There may be a new Call of Duty, FIFA and Assassin's Creed on store shelves every single year, but Nintendo of America's Scott Moffitt stresses that Nintendo isn't looking to pull the same trick any time soon.
Speaking to The Examiner, Moffitt addressed the issue of yearly updates, something which publishers like EA, Ubisoft and Activision have embraced with a vengeance. Nintendo of American's VP of Sales feels that keeping games alive with DLC content - as has been the case with Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros. - is a much better idea:
We tend not to annualize our franchises, there's not a new Mario Kart every year. What we've tried to do with the Wii U is first, create a fully featured really enjoyable game that has something for everybody, has surprises that you'll discover as you play through levels and it gives you a good amount of quality entertainment.
For fans who love [Mario Kart], we've released extra content over time so that it keeps the game fresh and allows them to experience more than they could when they originally bought the game. That's the approach we take, rather than annualizing the franchise, we are periodically releasing new courses, levels and features that keep people playing. We see a huge surge in gameplay hours on Mario Kart when we [release new content].
There are exceptions, of course. Traditionally, we've seen lots of Pokémon games in a short space of time, proving that Nintendo is willing to speed things up if the market - and the franchise - calls for it:
We take different approaches with different franchises. If you look at the Pokémon franchise, we have released multiple core games for 3DS. We like to give Pokémon fans something every year, but something like Mario Kart or Smash Bros. there may only be one version of that franchise in the whole console cycle.
If Pokémon is approaching an almost yearly level of updates, could we see other famous franchises do the same? Moffitt says it's all down to the series and the developer, and whether or not a yearly release schedule can still deliver the kind of quality Nintendo expects:
It all depends on the franchise, the developer and what new ideas they can bring to the franchise to move the gameplay forward and keep the franchise fresh. I think we always need to innovate and we need to always bring new ideas and new thoughts, but they have to be sufficient enough to justify the next release. Small, incremental changes may not be worth a whole new release.
Do you think adopting an annual release schedule for some of its other titles would be a good move for Nintendo? Or do you believe would come at the cost of innovation and quality - something that Ubisoft's bug-filled Assassin's Creed titles have been guilty of? Sound off in the comments to let us - and the rest of the Nintendo Life readership - know what you think.
[source examiner.com]
Comments 116
Yearly sequels of core franchises? We should be so lucky, releases period would be nice.
Tried my best to read too much into this and hope there was a hint at more Mario Kart 8 DLC on the way.
I'd prefer them to do it this way than.release a new Kart for example, each year. It's cheaper than another $60 and it makes these games stay fresh. Though this summer has had no releases since Splatoon in NA, updates in Splatoon and Smash have helped.
F-zero released once a decade would be nice
New Pokemon version confirmed for this year !
This is why I'm a Nintendo fanboy. Imagine getting a new Smash Bros. every year? Not only would the games get boring after a while, but it would put to much stress on the development team. I'd much rather have the Big N focus on delivering quality games than making more of the same.
I like that idea. I for one would much prefer good quality, once a system game series like Smash that adds new characters, stages, items, modes, etc. Pokemon has started to get stale for me since it rarely changes with yearly releases. ORAS only added Primal forms for only 3 Pokemon and added soaring. Not a whole lot.
This is why you can always throw out the "Nintendo just rehashes its series" argument like the garbage it is. To date, only one Nintendo plarform has had multiple 3D Mario titles, and each one feels distinct. Mario Kart, the critics' favorite whipping boy, only sees one release per platform. Because there is extra time taken between each release in a core Nintendo franchise, every entry feels worthwhile.
@Jimtaro
Oh come on. The Wii U and 3DS have tons of games and a healthy release schedule. You sound nuts.
Smash DLC costs way too much. The sad thing, Nintendo got a taste so this will probably be the norm.
@Dr_Corndog
NES - Multiple Mario and Zelda. Multiple DK games and spinoffs of them but basically the same kind of thing
SNES - 3 DK games Mario Remakes along with Mario release
N64 - Two Zelda games
Gamecube - Multiple Zelda
Wii - Multiple Zelda, Multiple 3D Mario
Pokemon in general
Mario in general yes, Mario because of all the spin off games.
Wii U - Zelda (Remake and Hyrule Warriors) Mario kind of with both Mario and Luigi bros. U
Overall, there is become a large amount of remakes between Zelda and Pokemon and then Since Mario is just a platformer and needs no story, it's formula just remains the same. Mario, Zelda and Pokemon are the 3 biggest. DK was rehashed once on the NES and SNES but the other 3 are just repeatedly used.
@SquirrelNuts
No, I really don't think that the Wii U has tons of games coming out, that's not nuts but being realistic.
In all fairness I like how Nintendo does DLC though it would be nice if they used it for more gamers other than just MK, Splatoon and SB. They know how it works but it just needs to be implemented into more titles.
Sounds fine too me. I'm up for more DLC as long as its fair.
@ikki5 doubt it. Fire emblem was too high as well but Mario kart was very low priced for what you got. I think it's going to be a game by game thing.
I like this approach. One thing that should add to some franchises like Mario spinoffs are more characters. Like Link and Samus to the Party series. I would like to see a hyrule stage or brinstar. Side note go back to the original gameplay of Mario party since they added the whole stage based rules instead of collecting stars has been bad. Mario Tennis with Zelda and Samus in tennis gear would be funny. Or heck even golf. Mario Kart 8 is amazing and I use Link all the time now. Many gamers buy memorabilia and collectibles for certain franchises i don't know why they don't add certain favorite characters to spinoff games to appeal certain groups. All star baseball could have actual teams, Mushroom Kingdom with Mario heroes, and a bowser team. Team Zelda vs Ganondorf team in Hyrule, the possibilities are endless but Nintendo just doesn't seem to do it. If they add some extra characters beside Mario characters in the upcoming tennis game i will most likely buy it.
