Your Thoughts: Nintendo

Recommended Videos

Anniko

New member
Dec 6, 2007
89
0
0
Jagdedge said:
Perfect example: The Prince of Persia series.

I miss the original Prince.
You mean how it's the same game over and over but the reason you play it is for the new puzzles?

Nintendo uses their franchises as a basis for the new platformer or puzzle game they've made. You don't really play Mario or Zelda games for their story, you play em so you can jump on turtles and walking mushrooms or going through 8 or 9 areas each with differing puzzles. You play Metroid games to explore a new planet/station and to be challenged by new enemies (alright, I played Metroid games for their story).

Nintendo is great for releasing quality, bug-free games of 3 genres, action/adventure, puzzle and platformer.
 

Jagdedge

New member
Dec 23, 2007
103
0
0
Anniko said:
Jagdedge said:
Perfect example: The Prince of Persia series.

I miss the original Prince.
You mean how it's the same game over and over but the reason you play it is for the new puzzles?

Nintendo uses their franchises as a basis for the new platformer or puzzle game they've made. You don't really play Mario or Zelda games for their story, you play em so you can jump on turtles and walking mushrooms or going through 8 or 9 areas each with differing puzzles. You play Metroid games to explore a new planet/station and to be challenged by new enemies (alright, I played Metroid games for their story).

Nintendo is great for releasing quality, bug-free games of 3 genres, action/adventure, puzzle and platformer.
I guess it'd fit into that category too. I was actually using it as an example of developers considering anything light-hearted as taboo, and dark, edgy stuff great.
 

TheHound

New member
Dec 22, 2007
53
0
0
Jagdedge said:
How is the choice between killing this guy or not such a huge moral dilemma? I don't know if that's a choice in any of the aforementioned games, as a result of not playing them, but that sounds like every "morally ambiguous" choice I've ever been given in a video game.

Kill the guy, or spare him. YOU GET TO BE BAD OR GOOD!!!1!

How about this. You can either be a tree-hugging pussy peace child, or you can be a nut-stomping manly man by either choosing to crush the life out of the short, deformed midget hobbling towards you, or not.

There, a true moral dilemma.

Addressing the second part of your post; I just don't really feel like a kid when I'm sitting there blasting zombies' heads clear off. Or ordering around twenty-some people trying to avoid getting them killed by using sound tactics, then turning around and demanding them to kill that guy over there by cleaving his head in two. I also don't feel like a nine year old girl when I'm using a laser sword to hack people into little bits and a shower of blood rains down.

Resident Evil: Chronicles, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, and No More Heroes respectively.

I don't see how you gleamed that this was "such a big problem". I've posted once, with a total of what? Twenty-five words? It's just that I hate when people take one game as the standard for all the games presented on the system.
Wow you know I didnt realise Resident Evil:Chronicles or No More Heroes was made by Nintendo. Oh wait they weren't. Are you blind, can't you read. I said I thought the Wii was allright BUT Nintendo games, thats games made by Nintendo are for kids. What relevance does bringing up games not made by Nintendo have?

Secondly, If you had played those games you would know what I meant by morally ambigous choices, such as 'If i know he is guilty is it okay to plant the evidence to get him caught' - One of the many possible options in a quest in BG. Im not saying a kid couldnt cope with the game but non the less its more thought provoking then say any game Nintendo actually made. Bloodlines has complex dialog and gameplay choices which change the way the game plays out, not to mention fleshed out characters with back story and details. No one is a saint, its just whos ideals you agree with is who you side with.
 

