Topic: What gamers want in the next Nintendo system

[ThePerm]

first of all here is what I want

Higher Capacity disks- I want higher capacity disks because I don't want developers passing on the next system or doing lazy rush ports on the system because it has smaller disks. Nintendo improved this from finally switching from cartridges to optical, but it still had some of the same problems even though the situation was alot better. I HATE looking at artifacted as hell fmvs. There is no reason why Nintendo's system should be held back. Make it proprietary, but all means don't limit developers more on a Nintendo's system than a competitors.

Backwards Compatability- It sounds hypocritial to ask for Higher capacity disks and ask for backward compataility at the same time, but its worked. It worked for ps2, the gameboy line, and now its working for ds. It just works. Find some way to do it. Make the newer higher capacity disks the same physical size...do whatever...just don't slack. There WILL be people who will see that there were a bunch of games that they missed on the cube and will pick up revolution with a few new and a few old.

A built in ethernet port. So the system will have one damn thing that isn't automatically proprietary. Big deal. Having this little port on the system will guarantee that you don't have to spend the money to try to deal with a split market for people who want internet games and those who don't. In fact third party developers will see itas a sign that you are also moving forward just as your competitors are. This has worked well for xbox...and with the next generation im sure whatever happened on the xbox will be a more established thing on the next system

A fucking Pokémon game thats crazy. Thats right back to the online thing. I want to beable to get online. Meet trainers and woop their ass with my Charizard. Build a big freaking world and don't just send the game off to a little developer and expect us to think that just because its pokémon that it will be good.

3rd party support. ****...get Metal Gear. Pay them the fuck off. I don't care what you do but if you could get Metal Gear, Splinter Cell or some unexpected franchise exclusive then you'll have some advantage. To an extent it worked for Resident Evil. Have two franchises like this. I'm talking mature ones actually. Nintendo getting these isn't abandoning their audience. Its expanding it. Or more or less ditching some bullshit steriotype. If you had some announcement at e3 that you had Metal Gear AND Splinter Cell exclusive for your next system and showed them off in next gen glory. People would shit their pants.

2nd party trust. In this generation we lost Rare. The fucking beloved Rare. We felt confort in "hey we still got Silicon Knights'.....and THEN WTF. Get some 3rd parties, make em exclusive..buy their full support, invest in their company..buy percentages of the stock...and fricking more importantly of all make them GOOD. Things like geist, and advanced wars bother me. We lost Rare and Sk, and now we get these games that look sort of less than what we always expect out of Nintendo.

Expand your Franchises!!! We love Mario, Zelda, Dk, Metroid, and Pokémon. But damnit weve played 1000 incarnations of those games. Is it time for Bayou Jack, Samurai Billy, Metal Cell, or Splinter Gear. Something new please. I love Nintendo's style, but I also remember a time when I would play somehting made by Nintendo with Nintendo's style and it was something new.

First Party games more often. It shouldnt take 6 years for every Mario game. Really. Nes had 3 marios, super nintendo 2, n64 1, gamecube 1. With Mario 64 you established platforming. Then you tried to do something different by adding a waterpack and thinking it was all innovative..it wasn't it was kazooie on mario's back dressed like a water cannon. Take mario 64, bring back the long jump...and jsut build alot of freaking levels..they would all be based on mario physics. In some ways i think Nintendo is innovative. In other ways i don't think they even try anymore. With games like prince of persia being just as good as a nintendo game...(the detail, the intuitive control, the plotline, the setup...although i think pop:WW kinds sucks). It seems as though Nintendo is doing right with the new Zelda(i don't mean maturing it...i can see some gameplay improvements)

anyways, thats my rant. Feel free to add what you want or just criticize me. This is one of those times when less isn't better.  

[Bill Aurion]

First Party games more often. It shouldnt take 6 years for every Mario game.

I hear enough of Ian and others whining about how many Mario games there are... -_-

[ThePerm]

if they meanin the tennis, and the golf, and the party games....those don't count. I meant meaty Mario adventures(rpgs count..so really there are two mario games for gcn)

[Ian Sane]

"I hear enough of Ian and others whining about how many Mario games there are..."

