This is one of Nintendo's biggest failings in my eyes. They are sort of immune to the competition, as they target a different market than Xbox and Playstation - so they don't really get punished...
This is one of Nintendo's biggest failings in my eyes. They are sort of immune to the competition, as they target a different market than Xbox and Playstation - so they don't really get punished when they continually re-release old games at full price on new systems. I've been recommended some older Gamecube and Wii games to play for back story - but they simply aren't feasible to play without an emulator...unless you happen to own the console and disc already. Old games can be found for cheap with a search, but many are selling on ebay and the like for higher than MSRP - and often hundreds of dollars for the more popular games.
Even beyond the days when only game cartridges/discs existed, I'm still not very confident that my digital purchases from Nintendo will still be honored in the future. Especially compared to other ecosystems.
I don't remember where I saw it, but this quote comes to mind:
Nintendo is a great game company, but a terrible business.
Is Nintendo a great game company though? I bought the Wii on my nostalgia for the N64 (I started "adult life" during the Game Cube's run). I traded in the XBox360 for a Wii on the strength of the...
Is Nintendo a great game company though? I bought the Wii on my nostalgia for the N64 (I started "adult life" during the Game Cube's run). I traded in the XBox360 for a Wii on the strength of the Wii Sports package. I grew up with a regular Nintendo and saw the difference between Mario 1 and Mario 3. I thought, "Wow, if the motion control is this good now, I can't wait to see what the games are like at the end of this console's run!"
Then it was just an endless stream of waggle-the-remote mini games.
It feels like Nintendo's M. O. now is release a console, one Mario, one Mario Kart, one Smash Bros, one Zelda, then move on to the next console.
Are they actually pushing the envelope somehow? Totally possible too that I've missed out on some other good titles. I'm just still bitterly disappointed by the Wii.
Yes, they are an excellent game company. For one, as console makers they are the only company that still tries to innovate - the rest of the industry has basically become a homogenized blob...
Yes, they are an excellent game company. For one, as console makers they are the only company that still tries to innovate - the rest of the industry has basically become a homogenized blob centering around x86 gaming PCs in terms of hardware.
On the software side, there is perhaps no other game developer in the world with the number of releases that both across user reception and critical reception have such consistent excellence. They have 6 titles in Metacritics all time top 10.
The Metacritic ranking I looked at has three in the top 10, but most of the other entries seem to be variants of GTA. So I looked at the top 50. For Nintendo consoles it's some Mario titles, some...
So I looked at the top 50. For Nintendo consoles it's some Mario titles, some Zelda titles, Metroid, Goldeneye, and Perfect Dark. In the top 50.
I get it, too; I grew up playing basically all the Nintendo titles in the 90s, but it feels like all they're doing is recycling the same game every 4-5 years or so. They were fun, and some of the remakes were fun, but I'd like to see them branch out into something different.
Like if Bethesda kept making Elder Scrolls games and never branched out into Fallout 3/New Vegas, or Will Wright only did The Sims and not Spore, Valve kept doing Halflife and CS and never made Portal, etc.
Some companies spit out the same game over and over and then make something beautiful. Nintendo just seems (to me at least) to just keep doing the same thing for 25 years now.
First, simply because they are of the same franchise does not mean they are the same gameplay type. Take BotW for instance, it is not only very different from prior Zelda games, but it's just...
First, simply because they are of the same franchise does not mean they are the same gameplay type. Take BotW for instance, it is not only very different from prior Zelda games, but it's just different from what existed as "open world" games flat out. Hence why it's spawning a whole class of ripoffs.
Not to mention you're just ignoring the new IP they've made. So other first party experiments like Splatoon, or the Xenoblade series don't count but Fallout does? Wacky releases that no one does like Ring Fit doesn't count?
The near death, revival, and now Personaification of Fire Emblem doesn't count?
Even things like Mario Odyssey - there are only actually 3 open world 3D Mario games; ever since Sunshine they've gone to 3D but linear titles. Or the fan-dislike Skyword Sword - the reason that title is disliked is partially because Nintendo experimented by making it a very linear game with more story elements.
I really feel like you just have a prior (namely that Nintendo rehashes the same releases) and are just cramming reality into it - the Bethedsa comparison is extremely bizarre. In comparison, Bethedsa, which ever since Morrowind has been making games so noticeably similar you can easily feel out who made the game from how the game feels alone, has far less breadth of genres than Nintendo - which is normal, since they're a comparatively small developer with evidently a very consistent design focus.
I might be completely off since I haven't paid close attention to anything Nintendo has done in the past 15 years, but it seems to me like "cash-in on nostalgia" is 80% of their business strategy....
