Topic: Do you consider Nintendo games "outdated"?

Yeah, natural selection / survival of the fittest can't really be applied to business, art, philosophy, etc intellectually honestly. The underlying principals are just too different.

Also, the mechanics and story have certainly improved since Ocarina of Time, though not linearly, exactly. It all depends on effort and planning on the development side.

This is the most inaccurate thing you've said in this thread thus far

Peroid

Anyway, you are wrong. I've taken 10s of classes on environmental science. Natural selection acts on populations of organisms so the ones that can't survive a certain feature of the natural world succumb to it or are outcompeted by their peers and the more efficient life forms live on. Ideas are so different from organisms, as they aren't as heavily rooted in the physical world. Furthermore spontaneous thought is at least seemingly a thing, whereas spontaneous generation is, well, Darwin did the work for me there.

Games, all art really, exist as individuals, the products of developers. There aren't thousands of games with very little difference in the same way individuals in a population with slight genetic diversity amongst them are to their species. Furthermore natural selection does not act on games. Adaptability is concrete in the natural world while merit or capability in games is totally subjective. Market forces can prevent a sequel to games people enjoyed just as easily as they can games that people did not. Popularity and sales are too arbitrary and not in any way comparable to survival of the fittest.

@Haru17
If you can't see the link, which has been written about to death, between a marketplace and the idea of natural selection? You're blind. Because that's quite literally what happens. And while I'm at it don't make the mistake of assuming that natural selection "breed" more complex and "better" things. It doesn't. It just shows how an environment crafts things that are best suited to survive in that particular environment. For games it explains why there's a push for "realism", 30fps targets and micro-transactions... not because those things are "good" but because they're efficient. The games that do those things "survive".

And it applies to games in a marketplace just as it does to restaurants, ideology, ads, sport, technology and of course biology. And if you don't think there's variety happening in those spaces or games in particular? Look on the eShop, look at the indie stuff that's happening. The games market is far less "regulated" than it used to be, there's a Cambrian explosion of ideas going on right now. Just under the surface there's a whole pile of experimentation going on. And that's all you need, variety (which clearly exists) and a selection pressure (profitability). That's it. It's a thing.

It's literally literally not. Going out of business is not death, income is not the conditions to sustain life, an individual is not a population, development is not reproduction, and popularity is not survivability. I don't care how badass business owners want to feel, there is only the most limited, surface-level analogy devoid of any substantive meaning to be found in this.

I never played Windwaker on GC loving it on wii u.. doesnt feel outdated at all
Mario 3D world I thought might be a cash in/cant he bothered with a proper 3d Mario.. Beautiful game fresh ideas plays like a dream i dont find them outdated at all

That's the thing, that game was made from 2000-2003. It's not exactly a reflection on the Nintendo of 2015.

I am sure to a 3 year old playing Smash Bros, it's not outdated. How can it be? But to a 30 year old, who has probably played every version of it, then ye, its samey (maybe not outdated because something are just classic!) but they offer new characters and better graphics to keep them hooked. Nintendo target a new generation of kids every time they make a console. Back in the 90s everyone realised they were not keeping up with the snes kids as they aged. (Kinda like George Lucas not making the new star wars films for the original 70s viewers but made it for a new bunch of kids.) So I don't think Nintendo games are outdated. Most are actually timeless that they make for new children to enjoy. Mario 64 is very similar to Mario Galaxy, Nintendo just make sure there is a 10 year gap in between so people are slow to realise!

@Haru17
There are entire branches of economics built on this. And not just economics but culture, ethics and all sorts of things. For crying out loud, the word "meme" started out as a way to describe how natural selection applies to culture. The word was picked because it sounded like "gene" and was intended to be used in the same way. Cultures pass on memes in the same way that populations pass on genes. You can't pretend that Natural selection applies only to Biology and nothing else. As I said, this is the most wrong you've been in this thread thus far.

@Pahvi
If you want to do the comparison then genres aren't islands. The equivalent of Darwin's islands with the canaries would be the cultural divide. There are games in Japan which struggle to cross the Pacific and there are games in Europe which struggle to cross the Atlantic. Genres are more like different niches. In nature you have predators, prey, scavengers, insect eaters, pollinators and so on. In games we have RPGs, racing games, shooters, action games, puzzlers, platformers and so on. There's a limit to the amount of things an "ecosystem" can support, there's a limited amount of "resources". But the ecosystem as a whole fills out all the niches. The best at surviving thrive and the less suited become less common and sometimes even die out.

