As someone who generally isn't a fan of crossovers (probably too much of a purist I admit), I don't want to see Sonic shoved into Mario games and I don't want to see Mario shoved into Sonic games. They have no place in each others' universes.

Plus surely any Mario vs Sonic novelty died in the 90s. And also, Sonic as a character was created by SEGA to destroy Nintendo. This sort of cosying up makes my early-90s-Nintendo-fan-self feel queasy...

I kind of hope not. I don't really like crossovers, but then I'm probably just too much of a purist (for example, I didn't like how Smash Bros. Brawl featured non-Nintendo characters. For that reason Melee is the purer/better Smash Bros. imo).

Or maybe I'm just burned on the idea from having to endure the Wii Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games waggle-fest at a party (and as the resident Nintendo fan having to remind everyone that Nintendo didn't actually make the game).

@Emaan
Ha! Exactly.

Also, how do we know for sure that these people are kids/much younger? The facial hair on some of those Miis would indicate that they could very well be roughly the same age and brought up from the same totally hardcore and super-tough macho background (where guides and walkthroughs didn't exist even though they totally did)?

Surely it would be more like the Xperia Play? WIth full button layout (and possibly Nintendo's beloved second screen) sliding out from underneath.

@WiiLovePeace
But how is shaking the controller to perform a roll or blow more immersive? Surely any immersion in the game comes from the atmosphere, the characters and the world that has been created, rather than wacky control gimmicks. Would jumping up in your seat every time you need to jump in Mario instead of just pressing A make you feel more immersed? I doubt it.

Is it like:
... not immersed in the game world, not immersed in the game world, not immersed in the game world, [waggles controller] TOTALLY IMMERSED IN THE GAME WORLD, not immersed in the game world, not immersed in the game world...

An awful lot of pomposity in this thread. I would imagine "kids these days" are actually cleverer/more savvy than we were at the same age. And I'm not sure about all the "back in my day there was no help/walkthroughs". Er, there was: Nintendo Power, Player's Guides, Nintendo Hotline, real offline friends, etc.

I remember performing B. Orchid's boingy fatality from Killer Instinct when I was 10...

In fact, Killer Instinct was the only game I remember my parents (who were generally very cool about such things, but then I suppose it was easier back then as games obviously weren't as realistic) showed concern. I remember my Dad walked in the room when I was performing Fulgore's machine gun fatality with my little cousins. He didn't look entirely happy about it...

So many good (and often far longer than I had initially planned) times.

Fine by me. I hate it when games gets criticized/marked down for being "too short" (the first Luigi's Mansion and Pikmin spring to mind). It doesn't matter to me if they're not that long. It's the quality of the experience, not the length. If anything I've more often been annoyed by games that dragged on too long beyond their natural length (probably in a desperate attempt to avoid such criticism).

@TheRealThanos
Oh, my mistake, sorry (I was stupidly thinking about regular steering wheels...) Thinking about it, it did seem at odds with the rest of your comment...

I'm off to check it out. I haven't looked at Miiverse for a while and I'm not sure how I've managed to cope without the exhausting, neverending flood of fascinating and original insights such as "Nintendo rocks!" and "Mario is fun!"

Only joking! Though doesn't NL (being the number one Nintendo site/fan community on the internet) see this as like online competition or something?

@Meaty-cheeky
"The Wii U name is bad, The Wii name with casuals is old news, and to the Madden / Call of Duty douche gamer the Wii name is garbage."

Pretty much summed up the problem perfectly.

Oh God no... The "real families" are back! With their perfect aspirational lifestyle and painfully contrived held-at-gunpoint-style dialogue. I don't know if I can take so much cheese all over again. Note to Nintendo's marketing department: Generally (as much as parents are the best) if parents like something, that tends to make it really uncool. Like exactly what you did to the Wii.

But I'll cut them some slack because their 3DS ads have been awesome of late:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8y60saPdaM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTa2Jn48G90

Nice use of the word verticality.

Wow, never thought I'd see a Fire Emblem game in the top 3 of the UK all-format chart!

