO PROVE IT WITH CONJECTURE!" I think you misunderstood my point.
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 06:03:42 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 06:15:07 AM
Quote
Then can we change the title of the thread now?
I would like to in order to avoid the drama of people somehow thinking that because I asked the question then I obviously must hate Miyamoto and want to spit in his face and kill his favorite pet, and there is definitely more to the point of this thread than the yes or no answer. But, at the same time, a few people have actually, you know, answered the question with more than "Pittbboi you're an idiot for even asking". And, to my shock, some people actually do believe Miyamoto is past his prime.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 20, 2007, 06:20:03 AM
Miyamoto has changed, the last interview I read with him was pretty interesting - he seems to be getting into more projects outside of Nintendo and the last project that seems to get closely related to Miyamoto is Nintendogs, which was not a normal video game in any sense. I don't think he's past his prime, though, I actually think it's a testament to Miyamoto's diversity and focus on entertaining that he can come up with products that break the mould and grab a whole new audience. He's not just some guy making games for himself.
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 06:27:04 AM
Quote
The post really had virtually nothing to do with the "look at me" title.
I can assure you that I didn't have "look at me" in mind when I came up with the title. lol
The question itself wasn't the only thing I wanted to bring up with my first post. But can you honestly say that the question wouldn't have been totally glossed over had I not initially presented it in the title? It was a question I wanted to see answered by people, afterall. And some people are answering it without taking offense.
Post by: IceCold on February 20, 2007, 06:39:31 AM
QuoteThen why don't you change it?
I can assure you that I didn't have "look at me" in mind when I came up with the title. lol
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 06:42:13 AM
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 06:54:10 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 06:57:54 AM
lol
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 07:08:09 AM
/happy
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 07:10:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
(or vice versa)
You know...actually, that wasn't something I originally considered, but it's definitely something to think about.
I can't find the article now, but I think I remember reading somewhere that Nintendo originally didn't think the nunchuck attachment was fitting for the wiimote, but the developers they initially unveiled the controller to pleaded for the attachment because the wiimote alone wouldn't provide enough functionality for a lot of games. Even now some developers claim that the Wiimote even with the nunchuck attachment just doesn't provide enough functionality and accessible buttons for certain traditional games.
It's clear that Nintendo developed the wiimote with Miyamoto's minimalist design philosophy in mind. I guess that could be an example of Miyamoto holding Nintendo back, if you agree that is the case.
Quote
I feel respected, appreciated, listened to, and all warm and fuzzy! Thanky you!
/happy
Well, contrary to popular belief, it isn't my goal to tick people off on this board. lol
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 07:14:30 AM
And then the DS and Nintendogs happened...*sighs happily*
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Deguello on February 20, 2007, 09:13:38 AM
Quote
You have your example with pokemon of a game that became much more than a fad, and I have my example with tamagotchi of a game that started as a fad, remained a fad, and died as a fad.
Tamagotchi isn't as dead as you might believe. It's still breathing somewhat in Japan.
Quote
When has this thread ever been anything more than my opinion? And isn't that one of the points of forums? The title of this thread is a question, not a statement of fact.
You can't hide behind "it's my opinion" when you don't back it up. Your opinion of Miyamoto being past his prime is evidenced by your FURTHER opinion of his games since 1998. That's like buying stock on margin. It's not founded on solid ground. And yeah while it may be a question, think if I posted this: "Is Pittbboi a Flaming Homosexual? Discuss." You even started the thread with: "Ok, before we get into it I would just like to say that I am NOT trying to incite a flame war here." You rationalized it before you even started.
Quote
I couldn't disagree with this challenge more. A person can demonstrate all of these qualities with their work in their respective fields and STILL be considered past their prime. Being past your prime just means that your best work is behind you--not that all of your current work sucks.
BUT we won't know where his prime IS until he quits. Not only have you cast summary judgment on his work from 1998-present, with your assumption that his prime was before that, you have cast summary judgment on all of his future works as well, which if you think about it, is very disrespectful. You're trying to set up a self-fulfilling prophecy here. By saying Miyamoto's best days are behind him, you are inclining yourself to be disappointed and dismayed when say... Miyamoto announces like... Bardruk the Tornado on the Wii or something. "Well his best work is behind him anyway." Who says? You?
And my challenge is astute. It was you who judged Pikmin by saying it was short-lived. Short-lived how? Do you KNOW that there will be no Pikmin 3? Why? Sales? Critical reception? (you said the second was "rushed") You are the one saying Miyamoto means less now than before. You are the one saying his best days are behind him and his games are not doing as well as they should. You have to back it up with more than "I think so." This is why I used Yuji Naka. His career might actually BE dead, or maybe not, there is a little glimmer of a chance. But it is only fair to judge the concert when the set is over, not after they've played your favorite ditty.
