Topic: Nintendo is Lazy and Doesn't Care?

Some of the most innovative and ground-breaking games from the last few years have been even less "high tech" thsn a 2D platformer. Just look at the Bit Trip series and Geometry Wars, both of them are modern reworkings of pre-1980s games like Pong and Asteroids. I don't see why innovation has to nessisarily be "bleeding edge".

As for price. I picked up my copy for $75AU which isn't too bad. I paid more for Wii Sports Resort with Motion Plus ($88), I paid more for Twilight Princess in 2006 ($99) and if I wanted to get a big blockbuster game for the PS3 I would pay more yet again ($110). Is it expensive? yeah, but only as expensive as all the other games out there. When I buy games I pay for the intensity and length of the fun I can extract out of it. So far New SMB Wii has delivered on that more than a lot of other games I have paid about the same for.

I don't see how its a bad deal personally.

@zemulii: According to conversion rates found on Google, that $110 NZD is $79.75 American! DAY-UM!

A similar search finds skywake paying $68.22 American. Not AS bad, but still bad. I really sympathize with you PAL gamers...truly, you're getting hosed.

By 1983 I was quite quite happy with several text based conversational games and with the very first and very basic sprite driven graphic games. So, following the logic of some Nintedo-fan-atics here, I should be already quite happy having these games revisited on my Wii and also for 45Eur. Luckily for the human kind, most people are not like many on this thread and the tech (soft and hardware) keeps evolving. Skywakes, you are not being a "HUGE" fanboy, you are being an extremist and fundamentalist fanboy (or the most conformist one all around). Anyway, if you are really happy with what Nintendo offers for the Wii and with the value (in $AU) of nintendo games, fine, while it is still a quite weak way to defend Nintendo strategy (except just for business).

And just as a side comment, just imagine you are not a Nintendo user, and for some reason you reach the main page of this site, what would you see there? A lot of shoveware, wii-cheap-ware, 20 years old games (should I continue)? Because this is all that Nintendo has to offer for the Wii. Fan-atic-boys, keep defending Nintendo with your blood and money if you want, but Nintendo is not really worth of any minimal defense.

@Mandoble: you make some very good points. truth is, for me, (while nintendo may not be doing all they can, i still love their games, and a lot of the games others release on their systems. no others have just ever seemed to have that same magic about them, as many others have pointed out. and for someone with a gaming buget as low as mine.... nintendo's offerings are FAR more than what i can handle, so i have more than enough to be thankful for. but that's me. i also appreciate where you're coming from though, but i do wonder, then, honestly, why you're a member here? i mean this not to say i don't think you should be, i'm just legitimately wondering the reasoning. i mean, you're obviously not trolling. you're being very respectful and intelligent. but you don't seem to be any sort of nintendo fan, either.... so i guess i'd just say i'm puzzled.

Not really. Following my logic the essential product you are buying when you purchase (or at least when I purchase) a game is fun in both intensity and length. Technology and Innovation is a large part of that but its not the only part. Just like great visuals in a movie can increase your enjoyment but is always trumped by a decent story a game with great visuals is worth nothing if it doesn't have good gameplay. Great gameplay with non-distracting visuals is one of the most effective combinations for maximum fun and IMO New SMB Wii nailed that.

I am not a modern day Luddite. I crave innovative technology but not always in the conventional ways. People always put too much emphasis (not just in the gaming world) on Ghz, Megapixels, the amount of bloom and other superficial specs rather than what works best for the job they need done. More often than not the most important improvements are in things like battery life, load times and innovative software rather than simply how good it looks on paper.

Am I a conformist, extremist and fundamentalist? I don't think so. For a start an extremist by definition has extreme views and so isn't a conformist because a conformist subscribes to the majority opinion on everything. A fundamentalist is a person who believes in a small narrow set of basic principles and sticks to them. I don't think I subscribe to Wii/Nintendo/Mario fundamentalism either because while I generally enjoy those games its not all I play nor is it all I enjoy. I guess if you could accuse me of any fanatic belief is that of fun in games but that's a bit to broad of an idea to be deemed fundamentalism I think.

