Quantcast
The truth about Nintendo

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The truth about Nintendo

What do you think about Nintendo's attitude?

Awful, they should fail i... 189 14.04%
 
Pretty Bad, they should l... 385 28.60%
 
Not bad, they're just as anybody else 188 13.97%
 
Good, we need more like them 389 28.90%
 
Excellent, they don't need to change one bit 173 12.85%
 
Total:1,324
Zod95 said:
Mr Khan said:
Most of it digs up rather ancient history.

As for the rest, Nintendo could certainly afford to be more ambitious (mostly in terms of talent acquisition), but not in the way you describe. Nintendo's gotta keep what makes them unique.

You can't say that. None of us have any idea of what Nintendo games would look like if Nintendo heavily invested on them.


you sir, have never seen the ending credits for a Nintendo game. go ahead, attack Nintendo, but make sure you attack the other first party console devs who have more in house 1st and 2nd party game devs than Nintendo...oncev they come into existence that is...



NINTENDO

nintendo forever . . .

Around the Network
sundin13 said:

I guess I'll just talk about a one point you made because there is no way I am going to talk about everything in that massive OP:

"Moreover, Nintendo has promoted low competitive environments, where shovelware could thrive and sell millions on the Wii. A console with less than 40% of market share was able to collect many more (and far more successful) trash games than PS1 with 70% or PS2 with 75%."

The reason there was so much shovelware on the Wii was twofold:
1. Relatively cheap development costs: Due to the weaker hardware of the Wii, the development costs and development times could be drastically decreased, allowing the creation of games for much lower costs.
2. Extremely large "casual" userbase: More casuals means more people who are likely to buy a bad "shovelware" game.

I totally agree with you on this and the OP doesn't say anything against it either.

 

sundin13 said:

(EDIT: I would like to add that neither of these things are inherently bad. In fact it could be argued that these things are inherently good for the industry, despite the side effect of increased shovelware)

Now, you also say this implying that this is bad for the industry but I disagree. Lets take WayForward Industries as an example of this. You may know them as the creators of games such as "Shantae" or the Mighty franchise but did you know that they have also made games such as "Despicable Me: Minion Mayhem" and "Space Chimp"? Yup, a fan favorite developer funds its wonderful projects by pumping out what many people would refer to as shovelware.
Shovelware by nature is a cheap way to make a profit and in these times of "one unsuccessful game and you go out of business", I don't see how you can complain about that. Where M$ and Sony provide a space in the market that breeds extremely high dev costs and multimillion dollar projects that could very well bankrupt a company, Nintendo has provided a space that allows significant creative freedom (due to innovative control schemes) as well as lower development costs (due to weaker hardware). 
Shovelware isn't evil by nature, in fact, it may be the reason some of the games you love are being developed and published.

You've made a very good point and I can't say you're wrong. Yet, I disagree with you.

In my opinion, a shovelware environment (like the one generated around the Wii) is a bad thing because it concentrates incompetence at making titles and contempt for the gamer. This is everything we don't want to be successful because the moment AAA devs realize they can do more money with shovelware than with AAA titles, we're f***ed. On the other hand, PS2 was a platform for everthing (good and bad games from all genres) and nobody thinks about shovelware when thinking about the console, although it was there. This passes a very different message to developers (shovelware is the easy way but not a long-term viable option) and gamers (there is shovelware, but there is much more than that, you can find plenty of good games).

Microsoft and Sony don't make any developer to spend millions. Look at the PS4 for example, it's full of indie titles. However, they do offer the possibility for devs to create AAA titles. And that's not a bad thing at all.



Prediction made in 14/01/2014 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 70M      WiiU: 25M

Prediction made in 01/04/2016 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 18M

Prediction made in 15/04/2017 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 90M      XOne: 40M      WiiU: 15M      Switch: 20M

Prediction made in 24/03/2018 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 110M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 14M      Switch: 65M

Zod95 said:
cannonballZ said:

You do make some valid points, but you also paint them in a very bad way. And for the most part I feel it's unnecessary to feel like they owe me or that I should despise Nintendo. And I don't see anything wrong with exclusives.

Every one of your paragraphs is titled with painting them in a bad picture, as "harming" gamers. I don't feel that way at all. I do feel they are behind in times, but this entire article is a bit exaggerated. The context of each is the same- Nintendo is harming gamers. And I just don't see it that way. Gamers have a choice whether to buy their products or not. They aren't harming anyone but themselves with their attitude, which I agree is a bit s****y. But to say they are harming gamers is false.

Harming 3rd party? 3rd party also harmed themselves on Nintendo consoles also. Sure Ninty gets most of the blame on that one, but that goes both ways. What you consider "truth" is what I consider opinion. Not all gamers are broke and need to choose between consoles. Most gamers choose which console to get first and get a second console down the line anyway. Of all the friends I have that are gamers, I know of only one that games on one console only and it's not Nintendo. 

1 - I understand your view, and it's a valid one. After all, Nintendo hasn't done anything illegal. As for the way I tell things, every subjective statement of mine is backed up by objective facts. Therefore, my bitter comments are a natural consequence of Nintendo's bitter actions.