I mean Mario spinoffs.  I want to see less Mario Generis Rehash and more Mario Amazing Platformer.

Well Perm pretty much said the same stuff I would say.  You could pretty much sum it up as "stop doing all this stupid sh!t."  Though having both Metal Gear and Splinter Cell seems a little redundant since both games are so similar.

The main thing I want beyond what Perm said is options.  I'm tired of Nintendo TELLING me what I want to play and what I want to do.  In general I like what Nintendo offers but sometimes I want to play types of games that Nintendo doesn't make or go online or play demo discs without doing all sorts of weird sh!t to get them.  I want to able to hook my system up with component cables I can buy in a store instead of ordering online from Nintendo themselves.  I want to able to buy one memory card at launch that will last me for years.  I want flexibility.  I want a console that is designed to accomodate all genres and all developers and all gamers, not just Nintendo themselves.

I want a modern equivalent of the SNES, minus the slowdown.

[Spak-Spang]

I love these supposed Mario generic spinoff games.

Mario Tennis for Gamecube is one of the best Tennis games made.  Sure you have to turn off the special "Smash Hits" but once you do you have a very deep and enjoyable party game.  Besides the Smash Hits allowed younger games to play the game as well.  So you can have a deep experience without the special moves, or have the special moves for added bonus.

Mario Golf Toadstool Tours took this franchise into a whole new realm of golf fun.  I just wish they did more with it...and next game will be awesome.  This golf game is deep, and keeping with the traditional power guage you have skill with the slight element of chance mixed into the game.  Very cool system, and very fun game.

Mario Kart:  Double Dash may not have been the best game in the series, but it is fun and enjoyable to play.  

I don't want these fun games to disappear...I want more of these games.

Here is what I want:

1)Continued innovation with controlling games.  We haven't yet found the best controller for games.  I love that Nintendo's pursuit has always included involving the controls for games.  Sony and Microsoft both have been lazy in designing their controls for their systems, and I predict their next systems will have very few innovations.

2)Quicker release of quality new games, and favorite franchise games.

3)Full wireless controls.

4)A more powerful system at a very affordable price.  I don't want to pay more than $250 dollars for a game system.  If Sony or Microsoft try to make me pay $300+ then I will say no.  I live on a budget.

5)Uniqueness.  I expect Nintendo to create something that seperates them from the competition.

[Ian Sane]

I thought of something else I would like.  Remember in the 16 bit era when Sega and Nintendo would aggressively try to "match" exclusives.  Nintendo got Street Fighter II exclusive so Sega made Eternal Champions to get their own exclusive fighting game.  Sega made Virtua Fighting so Nintendo made Stunt Race FX.  If one company had a major unique game the other company would give its userbase their own spin on the genre.

Nintendo doesn't do that anymore while Sony and MS do.  Sony made Killzone to try to get the Halo experience on the PS2 while MS got GTA on the Xbox.  The two companies are doing what they can to cancel out each other's advantages.  It doesn't sell systems but it keeps the userbase from jumping ship.  And they've done a pretty decent job of cutting out the advantages of the Cube as well.  Sony has Jak and Ratchet & Clank to cancel out Mario while MS has Blinx.  Sure they're not necessarily as good as Mario but they get the job done.  Zelda meanwhile is cancelled out by Dark Cloud and Fable.

However Nintendo has done absolutely NOTHING to combat GTA or Halo.  There are no exclusive games on the Cube with the open gameplay design of GTA and there are no exclusive first person shooters that I can think of.  Those are holes.  Holes that Sony and MS made sure to fill on their consoles.  Holes that Sega would have filled.  On the Revolution I want Nintendo to acknowledge when the competition has something they don't have and try to fill the void with an alternative.  I would love to see what Nintendo could do with the gameplay of GTA (no not the violence, the gameplay).  There should be no types of games that are exclusive to another console.  I should never feel that I'm missing out by sticking with only Nintendo.