Well, I have the most fun with Nintendo consoles, so that's what I'll be sticking with thank you. And that's my opinion which no one has to share nor can take away from me. I have a Playstation for games such as Metal Gear and Final Fantasy: Numbered series (of course I'll buy more games for it if any come out that interest me, but those are the two main reasons I have a Playstation; everything else is secondary).

The junk on Nintendo's console doesn't bother me, and there's a secret to that. I'll be willing to let everyone know, too. Hang on for a sec; you really need to prepare yourself for this because it's some pretty crazy junk right here. Okay, are you ready? Here goes..................I don't play them. Gasp Oh my gosh!

Seriously, though, every system has bad games, and yes the Wii has the most, but I don't see why that matters if you don't play them anyway. People just like to play the numbers in order to make their preferred system seem better in their eyes. But please, quit whining. It's enjoyable to make fun of stuff, heck, I do it all the time with stuff that I love. But stop the whining.

Nintendo has made games that I enjoy far, far more than anything that I have on the other consoles (note, I don't hate the other consoles at all), and I can always come back to play through a Nintendo game for fun. The amount of games that I am able to replay is far greater on Nintendo rather than on the other systems. Remember, this is my opinion and it not meant to be taken as fact. This is how I feel and is not reflective upon the Nintendo community as a whole; it is just my opinion and reflects the games that I really enjoy to play and my system of choice, but does not mean that I don't enjoy playing other consoles.

Nintendo makes the absolute best E rated, or family, games. The same cannot be said about the other consoles, in my opinon! This is the huge reason why I'll stick by Nintendo, because of the sheer amount of quality titles that the whole family can play. I don't care for the blood and gore crap. I didn't buy Madworld or No More Heroes (but I'm glad that the people who enjoy those games are able to); they are just not for me. I'll stick to my family friendly and fun games.

And it's also important to note that.....this is my opinion. I'm also posting on a Nintendo site that's talking about Nintendo and Nintendo related games and why we enjoy these Nintendo games for the Nintendo system that I would assume most people on this Nintendo site would have.

Skywake, with all my respect, you are not a gamer, you are a nostalgic player. I've been playing video games since 1982, developing my own games, doing some freeware ones (MSX, MSX2 and CBM Amiga) and participating in the developments of some main ones (PC), and I've been evolving with the time. With the power we have now, a minimum is always a MUST. For quite short and simple games, art and music is not a big deal, it is clear that the game is short, basic and simple (but then, please, dont sell it for 45Eur, else I will simply explode as any consumer with the impression of being insulted to the bone).

bro2dragons, I have two DS, one Wii, more than 50 DS games and more than 40 Wii ones (about 3700Eur in total). Looking at these numbers you would say, "hey, you are a big Nintendo supporter", well, way way above being any-thing supporter I'm (like you) a consumer (I'm the customer). And as a customer I should be pretty critical with what I pay for (like you should). And I'm getting to the conclussion that the Wii is the very "worst buy" possible thing in the gaming market, while probably the Nintendo DS is the best one. Anyway, is this site supposed to be open only for extremist fan-atic boys? Or should it be also open for the voices of critic consumers? If I see something worth Nintendo does for the Wii, I will be the "first" to announce it, but if Nintendo acts with the Wii as if the Wii were already dead, then I will say it too. And this is the current case. Probably Nintendo is just quite happy $-wise with Wii selling-inertia, they have drawn their $ charts predictions and the conclussion is that Wii may be left unnatended for the following year and a half, and then a new console might see the light. Fine for Nintendo, but I spent 270 Eur in an unnatended Wii, so as a consumer I'm not quite happy at all. And yes, the only good Nintendo specific development of some entity for the Wii is Mario Galaxy (one single game since Wii entered the marked), everything else is third party, cheap and fast Nintendo developments or direct conversions from NGC. So what do you want me, as a customer, to say in favour of Nintendo?

The gamer would be, by definition, the guy who plays the game, which in this case is not you.

Just because you don't like a game you haven't played doesn't mean that those of us who actually have, you know, informed opinions can't like it. Some of us like platformers, and since there aren't a lot of new 2D ones around, the price is well, well worth it. It does a lot of new things, namely up to four-player multi-player (done before in one game, LBP, but not half as well). It is easily the best multiplayer game I have ever played, and a wonderful single-player game, too. That's enough for me, and yes, I am a gamer.