@faint
I never looked at the Fire Emblem DLC but that is too bad, I am trying to get into the series but my girlfriend stole (ok, she borrowed ) awakening from me. ha ha But Mario Kart was still when DLC was fresh and a new thing with Nintendo. It was done nicely but Smash was just bad. Really, Mario Golf is where is started to go bad, maybe even with them allowing the stuff they did with Bravely Default. But Mario golf, they threw in Day on DLC which is where I started to see it go wrong but Mario Kart was shortly after that so everything didn't seem to be sinking in. Though if Fire Emblem's DLC is really bad, it may have started there and they just probed. And with Smash... well, they probed a lot, they know people will buy it so I can easily see it staying up high especially if they've done more "bad DLC than good" price wise. Don't forget that DLC in other places started this way too and now take a look where it is at.
@ikki5 Hardly. I think the prices are fair, and even then they're all optional. You get to support the devs for putting in the extra time for each character. If you don't care for the characters then don't get them, it's that simple. They're all worth about as much as a fast food meal, if you can shell out the money for stuff like that then you can do the same for entertainment content that'll last you a good while.
They might have been late to the party, but they're the only ones who got DLC right.
Hey Scott, a new Wars title would be nice! Or a Wave Race, too, considering how NST is under NoA.
Or like @ghostjoshu said, a new F-Zero considering how well reception was been so far for FAST RACING NEO?
i can kind of understand this.i dont need a new game of the same series every year if the game is big and gets updated.as long as i can play it and discover new things i dont care about a next entry.if the game is finished in a coiuple of hours and you then have to wait for 3 years,thats a diffrent story,that sucks.
@sWiTcHeRoO The prices for smash are not fair. You buy 4 characters and 4 stages (3 of those stages and characters are re-hashes of them too) for almost half of what the game itself costs. You get a fleas worth of content compared to what the game is for half the cost of the game. If you buy all the DLC, you are almost paying the price of the game just for the DLC and they are adding at least 5 more characters which will run you at least another $20, more if you get it for both versions. Over all, the content you get for the price does not match at all.
Even Amiibo really are handled poorly for what you pay, though i guess you pay for more the figure however, if you don't pay for the figure, then you have content locked out from you on day one with no chance of getting it unless you buy the figure... which you know very well that even that may not be possible.
@yoshinatsu *on certain games
MK8 is DLC done right and amiibo done decent. Sm4sh is DLC done wrong and amiibo done right. Code Name STEAM has no DLC and amiibo done right. Splatoon has DLC done right, and amiibo done in an okay manner.
@Jimtaro
There may not be a lot of games scheduled right now, that's true. But you have to admit the amount of games available currently is rather robust. I have over 40 games myself for the Wii U alone. (NX announcements put a nail in the coffin of new games though. )
Yes, their approach to DLC is awesome. I think it's a good bet that they will continue on their current path in the future with other titles.
EDIT: Nuts.
@ningeek185
"Imagine getting a new Smash Bros. every year? Not only would the games get boring after a while, but it would put to much stress on the development team."
http://www.inquisitr.com/793607/smash-bros-developer-stressed-almost-to-the-brink-of-death-over-roster/
Hmm... a one-time fee of $60(with a chance of discount) and sometimes a boatload of free DLC or annual fees of $50, very little DLC and a bunch of bugs... Hmmm, this is a hard one... #sarcasm
@ghostjoshu lol
@gatorboi352 Thanks, I already knew that. If too much stress induced when making one Smash game after six years, then making one each year would be overwhelming.
More Mario Kart 8 DLC, please, Nintendo?
The annual release date is just Nintendo- imitating EA. I mean, the constant sports releases EA gives just go down salty to me. Contrast that to Super Mario Bros 3; save the e-Reader stages (which shrunk with each country, eventually being non-existent in Europe), every release of Super Mario Bros 3 is very much the same yet still fresh without DLC. Fabulous games do not necessarily need supplements in keeping themselves 'fresh'.
@ikki5 My point wasn't that each platform only sees one entry of each franchise, since that certainly isn't true. I was merely using some select examples to show that, in general, Nintendo spaces its core releases to keep them fresh, a point the very games you listed further supports.
Edit: That last part probably came across as an insult, which was not my intent. But it really is pretty silly to complain about the Smash DLC.
@SquirrelNuts
I wouldn't say that the entire back catalogue is worth it, but yes, a couple of previously released titles have been wonderful. Alas after you've played those there doesn't seem to be much on the horizon, especially for core franchises.
The Wii U has yet to have a Metroid, Punch-Out, Animal Crossing, Waverace, F-Zero, Pilotwings etc. I'm tempted to add Zelda to that list but we live in hope! So while it's ok to say that there won't be yearly releases of core franchises, look how they've released so many Mario Karts or Pokemon in relation to others. Some franchises seem to be milked while others are woefully forgotten. Hence me saying it would be nice to get some releases. Fingers crossed, Nintendo may surprise us during the Wii U's final year (2016 I imagine) but I'm not holding my breath.
The Wii U never had a Metroid, Animal Crossing, Punch Out, F-Zero, Waverace, Pilotwings etc. Yet they've milked Mario Kart
The Wii U didn't get a new F-Zero, Metroid, Animal Crossing, Waverace, Punch Out etc. Heck I'm half tempted to add Zelda to the list but we live in hope. So yeah, it's nice that Nintendo aren't focussed on annual releases of their core franchises but some have been woefully forgotten. Look at the amount of Mario Kart games compared to F-Zero for example, yet both debuted on the SNES.
Sorry, iPad went nuts!
Nintendo clearly don't have the resources to make annual games whether they want to or not...
I have an issue with the quantity of DLC, to be more specific not enough. Nintendo just abandoned Mario Kart 8 after 2 DLC packs which were very spread out when they had the perfect opportunity for more.
Sure it would make Mario Kart 9 for NX a lesser product but you could easily fix that by releasing something like "Mario Kart 8 GotY Edition" instead which contains DLC packs 1 and 2 on disc, run on the same servers as the Wii U version (so NX users can play with Wii U users) as well as release DLC for both the Wii U and NX versions at the same time.
I like this approach personally. We don't need gamea like mario kart, smash bros and now splatoon to have yearly releases. Keeping them fresh with dlc is a great idea sometimes free sometimes paid for.
I thought they did a really good job with mario kart 8 and think it's a perfect example of how this approach can work. Splatoon has been really good so far too. Smash Bros less so, I think more of the content should be free, i'd be happy to pay for new game modes but not really fighters (although I did buy Ryu)
@Jimtaro Don't worry mate. That needs to be repeated cos it's the the truth
I want new tracks! Please,Nintendo
@Jimtaro I'd argue that the small library is more due to the fact that the Wii U is less than 3 years old, and the fact that Nintendo can only do so much themselves. What's there is great, though. I have about 8 retail Wii U games, and my Wii U sees as much use as my PC with ots huge Steam library.
(Please note that I have no illusions of the Wii U getting an F-Zero, however.)
@ghostjoshu
My thoughts exactly.
@Dr_Corndog Um... how is having multiple releases of a game, remakes of old games and such fresh? Yes, some games I'd say they do a good job at keeping them fresh by doing a 1 generation release for games such as Mario Kart and Smash. but overall, the franchises are milked. Mario is in everything. it is like if they don't know what to do with it, throw Mario in there. Then we have Pokemon. This was the first year where I was surprised to not see anything Pokemon at E3. it was too the point really where when the direct ended, it had me slightly confused as I was expecting Pokemon. I was expecting it because it is milked so bad but who can blame them? These are money pits. Zelda, they did a good job but I haven't felt like I played a fresh Zelda game since Skyward Sword. Yes that was only 4 years ago i know but since then, we have had 2 remakes, a hack and slash game, a Zelda game with a world hugely based off a previous old game and the other remake was not too much before Skyward Sword. So yes, some stuff, they give a freshness too but there is a hugeness to what they are releasing that jus doesn't have a fresh feel especially with Mario, Pokemon and Zelda. I am really hoping Zelda U will break that but... with it's delays, I don't know, it may be a while before I get to see how that is.
Also, the size of the Library really isn't anything with how old it is and the fact it is not even 3 years old yet, it is the fact that no one wants to support it. The XOne and PS4 are not even 2 years yet and their library is substantially larger than the Wii U's right now and their coming soon list is also much, much larger. So it is 1) Nintendo cannot maintain it to keep the games coming and 2) hardly anyone wants to develop for it and 3) Nintendo is still lacking in reaching out to developers to develop for it. They have it a bit, but not enough to maintain it.
@Dr_Corndog
That actually highlights another problem. Nintendo are easily the biggest developers of the Wii U. Sure we have others, but it's Nintendo and their games that are keeping the machine afloat for the most part. With that in mind, perhaps it's not the best idea for them to 1) drop annual releases and 2) only provide DLC for a small handful of games. Yes, with more third party developers onboard Nintendo can afford to take that stance but when the machine depends on them, it would be nice for at least more games to incorporate DLC if we're not getting annual releases.
Please let this be a subtle hint that more Mario Kart 8 DLC is on the way. I don't mind having to pay for it, as long as I get my money's worth. Which in the case if DLC Pack 1 and 2, I got and more.
This approach makes a lot of sense. I'd much prefer it if Pokemon wasn't a yearly release, but they instead spent more time on each game to make it the best game possible instead of creating a new game with only minor improvements. The most recent Pokemon games have felt a bit rushed IMO.
The Mario Kart 8 approach was great. The new tracks vastly increased the gameplay and enhanced the game. I just wish there were more DLC track bundles.
I can't believe people would complain about this.
However, one thing is for sure, some games go YEARS without a sequel. Let's have less of that please. You can definitely feel free not to rehash every single year like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed though, that's a nice feature.
For most Nintendo series, one release per console is fine. Smash and MK would have been fine without DLC, but having those has helped extend their value. MK's DLC is absolutely wonderfully handled, and that's what I'd like to see more of. Smash's DLC is a bit much. A new fighter shouldn't be more than $5, but I don't want to get off topic too much.
FE: Awakening's DLC was pretty bad too. The vast majority of the DLC (especially early on) was completely over priced. FE: Fates may have fixed the problem with additional STORY RELATED content as DLC instead of buying characters with some new maps.
Pokemon is an interesting case. Because there's such a desire for the remakes and there's a precedent for second versions, it's hard to space out the releases. The fact that there's not a release this year is astounding to me. That said, I would like to have more than a year between releases. There's not enough change in between releases to justify buying every game, and after ORAS I'm really starting to feel burnt out on the series.
They did it for Mario Party 4-7...
I'm really confused as to why they didn't announce a new Pokemon game at E3. Does anyone have information on this? Is there maybe an expansion for Onega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire being worked on instead of a new game?
@ikki5 I think you're right about a few games but wrong about others. While the subject/characters may be the same, the type of games are completely different. For example, Hyrule Warriors and Windwaker are completely different genres of games. They only share characters. Actually, I feel that 3D World is completely different type of game then New Super Mario Bros. U.
When Activision, EA, and Ubi are pumping out COD, Madden, and AC every year, they are new stories/characters/rosters but they are basically the same game every year with minor improvements or tweaks to the same formula. I think that by Nintendo not cranking out Kart or Smash every year, it remains fresh. I loved the 360 but a lot of the series for that system got stale for me. Gears, Rock Band, COD, AC, Batman, even Bioshock just seemed like the same games over and over again. Nintendo does it too, just not as much as the other companies and I respect that about them.
I like to have the complete package, so to speak. So, I purchase all the dlc. I am of the opinion MK8's dlc was adequately handled, but Smash's is not currently that way. As many above me have said, to purchase all the dlc pack 2 for both versions of Smash would be, w/ state tax, approximately $31. Adding Pack 3 for both ver.s takes the cost up to about $50.
True, you don't have to have dlc, but it is nice. Another deterrent to purchasing is whether or not, down the road, Nintendo will release the game again, w/ all dlc, & even if they do not, that's money that is tied to that physical console. Worse, b/c of that, the dlc is not able to be carried over to other consoles, unless those systems have the updates/dlc necessary. That's a lot of money for content, that, unlike a physical game disc, unfortunately has the same lifespan, as the console, b/c it is tied to the console. & who is to say the servers will still be hosting the dlc/updates, when you need, &/or want them down the road.
I like dlc done right, but those things I mentioned are my big concerns w/ it. As for not doing annual sequels, that's great. I'm not made of money. I understand maybe some series warrant it, ...or not, but I prefer the once, or twice per console.
The Wii U has released games a turtle's pace for years. It just sucks. Don't give me the e-shop as an example of games coming out because I didn't buy the system for indy games. I'm sorry if that's not what some want to hear but as a customer, I want packaged games not e-shop stuff. Normally I would suggest limiting some games to 1 per generation but there has to be a point when Nintendo gets more content out there. Pokemon X/Y and then ORAS for the 3DS was a great example of how it can work. I'm not sure Smash could work because the characters affect the game much more than the stage does. A year Smash would become stale. However, Mario Kart is all about the stages and modes. In theory, you could release a new Mario Kart with all new stages and it would be a fresh game. Even if it had similar anti-gravity as MK8. Heck, you would get a lot of people to buy a spin off MK that had a proper battlemode with battle stadiums/stages. Price it like Captain Toad and Kirby RC and you'd get a lot of people to buy that. As the guy says, each franchise is different but Nintendo needs to turn up the production speed. Not every game is this amazing masterpiece like people think when talking about the Wii U. Some games are OK and we still wait months between releases. This fall will be the first time in ages where I will be happy to buy a new game each month starting in Sept with Mario Maker. More games, more DLC, just......more stuff. It feels like there is such a big gap between content with Nintendo products.
Wii U summer 2015 NA release schedule
May Sapltoon
June nothing
July nothing
August nothing
Yearly sequels is the least of Ntinedo's worries, how about just making some games? Where's Zelda U? Where' sStar Fox Zero release date? Where's Devil's Third release date? Wheres Projects Guard and Giant Robot?
Nintneod isn't above or opposed to making yearly games, they are completely incapable of hardly making any games and getting them out the door. Yearly games, that's a joke, right? It took 10 years for Pikmin 3, was that Ntinedo's way of sparing us from yearly releases. Puh-lease.
I disagree with the whole DLC idea. Mario Kart 8 recently got a 200cc update but that's just one less original idea that they could have kept for the next Mario Kart game. Additionally, as @rjejr said, I would have thought it would be much more important to keep a steady flow of releases. All the Splatoon marketing is also to cover the fact that there's nothing coming out until Christmas.
This whole DLC plan could work but I think they should REALLY keep it under control. A good example of DLC being used to make a game evergreen is with Rock Band 3, but a bad one would be Street Fighter IV. (possibly an unpopular opinion, but come on, they did NOT need three iterations of the franchise, and Ultra's new characters didn't have their own cutscenes so it was evidently forced.)
One final note: on the topic of Pokémon, I think that the only reason they are so thrifty with that franchise is because The Pokémon Company would rather more games were released. Pokémon is a cross-platform franchise (as in, it has manga and TV shows) and as such certain demands have to be kept up.
@TheDavyStar - "until Christmas"
Well i wouldn't go that far, Super Mario Maker is 9/11, and Yoshi is mid Oct. SFZ will probably release in Nov. And whenever AC:aF comes out. May not be anything on that list you want - insert long list here of AAA mutliplats not on Wii U - but it's pouring games compared to this summer. Oh, and Lego Dimension and Skylanders in Septmeber, those will be the biggest selling games on Wii U this holiday. Nintneod didn't make those 2, but I bet they advertise them a lot on the eShop. Still, summer was/is a desert wasteland.
I just want pokemon to have two regions and sixteen gym leaders instead of one region with eight gym leaders
@ikki5 if we're talking about core series which was the topic of conversation, and further more home iterations, and discount all the various spinoffs, remakes and re-releases that can largely be skipped, 15 Marios, 9 Zeldas and 9 DKs in 30 some-odd years isn't too bad at all. If you just break it down into 3D era, where the majority of folks consider 3D Marios/Zeldas the core experience that number goes down even more. In the case of DK, there only been one each console generation, with Mario and Zelda getting 2 games in one generation at one point (not counting the cross-gen Twilight Princess).
That said, Nintendo has way too many dormant properties that they could utilize to fill out their library outside of all the various spinoffs they utilize Mario for.
I couldn't agree more with the article, Nintendo is on the right path. Releasing games annually is just a rip-off (and I bought almost every installment of PES in the last ten years). They should continue to release one polished version of their not-epic (not like Zelda, Mario 3D, Metroid, Starfox) game series per console (or even longer now) and continuously add DLCs to it.
@ikki5 Are you really throwing such a superficial argument in? First of all, you can't compare the (S)NES times to today, much has changed in the way games are developed (nowadays it takes more effort and time, the games are bigger and more complex).
N64: Two Zelda games was an exception, MM wouldn't even been released if the hadn't developed it in one year.
Gamecube/Wii: Twilight Princess was a crossover title, so you can't count it for both platforms.
Wii: Mario Galaxy 1&2 were very similar to each other, so I wouldn't call those "multiple games", more like "multiple versions of one game". Anyway, MG2 was just released because Miyamoto wasn't that involved in MG1 and when that game came out, it was too easy and focussed too much on story for Miyamotos taste. So he took over more control for the updated version (which is harder and also features better coop-play).
Wii U: Hyrule Warriors is not a Zelda game. Have you even played it? And Wind Waker HD is a remake, not a new Zelda game, so it doesn't count either. Luigi Bros. is just a DLC to Mario Bros., not a full game.
Give us new levels for Captain Toad, new worlds for Yoshi, new missions for Pikmin, new dungeons for Zelda etc. The possibilities for DLC are endless and if Nintendo want to set themselves apart from the PS4 and Xbox, they could focus on giving us rich, quality DLC for their games. Especially if they're so slow in releasing full titles. Sure what they've done is MK is a start, Splatoon was good and SB could be more refined. But they need to start doing this for more than just three titles before they can take the moral high ground.
This is exactly what Nintendo has been doing ans should be doing. There really isn't too much of bash for the new super mario series because there's only four of them and one for each console its on.
I hate the annual model and I'm glad first party nintendo doesn't do it. It comes at the cost of both quality content and my wallet!
BUT I also don't want to wait TOO long, you know? An F-Zero every year wouldn't be very good. But an F-Zero AT ALL would be great.
I think that Zelda Team, Retro Studios, and Monolith Soft have perfect release schedules with high quality content. Intelligent Systems too.
If Nintendo does one thing really, REALLY well, it's handle its core franchises. Annualized Mario Kart, Smash Bros., Super Mario Bros., Zelda, etc. would kill the creative minds that make those few-and-far-between releases so special.
That said, WOULD IT KILL THEM TO RELEASE ANOTHER FREAKING REAL METROID GAME ALREADY
While I'm glad nintendo is not annualizing their franchises, but man some franchises need more sequels/games. We need new Pikmin, Metroid, Advanced Wars, etc.
@rjejr You're wrong there, every month after April is Splatoon. Super Mario Maker, Yoshi's Woolly World and Xenoblade X are being delayed to 2016 to make way for even more Splatoon content.
@TheDavyStar I agree. Rock Band is the best DLC setup between November 20th 2007 and April 2nd 2013 and I hope that structure continues for Rock Band 4 once it launches on October 6th. Of course that setup only works for music games, as for standard DLC I think CoD has it best in terms of spacing and Mario Kart 8 has it best in terms of content and value for money. Combine the two things and you have the perfect DLC strategy outside of music games.
They have mobile games to worry about now bleh
Wanting to innovate instead of iterate is fine. I like that. But sometimes that bar is too high. No Waverace or F-Zero because they can't think of a new thing to do with them, for example. I would argue that each game doesn't need to be a completely new experience, that an older concept on newer hardware is frequently plenty.
It's the same with hardware, really. So new, unique ideas are great. Having them get in the way of producing for your audience, however, is not. Nintendo needs to innovate, not reinvent the wheel with every idea. That's the way of winding up with the occasional tech demo but no real content.
it's the right approach. FIFA is only as big as it is because of all the football fans out there. The sort of people who literally buy a next gen console to play that, and it's pretty much the sole game they buy every year. The difference between each version is often so negligible that they could release it as an update for 1/4 of the price of the full game, but they know people will pay full price for a new disc.
Who even gets excited for new Call of Duty now? There's so many spinoff titles I forget how many there actually are. You'd do well to note Sonic has had yearly releases for the last 6-7 years, each one always feeling rushed like they didn't have the time to develop it on such a tight deadline. Nintendo has that many franchises, it doesn't need to do yearly releases for any of them. Sadly it neglects a few of the big ones these days (Metroid, Star Fox, F-Zero) but hopefully it's changing.
The annual release model does get old and stale after a while; I'm looking at you Assassin's Creed.
@Dr_Corndog Yeah it's kind of ridiculous when you see a 23 year old series chided over having 8 entries across 8 platforms. What do they want Nintendo to do? Not release Mario Kart at all?
It kind of stands out as silly when you have Assassin's Creed, a series created in the 7th generation has more entries than Mario Kart which was created in the 4th gen. A lot of Nintendo's series have been overtaken in entries by series that are far newer than them. Assassin's Creed is a series 8 years old with 9 main entries and 13 side games.
@Grumblevolcano -Yeah, I forgot XCX Dec 4. I only get a moment on the PC between my kids. I'm upgrading my netbook to Win 10 so that was busy as well.
NX will only have 2* games, MKX and SSBX, and 5 years worth of DLC.
*Zelda X doesn't count as it will only be Zelda U w/ or w/o something added or subtracted.
You know, I think they are calling it Nintendo X just so they can name every game w/ an X at the end, X is the new black. I kid you not.
@ikki5 To be fair, they did put some time and work into the Smash DLC. How often have we brought DLC characters or levels for games only to find we cannot use them in every mode? They not only did that for Smash characters in every mode, but pretty much everything in the game from showing up in one player modes to even showing up as silhouettes in the Wii U menu.
True the MK8 DLC is better value but still, the work into both still shows.
I would hope Nintendo wouldn't annualize the franchises. They have to many IP's to focus on instead of redoing the same one's.
@rjejr: Perfect, and when they want to "redo" Starfox again for the NX, they can name it StarFox X since they are using Zero this time for the U. After X thoughm I'm not sure what would really work.
@Ryno Capcom probably has the answer to that.
I'm perfectly fine with non-story driven games like Splatoon, Mario Kart, and Smash Bros having a core game, then just DLC after DLC to keep the content, courses, guns, levels, and characters fresh. Getting courses on Mario Kart was far more exciting than waiting until an entire console cycle to get more Mario Kart courses. Same for Smash. I'd be happy if this was the last Smash they ever made as long as the roster and stages kept growing. The mechanics of the game are perfect. Why release anything else? There may be a time for it eventually, but it's far easier on the development team to add to the existing game, than it is to reinvent the wheel every year or two.
Now, that said, story driven games, like **cough** Metroid are increasingly fewer and farther between. With the announcement of Federation Force it was like a slap in the face! I would love to see non-story games keeping the consoles on (I play Smash or Mario Kart almost every night. One or the other and sometimes both). Having those games keeps the console fresh with tons of options for players of all skill types. I EVEN play Mario Party with friends (especially girls) who haven't touched a set of sticks in decades and they have a good time.
Nintendo has done a pretty poor job on a few titles. Star Fox looks boring and bland, Zelda is nowhere to be found, although I did appreciate WWHD, but that was a remake. And Metroid and F-Zero are just in some dusty filing cabinet in a Nintendo mop closet. It's a shame. Also, losing the Rare-style second party games was a huge blow to the balls. Nintendo needs a strong second party.
My shower thought:
Ok you ready for this? Nintendo 2-3 year plan: Hire an outside analyst to determine the appropriate and fair value of the Banjo-Kazooie and Conker Characters as well as Pipsy, Timbur, and all other Diddy Kong Racing characters. Make a fair purchase of these characters from Microsoft (because they sure aren't using them **correctly**) with maybe the future option of allowing them to create a handful of spinoff games using these characters (1 per 5 years). Now Donkey Kong Country, 2, 3, and 64 were all GIANT icons in Nintendo’s History which were ALL made by Rare. Contact Playtonic and offer them the chance to work on the newest Donkey Kong Country Game which will bring back King K. Rool, the Kremlins, and the 3 ally animals (Feel free to use Cranky, Lanky, Crazy, Dixie, Tiny, and Candy Kong as well). This frees up Retro Studios’ time, efforts, resources, and focus to make a new (and proper, mind you) Metroid game. One that possibly focuses on the rebirth of Kraid instead of Ridley or Dark Samus (We’ve got Dark Pit. Move on). Also get Playtonic to make a new Banjo-Kazooie Returns game with a new villain, and finally Diddy Kong Racing 2. Nintendo would be swimming in new material with the ability to add new levels and characters and hell, costume DLC in the future, and they’d have so many fans shipping their panties to Kyoto HQ it would make Gene Simmon’s head spin. Thoughts?
@ikki5
So, you're saying that charging 60$ for the game without DLC, and 100$ with a season pass (which is what Ghosts sold for here) is a better option than picking and choosing what you want?
Maybe BOTH should be made available, but don't you dare pretend that 4 extra maps and a handful of weapons is even close to fair for the extra 40-60$ season passes cost now.
While we're at it, let's just call out Destiny. Season passes and full scale DLC packs on top of having to pay Gold or Plus memberships just to play the game.
Console gamers still have no idea. When we're paying retail price for the game AND 10-20$ a month just to log-in (and your connection isn't even helped by overloaded servers) then we can complain that gaming is ridiculously priced.
Splatoon, Smash and MK8's best features and updates aren't paid, let's just remember that. One day that may change and then we'll want to go back to days like today, when complaining about not getting a Kazuya costume for free will seem redundant.
For those who may read this, who want to rail against the structure, ask yourself one thing: have you supported DLC in any way or purchased an amiibo like figure? If so, you're in the same camp as me. You might want it to change, but you're a hypocrite just for buying into the system.
@Jimtaro Part of that is Nintendo has A-Rank, B-Rank and C-Rank franchises.
A-Rank (Guaranteed on the Console): Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Pokemon, Smash, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing (for portables)
B-Rank (Might be on a console): Metroid, Fire Emblem, , Star Fox, Wario, Yoshi, Pikmin, Xenoblade
C-Rank: (One offs or rare appearances): Everything else.
The reason for this is simple. Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, and historically Donkey Kong has sold easily double what anything else has. Mario Kart and Smash pulls in big numbers while Animal Crossing found an audience on portables.
As for their sports, no one is going to buy Nintendo makes generic Tennis games. Nintendo isn't going to put down the cash for licenses to get real players, when they did it was out of a western development house that was closed in the early days of GameCube. But people will buy Mario Tennis or Mario Golf because of Mario.
Considering how several of Nintendo's IPs only got one or two games this generation and still weren't innovating (DK, Yoshi, and Kirby being good examples), I'd say yearly sequels aren't the problem. They just don't have good ideas for games and mechanics, especially for their platformers which are mainly just recycling what they did last gen.
I take it is that Mario Kart 8 may receive more DLC? They need to add 4 more cups, and arena battle mode with Online Play they could make some more money off of this yet.
It's a wonderful idea I think. IP's like Mario, Zelda, MK, SSB, etc. are once in a hardware lifetime types of games, and if more is needed to prolong their core experiences, then I'm all for it. Best part about DLC is it's all optional. As long as the core experience is sacrificed for the sake of creating DLC, then I'm good. I expect what happened with MK and SSB to continue with future installments.
@Darknyht
Thanks for explaining that, I never knew Nintendo categorised their franchises like that. Sadly, it seems like typical Nintendo to have such a rigid and 'safe' structure in place. I wish they would stop relying on historical data so much and actually take more chances with both bigger releases for their B and C franchises, and some new ones on top. Sure that data has served them well in the past but tastes change and unless the NX (and the business culture within Nintendo themselves) changes to match those tastes, they're going to be lagging behind for another generation yet again.
I'd love a world wide Nintendo poll asking consumers which famous IP's they'd like to see as NX launch titles.
@SahashraLA
You are talking about what companies now do but Nintendo is a tiny toddler in the DLC business right now and the bad practises are starting up rather quickly. What I am saying is that charging $60 for a game and then charging another $60 for very little content is bad. I personally don't care what other companies do because what they are doing is bad. What I don't want is Nintendo to go down that route which is already is. We have seen Day one DLC, we have seen Expensive DLC twice now, in game purchases and with doing some research on the Fire Emblem DLC, we have pay to win DLC with how you can get a bunch of rewards to power up your heroes and such.
Also, the subscription fees are not the developers, they are the platform owners doing. The season passes would be fine if more DLC comes where the content is actually worth it. For example, Hyrule Warriors though I wonder how much more DLC is coming, the current stuff is worth it. But DLC overall where it is atrociously priced like it is in Smash and Fire Emblem (plus other games outside of Nintendo of course) Then that is horrible and I try to buy as little as possible because of just how much it is.
Then we have the Amiibo which are basically like an on disc DLC that is locked from the moment you buy the game. Sure you get a cool figure and you can use them for multiple games (which could actually be worse) but you will need to go and buy that figure to access the content on the disc. For games that use multiple Amiibo, you are stuck needing multiple Amiibo for that one game. Now, here is the biggest problem. If you cannot get that Amiibo you need, that content is locked forever. You are stuck with having disc locked content that you will never be able to unlock unless you want to pay a bunch more to some random dude making a profit.
Also, just so you know, complaining about the price of DLC and then buying it, that does not make you a hypocrite. Telling others not to buy it then buying it would. Sometimes, we are stuck paying the price for what we want so we usually end up compromising with only buying parts of it but still feeling annoyed that we paid that much. We are just the people who end up getting suckered into it without any other choice on the matter. But at the same time, eventually, we'd probably get fed up and stop buying it. This is why I don't buy Amiibo any more.
@Angelic_Lapras_King
It is all about content though. We are paying almost the cost of the game now for Smash with very little content. Some content which is local only. You paid $60 for the game and get very little for another $50 or so. Let's put this into perspective. If you had to pay the DLC price for each character, you'd end up spending nearly $220 for just the characters along and then if we add the stages another ~$130. So.. think about that for a minute, if they priced just all the characters and the stages the way they do the DLC then for everything... you'd be spending close to $350? And that would even include the other stuff. I'm sorry but that spells out something wrong here. Sure, it is extra work and maybe be priced a bt higher since it is not this big bundle bit overall, for that much of a difference, there is a big problem.
@shani @Sir_JBizzle (Sir_JBizzle this is mostly directed at shani but some points are for you as well and my post is getting long)
If you go and just break up stuff saying it doesn't matter because it is old, then that is your opinion because with this logic, you can draw it anywhere and then say it isn't a reshash. But that is a load of bull. The NES and SNES games are perfectly valid because Nintendo still follows those practices today. You have it saying I can't claim a game that is a cross platform but why not? Where would it go? It is still a Zelda game and it was still released. The fact that you brought up MM being made in a year proves my point even more. Then you also talk about Galaxy 1&2 being "multiple versions". What a load of crap. Seriously, that is what re-hashing is and you are just making exceptions to say "Oh, core releases" which you know it is a bunch of bull. As for Hyrule Warriors, yes, I have played it, I own it but it still doesn't change the fact that Nintendo, threw the Zelda thing in there instead of coming up with something more original because that's what Nintendo does. Remember the talk with Splatoon? It almost became a Mario game. Why? Because Nintendo can't think of anything half the time except for their old franchises. Luigi U is also not just a DLC as they gave it a physical release making it it's own game, just at a $30 value. They will take the name and reuse it over and over and over just like other companies just making the game games over and over. Sure, it is a bit different but the concept is the same. You guys talk about freshness as as it only being the core game which is a terrible way to look at it because it a shallow in thought. Nintendo uses the same franchises more often than these companies that do yearly releases. Such, the game might be different whether it be baseball, paintball, soccer, minigames,punching bags, racing or whatever. But they are just so overused it is ridiculous. Even now, it is like they are burned out of ideas so now we are getting a bunch of remakes. If you just continue to ignore all these and say it doesn't count then your points are basically becoming invalid because now you are letting one company get away with something while denouncing another for doing the same or similar or following a similar concept.
/end super wall of text
I definitely like this way of doing things.
@Darknyht I could honestly see Fire Emblem and Xenoblade rising to A rank. Also, if it weren't for the franchise's legacy, Zelda would drop to B rank.
@ikki5 Bruh, many people wanted those 3 characters and stages, and if you think it's unfair than don't buy it. At least it's not like Witcher 3 or Destiny or Batman DLC prices, all being way too overpriced.
@TheGreatLord If only they would do that again
@Hamedm1 And this is part of the problem right here, why DLC is effective and why it will only get worse.
this isnt a new stance I just want them to pull into that back catalog a wee bit more. Doesn't have to be a retail release... eshop has done well for titles like pushmo. I just want another 1080!!!
The only thing I dislike is the rehashing of all these mario games. They could work on title like FZero, Kid Icarus, Battalion Wars, Metroid, Ice Climbers, Balloon Fight, or heck, even new IPs like Splatoon! I don't want another mario sports game, or the renewal of a mario game that's just a few years old when there's plenty of older IPs that could use an update.
Overall, I think this is a good idea as long as they don't spread their teams too thin and can't develop new games.
@ikki5 Ehh, it's all optional anyway so you don't have to get anything if it bothers you so much. Besides, DLC has been coming out sporadically, which I feel gives consumers some time to simmer down and enjoy the current DLC and then be prepared for the next one.
I've bought Dream Land, Roy, Lucas and Ryu, then Peach's Castle and Hyrule Castle and I'm happy with all of it. I even bought the first set of Mii costumes while I was still into using Swordfighter, but I don't care anymore so I didn't get 2 and 3.
Seeing as how replayable Smash is, I don't care to pay the DLC prices when the content is good and will last me plenty. I also kinda share my Wii U for tournament setups, but even then I got the stuff I got because I wanted to. Again, if these so-called unfair prices bother you then don't get anything. It's not even that bad for the quality of what they create.
@Ryno After X thoughm I'm not sure what would really work.
Well if they stop making hardware after NX then the games don't need to be named to match. And I really don't why they would continue, just go 3rd party already.
I'm all cool with DLC if done right.
MK8- Fantastic DLC.
Smash- Overpriced. Why do we need to pay for costumes?
Splatoon- I wish the content was in the game. Free doesn't mean it's a good practice. That's like saying on disc content is ok as long as it's free.
A lot of you guys are saying Smash's DLC is overpriced. But let's look at it like this.
Here's what Ryu comes with:
1 character (a newcomer mind you)
1 stage + omega version
6 songs
4 trophies (2 of which you have to unlock)
All of that for $6 is a steal IMO. But the Mii costume packs seem a tad bit much.
Well. I guess this'll be my last Gen doing gaming. -_- Never thought the Big N would start nickel n diming people like everyone else. What a freakin shame.
@Tempestryke Yeah, such a shame that Nintendo adds extra content to their games after they're completed. How dare they!
