Is Nintendo making the games they want to make a bad idea these days?

[themistermanguy]

When developing games, Nintendo doesn't develop for, or chase after any particular demographic, they just make the kinds of games they think are fun, which is why their software has such broad appeal. But in this day and age, is this an outdated practice? Most AAA publishers develop games with the 18-34 year old demographic in mind. This mean realism, violence, sofisticated storytelling, mature themes, an M rating, and online features.

In fact Insomniac's Overstrike, was changed to the much more serious looking FUSE because the focus group they tested with though Overstrike was too cartoony. Hell, even 12 year olds thought it was a game for their little brother. I'm seeing similar complaints with Splatoon, people who claimed to want a new Nintendo IP wanted something realistic and mature as opposed to Splatoon and to a lesser extent, Codename S.T.E.A.M.

Don't get me wrong, I definitely think Nintendo can benefit from some fan input in terms of online features and hardware, and I do think they should try and get more "mature" games oon the Wii U to appeal to older gamers, but as far as their own games are concerned, should they continue to just release they kinds of games they feel like releasing, or should they becomes slaves to market research and focus groups and try and make what they think the average gamer wants?

 

[Fox12]

In fact Insomniac's Overstrike, was changed to the much more serious looking FUSE because the focus group they tested with though Overstrike was too cartoony. Hell, even 12 year olds thought it was a game for their little brother.

The game was crucified for this, though, and generally underperformed. That's why sunset overdrive is so colorful.

Nintendo is lagging behind because they recycle the same tired IP's. and because they chased off all of their third party support.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Nintendo has a fanbase large enough to support them, for now. They have a demographic that is identified as people who like Nintendo games. Even with the Wii U doing worse than originally anticipated, the 3DS is still hitting home runs like a 'roided up batting android. I think they are sort of collecting data for "main" demographics like age, gender, or interests, but I doubt they are currently looking at those with detail.

If the Wii U doesn't do as well as Nintendo would like within the time frame they want, they might, might try to appeal to a broader audience with the last selection of Wii U games to be made or start fresh with the next generation. If they are still losing money with the Wii U and don't fix their third party issues or diversify their own IP line up more by the time their next console hits stores, then, yes, the idea of making what they want make is a bad idea.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

When developing games, Nintendo doesn't develop for, or chase after any particular demographic

Stahp stahp stahp. You're trying to tell me that a hundred year-old multinational consumer electronics company, one of the most influential in the industry, as well as Japan's third most valuable listed company with a market value of over US$85 billion... this company doesn't believe in "demographics", and that it is somehow "sticking it to the man" by repeatedly failing to sell their latest product. No, Nintendo "just makes the kinds of games they think are fun". Fuck market research and consumer demand: Nintendo just happens to casually stumble into success now and then.

Come on man. Nintendo's demographic are its own fans. They did well in marketing the Wii as a family product and focusing on the motion control gimmick, but that was it. Just as the GameCube sold like crap, so does the Wii U now, because they don't have a fucking clue how to sell their latest console.

 

[Plucky]

I just feel that existing franchises for Nintendo is wearing thin except for maybe Pokemon and Mario. the Legend of Zelda franchise is spaced far from eachover so it gives people time to cooldown. in some respects, their newest things seem to either looks unpopular to the core fanbase or just doesn't look as popular as other things.

Like Splatoon was seen as a bit average at first and Bayonetta 2 picked up any popularity Smash Bros didn't collect up. once B2 came out, Splatoon got more news like an actual playable single-player mode with some substance compared to other FPS games where people generally goes straight to the online mode. Codename Steam arguably looked a bit weak in comparison even during E3. for the moment, Codename Steam still looks unpopular; the last nintendo direct revealed Wii VC for Wii U, Pokemon Shuffle, Puzzle & Dragons Z: Mario Bros Edition (PvDZ:M already beaten Pokemon Shuffle), Xenoblade Chronicles 3D, playable Tingle/Ganon in Hyrule Warriors, Majora's Mask 3D, Fire Emblem IF, Monster Hunter 4's western release date and the EU/US 3DS release dates themselves. Mario and Donkey Kong: Tipping Stars and maybe Kirby were the "weakest" Main games, though they're not that strong when MvDK turned into Lemmings and Kirby just did a great game recently. (Triple Deluxe)

But Nintendo tried new things in the past like Wonderful 101, except it barely got ads and people confused it with being an eShop-only game, there's also the severe glut in 3rd party game releases for the next few months in comparison to what the 3DS could get. to be frank they're trying to push Codename Steam into something like some sort of Hollywood epic in terms of promotions: Majora's Mask pin for preordering at GameStop? the only game-related reason that they're justifying more Marth amiibos?


