Nintendo is not cool

[Jazoni89]

Nintendo is a much different company, to the one I fell in love with years ago.

Now they are shadows of their former selves (kinda like Sega as well really), releasing old games (and charging full price for them), and relying on gimmicks to sell their products.

Watching Nintendo fail Is kinda like a car crash, utterly traumatic, but you can't help but watch it.

 

[ThePuzzldPirate]

For one, they have said that it can support more than one wii-u tablet, they are at the moment just looking at cost and hardware power. The console itself has to render two separate screens at once, without not taking a quality hit on the tablet, you aren't gonna see more than that.

And for the love of god, can we stop harping on Nintendo for not making new Ip's when the entire Industry is at fault for this. This is the equivalence of me asking you to quit your job and get a new one when your making 26-30$ bucks an hour because you have been doing it for years.

If you don't like what Nintendo offers for games, go buy from the other developers that will be making games for it.

 

[Leoofmoon]

Its there marketing department to mainly blame, they made a system with VARY little prosseing power and motion controles that didnt work.and with the new WiiU there clearly adandoning the Wii system. if project rainfall wants to move the games to a PS3 or xbox im sure they would make jsut as much money

 

[Toriver]

"HOW DARE NINTENDO TRY CHANGING SOMETHING BESIDES GRAPHICS! Graphics are EVERYTHING! I wanna see REALISTIC wood grain on that gray-brown crate I'm about to shoot in Gears of Halo: Medal of Duty so my gray-brown character can blow up those gray-brown enemies! I'll just go back to playing that, and God help them if they dare try to change anything in the next 20 years, or God forbid, make me MOVE something aside from my thumbs! And I won't dare play anything unless it's at least rated T!"

This (Theory: Yahtzee-influenced) crap is getting as old and stale as the games this kind of thinking produces. And before anyone blows up at me for picking on FPS, I can level similar claims against RPGs. No, Nintendo doesn't consistently make the most innovative software, but what company does? (And before you all say Valve, NO THEY DON'T. They're still mostly gray-brown shooters, but more "light-hearted" gray-brown shooters. And Portal alone doesn't save them in that.) At least Nintendo has a lot of variety in style in their software offerings, and more importantly, innovates in its hardware past just graphics in a way that actually impacts GAMES. I suppose I can credit MS for popularizing and streamlining online multiplayer on the console. But aside from graphics and technical stuff, what has Sony done with its Playstation hardware to actually innovate the way we play games? Seriously? I can't think of anything that hadn't already been implemented by someone else. The other console developers, especially Sony, (again, can't entirely fault MS for an original idea once in a blue moon with Live and Kinect) don't want to actually innovate gaming itself because then it takes away from the true focus they want to emphasize: that their machines are really entertainment centers or extra computers that just so happen to play games too. If they emphasize the games too much, it becomes "about" the games, not the other brands in their corporation that MS and Sony want to push on you. Nintendo has none of that baggage, and none of that to lose by pushing gameplay innovation. They're primarily a gaming company, so they have always put games first, not stuff like DVD players, MP3 music storage, streaming movies and TV, or any of that. And for all the Wii's faults (and it does have some of its own), I at least give Nintendo credit for having the balls to try new ways to play games, something MS and Sony have been playing catch-up with them on since they got into the business.

 

[Saltyk]

Oh and as for Arkham City...I'll be playing it months earlier on my PS3 thanks Reggie.

This bugs me. Does Nintendo actually think anyone will buy their new console to play games like Arkham City and Dark Siders 2? Games that can be played on other systems, too. Systems that most people who would be interested in them already have. I'm sorry, but its just too little too late in my mind.

And the Wii U only supports one Wii U controller at a time? That literally ruins 90% of the games I could see the touch screen being useful for. It just reeks of desperate gimmick to me.
[sub]Though the PS3 Six-axis controller wasn't much better[/sub]

Actually it's five, not one. It supports one Touch-screen controller and four wii-remotes. I'm really interested to see how this works out...the new controller opens up a lot possibilities, and motion controls are more of an "option" than ever...the majority of single-player games will use the new controller, and for multiplayer...well, it's safe to assume that just about anyone who likes the Wii but not its remote has a classic controller. It can't take too long to prepare for the classic, can it?

I'm quite well aware that it supports multiple wii-remotes and only one touchscreen. That was my point. The console doesn't support more than one of its "new and improved" controller model. It would be like if the PS2 only supported one dual shock controller.

And what possibilities do you see?
In a Zelda or Metroid type game, it would be a used to select items or weapons much more quickly without having to pause the game. Which would be pretty cool.
In a sports game, it could let you select a play without letting your opponent see them. Only your opponent would either have to use your controller or suck it up and select from the TV screen which seems to defeat the purpose.
In a Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles or Zelda Four Swords type of game, you could select items from your inventory without inconveniencing your friends. Only you can't, because the Nintendo completely overlooked allowing other players to use touchscreen controllers.
In Mario.... you could... honestly, I don't know. I'm sure Nintendo will come up with some gimmick for their flagship title to use the touchscreen.
In a Pokemon game, I'm sure it would be used to select pokemon, items and pokeballs.