J-Val

New member
Nov 7, 2007
101
0
0
Nintendo is my favourite of the warring trio. Microsoft only care about money, and Sony is just plain arrogant. Nintendo is the company which seem to care the most about games, and not the money they make from them. They've always been ahead of the game.
They made all the GameBoys, which are still fun today. They made the DS, a touch-sentitive handheld, while Sony only made a pretty unsuccessful PSP.
They made the N64, probably the biggest advancement in the console market ever made. When Sony and Microsoft made the cumbersome PlayStation and Xbox respectively, Nintendo had made the smaller and lighter GameCube. And even now, instead of just focusing on graphics, they made a completely new type of console. Sony can dismiss the Wii as a "gimmick", but are they not now trying to do the same thing with games that use the Sixaxis controller?
In conclusion, you cannot deny that Nintendo is the most innovative and ingenious of the gaming companies.
 

dl_wraith

New member
Dec 21, 2007
73
0
0
There's one thing noone here has yet mentioned directly - Nintendo are the undisputed kings of the handheld market. Now, given that the PSP is technically better than a DS (look at that wonderful screen for starters!) and that the GameGear was colour and more powerful than the dotmatrix GameBoy and that the NeoGeo pocket had better games than the GBA and that the Nokia NGage was also a phone and that yaddayaddayadda, why are Nintendo's handhelds always selling more?

They're getting something right and that's for sure!

(For the record I have a Game Gear, a GBA and a DS. My wife has a PSP (for Burnout and Medevil, mainly))
 

Girlysprite

New member
Nov 9, 2007
290
0
0
I like the new consoles, but the amount of partygame trash annoys me. A bunch of it is not from Nintendo, but it bothers me nonetheless. I like to have a game that is not cartoony sometimes, and while there are some, they seem to be somewhat few compared the rest of the games. A Wii is nice for me in combination with other platforms, but not on its own really.
 

McMo0^

New member
Dec 21, 2007
147
0
0
Nintendo have basically had pary consoles since the end of the n64's reign.

Sadly the Wii seems to have not lived up to its potential. I see countless games come out for it atm that are either for someone younger than me, or for the other sex. Fair enough, its about time that the females got gaming experiances that didn't invovle them slaughtering somewhat cute monsters, but thats beside the point.

Wii Sports has acutally become a life gobler. No-one here goes bowling anymore because it seems to be "better" when 6 of us crowd into a small room to swing a weightless remote in the direction of the tv.

When the Wii was being pre-advertised, its showed you using your wiimote as a sword, then a gun, and it may sound childish, but that got me really really excited, then when it arrived, it wasn't that great, and they haven't tried to develop much on this it seems.

btw the 2player on Mario Galaxy is really really bad, but you can basically tell that from the adverts.
 

hooloovoonate

New member
Nov 7, 2007
18
0
0
The DS is a wonderful little system and I play it about as often as I play my PSP (I know, right?) They both have their respective strengths.
As for the Wii, it's alright, but I feel as though it is a secondary system to 360 or PS3. Call me old-fashioned, but why can't we be hardcore and geeky?
As for Nintendo as a whole, I don't understand all the bashing that I see on this site (not that I frequent other forums much and there are many here who like them). I for one, love Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash Bros., and F-Zero. So what if they are "rehashes"? Story isn't necessary to gaming - gameplay is necessary to gaming and they all have it in spades. That being said, thank god for Sony and SEGA and their maturity.
 

Jack Spencer Jr

New member
Dec 15, 2007
96
0
0
I don't think much about Nintendo in general. On some level, they as so ubiquitous it's like discussing the wetness of water. Yes, they do tend to just keep making Mario, Metroid, and Zelda games over and over, but that's where their money is, I guess. To fail to make such games would be like Def Leppard putting out a country album.

Any discussion of Nintendo these days just can't happen without talking about their latest console, the Wii. I'll be honest. The Wii is the first console I have been excited about since the Nintendo Entertainment System way back in 1986, over twenty years ago. The reason why is that there has been little by way of improvement in game consoles in the past two decades. Yes, there have been improved graphics and 3-D modeling and such. It's surprising how little that matters. Better graphics do not make for better games. I have had no interest in any of the last couple generations of game consoles. Although I do own a PS2, but it's used primarily as a DVD player. I see little reason to buy new game consoles because the experience is pretty much the same as the last generation consoles, which was the same as the generation before than, etc., etc., going back a good twenty years.

