What should Nintendo do?

[EyeReaper]

So, I was cruising around the internet today, and I discovered the most amazing thing. There's an Animal Crossing style party game coming to the Wii U. It was apparently teased at E3, but I missed it or something. "This is great" I thought. "The last few Mario Parties were complete flops, I need something besides Dokapon Kingdom to play at game night"

Turns out, I am alone in this thought, at least according to the basic google search I did. Same with Metroid Prime Federation Force. A 4 player co-op Metroid? sounds like pure heaven, Oh, but they have a ball, worst game ever I guess.

It seems to me that Nintendo is in some kind of catch-22. When they keep making games that play similarly to previous games (like the New Super Mario line) they're lambasted for being unoriginal, stale. Yet when they take a franchise and actually shake it up a bit, actually do something original, All I see are comments going "I just wanted another Animal Crossing!" and "Why couldn't they just make this Metroid like the last not-other M one!"

Just seems silly to me. Almost as if fans don't know what they want.

 

[Zhukov]

I think you'll find that the "Nintendo is unoriginal and stale" crowd are a noisy minority.

And that's coming from someone who doesn't much like Nintendo games.

If I were them I'd just keep churning out the same, formulaic but solidly designed games and raking in the cash.

 

[Scarim Coral]

The reason for the so much hate toward Federation Force is due to the fact it look NOTHING like Metriod. Heck I don't evne why they still keep the "Prime" in the title or that is there to place the game in the Metriod timeline.

OT- Probably keep trying to invest in new franchise. I mean just look at Splatoon, a kiddy fps like game into the fps market and it has been a huge hit!

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I think you'll find that the "Nintendo is unoriginal and stale" crowd are a noisy minority.

I'm not sure that's true anymore. Certainly they're vocal and noisy. Hell, they could teach Noise Marines some lessons.
But I remember Bioware saying the same thing about the ME3 protesters; they were a minority. When they really weren't.
Not saying its a fair critism to call Nintendo stale or not, but it seems like more people have that train of thought than don't, or at the very least its a rapidly growing minority that is closing in on that 51% sweet spot.

Captcha: turning point. See, this guy gets it.

 

[BytByte]

Changing something people remember from their halcyon days, even just using the name, will get certain people uppity.

The other thing is, I don't think the people who keep claiming Nintendo is stale are the same people who are upset when Nintendo changes things up with their franchises.

If you want to play the game play it, just like the other thousands of people who play it.

 

[JayRPG]

I've been saying this for years and years; and you know what? Nintendo does both of those things, they make solid, well designed games that follow the same/similar formula because that is what half of us want but they also make some incredibly original games that are either new IPs or completely change the IP they are using because that is what the other half of us want.

The problem is that each side of that coin doesn't ever stop loudly, constantly whinging, and completely disregarding any game that goes against their predetermined view.

I absolutely love the "Pokemon is just the same game, why don't they make an original pokemon game, it's the same game with new pokemon" crowd; It's almost like Nintendo and Gamefreak didn't make games like:
Pokemon Snap, pokemon puzzle adventure, pokemon pinball, pokemon mystery dungeon (a game that became so popular it is now it's own series), pokemon conquest (this was a crossover SRPG with Tecmo koei for christ sake, how different can you get), Pokemon stadium/Colosseum, pokemon gale of darkness, pokemon ranger, pokemon TCG, pokemon dash, pokemon trozei, pokemon rumble, and pokemon shuffle.

Nintendo is far from my favourite company in the world, and they only get it right about half of the time (as far as big decisions go), but they get way too much shit for stuff they don't even do. Most of Nintendo's first party IPs have less games in their catalogue than Assassin's Creed does, and Assassin's Creed has only been around for 8 years, where as the IPs it beats on franchise milking have been around for as long as 29 years.