BTW what is this thread ABOUT anymore? It started with Miyamoto being past his prime and that they need new blood, and then it became about how Miyamoto has too much control over projects, and then became how Miyamoto doesn't have enough control over projects, and is now about how Nintendo is holding back Miyamoto. Somebody print me out a map.
BTW, no way is Nintendo holding Miyamoto back. You think any other company would have let Miyamoto make a game about dogs? Forget its current success and put yourself in an E3 2005 mindset. Nintendogs was a risky risk. If Nintendo were holding him back we would have seen Zelda before Nintendogs.
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 09:22:33 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 10:01:31 AM
Quote
Tamagotchi isn't as dead as you might believe. It's still breathing somewhat in Japan.
Yes, but is it anywhere near the craze it was back in the 90s? Not even close. It no longer exists as the thing you had to have if you wanted to appear cool and in the loop.
Quote
You can't hide behind "it's my opinion" when you don't back it up.
But that's the thing: that ISN'T my opinion, and I've stated that several times already. MY opinion is that Miyamoto IS NOT past his prime but that his current position in Nintendo's hierarchy keeps him stifled. And I don't seem to be alone in my thinking that while his current games are definitely worthy of acclaim and continue to set industry standards, many of them lack that indescribable magic that many of his earlier works had. This really isn't something your can back up with concrete facts, because it's all dependent on opinion, and I wanted to gauge what the general consensus was on this board. Some people feel that Miyamoto is past his prime because it just doesn't get any better than his earlier work. I, however, feel that, if given the right circumstances, Miyamoto could definitely recreate that magic that thrived in his earlier titles.
Quote
And yeah while it may be a question, think if I posted this: "Is Pittbboi a Flaming Homosexual? Discuss."
Well, if this was a forum where a question of that nature would be relevant to the forum's theme, I don't see what the problem would be. But as it stands now, in this discussion, it's nothing more than an underhanded jab to the gut.
Quote
You even started the thread with: "Ok, before we get into it I would just like to say that I am NOT trying to incite a flame war here." You rationalized it before you even started.
Because even you must realize that anything that can possibly be perceived as anti-Nintendo will immediately put fanboys in Attack Mode. And that was something I wanted to avoid in favor of what, I thought, could be interesting discussion.
Quote
BUT we won't know where his prime IS until he quits. Not only have you cast summary judgment on his work from 1998-present, with your assumption that his prime was before that, you have cast summary judgment on all of his future works as well, which if you think about it, is very disrespectful.
Because never before has someone cast "summary judgment" on anyone's work until they were done with it. The world wouldn't have much to talk about if we waited until every creator died or quit until we discussed the significance of their creations. It gets done with everyone--painters, writers, architects, musicians, and even game designers. The works of Miyamoto are especially susceptible to this because it can be argued that the nature of his work now is a lot different than the nature of his work then. He's in two completely different places within the company. Deguello, welcome to the water cooler.
Quote
Do you KNOW that there will be no Pikmin 3?
Well, if you keep going in this frame of mind what's the point of ANY discussion of opinions, rumors or the like? You'd have to close more than half the threads created on this board. I don't KNOW there won't be a Pikmin 3 (I personally would like there be), but as it stands now it doesn't seem like there's going to be. Miyamoto could actually be a few years away from creating the greatest, most esteemed game of his career; or that game could have come out years ago. Nobody really knows, but does that stop discussion? speculation? I don't think so.
I get the feeling that you, and a few other people, are being a little defensive because you think that, somewhere in all of this, I was blindly attacking Miyamoto and calling his recent games crap. That really wasn't my intention.
Quote
BTW what is this thread ABOUT anymore?
Kairon answered that question a lot better than I could.
Quote
BTW, no way is Nintendo holding Miyamoto back. You think any other company would have let Miyamoto make a game about dogs?
Well, considering that Miyamoto is their most esteemed game developer/director right now, I'm inclined to believe that he was met with little, if any, opposition.
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 10:07:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
But as it stands now, in this discussion, it's nothing more than an underhanded jab to the gut.
But WiiSports Boxng has shown us all that that's legal and allowed!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on February 20, 2007, 10:32:00 AM
Nintendogs has had a couple clones which makes sense because it was a big commercial success on a very popular system. I think Pikmin isn't copied because the Gamecube itself is fairly obscure in the grand scheme of things. If the console was more successful its games would have spawned more clones from publishers trying to grab onto a hot thing. Metroid Prime (though not a Miyamoto game) isn't copied either, despite being one of the top ten games on GameRankings.com, and that too is likely because as a Cube game it was overshadowed by the big PS2 and Xbox games.
