What Nintendo should do?

[*o*]

i agree brand new top quality games are needed for ds and gamecuube

[daguuy]

^^^
don't make me laugh, the sony's console's suck the whole line, only game's for them rock

it's the games that matter

[MajorLag]

Oh man, are you totally wrong about... everything!

My top 10 list of...
What Nintendo needs to with the Revolution
--------------------------------------------------

1. STOP MAKING A MILLION GAMES WITH ROOTS DATING BACK TO 1985!

Why? This is exactly the kind of thing their core audiance wants!

2. Break the "T" rating barrier with their in-house games

Entirely unessesary. Indeed, it would be harmfull. Nintendo understands that great games don't have to be gory or sexy to be great, so they don't make them that way. This allows parents to identify Nintedo games as 'kid safe', but that doesn't mean that they're just for kids.

3. Quit making their systems toys. I mean, the GameCube can't play DVDs, for chrissakes! And don't get me started about the Donkey Konga drums...

I don't happen to own it, but I've heard that Donkey Konga is actually a lot of fun, don't let the seeming rediculousness of the controls turn you off. This is one thing Nintendo has going for it, it tries to innovate. As for 'not making toys'.... why? Why should they have a DVD player built in? Everybody and their mother can own a better standalone player for under $50. They make a game system, its for playing games.

4. Two words: Backwards-compatibility.

Done.

5. Make a new Duck Hunt game, with the NES game hidden inside somewhere. (I know this contradicts #s 1 and 3, but Duck Hunt was awesome!)

See? Even you want reincarnations of old franchises. And why not? Just because tehres a new addition to the franchise doesn't mean it has to include the same old gameplay. The only problem with this suggestion is that lightguns don't work on so many TVs that they are a risky thing to develop unless you know you're game is going to sell big, like TC2.

6. Realise they can only do so much with Mario.

Mario is just a character, they can do whatever they want with him. Mario air combat hasn't been done yet.

7. Same as #6, but with Samus, Star Fox, Wario, Luigi...

If there is something you can't do with Samus then I don't know about it yet.

8. Accept games like GTA and Unreal.

I don't think there is anything stopping third party developers from making these games for a Nintendo console (other then exclusive contracts).

9. Quit being so gimmicky with their hardware. Again, the Donkey Konga drums, and the DS. I mean, a touchscreen? WHY?!

Because its different. Look, everybody else releases a new system and their big innovation is that, *gasp*, its more powerfull then the last one. Nintendo at least tries to innovate.

10. Do it all again.

OK, rant done. you can all ignore this now!

Whats the big deal? So there are 3 versions of the GBA out there, they all play the same games, they just cater to different audiances.

I read an article a few months back were one of the CEOs of nintendo hinted that their next system will not be online, as a matter of fact i believe the quote was "people do not want to play games online".

I believe that was said long ago, when the GC was first coming out. I thought they were right, for the most part. Online console games are a mere shadow of online PC gaming glory, it seemed like a waste of time to me. Additionally, some of the most fun with consoles is that your opponents are sitting right next to you, where you can hit them.
But anyways, Nintedo seems to have dealt with that for the Revolution.

NOTE: Nintendo fanboy talking

[Nes Man]

Oh man, are you totally wrong about... everything!

My top 10 list of...
What Nintendo needs to with the Revolution
--------------------------------------------------

1. STOP MAKING A MILLION GAMES WITH ROOTS DATING BACK TO 1985!

Why? This is exactly the kind of thing their core audiance wants!

Even though I love Nintendo for what it was and partially is, I agree with the STOP MAKING A MILLION GAMES WITH ROOTS DATING BACK TO 1985! statement. !?! I still love mario, metroid, star fox, DK and zelda, Nowdays thats basicly all they realease and rerelease. (I'm talking about Nes and Snes games on the GBA). More and More peolpe now are looking for new games with new characters. If Nintendo stays down this path, or if the revolution is not truley revolutionary, then Nintendo is doomed to be the next Atari, or Sega if they are lucky. I don't want to sound like i'm bagging on the big N, I'm just saying if Nintendo wants to regain even one half of the control on the market thy had in the Nes' time, they need to really, really get some things in line.

[cennar]

I couldn't resist posting that I don't like Nintendo much because I blame them for the fall of sega

blame sega for sucking so much... or BLAME CANADA!! blame canada!!

[nos_slived]

CENNAR! I say praise Canada for our large quantities of marijuana.

Here is a Chinese proverb made just for Cennar:
Man who stand on toilet is high on pot.

[bicostp]

Sure, I want a reincarnation of an old franchise, just not a franchise that has been driven into the ground. Mario games come out in every genre and every Nintendo system imagineable, while Duck Hunt hasn't appeared in 20 years.

I'm just getting tired of seeing re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-releases of games, that's all. I just want newer, innovative games. Luigi's Mansion was OK (Played it in Target), but you know it's getting ridiculous when you get another copy of DDR because they stuck Mario in it. That's why I liked the Crash Bandicoot games for the PSX (before Naughty Dog sold all the rights to Universal.) Crash became a mascot of sorts for the platform, without being the only reason you bought the console *coughcoughMARIOcough*. I'm not saying Nintendo or Mario is bad, I'm saying we need a little break from the constant re-releases.