It is exactly as the OP says, if Nintendo release a solid new entry into a long running series they are scalded for always doing the same thing, if Nintendo shakes up a series or makes something original it is either ignored, or they are scalded for not doing the same thing.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Nintendo has made heavy changes to each Zelda, Metroid, and even 3D Mario game without changing the foundations of each series. Despite the naysayers, they have playing with different changes beyond just new level layouts:

Spoiler: 3D Mario

3D Mario: 64->Sunshine, FLUDD-> Galaxy, gravity shenanigans-> Galaxy 2, ok, the fans demanded this one-> er, 3D World had the multiplayer co-op, if that counts as the continuation of the main 3D series

Spoiler: Zelda

3D Zelda: Majora's Mask, No Ganon, vastly different time mechanics, character focus and sidequest ratio than OoT-> Wind Waker, extremely different art style, added new combat moves and way to travel-> Twilight Princess, improved those combat moves, added more of them, Wolf Link-> Skyward Sword, motion controls (first game to be developed with them in mind), blended WW''s and TP's art styles

2D Zelda: Zelda 2, switched to full out side scrolling action-RPG-> A Link to the Past, returned to top-down view, added the Mastersword (and the upgrading of said sword that comes back in later games), added tons of items and the piece of heart system-> Link's Awakening, music became more important to gameplay, first long trading quest, Ganon not important to plot-> Oracle games, linked game feature, weather/time mechanics important to puzzles-> Minnish Cap, shrinking mechanic, No Ganon (at all), split form, learnable 2D sword moves-> Four Swords/Adventures, multiplayer Zelda, Adventures even experimented with GBA to Gamecube linking-> Phantom Hourglass-> touchscreen controls, new sailing method, central dungeon which is revisited a lot-> Spirit Tracks, fixed some of PH's issues, Trains-> A Link Between Worlds, return to glorious buttons, wall/painting merging, new item meter and rental system, most non-linear game since NES original.

Spoiler: Metroid

Metroid: Super, added charge beam, power bombs, heat resistant suit, wall jumping, speed booster-> Prime 1, 3D, hint system for those that get lost, beam combos, massive amounts of new lore-> Fusion, dropped non-linearity for story telling, survival horror aspect added, items improved-> Prime 2 dark world mechanic, beam ammo, improved on things Prime brought to the table, simple multiplayer-> Zero Mission, back to non-linearity, first 2D hint system, stealth section, made with sequence breaking in mind-> Prime Hunters, touchscreen control option, multiplayer (that was popular)-> Prime 3, hypermode mechanic, fixed end game key hunt of other Primes, stacking beams like 2D titles, Wii controls, full voice acting-> Other M, first 3rd person 3D Metroid, added hand to hand combat not seen from Samus outside of Smash Bros, Wiimote only controls, went back to linear progression for story telling, extreme focus on characters, first game to try to actively tie two other games together (Prime 2 and 3 gave hints in their lore scans about previous games and Super had an intro reviewing 1 and 2's events)

Not all of those were positive changes (Other M having only a few good changes), but most of them did add variety or well received features to each series. There's also the spin off games that came out with good spacing between the main series games of their respective franchises, like Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, or Hyrule Warriors.

There is that Catch-22 where they can't please everybody. The main criticism I agree with, though, is that they have outright ignored some franchises for years (or even over a decade - F-Zero) only to make spin offs (Federation Force) while not even bothering to take advantage of the Wii U's hardware. (I know someone could make a Metroid that utilized the gamepad's screen well, and a real Animal Crossing game probably could have benefited similarly - though I don't anything about the franchise.) The "Nintendo is stale" stigma probably wouldn't be as bad if they didn't punch out a confusing amount of 2D Mario games in the past 15 years.

I do know what I want: a Metroid that shares the series' foundation of exploration, non-linearity and atmosphere, whether it is a Prime, a sidescroller, or third person. Federation Force might be a decent title (still too early to completely dismiss it), but it is definitely not what most fans wanted after no news of a new game in 5 years.

TLDR They should try what they were doing before the Wii U was marked "3rd place" by the internet, keep up the steady pace of changing just the right amount of things to make the games feel fresh and keep adding to the 3DS library too, while ignoring those that say they make the same game over again, because everyone does to an extent (unless it's a super-experimental indie game).

 

[FalloutJack]

Snippen downen

It's a trope called Unpleaseable Fanbase, where it's impossible to please everybody, and it happens to everyone. Nintendo understands this, and really...I don't think their business model overall is terrible, from an outside perspective. I don't have many of their products, but consider their long history of doing fairly-decent work and just hunkering down, year after year, hanging on while others might rise or fall. They're not the greatest, but they seem to know how to remain stable.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

My usual 2 cents: get better third party support, meet Amiibo demands, drop the Youtube bullshit and maybe don't release so many consoles/handhelds so close to each other. On a personal note, I'd love a Pokemon game just like the handheld ones (i.e. not a fighting/photography game, and actual RPG) but for home console.