While I wouldn't normally complain about such things (as I think all games should be as accessible to everyone as possible) it seems a bit odd to add an easy mode. I mean the game was quite tricky/frustrating in parts, but the thing is, there are so many extra heart/extra life/invincibility type items available from Cranky Kong if you need them (as well as the Super Guide) that it sort of gives you an easy mode already.

Plus difficulty settings in a Nintendo game seems out of place as they usually just have one difficulty setting which is perfectly judged (though obviously this is 2nd-party).

@Mr_Video
Thanks dude. I may have to check Awakening out then.

I can appreciate hardcore FE fans thinking it's a bit sacriligious, but I welcome the casual mode. I find that I don't particularly enjoy playing Fire Emblem games because I'm so on edge, spending so long pouring over every single decision and every possible outcome of each decision, terrified that a bad move may screw me over later down the line, that I don't actually have much fun.

But I was wondering; the first Fire Emblem game I played was Sacred Stones and I really enjoyed it (and, having sucked at Advance Wars, reassured me that maybe I'm not completely useless at strategy games!) but then I heard that Sacred Stones is like the easiest Fire Emblem game. Certainly the two others I've played since (Radiant Dawn and Shadow Dragon) seemed quite a bit harder and more frustrating and I thought "Oh, maybe I don't like Fire Emblem as much as I thought..." So, can anyone tell me, were those two particularly hard ones or are they more the series' standard?

And funnily enough (despite popular belief) the Power Glove wasn't actually made by Nintendo. It was a Mattel product. So, put down that entertaining Mattel product.

Superman's outfit doesn't seem quite as blue as I remember... I'm guessing they're trying to make him "grittier".

Anyway, I always love infographics and this one is rather stunning.

@ToxieDogg
No worries dude, I wasn't referring to your comment. But there are a few of the "this guy's crap, so who cares what he thinks!" type comments here. I imagine if tomorrow he said that his next game will be a Wii U exclusive these same people will be saying how much they always liked and respected him and his games!

It seems Gears of War (which is one of the few games I've ever bought for the PC. In case people are wondering, "aren't you a Nintendo only gamer?") is often criticized for being generic and derivative, but if anything, that's because of all the stuff that came after it and tried to ape it. Maybe a victim of its own success in that sense. I dunno.

Yeah, Gears of War, despite having a Metacritic average score of 94% and sales of 6 million (20 million for whole franchise) and just being generally good, visceral, macho fun (anyone who doesn't find chainsawing an alien enjoyable clearly doesn't know what they're talking about! ), is now totally crap and worthless all of a sudden just because he said something (not even particularly controversial or antagonistic, if anything probably tongue in cheek) that upsets you... Stop being so precious, you pansies!

@SCAR392
The PS3 Move most definately, but I would say Kinect is less an adaptation of the concept of the Wii and more the PS2 EyeToy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au4d5anfjnA (the Sony motion control device that came out before the Wii and thus has been conveniently wiped from history round these parts. I mean if Kinect copies the Wii, then surely EyeToy - Wii is the same difference?)

Nice one.

@LDXD
Fair enough and I agree with a lot of that. But we can also use examples from Nintendo franchises that play very similarly with each sequel: New Super Mario Bros series, Pokemon series, Mario Kart series, Animal Crossing series (as always, I should clarify that I'm not complaining about this. I think it's fine. I'm just complaining about those who claim that other companies do it and Nintendo doesn't, usually clutching at straws with minor differences).

Also yes, Metroid Prime plays very differently to Super Metroid, but that's over a span of three console generations, so of course it will, whereas the third-party games you're comparing are over a year or so. It's not a particularly fair comparison. It's not a franchise I'm massively familiar with, but I would imagine a Madden of today plays a lot differently than one from 1994. And if COD or Uncharted or GoW had been around during the NES or SNES era they probably would have played a hell of a lot differently to how they do now as well. It's not their fault that they're still young, rather than having been churned out for 30 years.

@LDXD
OK then... I'll take out the Wii U one. That's still two (on one console) in less than one year.