[vudu]

For the record, Nintendo is making Geist, which hopefully should get at least a little attention from FPS fans.  And then there's Killer 7, which at least was exclusive.

[SgtShiversBen]

I just hope that the next system isn't all crazy and makes me jump around to play the game.  I play games because I'm lazy, I don't want a work out.

I also hope they put a handle on this one too.  Sure it made it seem like a lunchbox, but hell, it spoiled me for handles.  I got my laptop cause it has a handle and I love carrying this thing around saying "You know you want this."

Ian, back then the companies weren't at a war.  They were just trying to out do each other, not obliterate.  I wish that's how it was now.  There was competiveness, but not massacres.  They also did respect each other rather than say "Nintendo is for babies, buy our MATURE games."  Because of this new attitude, may the gaming empire come to a crash.

[Spak-Spang]

Ian I would argue Nintendo has done what you said about aggressively providing exclusives to counter balance, but then stopped when certain games weren't successful.

1)Eternal Darkness was snatched so that Nintendo can say they have a mature game on their system...it didn't sell well despite rave reviews.  
2)Nintendo made a deal to get Metal Gear Solid on its system, and it didn't sell well despite that it was an exclusive Metal Gear Game.

Then Nintendo decided to go a different route they started to crank out their games more frequently by giving them to 3rd parties to create.

Nintendo released F-Zero designed by Sega, Metroid designed by a new 2nd party (now 1st party developer) Nintendo farmed out Zelda 4 swords, Mario Party, and Star Fox Armada.  All of these games are exclusives and are fun (yes even Star Fox) and have been very successful for Nintendo.

Nintendo has quite a few great exclusives on their system, that I feel have been unfortunately ignored by the gaming public.

[MaleficentOgre]

gamers want megaman in the next system.

[Ian Sane]

"For the record, Nintendo is making Geist, which hopefully should get at least a little attention from FPS fans."

Yeah that's true though since it's being made by a developer who's claim to fame is crappy Olsen twin games I'm going to remain sceptical.

"Ian I would argue Nintendo has done what you said about aggressively providing exclusives to counter balance, but then stopped when certain games weren't successful."

There was no real effort though.  It was half-assed.  One exclusive mature game and one Metal Gear remake is not a legimate effort in my eyes.  It wasn't successful because Nintendo put only a bare minimum of effort into it.  It's like if Nintendo doesn't want to do something they'll half-ass it and then use the inevitable failure that follows to justify not doing it again.

[Gamefreak]

I actually prefer long waits between Mario, Zelda, and Metroid titles. It doesn't saturate the market with them and it gives them more time for development. I'd prefer they be better than get them earlier. Imagine getting Ocarina of Time in 1996 like originally planned.

[Artimus]

Nintendo is simply in disarray. They're basically not competing with Sony and Microsoft. This generation started out the first year with games coming for PS2, or PS2 and GCN. Now they're all XBOX and PS2. The XBOX is now the best selling system (natually Sony has the higher user base) and Nintendo is still trying to get second.

Nintendo should've made the GCN look 'grown up', not be purple and funnily shaped, not have a cutsey coloured controller, and to actually fight hard to get ALL multiplatform games. Imagine how different the 'war' would be right now if Nintendo had convinced Square to make FF:CC online and not GBA. Or if they had gotten dual rights with FFXI. Imagine if Nintendo managed to get GTA on its system. Imagine having just as many third party games as PS2 PLUS having online MK, SSB, a Mario platformer people like (SMS gets  abad rap though), a more difficult Zelda, etc. THAT would be unbeatable. The problem isn't that Nintendo would have to stop being Nintendo, it's that they refuse to compete. A game like The Wind Waker (brilliant game with the only flaw being difficulty) wouldn't have received half the criticism it did if Nintendo wasn't already perceived as tiku tiku tiku! .