They should try what they were doing before the Wii U was marked "3rd place" by the internet

It was marked "3rd place" by their sales, on its own, by losing a competition of three.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

My usual 2 cents: get better third party support, meet Amiibo demands, drop the Youtube bullshi and maybe don't release so many consoles/handhelds so close to each other. On a personal note, I'd love a Pokemon game just like the handheld ones (i.e. not a fighting/photography game, and actual RPG) but for home console.

They should try what they were doing before the Wii U was marked "3rd place" by the internet

It was marked "3rd place" by their sales, on its own, by losing a competition of three.

exactly this.

I can point out most of their "changes" to their typical games they release, but none of the changes usually entice me (although the forementioned pokemon on console that ACTUALLY takes advantage of a proper 3D pokemon release would be what nearly everyone I know has been begging for for over a decade.) and since they don't entice me, then I won't be spending stupid amounts of money on stuff that I will never play (or I can just go play the previous version that I got 10-15 years ago that is either the same or better.)

 

[Zontar]

Snippen downen

It's a trope called Unpleaseable Fanbase, where it's impossible to please everybody, and it happens to everyone. Nintendo understands this, and really...I don't think their business model overall is terrible, from an outside perspective. I don't have many of their products, but consider their long history of doing fairly-decent work and just hunkering down, year after year, hanging on while others might rise or fall. They're not the greatest, but they seem to know how to remain stable.

On top of that, their consistent stability has been near the top. They've been either the biggest, second biggest or third biggest console seller for decades now, and when it comes to publishing they've been unambiguously number 1 for just as long.

Sony Playstation has only recently managed to become profitable, while Nintendo has, during its time as a game company, has had almost no time in the red. Which is probably why, if they stopped making anything, they could pay their employs and maintain their facilities in operation for 30 years with the money they have at the bank.

I wish they'd use some of that money to start making in house anime series using their IPs though.

 

[EyeReaper]

On top of that, their consistent stability has been near the top. They've been either the biggest, second biggest or third biggest console seller for decades now, and when it comes to publishing they've been unambiguously number 1 for just as long.

Sony Playstation has only recently managed to become profitable, while Nintendo has, during its time as a game company, has had almost no time in the red. Which is probably why, if they stopped making anything, they could pay their employs and maintain their facilities in operation for 30 years with the money they have at the bank.

I wish they'd use some of that money to start making in house anime series using their IPs though.

There was an Animal Crossing anime back in 2006, Pokemon's still going, and uhh.. The Super Mario Bros. Super Show?

Speaking of Animal Crossing )and I oh so love to do so) why the hell isn't best character Mr. Resetti getting an Amiibo? He is the only character who really deserves one, outside of the inexplicably popular Isabelle and series mainstay KK Slider. I mean, who really gives a shit about the two pawn shop llamas?

 

[Zontar]

There was an Animal Crossing anime back in 2006, Pokemon's still going, and uhh.. The Super Mario Bros. Super Show?

But I don't care about Animal Crossing, Pokemon has been around so long it's stale, and I want a Smash Anime damn it! And another F zero series would be nice as well.

 

[Dark Knifer]

I don't really know. I like my wiiu but all the games I have are just more polished versions of their older games, mario world, mario kart, party and smash bros.

I wouldn't say they never try new stuff, like with splatoon, but its stuff that coincidental doesn't appeal to me or is very much over done by other companies. I think one problem they have is that apart from some zeldas and retros attempts at metro id they universally don't do story. In the last 5-6 years they haven't gone near a story besides some not-Nintendo created franchises like xenoblade.

I dunno honestly. Nintendo is in a weird spot.

 

[Nazulu]

The problem is (and always is) is that you are generalising a whole lot of different complaints into simple summary's, and I find it is hardly the case. And don't believe there are (if any) people saying Nintendo keep doing the same thing while also asking for the same thing.

It would be more understandable if those people say they keep making the same/similar Mario games while they want more, I guess 'proper' StarFox, Metroid or F-Zero games (because how common are those?).