@e6666
Yeah, personally I think the GameCube got decent third-party support for the most part of its life (certainly better than the Wii that succeeded it and also I would say the N64 that preceeded it). Obviously there were some big PS2 and XBox exclusives that it missed out on, but just thinking about some of the big multi-platform games of the gen (Soulcaliburs, Burnouts, Tony Hawks, Timesplitters, Call of Dutys, Need For Speeds, Sonics, Medal of Honors, Prince of Persias, etc). Even "mature" titles like Hitman and True Crime were on GameCube despite the "kiddy" image. Capcom planned to have one of the biggest games of the gen Resident Evil 4 as a GameCube exclusive. The support was there.

Also, that picture you linked to is rather unfair as the Nintendo ones are conveniently taken from a much greater span of time/consoles, so are obviously going to look a lot more different. The difference between the look of a Zelda game from 1991 and one from 2011 is obviously going to be much bigger than the difference between the look of an Uncharted game from 2007 and one from 2009 on the same console (surely in that case using Galaxy 1 and Galaxy 2 for Nintendo would have been fairer, but I guess that wouldn't have quite fitted in with their misguided, non-existent point). The comparison seems rather redundant and one could easily redo that image and make it extremely unfavourable to Nintendo. Also, ironically it kind of makes it look like Nintendo is more obsessed with updating graphics than Sony. And (within the context of "re-hashing games is a bad thing") it just suggests that Nintendo has been doing it for a lot longer. I'm sure whoever made the picture, their heart was in the right place, but it fails on numerous levels.

@LDXD
You're right that Nintendo doesn't release Mario titles once a year. After all, they just released 3 in the space of a year (3D Land, NSMB 2, NSMB U).

Also, how come the entire spectrum of third-party games is always reduced to just COD and Madden?

@Magolor
But those differences aren't really any bigger than the differences made in any other franchises/sequels though (and there are other non-Nintendo franchises than COD). I mean, if adding hang-gliders to Mario Kart is a huge leap, then so are the minor changes made to each new FIFA game. I mean, I don't really mind if they're not that different, but generally I don't think Nintendo's sequels have substantially more variety than anyone else's. If a new Zelda game has slightly different environments then surely that's the least one would expect from a sequel.

I hope I'm wrong, but I do worry about the Wii U. I mean, the GameCube had Nintendo exclusives, graphical parity with its rivals and actually pretty decent third-party support (getting most of the big multi-platform games of the gen) and it got trounced. It's looking like the Wii U may only have the first of those things, so it doesn't exactly bode well...

The novelty-value of the Wii helped it overcome these factors and sell like gangbusters for a period, but then completely died off (to the point where the Wii's final lead will be a fraction of what people originally predicted). The Wii U's novelty on the other hand doesn't seem to be even taking off, let alone wearing off.

I can understand that sort of statement regarding the Wii, but I don't really think the current Wii U audience is entirely the same.

@WaveBoy
"The Wii remote can mimick a sword, flashlight, gun, baseball bat, hammer, hell a corn dog ect ect. It's far more versitle in that sense, where as the GP is severely limmited."

I suppose, but in a way that list is actually pretty limited itself because really it can be condensed into one thing: "objects you can hold in your hand". If we believe that video game controls have to be a 100% literal interpretation of the actions on screen (so video game controls basically become glorified charades), then fair enough. But surely the beauty of video game controls is that they've always been more free and abstract than that. So in that sense the Gamepad is surely more versatile because it's a completely blank canvas to do anything you want regardless of realism. As long as you have an imagination you can do anything with the Gamepad because it's not desperately trying to mimic real-life objects. Pressing A to jump in Mario isn't realistic at all, but it works beautifully (jumping up in your seat each time would be more realistic, but it would also suck). Wii Tennis may be more realistic than Mario Tennis, but I had much more fun with Mario Tennis despite the lack of "realistic" miming and flailing.

@gameboy1975
Well, I'm not sure if I can accept "not even close" from someone who thinks Nintendo made the Power Glove, but then you'll probably also tell me that Nintendo invented the wheel and sliced bread! I'm only kidding dude. Look, we seem to be coming to the conclusion that Nintendo has been innovative and other companies have also been innovative (which was my point), but you seem to be trying to suggest that somehow Nintendo's innovations are more innovative than others' using rather tenuous reasons.

