You know, I'm beginning to get the idea that SK is like Rare's Canadian counterpart. We have a company that promised so much and then delivers only one title. And until the breakup, they sing praises to Nintendo, but afterwards, continually talk about how "well our philosophy is different" when that is a complete 180 from previous comments.
I also am beginning to think that SK feels like one of those companies where everyone is sitting around and saying "how can we make a name for ourselves?" and are thinking that a huge multli-million dollar trilogy undertaking is the only way.
You know who else was in that situation? Naughty Dog. Insomniac. Sucker Punch. But look at all of them - able to churn out a respectable number of titles (sometimes even cross platform) and get into the gaming public's eye without the need to be overly grandiose about it. Even Clover Studios gets the idea. You don't need a 100 hour RPG set in the future with a lot of high profile FMV video.
I really, honestly think that SK feels they need to "prove" themselves in the VG front. They want to be considered this big force to be reckoned with. They want people to watch a commercial and go HOLY SH*T, ITS FROM SILICON KNIGHTS!! They want that kind of reputation.
And guess what else - they failed to do so on the Gamecube. THey had ample opportunity, time, and finincial backing to create 2-3 games during the GC's life at least. At least. They talk about how they want to do a trilogy now like they couldn't do so before. I'm positive Nintendo saw them as another Rare - promising a ton of AAA titles, but get one in the end, and even that took forever, and now they want to take forever again. And considering that I bet almost their entire bankroll was straight from Nintendo, they cut off a festering arm when they realized what they had on their hands.
Are delays/taking your time in with Nintendo philosophy? Somewhat. They do delay like no one else. But they still get stuff out in time. Zelda might not be here but at least I have other games to play in the meantime, namely DS titles.
As for the "they don't want epic games" comment, I have a few things to say. First, I don't want a 100 hour game. I can barely stomach a 40 hour game, and that's because half of that 40 hours might be busy work bs with leveling up or traveling around. And as I get older, I want a game that's 20 hours long that is full of dynamic, great gameplay. I think when Nintendo started to stress shorter games, they meant games need to be potently concise, not bloated with needless hours. I'd rather play a bunch of games with different stories and gameplay methods that waste the same amount of time playing something that bores me halfway through, and I feel the need to finish it because I'm 30 hours in and another 30 isn't that bad.
Finally, I've noticed that Nintendo's comments are always, always taken WAY out of context. WAY. "We want shorter games" is the perfect example. People act like NIntendo said they want one-dungeon Zeldas and 20 star Marios. "We don't think graphics are the future." That will be spun endlessly by competitors and fanboys. "Online gaming isn't profitable." It isn't, and even now they aren't really going to make much off of it. "It's all about gameplay." This one pisses me off the most, because we see developers talk about, say, the 360's power, then at the end they ultimately come back to saying "but it's really all about the games." Mark Rein comes to mind. And all those people that call Nintendo's machines underpowered and can't play DVDs and other such nonsense. Hypocrites.
I wish SK the best of luck but if DD is goign to walk around and start saying a bunch of statements that completely contradict everything he's said in the last 4-5 years, then I don't know what to do for him. He always seemed like one of the smarter guys in the industry and could understand what Nintendo was saying, but now it sounds like he's wearing a money hat from MS.
Topic: Developer/Editor Feedback regarding the NRC (Read 39767 times)