The Wii is different. As such, it's still hard to judge if this is a case of different is good, but when I'm visiting the family and I, my five-year old nephew, my mother, and grandmother are all playing Wii Sports Tennis and having a ball, something is working. I applaud that. Hardcore gamers don't seem to care for it, and that's fine. They have two, as Yahtzee put it, bricks with paddles attached with string consoles that deliver the familiar gaming experience they've come to expect and get sulky like a teen-aged girl who's grounded on prom night when they don't get it. The Wii is a console for the rest of us who find the difficulty curve on most games erects an insurmountable brick wall right on the first training mission.

So, I have respect for Nintendo for trying to reach to a wider, different audience than the usual gamer market. It was a gutsy move that could have easily failed as spectacularly as it appears to be succeeding, if the continued inability to meet the consumer demand for the bloody things is any indication of success. To my mind, this excuses their conservativeness in the games they make, i.e. Mario et al., as they had already made the bold move with the console itself.
 

Jagdedge

New member
Dec 23, 2007
103
0
0
TheHound said:
Wow you know I didnt realise Resident Evil:Chronicles or No More Heroes was made by Nintendo. Oh wait they weren't. Are you blind, can't you read. I said I thought the Wii was allright BUT Nintendo games, thats games made by Nintendo are for kids. What relevance does bringing up games not made by Nintendo have?

Secondly, If you had played those games you would know what I meant by morally ambigous choices, such as 'If i know he is guilty is it okay to plant the evidence to get him caught' - One of the many possible options in a quest in BG. Im not saying a kid couldnt cope with the game but non the less its more thought provoking then say any game Nintendo actually made. Bloodlines has complex dialog and gameplay choices which change the way the game plays out, not to mention fleshed out characters with back story and details. No one is a saint, its just whos ideals you agree with is who you side with.
And Fire Emblem is made by who...?

The Fire Emblem series, which is on what? Game number twelve or thirteen? That's thirteen Nintendo games alone. Then, there's the entire Metroid series. Then there's the Legend of Zelda. None of those games have dirt simple gameplay and they require more than a pulse to play; unlike most FPS's that I can just mash the right trigger and just walk back and forth. And then, on top of that, they don't focus on these "kiddy" values that you are implying.

So, instead of killing him or not, you're finding him guilty or not? Wow, huge difference.

Who needs coherent gameplay when I have "morally ambiguous" choices!? Once you ignore the slogging through the actual game, I get an awesome story, right? 10 out of 10! The gameplay is the reason I play video games. If I wanted to enjoy a great story and amazing, realistic characters, with interactivity being so shitty to the point where I want to do away with it completely, I'd go read a book.

As a side note, I'm still looking for those "adult themes" involving "racial intolerance".
 

TheTakenOne

New member
Dec 24, 2007
59
0
0
TheHound said:
Jagdedge said:
How is the choice between killing this guy or not such a huge moral dilemma? I don't know if that's a choice in any of the aforementioned games, as a result of not playing them, but that sounds like every "morally ambiguous" choice I've ever been given in a video game.

Kill the guy, or spare him. YOU GET TO BE BAD OR GOOD!!!1!

How about this. You can either be a tree-hugging pussy peace child, or you can be a nut-stomping manly man by either choosing to crush the life out of the short, deformed midget hobbling towards you, or not.

There, a true moral dilemma.

Addressing the second part of your post; I just don't really feel like a kid when I'm sitting there blasting zombies' heads clear off. Or ordering around twenty-some people trying to avoid getting them killed by using sound tactics, then turning around and demanding them to kill that guy over there by cleaving his head in two. I also don't feel like a nine year old girl when I'm using a laser sword to hack people into little bits and a shower of blood rains down.

Resident Evil: Chronicles, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, and No More Heroes respectively.