Is Miyamoto holding Nintendo back? Well he did on the N64. He wanted to stick with cartridges so Nintendo did and screwed themselves for the next ten years as a result. But at the same time he introduced the analog stick on the same console and it ended up being one of the most influencial ideas in videogaming. I guess it's give or take. As an artist he is going to have some unorthodox ideas and it's the responsibiliy of the corporate side of Nintendo to determine if those ideas make sense from a business perspective.
One thing he could do better though is take into account the needs of other developers when pushing controller ideas. Other developers shouldn't have to suggest the nunchuk. Miyamoto should have an open enough mind for game design to make something more flexible. That is something Gunpei Yokoi can be praised for. Nintendo's controllers during his time with the company were incredibly flexible and practical while introducing new concepts at the same time. All of the "Miyamoto era" controllers have had some questionable design choices. Though that might be a coincedence.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 20, 2007, 12:54:33 PM
Post by: Maverick on February 20, 2007, 02:55:13 PM
Post by: mantidor on February 20, 2007, 03:13:41 PM
Post by: Pittbboi on February 20, 2007, 03:26:51 PM
Quote
Metroid Prime (though not a Miyamoto game)
But here's the thing, and going back to what was mentioned earlier when I credited Miyamoto with Metroid (the newer ones): Again, I can't find the article (I'm sure I read it in EGM), but wasn't it Miyamoto who decided that Metroid Prime should move in first person, despite the fact that the game was already in development? If that's true, while it may not be Miyamoto's creation, but that sure was one executive decision for him to make, and proves that he more than just play-tests the series. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
But I agree with you, Ian, about the controllers. Sometimes it seems that Miyamoto can't see past what he needs for his own games, and while that's well and good for him (and EAD), sometimes Nintendo the console developer needs to step in and make sure hardware is as wide-open as it can be so that developers can have the freedom they need to create.
Post by: IceCold on February 20, 2007, 04:40:12 PM
QuoteI'll have to disagree with this. How on earth have his hardware and controller decisions have been bad? Nintendo and Miyamoto have always been pioneers in hardware innovation, culminating in the Wii controller. The analogue stick, the rumble, digital click shoulder buttons (which are severely underrated), etc. Many of these became industry standards, so I just don't understand how they could be "less than stellar".
I hate to say it but I agree with most of what Ian said, Miyamotos hardware and controller descisions have been less than stellar (though I feel the Wii/Nunchuck combo is one of their better controller designs). Miyamoto should probably stick to giving advice on what he would like to see when it comes to hardware, and have people who know what they are doing make final design descisions. Even though I did like the GC controller it was still qutie flawed (IMO the Xbox 360 controller is the perfect traditional controller). Anyway Miyamoto should stick to what he knows best and that is games!
Do you mean his hardware decisions were bad commercially for Nintendo? Because the decision to stick with carts helped us - shorter load times can only be good for the gamer. Sure, it contributed to Nintendo's downfall in the 64 era, but looking purely from a gamer's perspective, carts were wonderful.
Also, the GameCube controller is by far the most comfortable one ever. It just moulded in your hands perfectly, and you didn't want to let it go. People may complain about the button layout, but the truth is that for some genres (such as platformers) it is much better than the 360/PS3 controller, but for others (like fighting games) it wasn't as good. Overall though, I like the Wavebird far more than the 360 controller.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 20, 2007, 04:43:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
After thinking about it I think I'll wait for Miyamoto to make the "next" pikmin (that is, a sequel to pikmin or another awesome game that isn't meant to be played by grandmas), if such game doesn't happen then he would really be past his prime.
Talk about a straw man, from what I understand he is heavily responsible for Mario Galaxy and I have no doubt he is also working with Retro on Metroid Prime 3.
Post by: wandering on February 20, 2007, 05:10:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
It's clear that Nintendo developed the wiimote with Miyamoto's minimalist design philosophy in mind. I guess that could be an example of Miyamoto holding Nintendo back, if you agree that is the case.
Not really. The wiimote was developed with Iwata's minimalist philosophy in mind. When the idea of a wand-like controller was presented to Miyamoto, he didn't think it would work with traditional games, and suggested it become a removable part of a normal controller.
Quote
Originally posted by: Djunknown
I think that right now, the public faces we see, hear, and read from Nintendo are as follows: Iwata and Miyamoto (Anouma, when they're talking about the next Zelda) from NCL, Reggie, Kaplan, and George Harrison from NOA. The names from NOE and NAL evade me at this time, but you get my point.