Nintendo had a problem coming from the N64: they were perceived as a toy compared to the techie Sony, and they were perceived as being sparse on games with nothing from third parties. They've done some things this gen to improve them, but the things are individual and seperate. Nintendo isn't makign games for everyone. They're way on the family side of everyone. Games for everyone means Pooh's Honey Jar Game for the kids, Mario for everyone, and GTA for the adults. If you want to be the company for eveyrone then you need to offer games for individual age groups as well as all age groups.

Nintendo did not try hard enough.  

[Famicom]

I don't prefer long waits between Mario games. Mario 1, 2 (okay, so not a REAL mario title, but bare with me here), 3 on NES, all wildy different, all major fun. Sure dev times are insane long today, but if you craft ideas ahead of time you can create similarly great experiences with all different play mechanics. In fact, I suspect this will be the case when "Mario 128" drops for GC later (as Reggie has confirmed it will be a GC title).

As for what I want out of the Rev, pretty much the same thoughts that everyone else in the world has. Solid online structure, universal controller, crazy sick Pokemon game, new franchises, more third party support/wider variety of genres. I wish Tetrisphere would come back. And Tetris Attack/Pokemon Puzzle League/whatever they wanna call it needs a game EVERY generation.

[Famicom]

Another post came in while I was typing.

!!!!

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Nintendo is simply in disarray. They're basically not competing with Sony and Microsoft. This generation started out the first year with games coming for PS2, or PS2 and GCN. Now they're all XBOX and PS2. The XBOX is now the best selling system (natually Sony has the higher user base) and Nintendo is still trying to get second.

Not much to argue here.

Quote
Nintendo should've made the GCN look 'grown up', not be purple and funnily shaped, not have a cutsey coloured controller

Now I don't have a problem with the rest of your argument since I pretty much agree with it, but in the case of the look of the GCN, I wouldn't lump that in with "not trying." Simplistic yes, but it's still a sleek hardware design. The Indigo color and the handle it could have done without however. And they certainly "tried" to make the controller as user friendly as possible with different sized buttons, but in the end it just added to the perceived kiddy image.

[Caillan]

Quote
We love Mario, Zelda, Dk, Metroid, and Pokémon. But damnit weve played 1000 incarnations of those games. Is it time for Bayou Jack, Samurai Billy, Metal Cell, or Splinter Gear. Something new please.

I'm split on this. When I play Mario Power Tennis I know I'm playing a Good Game. It's established in mind from the beginning, and a sort of embellished nostalgia lulls me into trance. The problem is that the studio working on it simultaniously was quite specifically not working on a GC Golden Sun. That really sort of pisses me off. I'd rather be blown away by one of every three titles than consistently buy games I can enjoy for a few hours. Geist might suck at release, but it's Nintendo trying something new without wasting their time.

Matching titles is an important part of competition. Remember Jonny's editorial "XBox or PS2?"? This is partially why the Cube is shunned by the Horde. If little Timmy hears his friends at school talking about how cool Vice City is, he will shy away from the Cube simply because it does not allow him to purchase the game in the future. Nintendo should be prepared to bribe Rockstar and have it ported - they'll keep their 'family' image anyway.

Lastly, I think second or third parties that cannot be absolutely trusted should not have franchises handed out to them. Let them make original games in partnership with Nintendo instead.

[Ian Sane]

"The problem is that the studio working on it simultaniously was quite specifically not working on a GC Golden Sun."

Yes.  This is what bugs me the most about all these spinoffs.  Mario Power Tennis could have been made by EAD but EAD couldn't make a Camelot RPG.  When a third party makes a Mario game they are not able to put what makes them unique to use.  Different devs have different talents and abilities that make them unique.  They are wasted on a formula franchise title that could be handled by pretty much anyone.  What's the better game?  Ikaruga or Wario World?  Ikaruga is brilliant and is an original creation by Treasure.  Wario World is Treasure working within EAD's formula and the result is an average game.  It's like bringing in Eric Clapton to record some guitar for a song and then forcing him to play the same way as the regular guitarist would play.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

I still believe everyone is asking for way too much from Nintendo.  I agree with some of your points that Nintendo has alot of things to fix but your asking them to be perfect in a sense.  Sony and MS have all these games becuase they have to, they don't have any true long lasting franchises that their consumers are expecting from them or have come to know them by.  Nintendo has their franchise games to develope, consumers expect these games from them so they have to put time and money aside for them.   It seems to me that you want Nintendo to fill in every possible gap yet still also provide their unique games.  

