Why I love Nintendo

[PoolCleaningRobot]

Maybe the screen on the controller is unnecessary, but at least it was Nintendo's original idea, as opposed to Sony's.

So, any counter-arguments?

Yes. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7005-Innovation-Gamings-Snake-Oil
When Jim speaks you are wrong

I wish they'd went a different direction with their next-gen console as I quite like Nintendo, but I get the feeling that when the other, most powerful consoles are released the Wii U will fall back into the Wii's role of being a platform for occasional casual gaming. I just have no interest in motion controls etc. and many of MS's current failings are in their efforts to replicate what Nintendo have achieved with the Wii (by trying to force the kinect on us).

I feel the same way. Its like Nintendo didn't "grow up" with me. I bought a Wii when I was like 14 and it was fun... Until I saw the games coming out for other consoles. Fallout 3, Oblivion, Metal Gear Solid 4, Moder Warfare (before it became cancer it was a classic), these great games with mature themes were things that I wanted and what did I get on the Wii? Metroid Prime 3, Zelda, bla bla bla all E rated, kid directed stuff. There's nothing wrong with that and I will fight anyone who says Wind Waker was for kids but I want moar. Blood shooty kill kill! To this day, I would kill for a high res and MATURE Metroid fps but those kind of things aren't what Nintendo wants to so my Wii will continue to be kept in a box under my bed and the Wii U won't be an option

 

[Sean951]

Nintendo and Sony made the consoles we all grew up playing. The difference is Sony decided they liked the size of the PS2 market and tried to basically capture all of it by "aging" and making more mature exclusives like Killzone. Nintendo, on the other hand, stuck to their model of "make a console for the family, let the devs make the "M" games" and that is what we have seen. Contrary to popular belief, there are bloody shoot em ups on the Wii, but Nintendo isn't about to stick their treasured franchise-worthy mascot characters into "M" games because suddenly a game that everyone could legitimately enjoy becomes one that only older audiences could enjoy. You might see some "T" games from Metroid or Zelda, which are more mature and tell actual stories, but my mom never had to worry about me playing them in front of my little brother like she would with a Mortal Kombat or... Crap, I honestly don't play enough "M" games to know a good example anymore.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

The only thing I really dislike Nintendo for is Monster Hunter, Bayonetta 2 and the improved Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Partially, of course, because I hate exclusives, and partially because I was an avid player of the series/games beforehand. But the main thing is that isn't their market. They have a hard enough time convincing anyone that a serious game will sell on the Wii U enough to justify the cost of accomodating the system, and they have no intention to make serious games for the Wii U. They just have these few to convince people who aren't generally interested in the classic franchises and shovelware that is expected of a Nintendo console to buy one. And that annoys me.

 

[Sean951]

The only thing I really dislike Nintendo for is Monster Hunter, Bayonetta 2 and the improved Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Partially, of course, because I hate exclusives, and partially because I was an avid player of the series/games beforehand. But the main thing is that isn't their market. They have a hard enough time convincing anyone that a serious game will sell on the Wii U enough to justify the cost of accomodating the system, and they have no intention to make serious games for the Wii U. They just have these few to convince people who aren't generally interested in the classic franchises and shovelware that is expected of a Nintendo console to buy one. And that annoys me.

Your loss. That's a minimum of 3 games you are cheating yourself out of because you don't think Nintendo makes "serious games," whatever that means.

Captcha: Snoop Lion. I didn't know The Escapist liked reggae

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

snip

Yes, how dare Nintendo try to gain new fans! I honestly don't understand what your problem is. Ooh, Nintendo wants more "serious" games (I'm only guessing that you don't know what that word means). Could it be that they want people who play those games to buy their consoles? Nah! How could that ever benefit anyone?

And, if you hate exclusives, the people you should be taking it out on are Sony and Microsoft. If they didn't exist, you'd only have to buy one console, you cheapskate. Oh, I'm sorry if you don't make enough to afford EVERY LUXURY ITEM on the market.

Firstly, you define serious games, and you know what I mean, in a way that isn't pretentious or stupid, and I'll use that term. I'm talking about games that are targeted towards a more mature audience, are more in-depth, and do not revolve around the use of a novel control system as their sole form of enjoyment. I could easily have said harcore or real games and sounded just as much of a fuckwit, but I thought serious was a slightly better description. Now that that's out of the way...

I dislike all exclusives, but I hate these in particular. These particular 3 aren't just exclusives, they're exclusive continuations of multiplatform games. I think the Wii U should get the same DE:HR as every other system, and/or every other system should get the revised version as well. I think Bayonetta 2 and Monster Hunter installments should be on at least every platform their predecessors were on. I don't particularly blame Nintendo for Bayonetta 2 because it may not have been made at all otherwise. But I certainly blame them for Monster Hunter Tri and onwards, which was intended as multiplatform until fairly late. Basically I can tolerate exclusives that were always exclusive, but it's a dick move to make something exclusive that should not have been.