2 - That's only point 1. Then you have all the other entities they've also harmed.

3 - That's right, gamers have the choice. And, if they become better informed, they can choose better. Then, this thread is not that useless.

4 - "But to say they are harming gamers is false." - That is just an opinion too. I guess half of the people that read the entire point 1 and agree with that will consider Nintendo is harming gamers.


So, the point of this article is to enlighten gamers to....????? I'm not sure.... You want to inform them of Nintendo's shortcomings or what you perceive to be harmful to the gaming community? So that they can then choose if they want to support Nintendo at all?

If so, fair enough. But to each his own. I read it and it changes nothing for me, they don't owe me anything and I don't owe them my loyalty. I buy Nintendo games because I like them, same reason I buy any other games. 



This will be the first thread in VGchartz I will bookmark for future reading. I already have some counter point to your ideas but it would be too quick to post them if I haven't taken the time to read the whole OP yet.



2 was the closest you got to relaying things that were seemingly quite true, although don't necessarily take place in the Nintendo of today. They've clearly become more interested in Indies and third parties, especially since they don't have much.

I applaud your effort, because that's quite a long and detailed read, but there is quite clearly glaring bias in some of this. Setting Sony or Microsoft ahead of Nintendo for certain acts that they have done is one of them. Big companies like these all have their own financial and "humane" (even that's a bit of a stretch) problems.



Carl is a Piplup hater and deserves to be punished eternally.

Around the Network

Regarding 1.2

You imply that one art direction (Realistic) is better than another (Cartoonish) and use that assumption to bash Nintendo. Afterwards, you imply that one gameplay style (Simulation) is better than another (Arcade) and, again, use that assumption to further bash Nintendo. Later on, you imply that a particular hardware focus (Raw power) is better than another (User interaction) and, again, use that assumption to bash Nintendo.

I could go on and on but it's pretty clear that you are using a bunch of very subjective assumptions representing your personal preferences (Realistic graphics, simulation gameplay, etc.) and then based on those try to establish the ''Truth'' about Nintendo. It's a very naive (or dishonest) way to analyse reality. Bravo for the effort but, from what I've read, it's a very poor essay.



BreakingLegend said:
I just have to say that the degree of integrity in this post is visible in the comparison of Sonic and Mario's soundtrack evolutions throughout the years. The bias becomes blatantly obvious when OP spins Sega's use of [cheesy] modern rock bands for Sonic themes as superior and more beneficial than Nintendo's instrumental Mario themes in today's era.

What? Seriously

Read the OP:

"Note that I’m not taking into account tastes when referring all those games earlier (like the Guinness book is not about the best people in the world). I’m just focusing on objective remarkable achievements of some games that could have only been done with effort/time/money. If the game X is beautiful or if the game Y is fun, that is already subjective (about tastes)"

 

BreakingLegend said:
If Nintendo merely copied the "cool" things PlayStation and Xbox were doing with more realistic games and simulators, we would have too much parity, and lack many of the unique and creative offerings that have come from them over they years

Nintendo wouldn't have to copy Sony or Microsoft. Look at the incredible amount of cutting-edge games that Sony invented that weren't based on any Microsoft game. Nintendo would follow their own way too. That's one thing I very curious, what kind of AAA game would Nintendo pull out if they were willing to spend their billions...

 

BreakingLegend said:
Yeah, they stuck with Mario Kart for all these years, but you know what? It's still incredibly fun for many people and manages to differentiate itself in each iteration. Uncharted games are amazing, but each one barely adds to the previous one.

Nintendo is the most influential gaming company of all time, constantly innovating in many different areas. Nintendo doesn't copy what the others are doing so much, because they don't have to, and they don't want to. There's no reason to bash them for this, as they still make some of the most innovative and fun to play games around, despite the longevity of their franchises.

Again, read the OP:

"They create games that are original, fun and engaging to the eye."

Yet, the OP also tell what they do wrong. Isn't that legitimate, to point out also the negative side?



Prediction made in 14/01/2014 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 70M      WiiU: 25M

Prediction made in 01/04/2016 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 18M

Prediction made in 15/04/2017 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 90M      XOne: 40M      WiiU: 15M      Switch: 20M

Prediction made in 24/03/2018 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 110M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 14M      Switch: 65M

SubiyaCryolite said:
*Skimming over the comments* Its a sad sad day when you realize that the quality of debate on a site like GAF (of all things) is better than that on Vgchartz.

It seems as though you don't have much room to say this. Your first post was about wanting somebody else to come in here and jostle up his points, now you're just calling people out over nothing.



Carl is a Piplup hater and deserves to be punished eternally.

i ve never ever seen in my life, ever, such a wall of text so full of words, so empty of ideas and arguments

TLDR?
Nintendo is bad because i dont like them, buaaaa!!! crying like a baby lol

believe it or not theres people out there, and a lot of them that enjoy more WiiSports than Killzone for example.
me included. id pay 50$ for Wii sports resort, but i wouldnt even buy Killzone 3.



This is too long.

~Mod Edit~

This post has been moderated.

-Smeags