I might be completely off since I haven't paid close attention to anything Nintendo has done in the past 15 years, but it seems to me like "cash-in on nostalgia" is 80% of their business strategy. I'm fairly certain that everyone who's come in contact with video games in the past 3 decades has played at least one game from Nintendo's flagship series, so they basically coast on the recognition of Mario, Zelda, Pokémon, etc.
Now, no one can fault them for playing it safe and sticking to their (hugely) successful franchises, but I haven't seen a single thing from them in years that strikes me as substantially different from the things I played back in the day. That works incredibly well for them, apparently. But I don't find it particularly innovative or interesting.
Yeah cash in on nostalgia, that's it exactly. Everything looks like Super Nintendo games to me. Not that it's terrible, but I wish they would do something more.
Yeah cash in on nostalgia, that's it exactly. Everything looks like Super Nintendo games to me. Not that it's terrible, but I wish they would do something more.
I mean, its always a matter of opinion, but IMO they still have some of the best IP out there. The recent Zelda (yes, BOTW, but also the recent 3DS ones) and Mario releases were top notch. SSBU...
Is Nintendo a great game company though?
I mean, its always a matter of opinion, but IMO they still have some of the best IP out there. The recent Zelda (yes, BOTW, but also the recent 3DS ones) and Mario releases were top notch. SSBU was a ton of fun for me as a casual player - no clue how it is in the competitive community tho. Splatoon 2 was really good. Animal Crossing had perfect timing going for it at the beginning of the pandemic, but it was (and is - its getting updates) amazing (though not perfect...some UI stuff hasn't been updated since the Gamecube days). We got new Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario. Pokemon has been hit or miss, but reliably putting out new games (personally I loved Sun&Moon, but felt that the Switch offerings fell far short of the mark).
They aren't perfect. And they aren't the only great game makers in town. And their games might not be your thing. But I think they are still making great games.
But like I said...the business side of things. Ho boy. The switch could use a lot of love in terms of software and UI updates. The aforementioned problems with re-releasing some old content at full price, but tons of content just lost to the ages. Their online service feels comparable to xbox live 15 years ago. Their sales tend to be rather stingy in comparison to any other platform. They get away with a lot due to the nostalgia factor for their IP - but also on the strength of their games.
Or pirating old games for a console that you can't buy the cartridges for anymore. Edit: Pirating them to the console that is not just for an emulator.
Or pirating old games for a console that you can't buy the cartridges for anymore.
Edit: Pirating them to the console that is not just for an emulator.
I just bought a switch last month and I agree with you. In addition to their policies around games, as much as I like the Switch, it is pretty clear that Nintendo wanted to avoid paying licensing...
I just bought a switch last month and I agree with you. In addition to their policies around games, as much as I like the Switch, it is pretty clear that Nintendo wanted to avoid paying licensing fees unless absolutely necessary.
This is unfortunate, as I believe that supporting both Bluetooth and some kind of streaming tech could have propelled the Switch from a great device into an outstanding device.
The switch is a bit of a disappointment imo. So much that it could do with software but it has has basically no feature updates in the entire lifespan of the device. The hardware supports...
The switch is a bit of a disappointment imo. So much that it could do with software but it has has basically no feature updates in the entire lifespan of the device. The hardware supports bluetooth audio and you can use it when you hack it to run linux.
Nintendo just doesn't seem to care or that they feel that these extra features could be the source of exploits like the 3ds web browser was.
I've been super impressed with Microsoft's approaches to gaming recently and I don't even have an Xbox. I installed a dev build of Windows 10 just to try out the Auto HDR feature and it's...
I've been super impressed with Microsoft's approaches to gaming recently and I don't even have an Xbox. I installed a dev build of Windows 10 just to try out the Auto HDR feature and it's incredible. I don't even have a good HDR monitor but the feature's relatively subtle affect really makes older DX11 games pop just that little bit more that it makes a big difference to myself as an image quality snob. They didn't have to do this at all but I'm super grateful.
Microsoft had to find its niche in the modern video game world. They dominated the 360/ps3 generation, disrupted the market with the original Xbox, but before gamepass and the expanded as well as...
Microsoft had to find its niche in the modern video game world. They dominated the 360/ps3 generation, disrupted the market with the original Xbox, but before gamepass and the expanded as well as enhanced backwards compatibility they didn’t have anything notable other than halo, forza, and gears for the xbone. They tried to get into the Japanese market on 360 with blue dragon and lost odyssey but it didn’t really work. They really had nothing left and valve has been pushing steam play and vulkan so they have to either buy up vulkan/Linux devs (which they have been doing) and/or buy up the competition like they used to do in the 90’s (which they also are doing).