I don't understand how someone can both admit that he hasn't actually played the game and make arrogant assertions about those who like the game and whether or not they're a gamer.

@Mandoble: say nothing positive about them if that's how you feel. as i said, it's understandable, and i'm not trying to make you feel unwelcome, i was merely curious. i do, as well look for the best buys for my money and am critical when i see the need to be. but if something suits me well enough, i try not to be nit-picky. not saying you are, but that's how the ign article came across to me. this site is open to all, and you've made some very good points in this thread, so nintendo fan or not, i'm glad you're here. i have no intention for you to feel like you're being attacked, i was simply curious. and i respect your opinion on what (little) good nintendo has done on the Wii. i disagree (i very much enjoy a number of their titles: Galaxy, BWii, Metroid Prime Corruption, Excite Truck/Bots, Mario Strikers, Fire Emblem, Mario Party, Smash Bros., Mario Kart, Mario Baseball, Wii Sports Resort, and a handful of others... all Nintendo games), but i respect that you hold that opinion, and i accept that it is just as valid as mine. no harm meant.

bro2dragons, is not that I dont like them all. But tell me, which Wii game do you know that might be on par with NGC ZeldaTP (or its direct Wii port)? The closest one might be Wii Metroid (which is done by second party Retro Studios, so it is not a first party Nintendo game) and anything else is far far away behind in estimated men/hours for development/graphics/sounds/music and design. All I see for Wii is very cheap short games (but expensive in money), and it is not that I dont enjoy some of them, problem is that Wii is already FULL of them and all of them are, in my opinion, way way way overpriced.

Who care what IGN think?, I bet only a tiny minority of gamers use there site.

You and me both.

Thank you. Who really complains about Toad1 and Toad2. Really?
Would the game be infinitely better with Toadette? I say no, as Toadette did not appear in SMB, SMB2US, SMB2J, SMB3, SMW, SM64, SMS, or SMG. So how is she part of the franchise and thus worth including in this game?
There are no other characters, that have appeared in the canonical Mario platformers, that could have been included in NSMBW as a playable character. And complaining about it is just ridiculous.

Although, a lot of the focus in this thread seems to be on whether or not "Nintendo cares."
The article was titled "Nintendo is lazy and you don't care."

Anyway, where is the "EA is lazy and you don't care" (for example, Madden '92, Madden '93, Madden '94, Madden '95, Madden '96, Madden '97, Madden '98, Madden '99, Madden '00, Madden '01, Madden '02, Madden '03, Madden '04, Madden '05, Madden '06, Madden '07, Madden '08, Madden '09, Madden '10) article?
Where are the "Activision is lazy and you don't care" (Call of Duty, Call of Duty 2, Call of Duty 3, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2), "Bungie is lazy and you don't care" (Halo, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo ODST, Halo: Reach, Halo Wars) articles?

These companies only make games. They don't make consoles. And yet, they pump out sequel after sequel that add very little content to the previous iteration and they are glorified each and every time they make a new game.
Nintendo makes consoles and makes games for those consoles. Every title they release is high quality and contains heaps of innovation over previous titles. For the most part they even manage to create sequels that aren't simply titled with a new number at the end (The last numbered entry in the Zelda franchise was Zelda II. There have been quite a few more Zeldas than that. Other companies have Resident Evil 1,2,3,4,5 or Call of Duty 1,2,3,4,CoDMW2 or Final Fantasy I,II,III,IV,V,VI,VII,VIII,IX,X,XI,XII,XIII).

IGN would never call these other companies lazy because they are 3rd-party developers and thus aren't tied to the system.
IGN would never call Sony/Microsoft lazy because they don't develop games, they only develop systems.
And yet, Nintendo is called lazy because they make consoles and games, and clearly having a second Toad in a game as brilliant as NSMBW means that they suck.

Well, since you were responding to me, I should clarify that I do think there are other characters that could have fit the role well, not just Toadette. If it had been up to me, Peach and Daisy would have been playable characters with some new silly excuse for a plot introduced (if a plot is really needed to begin with). I'm just saying it is an extremely minor and superficial complaint.

But yea, seriously, where are all those other articles? IGN is biased, and I don't care.

