Malstrom: 'The Big Picture' problem underlying Nintendo's decline

[NightDragon83]

RolStoppable said:

Level1Death said:
He makes excellent points. I like how he breaks down how certain things were successful/unsuccessful. I completely agree with him that Nintendo is an arcade style company. The N64 had good games, but it was no NES/SNES in terms of Nintendo quality. The GameCube was just a disaster. It's the only console, where I was disappointed in the Mario and Zelda games. I didn't play nor did I care to play Sunshine, and The Wind Waker felt incomplete. There are reasons why, the N64 and GameCube failed and why the NES, SNES and Wii were more successful. I just wonder, why can't Nintendo see these things?

It may not be so much that Nintendo can't see these things, but rather that they don't want to see them and instead look for another explanation that fits into the context they prefer.

For example, Mario. By now it's pretty clear that people do not play the 3D games, because they do not want to, not because they are too stupid to comprehend them. But Nintendo still continues to make the 3D games more accessible, more like the 2D games (sidescrolling sections, world maps, flagpoles, power-ups etc.). They could just make both types of games on a regular basis, but it doesn't look like they want to do this. Any other company would be happy to have a 10m series and a 20+m series running side by side, but Nintendo insists on merging them.

This sums up my problem with the modern day Nintendo perfectly.  Having been a gamer since the early days of the NES, I've grown with Nintendo and watch them and their games evolve over the years from the NES to N64 eras, only to have them sort-of "devolve" I guess you could say over the previous 2 generations to where they try to appeal to everyone all at once, many times sacrificing the quality of their games to do so.

Nintendo no longer really pushes the envelope of gaming not just from a technical perspective, but also no longer really does so from a gameplay perspective which used to be their bread and butter.  With each new Mario and Zelda in the series for example, we were always introduced to a new feature or gameplay mechanic that was not only innovative but challenged us in a way that had never been done before, like with the 3D mechanics in Mario 64 or Ocarina of Time, or the power-ups and hidden areas / multiple pathways of SMB3 and World.  Now its like all they do is rehash old gameplay mechanics with just a sprinkle of nostalgia to keep the hardcore coming back hoping that this time things will be different, like with the Tanooki suit coming back in SM3D Land (even though the leaf powerup from SMB3 turned Mario into Racoon Mario NOT Tanooki Mario! but I digress).

And the thing I hate most is the newer Zelda games, where they feel the need to walk you through EVERYTHING from the basic controls and combat to what to do and where to go next.  This was a minor annoyance in OOT with Navi, but it had gotten even worse in Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, and now Skyward Sword looks to be just as bad if not worse.  While companies like Valve tease our brains, eyes, and funnybones with games like Portal 2, Nintendo seems content with repackaging the same old stuff for the 100th time and slapping "New" on to it.  This is why they have such a tough time bridging the gap between the old guard and the new school, more "casual" audience.