Microsoft is desperate, they need the pc market or it will move to Linux with valve and vulkan pushing it, and they need the console market to push hardware and subscriptions to gamepass and Xbox live. I don’t know how the streaming market is gonna work out, but they’re in an incredibly advantageous position with xcloud. They can essentially gain an entire player base overnight by releasing xcloud for windows 10 devices. I don’t know how the cloud market is gonna turn out, but one thing is for certain, you know Microsoft has ran out of ideas when they revert to old predatory business tactics of being the guy with the bigger bank account. I guarantee the bc stuff was probably Phil Spencer and the acquisitions are the shareholders doing. Microsoft is going to be the wildcard this generation, they really have the most to lose.
This is one of Nintendo's biggest failings in my eyes. They are sort of immune to the competition, as they target a different market than Xbox and Playstation - so they don't really get punished when they continually re-release old games at full price on new systems. I've been recommended some older Gamecube and Wii games to play for back story - but they simply aren't feasible to play without an emulator...unless you happen to own the console and disc already. Old games can be found for cheap with a search, but many are selling on ebay and the like for higher than MSRP - and often hundreds of dollars for the more popular games.
Even beyond the days when only game cartridges/discs existed, I'm still not very confident that my digital purchases from Nintendo will still be honored in the future. Especially compared to other ecosystems.
I don't remember where I saw it, but this quote comes to mind:
Is Nintendo a great game company though? I bought the Wii on my nostalgia for the N64 (I started "adult life" during the Game Cube's run). I traded in the XBox360 for a Wii on the strength of the Wii Sports package. I grew up with a regular Nintendo and saw the difference between Mario 1 and Mario 3. I thought, "Wow, if the motion control is this good now, I can't wait to see what the games are like at the end of this console's run!"
Then it was just an endless stream of waggle-the-remote mini games.
It feels like Nintendo's M. O. now is release a console, one Mario, one Mario Kart, one Smash Bros, one Zelda, then move on to the next console.
Are they actually pushing the envelope somehow? Totally possible too that I've missed out on some other good titles. I'm just still bitterly disappointed by the Wii.
Yes, they are an excellent game company. For one, as console makers they are the only company that still tries to innovate - the rest of the industry has basically become a homogenized blob centering around x86 gaming PCs in terms of hardware.
On the software side, there is perhaps no other game developer in the world with the number of releases that both across user reception and critical reception have such consistent excellence. They have 6 titles in Metacritics all time top 10.
The Metacritic ranking I looked at has three in the top 10, but most of the other entries seem to be variants of GTA.
So I looked at the top 50. For Nintendo consoles it's some Mario titles, some Zelda titles, Metroid, Goldeneye, and Perfect Dark. In the top 50.
I get it, too; I grew up playing basically all the Nintendo titles in the 90s, but it feels like all they're doing is recycling the same game every 4-5 years or so. They were fun, and some of the remakes were fun, but I'd like to see them branch out into something different.
Like if Bethesda kept making Elder Scrolls games and never branched out into Fallout 3/New Vegas, or Will Wright only did The Sims and not Spore, Valve kept doing Halflife and CS and never made Portal, etc.
Some companies spit out the same game over and over and then make something beautiful. Nintendo just seems (to me at least) to just keep doing the same thing for 25 years now.
First, simply because they are of the same franchise does not mean they are the same gameplay type. Take BotW for instance, it is not only very different from prior Zelda games, but it's just different from what existed as "open world" games flat out. Hence why it's spawning a whole class of ripoffs.
Not to mention you're just ignoring the new IP they've made. So other first party experiments like Splatoon, or the Xenoblade series don't count but Fallout does? Wacky releases that no one does like Ring Fit doesn't count?
The near death, revival, and now Personaification of Fire Emblem doesn't count?
Even things like Mario Odyssey - there are only actually 3 open world 3D Mario games; ever since Sunshine they've gone to 3D but linear titles. Or the fan-dislike Skyword Sword - the reason that title is disliked is partially because Nintendo experimented by making it a very linear game with more story elements.
I really feel like you just have a prior (namely that Nintendo rehashes the same releases) and are just cramming reality into it - the Bethedsa comparison is extremely bizarre. In comparison, Bethedsa, which ever since Morrowind has been making games so noticeably similar you can easily feel out who made the game from how the game feels alone, has far less breadth of genres than Nintendo - which is normal, since they're a comparatively small developer with evidently a very consistent design focus.
I might be completely off since I haven't paid close attention to anything Nintendo has done in the past 15 years, but it seems to me like "cash-in on nostalgia" is 80% of their business strategy. I'm fairly certain that everyone who's come in contact with video games in the past 3 decades has played at least one game from Nintendo's flagship series, so they basically coast on the recognition of Mario, Zelda, Pokémon, etc.
Now, no one can fault them for playing it safe and sticking to their (hugely) successful franchises, but I haven't seen a single thing from them in years that strikes me as substantially different from the things I played back in the day. That works incredibly well for them, apparently. But I don't find it particularly innovative or interesting.
Yeah cash in on nostalgia, that's it exactly. Everything looks like Super Nintendo games to me. Not that it's terrible, but I wish they would do something more.
Breath of the Wild looks like a Super Nintendo game?
I mean, its always a matter of opinion, but IMO they still have some of the best IP out there. The recent Zelda (yes, BOTW, but also the recent 3DS ones) and Mario releases were top notch. SSBU was a ton of fun for me as a casual player - no clue how it is in the competitive community tho. Splatoon 2 was really good. Animal Crossing had perfect timing going for it at the beginning of the pandemic, but it was (and is - its getting updates) amazing (though not perfect...some UI stuff hasn't been updated since the Gamecube days). We got new Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario. Pokemon has been hit or miss, but reliably putting out new games (personally I loved Sun&Moon, but felt that the Switch offerings fell far short of the mark).
They aren't perfect. And they aren't the only great game makers in town. And their games might not be your thing. But I think they are still making great games.
But like I said...the business side of things. Ho boy. The switch could use a lot of love in terms of software and UI updates. The aforementioned problems with re-releasing some old content at full price, but tons of content just lost to the ages. Their online service feels comparable to xbox live 15 years ago. Their sales tend to be rather stingy in comparison to any other platform. They get away with a lot due to the nostalgia factor for their IP - but also on the strength of their games.
That depends on if you like their games or not.
IMO there is nothing wrong with using an emulator on old games no longer being sold. Copyright should expire after 20 years anyway.
Or pirating old games for a console that you can't buy the cartridges for anymore.
Edit: Pirating them to the console that is not just for an emulator.
I just bought a switch last month and I agree with you. In addition to their policies around games, as much as I like the Switch, it is pretty clear that Nintendo wanted to avoid paying licensing fees unless absolutely necessary.
This is unfortunate, as I believe that supporting both Bluetooth and some kind of streaming tech could have propelled the Switch from a great device into an outstanding device.
The switch is a bit of a disappointment imo. So much that it could do with software but it has has basically no feature updates in the entire lifespan of the device. The hardware supports bluetooth audio and you can use it when you hack it to run linux.
Nintendo just doesn't seem to care or that they feel that these extra features could be the source of exploits like the 3ds web browser was.
Funnily enough, the Switch's web browser is still a source of exploits even though it's not user-accessible.
For what it's worth, Bluetooth controller support is available if you have a hackable Nintendo Switch.
I've been super impressed with Microsoft's approaches to gaming recently and I don't even have an Xbox. I installed a dev build of Windows 10 just to try out the Auto HDR feature and it's incredible. I don't even have a good HDR monitor but the feature's relatively subtle affect really makes older DX11 games pop just that little bit more that it makes a big difference to myself as an image quality snob. They didn't have to do this at all but I'm super grateful.
Microsoft had to find its niche in the modern video game world. They dominated the 360/ps3 generation, disrupted the market with the original Xbox, but before gamepass and the expanded as well as enhanced backwards compatibility they didn’t have anything notable other than halo, forza, and gears for the xbone. They tried to get into the Japanese market on 360 with blue dragon and lost odyssey but it didn’t really work. They really had nothing left and valve has been pushing steam play and vulkan so they have to either buy up vulkan/Linux devs (which they have been doing) and/or buy up the competition like they used to do in the 90’s (which they also are doing).
Microsoft is desperate, they need the pc market or it will move to Linux with valve and vulkan pushing it, and they need the console market to push hardware and subscriptions to gamepass and Xbox live. I don’t know how the streaming market is gonna work out, but they’re in an incredibly advantageous position with xcloud. They can essentially gain an entire player base overnight by releasing xcloud for windows 10 devices. I don’t know how the cloud market is gonna turn out, but one thing is for certain, you know Microsoft has ran out of ideas when they revert to old predatory business tactics of being the guy with the bigger bank account. I guarantee the bc stuff was probably Phil Spencer and the acquisitions are the shareholders doing. Microsoft is going to be the wildcard this generation, they really have the most to lose.