My problem is not with Nintendo legitimately trying to gain new fans by having content for audiences other than their target market. My problem is that 1. they are doing this by manipulating already existing fanbases on other platforms, and 2. they do not seem to intend to support these fanbases with any other serious (see above for definition as used in this context) games. This is not about getting fans, if it were they might be a bit more supportive of such a demographic in the rest of their catalogue, this is a way to convince some players on other consoles to buy a Wii U, only to be stuck with it with no other games they might be interested in.

Lastly...did you just imply that my not wanting to have to buy all the available consoles to play sequels to series I am invested in is somehow unreasonable? And that if there was no competition one console dominating the market would lead to better prices and a better product? And if that is the case, please explain?

snip

Sorry for not replying personally, but see above, it's pretty much what I'd have said anyway.

EDIT: Hey wait a f***ing second, you make the distinction between the games Nintendo makes and the games made for other consoles yourself. And I almost thought you were actually confused at what I meant by 'serious'.

 

[lapan]

WAAAIT....low price??
PS3
$249.99 for 250GB PS3 model

$374.99 for 32gb WiiU model. (!!!!!!!!!!, i mean REALLY in this day and age you release system with such low space available out of the box? i can understand basic 8gb model but high end sku only 32GB is this some kind of joke? or they certain that their digital marketplace will be wasteland without any 3rd party digital only games so they didn't bother? and yes i know you can expand it but that's another expense when PS3 have 250gb out of the box and cost less)

Don't forget that the PS3 has been out for years, at launch it costed quite a lot more than the WiiU does at its launch. I remember it costing about $600.

The only thing I really dislike Nintendo for is Monster Hunter, Bayonetta 2 and the improved Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Partially, of course, because I hate exclusives, and partially because I was an avid player of the series/games beforehand. But the main thing is that isn't their market. They have a hard enough time convincing anyone that a serious game will sell on the Wii U enough to justify the cost of accomodating the system, and they have no intention to make serious games for the Wii U. They just have these few to convince people who aren't generally interested in the classic franchises and shovelware that is expected of a Nintendo console to buy one. And that annoys me.

Hate Sony for pissing off Capcom in the case of Monster Hunter and the old Bayonetta publishers for abandoning it then, that's the whole reason they are on Nintendo consoles now.

It seems that Nintendo fans in this day and age are an endangered species. What with the Wii alienating all the core gamers and everyone turning up their noses at the Wii U, it seems nobody is sticking up for the house of Mario.

Funny thing: I own more non-casual games on the Wii than i do on the 360. It is true that there is a ton of shovelware but the wii did have some really good games. Also, lightgun shooter ports are practically made for its motion controls.

 

[Sir Pootis]

At first, I regretted supporting Nintendo with the Wii, but with the likely release of an always online Xbox and rumours of the PS4 having a similar function, I find it impossible to hate them. My primary problem with Nintendo is the weaker hardware, or more specifically publisher's rufusal to publish games for it as a result, but when Nintendo is the only major company, with the exeption of Valve, creating and providing a decent service, I find them more appealing as they are the only company worth supporting by default.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Sounds like a lot of what you love about nintendo is composed of "adding water to the wine" sorta speak. "Yeah, nintendo sucks it this one thing, but atleast this other thing is kinda good."

However with the next generation in the prospect, I might be more inclined to buy a WiiU due to it looking like the least bullshitty of the three. And mind you that's including the stupid touchscreen controller.

 

[Maximum Bert]

But there's a reason I'm still a staunch Nintendo supporter; they aren't nearly as scummy as the other two.

Thats a backhanded compliment if ever I saw one I would also disagree to an extent back when Nintendo were on top they treated a lot of their fans like shit with ridiculously high game prices and not a lot of localisations in fact one of the main reasons they actually ended up being kicked off the top spot was because they reneged on their deal with Sony and tried to get into bed with their competitor Philips instead, Not saying they are worse than Sony and Microsoft (especially Microsoft god I hate that company even before they entered the console market) but they are hardly all smiles and good intentions.

[quote/]Sony and Microsoft seem to be in a competition of who can make the dumbest desicion for their consoles, but Nintendo consistently shows evidence of a brain-and a heart. Maybe the Wii was a gimmicky fad, but at least it had the decency to cost less than half the PS3 did. Maybe the Wii U won't have graphics as good as the PS4, but at least I can play my favorite Wii games on it. Maybe the screen on the controller is unnecessary, but at least it was Nintendo's original idea, as opposed to Sony's. And maybe the Wii U doesn't have too many hardcore games on it, but at least they were smart enough to keep the price down (even if it means selling at a loss) as opposed to $500!