[Lucretius]

3. Quit making their systems toys. I mean, the GameCube can't play DVDs, for chrissakes! And don't get me started about the Donkey Konga drums...

I don't happen to own it, but I've heard that Donkey Konga is actually a lot of fun, don't let the seeming rediculousness of the controls turn you off. This is one thing Nintendo has going for it, it tries to innovate. As for 'not making toys'.... why? Why should they have a DVD player built in? Everybody and their mother can own a better standalone player for under $50. They make a game system, its for playing games.

But the problem is that about 10% of their audience thinks like you, Major. The other 90% think like bicostp. Conformity, however much we all hate it, is very real here. XBox and PS are very similar and ther conform, or rather, cater to the wants of the VG audience. Nintendo just does whatever the hell it wants to do. And that's why it doing worse than MS and Sony.

2. Why? Mature games are not fun. And kids can't play them.

8. Nooooo! Not boring "Adult" games! I want only fun games, not bad

Yea, you probably aren't 16 yet, are you? You see, those games are more successful than the mario games by like 200%! (Not real %, just a guess, but probably acurate). You see what I mean, though. As Ben him self said:

The core problem of Nintendo is their games were aimed at too low an age demographic for too long.

Let's look at videogamers. I'll break them down:

Yuh-Gi-Oh (sp?) / Pokemon' Generation, (Now ages 0-13): These are the kids keeping Nintendo afloat, but mostly with the portables. They're into the kiddie stuff, but even then, it's stuff like Yuggie-Gee-Oh (sp?) and Pokemon' more so than Mario. Even this generation will outgrow Nintendo in time.

Old Schoolers, (Now ages 30-35): These people got Ataris when they were young and it was the first videogame influence on their lives. However, they were less likely to be into Nintendo because by that time they were going to high school, college or getting married/etc. Also, the videogame crash happened during their time, so they may have stopped playing videogames altogether.

Target Generation, (Now ages 20-30): I'm in this group and if I had to bet, this is where the money is for videogame companies. You've got people in college sitting around playing Madden 200X, you've got bored married people who never go out sitting around playing Final Fantasy X, you've got roommates just out of school sitting around playing Grand Theft Auto. But the most important thing about this generation is this:

A) Our first real MAJOR exposure to videogames was Nintendo.
B) Since that first major exposure, there has been no "videogame crash"
C) Disposable income

The 'no videogame crash' thing is important. Why? Because most everyone I know around my age got a Nintendo, usually in 1988 when it really took off. Then what? We all got Sega Genesis. After that? Sony Playstation. And so on. We never stopped playing videogames. We only put a system in the closet to make room for the new one (where most Old Schoolers put their Ataris away FOR GOOD which caused their videogame hobby to lapse)

The important thing is, since videogame systems kept getting more and more popular, people kept buying one every generation. But there was a problem.

We got older. Nintendo didn't.

Even starting with the Sega Genesis, Sonic was 'cooler' and 'faster' than the plodding Super Mario World on the SNES. The Genesis had BLOOD in the games, and they were darker in nature. The 'darkness' being literal and figurative since the Genesis had a much smaller color palette than the SNES and the color black was more prevalent for technical reasons, but still. The SNES did eventually catch up (sales-wise) with stuff like Donkey Kong Country but even that was the cutesy stuff for kids.

The sales of Donkey Kong Country probably prompted Nintendo to make more stuff like that. Then came the Playstation, which everyone bought. Its games were even darker. When I was 20, I wasn't playing Super Yoshi World or Donkey Kong Country 12. I (and everyone else I knew) was playing Twisted Metal, with its dark themes and psycho clowns.

Side note: I worked at Funcoland when the PS1 was released and if there was one game everyone was after, it was Madden '96 for Playstation. We of course know now that at the time it was a horrible mess that would never had been ready when initially promised, but imagine if it had been released by holidays 1995 and was pretty good. Sony might have had a killer app a year before the N64 arrived on the scene. Ouch. Nintendo should thank the development team of the aborted Madden '96 for their accomplishment. (or lack thereof)

The trend continued with Resident Evil, a game that was fairly bloody, scary, more mature and violent. Developers caught wind of the more mature trend. Playstation had games with profanity, scantily-clad babes, and they sold like hotcakes.

Then of course there's Final Fantasy XII. From what I hear, this is the game that really made the PSOne take off. I've never been an RPG fan so I can't attest personally, but I can imagine how things went:

A) "Target Generation" gamers loved Final Fantasy on their NES
B) These same people got a SNES to play RPG's such as Final Fantasy 3 since the Genesis had very few RPG's
C) These same people bought a Playstation because they loved RPGs and the N64 had very few

See the linkage? Nintendo held onto that genre for 2 generations, then lost it. The practical lack of an entire genre is not good for a system. In the N64's case it was RPG's. In the Gamecube's case it's Gamecube-only titles that appeal to adults. (like Goldeneye 007) The downward spiral begins spiraling faster!