Also, all their new stuff has been rather weak in comparison to what they used to make.

 

[Plucky]

I just assumed that Nintendo was slowing down on speed, so they had to resort to spinoffs to tide people over. like who remembered Zelda: Tri Force Heroes when Animal Crossing got bile for having 2 spinoffs and Metroid having a new game that happened to be a spinoff as well? at least Amiibo Festival did calm down a bit once they shown off more features. For the time being, i would think that the most close "main" Nintendo games has to offer for the moment is probably LBX, Yo-Kai Watch, Super Mario Maker and Star Fox Zero. (wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo was only allowed to do YW if they bring over LBX)

Also, i think the reason that NSMB gets a free pass because originally it was "New" because it was the first time that Mario was in a 2D platforming environment, barring remakes so it got praise. they got slightly more bile around NSMB2 but that might just be a case of "it's the same, so now it sucks", the same thing probably happened around Animal Crossing City Folk/Let's go to the City when people was worn down on Wild World which itself felt more loose in comparison to the Gamecube original.


In AC: Wii's case, Animal Crossing was wearing slightly thin and just happened to tail into the whole Non-main Nintendogs spectrum. the original game was complete with NES games. but Nintendo's friend codes and sleepmode meant it was a seldom-used feature outside of Japan and would require going online on boards or going to purposed events for visiting other towns. this lessened significantly when New Leaf came out when sleepmode was upgraded to Spotpass; providing incentive to actually carrying the 3DS around with you since you'll pass Nintendo Zones. and the graphical differences made the game much more organic which gave a distinct edge compared to previous games. this makes the hate for the 2 Spinoffs justified because it seemingly reduced the amount of interactivity a player could have, and in AF's case; shown off graphics that made people think it was a main-line Wii U Animal Crossing which turned out to be Mario Party-like from the moment people noticed the gameboard.

Personally i just chalk it down to most of the games being aimed for the Wii U which already has a slow libarary. it's getting closer to Winter and there isn't many games between the 2, so the spinoffs sticks out more. doesn't help that games people were expecting like Hyrule Warriors' Legends, Pokemon and Zelda Wii U are next year. slightly painful to know that the Smash Line of amiibo is almost fully released (barring DLC characters) and some of them like the Pokemon ones has no personally defined use yet outside of Smash. it's even worse in the UK since out of all those new games, we're only getting Chibi-Robo and the AC Spinoffs, presumably to sell Amiibo or because their gameplay makes it easy to translate. (Xenoblade Chronicles X barely squeezes into December)

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

If I were going to sum it up in a pithy, patronizingly simplistic manner then I would say this: I got no clue. Why? Because I'm not in the business. And of course it's none of my business in the first place anyway, so it doesn't really matter. If anything, this should be "how can gamers stop acting like selfish dickheads?" because that's all I see happening.

 

[Lightknight]

So, I was cruising around the internet today, and I discovered the most amazing thing. There's an Animal Crossing style party game coming to the Wii U. It was apparently teased at E3, but I missed it or something. "This is great" I thought. "The last few Mario Parties were complete flops, I need something besides Dokapon Kingdom to play at game night"

Turns out, I am alone in this thought, at least according to the basic google search I did. Same with Metroid Prime Federation Force. A 4 player co-op Metroid? sounds like pure heaven, Oh, but they have a ball, worst game ever I guess.

It seems to me that Nintendo is in some kind of catch-22. When they keep making games that play similarly to previous games (like the New Super Mario line) they're lambasted for being unoriginal, stale. Yet when they take a franchise and actually shake it up a bit, actually do something original, All I see are comments going "I just wanted another Animal Crossing!" and "Why couldn't they just make this Metroid like the last not-other M one!"

Just seems silly to me. Almost as if fans don't know what they want.

The problem is that they bastardize existing franchises rather than creating a new IP where one could have been made. Miyamoto first thinks of a new game mechanic and then tries to figure out which existing IP would work best with it. This is problematic and it ends up looking not only like more milking of existing characters in ways that don't entirely make sense but also ends up robbing the main IPs of having legitimate sequels in many cases as well as robbing Nintendo of having a new IP under their belt.