I don't see how you gleamed that this was "such a big problem". I've posted once, with a total of what? Twenty-five words? It's just that I hate when people take one game as the standard for all the games presented on the system.
Wow you know I didnt realise Resident Evil:Chronicles or No More Heroes was made by Nintendo. Oh wait they weren't. Are you blind, can't you read. I said I thought the Wii was allright BUT Nintendo games, thats games made by Nintendo are for kids. What relevance does bringing up games not made by Nintendo have?

Secondly, If you had played those games you would know what I meant by morally ambigous choices, such as 'If i know he is guilty is it okay to plant the evidence to get him caught' - One of the many possible options in a quest in BG. Im not saying a kid couldnt cope with the game but non the less its more thought provoking then say any game Nintendo actually made. Bloodlines has complex dialog and gameplay choices which change the way the game plays out, not to mention fleshed out characters with back story and details. No one is a saint, its just whos ideals you agree with is who you side with.
You conveniently neglected to mention how Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn was actually not only made by Nintendo, but is not exactly the sort of thing geared toward kids either. It also has a FANTASTIC storyline if you're willing to play through the whole thing (and maybe you needed to play its predecessor as well.)

People, seriously, do the research.

While Nintendo mainly makes games that are family-friendly and all that junk, it really means they're not buying into that whole nonsense that's spread across the video game industry that games need to be Darker And Edgier in order to sell to those teenagers that will never play a game without blood and/or guns. There's not actually any real blood in Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, but it really doesn't need it. People die, and at an alarmingly large scale, even the units on your own side you've become somewhat attached to can be offed never to be seen again if you're not careful with them.

Who'd have thought a NINTENDO game would feature things like death on a realistic scale rather than those games that make death an impossibility as long as you've got some sort of revival magic/item handy? Apparently nobody here knows it exists because nobody does the research. Maybe they go by what everyone else says or maybe they twist and bend the truth so that it suits THEIR point of view, honestly, I don't know or care.

And before anyone tries to reply trying to counter that they probably don't really die in this game and get KO'd ala Final Fantasy, no--they die. D-I-E. Death in a Nintendo game. Believe it, chumps.

Edit: Forgot the "racial intolerance" issue. Yeah, this game handles that too in a very direct way. On top of THAT you've also got religious extremists around the last quarter of the game. I know, I'm surprised too.
 

TheHound

New member
Dec 22, 2007
53
0
0
Jagdedge said:
And Fire Emblem is made by who...?

The Fire Emblem series, which is on what? Game number twelve or thirteen? That's thirteen Nintendo games alone. Then, there's the entire Metroid series. Then there's the Legend of Zelda. None of those games have dirt simple gameplay and they require more than a pulse to play; unlike most FPS's that I can just mash the right trigger and just walk back and forth. And then, on top of that, they don't focus on these "kiddy" values that you are implying.

So, instead of killing him or not, you're finding him guilty or not? Wow, huge difference.

Who needs coherent gameplay when I have "morally ambiguous" choices!? Once you ignore the slogging through the actual game, I get an awesome story, right? 10 out of 10! The gameplay is the reason I play video games. If I wanted to enjoy a great story and amazing, realistic characters, with interactivity being so shitty to the point where I want to do away with it completely, I'd go read a book.

As a side note, I'm still looking for those "adult themes" involving "racial intolerance".
I stand corrected I didnt know Nintendo made that game, I guess when I was looking at the games made by Nintendo list it was lost in the sea of Mario and Zelda games, which at the end of the day are very simplistic and childish. Maybe if I played this Fire Emblem game I would like it, I confess I haven't. However for me the idea that they might have released one game series which i might like isnt enough to excuse the rest of the countless games that I dont. EA were the publishers on Crysis, great game i loved it. Dont mean I like EA or the rest of their games. I really dislike the Zelda games, the gameplay is average run of the mill RPG without a good story to back it up. Compare to say Deus Ex which had arguably average shooting in it yet a great and interesting story that kept people playing and earned it over 50 game of the year awards (btw im not saying a high score = great game cos it doesnt im just saying im not the only one who thinks this way)

The way you seem to think shooters are simple leads me to believe you dont have much experience with pc shooters. Ala S.T.A.L.K.E.R., or Far Cry or Crysis OR Half Life 2. Two of those are on xbox&360. They are neither simple nor easy.

