Topic: Miyamoto: The Industry Has a Long Way to Go, Needs More Creativity

Like I said you can easily (and yes people do this) flip the coin the other way. There are more Mario and Pokemon games launching in particular years than a singular yearly franchise (AC, FIFA etc). When they rely on their established franchises (and usually achieve it) to be creative is good, but when they cannot replicate creativity in regards to a new IP then that is an issue.

if that is how you chose to see it then that is your choice. I don't see Zelda as a RPG. Also from what little I have played of The Witcher, it is nothing like Zelda but saying a series can't be creative by being inspired by another game is wrong too. Creative, inmy opinion, ddoesn't mean always coming up with new ideas but also coming up with new ways to use old ideas. I just get tired of playing the same games over and over when they should be sequels(probably why I hhaven't played much of New Super Mario Bros. U or 2)

Nintendo are churning out the same games over and over. (Almost all of them are almost identical to the last one). The problem is getting worse as well.

Project S.T.E.A.M
Kid Icarus : Uprising

That is all I can think of from somewhat recent times.

Look at Kirby or Wario Wii and DS vs 3DS and Wii U

Something like Kirby's Air Ride or Dream Course or Canvas Curse (Or all sorts of Wario stuff) has creativity.

I find most of Nintendo's newer IPs to be pretty creative. Take a look at Dillon's Rolling Western, Pushmo, Sakura Samurai, and I bet there are more I can't think of. New Nintendo IP that a lot of people seem to overlook.

@CaviarMeths
But that's exactly what they're doing. As for those new IP examples, palming them off as gun violence? Should I palm off each Mario release as "cutesy platformer?" No, I don't because it's insulting, generalising and inaccurate.

@Goginho
I never said Nintendo don't do new IPs, the balance between those and their franchises is leaning heavily towards one way. The new IPs they have a hand in? Devil's Third? Picked up after no one wants it. Palming them off as bloody shooters in violent surroundings, is insulting and generalising to devs that worked on it. I'm aware of Splatoon, Project Steam, Fossil Fighters but that was not my point.

@DefHalan
Those are smaller new IPs, think of bigger new IPs such as Splatoon or Project Steam. You know the ones Nintendo are going to put on store shelfs.

Its not the question of creativity or the content in the games today that matter. The problem with this modern times is that there's really not much of technical limitations.. I mean think of it. Ninja Gaiden was made for the NES with the limitations in mind. SNES games were made with limitations in mind.

I guess that probably explains why Nintendo uses gimmicks like DS and Wii to compensate the technical limitations creativity so devs can use that gimmick as means of uniqueness.

I agree with Miyamoto here that the industry isn't as creative as it was back then especially when comparing between Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Galaxy. Everything in 64 was non linear but in Galaxy, pretty much everything is linear.....

What about them? Are they not creative enough for you? I didn't mention the as they are not out yet and you seemed focused on what Nintendo had done recently, not on what they are going to do

The problem has never been that they cannot only they will not. (Give 3D World or Zelda amounts of resources to a new IP then see what happens).

I wouldn't mind seeing that happen (Splatoon, possibly could be an example of this) but you don't need a new IP to be creative.

Yoshi's Island / Warioland with the Nintendo of today those things would never have happened. (We would have got another sequel to Mario World that is very similar and another Super Mario Land game).

Instead of doing Zelda they could do a kid Icarus game that is basically the same style game but a new setting (Or even as a test run to check what works well for the new Zelda).

No I'm actually telling you think of bigger New IPs that they've launched previously, those are examples. Anything that competes with Mario, Zelda and Pokemon, because I can't think of a new thing since then.

Yeah, it's too bad that we're just getting a sequel to Super Mario 3D World. A spin-off based on Captain Toad would have been cool.

Oh.

Or they could just make both. Kid Icarus was one of the most unique Nintendo games in years, so why would you want them to make it a Zelda clone anyway?

well in the GameCube era we had Animal Crossing and Pikmin. Wii era we had the Wii series (Sports, Music, Fit) and Xenoblade Chronicles. (Which i haven't played) The DS had Nintendogs and Professor Layton (which I guess isn't a Nintendo IP but a Level 5 IP) The 3DS has seen the above titales and Kid Iccaus Reboot (may not count)

No, just no. Aonuma has been wanting to do a huge Zelda world but because of the hardware limitations he just couldn't do it that way. You can find him saying that in interviews prior 2005

Reading comprehension is a good thing.

He is talking about the industry as a whole. It is not about one company that releases the same type of games, but about the fact that you have a whole bunch of companies releasing games similar to one another. One company makes a shooter with aliens, others follow, a shooter with aliens gets made, others follow. And even if someone would like to make something different, money is only put into tried experiences, because those sell.
I think this is what he is talking about. How some take his view on the whole industry to single out one company is beyond me.