Lets just wait for the next inevitable release that somehow garners much more attention and praise, 7th Gen Pokemon? a 3DS Animal Crossing sequel? only way for it to go extremely badly if they made a non-main Pokemon game that's either too short or compared to previous games like the Mystery Dungeon subseries or if Animal Crossing goes Wii U-only...doing another black eye to the series like how the removal of NES games did to Wild World...the odd Lets go to the City, but then came New Leaf where Sleepmode was substituted with Spotpass, QR Codes are quirky, and the 3DS being promoted into being carried around for stuff like coins; it's probably one of the most synergistic titles in terms of usage of core 3DS features.

 

[themistermanguy]

In fact Insomniac's Overstrike, was changed to the much more serious looking FUSE because the focus group they tested with though Overstrike was too cartoony. Hell, even 12 year olds thought it was a game for their little brother.

The game was crucified for this, though, and generally underperformed. That's why sunset overdrive is so colorful.

Nintendo is lagging behind because they recycle the same tired IP's. and because they chased off all of their third party support.

So it's ok to buy yearly Assassin's creed games, but it's taboo to buy Nintendo series that only get 1 or 2 releases a generation? Also you do realise Nintendo series almost always try to reinvent themselves mechanicaly right? Your going to sit there and tell me that Super Mario Sunshine is the same as Super Mario Galaxy?

Stahp stahp stahp. You're trying to tell me that a hundred year-old multinational consumer electronics company, one of the most influential in the industry, as well as Japan's third most valuable listed company with a market value of over US$85 billion... this company doesn't believe in "demographics", and that it is somehow "sticking it to the man" by repeatedly failing to sell their latest product. No, Nintendo "just makes the kinds of games they think are fun". Fuck market research and consumer demand: Nintendo just happens to casually stumble into success now and then.

Come on man. Nintendo's demographic are its own fans. They did well in marketing the Wii as a family product and focusing on the motion control gimmick, but that was it. Just as the GameCube sold like crap, so does the Wii U now, because they don't have a fucking clue how to sell their latest console.

Nintendo operates on the philosophy that if they think a game is fun, then others will too.

 

[Casual Shinji]

When developing games, Nintendo doesn't develop for, or chase after any particular demographic, they just make the kinds of games they think are fun, which is why their software has such broad appeal.

Except for all the man children who grew up on Nintendo and just wanna buy the next Zelda and Smash. If their software had such a broad appeal I'd think the Wii-U would be selling quite a bit more than it is now. Unless ofcourse their marketing really is that horrendous. And seeing how out of touch Nintendo is with the Youtube demographic, this could indeed be the case.

Nintendo sells to Nintendo fans, and that fanbase doesn't appear to be large enough to sustain a home console anymore in this day and age.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Nintendo operates on the philosophy that if they think a game is fun, then others will too.

Is this just your opinion or are you trying to present it as fact? If its the latter I would like to see evidence to support your theory. I will offer a counter theory Nintendo operates on the philosophy that they think they will profit from a game most obviously from an immediate financial standpoint but also possibly from a possible more longterm position (i.e like almost all game companies ever with the exception of some indie devs) such as it hopefully widening their install base you could point to their release of Mario Kart 8, Smash Bros WiiU and the new Mario platformers as evidence of the former and their partnership with Platinum as the latter (which did not seem to have the effect they were after even if it did get me to buy a WiiU).

Nintendo rely on brand more than any other company I can think of in gaming, in their characters and in their art style. Do they make good and in some cases great games yes, do they make games that arent so good yes they do but they take care of their franchises more than most and with good reason.

I have played Nintendo games my entire life starting with the NES the company really innovated back then coming up with killer new Ips that were spot on and now we still have those Ips which is great but they really seem to have lost their cutting edge. I still enjoy some of their games but many more just feel tired to me like I have played them before.

Its obvious they have failed to widen their install base the one they got with the Wii has all but abandoned them. Now they are just selling to their already established fanbase not a bad thing but its not an effective long term strategy. So yeah their strategy at the moment is go after the demographic they have i.e the fans and give them what they expect.

As for their games having broad appeal well yeah they do and no they seemingly dont. On the one hand everyone can enjoy them on the other not many people seem to want to at least on the WiiU. If they could replicate the awesome mix of games available on the DS on the home console they would kill it.

I feel writing anything except glowing praise for Nintendo will be pointless for you (OP) however as it seems you will tolerate no bad thing said about them and spin their failures in any way so as to lay as little blame on Nintendo as possible. But still I had a few minutes to kill so decided to type this anyway.