Sony has every angle covered by default simpley becuase of their user base.  They don't really have to do much.  I'm not even going to get into the pc in a box that is the xbox.  The xbox is nothing more than a fps's dreambox.  It does have some unique exclusive role playing games like KOTOR 1 and 2 and fable (which isn't all its cracked up to be) but beyond Halo (grossly overrated), there is little reason to really invest in an Xbox.

Also, don't forget that we are to blaim for alot of Nintendo's 3rd party problems.  Gamecube consumers are notoriously known to not support quality 3rd party software.  I think a big reason in this is becuase Gamecube owners are either multi console owners or diehard Nintendo fans that aren't interested in anything outside of Nintendo.  

Personally though, I believe Nintendo has learned somewhat from this generation.  If the rumors are to be believed, I don't think Nintendo is going to go skimpy on the optical disk's space this coming gen, there will be an ethernet port right out the box and their lineup will be more diversafied.  Nintendo has been outsourcing alot of its games lately so you have to figure they putting time elsewhere.  The 3rd party problem is something they need to work on and we need to support.  All they can do is provide us with the games, its up to us to actually buy them.  Forget 2nd party, they come and go, Nintendo has an eye out for quality teams so I'm sure this next gen we'll see the next SK and Rare.  Remember, whoever thought Retro would be as good as they are.  Speaking of Rare, let it go, there are a mere shadow of what they once were.  They are the only company that takes longer than Nintendo to develope games and the quality isn't even up there anymore.  SK was a good team but I'm sure we haven't seen the last of them on Nintendo hardware, besides we have to see if they can are the real deal.  All we've expereinced from them lately is ED (a gem no doubt) and a remake of MGS.  

I understand everyone's complaints ( I feel the pain lol, I'm a diehard Nintendo fanboy yet also a multi console owner) and I ain't trying to be a d*ck, but you have to be realistic sometimes.  Change can not happen overnight.  Nintendo is changing for the better.  Look at the complaints the N64 had.  Nintendo fixed the cartridge prob, we've recieved more 3rd party support (Squareenix, Namco and Capcom are putting ing much stronger support compared to then) and 1st party titles aren't taking as long as they used to.    

[Famicom]

Quote
Originally posted by: Truthliesn1seyes
I still believe everyone is asking for way too much from Nintendo.  I agree with some of your points that Nintendo has alot of things to fix but your asking them to be perfect in a sense.  Sony and MS have all these games becuase they have to, they don't have any true long lasting franchises that their consumers are expecting from them or have come to know them by.  Nintendo has their franchise games to develope, consumers expect these games from them so they have to put time and money aside for them.   It seems to me that you want Nintendo to fill in every possible gap yet still also provide their unique games.

Just because we get less doesn't mean we should accept it.

Taking a look at the big picture here, afaik no competitor in the console side of gaming has quite had the problem of third party support or lack of variety in titles quite like Nintendo has in the last 2 gens. Even the "losers" of past gens didn't fail because of support, or it didn't APPEAR that they did because their first or second parties filled up the gaps themselves when exclusives couldn't be had. I chalk it up to Nintendo not finding a real replacement for Rare, who were the ones that usually filled in the odds and ends of their needs.

[Ian Sane]

"I agree with some of your points that Nintendo has alot of things to fix but your asking them to be perfect in a sense."