For example, you seem to be dismissing the innovative-ness of the PS2 EyeToy because it was just a peripheral (which is a strange change of tune as your original list of why Nintendo is the most innovative was mostly peripherals... The first of which, as we've established, Nintendo didn't even make...) whereas the Wii was a whole console. Well, I'm sure I can come up with an equally flimsy reason. Err... let's see... The EyeToy was more innovative because it came out first and Sony were riding high and crushing the competition, so they had absolutely no need to do anything innovative, but they did anyway. Whereas Nintendo's was born out of desperation at the time and if the GC had been as successful as they'd hoped, there's no way their next console would have been anywhere near as innovative. There, I don't entirely believe that, but I'm just trying to show we can all clutch at straws.

I also can't see how we can deny that there was a marked and sudden shift in Nintendo's attitude towards innovation post-GameCube. Their previous console progression NES > SNES > N64 > GC was the traditional console progression with each new console being a next-gen graphical powerhouse (because yes, Nintendo has focused on graphics and power just as much as anyone else, but let's not shatter too many illusions at once here...) and also each new Nintendo console was released as a direct response to a competitor who made the first move (innovated perhaps...? No of course not! Only Nintendo can!) despite Nintendo supposedly "marching to the beat of their own drum". Then there was a clear change in their console/innovation strategy with GC > Wii > Wii U.

Anyway, Nintendo isn't an exclusively innovative company, and it's somewhat unfair that other companies' (like Atari, SEGA, Sony, etc.) innovations are conveniently ignored and wiped from history by the more smug and sanctimonious section of the Nintendo community who have deluded themselves into believing that Nintendo did everything first. And this all without even mentioning the fact that innovation in video games doesn't just come through wacky controllers. If being innovative (like Wii Sports, etc) makes Nintendo money then that's what they'll do, if being uninnovative (like New Super Mario Bros. etc.) makes them money then that's what they'll do. Just like anyone else.

@gameboy1975
I assume that was directed at me. Absolutely, Nintendo has been innovative, for sure, but not particularly more than any other company (until after the commercial failure of the GameCube, when they started basing their consoles on a specific gimmick/innovation). All video game companies have made kooky peripherals like the ones you listed (such as the Power Glove, which was actually made by Mattel, not Nintendo). Or Sony, who made the motion-controlled EyeToy before the Wii (I'm assuming you're saying that Kinect is a copy of the Wii, then surely for you the Wii is a copy of the EyeToy right, as it's the same difference?) It even had motion-controlled fitness games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au4d5anfjnA though I'm sure you'll tell me that that's a genre Nintendo innovated with Wii Fit five years later?

Nintendo did have a sudden change of attitude towards innovation after the GameCube. Hence why Nintendo fans barely uttered the word "innovation" before 2004... Nintendo were very high on their innovation selling the DS like hotcakes, but I don't remember them mentioning innovation quite so much when they were happily selling GBAs like hotcakes with ports of old SNES games. We can use just as many examples of Nintendo being uninnovative: New Super Mario Bros. series, Mario Kart series, Pokémon series, I imagine the new Animal Crossing is incredibly similar to the previous ones, etc. (not that I'm complaining, I absolutely love those games, but I'm not the one on the innovation high horse).

@DkFluttershyGuy
I partly agree, but the DS had excellent third-party support (and had third-party games that made just as good, if not better use of its unique features than Nintendo's).

The poor third-party support for the Wii was probably more down to the lack of power and the largely casual install base compared to the other consoles. Companies will go wherever the money is at any given time (which also applies to Nintendo's sudden post-GameCube quest for "innovation").

It's nice to see this game potentially reach a greater audience (and without that damn "waggle to roll" as well!) While I wouldn't normally complain about such things (as I think all games should be as accessible to everyone as possible) it seems a bit odd to add an easy mode. I mean the game was quite tricky/frustrating in parts, but the thing is, there are so many extra heart/extra life/invincibility type items available from Cranky Kong if you need them (as well as the Super Guide) that it sort of gives you an easy mode already.

I never particularly liked the Wii remote/nunchuk as I found the motion controls to be mostly annoying and tacked on. I suppose in that sense I prefer the Wii U Gamepad as it will allow for more traditional control without so much miming and flailing, but it does seem to have the potential to be just as (or perhaps even more) gimmicky. I think some of its functionality is neat (like the three multi-only games in Nintendo Land), but I haven't really seen much so far that's made me think that its features are essential (it's mostly seemed contrived at worst, tenuous at best).