 

[Fox12]

In fact Insomniac's Overstrike, was changed to the much more serious looking FUSE because the focus group they tested with though Overstrike was too cartoony. Hell, even 12 year olds thought it was a game for their little brother.

The game was crucified for this, though, and generally underperformed. That's why sunset overdrive is so colorful.

Nintendo is lagging behind because they recycle the same tired IP's. and because they chased off all of their third party support.

So it's ok to buy yearly Assassin's creed games, but it's taboo to buy Nintendo series that only get 1 or 2 releases a generation? Also you do realise Nintendo series almost always try to reinvent themselves mechanicaly right? Your going to sit there and tell me that Super Mario Sunshine is the same as Super Mario Galaxy?

More or less, yeah. There are a dozen different iterations of Mario, but they're still just Mario. I owned a game cube when i was a kid, giving me access to OoT, Majoras Mask, and Windwaker, essentially the best titles in the series. I have no desire to pick up a new Zelda or Smash Bros. I'll just play one of titles I already own. I don't hate Nintendo, I think they're creative, but the facts are still there. They're lagging behind everyone else, and this is one reason why.

I don't like assasins creed either, since Ubisoff is even worse at franchise milking then Nintendo. And between the two, yes, I'd rather play a Nintendo game then an Assasins Creed, Halo, or COD title. That said, Nintendo is still guilty of releasing the same brands every generation, so we know exactly what to expect. It's not their fault, really. It's difficult to produce so much alone, and unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo can't rely on third party support to ease their burden. And this is where they made their fatal mistake. Go back to their SNES days, and tell me what their best games were. Sure, they had Metroid and Zelda, but they also had Chrono Trigger and FF6. GameCube had RE4 and Rogue Squadron. Today Nintendo has isolated themselves from the rest of The industry. It not Nintendo agains Sony or Microsoft, its Nintendo against everyone.

I like Nintendo, but fact is that they're limping behind in the race, no matter how fans try to spin it. Personally, I think they're great. I hope they enjot great duccess. Unfortunately I can only afford one console, and Sony has the story based titles that I want (most of which are 3rd party).

 

[Ishal]

Oh boy... I can't wait to see the usual suspects come in here and start arguing.

[Disgonnabegood.jpg]

Nintendo uses market data just like any other company. It's a bit foolish to think otherwise. Difference being that they are a very old traditional Japanese company. This is only substantiated by their views of the internet and how they choose to do business. They are very different from American companies, both in good ways and in bad.

Nintendo does make what's fun, but it trends towards kids. This is not a bad thing. Despite my own misgivings of the company and it's leaning on old franchises. It's still focused on game play and mechanics first, which to be blunt, we kinda really fucking need right now. Seeing all these "cinematic" and story focused games blow their budgets on mocap, Voice actors, and all this other crap... then playing the game to find a shoddy bug ridden mess? That combined with the increasingly loud "We want games that aren't games" crowd.. Not really endearing me to the trends in western AAA games. Which really... puts me in a bit of situation. I don't want to jump on the "glorious Nippon" bandwagon. There are few eastern games I like, but it's getting to the point that other than the Indie scene, there isn't much choice.

 

[Super Cyborg]

Like others have said, even with many of their games being good, have the same characters being stuck to so many games doesn't help them. Yes, having a new Zelda, Mario, etc. isn't a bad thing (I love the games), but the lack of variety in character games is really hurting them. I can say how these various Mario games are so different, but when one see's every other game being a Nintendo character, then it can get hard to be excited. They do have other games that are different, but only people like us really know about it. Few know about Monster Hunter, Wonderful 101, etc. because there is little advertisement. Nintendo Direct does not give enough advertisement to get wider audiences interested.

Yes, they can have interesting concepts that are really neat or not work that well (looking at you Link Between Worlds), but if they could add new character designs and art styles, and add some story depth, and add in advertisement with that, they could start slowly bringing people in. It won't work quickly, but they need to bring new and old people back in to keep going.

Also, streetpass stuff is getting a little ridiculous. Not everyone has the ability to get street pass stuff for your game Nintendo. I can't get lots of people for your Bravely Default farming sim thing, or coins for getting hints in Link Between Worlds. It's alright enough for now, but you are inching towards street pass being essential to the game.

 

[happyninja42]

When developing games, Nintendo doesn't develop for, or chase after any particular demographic, they just make the kinds of games they think are fun, which is why their software has such broad appeal. But in this day and age, is this an outdated practice? Most AAA publishers develop games with the 18-34 year old demographic in mind. This mean realism, violence, sofisticated storytelling, mature themes, an M rating, and online features.

In fact Insomniac's Overstrike, was changed to the much more serious looking FUSE because the focus group they tested with though Overstrike was too cartoony. Hell, even 12 year olds thought it was a game for their little brother. I'm seeing similar complaints with Splatoon, people who claimed to want a new Nintendo IP wanted something realistic and mature as opposed to Splatoon and to a lesser extent, Codename S.T.E.A.M.

Don't get me wrong, I definitely think Nintendo can benefit from some fan input in terms of online features and hardware, and I do think they should try and get more "mature" games oon the Wii U to appeal to older gamers, but as far as their own games are concerned, should they continue to just release they kinds of games they feel like releasing, or should they becomes slaves to market research and focus groups and try and make what they think the average gamer wants?

No it's not a bad thing that they make the games they want to make. I personally don't own a Nintendo console anymore, and haven't for decades, but I don't begrudge Nintendo for that. If they want to focus on games for the younger demographic, rock on. Somebody needs to make those games in my opinion, and if Nintendo actually want to do it, more power to them. If their sales are doing fine with the titles they are making, they can make the games they want, for the market they want, and I don't have a single problem with this at all.

 

[Gengisgame]

Maybe Nintendo doesn't do the things you say but I feel the problem with them is different, they keep some standards low on their I.P.s to keep expectations low and save themselves some money. Look at Pokemom for instance, they could have released a proper console RPG years go, something almost every fan of the series really wants but it is considerably cheaper to make low quality handheld versions which even then has only recently changed to 3D. You will never see a proper console Pokemon game as long as they are able to milk fans for a fraction of the price.

I don't buy into the idea that Nintendo heavily aims at a younger generation considering they make most of there money on sequels.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Stahp stahp stahp. You're trying to tell me that a hundred year-old multinational consumer electronics company, one of the most influential in the industry, as well as Japan's third most valuable listed company with a market value of over US$85 billion... this company doesn't believe in "demographics", and that it is somehow "sticking it to the man" by repeatedly failing to sell their latest product. No, Nintendo "just makes the kinds of games they think are fun". Fuck market research and consumer demand: Nintendo just happens to casually stumble into success now and then.

Come on man. Nintendo's demographic are its own fans. They did well in marketing the Wii as a family product and focusing on the motion control gimmick, but that was it. Just as the GameCube sold like crap, so does the Wii U now, because they don't have a fucking clue how to sell their latest console.

Nintendo operates on the philosophy that if they think a game is fun, then others will too.

Fun like Sonic Boom, right? Or maybe that doesn't count because they only published it? They "only published" Bayonetta 2 as well, and that was a GOTY contender for many.

I don't believe for a second that any company in the world mass-produces anything without being absolutely sure that they can (at the very least) even out. First comes marketability. Fun is immediately second at best. And no, "fun doesn't sell itself". YOU (Nintendo) have to sell the game. And I have a love/hate feeling every time its fans try to play their failures as "Nintendo's too cool to succeed" or "Nintendo fails because its games are just so much darn fun" or "It's the consumers' fault, they don't know what fun really is".

 

[hermes]

There are 2 different points here: Nintendo should listen to their fans, and it should improve their relationship with 3rd parties.

In the case of the fans, they do market research and test technologies with the public as much as any other company; but, since they are a traditionally Japanese company, they pay a lot more attention to seniority than the public, or other companies. In other words, no matter how many people asks for decent online experiences on the Wii U, if Iwata or Miyamoto feel strongly that it is not important, it doesn't get greenlighted. That is why people believe they don't sway out of their way to listen to their fans. Because they do, but up to some point.

The third party problem is different. I think we can all agree that Nintendo's first party development is the strongest of the three. If a console had the support of Nintendo and the output of the other two in terms of third party support, it would be great. But Nintendo never had good relationship with other companies. For Nintendo, it used to be "my way or the highway", to the point of being barely legal in some ways, and many publishers resented them for that. Some still do. To be fair, it was a good policy on the part of Nintendo when they started. The lax controls on the content published created a flood of shovelware that helped the burst of the console industry.

This is also an atypical generation, so far, because indie developers represent most of the industry output... Sony and MS has taken serious steps in order to make the process as painless as possible, but Nintendo keeps pretty much the same policy and support as 20 years ago.