@CapeSmash It is all about the amount of content for what they charge. Look at my reply to Angelic_Lapras_King. The DLC is over priced for what you get to compared what is in the game.
"Pokémon being the notable exception", when will people realise Nintendo DOESN'T make Pokemon, GameFreak does, Nintendo only own a 1/3 of the Pokemon franchise making it exclusive. Though I wish they would just buy GameFreak and finally make some console Pokemon games, at least like they use to, Pokemon Stadium anyone?
"Nintendo Not Looking To Churn Out Yearly Sequels To Its Core Franchises"
Good to hear! No Ass-creed antics, I don't like that!
@CapeSmash
I know you're being sarcastic but yes, that is my take. If I'm gonna drop 35-60 bucks on a game, I would prefer it to be complete, not hey, how'd you like a brand new level? Or an unlockable character? We'll put it in if you pay us. No. It was bad enough I did it with Skylanders but I really don't wanna do it again and not with my favorite gaming company.
I think Splatoon should be the model moving forward. So satisfying. Particularly if they can keep the current pace of updates. I could see Nintendo going the same route with Mario Kart.
@variableman But would that model be appropriate for games like Uncharted, Grim Fandango, or Metal Gear Solid?
I only have one question where is more Mario Kart 8 DLC!!!!
Nintendo DLC has been great for the games I care about. In fact, I really enjoy it as it brings new life to games that I enjoy but get passed up after awhile. Smash doesn't make sense to me though. Feels like it wasn't well planned and looks like nickel and diming. I don't judge it too much because it's just not my game. I can appreciate it but I'm not into it.
Splatoon will have my money if they do single player dlc.
I always thought Nintendo Land would just keep cycling in new rides as a promotion or some new levels... but few cared about that game and that thought was in a delusional time when the outlook for Wii U was much less desperate.
@Jimtaro truth
@MrMario02 None of those are Nintendo's core franchises. Nintendo can't control how third parties want to serialize or monetize their games.
@kensredemption Same with every NSMB game and 3D Land/3D World.
@variableman,
But from what I heard Splatoon came out as a bare-bones game. And now they are adding more content over time. Personally I think the core-game already should have been robust! And from there you can add updates.
Well at least the updates are free...
@Henmii Yes, at launch Splatoon was probably worth around $10, not $60.
@Grumblevolcano no tbh it was worth at least $69 in my book, I play it daily or almost daily since the day I got it...
I mean sure maybe it should of been cheaper, but that was the only dang thing NoA did wrong, every other region as far as IK had it for cheaper...
@Jimtaro well, just let me count all the upcoming Wii U games. Fatal frame for the horror fans and with good story, Super mario maker for bascially everyone, Star fox zero for old star fox fans and we have barely seen anything from it yet , its porbably getting polished right now, Xenoblade Chronicles X thats my most anticipiated game for this year it looks so awsome, SUper mario tennis not too interested in it myself but mario sports fans will probablly like it, and for the NA yoshis wooly world aswell, and that concludes only the 2015 release from Nintendo first party THAT WE KNOW OF!. I agree not overflowing with games but it satisfie me because the other times we get new 3DS titles
@97alexk
So that's five games (Europe) for the rest of 2015. Don't get me wrong, they should be good games, but if someone doesn't like them then they haven't got many new alternatives have they?
@Jimtaro no, i said what we know of, and thats just first party games, if someone doesnt like any of those games , then i wonder why they would buy a Wii U in the first place, but i doubt there is someone who doesnt like any of those games, and if they do, then they shouldnt buy Nintendo consoles, because thats what nintendo is, making good games, and not everyone likes good games, maybe someone wants more griddy like playstation or xbox games. Also a person who bought a Wii U maybe just bought it for Zelda Wii U and is not interested in buying something else, so that person has 2 options, either sell his Wii U and buy it again when zelda U comes out, or try out new games that maybe he/she is interested in, then they try something new and maybe they like it, and will continue trying new games.
Annualizing Pokémon will kill the series.
Naturally, they can keep up the act of every other year being about a remake, as to give some people a reason to pass, but there's only so many game left to remake before they have to start over.
@97alexk
Hmm...let's agree to disagree here. I'd be very surprised if Nintendo had more first party titles lined up for 2015 but haven't yet announced them. Especially when so many people are getting ready to bail out on the Wii U, keeping quiet about a big release now just wouldn't make sense. Likewise I wouldn't depend on third parties to fill the void either. As for someone not liking any of these five games, yeah, that happens. They could like every other Nintendo game but those five may not appeal to them and that would be perfectly normal. You can't expect them not to buy a Wii U on the basis of those five games alone, that would be silly, but it would be nice to have a few more alternatives to choose from (be it eShop or VC titles) rather than to depend on that five alone.
Thankfully we do have new VC titles coming and no doubt but it would be good if Nintendo promoted those, along with some higher quality eShop titles, alongside their retail releases. That way users who don't like the five retail games being released may still have something else to look forward to.
This sounds like complete hogwash. If Nintendo had the ability to crank out more games as quickly as other companies, I'm sure they would to. The fact of the matter is games like CoD have multiple development teams that release their games in cycles so that there is a new one every year. Nintendo does not have this with any of there games, and given how often they've run into delays this generation, it is obvious this is because they don't have that kind of labor power.
Pokemon being the exception proves this. They are able to crank those games out quickly because they reuse many of the same assets for subsequent games.
Zelda gets at least one game every year.
"Small, incremental changes may not be worth a whole new release." Unless we're talking about New Super Mario Bros. Then small, incremental changes per release is exactly how it's done.
"We see a huge surge in gameplay hours on Mario Kart when we [release new content]" How do they know? Are Nintendo anonymously collecting data from our activity log!? I think there's a setting in the system settings to enable or disable the sending of usage data.
EDIT: Yes, there is. On the home menu, click on your Mii on the top left, there's a button "sending information" it says something along the lines of "you have spotpass enabled to send usage information on how you use your console (such as play records)"
@variableman sorry. when you said it should be the model, I thought you meant for all games.
Tap here to load 116 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...