By the way, aren't all the characters in NSMBW unnamed?
I don't think the words "Mario" or "Luigi" appear under their respective portraits, but I suppose I could be wrong.
If I'm right though, then Matt is complaining that the Toads are unnamed, despite the fact that the Mario Bros. are also unnamed. Except in the instruction booklet... then if that's where the complaint lies, then... wow.

Toads never have names anyway.

That's a huge stretch. We know what their names are. Even if we didn't, yes, the names are in the game. Peach addresses Mario in the final cutscene. You could also look at the game's title screen for another hint at Mario's name. I'm sure I've seen Luigi's name, too, but can't think of where.

Nintendo is lazy and doesn't care? What kind of sick, twisted topic is this? Has IGN lost their minds? Know what? I'm just gonna slowly back away from this. (heads for the hills)

Well obviously we know Mario's name from the title of the game and his legacy.
But if Mario and Luigi aren't labeled (i.e. in character selection), then why would the Toads be labeled with names?
I haven't played NSMBW in a while since I've been extremely busy with some other stuff, so they might be labeled somewhere. I just don't remembering seeing the word "Luigi" anywhere.

Edit: of course you could chalk that up to laziness too, if someone really wanted to run with that. Maybe Mario and Luigi aren't labeled on the character selection screen because that would highlight the fact that both Toads are simply called "Toad."

What exactly are you asking here? if there are any games that are equal in quality to Twilight Princess on the Wii that have been ported from the Gamecube? What kind of drawn out question is that? Is this in belated response to my comment about people's criticism about Twilight Princess on Wii?

I already explained which highly regarded games that could have easily been done on the Gamecube. Metriod Prime 1 and 2 were done on the Gamecube and ported to Wii along with the entire New Play Control series. Super Paper Mario gets no complaints and yet it doesn't really do anything that couldn't have been done on the Gamecube. Wario Land Shake was even presented in a 4:3 aspect and was entirely sprite based. New Super Mario Bros Wii (excluding the tilt platforms, highly intuitive shake spin and Remote speaker extras) probably could have been done on the Gamecube also.

So lets just sit back for a second and label these games "old games" for arguments sake. Does that make these games less capable of delivering both long and intense doses of fun? Are older games less valuable? According to my play data on the Nintendo Channel not exactly. All up I have spent 26hours and 45mins playing New SMB Wii so far in ~1.6hour gaming sessions. In comparison playing Paper Mario, a N64 game with obviously inferior visuals, I have spent 29hours and 37mins in ~2.4hr gaming sessions. Metriod Prime 3 is one of the major and well received games on the console and yet I have only spent 15hrs and 45mins over ~0.7hr gaming sessions. Out of those three games the one with the most visuals was the one that held my interests for the least amount of time. What about other major games? Galaxy has lasted 62hours in 1.3hr bites, Twilight Princess lasted 74hrs in 2.5hr bites, Brawl got 74hrs in 1hr bites, Mario Kart Wii lasted a ridiculous 105hrs in 1.4hr sessions.

So does a modern game have infinitely more value than an old game on a modern system? In terms of development time it definitely does but in terms of ACTUAL value to me I don't think so. New SMB Wii holds my interest for longer periods than some of the most visually praised games on the console. The most absorbing game I have played on the console is Twilight Princess which is the game most labelled "Gamecube port" and retails for $99AU. If we are basing cost on fun length and intensity and assume TP is worth $99AU to me MP3 is probably worth ~$20, Paper Mario ~$35 and New SMB Wii $34.

I think your logic is wrong

First of all, you are incorrect about Retro Studios. It is actually a first party developer since it is wholly owned by Nintendo.

Nintendo does not make any of those short, crappy games you mentioned. Most of those crappy games are made by third party developers and publishers. Licensing games is very different than publishing games. I don't think Nintendo can look at a publisher and say "we don't want your game on our system." In my opinion, that would not look good on Nintendo's part especially with publishers like EA and Ubisoft.

Your opinion may be different from others as well. People call many of these games crap, however people still buy some of these so called "crappy" games. This is the biggest reason that the Wii has so many bad games: publishers want to sell but do not put forth effort in the games. This is nothing new actually. Look at the NES, Game Boy, SNES, and Playstation libraries.