 

[Super Cyborg]

Stahp stahp stahp. You're trying to tell me that a hundred year-old multinational consumer electronics company, one of the most influential in the industry, as well as Japan's third most valuable listed company with a market value of over US$85 billion... this company doesn't believe in "demographics", and that it is somehow "sticking it to the man" by repeatedly failing to sell their latest product. No, Nintendo "just makes the kinds of games they think are fun". Fuck market research and consumer demand: Nintendo just happens to casually stumble into success now and then.

Come on man. Nintendo's demographic are its own fans. They did well in marketing the Wii as a family product and focusing on the motion control gimmick, but that was it. Just as the GameCube sold like crap, so does the Wii U now, because they don't have a fucking clue how to sell their latest console.

Nintendo operates on the philosophy that if they think a game is fun, then others will too.

Fun like Sonic Boom, right? Or maybe that doesn't count because they only published it? They "only published" Bayonetta 2 as well, and that was a GOTY contender for many.

I don't believe for a second that any company in the world mass-produces anything without being absolutely sure that they can (at the very least) even out. First comes marketability. Fun is immediately second at best. And no, "fun doesn't sell itself". YOU (Nintendo) have to sell the game. And I have a love/hate feeling every time its fans try to play their failures as "Nintendo's too cool to succeed" or "Nintendo fails because its games are just so much darn fun" or "It's the consumers' fault, they don't know what fun really is".

I have to wonder at times If Microsoft went with the original ideas of the Xbone that Microsoft fanboys would be like that. Even if not the exact same lines, something along the lines of that.

Also, what the OP says could be argued for all companies really. I could say EA makes their games because they think it will be fun, and damn everyone else who thinks otherwise. I guess the problem with that particular company is the way they talk about it. Just that you could claim any company makes a game they think is fun as a defense, doesn't make it any better. Pretty sure if you look hard enough, you will find that for Destiny, Evolve, Mass Effect 3, Assassins Creed, etc. etc.

 

[CaitSeith]

Without Nintendo doing what they usually do, young kids and casuals probably would go to mobile and F2P games. I wouldn't wish that even to my worst enemy!

 

[CaitSeith]

When developing games, Nintendo doesn't develop for, or chase after any particular demographic, they just make the kinds of games they think are fun, which is why their software has such broad appeal. But in this day and age, is this an outdated practice? Most AAA publishers develop games with the 18-34 year old demographic in mind. This mean realism, violence, sofisticated storytelling, mature themes, an M rating, and online features.

And from the AAA we got Assassin's Creed Unity, Evolve and The Order 1886. We got too many big budget publishers doing games involving realism, violence, sofisticated storytelling, mature themes, an M rating, and online features. Nintendo trying to imitate them would put it in a big disadvantage.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

So it's ok to buy yearly Assassin's creed games, but it's taboo to buy Nintendo series that only get 1 or 2 releases a generation? Also you do realise Nintendo series almost always try to reinvent themselves mechanicaly right? Your going to sit there and tell me that Super Mario Sunshine is the same as Super Mario Galaxy?

The problem with this argument is that it ignores the large amount of spinoffs with Mario's name in them and the amount of cameos he makes in games in general.

Let's take a look at the Gamecube era. Sure, you had Super Mario Sunshine. You also had Mario Party 4,5,6,7. Mario Kart Double Dash, Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Super Strikers, Paper Mario, and many others.

People have gotten bored with 1-2 Assasin's Creed games a year. You think having up to 11+ mario games at 2-3 a year won't have sone wear on people? And that's just one Nintendo franchise.

People would say the same thing about Sony if we had 11 games and spin-offs for Uncharted on the PS3. With 2-3 spinoffs for othe popular franchises.

 

[Signa]

Stahp stahp stahp. You're trying to tell me that a hundred year-old multinational consumer electronics company, one of the most influential in the industry, as well as Japan's third most valuable listed company with a market value of over US$85 billion... this company doesn't believe in "demographics", and that it is somehow "sticking it to the man" by repeatedly failing to sell their latest product. No, Nintendo "just makes the kinds of games they think are fun". Fuck market research and consumer demand: Nintendo just happens to casually stumble into success now and then.

Come on man. Nintendo's demographic are its own fans. They did well in marketing the Wii as a family product and focusing on the motion control gimmick, but that was it. Just as the GameCube sold like crap, so does the Wii U now, because they don't have a fucking clue how to sell their latest console.

Nintendo operates on the philosophy that if they think a game is fun, then others will too.

Fun like Sonic Boom, right? Or maybe that doesn't count because they only published it? They "only published" Bayonetta 2 as well, and that was a GOTY contender for many.

I'm not sure if it changes your point at all, but Sega published Sonic Boom. Nintendo did do Bayonetta 2 though.