It's kind of ironic that at one time Nintendo was going to release the NES under the Atari name, but didn't and Atari died. It's also ironic that ten years later, Nintendo and Sony were going to make the Playstation together but Nintendo let the deal fall apart and got their butts handed to them. Nintendo may keep puttering along, with the idea "as long as there's kids in the world, we'll make money". But slowly and surely Sony is eating into that market as well.

That's it in a nutshell folks....

[MajorLag]

About so called 'mature' games: I never said they shouldn't be there, only that I understand why Nintendo doesn't want to make them. The door is wide open for third party developers to make anything they want (AFAIK), but when people see a Nintendo branded game they associate it with good clean fun, something their kids can play and not be exposed to the profitability of murdering hookers. And whats wrong with that?

Also: Franchises are an important component to selling games, and even systems. Halo sold X-Boxes, Halo 3 will sell X-Box 360s, the next Zelda will sell Revolutions. That is why it is a good idea for Nintendo to keep re-using old characters so long as they innovate the gameplay (Donkey Konga, you may not have liked the 'gimmick' but it is supposedly really fun and definatly different from other Donkey Kong games). The only reason I didn't addess the idea of creating new characters in my last post was that you didn't address it either. You said "Stop making games with characters from 1985", which I pointed out was a bad idea. Would making new characters and new franchises be good for the big N? Most certainly.

[harad]

if they would make samus a killer or naked then metroid would sell ten times better

ninny on e3 sucked the whole line...

[Doofus]

MajorLag pretty much nailed everything that needs to be said.

[Turbo Tax 1.0]

they should stop using those damn screws

[bicostp]

Amen to that!

[Reploid Ayla]

Sega hasnt really profitted from making new characters. See Shadow or any other sonic character that isnt tails or knuckles.

Nintendo might be able to pull it off, as long as they dont sink too low and make them really random like Billy Hatcher...

[Alchemist]

I'm just getting tired of seeing re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-releases of games, that's all.

Out of all the real Mario games, tell me one that didn't have innovation. Super Mario Brothers was one of the first classic platformers, (ignore lost levels for now), Super Mario 3 expanded upon it, Super Mario World brought Yoshi, Super Mario World 2 Yoshi's Island was a fundamentally different game, Super Mario 64 was in 3D, Super Mario Sunshine had the backpack. Besides the point, since all of them were created to an extremely high standard and are each unique and fantastic games. Such has been the case with practically every Nintendo first party title I've ever played. So what if it looks like it's for kids? Anyone who sees this as a problem is stuck, ironically, in the kiddie zone - as Penny arcade once neatly pointed out:

But seriously, these guys think that Zelda is a game for kids. Well only KIDS would care that a game looks like it is for kids. It's like when you are 14 and your mom wants to get a picture of you on the merry go round with your little sister but you don't want to get on because it's for kids. Eventually you grow out of that phase and you can appreciate just having fun whether it be on the back of an undulating wooden horse or in front of a cell shaded video game.

That metaphor kicks ass, remember it.

If you mean the current batch of Mario branded games, sure, you're right it's whoredom. But guess what, it's payday for Nintendo - check out who's making all those games, it's all third-party teams. All those companies are paying Nintendo to use the big Nintendo mascots, as the games are guaranteed to sell. If you don't like Mario Tennis or don't feel like playing Mario Golf, then ignore them like you (hopefully) ignore NBA Street and other derivative sports cash-in games - it's only ever going to be your loss (especially since they're actually both quality titles, unlike NBA Street).

the problem is that about 10% of their audience thinks like you, Major. The other 90% think like bicostp. Conformity, however much we all hate it, is very real here. XBox and PS are very similar and ther conform, or rather, cater to the wants of the VG audience. Nintendo just does whatever the hell it wants to do. And that's why it doing worse than MS and Sony.

They've certainly made far more money than Microsoft this round - try and imagine the loss Microsoft have incurred. Everyone seems to be doom and glooming Nintendo but they're still turning a fat profit.
(Um, and it might reflect better on you if you stop pulling numbers out of thin air by saying that some unspecified X sells 200% better than Mario, especially if you're not even going to tell us what X you are referring to )

9. Quit being so gimmicky with their hardware. Again, the Donkey Konga drums, and the DS. I mean, a touchscreen? WHY?!

Because its different. Look, everybody else releases a new system and their big innovation is that, *gasp*, its more powerfull then the last one. Nintendo at least tries to innovate.

Next hardware generation will be interesting since all the main consoles should be reasonably close in spec. It's going to get harder to tell the games from one console to another, especially Xbox 360-Revolution, since they've both got similar multi-core PPC CPUs and likely similar ATi GPUs. As a result the main differences will be console price, games and physical features. A little innovation in the latter wouldn't hurt, the size on Revolution is attractive to me already, lets see what they do with the controller.

peolpe now are looking for new games

As evidenced by the endless sequals that consistently top the sales charts. No wait...

The constant call for new franchises just doesn't hold up. Take Beyond Good and Evil as a good example - available for all 3 platforms, lovely looking game, excellent polished gameplay. Praised by every review, but sank without a trace (and almost took Ubisoft with it). Why? Because nobody had ever heard of it. New franchises don't sell as well as old established ones, end of argument.