So, any counter-arguments?[/quote]

Cost less because you got less. Some would say alienating a large proportion of your core gaming demographic in order to try and court the unsustainable but potentially massive casual crowd wasnt there best idea from a long term perspective as for a heart no company has a heart they are all soul less machines usually designed to make money almost always more money so they post a profit.

Know what else you can play your Wii games on? a Wii. Note I can play PS2 and PS1 games on my PS3 seeing I got it fairly early and PS1 games on my PS2 even the 360 plays some Xbox games but they soon abandoned that in favour of trying to sell them to you again a practice which Sony also indulged in later as well and which Nintendo has been doing for ages. But lets look at the earlier consoles NES and SNES not comaptible same with the N64 and Gamecube its not until the Wii this changed at least on home consoles.

As for who pinched whos idea off who it dosent matter good ideas will always be stolen or borrowed (whatever way you want to look at it) its the one who pulls it off best that gets remembered and last gen (this gen/ whatever) Nintendo did that by far the best as Sonys and Microsofts efforts were a joke especially Sonys jeez what a load of crap that was but I didnt buy a kinect either because I thought no good games would be made with it and have so far not regretted my decision while I did have fun with some Wii motion controlled games although only Wario Ware gained from it imo.

As for comparing prices that is pointless as we dont have a price point for the PS4 and Nextbox yet and Sony and Microsoft have always sold consoles at a loss to keep prices down its only with the WiiU that Nintendo have followed suit.

I have enjoyed every Nintendo console to an extent. I will say they make way more reliable consoles than Sony and Microsoft (goddamn you Microsoft) and ofc they have some great games but then again so do Sony and Microsoft (only reason I bought a Microsoft console despite despising the company. Not going to let hate get in the way of me having fun)

 

[IllumInaTIma]

snip

While I certainly agree with your stance on multi-platform games becoming exclusives, I think it's okay to make enhanced editions of older games. I mean, they're rereleasing the game on other console some time after it's initial release, might as well add some new stuff while they're at it, and making the same enhanced edition for all other consoles wouldn't be very sound investment, I doubt a lot of people will buy it.

 

[rob_simple]

I like Nintendo because they are one of the few developers that seem to remember games are supposed to be fun. Playing through Metroid Prime again, recently, I forgot what it was like to play a game that I actually just enjoyed playing; not because I felt like I'd bought so I may as well finish it.

The problems I have with Nintendo are their over-reliance on old IP's --I'm sure Mario Galaxy 2 is very fun, but I've done Mario a hundred times before, I want something new-- and their insistence on focusing on theoretically interesting new methods of interaction, with the motion control and the touchpad, that end up becoming little more than tokenisitc with the majority of games that get released. There wasn't a single Wii game that I wouldn't have enjoyed playing more with a regular controller.

Despite that, they seem a lot more willing to take a chance on new things and strange ideas than any other major developer I can think of, and they have my respect for that.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

WAAAIT....low price??
PS3
$249.99 for 250GB PS3 model

$374.99 for 32gb WiiU model. (!!!!!!!!!!, i mean REALLY in this day and age you release system with such low space available out of the box?

A next-gen system with new ideas/technology and better graphics is going to cost more.

But you are making the wrong comparison, the direct comparison the OP made in the middle of his post was that original Wii's price being low compared to the PS3.

Before the Wii was out even a year I got the thing with another game besides Wii Sports for right at 250 dollars.

Also, as someone has already pointed out to you, that you can't compare the end of the generation price to the start of one. The PS3 when it launched was between 500 to 600 dollars, that is the number that counts when you compare. So the original Wii beat it in price and even at launch the Wii U beat it in price, and the Wii U is next-gen.

Yes 374.99 for the Wii U is higher than normal for a Nintendo system, but I know the PS4 when it comes out won't break lower than a base of 400.

Plus, I only see space on the Wii U as a problem for someone that is going to have 40 or more games on the thing, that is well beyond the game purchase count of a normal gamer(well until like 3 to 4 years later). I also never understood how people complained about the original Wii's memory amount. When my mom bought the thing for me as a gift(because at the time I had been looking everywhere and couldn't find one, since it was during the great Wii "rush"), at the store she got it from, the guy selling it to her said that it would be wise to buy an SD memory card(or whatever thing the Wii used for external memory) because the system didn't have a lot of space for it. The guy was obviously talking out his ass to sell more stuff, because during the time I used my Wii, which was around two and a half years, I had save files from 10 normal sized Wii games on it, plus 10 downloaded retro classics from the virtual store, and I still had a little less than half the memory of the system to go to fill up.

