Topic: New Nintendo President: Tatsumi Kimishima

Nintendo has so many RPG franchises it's not even funny.

I don't even get how suddenly 65 years is too old for the job. Like, some people wanted Takeda and he's older than Kimishima.
People can live longer this day and age, Japanese men remarkably so. If Kimishima does the job well after a year, I see no reason not to keep him longer. With the know how he reportedly has on the American market, he could possibly renew Nintendo's public image.
And yes, he looks a little grumpy, but I don't think we're dealing with someone as stiff as "Emperor Yamauchi".
I hope some western media outlet does a full interview with him, in English. I want to see him talking to understand this man that suddenly came out of nowhere to the core of my most beloved video game company. It's too early to pass judgement right now.

This guy is a bit of a wild card in some aspects. No telling how defensive he's gonna be, but two things we can be sure of. He'll handle Nintendo's finances well and he'll have the North American market in mind far more than any previous president.

EDIT: read through the rest of the thread. I'm liking this guy. No doubt some of that article was PR speak, but I like that he has drive and still realizes that the creative and social aspects of the company are important. Seems like a "bet of both worlds" scenario between Iwata and Yamauchi. Here's hoping he does something about Nintendo's absurd YouTube policies.

I think you just worry too much in general.

Including the most successful one of all time (by a ridiculously huge margin).

@iKhan @CaviarMeths: And the Wii U has none as far as first parties go, so go spread your anti-RPG nonsense somewhere else.

Even the 3DS doesn't have that many RPG's to be honest. I don't get it, Nintendo literally has hundreds of platformers on their systems and nobody complains, but they have so few first party RPG's you can count their current gen releases on two hands and yet that's too much...FACEPALM

@Neko_Rukiafan: Do you suffer from some sort of reading comprehension disease because you aren't making a lick of sense in this thread.

You're not using the word literally correctly. Here's a correct usage:

By early 2016, I will own literally dozens of retail JRPGs for 3DS.

And nobody is asking Nintendo for more platformers right now, except for the few crazies who think SM3DW isn't a "real" 3D Mario, whatever that means, and are still asking for Galaxy 3.

Making a platformer requires robust mechanics and good level design.

Making an RPG requires: A balanced battle system, robust mechanics (if it's an action RPG), story writing, world design, level design, level/growth scaling, and balanced crafting/customization mechanics.

That's not even taking into account the fact that 2D Platformers have some unique merits from 3D Platformers, whereas if you made a AAA 2D RPG everyone would laugh at you.

That all said, I love RPGs, and I don't like 2D Platformers. I don't like that Nintendo has been so focused on the latter on Wii U, but it does make some sense.

As for the 3DS:
Mario and Luigi: Dream Team
Paper Mario: Sticker Star
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Pokemon XY
Pokemon OR/AS
Puzzles+Dragons Z/Mario Edition
Fantasy Life
Codename: STEAM

That's JUST on the 1st party end. Is that not enough for you? Now if you said that Nintendo doesn't have enough 1st party Action RPGs, then I'd agree with you.

I've made a video with some news articles if people want to see what's going on with some weird commentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpyfzI3_qGA

Maybe this guy will finally stop nintendo from keeping so many games in japan for so long. Just to name a few franchises that started out Japan-exclusive:
Starfy (It wasn't until game number 5 that Starfy got a western release)
Fire Emblem (wasn't until game number 7 that FE got a western release)
Nintendo Wars (Advance wars, Famicom wars, Battalion wars, etc.) (Took 7 games to get a western release.)
Custom Robo (Took 4 games to get a release in the west.)
Rhythym Heaven (only 2 games to get a western release)

@MrMario02: It has to make financial sense to bring a game westward. Localization isn't cheap

Xenoblade Chronicles X and Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem are the only localized JRPGS on Wii U, right?

I was strictly only referring to JRPGS on consoles... My bad. I've always been a guy who wanted more JRPGS on Nintendo consoles. And I hope the new president is determined to not let Sony pretty much dominate almost every JRPG series anymore on console.

Technically Monster Hunter is a JRPG, so...yeah. Well, I think it's one anyways.

@NintyMan: The face actually reminds me of Yamauchi-san and that puts a smile in my face.

Ok I think I need to say this outloud. I don't think Nintendo going straight to mobile is going to solve their problems. If anything, it would worsen the situation. Every employee at Nintendo has a fun time when working. Sure, they work to earn but they are well treated and respected because of what they love to do. Simply making games on a phone for decades would burn the employee's because there's only so little you can do by touching. And it just ruins Nintendo's image as well.

Just think, why would Nintendo change to mobile when they are literally kings in the handheld market? Not to mention, the whole point of Nintendo products existing is to buy games that can only be on them. Simply porting games on phones isn't going to make them huge. Its rather ruining their image.

I'm positive that if Nintendo went mobile and told Miyamoto-san to make like 20 games for it, he'd be burned and just retire let alone develop passion for making games like he still is. With the things going now, Its safe to assume that Tatsumi Kimishima isn't going to do much of changes other than to figure out how to engage us with either directs or E3's.

@Artwark: Lovely speech, but Nintendo going mobile only is neither being argued nor on the table. They aren't even going to "simply port games" onto mobile. This has been covered quite thoroughly.

I think that's mostly on Yamauchi. He didn't like RPGs very much at all.

And when you think about it from a cost vs. revenue sort of way, it kind of makes sense especially in the 3D era. RPGs are among the most complex genres out there, and truth be told, they don't make that much relative to action games. Narrow that down to JRPGs and Square-Enix is pretty much the only company out there whose biggest franchise is a JRPG. So to a business many, why not reach that market on a handheld where costs are controlled.

But that kind of ignores the publicity and hype big RPGs can generate, especially when done in an accessible way.

Interesting statement from someone whose area of expertise seems to be finance, I'm curious as to what other aspects he believes a gaming company needs to be led by.