I think the reason many of us are asking for near perfection is because perfection is almost required for the Revolution to be successful.  Nintendo just takes too damn long to fix mistakes and no one is willing to wait for them anymore.  Plus their image is so tainted now that any sort of flaw is going to be blown out of proportion.  They don't just have the childish image anymore.  They also have an image of being unoriginal, out-of-touch, anti-technology, and just plain incompetent.  Everyone but the very hardcore is ignoring the Revolution already.  Only near perfection can regain people's attention and even that might not be good enough.  Otherwise if too many problems are still present people will assume they've made no change and thus are releasing N64 3.

What I'm looking for is what the Gamecube should have been and that's Nintendo's Dreamcast.  Now I know the Dreamcast failed so you might not see it as a good model to base a new console on.  But the Dreamcast did something Nintendo hasn't been able to do since the SNES: completely satisfy the userbase.  I've never met anyone who owned a Dreamcast who didn't love it and regrets buying one.  In terms of what the system could do and what games were available Sega did nearly everything perfect.  I think if Sega wasn't so screwed already it could have survived.

If Sega could do it so can Nintendo and unlike Sega Nintendo is still profitable enough that they could survive.  Even if it didn't become the number one console the important thing would be that it would satisfy the userbase.  I think we really just want Nintendo to give it their all.  Even if they can't be number one in today's market trying to be is enough to ensure that we're satisfied.  I should feel that everyone else is missing out by not owning a Revolution instead of the current feeling I have where I'm missing out by only owning a Gamecube.

Just make the best damn console you can, Nintendo.

[Bill Aurion]

"In terms of what the system could do and what games were available Sega did nearly everything perfect."

Whoa, hold up...I loved my Dreamcast too, but the lineup overall sucked in my opinion...The Gamecube has had a lot more enjoyable games overall...

But I do agree that the Revolution has to be perfect in order to impress, but guess what?  Nothing in the world is ever perfect, and that's the way our world works...Perfection will never be, just as Nintendo will never be considered "cool" or "the best"...

[SgtShiversBen]

See Bill that's the thing, Nintendo IS considered cool (SNES, GBA, NES) but the GameCube and 64 aren't.  I think at one point they WILL be just like how the "retro" ones are.  But people are idiots and they care about self image and follow the herd.  I do it to in some aspects (wearing shoes and clothes) but I love my little LunchBox with all my heart.  My PS2....it serves as my waffle iron.

[KDR_11k]

Even if the Revolution was perfect the media would bash it and proclaim the Xenon is superior. The media is driven by hype and corruption, not actual quality. Unless "perfect" includes nice, large wads of cash to major review sites you'll see them favouring Sony and MS over Nintendo. If everything else fails, they'll claim the design isn't as "sexy" as Sony's butt-ugly 70s-cheap-taiwanese-POS hardware design or complain about how the Revolution is too "gimmicky" just because they can't think up a game using all of its features in five seconds. By now everyone stopped caring about anything Nintendo does right and only gives those "Nintendo sucks, they're going to die BECAUSE WE SAY SO!" articles. I mean, look at the DS vs. PSP comparisons. The reasons they give for choosing the PSP are so inane ("big screen!" "sexy design!" WTF???) I sometimes question that I'm not reading Something Awful. Hell, we see gamers complain left and right about how all games are basically the same rehashed ideas with better graphics but when a system out to change that appears we are supposed to believe a gamer would prefer the system that offers better graphics? Sorry, Mr. Mind-controlling overlord but your cattle refuses to eat up THAT lie.

[Ian Sane]

"Even if the Revolution was perfect the media would bash it and proclaim the Xenon is superior."

Yeah probably.  What's your point?  At least we would be happy with it.  Are you saying that since Nintendo likely isn't going to win anyway they shouldn't even try?  If it makes no difference they might as well at least strive for perfection and keep their fanbase happy.  Near perfection at least has a better chance of working than half-assing it.  I would rather Nintendo release the best console ever and die despite its quality then to half-ass it and die with a mediocre bare minimum effort console as their last hurrah.

[Bill Aurion]

It's too early to be worrying about how Ninty will follow through with things like marketing and 3rd party support...Let's wait till E3 when we find out what the Revolution is all about first...