happydolphin said:
@bold. It's all very ambiguous. Malstrom seems to be saying that, since 2D Mario created a market for such great games, then we need to encourage 2D Mario, his point is founded on awesomeness. But then, at other times, the argument is that, since Nintendo makes more money with NSMB, then that's what matters since that will fuel higher quality games. Yet when said higher quality games are released, people are upset, so what's the dealio? Well, I think they should make up their minds. If it's Mario that creates a market for awesome games, then so be it, but if it creates a market for cheap revivals yet makes loads of cash, then nobody's happy. Also, sales are not a measure of quality, they're a measure of appeal. What is a measure of quality is objective: time spent on the project, talent working on the project (which teams), the ultimate score (reviews, metascore), the longevity (is it a classic?). All these points taken TOGETHER are the right metrics for quality, sales is not. It's a measure of a baseline quality, enough so as to not be put in the shovelware category, but sales generally measures appeal, not quality, and appeal requires a baseline of quality, not much more. As for the rest, as we all know, appeal requires certain themes or dynamics that people like, and that's about all there is to the secret recipe.
|
I have no problem with those games being made. Nintendo just needs to not make them the focus of a year's lineup and expect them to sell. Fire Emblem is a great series and leading its genre but no one would expect it to sell a 3DS on its own at Christmas. Yet this is exactly what Nintendo hoped for with Galaxy 2, and then with Skyward Sword.
Nintendo's executives main problem is that they do not understand the game market. It would be fine if they said, we know X would sell better but we are doing Y, outright. But if you read the interviews it's more of a Reggie "what's wrong with you" when a Galaxy doesn't sell like a 2D Mario. They just don't know why.
The measure of quality you are describing is cool - for you. You can come to your own conclusions about which games are better and why, based on some combination of what you listed. Sales isn't the only thing, sure, but if we are talking about what Nintendo is doing wrong and how they could do it better, time, talent and metacritic score are not issues for them at the moment. NCL is a top tier studio. It is being misused. Longevity I left out because it is also a revenue issue, if games retain their value they can be selling at $30+ years after release and be earning. The existence of low priced used copies is actually a failure on the developer's part to make a profitable game.