What Nintendo needs to do is let more of these go to new IPs and to just continuing improving on the beloved franchises separately. It's OK if they make changes here and there but those games are more popular for nostalgia than anything else. It has to make sense if it's going to happen and Nintendo just isn't doing that.

Personally, I think Miyamoto needs to be taken out of control of some of the development studios altogether. Right now he is a serious bottleneck in the process. He is brilliant, sure, but it's silly to make everything go through one person and it does lead to stagnation in some areas. It's time to start letting the next generation of Nintendo take risks and innovate.

 

[Orga777]

So, I was cruising around the internet today, and I discovered the most amazing thing. There's an Animal Crossing style party game coming to the Wii U. It was apparently teased at E3, but I missed it or something. "This is great" I thought. "The last few Mario Parties were complete flops, I need something besides Dokapon Kingdom to play at game night"

Turns out, I am alone in this thought, at least according to the basic google search I did. Same with Metroid Prime Federation Force. A 4 player co-op Metroid? sounds like pure heaven, Oh, but they have a ball, worst game ever I guess.

It seems to me that Nintendo is in some kind of catch-22. When they keep making games that play similarly to previous games (like the New Super Mario line) they're lambasted for being unoriginal, stale. Yet when they take a franchise and actually shake it up a bit, actually do something original, All I see are comments going "I just wanted another Animal Crossing!" and "Why couldn't they just make this Metroid like the last not-other M one!"

Just seems silly to me. Almost as if fans don't know what they want.

This isn't really accurate. Mario gets lambasted because it literally is the same thing over and over again lately. All it is at this point is a new version of Super Mario World with better graphics and whatever gimmicks they want to throw in. It gets boring after a while, which is why Mario is no longer a console seller for Nintendo. The brand has lost its luster. However, when Mario is changed up juuust enough, you get games like Mario Galaxy, which everyone loved because of how new and exciting the level design was. Or you have the Mario and Luigi RPG series, which are all quality games in and of themselves. Don't get me started on Paper Mario, which is also a quality series (except that trash that was Sticker Stars.)All Nintendo has to do is design a game with creative game mechanics in a familiar environment to change it up more often. Having a stale platforming game is not a good thing, after all. They have to adapt.

Same can be said for Zelda. They need more Majora's Mask like games with different game mechanics and different play style, than the same old same old Ocarina of Time style with the same exact story. The biggest problem with Skyward Sword was that the motion controls turned people off, and the level design was uninspired, limited, and repetitive with too much backtracking. The new game, being open world, has a whole lot of potential that hasn't really been tapped, which makes waiting for it very exciting.

As for Metroid Prime Federation Force... There hasn't been a Metroid game since that awful disaster that was Other M in 2010, the worst game in the entire franchise. With a terrible story, lack luster gameplay, and just... guh... To follow up that unmitigated disaster with some co-op shooter game on the 3DS that doesn't even have Samus involved is kind of a backhand slap to the fans of the series. Nothing involved as playing as the Federation is appealing, nor does it even feel like a Metriod game what so ever. It might as well be a Halo rip-off. Metroid was always about the exploration aspect. A co-op shooter game will have NONE of that. It will just be Halo with Metroid terminology on a handheld. Yawn. Of course people aren't going to be happy about that. I know I'm not. The thing about Metroid is that it is very adaptable with the times. The first game was very different from Super Metroid, which is very different from the Prime series. It is all about putting Samus in new and interesting environments for Samus to explore in different ways. All they did here was make some shooting game, slap Metroid on it to get people to buy it, and call it a day. That is lazy, because Metroid without exploration isn't Metroid at all.

What people want is the same but different. They have to change up level design, game play mechanics, and exploration in such a way to make the series feel fresh, but familiar. They can't go too far and change things completely and make it unrecognizable, and they can't stay put and change nothing. There needs to be a balance between the two.

 

[Lightknight]

What people want is the same but different. They have to change up level design, game play mechanics, and exploration in such a way to make the series feel fresh, but familiar. They can't go too far and change things completely and make it unrecognizable, and they can't stay put and change nothing. There needs to be a balance between the two.

Exactly correct here. This is how existing IPs need to be treated.

Use new IPs to introduce the drastically different mechanics unless they make particularly good sense with existing IPs. Otherwise you run significant risks of alienating your existing fanbase while failing to attract new ones who weren't attracted by the original IP.