Topic: What's the criteria for a New Nintendo IP?

We've seen it before. "Nintendo doesn't have new IPs" lists new IPs "they don't count because handhelds/eShop/AAA/Potatoes". It seems like people know this argument is stupid, so they try and create some contrived checklist in order for an IP to be approved so they can be right. So what exactly is the criteria here? It has to be made by Nintendo, not published from an out-house developer? That's like saying Codename: Kids Next Door isn't a Cartoon Network original series because it was produced by Curious Pictures and not Cartoon Network Studios. Everyone knows damn well it's a CN original. Cartoon Network commissioned it's production, they paid for it's production, they own the copyright to it, it was created specificaly FOR Cartoon Network.

Same with something like Sin & Punishment. Nintendo didn't develop the game wholly, but they commissioned it to be made, they funded development, they own the copyright, they co-developed the game. It's their property, it was created FOR them. Therefore, Sin & Punishment is a Nintendo IP.

Also, people feel they need to discount handhelds, downloadable games, and niche games because it needs to AAA and recieve Mario and Zelda level of Marketing. Ah yes, modern gaming, where gaming has become less about enjoying the product and more about looking cool playing it, and having the company plaster it's existence everywhere you go. Look, a good game is a good game, who cares if it's not on a console, isn't a retail game, or doesn't have a AAA budget or marketing campaign. What matters is whether or not you enjoy the game, and if you do, that's all that should matter.

People want a game as big as a Zelda game but with a new IP that doesn't have cartoon-y graphics. So basically they want a clone of what the other two (Microsoft and Sony) are doing.

I just want something with the maximum amount of resources (Say like Zelda or Mario gets) that isn't in a series that each entry is pretty much exactly the same as the last.

Project S.T.E.A.M is a new ip but not on the same level. Same with Splatoon.

The absolute best can only be made with the most resources. (I am indifferent to whether it is cartoon-y or not and something like a home console Kid Icarus would be ok as well for me say in the Zelda style with the effort put into Zelda).

This is all that matters when making the argument. People arguing otherwise are arguing on a subjective basis, which makes the argumentation pointless. So you might as well stop and leave the conversation when that happens.

This is all that needs to be known, in two easy steps!

Step 1: Who owns the IP?
- If Nintendo: It's a Nintendo IP! ( => Continue to Step 2 )
- If other publisher/developer: It's not a Nintendo IP.

Step 2: Is it a new IP?
- If yes: It's a new Nintendo IP!
- If no: It's an old Nintendo IP.

Is anything else relevant?
on :rewsnA

Simply focusing mainly on game mechanics and 60fps (As opposed to cutscenes) would produce something quite different to what they are doing.

Is Splatoon not that?

We will see - I suspect the amount (And quality) of content will be closer to say Captain Toad than e.g Smash Bros or 3D World.

More content is more effort which Nintendo is reluctant to do outside certain titles.

I disagree with that.

So you think that they always do the best they possibly could (i.e Smash Bros) not the absolute bare minimum (NSMBU/MK8).

I would say they make the games they want to make. Mario Kart 8 is a very fun game and one of my favorite Wii U games. While some games have different scopes I think Splatoon is closer to the scope of 3D World/Mario Kart 8.

Level design isn't easy. Sure, they could recycle some assets or make small alterations to existing ones and stick it into a game but that's streamlining the process in certain situations. compare their efforts to other 3rd party or 1st party games at Microsoft and Sony. Nintendo is ALWAYS high quality. Rarely do they bomb and when they do, they learn their lesson. I expect Splatoon to have a bunch of maps and if they have DLC i expect it to be MK8 style and get my money's worth for them.

I rather have a polished game with less content in some cases, if Smash is a measurement of doing the best they possibly could. Smash is (compared to the usual Nintendo standards) a very unpolished game, but it has a huge amount of content.

I'm curious. Why is it unpolished?

I don't get half the arguments in this thread.

Why do people want a new IP in general when all they'll do is say it's not good enough?

Take NSMBU they knew all the best levels were in rock candy mines (Reason the embargo said you cannot mention anything about it). They didn't want to wait until the whole game was that good and it showed.

Is it a new IP?
Is it owned by Nintendo?

If yes to both, then it's not a new Nintendo IP, cus thats what the trolls say.

No criteria. New IP is New IP. Expectations, standards, attachments inserted are a completely different topic (valid, but still).

There's not much Nintendo is really missing that would warrant a new IP, aside from superficial "realism". They could use a beat em up platformer (like God of War, Werehog, Knack), but they could fill that niche with Donkey Kong. Aside from that, maybe an open world game akin to Infamous or Prototype? Oh, and bring back collectathons, but they could easily just bring back the Mario collectathons or turn them into a Rosalina spinoff. IDK, they've got most of their bases covered.

What they really need to do is find ways to revitalize their existing IPs, as many of them have gotten stale.

I don't get most of the threads on this forum

It's funny because Nintendo have so much already. You think of Nintendo and your head is filled with Mario Kirby Zelda Metroid. Think of Sony and you think of Walkmans. Microsoft you picture the Halo guy or Windows.

I'm pretty sure most kids don't even know what IP means and they just enjoy typing.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced unrandomsam is just a character and not an actual person.

Anyways, why is this a question, or even a discussion, when you're basically just 'telling people what for', so to speak? You're not actually asking anything, or really even leaving anything to be discussed. Good to know what a "New First Party IP" means, I guess...