Considering the Wii U is only 32GB(though still greater space than the Wii), I would figure if I got one, with my purchasing level of gaming these days(much higher than before), it would still take around two years to fill that space up. Space always seems different compared to the other companies. Yes, for my Xbox 360, 32 GB is way to small(mine is a 120GB model), but the only reason I've used up 70GB of that space is because I downloaded a few of my full games to the hard drive to shorten load times. Main size and marketplace-wise, I have around 64 games(built up over almost 4 years) for my 360, and if I didn't download some of the main games full to my hard drive. I'd be looking at only 32GB or so of space used. So, to reiterate 32GB of space isn't on the WiiU isn't going to be a problem for some time, even if at all.

 

[V8 Ninja]

You know, OP, you need to provide data that leans toward your point when making an argument. Saying things and insisting that your statements are true is not data nor. Sure, it very clearly leans toward your main point, but it can be easily swatted down with anyone who has a conscience.

(I like Nintendo, BTW.)

 

[Requia]

I don't think doomsaying with the Wii and doomsaying with the WiiU are comparable. The Wii sold 600,000 copies in eight days. It was very obviously going to be the market leader *right then*. While some of the same 'its not as shiny' complaints have applied to the WiiU, the WiiU has also had nowhere near the same sales numbers.

But, that may be because the economy is still ass and a new console is an uneeded expense, MS and Sony won't be any better off in that case.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Something I read on Neogaf which made me pause for thought: why Nintendo always fail to get the support of the likes of EA.

Companies like EA and Activision are much more narrowly focused on selling games to the 18-35 male game demographic. While there are exceptions, the majority of games that revolve around shooting/stabbing people are played by gamers of that demographic. While Nintendo consoles often sell in bug numbers, they sell to a much wider range of demographics: parents looking for something for their kids to play, teen gamers, adult gamers, female gamers, etc etc. So while the total audience may be bigger, the market for 18-35 male gamers is smaller. Whereas while the 360 and PS3 may sell individually in smaller numbers, they sell in far higher quantities to that same demographic.

Meaning that if EA is making, say, an action-horror shooter and they want it to sell well, nothing Nintendo does will convince them that it'll sell better than on the PS360.

Maybe that's absolving Nintendo of too much responsibility, but I think this is a recurring trend we see. Just look at Kinect. Before it became an industry joke, it was one of the best selling consumer electrical goods ever. You'd think, with that sort of sales success, that publishers would be lining up to get games out for it. But as we saw, that didn't happen. Why? Because again, the demographics were wrong. Comparatively few of the gamers who bought Kinect were of that 18-35 demographic, so publishers didn't bother making many games for it. At most, we got a couple of "Better with Kinect" features for already existing games that were slapdash and pretty poor.

Really, it's a bit of a Catch 22. If Nintendo want EA and Activision fully onboard with the Wii U, then they need to sell more consoles to that 18-35 demographic. But that demographic won't pick up the console without the likes of EA and Activision making games for it.

Looking at it like that, I can kind of understand why Nintendo has been so slow in courting the likes of EA. It's just another example of homogenous, risk-averse thinking ultimately butt-fucking the industry. Nintendo can reach out and try and make the platforms open for the likes of EA, but if EA won't reciprocate in turn and actually make the sort of games that appeal to the various types of Nintendo owners, what's the point?

Conversely, this is probably why Ubisoft have done so well with Nintendo, especially with the Wii. They got in there with a popular dance game that appealed to many of the non-18-35 Wii owners, and Just Dance sold like crack as a result.

While the 18-35 male gamer is indeed the biggest demographic it also has a couple big problems: it has little room for growth and it also has the greatest chance of retracting. I remember Bob way, WAY back in his first Game Overthinker episodes reminded everyone that a problem with the audience everyone besides Nintendo is aiming for is that a lot of those 18-35'ers have the greatest chance of spending less money on games or just dropping it as a hobby altogether when bigger issues and responsibilities come up. Aiming at one audience is ultimately self-destructive. Furthermore, I notice this is primarily a problem with the West as EA and Activision always seem to pander to that demographic while Eastern devs like Atlus, Nintendo, Arc System Works, and even CAPCOM (with Phoenix Wright and their fighting games) are oddly more diverse in age and gender appealing (and that's before you get into them being the ONLY people aware that middle-tier budgets exist).

 

[Jimmy T. Malice]

smart enough to keep the price down (even if it means selling at a loss)

Surely it's not smart if they're making a loss...