No, no they don't. Culture passes on memes via search results, keywords, and the odd real world transfer. Genes are preexisting in a species and the corresponding allele frequencies in particular populations can change as a result of a number of factors. This quixotic analogy brings no meaningful insight to either field.

As I said, this is the most wrong you've been in this thread thus far.

Ur, rong. I rite. Me win debate now??

In any case, drop it, this is off topic.

I don't particularly care about what "on-topic" is really. As long as the discussion is interesting. And in this case the discussion has turned into one that is both interesting and lends a new perspective to the thread topic. If you think about the "evolution" of gaming then "outdated" isn't important. What matters is whether or not the games and the ideas behind them can survive. And Nintendo's have survived pretty well over the years, they're stubborn for sure but they've got a lot of creativity and a bucket-load of IP. Diversity is the key to survival and Nintendo has it more than most.

So how are you liking your new thesaurus? You can write with the fancy wordage I'll give you that, but you have no idea what you're talking about. I could go at length to explain why what you said is hilarious but I think it's best to just let this one sit there hanging

They have no understanding on how Youtube directly benefits them, they never release the most powerful system, they (for the most part) give up on 3rd party support, and are a gimmick factory (Gamepad, 3D, motion controls)

Yet they still make the most polished, perfect games on the market. The always start off looks like they are dying (The 3DS had terrible starting sales) and then turn it all around and make their newest system into a money printing machine full of awesome titles. The Wii U is on this upswing (even with the NX announcement). Prototypes can be announced 4+ years before anything is even shown at E3. Plus Nintendo has been awesome with backwards compatibility so even if its sooner it shouldn't make you stop buying Wii U games.

For those keeping track Skywake is now claiming that he's right and that I am wrong because he said so; sort of a circular logic tour de force.

Ok guys, I know you want to compete with my nonsensical gaming terminology post but at least use real words. Pfft "circular". What wacky made-up language is that? :V

Well if you want to argue that Natural Selection can't be applied to economics, businesses, culture and so on then go ahead. You can pretend that you're right that there's only one use for Natural Selection if you wish. Or you could do a bit of googling and find a good hundred or so years worth of stuff digging into how and what it could apply to. Sometimes game-changing, sometimes disturbing but insanely influential regardless. You could even just understand what is actually a pretty simple process and use that stuff between your ears and apply it to stuff. Or accept that some people are wired up differently and not only can do that but already have.

Alternatively, try to "win" the argument. Be that person. Take your "10s of classes on environmental science" and pretend to be the world's authority on this if you want. I mean what do I know, I only have a degree in Computer Science. What would I know about whether or not there are real world non-biological applications of Natural Selection? Obviously you're the expert because you did a term of biology at some point. So we should just take your word that there are absolutely no other applications for this....

@Pahvi
Bucket-load of IP in the sense that they have Mario, Zelda, Metroid, StarFox, Kid Icarus, Pikmin, Pokemon, Smash Bros, Donkey Kong, Animal Crossing etc, etc. Nobody outside of Disney has that amount of IP and nobody in the gaming industry comes even close. Look up a few companies on Wiki, see what IP they have. I'm not going to count them all but just eye-balling a list Nintendo has around about 5x as much IP as Ubisoft, 3x as much as Activision and 2x as much as Sega. If they keep pushing out content in the sort of wide spectrum of genres they have been? They can survive.

No. I don't consider Nintendo games to be outdated. I don't really consider any games to be "outdated."

Well I'd repeat my point before about how Nintendo fills a niche. Or that their diversity of IP and unique space in the game industry is important if the industry wants to keep growing. Diversity being the thing that allows and industry to adapt and survive. But apparently I'm not allowed to apply that sort of thinking to this topic because it's "wrong"

You do realize Nintendo isn't the only copyright nazi in gaming do you

they never release the most powerful system

Why should they? Yes, they should be able to make a system powerful enough for multiplatform games, but to make the most powerful....? The PS2 wasn't the most powerful system last gen, yet it got the most 3rd party support

and are a gimmick factory (Gamepad, 3D, motion controls)

I'll give you the gamepad, but the 3DS and Wiimote actually have games that justify their existence.

How exactly did Youtube benefit them?