As for Racial Intolerance it is pretty much the main theme of 'The Witcher'.

LOL btw just did my research. Nintendo didnt make Radient Dawn, they published it the developer was a studio called Intelligent Systems. Saying Nintendo made it is like saying EA made Black and White 2 or Crysis. They did no coding, no art, no development. Hence it wasnt made by Ninentdo, as opposed to the Zelda games.

EDIT: Reading this back it seems a bit harsh to give no credit to Nintendo, if EA can screw a game then that means a publisher can affect the outcome. So I might let this one slide as a decent Nintendo game that I might like. Still 1 in god knows how many isnt a lot. And Nintendo wont have been responsible for the plot nor gameplay mechanics.

Finally on a personal note as to my preferences, I need a plot as well as good gameplay. Shooting/Slashing badguys is only so fun for a while but without a goal its pointless. Im bringing it up again but it is one of the best games ever made, Deus Ex. Play it and realise that a clever plot that doesnt spoon feed you that offers dynamic choice is not only possible but comes with in muy opinion a great RPG gameplay system.
 

TheTakenOne

New member
Dec 24, 2007
59
0
0
TheHound said:
LOL btw just did my research. Nintendo didnt make Radient Dawn, they published it the developer was a studio called Intelligent Systems. Saying Nintendo made it is like saying EA made Black and White 2 or Crysis. They did no coding, no art, no development. Hence it wasnt made by Ninentdo, as opposed to the Zelda games.
Intelligent Systems is an internal team of Nintendo Co. and is actually responsible for many games in Nintendo's history, including but not limited to, Metroid, Paper Mario, WarioWare, Advance Wars etc. It is a first-party developer of Nintendo and therefore IS a part of Nintendo.
 

TheHound

New member
Dec 22, 2007
53
0
0
Okay I stand corrected, yet again, seems my research sucks. Ill leave my previous post alone, I dont believe in editing out mistakes only confessing to them. Though as I said a 1 off isnt good enough reason for me to change my mind just like Crysis wont make me kiss EA's ass.
 

Jack Spencer Jr

New member
Dec 15, 2007
96
0
0
And speaking of story, there are only 3: Man vs. Man (or alien). Man vs. Nature. Man vs. Self.
Oh, Jesus. Not that again.

Look. They lied to you in high school, alright. That stuff is utter bullocks. There's all kinds of froofy lists of basic story types that range from only one (all stories are a quest for... something) to thirty-six or more such "basic plots." The problem with all such things is that they are generally as useful as scrotal tweezers. You could use them, but it's much too painful and ultimately pointless.

In any case, noting the "Man vs_____" plots is a poor counter to Nintendo's flagship titles having basically the same plot. They're all just rescue the bloody princess, ferchrissakes, over and over again. It would be nice if it were different, I guess, but as has already been said, you don't play a Nintendo game for the story.
 

squirrelman42

New member
Dec 13, 2007
263
0
0
I think we've all established that Nintendo has chosen deliberately to make a broader demographic enjoy games rather than cater to the elite game expert that every hardcore gamer thinks he is. There are games for everyone on the Wii, but that means only a handful for each demographic and preference. If you are a "hardcore" gamer and you want to have the best visual experience possible and an intense storyline involving a gruff badass saving humanity because he's the only one left who can, there are many games for you that are not on the Wii. You can say that you hate the system for the company's decisions that make you feel as though they're not catering to you because in all honesty, they're not. You cannot, however, say that the move they made with the Wii was a bad decision, because look at the numbers, Nintendo is blowing the crowd away.