If we could hear more from the designers, programmers, artists, even from NCL's board, then we'd could equate Nintendo to more than just the names I mentioned above. I just learned from this thread the man responsible for Animal Crossing!
Well, there's Iwata asks...
Post by: son of lucas on February 20, 2007, 06:30:44 PM
Post by: UncleBob on February 20, 2007, 06:50:37 PM
Stan Lee "created" tons of Marvel characters and wrote tons of great stories. Eventually, the entire company started to pretty much revolve around him. As it went on, Stan Lee became less and less about creating and more and more other stuff that he just didn't do as well. Meanwhile, he wanted to go back to creating... so he got out of his Marvel-exclusive contract and started doing his own thing. Unfortunatly, by this time, he was so out of touch with everything that I don't think he's created a dang thing anyone cares about since then. Backstreet Project anyone?
Post by: ShyGuy on February 20, 2007, 06:53:45 PM
Post by: oohhboy on February 20, 2007, 07:07:19 PM
Post by: Kairon on February 20, 2007, 08:40:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: son of lucas
I might be alone, but I still think the N64 controller was the greatest ever created. No button has ever been as perfectly functional as the Z-trigger.
You're not alone. I love the N64 controller.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 20, 2007, 09:54:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: son of lucas
I might be alone, but I still think the N64 controller was the greatest ever created. No button has ever been as perfectly functional as the Z-trigger.
You're not alone. I love the N64 controller.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
The N64 controller was a good controller. As of now I would rank the traditional controllers as so
1. Xbox 360
2. Gamecube
3. N64
4. Xbox fat (Hey I liked this controller)
5. PS dual shock version 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, 8
6. SNES
7. Genesis
8. Dreamcast
9. NES
7.
Post by: Nick DiMola on February 21, 2007, 12:03:06 AM
Other than that, I will say that anybody who thinks Nintendo controller design is poorly done they are out of their f-ing mind. Every single relevant controller feature ever created (pretty much) was created by Nintendo. People pretty widely regard the 360 controller as the best ever, but how much different is that than the Gamecube controller? Let's see, add another z trigger on the left side, make the analog sticks clickable and toss on the useless back button (which resembles select, which Nintendo did away with starting on the N64). Nintendo has a knack for creating great controllers that are widely copied by their competitors. Look at the Dual-Sh!tty-Shock, it's a modified SNES controller with 2 analog sticks awkwardly placed on the pad, and a couple extra shoulder buttons. Nintendo is king at controller design, the competitor replications really prove that.
Post by: son of lucas on February 21, 2007, 04:36:36 AM
Post by: Djunknown on February 21, 2007, 02:20:40 PM
Quote
Well, there's Iwata asks...
Thanks for the link. I just read the first section regarding the actual Wii console. Its a fascinating read.
This is what I'm talking about. Its a step in the right direction. Now they need to expand a little more, from Nintendo Power, to EGM or Gameinformer (Though I understand they might be maligned according to NWR posters.). Hell, an appearance at G4 techTV forever! would give that network some credibility...
Concerning the new question of the thread, that's a tough one. Someone should ask Iwata if they get a chance!
Post by: Edge on February 22, 2007, 01:17:21 AM
Post by: TerribleOne on February 22, 2007, 04:05:35 AM
Post by: chaingunsofdoom on February 22, 2007, 04:51:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
The N64 controller was a good controller. As of now I would rank the traditional controllers as so
1. Xbox 360
...
Second post on this page with this one as #1 and I'm just baffled. Sure, it's a solid design, but the clicking sticks were a horrendous 'innovation'. One example: Playing GRAW and your guy ducks/crawl instead of moving cause you accidentally clicked-in on the left stick, or worse you zoom-in on your scope with a right stick click instead of turning around. Either way you're toast.
This can't just be a 'me' thing either... when we play 4x4 multiplayer games, there are multiple people complaining every time we play.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 22, 2007, 08:08:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: chaingunsofdoomQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
The N64 controller was a good controller. As of now I would rank the traditional controllers as so
1. Xbox 360
...
Second post on this page with this one as #1 and I'm just baffled. Sure, it's a solid design, but the clicking sticks were a horrendous 'innovation'. One example: Playing GRAW and your guy ducks/crawl instead of moving cause you accidentally clicked-in on the left stick, or worse you zoom-in on your scope with a right stick click instead of turning around. Either way you're toast.
This can't just be a 'me' thing either... when we play 4x4 multiplayer games, there are multiple people complaining every time we play.
One game definately proves whether a controller is good enough or not. GRAW had too many action buttons for its own good and personally can't stand the game because of this. It was like they took every action they could think of and give it a button, which makes things overly complex and quite stupid.