I agree with Mr. Miyamoto from the perspective of a person that loves fun games and new experiences, however we can not forget that games are a mass marketed commercialized package that needs to sale to the lowest common denominator because development costs so much. It the tech could churn out the AAA experience at a fraction of the cost I could see the gaming industry pushing for more creativity but when you get issues like EA having a stranglehold on sports games or annualized games because they are cash cows its hard to convince the suits to allow for creativity. Nintendo has a different dynamic than most but even they still have to cater to the masses... look at the wiiu when they try to step outside of the mold they suffer. The wiiu is the best of both worlds... it has all the same functionality of the wii and it offers the potential for traditional and unique game experiences but it can't bet the mainline machines. Even worse poor sales means that they have to be more selective with projects that they make or back. I will bet you that if they knew how W101 would have sold then they would have went with Kamiya's wonderful Nintendo idea.... and I think that would have killed some of DNA of the game.

I never said that you never said Nintendo don't do new IPs I'm just contributing to the healthy discussion here.

I personally do not find Miyamoto's comment insulting at all. He's basically stated an observation, and I can agree that the industry today is somewhat over-saturated with gun violence. I guess we're just in a phase where such products are very popular and sell well, so it's only logical that devs want a piece of that dollar.
Nintendo's role is basically to restore some balance. If we get bloody, realistic and uber cool on one end, they try and give us cheerful, vibrant and above all...playful and not so serious. These are games afterall, and the philsophy behind games is to have fun i.e. gameplay, simply put.
This doesn't mean that other platforms don't have colourful and cheery, and that Nintendo doesn't have mature and serious, no. Clearly all the platforms out there have their fair share of variety to an extent, but when looking at the general image and reputation each platform carries, then there is a distinct picture being painted, in that Nintendo is solely the "kiddy" console, and the others are the "FPS" consoles and what not.
I can respect all genres, more or less, as I can respect the work that devs put into the games, but sometimes the morals that some of these games contain I cannot get behind and defend. Of course, I'm talking about games that portray and depict reality in a sense, like wars, injustice (or supposed 'justice' and self-defense, however you wanna see it) and all that jazz. Sure, we can argue the fact that our innocent ol' Mario goes around stomping on defensless Goombas but I mean...c'mon. I don't think anybody really thought about these things when they started to play Super Mario way back then. It was all about the gameplay — perfecting that platforming. On the other hand, games with realistic aesthetics (unlike Mario) coupled with questionable ethics can have a negative impact on a person. I obviously don't mean that everybody is gonna turn aggressive or w/e, but surely there are liable people, especially amongst kids, that could in some form or another be negatively affected or influenced by a game which depicts realism (enhanced with today's graphics and visual standards) and portrays violence and war in a realistic fashion, as it has you going around killing real-life-looking people, no matter if enemy or not. Don't get me wrong, I played all kinds of games. I enjoyed Halo, and for what it is, it isn't on the morally bad list so no worries, not all shooters are listed as 'evil' or whatever. Halo has a pretty creative concept to it. It seems that nowadays it's just mindless gameplays with no real purpose but to get behind the crosshair and execute some headshots, boast and feel superior about yourself, develop some strong opinions on certain subject matters, even become misinformed, thus ignorant. So, yes...I guess I'm generalising, as I said "seems".

In the end though, I just think there is nothing insulting in Miyamoto's statement. Don't worry, had it come from anybody else, I would have felt the same way so it's not due to the fact that I admire him. It's kinda like when an infant or young child points out a person of a different race or maybe a piece of clothing with ethnical or religious significance on someone for example, something they've never seen before. They have no harmful intention, it's simply a child's nature to openly notice. I'm no psychologist, but I'm guessing curiosity partly plays a role here, as does the need to observe the surroundings and point out things that are new in order to learn. So maybe Miyamoto just wanted to point out a fact (proven or not) or observation he made about the video game industry at the moment, that it lacks the necessary creativity and that a lot of companies / developers strive toward creating these"bloody shooters" instead of challenging themselves to get off the mainstream river.
That's the way I see it. I don't think his intention was to offend, so if someone felt offended by his comments i.e. devs, then maybe they took it too personally. But that's another story and another discussion

I have a feeling Nintendo would be more interested in making more Mature titles (as opposed to just publishing one here or there) if the AAA market wasn't already over saturated. At times other companies are making Nintendo look more creative than they are, just because Nintendo is the only AAA company with anything close to a consistent focus on family friendly, retail gaming.

The marketing teams getting involved with the game development side is clearly a thing, and should NEVER be a thing.

There is also Pikmin, WarioWare, Pushmo, Dillon's Rolling Western, Endless Ocean, Smash Bros... There have been tons of new Nintendo IPs since freaking Zelda, Mario and Pokemon. That's like being back in the 80's or something, and Pokemon came out in the middle of the 90's. Even Earthbound on SNES was coming out around the same time as Pokemon.