earthboundlink

You know your fanbase is ready for hype when you can generate a comment thread this long to discuss two letters.

LET THE HYPE COMMENCE!

Will the Palico armors from MH4U be making a return? I love the idea of playing prowler mode with some of those awesome Palico armors from MH4U.

Of course, I barely got any of the DLC in MH4U, because I have no friends IRL that play Monster Hunter, and I have small children, so lengthy online sessions need to be focused on increasing HR. As a gunner, I wanted that Hero's Bow so bad, but at this point I don't think it's ever going to happen. Plus I stalled out at HR 7. I have one mission left to reach G-Rank.

So little time... so much Monster Hunter.

The limited number of 3D classics will, for me, go down as one of the biggest missed opportunities of the 3DS generation. My understanding is that Nintendo did a few, but they turned out to be kind of difficult and resource-intensive, so they stopped pretty early on. I've been extremely pleased with Sega's efforts to pick up the slack and expose me to their back catalog that I missed the first time around. I was so pleased with Sega that I bought the Sega Classics collection even though I already had Sonic on its own.

I would have bought so many more classic titles on 3DS if they had been remastered in 3D. I understand one of the demos for the 3DS when it was first revealed at E3 was a 3D version of the original Legend of Zelda. I am eternally saddened by the fact that it never released and I will never get to play it.

Capcom is not allowed to do anything that could distract from their production of Monster Hunter titles.

I KID. I KID. (Sort of...)

Reading this comments section has made me realize:
1) A lot of games I like from a long time ago I did not realize were made by Capcom
2) Capcom has a lot of franchises with which I am completely unfamiliar

If you've been following Nintendo for a long time, you probably know that the thing you expect them to do is likely not the thing they will do. And for the most part, that is a good thing. The days of "my console is more powerful than yours" are long, long gone. Nintendo always seeks to push the industry in new directions. It has been in their DNA for a long, long time, and it's not going to change because of one console that didn't meet expectations.

No matter what the system "is," we can be sure it will play games made by Nintendo, which is pretty much all I need to know to be interested. After all, as Nintendo used to say in the days of the NES, "the name of the game is the game."

The decline of the arcade has been murder on the space-printed carpet industry.

It's gonna be Fire Emblem. That's their new go-to franchise for experimentation.

Third parties don't fail to support Nintendo because of power alone. They fail to support Nintendo because its architecture is different, the controller requires additional thought/effort, and the Nintendo base doesn't buy third party games at a rate high enough to warrant the extra costs of porting under those circumstances.

I suspect Nintendo would get more third party ports if the system were more in line with the architecture and controller schemes of the other systems. But if this were the case, I would ask myself, why make the system at all, when others have already made this system? The way I see it, Nintendo needs to do its own thing. They don't work for EA, Ubisoft, Activision, etc.

@TerrapinJess I like that you called it "nostalgic." I didn't realize it until you said it, but that's just what it is. One of the great thing about the indie developers (especially those who have made a home on the eShop) is the way they can take older, simpler gaming concepts and modernize them in small ways. You end up with a fun, contemporary game that doesn't feel like it needs to shoehorn in $60 worth of value.

"AAA" titles often have to try to do too much to justify their consumer costs, and the result is that some of those additions just don't work very well. These additions also raise development costs. But if you're paying $20 or so, you can be more okay with the idea that this game does one or two focused things really well—just like the classics did.

Aaaand... now I really want to play this game. Away from my Wii U, so I'll have to play Nano Assault EX instead.

Oh man, that blue N3DS... My wallet hurts just looking at it.

Shin'en is so good. I just got Nano Assault EX as part of the Humble Bundle, and I didn't realize they had developed it. Combine that with this game that really presents like a AAA title, and they are turning to the new standard bearers for "fast and futuristic." Sega used to be that company (notably, they worked on F-Zero GX).

Would love to see Nintendo make Shin'en a second-party developer. Or maybe Sega can pick them up and start producing some good work for a change.

I've already made this prediction on other threads, but I'll bet my left foot that the FE game is set up more or less like Fates, but with the intro chapters being free, and the various campaigns being behind a paywall, with some additional DLC. None of that bothers me. I'm much more concerned about the simplifications they have planned for the gameplay.

Generally though, I'm not overly worried about the plans. Nintendo does a pretty good job of protecting its IPs, which are probably its most important assets.

It is never unfair to hammer on EA.

Paid the $13 just for Street Fighter, Citizens of Earth, and Nano Assault. Can't wait to try all the others. Runbow was the only one I already had.

Man, I thought I had a backlog before...

@rjejr I don't know; it's not that different from the way things went with Twilight Princess. There was massive hype for it as Gamecube game (IIRC, people literally cried at the reveal trailer). They promoted it as a Gamecube game for a very long time before eventually revealing that it would release alongside the Wii, where it was a resounding, system-selling success. I don't know what the attach rate was on Twilight Princes with Wii sales, but I bet it was massive.

I understand that the difference here is that we already know the game will release on both systems, but still, it's not like it's a massive departure from the Twilight Princess route. And of course, just because it worked with TP doesn't mean it works with this one. Just pointing out that this is not completely unprecedented.

A good game is a good game, no matter how many times it was delayed. I'll watch the reviews on this one to make sure there are no game-breaking problems, but I'm inclined to think that they simply took a long time to get it right. If there are no serious flaws, I will probably get it and squint until it looks like Mega Man, because Mega Man is just the best.

Holy moly some people are demanding. This program has been out for a month and I already have an exclusive Picross game and enough points to get a number of discounts/3DS themes. If you just do the bare minimum easiest "missions," you'll have tons of platinum points to spend, and none of that even costs you any money.

There's nothing on there I'm aching to get right now, but the points don't expire for several more months so I think I'll just wait it out until next month. Although I am eyeing that Metroid Prime Trilogy discount... I have all the games for their original systems so I've never felt like investing in the trilogy, but a reduced price might make it worthwhile to have them all in one spot.

Also, I'm curious, if you buy a discounted title through My Nintendo, do you get gold points based on the game's full value? That would be a nice bonus.

Probably would have gotten Xenoblade for Wii U if I didn't already have the N3DS version. Would have been better on the bigger screen. Still, I like the game and don't regret the purchase (though I still haven't beaten it...)

I think I'm going to pick up those Sega 3D classics. I really love the idea of 3D classics, because they give me a reason to relive these games I've played a zillion times before. I've been disappointed that Nintendo abandoned that concept some time ago. Sega has not only picked it up, but based on reviews and the one Sonic game I already have, they have done a better job with the concept than Nintendo did.

FWIW, I always play my 3DS handheld VC games in the quasi-3D proper resolution mode where you can see the "system" you are playing. Plus, I always play the Game Boy games with the weird green screen. That kind of stuff is a neat use of the 3D function.

@TheDarkKnight851 You're right, video games are supposed to be fun. These days so many people are hung up on the culture of it. The games become more about expressing some kind of cultural identity rather than doing something enjoyable.

I'll be marauded for saying this, but I think Federation Force is a great example. People are up in arms not because they think it won't be any fun, but because it's not "a real Metroid game." It doesn't fit the cultural status they have built for themselves as "Metroid fans."

Already people are decrying this game they know nothing about because it won't be "a real Fire Emblem game." I think it's a big reason so many were turned off of the Wii, and why so many are so hateful of mobile games. When too many people get into their hobby, the "gamers" feel like they have lost a part of their "gamer" identity, and need to establish themselves as "real gamers" or "hardcore gamers" by rejecting the things that are most popular. Just spinning off some dime store psychology.

I myself don't like most mobile games, especially since so many are just microtransaction cash grabs these days, but there are a few good ones out there worth checking out.

@PlaytendoGuy FWIW, that's kind of how Fates is. The game is easier if you buy the DLC for experience grinding, but it's not necessary. I actually find the game more fun/challenging without all the grinding, because then getting the right characters experience is a key part of each mission, not just finishing the objective.

I suspect it will be similar to birthright, but with less emphasis on character stats, weapon levels, and the more detailed parts of the game. I'm expecting more emphasis on multiplayer battles and something like the castle raid parts of Fates. I also suspect the story will be a little less serious and the scale will be a little smaller. I'm sure the core TBS gameplay will be the same as we're used to in a FE game, so everybody calm down.

I also strongly suspect that it will be similar to Fates. A few chapters for free, a branching decision, the various branches of which will be behind a paywall, along with sundry map packs as smaller paid DLC. I'm fine with that. Frankly, they could have released Fates that way on the eShop, and it would have been fine with me.

Also, all these people whining about Birthright being too easy... Why don't you just play Conquest?

Fire Emblem is one of my very favorite Nintendo franchises, so I definitely view this as good news. I suspect it will work something like Fates, where you get a few chapters for free, then you hit the pay wall and can choose one of a few campaigns. If you finish it, you can then go back and pay to try the others from the decision point.

If you look at Fates, you can see how they have already started simplifying the franchise for this kind of application with the elimination ofweapon-breaking, a single color-based weapons triangle, and an increased focus on mini-games and DLC.

I'm not a huge Animal Crossing fan, so that is less interesting, but I might pick it up to mess around with it a bit like I did with Miitomo.

But unless they really over-cater to the lowest common denominator, Fire Emblem could be the best turn-based strategy game on mobile. Because it's Nintendo, and they tend to do things with solid quality, I'll probably dish out past the paywall, which I rarely do in mobile apps.

I've tried a number of others turn-based strategy games on the App store, but they just don't quite do it for me.

I really hope this announcement increases the likelihood that we get some good HD remasters of Gamecube-era games. Mario sunshine would be glorious with an HD coat of paint. Maybe they could convince Capcom to bring Monster Hunter Generations to Wii U like they did with MH3U.

Okay, one of those things seems more likely than the other, but a fella can dream, can't he?

Frankly, all I really need is Monster Hunter to get me through until Zelda/NX, and that's coming. The extra months to focus on Monster Hunter/my backlog /save a few bucks will be fine. Maybe not so great for NIntendo's bottom line, but it sounds like they've got a pretty realistic understanding of what's going to happen, which suggests to me that they have a coherent plan. They're still sitting on a giant pile of Wii cash, so they'll weather the storm fine.

As others have said, 2016 was never realistic. If they crunched to get it out in 2016, it would be yet another botched release with no accompanying software.

No E3 showing is a pretty big surprise, and suggests to me that what they will be selling is a concept, not just a new box with fancier internals. They want to make sure they can sell their concept in the right way on their own terms, which I think is a great idea. E3 used to be fun, but it does feel kind of outdated now, when the companies could just speak to us directly.

@StuOhQ I with you for most of your comment, but you lost me at "back to the trend of decline it's experienced since the NES." That seems like some revisionist history. I don't think that's a very accurate characterization of the history of Nintendo. They basically made home video games mainstream with NES, and this invited competition. The rest of the story is not decline, it's just them trying to work with more effective competition than they had in the NES days.

I also don't agree with the sentiment commonly expressed in NintendoLife comment sections that the massive success of the Wii doesn't count or was somehow bad for the company. They clearly made some missteps in pushing forward after the Wii became such a huge success, but I don't think it makes sense to say "this massively successful product was a bad thing for this company." A better way to put it is that Nintendo learned the wrong lessons from the success of the Wii.

I realize that the article has been updated to retract the original assertion, but at this point December 2016 seems like a pretty optimistic goal.

@JBDD I think you and I are on the same page. I think Wii U was a great opportunity to make "Wii HD," and sell an HD Wii with Motion+ packed in, built in rechargeable batteries for Wii remotes, etc. It feels like developers, Nintendo included, were just getting the hang of high quality motion controls when they introduced Wii U. They kept the Wii remote as an input method, but then never really developed much that used it, so the concept was never focused enough.

@Xenocity True, but you can still buy a phone in installments, which you can't really do for a video game system.

Also, I think the smartphone decline is not because of lack of interest in smartphones. It's because we've hit a saturation point where there are not really very many new customers in developed countries to sell to. They're not selling as many to repeat customers because the new features in new phone models have less marginal value to most consumers than they used to, so it's harder to justify the purchase.

I don't know how all that impacts Nintendo, but we still haven't reached the point where mobile games are as good as games on dedicated game consoles. A few are getting there, but they are few and far between. That means that a dedicated gaming console maker still has an audience, but it's going to be really hard to compete for the mainstream, because the blue ocean isn't blue anymore, it's red from the battle between Apple, Google, Samsung, LG, etc.

Nintendo's laser beam focus on gaming I think gives them a competitive edge over more diversified companies like Microsoft or Sony (both of whom struggle mightily in the smartphone market), but it's still going to take some super creative thinking from Kyoto to adapt to the new technology landscape.

@JBDD I don't mean to say price doesn't matter at all to those more invested in gaming as a hobby. I just mean that it tends to be a smaller factor compared to the broader mainstream. Price is a factor for me too. I wouldn't buy a Wii U for $600. But because I really enjoy video games a lot, I would probably be willing to pay more for a Wii U than someone who just kind of thought Nintendo Land looked neat.

I think that's where the Wii nailed it. It was a pretty looking piece of relatively simple tech with a great pack in demo that looked like fun. It was a lot easier for people to say "what the heck!" and buy one for the house. I think the reason for its relatively short shelf-life was the take off of HD televisions within a few years of its release, along with the smartphone craze that put an accelerometer in everyone's hand and sold half-baked games for $0.99 that used the tech in amusing ways. In many ways I think the smartphone craze has hit Nintendo's home console market harder than it hit the handheld market, since Nintendo still holds the mantle of the handheld device for "core gamers," and those are devices that parents are more comfortable buying for their children than a smartphone. But even that is changing.

I have no doubt that Nintendo has some neat ideas up its sleeve, but as I mentioned upthread, it is going to be really hard to compete in terms of hardware/software price and tech with smart devices. Miitomo and mobile is probably the right business move to keep a toe in those waters.

@Xenocity wins points for mentioning the thing that matters less to us as "gamers" and a whole lot to the masses: Price.

Nintendo likes their hardware to be profitable when they sell it, but they're competing in a world of carrier-subsidized smart devices. They can't compete on price and specs with those devices that can hide their true costs from consumers. I think price is one of the main reasons Nintendo has struggled in the last generation. The Wii And DS seemed to present a lot of interesting tech for not a lot of money at the time, but this was before carrier-subsidized smartphone arms races that have left pretty much all gaming console companies forced to sell basically subpar tech to compete at the right pricepoint, or sell more advanced tech at seemingly high prices when compared to the shiniest new smartphone.

I honestly don't know how Nintendo is going to meet that challenge without selling the systems at a loss, which they have always been loathe to do.

The people who are going to show up in this thread:
-Those who demand that Nintendo essentially produce a Playstation that plays Mario and Zelda.
-The doomsayers who say that Nintendo is going to die because it doesn't have [insert thing commenter wants here]
-Those who call everything they don't personally like a "gimmick"
-Those who think that Nintendo can do no wrong
-Those who say Nintendo needs more new IPs

I don't know what Nintendo's going to do, but I can be sure it will be more interesting than "this console is more powerful than the other one." I'm just strapping in for the ride.

I really like the gameplay of Fates a lot, but the Conquest story is a bit too focused on mysticism and magic. I prefer the older storylines that focus more on complex diplomatic relationships/alliances between nations.

But the actual levels and missions of Conquest are truly excellent; some of the best of the whole series. I find them refreshing after so many installments of otherwise very similar levels and objectives. The graphic style and battle animations are also the best of the series, but I had to turn them off for time efficiency purposes.

Probably will never have the time to take on the DLC, so barring a pretty substantial and unexpected lifestyle change, I'll just keep to the main campaign of Conquest.

So, is this available for download, or do I have to buy the cart? I generally don't buy retro games in physical form, so I'd prefer to have this collection via download if at all possible, even though I already have the Sonic game separately.

They should really do these collections with single franchises. For example, Mega Man Legacy Collection 3D would be incredible. I would buy that twice just to register my approval.

Anyway, good on Sega for working to do good emulation. It is much appreciated by us old school folks.

@VanillaLake Yes, most people know NintendoLife is generous with Nintendo compared to other outlets, but so am I. Therefore, because I know NintendoLife shares my view of what makes a good game, I go there for the review that will focus on the things that most interest me.

The reason you can't seem to understand my point is that you seem to have this view that there is some perfectly objective "score" out there somewhere that perfectly encapsulates the game's quality. I don't believe that is a real thing, and even if it were, it doesn't seem to fit with my view of what makes games good, so it's useless to me.

@cleveland124 I think that's a fair point, but even Wii Sports was more about exploring new methods of control than creating a realistic sports sim. The controls just happened to be really intuitive.

@VanillaLake NO. You didn't read what I wrote. People read reviews to get information to answer a question. For me, that question is "Will I like this game?" For me, the answer to that is more likely to be found in a NintendoLife review than an aggregation of disparate reviews that weights reviews from larger outlets that generally don't share my gaming sensibilities.

Metacritic is there to answer the question, "What do most reviewers think of this game?" That is all.

I think you are trying to answer the question "Is this game good?" I personally don't think that is a useful question, since the question is subjective and different people have different views of what constitutes a "good" game.

@VanillaLake "40 reviews > 1 review." This is only true if the question you are trying to answer is "What do most reviewers think of this game?" Reviews are subjective, so one review from a reviewer who shares my gaming sensibilities is infinitely better than 39 from gamerbros who ran through the campaign once before returning to a Destiny raid.

I don't say this to argue that Metacritic has no value, or that NintendoLife is the only review worth reading. I'm just noting that your premise is only the correct if you are assuming a particular question.

"Like all the best games - and many of Nintendo's in particular - Star Fox Zero gives you the tools and then presents you with a series of challenges which test your understanding of them. There's a definite design language at play here; while the interface might seem initially daunting, each new encounter gradually reinforces the core mechanics."

This is a great summation of the Nintendo approach to gaming, and I think the reason their games in the last few generations can be so divisive. A lot of modern gamers want games they basically already know how to play, and they want to use the familiar controls to experience a new story/cool graphics/whatever the game's internal hook happens to be. That's a perfectly normal way to think, but it's going to frustrate you when you play Nintendo games, because their designers don't think that way.

For my part, I have always really enjoyed Nintendo's approach to game design in which they embed a learning curve into the game's control scheme and teach the player by doing. So the idea here was not "let's make The Force Awakens but with forest animals," it was, "let's use the world of Star Fox 64 to explore a new way to control ship flying games." I'm fine with that, and will eventually pick up this game.

The lack of online multiplayer is the only real disappointment for me here.

Just stopping by to contribute to the HYPE, which should be even larger than the file size.

@Project_Dolphin "That's easy to say and difficult to accomplish with finite resources." I think this gets at the core of people's concern with Nintendo over the last few years. They have been supporting two entire platforms almost singlehandedly since the departure of the third parties, in a time when development costs are ballooning like crazy. Therefore, when they release games, they need them to sell as well as possible. Thus, a lot of more recent IPs are smaller projects on 3DS (with the notable exception of Splatoon) and larger projects have played it pretty safe this generation (with the possible exception of Star Fox... we'll see).

This is a big part of the effort to attract and promote indie developers, who fill in that third party gap somewhat. And it's the reason I believe that the next handheld/home hardware will run essentially the same platform, a lot like iOS on iPhone/iPad. This way they can consolidate development costs to a single platform and basically give twice the game support to each system.

@TheRealThanos I sincerely hope that I'm wrong, not because I'm impatient, but because I agree that a 2016 release makes business sense. I just remember being ready to buy a Nintendo 64 on launch day, and that day was pushed out so many times... I suppose I've just been traumatized by so much "please understand" in my life.

@Hotfusion Let me be clear that I think Nintendo thinks they will release it in 2016. I'm just not convinced they will succeed in that timeline. And given that we're hearing next to nothing about development of games for the system, if it does release in 2016, it will do so with a paltry slate of games. From Nintendo, we're looking at a Zelda cross-release and maybe a Smash Bros. port. From third parties, we don't even know if they have dev kits. If there's a decent pipeline of launch window titles, they've done a really good job of keeping it quiet.

Maybe holiday 2017 is a stretch, maybe spring 2017 makes more sense, but holiday 2016 sounds like a recipe for disappointment, and Nintendo tends to release systems in the holiday season.

I'd love to be wrong here, but I'm usually not.

@Moshugan They would fill the gap with Zelda and associated hype. They've already got Star Fox and a Slippy spinoff coming out. Zelda will probably release later this year. In the middle they'll just promote indie titles and VC-related stuff.

I've been a Nintendo guy since the NES days, and I have never seen them go from announcement to release in less than 6 months. Even for certain games they won't do this. How long have we been waiting for Star Fox and Zelda on Wii U? Announcing something and then releasing it that soon is more an Apple thing to do than a Nintendo thing to do.

Just my opinion. Nintendo is aiming to switch things up, so maybe they do something they've never done before. But even if they announce a holiday 2016 release at E3, I won't believe it will actually happen until I see units in a store. Believing in a 2016 release is setting yourself up for a "please understand" moment.

I will still be absolutely stunned if this thing releases in 2016. I've got my money on holiday 2017.

Things we know about the NX for sure:

• It will be a video game system made by Nintendo.
• It will play video games made by Nintendo and some third parties.
• It will feature an input system of some kind.
• It will use a screen of some kind to display games.
• No one will ever beat Battletoads

"taking Monster Hunter as an example..."

STOP IT! JUST STOP IT! I CAN'T HANDLE THE HYPE!

Oh man, that dodging mechanic... I am such a last second dodger, really hoping it's not too difficult to pull off.

@cfgk24 If you're wrong about that prediction I will come after you personally for getting my hopes up so high.

I don't mind spending platinum points on Miitomo clothing, but it's kind of expensive, and if you don't have a lot of friends, the points accrue pretty slowly.

But seriously, I want that hoodie in real life.

Side note, I like how much attention Nintendo has given to the old Super Famicom aesthetic in recent years. The brightly colored buttons in the diamond shape are really cool and recognizable. The main reason I was bummed about not initially getting the smaller New 3DS in the US was the fact that the XL didn't have the slick colored buttons. I hope they keep Super Famicom in mind for the design aesthetic of NX.

Mario Maker and Splatoon both need the Wii U controller as a core part of how they function (although Splatoon could probably be retrofitted to a more traditional setup, as long as gyro aiming remains, which I'm sure it will.)

Smash is obvious. Just release Smash Wii U, include all DLC and maybe some of the 3DS stages that didn't make it to the Wii U version. To make an entirely new version is a massive lift, and I just don't see Sakurai being up for it so soon after the release of two versions just a year and a half ago.

Zelda Wii U may be a go just because at this point they are probably developing the game to make it easier to release on both systems.

Obviously it's just a rumor, but I would be sad to learn that the handheld component is not a focus of the system. Frankly, the 3DS platform is in more need of updating than the Wii U.

Still, there's new Monster Hunter for 3DS this summer, so there's not much that could bring me down off that high.

I have never enjoyed tower defense games, but this one sounds like a neat take on the genre. I also like that it makes good use of the Wii U gamepad. May have to check it out.