The point I'm trying to make, is that the touchscreen would either be a slightly pointless, but nice, gimmick in most games. Or it is completely lost in any game where it could be really fun, like party games.

Sorry, I'm not trying to shit on something that you seem to be excited for. I just don't see it as much more than a gimmick at worst or something I don't have any interest in at best. To put it in perspective, I felt the same way about all motion controls (from the Sixaxis to the Wii and Kinect).

 

[Macgyvercas]

Gee, this thread hasn't been done a gazillion times already...

And anyway, no, Nintendo is not "cool," which is what I like about it. Grayish-brown shooters are what qualifies as "cool" nowadays, and I want no part of it.

This. Exactly this.

I want my games to be fun and colorful, damnit, and I'll be buggered if about 95% of all Mario, Metroid and Zelda games don't deliver on the fun and colorful criteria.

Besides, I'm still waiting on Skyward Sword.

 

[Xanthious]

This post I'm about to make is about to become my default answer to anyone who has a problem with the Wii.

Me and a friend recently weer talking about console exclusives (we're both PC gamers, but pay good attention to consoles too) and I told him the Wii was the console with the most good exclusives.

Sure they have a library of decent first party titles. However, most of those titles are the same games we've been playing since Regan was in office regurgitated over and over.

Secondly, what you neglect to mention is all the games that are on the PS3 and Xbox 360 that will never be on the Wii. Nintendo has no choice but to make worthwhile games for the Wii because no other company wants to bother with it outside of throwing cheaply made shovelware onto it. So how about instead of making a list of simply exclusives we make a list of worthwhile games each system has regardless of exclusivity and I can promise the Wii will be a very distant last.

Nintendo hasn't been a truly great company since the SNES was the hot new thing. The core gaming audience has all but abandoned them over time as proven by the failures that were the N64 and the Gamecube and Nintendo has given up being anything more than something to part casuals with their money as evidenced by the Wii.

The WiiU claims to bridge the gap between the core crowd and the casuals but ultimately it will end up being too much for the casuals and too little too late for the hardcore crowd. By trying to appeal to everyone they will appeal to almost nobody and end up back to where they were when they were struggling to maintain relevancy during the days of the N64 and Gamecube.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Ok first of all I'm going to remind everyone that HD is just a big fucking gimmick

I agree with you on this I see no difference in picture when watching TV, in games the graphics are slightly better.

Glad someone does. Every time I come across a post talking about wanting a remake of some random game in HD I shake my head in disgust. Esp. considering how quickly presumably these same people will rail against games or systems with gimmicks. And yet they overlook the biggest gimmick of this fucking generation. ...okay second biggest gimmick (the biggest being steroscopic 3D)

 

[starwarsgeek]

And what possibilities do you see?

There's an Ubisoft game in development that's a pretty good example of what the system is capable of. The local multiplayer starts out pretty basic--split-screen co-operative FPS that plays like Gears of War's Horde mode, Halo's Firefight, ect. It's you and your partner against lots of enemies. What makes this interesting is that the third player, using the new controller, positions the enemy waves.
Basically, it's an FPS with one controller and an RTS with the other.

As for a few incredibly vague ideas of my own...

You know how some games will have text pop up in real time, but it's hard to read? (Dead Space). This isn't a problem with many games, but I'd much rather see that on a screen in my hand where it's easy to read.

I know I'm not the only one hoping for a "retro movement" for shooters. Action packed levels that you actually need to explore, tons of ridiculous guns that you carry around with you at all times, ect. Well, with each weapon being one tap away, it's suddenly a lot easier to manage all that gear, so maybe we'll see an old school FPS comeback.

Fighters could benefit from constantly having the move list on your controller. (well...I would benefit from it anyway...)

Hopefully, there will be at least one survival horror that comes up with a good use for Augmented Reality.

And, this is really for those more creative than I, more multi-genre multiplayer would be awesome. I hope Ubisoft's game will be a success, because games not even being limited to style of play is an opportunity I do not want to see designers pass up.

I'll admit, it will mostly be a simple convenience in single-player games: quick-access inventories, tutorials, maps, birds-eye-view, ect, but this is a system that can use any type of controller (I doubt many developers will think of keyboard and mouse, but the Wii U does have several USB ports), but I'm confident that people more creative than I can come up with many interesting uses for that.


Don't worry, I didn't take it personally. They're doing something really different with this one, and there's always the chance that the designers won't get the hang of it. I don't that is likely this time around, since the controller is so similar to the DS, but it's still possible. I'm hoping that Nintendo will start selling the controller separately later on...sometimes being backed into a corner helps with creativity, but once they get the hang of things (and the controllers get cheaper), I'd like things to open up a bit.