To be honest, I just prefer a simple old-skool controller without all the modern bells and whistles. I kind of feel like Nintendo focuses too much on wacky controllers these days. The controller is just a device to play the game. The game itself is the main event. I sometimes feel that these days Nintendo thinks the controller is the main event.

The FPS becoming the genre of the moment (certainly of this last gen) hasn't really helped. But its time will probably pass (like how fighting games were the big genre in the 16-bit era, but not so much anymore).

NES: "Now you're playing with power"
SNES: "Now you're playing with super power"
N64: "The fastest, most powerful games console on earth"
GameCube: Err, don't remember the slogan... But it was also bloody powerful!

Just feel the need to put this out there in case it gets into one of those "little plucky underdog Nintendo has never focused on graphics and power, that's only what other companies/graphics whores/snobs do" type things.

Happy anniversary to a truly exceptional website!

I must say, I don't entirely get Miiverse yet. I'm wondering if people here could convince me of why it's good (after all, when I first got a 3DS I thought Streetpass was completely pointless and now I think it's awesome and am rather obsessed with getting Streetpa
ss hits and puzzle pieces, so I'm totally open to having my mind changed).

I mean, so far I've heard that it's "a great way of interacting with other gamers" (like what the internet already does...) and it's "a great way to get help on games if you're stuck" (like what the internet already does...) I mean, this website seems like a far superior way to interact with other Nintendo gamers than Miiverse.

Does the world really need another relentless, exhausting, overwhelming stream of Twitter-esque social media noise that's slowly destroying our brains and driving us all insane? Another outlet for the 21st-century plague of mass verbal diarrhea and information overload.

So far, it just seems to me to be a neverending flood of inane and banal comments from random people: "Nintendo rocks!" "Mario is fun!" "Level 24 is hard!" etc. I don't really get the appeal, but I'm totally willing to be convinced. After all, I want to like it, I don't want to dislike it.

I must say I'm loving this sort of goofy stuff that Nintendo's been doing recently. Last generation Nintendo almost seemed embarrassed to show this side to them, worried that it didn't quite fit in with their new bland, insipid, vanilla image or how it would go done with their new middle-aged "lifestyle" audience. It's great to see them go back to this and have fun again and be themselves again.

I can't wait for what tomorrow's Phil Fish related news will be!

I knew before clicking on the article that the top 3 would be the 3 current gen consoles. Polling the general public on things like this is pointless because most of them just put the most recent thing without even thinking about it.

Anyway, for me it's the SNES.

Despite the rant, I agree with him that "the Game Boy Micro was the best handheld ever".

I've never really understood gamers who complain about a "games drought". I mean, there's always plenty of games around to play on any console. Whether it be current retail games, small eShop games or of course retro games on the Virtual Console (I mean, how can anyone have a "games drought" when there's over 30 years of video game history to explore?)

It also means that you may end up buying an obscure hidden gem that you might not have taken a chance on if there were more obvious choices around at the time.

@DePapier
Fair enough!

Though I think Thanos' comment may have been sarcastic (seeing as a real life steering wheel isn't detachable or full of buttons and isn't similar in shape).

@Red_Kinetic
In terms of Japan, the top selling games of all-time are:
1) Pokemon Red/Blue (GB)
2) Pokemon Gold/Silver (GB)
3) Super Mario Bros. (NES)
4) New Super Mario Bros. (DS)
5) Pokemon Diamond/Pearl (DS)
6) Pokemon Black/White (DS)
7) Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire (GBA)
8) Animal Crossing: Wild World (DS)
9) Brain Training 2 (DS)
10) Monster Hunter Freedom 3 (PSP)
11) New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Wii)
12) Dragon Quest IX (DS)
13) Tetris (GB)
14) Super Mario Land (GB)
15) Brain Training (DS)
16) Monster Hunter Freedom Unite (PSP)
17) Mario Kart DS (DS)
18) Dragon Quest VII (PS)
19) Pokemon Heart Gold/Soul Silver (DS)
20) Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES)