The character we saw in Other M cried at the idea of Ripley magically being alive/cloned for the 50th time. She was totally incapable of making decisions for herself. And she was totally incapable of taking care of herself, constantly needing to be saved by NPCs. Not only was this monstrously sexist, but it's pretty clear that this is not the behavior of a brave bounty hunter or galaxy-faring solemn warrior.
The Samus Aran in every game prior to Other M (maybe not Fusion) was a stoic warrior who relied on her own strengths, her own skills, her own intellect, and herself to accomplish tasks she willingly accepted. She not only required no saving from anyone, but she genocided entire planets and brought species to extinction by herself.
The only possibilities we have are:
The Samus in Other M is not the real Samus Aran, but a sad, broken clone created by the federation to be an obedient little tool, like a religiously indoctrinated slave housewife.
Or, Other M does not take place in the same Metroid universe and is trying to claim that the most emotionally crippled person in the galaxy is somehow thought of as heroic, even when she's recast as a damsel in distress in her own game, a game in which, it should be noted, she does not affect the plot at all.
If Nintendo is blatantly stupid enough to stick with the portrayal in Other M, then Samus is ruined, and Nintendo is sexist. However, they could save face, and simply erase Other M from the continuity, and remind us that the Samus of literally every other game is the real one. The hero. Not the weakling.
This further shows that there is really no where else to take Metroid in 2D, and that people should stop bloody begging for it. I've been saying this for ages, years. There is no more room for growth in 2D Metroid, and the 2D games since Super have all tried to clone Super Metroid in some capacity, getting worse every time, including Fusion, Zero Mission, and Other M--which, let's face it, was a 2D Metroid game in pretty much every conceivable way. Even the few 3D First-Person segments were painfully two-dimensional, lacking depth, control, or movement.
On top of this, Nintendo also has no idea how to grow the story in any meaningful way, and has actually done immense damage to the franchise in that regard. Samus Aran is not a hero anymore. She's a pathetic, useless, crying, awkward little girl constantly dependent on men to save her from even the most banal and predictable situation.
"Dude, do you even read news?! Need I remind you of Assassin's Creed Unity (still not running properly), Batman: Arkham Origins/Knight, Battlefield 3/4, Call of Duty: Ghosts, or Need for Speed: Rivals, to name some rather widely-known examples? It's not even Nintendo-related, it's literally everywhere, and it's infectious, seeing how even Nintendo starts putting out lazy efforts recently! How about you take off your pretty black-and-white glasses and start making sense for once, instead of spouting the usual baseless assumptions? Just because something isn't directed against Nintendo doesn't automatically imply fanboyism - but you only seem to know about this extreme end and yourself, apparently."
Calling these issues laziness is itself incredibly gross laziness and ignorance of how the industry works.
A game launching with issues does not mean the developers were lazy, and it's incredibly stupid to even assume so. You are also painstakingly cherry-picking and applying a few problems to the industry as a whole--oh, except for Nintendo who apparently never releases broken, buggy messes like Other M or Flingsmash or the countless Smash Bros bugs that have been documented. By your own logic, Nintendo is a lazy developer.
Arkham Origins, for instance, had problems because it was developed by a completely different studio than the studio that made the other Arkham games.
Yep, Battlefield 4 had serious problems. Lazy developers? How about placing the blame where it belongs--on EA who screwed up the handling of the game in a desperation to release it at a specific time to compete with Call of Duty.
Call of Duty: Ghosts suffered more from franchise fatigue than anything else, and an exodus of Infinity Ward's top guys in the interim. No, no, better that you blindly assume that everyone there is just f**king lazy because you aren't smart enough to understand these issues. Activision, quite clearly, paid attention to some of these issues and modified how the entire CoD franchise is handled, to the point that Advanced Warfare was highly celebrated.
Assassin's Creed Unity also struggled with franchise fatigue as well as new hardware struggles--it was the first next-gen Assassin's Creed game, so there are going to be learning curves and early missteps, which happens literally every new hardware generation. Hell, look back at the Metascores of X360 launch games--annualized sports titles fared worse on the X360 the first year than the PS2 at the same time (2005) because the new hardware brought learning curves.
No, no, no, just call them "laze," because it's so much easier than actually having understanding. Yes, it's unfortunate when these things happen, and rather than b**ching and moaning about developers and literally calling all of them lazy for a few struggling games, which has become a running theme in your posts, why not bother actually learning a few things about the industry? This is an industry that became notable over the last generation for working developers to the bones. When I tested at Activision, we worked 72-hour work weeks. Oh, but that's lazy to you, because a game somewhere launched with problems, so that makes all developers lazy--which you adamantly cling to--because "angry fanboy is angry," because I sincerely cannot think of any other reason you would refuse to learn any of this and wish to continue to grasp an apparent conspiracy theory that "all developers are just lazy."
Yes, bad games happen, mistakes are made, and sometimes--occasionally a developer is lazy. But a lazy developer isn't making Call of Duty or Batman or Battlefield. They're making Meme Run and The Letter and Big Rigs Racing and cheap clones of Angry Birds. Those are lazy developers.
On top of this, you completely, deliberately ignore the impact that publishers have on these things. Is it the developer's fault Battlefield 4 had problems? Or should we be looking at EA's management instead for rushing an incomplete game with known issues? It's not like it was the first time EA did this--as it happened with Sim City one year before.
Though it is disturbingly hilarious for the pot (you) to be calling the kettle (me) black in the "baseless assumptions" category as you have taken a single baseless assumption and applied it to an entire industry, targeting every 3rd party developer as equally lazy. No, your assessment is insanely lazy, and solidifies the definition of ignorance.
You have failed to supply valid evidence to your claim that the majority of the industry is made up of lazy developers, and instead cherry picked a few games with issues, applied them to literally everybody while you refuse to understand so you can cling to being wrong. That is not something that should be a point of pride.
"Cinematic games have gotten a bad reputation lately..." You have apparently based this comment entirely on The Order 1886 and somehow failed to realize that cinematic titles like Witcher III, Telltale's games, Life is Strange, GTA, Metal Gear Solid, Far Cry 4, Tomb Raider, Alien Isolation, and numerous others have been performing extremely strongly. Hell, Witcher 3 basically outsold Mario Kart 8 in a month.
I deliver endless basis and evidence for my claims, which is part of why my posts are so lengthy. But, you have to be smart enough to pay attention.
My point about not being the only person to point out the gradual decline was not to make it right--it was because it's been made readily available on this site numerous times. It's not hard to find the evidence or follow it.
Oh well. One can't teach someone to hear who is adamant to keep his ears plugged.
I don't know about Sony, because of their own financial woes, but yeah, I would not be surprised to see Capcom bought out at some point this generation.
Oh, you didn't ask, but there are potentially three other places besides Disney that might gobble up Nintendo, if it came down to it: Google, Amazon, or Apple.
My bet would be Apple. I think if Apple seriously wanted to get back into gaming, that'd be the way they'd do it.
Although, I've read recently that Amazon is actually a company with surprisingly serious financial problems.
Being in the black has it's caveats. Even Iwata has addressed this several times, and promised to be back in "Nintendo-like profits" by the fiscal year ending March 2017.
According to the link you provided, if I'm reading this correctly, Nintendo only owns 16% of their shares, as noted by "*The Company owns 23,297,005 treasury shares, which are excluded from the major shareholders above."
It's debatable to address GB and GBC as separate, and I can see why Nintendo would for marketing purposes. At the end of the day, though, they are quite literally identical hardware, but one has very limited color added. They are the same thing. The hardware is what matters here, not the marketing.
It can also be argued that the only reason the GBC (alone) had lower sales than GBA was due to it's very obvious stop-gap status as it came out only about a year and a half before the GBA. That is very much the definition of a stop-gap or revision. Calling the GBC a different platform is like calling the New Nintendo 3DS a different platform. They aren't.
I think Capcom may still be hovering around a potential failure point, as they were one of the companies to announce a deliberate focus on mobile games--along with Konami, Sega, and Square-Enix. The company announced last year that they were open for a merger or a sale, and it may well be only a matter of time. Capcom may only need one or two gross missteps to push the company out of their independence.
I'm not sure I even have the time to address such a level of ignorance. But I will note that the 3DS selling 50 million sounds good, right up until you realize it's the worst selling Nintendo portable, and fell not just below DS numbers (hovering around 1/3 of them), but below GBA sales--which were well below Game Boy/GBC sales.
I am not the only person here to point this out, but the Wii and DS were flukes. Statistical anomalies. Nintendo's hardware has been dropping in sales and market share since the NES and Game Boy, and the Wii U and 3DS fell to below the levels of the GC and GBA. The downward trend continues.
The over-reliance on gimmicks has driven off most consumers and the failure to make generation-equivalent hardware has helped drive off third parties. They have a lengthy series of mistakes before and now after their lucky money-printing fluke. And while we may find good in the Wii and DS, we need to remember that Nintendo screwed up something hugely in that they were totally unable to maintain the success of those two platforms.
It's also highly debatable that Nintendo is actually profitable now. Several of their earnings reports weighed very heavily on favorable exchange rates or other financial tricks, not necessarily "selling better" or "making more money." Keep in mind, at one point, they slashed some salaries, and they have routinely stated that they cannot drop the price of the Wii U or it would impact their income. That is a very fine line.
Just because a company has been around a long time doesn't mean they can't fail or be sold off. Such a statement is the height of making a fallacy.
By all means, supply the evidence. And since you made this statement targeting a clear majority of developers, you will need to provide evidence to support this case.
Otherwise, this sounds like the typical Nintendo fan attack against anyone making video games who isn't "Nintendo."
You should also properly support your argument by looking at equivalent titles from Nintendo for this to properly define what is "developer laziness," and not just an angry Nintendo fan hating 3rd parties.
There's absolutely no guarantee that Nintendo fans would buy the definitive version of any third party game. Hell, we have evidence that the exact opposite is true, as Nintendo fans did get definitive editions of Deus Ex, Arkham City, and Ninja Gaiden 3 to name a few. These didn't garner better sales than non-definitive versions from other platforms.
Nintendo could choose not to announce who may buy or merge with them, but it's not like that would remain secret for long. Eventually, we'd be seeing that Mario game coming out with a new logo on the cover. Be it Microsoft, Sony, Disney, or whatever.
Those franchises would still end up somewhere. One way or another, someone would own them. There's money to be made. If Nintendo was closing their doors, that's a sign that the money is gone. Those executives and investors would want their money back and to take advantage. If the company was really closing their doors, why would they even care where the franchises go?
They won't. They'll care about closing those doors with money in their pockets.
No company is invincible or immortal. Mistakes can still sink a company, and Nintendo has generations worth of mistakes stacking up for them, rather like Sega did. In almost every way, their stance in the industry mirrors Sega and Atari before they stopped making hardware--again, with some exception.
They would go third party first, bankrupt second, sell off assets third. There is no reason at all to think Nintendo would behave any magically different manner than any other company.
How much you personally care about hardware in the console doesn't matter. Surely you recognize that. That power under the hood matters for getting third parties on board and being competitive.
They are not one of the wealthiest companies in the world. Wealthy, yes, one of the wealthiest? Hardly. And Nintendo going under is a very real possibility. Why not talk about it?
You're playing with words. When anyone says "Nintendo fans don't buy third party games," they are obviously indicating it about Nintendo consoles. Anyone else, using the term "Nintendo fans" is meaningless. The number of Nintendo fans that actually support 3rd parties on the hardware is clearly, obviously, notably, painstakingly small.
I strongly disagree. Nintendo is just another corporation.
If Nintendo collapsed, they wouldn't be allowed to kill their copyrights and trademarks--they'd be sued into oblivion for even attempting it by their investors and debtors and it would only make such a situation worse. It's grossly, immeasurably unrealistic. Have you ever heard of a company doing that? Ever? Because it's not going to happen.
Either they'd sell them off, their buyer would sell some off, or their debtors would sell them off to recover debts. Sorry man, but the very idea is absurdly ridiculous. At the end of the day, they are just another corporation like any other.
If Nintendo does go down the drain, they will be selling off those franchises. Yes, Nintendo is notoriously arrogant and protective, but they aren't invincible. They would have to answer to huge numbers of investors who could tie the company up in courts for ages for failing to make up losses--and that includes selling off IPs. If worse comes to worse, either Nintendo will sell them off--or they will be divided up by someone else, like a bank or government entity in order to have the money to clean up the pieces.
The only thing Nintendo could do is suddenly kill their copyrights and trademarks as some kind of bitter spite, but if Nintendo fell to the Atari level, franchises would indeed be sold off. Their arrogance and stubbornness would only go so far.
This idea that "they'd never sell" is just as ridiculous as the belief that they can "fail for decades and be just fine." No, those are both staggeringly incorrect concepts.
This article twists the power argument all over the place, and seems to make a supporting case for yet another under-powered gimmick machine.
Let's be clear here, if Nintendo is banking on another gimmick machine, they are failing from the start. The new "gimmick" the industry is looking forward to has to do with VR and stuff like Hololens, largely because they seem less like gimmicks and more like industry evolution. But after the Wii era ended, and the Wii U and Kinect 2 bombed, it's become crystal clear that consumers are not interested in gimmicks.
The power of the NX is going to be important, because if it falls behind like the Wii U and Wii and cannot handle modern game engines easily or smoothly, they are going to be starting from a losing position. This tells third parties that, not only do they have to contend with a core fanbase with a spiteful and adversarial history towards them, but they'll have to do extra work for almost certainly guaranteed smaller sales for the "privilege" of putting their game on a Nintendo system.
Frankly, as I've noted, this machine might have a chance if it is the integrated platform, and July sees them release the portable half early and separately, while they release the base unit later, maybe November or February 2017. But there is ample evidence that the Wii and DS were little more than fads and flukes, particularly when we realize that the Wii U and 3DS are actually continuing Nintendo's decades-long downward trend and are actually selling below GC and GBA numbers.
Nintendo is fighting against an industry where the vast majority of people are just waiting on them to finally just go third party. They are fighting against a perception of gimmicky consoles. They are fighting against a perception of irrelevance. Underpowering the hardware in the NX, even a little, could have staggering repercussions. Thus far, it there is already more negativity towards NX than there was against Wii U--and we all saw how well that system performed.
Fair enough on the positive measure of the secrecy. I misread that portion. Nintendo still did not say any 3rd parties were saying anything positive about NX at E3. If you are going to talk up the secrecy in a form that we shouldn't trust critical words at their value, then you shouldn't talk up the positives in that manner, either.
Your post essentially said, "there is secrecy around NX, and we shouldn't trust these rumors. But here are some positive rumors that people liked NX behind the scenes at E3. Let's listen to those because they're kinda positive."
Every time someone attempts to attack someone else as "you just say mean things about Nintendo just cuz," all they're doing is ignoring valid points, jamming fingers in their ears, covering their eyes, and flying the banner of the fanboy. Those comments do not help anyone make their points. Get over it. Address comments and don't be a child. It also illustrates that you are extremely selective in which posts you bother reading, indicating that you have an agenda to--for whatever reason--continually demonize another person.
Indeed, my arguments for Nintendo going third party are overwhelmingly positive because it would finally be a way for the company to get their games to the audiences they deserve. Fanboys hate hearing that because, apparently, what they want most of all is that hardware, regardless of the games and, evidently, they want Nintendo's games to sell to only the smallest possible audiences.
_The reason a lot of people are saying it is a 'console', is because Iwata clearly stated it would be a dedicated gaming console. Also, Nintendo have said they have had very positive feedback from 3rd party Devs when they pitched 'NX' to them at E3. If it is going to be a useless, underpowered console, no 3rd party Dev worth their salt would even be interested. Also, the amount of security surrounding 'NX' is immense. The chances that someone, who in the past has been correct on a couple of things, has managed to find out the specs and everything else is pretty remote. I say, wait and see. Why start slagging Nintendo yet again, when we have no idea what they are planning. If someone else tweets that they have seen the specs, and are amazed at them, are you going to believe them?????_
I will point out that secrecy around NX is meaningless. There is secrecy around everything Nintendo does, and around every major project in this industry. That doesn't mean it's automatically going to be "good." Just because there is secrecy and security doesn't mean that being hidden is good.
Nintendo also said nothing at all about positive views on NX at E3. Nintendo didn't say anything about NX at E3. The information is leaks and rumors from industry sources, not from Nintendo at all. It was not known until after E3 that Nintendo was apparently showing off the hardware behind the scenes. This also does not automatically mean it's going to be good or impressive hardware. People can be interested or intrigued, but that doesn't mean they are ready to support the hardware or that it'll be amazing. Third parties were also interested in the Wii U early on and behind the scenes, and look how that turned out.
Unfortunately, most of what we've been hearing about NX mirrors the way Nintendo talked about the DS, Wii, 3DS, and Wii U before launch. Lots of "change the way we play games" and "new ideas" and whatnot. Almost nothing about how they've learned from their mistakes.
Just being under-powered compared to PS4 wouldn't necessarily put it closer to Wii U, but if the rumors of it coming as early as July next year (which I doubt, I'd put my money on November next year), but it would be risky, and potentially very damaging way to go. If you're putting out new hardware, it should be more powerful or equivalent to what is already out, or consumers aren't going to see the point.
For instance, if someone came out with a new phone to compete with an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy, would you want to buy it if it was less powerful than either of those, but cost around the same? Of course not. And that's one of the big things that hurt Wii U. Sure, it has four times the RAM of the X360, but equivalent CPU and GPU heft, while being $150 more expensive. Consumers looked at it as a system the same power as the X360, without a harddrive, and fewer games, but for $150 more (at launch).
I think 3rd parties are mostly burned out with Nintendo's nonsense. The evidence isn't just the Wii U, but the 3DS. When a system with 50 million in sales struggles to get 3rd party support, something is seriously wrong with the hardware maker and their place in the industry.
We, of course, always need to keep in mind that these are just rumors. But as they continue to spread, that's going to put pressure on Nintendo to act, and get their reveal addressed before too much damage is done outside of their control. At the same time, I remember hearing rumors that the "next Nintendo system" (then, Cafe) would feature a nearly 6" screen built into the controller. I thought it was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. But here we are, and that game system exists and is dying at retail.
Nintendo doesn't seem to have learned their lesson about weaker hardware, apparently still believing the Wii was a genuine success and not, as reality shows, that it was a fluke, a fad. Their "we're not competitors" stance has only made them look irrelevant and hypocritical--particularly at points where Iwata literally used a cherry-picked list of Metacritic scores to make Nintendo look "better" than the competition they aren't competing against.
This company is delivering face-palm inducing moments at an unprecedented rate these days.
No, I'm not wrong. Just like Wii U, the NX will be seen by the industry as a whole as a lame stop-gap, especially if it's under-powered yet again. And the problem is that perception becomes reality to wide audiences. Nintendo sitting there pulling the "non-competition card" again will also not benefit them as it hasn't before. Instead, they'll continue to be seen as a fringe that doesn't understand the industry.
If Nintendo doesn't want the NX to be ignored as some kind of lame-ass stop-gap machine, then it needs to be notably more powerful than what's out now for the same price--essentially, they need to step up to the plate and bring competition.
Though as @Jetset notes, if this rumor is true and the NX is under-powered again, that points to another gimmicky Nintendo console destined to be quickly shoved to the side like the Wii U. The rumors are starting to roll for NX, and already they aren't sounding particularly attractive.
I'm literally not planning to get any of these games. I have not been impressed with anything Nintendo's done with multiplayer lately. First Splatoon is a shorter game than any Call of Duty, is missing typical online gaming features, and lacks a co-op mode for offline play. I'm sure these other games will also all fail to have voice communication and will be short-sighted in some variety of elements. None of them looked particularly fun, either.
Oh well. NX is coming up. Maybe they'll do some of this stuff next time around.
The GamePad has not made gaming better, and this can be said quite objectively.
Again, what did it do to make Mario Kart better? What did it do to make Pikmin better? What did it do to make New Super Mario Bros better? The vast majority of reports on Star Fox Zero certainly do not sound better in any regard. What did the GamePad do to make Smash Bros better?
Pikmin is generally better played with a Wii Remote and Nunchuck. Mario U, Mario Kart, Smash Bros? They all play exactly the same. If the Wii U GamePad truly made things better, why don't we see that? Why hasn't it's "big improvements" seen wider industry acceptance?
For that matter, by all means, explain how it's made gaming better. How has the GamePad made RPG's better? How did it make Zelda truly better? Even Nintendo fans tend to be critical of Nintendo Land for being a largely lackluster affair.
Look, playing games elsewhere doesn't mean you don't harbor fanboy tendencies. Apologetics about how the GamePad "made games better" both in the face of rampant failure to do so and the number of games that don't use it to any effect at all--while offering no examples smacks of fanboyism. Sorry to say. The GamePad has failed to live up to it's potential, is seen by most of the industry as a lame gimmick or a hassle, and frankly, many of the things it attempts as "game changers" are laughable. Is looking at your lap to view a map really better than just having it pop-up onscreen? Even if you like the concept, this is hardly a game changer or an improvement in any regard.
The GamePad didn't improve things or change anything. It just made some things more cumbersome. Rather than letting players look at a single screen to play their games, they were forced to awkwardly look at their lap for some of their gameplay.
So how did it change things? How has it improved our games and gaming? How did it revolutionize RPGs and FPSs and platformers? By all means, explain why Mario Kart 8, Donkey Kong County, Captain Toad, Splatoon, New Super Mario U, Pikmin 3, and Smash Bros could never work on any other system. Because if the GamePad is truly a game changer that made games better, then surely, these games could never be playable on any other system Or perhaps they could be, because if the GamePad really did make things better, then we'd be seeing it cloned for the PS4, XBO, and PCs.
I noted that--just not with the specific "a year behind" note. Perhaps not very clear, but my note on the "PS2 seeing it's first major hits" has to do with it heading into it's strong second year while the GC was going to have to attempt to compete with typical first-year console woes.
Most major titles start coming out around the 1-year anniversary of a console--for instance, Gears of War and Kid Icarus: Uprising both landed around the 1-year anniversary of their machines.
Well, the public reveal of the Xbox One, Playstation 4, and 3DS, all occurred within a year of their launch. The 3DS only didn't occur the same year because it came out in March after. But within a year of it's E3 reveal.
Both the XBO and PS4 were publicly revealed in early 2013, and both launched later in 2013.
The GameCube launched with Star Wars: Rogue Squadron II. That was one of the biggest launch games ever, in terms of heft and impact. The problem was that the GameCube was launching after the N64 had already left a sour taste in the mouths of gamers, at a time when the PS2 was seeing it's first major hits, and when the Xbox slammed into the industry amid a torrent of media promotion.
Nintendo slowly sauntered to the marketplace last to the party, and with little fanfare. Even Rogue Leader couldn't turn the tide, but it was a bonafide hit.
The Wii itself had a successful launch, but it was still plagued by droughts and a lackluster launch line-up. Just because the console sold well doesn't mean it didn't have issues.
No doubt, any Nintendo fanboy would be super quick to make similar charges to the PS4 which had a monumental start out the gate, but has featured the typical first-year drought and line-up of ports.
Nintendo also said Twilight Princess would be on GameCube. That didn't stop it from being better off as a Wii launch title.
And I highly doubt the NX will utilize the GamePad--at least in any serious manner. That device has been nothing but a set-back for them and the Wii U, and yes, I'm aware that a micro-percentage of Wii U fanboys super totally love it for some reason. But the reality is that it's damaged the console and their image. Better to drop it like a Virtual Boy.
I think a July 2016 release is beyond foolhardy for a game console because it's freakin' July and that's when we want to be outside. Unless, of course, NX is indeed the oft-fantasized unified console half portable/half home console, which is then somehow encouraged to be taken outdoors.
But this statement about July 2016, if even true at all, likely indicates when the hardware needs to be ready for Nintendo, not necessarily for an actual release. November is the proper time to release a new console, though as @IceClimbers noted, October might be wiser for Nintendo so they can get a jump on the other guys heading into the holiday season.
One thing that's almost certain, is that 2017 will be way too late, as by that time, the PS4 and XBO will be at their absolute strongest, and Nintendo will just look like a pathetic mid-generation stopgap to be ignored--like the Jaguar and 3DO well before it, and the risky early release of the ill-fated Dreamcast. Granted, that only hit one year "too early," but still with ample enough time for serious damage to be done.
You are demonstrably wrong and full of crap. Congratulations on defining what it means to be wrong. Not only isn't Nintendo's stock out-performing everyone, it's the lowest of these companies.
Numbers taken from CNN Money.
The rest of your post is equally full of nonsense. Given that you stated demonstrably false information, it would seem you are the one trolling.
That you can't see the big picture does not mean I cannot. That is a bold and unsupported assumption.
Nintendo going third party would allow them to reach the audiences their games deserve. The hardware is an obvious barrier to this for most gamers and consumers. This will be supported or not once we see their mobile titles start rolling out--in which they will be acting as a third party.
Once the barrier of the Nintendo hardware is removed, the games will sell to wider audiences and far more people. Again, on a platform with high sales, Mario Kart managed over 30 million in sales. On a platform with fewer than 10 million sales, Mario Kart's numbers fall well short of that.
Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, even Pokemon. These franchises have long since ceased being titles that sell hardware. And because of this, they aren't reaching new consumers or growing their audiences. This will continue being a problem as long as Nintendo forces people to buy their hardware to play them.
Clearly, the hardware side is not benefiting them or aiding them anymore. The Wii U and 3DS are selling below the GC and GBA, continuing a downward trend for the company since their peak with the NES.
Nintendo once took over this industry because their games were available in a wide variety of places allowing them to build a reputation and presence. This helped them when they finally released the NES--on top of their draconian business practices that largely killed any competition. But people were aware of things like Mario Bros and Donkey Kong before the NES ever saw the light of day.
These games aren't being played by anyone but core Nintendo fans anymore. No one else is finding or enjoying Zelda for the first time with rare exception. I'd prefer the company to continue to grow and reach more people. Every single time you people argue against them going third party, you are stating that you want them to continue shrinking to ever smaller audiences, because that is exactly the pattern established.
They will not be supporting Wii U after NX launches. This is the same corporate speak they delivered concerning the DS when they said they were going to continue supporting the GBA--a system quietly phased out over the next year. If NX is successful, Wii U will be dumped quickly and quietly.
Nintendo has already "Sega'd" itself, but instead of too much crappy hardware, it was with stupid peripherals and badly implemented motion controls and gimmicks. Nintendo gimmicked themselves into the same position Sega was in years ago. They are in the same position now that Sega was in before the launch of the Dreamcast. A company limping to an early end of a console while trying to get their new "saving grace" ready for the public to hopefully make everyone forget. The Wii U is their Saturn.
The only difference is that Nintendo has the generally successful handheld and more money in the bank, but that won't last if they can't actually turn things around.
If those third parties are starting with ports--which is most likely the case, then they will have plenty of time with the system to get them out, especially if Nintendo was smart for once and built it on x86 architecture and it's friendly to modern game engines. Yeah, big IF, I know.
But that's over a year until NX releases, which is plenty of time to get ports under way, especially if they are engine-friendly. Say, if NX can handle Unreal 4, then porting an Unreal 4 game would be relatively easy.
But you're right to the point that Nintendo should be targeting the 130ish million X360/PS3 owners who haven't upgraded yet, and try to steer them away from PS4 and XBO. The problem there is that Nintendo would have to be offering up something insanely compelling to do so. I'm a gamer on both of those platforms, I have my Xbox Live profile and my PSN profile, and I have histories with them--Achievements, Trophies, friends lists, account and game download histories, etc. These are incentives that keep my attention to those systems.
Yes, it was fun to start over in a sense when I switched from X360 to PS4 this generation, and build up my PSN profile instead, but I still have my Xbox profile and I still go back to it.
The other thing is that Nintendo has grown a number of unsavory reputations where gaming is concerned. They're the kiddie company. The casual company. The Mario, Zelda, Pokemon company. Nintendo is not where you go unless you want casual, kiddie, or MZP fare. And even then, if you want some of that stuff, Nintendo is still a hard sell because it's going to lack so much else. Nintendo is the company known for stupid gimmicks like motion controls and the GamePad. Nintendo is the company known for having weak, backwards policies for online gaming. Nintendo is the company that is totally unfriendly to streaming and video services. You can't play movie disks on Nintendo hardware.
These are all red flags that Nintendo has had for generations now, and they need to magically over-turn all of these issues if they are to appeal to those X360/PS3 owners waiting to take the next-gen plunge. Yes, they should still try to, but it's an awful lot to try to conquer. And I still don't see them interested in competition or actually trying to do something worthwhile on this front.
If you actually bothered to read any of my posts, you'd have actually seen ample justification and reason for Nintendo to go third party. It's not my fault that you refuse to pay attention. Is it a waste of my time to mention those points, yet again? Will you just ignore them again? Or will you bother to read them?
Because they are really quite simple:
1. Nintendo's hardware is unwanted by the vast majority of consumers. They want the games, but not the hardware. If Nintendo wants to reach these people, they need to start putting the games on other hardware.
2. Nintendo's hardware, outside of flukes like Wii and DS, sell worse with every generation, which means that the games are reaching smaller and smaller audiences every time. If Nintendo wants to reach a wider audience, third party is key--and they recognize this on mobile. They'll sell way more software on a platform with nearly a billion users as opposed to their portable system, with only 50 million.
By the time this generation closes out, the Wii U will not have even sold over 12 million (an estimate based on current failure to garner sales). But the PS4 will likely be a 100/130-million-selling platform, and the XBO will probably be quite close, around 80 million. That's potentially a consumer base of around 200 million people, as opposed to the 12 million that the Wii U might not even reach. I suppose you think appealing to a small number of people is better?
The Wii helps us understand this. The Wii had 100 million in sales, and Nintendo's properties sold some of their biggest numbers on there--Mario Kart Wii itself outsold the N64 console resting at a staggering ~35 million in sales. If the hardware is in enough hands, Nintendo's games sell pretty well. But Nintendo has a history of being terrible at selling the hardware, and people--as noted--do not want it.
But if those games are on hardware people do want or already have? They'll sell.
This concept could not be simpler to understand. Unless you have your raving fanboy goggles on and fingers in your ears. I guess we'll see if you plugged everything up and avoided this explanation yet again.
Ouya had a slew of other problems outside of the Android OS--which was arguably it's biggest strength as it allowed a plethora of games to be released on it (the library is surprisingly large). So to blame Ouya's problems on the Android OS is grossly negligent and ignorant of the platform's actual woes. I actually own one (as well as the ill-fated GameStick that GameStop murdered), and the Ouya has other issues that are far more damning. One of which was a lack of notable marketing funds or heft, and a big one was the "every game has a demo/trial" which ultimately devoured potential profits and sales as studies have shown that demos actually appear to be damaging to sales, not beneficial to them. Which is why you don't see nearly as many any more.
And again, if the PS4 ran on Android, it would still be just as powerful and just as supported, because it's the PS4 and Sony knows how to get the 3rd party support. Pretty much the only reason it doesn't use Android is because Sony is a big enough company to build their own flashy proprietary OS, which is actually, arguably, the best OS of any game console ever made--and a far cry from the PS3's "worst OS and user interface ever."
Get over the whole "Android console" thing. The only reason those microconsoles used Android was because it was cheap, easy, and versatile. It has absolutely nothing to do with hardware heft, game content, or game quality, and to say so is powerfully ignorant.
So, Shigeru Miyamoto frowns up on the idea of showing teasers for games that won't be released for a year or two.
Meanwhile, we were shown a teaser for Zelda U last year, and it likely won't be out until next fall on NX, and the rest of the world is still waiting for Xenoblade Chronicles X, which was revealed over two years ago and was dragged to E3 three years in a row.
He's basically demonizing MS and Sony for doing what Nintendo has always done. In other words, he's making lame excuses because they didn't have anything to show because those games are in development for NX and they aren't ready to show them just yet.
Great Cthulhu's beard, I'm sick of Iwata's weasel words. The man spills out so many words and never says a damn thing. What the hell is a "Nintendo-like solution?" That doesn't tell me anything. Hell, after seeing so many other "Nintendo-like solutions" like Amiibo and "maybe we can inspire 3rd parties to come back by not trying very hard," I can't say this really imbues me with glowing confidence.
"Joint initiatives" happening "below the surface" does not mean anything, either. Okay, with whom? In what capacity? Does something lazy like "unlock Mario costume in game with Mario Amiibo" count as one of these "joint initiatives" or is it something more involved, like having, say, Capcom handle development of one of Nintendo's properties?
They might as well have just had a beauty pageant contestant give a rambling "well, see, I think that, you know, answers are important, when, like, questions are asked and that companies--and we're a company, like--have solutions and considerations for those, um, questions and for like, everyone to have peace on the earth instead of all the wars." Iwata's responses to these questions are that useful.
Comments 2,916
Re: Unseen64 Digs Up Development Insights Into Metroid Prime: Hunters, Dread and Federation Force
@Aromaiden
The character we saw in Other M cried at the idea of Ripley magically being alive/cloned for the 50th time. She was totally incapable of making decisions for herself. And she was totally incapable of taking care of herself, constantly needing to be saved by NPCs. Not only was this monstrously sexist, but it's pretty clear that this is not the behavior of a brave bounty hunter or galaxy-faring solemn warrior.
The Samus Aran in every game prior to Other M (maybe not Fusion) was a stoic warrior who relied on her own strengths, her own skills, her own intellect, and herself to accomplish tasks she willingly accepted. She not only required no saving from anyone, but she genocided entire planets and brought species to extinction by herself.
The only possibilities we have are:
The Samus in Other M is not the real Samus Aran, but a sad, broken clone created by the federation to be an obedient little tool, like a religiously indoctrinated slave housewife.
Or, Other M does not take place in the same Metroid universe and is trying to claim that the most emotionally crippled person in the galaxy is somehow thought of as heroic, even when she's recast as a damsel in distress in her own game, a game in which, it should be noted, she does not affect the plot at all.
If Nintendo is blatantly stupid enough to stick with the portrayal in Other M, then Samus is ruined, and Nintendo is sexist. However, they could save face, and simply erase Other M from the continuity, and remind us that the Samus of literally every other game is the real one. The hero. Not the weakling.
Re: Unseen64 Digs Up Development Insights Into Metroid Prime: Hunters, Dread and Federation Force
This further shows that there is really no where else to take Metroid in 2D, and that people should stop bloody begging for it. I've been saying this for ages, years. There is no more room for growth in 2D Metroid, and the 2D games since Super have all tried to clone Super Metroid in some capacity, getting worse every time, including Fusion, Zero Mission, and Other M--which, let's face it, was a 2D Metroid game in pretty much every conceivable way. Even the few 3D First-Person segments were painfully two-dimensional, lacking depth, control, or movement.
On top of this, Nintendo also has no idea how to grow the story in any meaningful way, and has actually done immense damage to the franchise in that regard. Samus Aran is not a hero anymore. She's a pathetic, useless, crying, awkward little girl constantly dependent on men to save her from even the most banal and predictable situation.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Kaze_Memaryu
"Dude, do you even read news?! Need I remind you of Assassin's Creed Unity (still not running properly), Batman: Arkham Origins/Knight, Battlefield 3/4, Call of Duty: Ghosts, or Need for Speed: Rivals, to name some rather widely-known examples? It's not even Nintendo-related, it's literally everywhere, and it's infectious, seeing how even Nintendo starts putting out lazy efforts recently!
How about you take off your pretty black-and-white glasses and start making sense for once, instead of spouting the usual baseless assumptions? Just because something isn't directed against Nintendo doesn't automatically imply fanboyism - but you only seem to know about this extreme end and yourself, apparently."
Calling these issues laziness is itself incredibly gross laziness and ignorance of how the industry works.
A game launching with issues does not mean the developers were lazy, and it's incredibly stupid to even assume so. You are also painstakingly cherry-picking and applying a few problems to the industry as a whole--oh, except for Nintendo who apparently never releases broken, buggy messes like Other M or Flingsmash or the countless Smash Bros bugs that have been documented. By your own logic, Nintendo is a lazy developer.
Arkham Origins, for instance, had problems because it was developed by a completely different studio than the studio that made the other Arkham games.
Yep, Battlefield 4 had serious problems. Lazy developers? How about placing the blame where it belongs--on EA who screwed up the handling of the game in a desperation to release it at a specific time to compete with Call of Duty.
Call of Duty: Ghosts suffered more from franchise fatigue than anything else, and an exodus of Infinity Ward's top guys in the interim. No, no, better that you blindly assume that everyone there is just f**king lazy because you aren't smart enough to understand these issues. Activision, quite clearly, paid attention to some of these issues and modified how the entire CoD franchise is handled, to the point that Advanced Warfare was highly celebrated.
Assassin's Creed Unity also struggled with franchise fatigue as well as new hardware struggles--it was the first next-gen Assassin's Creed game, so there are going to be learning curves and early missteps, which happens literally every new hardware generation. Hell, look back at the Metascores of X360 launch games--annualized sports titles fared worse on the X360 the first year than the PS2 at the same time (2005) because the new hardware brought learning curves.
No, no, no, just call them "laze," because it's so much easier than actually having understanding. Yes, it's unfortunate when these things happen, and rather than b**ching and moaning about developers and literally calling all of them lazy for a few struggling games, which has become a running theme in your posts, why not bother actually learning a few things about the industry? This is an industry that became notable over the last generation for working developers to the bones. When I tested at Activision, we worked 72-hour work weeks. Oh, but that's lazy to you, because a game somewhere launched with problems, so that makes all developers lazy--which you adamantly cling to--because "angry fanboy is angry," because I sincerely cannot think of any other reason you would refuse to learn any of this and wish to continue to grasp an apparent conspiracy theory that "all developers are just lazy."
Yes, bad games happen, mistakes are made, and sometimes--occasionally a developer is lazy. But a lazy developer isn't making Call of Duty or Batman or Battlefield. They're making Meme Run and The Letter and Big Rigs Racing and cheap clones of Angry Birds. Those are lazy developers.
On top of this, you completely, deliberately ignore the impact that publishers have on these things. Is it the developer's fault Battlefield 4 had problems? Or should we be looking at EA's management instead for rushing an incomplete game with known issues? It's not like it was the first time EA did this--as it happened with Sim City one year before.
Though it is disturbingly hilarious for the pot (you) to be calling the kettle (me) black in the "baseless assumptions" category as you have taken a single baseless assumption and applied it to an entire industry, targeting every 3rd party developer as equally lazy. No, your assessment is insanely lazy, and solidifies the definition of ignorance.
You have failed to supply valid evidence to your claim that the majority of the industry is made up of lazy developers, and instead cherry picked a few games with issues, applied them to literally everybody while you refuse to understand so you can cling to being wrong. That is not something that should be a point of pride.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Kage_88
"Cinematic games have gotten a bad reputation lately..." You have apparently based this comment entirely on The Order 1886 and somehow failed to realize that cinematic titles like Witcher III, Telltale's games, Life is Strange, GTA, Metal Gear Solid, Far Cry 4, Tomb Raider, Alien Isolation, and numerous others have been performing extremely strongly. Hell, Witcher 3 basically outsold Mario Kart 8 in a month.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Timppis
I deliver endless basis and evidence for my claims, which is part of why my posts are so lengthy. But, you have to be smart enough to pay attention.
My point about not being the only person to point out the gradual decline was not to make it right--it was because it's been made readily available on this site numerous times. It's not hard to find the evidence or follow it.
Oh well. One can't teach someone to hear who is adamant to keep his ears plugged.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@BinaryFragger
It was probably for marketing purposes then.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
I don't know about Sony, because of their own financial woes, but yeah, I would not be surprised to see Capcom bought out at some point this generation.
Oh, you didn't ask, but there are potentially three other places besides Disney that might gobble up Nintendo, if it came down to it: Google, Amazon, or Apple.
My bet would be Apple. I think if Apple seriously wanted to get back into gaming, that'd be the way they'd do it.
Although, I've read recently that Amazon is actually a company with surprisingly serious financial problems.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Timppis
Being in the black has it's caveats. Even Iwata has addressed this several times, and promised to be back in "Nintendo-like profits" by the fiscal year ending March 2017.
According to the link you provided, if I'm reading this correctly, Nintendo only owns 16% of their shares, as noted by "*The Company owns 23,297,005 treasury shares, which are excluded from the major shareholders above."
And that is only 16% of the chart.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
It's debatable to address GB and GBC as separate, and I can see why Nintendo would for marketing purposes. At the end of the day, though, they are quite literally identical hardware, but one has very limited color added. They are the same thing. The hardware is what matters here, not the marketing.
It can also be argued that the only reason the GBC (alone) had lower sales than GBA was due to it's very obvious stop-gap status as it came out only about a year and a half before the GBA. That is very much the definition of a stop-gap or revision. Calling the GBC a different platform is like calling the New Nintendo 3DS a different platform. They aren't.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
I think Capcom may still be hovering around a potential failure point, as they were one of the companies to announce a deliberate focus on mobile games--along with Konami, Sega, and Square-Enix. The company announced last year that they were open for a merger or a sale, and it may well be only a matter of time. Capcom may only need one or two gross missteps to push the company out of their independence.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Ninstarkof
I don't even think you know what your point is at this point.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Timppis
I'm not sure I even have the time to address such a level of ignorance. But I will note that the 3DS selling 50 million sounds good, right up until you realize it's the worst selling Nintendo portable, and fell not just below DS numbers (hovering around 1/3 of them), but below GBA sales--which were well below Game Boy/GBC sales.
I am not the only person here to point this out, but the Wii and DS were flukes. Statistical anomalies. Nintendo's hardware has been dropping in sales and market share since the NES and Game Boy, and the Wii U and 3DS fell to below the levels of the GC and GBA. The downward trend continues.
The over-reliance on gimmicks has driven off most consumers and the failure to make generation-equivalent hardware has helped drive off third parties. They have a lengthy series of mistakes before and now after their lucky money-printing fluke. And while we may find good in the Wii and DS, we need to remember that Nintendo screwed up something hugely in that they were totally unable to maintain the success of those two platforms.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Timppis
Nintendo does not own most of their shares. Not even close.
That is from this very site. https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2014/01/nintendo_confirms_plans_to_acquire_up_to_ten_million_of_its_own_shares
It's also highly debatable that Nintendo is actually profitable now. Several of their earnings reports weighed very heavily on favorable exchange rates or other financial tricks, not necessarily "selling better" or "making more money." Keep in mind, at one point, they slashed some salaries, and they have routinely stated that they cannot drop the price of the Wii U or it would impact their income. That is a very fine line.
Just because a company has been around a long time doesn't mean they can't fail or be sold off. Such a statement is the height of making a fallacy.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Kaze_Memaryu
By all means, supply the evidence. And since you made this statement targeting a clear majority of developers, you will need to provide evidence to support this case.
Otherwise, this sounds like the typical Nintendo fan attack against anyone making video games who isn't "Nintendo."
You should also properly support your argument by looking at equivalent titles from Nintendo for this to properly define what is "developer laziness," and not just an angry Nintendo fan hating 3rd parties.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Ninstarkof
There's absolutely no guarantee that Nintendo fans would buy the definitive version of any third party game. Hell, we have evidence that the exact opposite is true, as Nintendo fans did get definitive editions of Deus Ex, Arkham City, and Ninja Gaiden 3 to name a few. These didn't garner better sales than non-definitive versions from other platforms.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@VeeFlamesNL
Nintendo could choose not to announce who may buy or merge with them, but it's not like that would remain secret for long. Eventually, we'd be seeing that Mario game coming out with a new logo on the cover. Be it Microsoft, Sony, Disney, or whatever.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
Those franchises would still end up somewhere. One way or another, someone would own them. There's money to be made. If Nintendo was closing their doors, that's a sign that the money is gone. Those executives and investors would want their money back and to take advantage. If the company was really closing their doors, why would they even care where the franchises go?
They won't. They'll care about closing those doors with money in their pockets.
No company is invincible or immortal. Mistakes can still sink a company, and Nintendo has generations worth of mistakes stacking up for them, rather like Sega did. In almost every way, their stance in the industry mirrors Sega and Atari before they stopped making hardware--again, with some exception.
They would go third party first, bankrupt second, sell off assets third. There is no reason at all to think Nintendo would behave any magically different manner than any other company.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Darknyht
How much you personally care about hardware in the console doesn't matter. Surely you recognize that. That power under the hood matters for getting third parties on board and being competitive.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@GrailUK
They are not one of the wealthiest companies in the world. Wealthy, yes, one of the wealthiest? Hardly. And Nintendo going under is a very real possibility. Why not talk about it?
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Ninstarkof
You're playing with words. When anyone says "Nintendo fans don't buy third party games," they are obviously indicating it about Nintendo consoles. Anyone else, using the term "Nintendo fans" is meaningless. The number of Nintendo fans that actually support 3rd parties on the hardware is clearly, obviously, notably, painstakingly small.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
I strongly disagree. Nintendo is just another corporation.
If Nintendo collapsed, they wouldn't be allowed to kill their copyrights and trademarks--they'd be sued into oblivion for even attempting it by their investors and debtors and it would only make such a situation worse. It's grossly, immeasurably unrealistic. Have you ever heard of a company doing that? Ever? Because it's not going to happen.
Either they'd sell them off, their buyer would sell some off, or their debtors would sell them off to recover debts. Sorry man, but the very idea is absurdly ridiculous. At the end of the day, they are just another corporation like any other.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@Kaze_Memaryu
One can only call developers "lazy" by clinging to deliberate ignorance of all that goes into game design.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
@IceClimbers
If Nintendo does go down the drain, they will be selling off those franchises. Yes, Nintendo is notoriously arrogant and protective, but they aren't invincible. They would have to answer to huge numbers of investors who could tie the company up in courts for ages for failing to make up losses--and that includes selling off IPs. If worse comes to worse, either Nintendo will sell them off--or they will be divided up by someone else, like a bank or government entity in order to have the money to clean up the pieces.
The only thing Nintendo could do is suddenly kill their copyrights and trademarks as some kind of bitter spite, but if Nintendo fell to the Atari level, franchises would indeed be sold off. Their arrogance and stubbornness would only go so far.
This idea that "they'd never sell" is just as ridiculous as the belief that they can "fail for decades and be just fine." No, those are both staggeringly incorrect concepts.
Re: Talking Point: Raw Power Isn't Vital to Nintendo's NX, But It Does Matter
This article twists the power argument all over the place, and seems to make a supporting case for yet another under-powered gimmick machine.
Let's be clear here, if Nintendo is banking on another gimmick machine, they are failing from the start. The new "gimmick" the industry is looking forward to has to do with VR and stuff like Hololens, largely because they seem less like gimmicks and more like industry evolution. But after the Wii era ended, and the Wii U and Kinect 2 bombed, it's become crystal clear that consumers are not interested in gimmicks.
The power of the NX is going to be important, because if it falls behind like the Wii U and Wii and cannot handle modern game engines easily or smoothly, they are going to be starting from a losing position. This tells third parties that, not only do they have to contend with a core fanbase with a spiteful and adversarial history towards them, but they'll have to do extra work for almost certainly guaranteed smaller sales for the "privilege" of putting their game on a Nintendo system.
Frankly, as I've noted, this machine might have a chance if it is the integrated platform, and July sees them release the portable half early and separately, while they release the base unit later, maybe November or February 2017. But there is ample evidence that the Wii and DS were little more than fads and flukes, particularly when we realize that the Wii U and 3DS are actually continuing Nintendo's decades-long downward trend and are actually selling below GC and GBA numbers.
Nintendo is fighting against an industry where the vast majority of people are just waiting on them to finally just go third party. They are fighting against a perception of gimmicky consoles. They are fighting against a perception of irrelevance. Underpowering the hardware in the NX, even a little, could have staggering repercussions. Thus far, it there is already more negativity towards NX than there was against Wii U--and we all saw how well that system performed.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Won't Be As Powerful As PlayStation 4
@akaDv8R
Dialing back to reality is not scare mongering.
Fair enough on the positive measure of the secrecy. I misread that portion. Nintendo still did not say any 3rd parties were saying anything positive about NX at E3. If you are going to talk up the secrecy in a form that we shouldn't trust critical words at their value, then you shouldn't talk up the positives in that manner, either.
Your post essentially said, "there is secrecy around NX, and we shouldn't trust these rumors. But here are some positive rumors that people liked NX behind the scenes at E3. Let's listen to those because they're kinda positive."
Every time someone attempts to attack someone else as "you just say mean things about Nintendo just cuz," all they're doing is ignoring valid points, jamming fingers in their ears, covering their eyes, and flying the banner of the fanboy. Those comments do not help anyone make their points. Get over it. Address comments and don't be a child. It also illustrates that you are extremely selective in which posts you bother reading, indicating that you have an agenda to--for whatever reason--continually demonize another person.
Indeed, my arguments for Nintendo going third party are overwhelmingly positive because it would finally be a way for the company to get their games to the audiences they deserve. Fanboys hate hearing that because, apparently, what they want most of all is that hardware, regardless of the games and, evidently, they want Nintendo's games to sell to only the smallest possible audiences.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Won't Be As Powerful As PlayStation 4
@akaDv8R
_The reason a lot of people are saying it is a 'console', is because Iwata clearly stated it would be a dedicated gaming console. Also, Nintendo have said they have had very positive feedback from 3rd party Devs when they pitched 'NX' to them at E3. If it is going to be a useless, underpowered console, no 3rd party Dev worth their salt would even be interested.
Also, the amount of security surrounding 'NX' is immense. The chances that someone, who in the past has been correct on a couple of things, has managed to find out the specs and everything else is pretty remote.
I say, wait and see. Why start slagging Nintendo yet again, when we have no idea what they are planning. If someone else tweets that they have seen the specs, and are amazed at them, are you going to believe them?????_
I will point out that secrecy around NX is meaningless. There is secrecy around everything Nintendo does, and around every major project in this industry. That doesn't mean it's automatically going to be "good." Just because there is secrecy and security doesn't mean that being hidden is good.
Nintendo also said nothing at all about positive views on NX at E3. Nintendo didn't say anything about NX at E3. The information is leaks and rumors from industry sources, not from Nintendo at all. It was not known until after E3 that Nintendo was apparently showing off the hardware behind the scenes. This also does not automatically mean it's going to be good or impressive hardware. People can be interested or intrigued, but that doesn't mean they are ready to support the hardware or that it'll be amazing. Third parties were also interested in the Wii U early on and behind the scenes, and look how that turned out.
Unfortunately, most of what we've been hearing about NX mirrors the way Nintendo talked about the DS, Wii, 3DS, and Wii U before launch. Lots of "change the way we play games" and "new ideas" and whatnot. Almost nothing about how they've learned from their mistakes.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Won't Be As Powerful As PlayStation 4
@MoonKnight7
Just being under-powered compared to PS4 wouldn't necessarily put it closer to Wii U, but if the rumors of it coming as early as July next year (which I doubt, I'd put my money on November next year), but it would be risky, and potentially very damaging way to go. If you're putting out new hardware, it should be more powerful or equivalent to what is already out, or consumers aren't going to see the point.
For instance, if someone came out with a new phone to compete with an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy, would you want to buy it if it was less powerful than either of those, but cost around the same? Of course not. And that's one of the big things that hurt Wii U. Sure, it has four times the RAM of the X360, but equivalent CPU and GPU heft, while being $150 more expensive. Consumers looked at it as a system the same power as the X360, without a harddrive, and fewer games, but for $150 more (at launch).
I think 3rd parties are mostly burned out with Nintendo's nonsense. The evidence isn't just the Wii U, but the 3DS. When a system with 50 million in sales struggles to get 3rd party support, something is seriously wrong with the hardware maker and their place in the industry.
We, of course, always need to keep in mind that these are just rumors. But as they continue to spread, that's going to put pressure on Nintendo to act, and get their reveal addressed before too much damage is done outside of their control. At the same time, I remember hearing rumors that the "next Nintendo system" (then, Cafe) would feature a nearly 6" screen built into the controller. I thought it was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. But here we are, and that game system exists and is dying at retail.
Nintendo doesn't seem to have learned their lesson about weaker hardware, apparently still believing the Wii was a genuine success and not, as reality shows, that it was a fluke, a fad. Their "we're not competitors" stance has only made them look irrelevant and hypocritical--particularly at points where Iwata literally used a cherry-picked list of Metacritic scores to make Nintendo look "better" than the competition they aren't competing against.
This company is delivering face-palm inducing moments at an unprecedented rate these days.
http://kotaku.com/nintendo-really-likes-metacritic-1686254849
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Won't Be As Powerful As PlayStation 4
@crimsontadpoles
No, I'm not wrong. Just like Wii U, the NX will be seen by the industry as a whole as a lame stop-gap, especially if it's under-powered yet again. And the problem is that perception becomes reality to wide audiences. Nintendo sitting there pulling the "non-competition card" again will also not benefit them as it hasn't before. Instead, they'll continue to be seen as a fringe that doesn't understand the industry.
If Nintendo doesn't want the NX to be ignored as some kind of lame-ass stop-gap machine, then it needs to be notably more powerful than what's out now for the same price--essentially, they need to step up to the plate and bring competition.
Though as @Jetset notes, if this rumor is true and the NX is under-powered again, that points to another gimmicky Nintendo console destined to be quickly shoved to the side like the Wii U. The rumors are starting to roll for NX, and already they aren't sounding particularly attractive.
Re: Hands On: Blast Ball Brings Crude Button Mashing and is a Poor Advert for Metroid Prime: Federation Force
Worst E3 in Nintendo's history. Even Wii Music didn't offer this much disdain.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Won't Be As Powerful As PlayStation 4
While this is just a rumor at this point, it wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if it turned out to be true.
Because only Nintendo would release a mid-generation stop-gap console that's pathetically under-powered.
Re: Poll: Does Nintendo's Drive Towards Multiplayer Gaming Appeal to You?
I'm literally not planning to get any of these games. I have not been impressed with anything Nintendo's done with multiplayer lately. First Splatoon is a shorter game than any Call of Duty, is missing typical online gaming features, and lacks a co-op mode for offline play. I'm sure these other games will also all fail to have voice communication and will be short-sighted in some variety of elements. None of them looked particularly fun, either.
Oh well. NX is coming up. Maybe they'll do some of this stuff next time around.
Re: Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable Likelihood of a Nintendo NX Release in Summer 2016
@garthvader
The GamePad has not made gaming better, and this can be said quite objectively.
Again, what did it do to make Mario Kart better?
What did it do to make Pikmin better?
What did it do to make New Super Mario Bros better?
The vast majority of reports on Star Fox Zero certainly do not sound better in any regard.
What did the GamePad do to make Smash Bros better?
Pikmin is generally better played with a Wii Remote and Nunchuck. Mario U, Mario Kart, Smash Bros? They all play exactly the same. If the Wii U GamePad truly made things better, why don't we see that? Why hasn't it's "big improvements" seen wider industry acceptance?
For that matter, by all means, explain how it's made gaming better. How has the GamePad made RPG's better? How did it make Zelda truly better? Even Nintendo fans tend to be critical of Nintendo Land for being a largely lackluster affair.
Look, playing games elsewhere doesn't mean you don't harbor fanboy tendencies. Apologetics about how the GamePad "made games better" both in the face of rampant failure to do so and the number of games that don't use it to any effect at all--while offering no examples smacks of fanboyism. Sorry to say. The GamePad has failed to live up to it's potential, is seen by most of the industry as a lame gimmick or a hassle, and frankly, many of the things it attempts as "game changers" are laughable. Is looking at your lap to view a map really better than just having it pop-up onscreen? Even if you like the concept, this is hardly a game changer or an improvement in any regard.
The GamePad didn't improve things or change anything. It just made some things more cumbersome. Rather than letting players look at a single screen to play their games, they were forced to awkwardly look at their lap for some of their gameplay.
So how did it change things? How has it improved our games and gaming? How did it revolutionize RPGs and FPSs and platformers? By all means, explain why Mario Kart 8, Donkey Kong County, Captain Toad, Splatoon, New Super Mario U, Pikmin 3, and Smash Bros could never work on any other system. Because if the GamePad is truly a game changer that made games better, then surely, these games could never be playable on any other system Or perhaps they could be, because if the GamePad really did make things better, then we'd be seeing it cloned for the PS4, XBO, and PCs.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
@Yorumi
I noted that--just not with the specific "a year behind" note. Perhaps not very clear, but my note on the "PS2 seeing it's first major hits" has to do with it heading into it's strong second year while the GC was going to have to attempt to compete with typical first-year console woes.
Most major titles start coming out around the 1-year anniversary of a console--for instance, Gears of War and Kid Icarus: Uprising both landed around the 1-year anniversary of their machines.
Re: Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable Likelihood of a Nintendo NX Release in Summer 2016
@FragRed
Well, the public reveal of the Xbox One, Playstation 4, and 3DS, all occurred within a year of their launch. The 3DS only didn't occur the same year because it came out in March after. But within a year of it's E3 reveal.
Both the XBO and PS4 were publicly revealed in early 2013, and both launched later in 2013.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
@TruenoGT
The GameCube launched with Star Wars: Rogue Squadron II. That was one of the biggest launch games ever, in terms of heft and impact. The problem was that the GameCube was launching after the N64 had already left a sour taste in the mouths of gamers, at a time when the PS2 was seeing it's first major hits, and when the Xbox slammed into the industry amid a torrent of media promotion.
Nintendo slowly sauntered to the marketplace last to the party, and with little fanfare. Even Rogue Leader couldn't turn the tide, but it was a bonafide hit.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
@LztheQuack
The Wii itself had a successful launch, but it was still plagued by droughts and a lackluster launch line-up. Just because the console sold well doesn't mean it didn't have issues.
No doubt, any Nintendo fanboy would be super quick to make similar charges to the PS4 which had a monumental start out the gate, but has featured the typical first-year drought and line-up of ports.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
@AlexSora89
It's just more tentacles.
Re: Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable Likelihood of a Nintendo NX Release in Summer 2016
@rjejr
Nah. I still haven't picked it up. Or Witcher 3. And that comes first.
Re: Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable Likelihood of a Nintendo NX Release in Summer 2016
@DarthNocturnal
Nintendo also said Twilight Princess would be on GameCube. That didn't stop it from being better off as a Wii launch title.
And I highly doubt the NX will utilize the GamePad--at least in any serious manner. That device has been nothing but a set-back for them and the Wii U, and yes, I'm aware that a micro-percentage of Wii U fanboys super totally love it for some reason. But the reality is that it's damaged the console and their image. Better to drop it like a Virtual Boy.
Re: Talking Point: The Pros, Cons and Questionable Likelihood of a Nintendo NX Release in Summer 2016
Basing talking points off rumors, now, are we?
I think a July 2016 release is beyond foolhardy for a game console because it's freakin' July and that's when we want to be outside. Unless, of course, NX is indeed the oft-fantasized unified console half portable/half home console, which is then somehow encouraged to be taken outdoors.
But this statement about July 2016, if even true at all, likely indicates when the hardware needs to be ready for Nintendo, not necessarily for an actual release. November is the proper time to release a new console, though as @IceClimbers noted, October might be wiser for Nintendo so they can get a jump on the other guys heading into the holiday season.
One thing that's almost certain, is that 2017 will be way too late, as by that time, the PS4 and XBO will be at their absolute strongest, and Nintendo will just look like a pathetic mid-generation stopgap to be ignored--like the Jaguar and 3DO well before it, and the risky early release of the ill-fated Dreamcast. Granted, that only hit one year "too early," but still with ample enough time for serious damage to be done.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@darth2d2
Right now, here are stock prices:
Nintendo: 21.34
Activision: 24.54
Sony: 28.36
Microsoft: 44.22
EA: 67.47
Apple: 126
You are demonstrably wrong and full of crap. Congratulations on defining what it means to be wrong. Not only isn't Nintendo's stock out-performing everyone, it's the lowest of these companies.
Numbers taken from CNN Money.
The rest of your post is equally full of nonsense. Given that you stated demonstrably false information, it would seem you are the one trolling.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@schizor
That you can't see the big picture does not mean I cannot. That is a bold and unsupported assumption.