 

[Swifteye]

Huh. I CAN say this, THIS thread's been repeated a thousand times. Just saying, THERE are a million better forums for the whinging," AAAHHH! NINTENDO IS TEH EVILEST THING EVAR!" argument.

They weren't the ones who sold out to EA sports, and they're not the ones who kind of ROYALLY messed up during the hacker incident.

You want to whine about Nintendo sucking? Go do it somewhere else, please.

People like to complain about the most current thing happening to them. The actual gravity of the situation or the consequences that unfold because of it are non existent to the minds of one who gets wrapped up in the moment.

 

[c.lavranos]

My original complaint wasn't so much a defense of FPS' or COD clones, as it was a critique of a company which spent a generation (wii) seeking a different consumer's dollars than mine.

Mario and Zelda are (almost) always great games, but I did not enjoy them with the wii controller. There is nothing wrong with fun or light games, but when a company makes a conscious decision to focus on the "blue ocean" of new consumers over established VG fans, I feel justified in reciprocating the disinterest.

Same goes for such decisions as not localizing content or region locking their systems. Nintendo has chosen to prefer a different consumer to myself, and I've chosen to move on.

 

[Epicspoon]

As an avid game enthusiast for 20 years or so, I remember being an ardent supporter of all things Nintendo; if the Wii didn't change my mind, the last month has cemented my opinion that Nintendo deserves non of our money.

I bought a Wii for my parents to use exclusively for Wii sports, and have not been impressed by any of the games released for it - almost every title imo would have been improved with HD graphics and a good control.

Now with the WiiU having only 1 controller, and the debacle over project rainfall; I dont understand why anyone would give money to people who take us for granted?

Oh and as for Arkham City...I'll be playing it months earlier on my PS3 thanks Reggie.

well while we're whining about Nintendo being unfair let's bring up every other douchey thing every other big gaming company ever has done. actually it would be easier to list all the ones that aren't
The only company that I buy from that I don't have any complaint's for is NIS simply because they've only have one game that's ever truly japan only. any others that were got an English option even though they weren't released in America. all the re-releases are excused because all of their games are VERY limited releases in the first place and they add a TON of new content in the re-releases. (which usually include entire new story modes) I'm sure some people can find fault with them but I can't and while I'm sure there are other companies that care about their fans just as much as (if not more than) their money I can't think of any off hand.

 

[LordOrin]

I absolutely hate Nintendo. Mainly because it's the largest, richest and oldest games developer in the world and they still can't think of a new game every 5 years or so, or even ten years. It's just a load of sameyness, dating all the way back to 1984, and the differences on terms of gameplay, story and character development are subtle (insert Yathzee quote), ''in fact, you can be forgiven for saying:''There aren't any.''.'' Zelda and Mario don't seem to have undergone any changes despite maybe a slightly remodeling in HD, but that's it. Rockstar can develop a character better in 30 minutes then Nintendo can in 30 years and yes that is pretty fucking embarrasing! I am totally tired of saving Peach's ass up to a big ''Screw you, *****, get someone else to do this besides Luigi!''

All right, I will admit that Rockstar basically have been making the same game for the past fifteen years, you dropped in a city and you murder everyone and steal their cars, but at least the guy you play changes, and you get to know everyone of them!

Hardware from Nintendo always is experimental, and mostly realeased before it fully works properly. This not a good thing, and learning throughh trial and error is not something in its favor when you have to pay 300 bucks for it. And the Wii wasn't that groundshaking, since the same company made it before, only a lot worse. And uglier. Even the most adement Nintendo fanboy can unirobically claim that the Power Glove worked just fine.

In short, I hate Nintendo because they spend less time writing new scripts then they spend counting all the money Mario has made them.

For the record, Nintendo didn't make the Power Glove, although it was officially licensed. And they did make the Virtual Boy, so yeah their history is hardly untarnished, but what else can you expect of a company that's more than a century old (not even joking).

I agree that for quite a while Nintendo has mostly been rehashing old ideas, but that's a complaint I have of the entire videogame industry right now. If you look at the lineup at this year's E3, nearly every title is a sequel to something else. And what's worse is most series' also look the same as other series. If you showed someone off the street clips or screensots from CoD, Battlefield, Killzone or Gears of War, I bet they'd have trouble distinguishing them. Everyone bashes on Halo for not innovating, but at least it doesn't look the same as every other shooter.

What I'm trying to say is, if Gears of War 4 decides to use a yarn motif and motion controls, then maybe I'll start accusing Nintendo of stagnating.

 

[fangface]

I have been supporting operation rainfall for a long time now. So long in fact, that it is no longer a campaign just for those games, it is campaign to make sure Nintendo doesn't screw us over ever again! Support the cause!