Think of it this way: there are so many people who never played games before who now own and use a Wii, even for casual games, that are now more likely to take gaming seriously and are more informed and involved with what their kids play, hence fewer ignorant parents, fewer neglected kids, and in the end more people who can call themselves gamers. There are many gamers out there who have yet to discover how much they love games. My girlfriend was one of them. I brought my Gamecube up to her house and left it there. She now plays Pikmin, Zelda, Puzzle Quest (on her DS) and World of Warcraft.

The Wii isn't taking business from PS3 and 360, it's bringing new business into the market, and in the end, that's how an economy grows.
 

Arbre

New member
Jan 13, 2007
1,166
0
0
J-Val said:
Nintendo is my favourite of the warring trio. Microsoft only care about money, and Sony is just plain arrogant. Nintendo is the company which seem to care the most about games, and not the money they make from them. They've always been ahead of the game.
They made all the GameBoys, which are still fun today. They made the DS, a touch-sentitive handheld, while Sony only made a pretty unsuccessful PSP.
They made the N64, probably the biggest advancement in the console market ever made. When Sony and Microsoft made the cumbersome PlayStation and Xbox respectively, Nintendo had made the smaller and lighter GameCube. And even now, instead of just focusing on graphics, they made a completely new type of console. Sony can dismiss the Wii as a "gimmick", but are they not now trying to do the same thing with games that use the Sixaxis controller?
In conclusion, you cannot deny that Nintendo is the most innovative and ingenious of the gaming companies.
*Wipes his eyes, blows his nose*

The very fact that when Sony and Microsoft were in the party and had better successes, notably shadowing the Cube, it almost forced Nintendo to make a desperate gamble.
I applaud their daring attempt, but their failure on the Cube while Sony enjoyed their ride makes me think that Sony did also innovate in a way which Nintendo couldn't think of.
Sony made games more mainstream, and if anything, I'd say that Nintendo pushed Sony's idea to its full potential.
 

sfried

New member
Dec 20, 2007
39
0
0
Girlysprite said:
I like the new consoles, but the amount of partygame trash annoys me. A bunch of it is not from Nintendo, but it bothers me nonetheless. I like to have a game that is not cartoony sometimes, and while there are some, they seem to be somewhat few compared the rest of the games. A Wii is nice for me in combination with other platforms, but not on its own really.
Jack Spencer Jr said:
The Wii is different. As such, it's still hard to judge if this is a case of different is good, but when I'm visiting the family and I, my five-year old nephew, my mother, and grandmother are all playing Wii Sports Tennis and having a ball, something is working. I applaud that. Hardcore gamers don't seem to care for it, and that's fine. They have two, as Yahtzee put it, bricks with paddles attached with string consoles that deliver the familiar gaming experience they've come to expect and get sulky like a teen-aged girl who's grounded on prom night when they don't get it. The Wii is a console for the rest of us who find the difficulty curve on most games erects an insurmountable brick wall right on the first training mission.
I agree for the most part about the Wii tending to be geared towards the casuals and unfamiliars. At the same time, it does do a good job of brining over a bunch of niche genres (as well as reviving past ones. See Zack & Wiki) for us to play. Hopefully this guy [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/projects/wii/] will be able to show developers how to put the Wii to real good use for mainstream "core" gamers (the other kind of "core" gamer partains more to said niche genres, or should we say "hardcore" gamers, such a tournament fighting game and shmup fans).

In the mean time, though, I'm happy with my PC...and GBA (but the DS looks really tempting).
 

Jack Spencer Jr

New member
Dec 15, 2007
96
0
0
sfried said:
Hopefully this guy [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/projects/wii/] will be able to show developers how to put the Wii to real good use ...
Wow. The VR desktop demo is amazing. I was amazed at what the Wii could do before and this topped that. Technology just took a big leap forward.