Nintendo going third party would allow them to reach the audiences their games deserve. The hardware is an obvious barrier to this for most gamers and consumers. This will be supported or not once we see their mobile titles start rolling out--in which they will be acting as a third party.
Once the barrier of the Nintendo hardware is removed, the games will sell to wider audiences and far more people. Again, on a platform with high sales, Mario Kart managed over 30 million in sales. On a platform with fewer than 10 million sales, Mario Kart's numbers fall well short of that.
Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, even Pokemon. These franchises have long since ceased being titles that sell hardware. And because of this, they aren't reaching new consumers or growing their audiences. This will continue being a problem as long as Nintendo forces people to buy their hardware to play them.
Clearly, the hardware side is not benefiting them or aiding them anymore. The Wii U and 3DS are selling below the GC and GBA, continuing a downward trend for the company since their peak with the NES.
Nintendo once took over this industry because their games were available in a wide variety of places allowing them to build a reputation and presence. This helped them when they finally released the NES--on top of their draconian business practices that largely killed any competition. But people were aware of things like Mario Bros and Donkey Kong before the NES ever saw the light of day.
These games aren't being played by anyone but core Nintendo fans anymore. No one else is finding or enjoying Zelda for the first time with rare exception. I'd prefer the company to continue to grow and reach more people. Every single time you people argue against them going third party, you are stating that you want them to continue shrinking to ever smaller audiences, because that is exactly the pattern established.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
@NintyMan
They will not be supporting Wii U after NX launches. This is the same corporate speak they delivered concerning the DS when they said they were going to continue supporting the GBA--a system quietly phased out over the next year. If NX is successful, Wii U will be dumped quickly and quietly.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@Kirk
Nintendo has already "Sega'd" itself, but instead of too much crappy hardware, it was with stupid peripherals and badly implemented motion controls and gimmicks. Nintendo gimmicked themselves into the same position Sega was in years ago. They are in the same position now that Sega was in before the launch of the Dreamcast. A company limping to an early end of a console while trying to get their new "saving grace" ready for the public to hopefully make everyone forget. The Wii U is their Saturn.
The only difference is that Nintendo has the generally successful handheld and more money in the bank, but that won't last if they can't actually turn things around.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@IceClimbers
If those third parties are starting with ports--which is most likely the case, then they will have plenty of time with the system to get them out, especially if Nintendo was smart for once and built it on x86 architecture and it's friendly to modern game engines. Yeah, big IF, I know.
But that's over a year until NX releases, which is plenty of time to get ports under way, especially if they are engine-friendly. Say, if NX can handle Unreal 4, then porting an Unreal 4 game would be relatively easy.
But you're right to the point that Nintendo should be targeting the 130ish million X360/PS3 owners who haven't upgraded yet, and try to steer them away from PS4 and XBO. The problem there is that Nintendo would have to be offering up something insanely compelling to do so. I'm a gamer on both of those platforms, I have my Xbox Live profile and my PSN profile, and I have histories with them--Achievements, Trophies, friends lists, account and game download histories, etc. These are incentives that keep my attention to those systems.
Yes, it was fun to start over in a sense when I switched from X360 to PS4 this generation, and build up my PSN profile instead, but I still have my Xbox profile and I still go back to it.
The other thing is that Nintendo has grown a number of unsavory reputations where gaming is concerned. They're the kiddie company. The casual company. The Mario, Zelda, Pokemon company. Nintendo is not where you go unless you want casual, kiddie, or MZP fare. And even then, if you want some of that stuff, Nintendo is still a hard sell because it's going to lack so much else. Nintendo is the company known for stupid gimmicks like motion controls and the GamePad. Nintendo is the company known for having weak, backwards policies for online gaming. Nintendo is the company that is totally unfriendly to streaming and video services. You can't play movie disks on Nintendo hardware.
These are all red flags that Nintendo has had for generations now, and they need to magically over-turn all of these issues if they are to appeal to those X360/PS3 owners waiting to take the next-gen plunge. Yes, they should still try to, but it's an awful lot to try to conquer. And I still don't see them interested in competition or actually trying to do something worthwhile on this front.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@kingofthesofa
If you actually bothered to read any of my posts, you'd have actually seen ample justification and reason for Nintendo to go third party. It's not my fault that you refuse to pay attention. Is it a waste of my time to mention those points, yet again? Will you just ignore them again? Or will you bother to read them?
Because they are really quite simple:
1. Nintendo's hardware is unwanted by the vast majority of consumers. They want the games, but not the hardware. If Nintendo wants to reach these people, they need to start putting the games on other hardware.
2. Nintendo's hardware, outside of flukes like Wii and DS, sell worse with every generation, which means that the games are reaching smaller and smaller audiences every time. If Nintendo wants to reach a wider audience, third party is key--and they recognize this on mobile. They'll sell way more software on a platform with nearly a billion users as opposed to their portable system, with only 50 million.
By the time this generation closes out, the Wii U will not have even sold over 12 million (an estimate based on current failure to garner sales). But the PS4 will likely be a 100/130-million-selling platform, and the XBO will probably be quite close, around 80 million. That's potentially a consumer base of around 200 million people, as opposed to the 12 million that the Wii U might not even reach. I suppose you think appealing to a small number of people is better?
The Wii helps us understand this. The Wii had 100 million in sales, and Nintendo's properties sold some of their biggest numbers on there--Mario Kart Wii itself outsold the N64 console resting at a staggering ~35 million in sales. If the hardware is in enough hands, Nintendo's games sell pretty well. But Nintendo has a history of being terrible at selling the hardware, and people--as noted--do not want it.
But if those games are on hardware people do want or already have? They'll sell.
This concept could not be simpler to understand. Unless you have your raving fanboy goggles on and fingers in your ears. I guess we'll see if you plugged everything up and avoided this explanation yet again.
Re: Rumour: Nintendo NX Shipping This Time Next Year, 20 Million Sales Targeted In First 12 Months
@napalmninja
Ouya had a slew of other problems outside of the Android OS--which was arguably it's biggest strength as it allowed a plethora of games to be released on it (the library is surprisingly large). So to blame Ouya's problems on the Android OS is grossly negligent and ignorant of the platform's actual woes. I actually own one (as well as the ill-fated GameStick that GameStop murdered), and the Ouya has other issues that are far more damning. One of which was a lack of notable marketing funds or heft, and a big one was the "every game has a demo/trial" which ultimately devoured potential profits and sales as studies have shown that demos actually appear to be damaging to sales, not beneficial to them. Which is why you don't see nearly as many any more.
And again, if the PS4 ran on Android, it would still be just as powerful and just as supported, because it's the PS4 and Sony knows how to get the 3rd party support. Pretty much the only reason it doesn't use Android is because Sony is a big enough company to build their own flashy proprietary OS, which is actually, arguably, the best OS of any game console ever made--and a far cry from the PS3's "worst OS and user interface ever."
Get over the whole "Android console" thing. The only reason those microconsoles used Android was because it was cheap, easy, and versatile. It has absolutely nothing to do with hardware heft, game content, or game quality, and to say so is powerfully ignorant.
Re: Nintendo Seeks Improvement at E3 2016, Though Miyamoto Defends Near-Term Rather Than "Dream-Like Demonstrations"
So, Shigeru Miyamoto frowns up on the idea of showing teasers for games that won't be released for a year or two.
Meanwhile, we were shown a teaser for Zelda U last year, and it likely won't be out until next fall on NX, and the rest of the world is still waiting for Xenoblade Chronicles X, which was revealed over two years ago and was dragged to E3 three years in a row.
He's basically demonizing MS and Sony for doing what Nintendo has always done. In other words, he's making lame excuses because they didn't have anything to show because those games are in development for NX and they aren't ready to show them just yet.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
Great Cthulhu's beard, I'm sick of Iwata's weasel words. The man spills out so many words and never says a damn thing. What the hell is a "Nintendo-like solution?" That doesn't tell me anything. Hell, after seeing so many other "Nintendo-like solutions" like Amiibo and "maybe we can inspire 3rd parties to come back by not trying very hard," I can't say this really imbues me with glowing confidence.
"Joint initiatives" happening "below the surface" does not mean anything, either. Okay, with whom? In what capacity? Does something lazy like "unlock Mario costume in game with Mario Amiibo" count as one of these "joint initiatives" or is it something more involved, like having, say, Capcom handle development of one of Nintendo's properties?
They might as well have just had a beauty pageant contestant give a rambling "well, see, I think that, you know, answers are important, when, like, questions are asked and that companies--and we're a company, like--have solutions and considerations for those, um, questions and for like, everyone to have peace on the earth instead of all the wars." Iwata's responses to these questions are that useful.
Re: Nintendo NX Will Avoid The Launch Issues Which Plagued 3DS And Wii U, Claims Iwata
They said the 3DS and Wii U would avoid these issues as well.