NightDragon83 said:
well first off, Nintendo is the world's largest dedicated videogame developer and publisher. If they lacked the capacity to make games for two of their biggest franchises simultaneously (both of which have been primairly handled by 2nd or 3rd parties over the past decade, mind you), then they REALLY need to get their priorities in order and stop releasing a bajillion party or Mario games every year. And to your second point... so basically you're saying that 2 of Nintendo's biggest IPs can't succeed on their own in the modern gaming era? Prime 3 didn't sell nearly as good as it should have because Nintendo for some reason refuses to advertise games that don't have "Mario", "Wii" or "Pokemon" in the title. And there hasn't been a bonafied Nintendo-made StarFox game since '64, other than the 3DS remake of... you guessed it... Starfox 64. As for the lenght of the games in question, none of the Prime games were that short unless you were going for a speed run or had the hint-system on at all times instead of exploring on your own, and a true Star Fox in HD with online multiplayer would be killer and have tons of replay value. Of course, that would require a little effort on Nintendo's part, so I'm not really holding my breath for that unless they hand it off to a 2nd or 3rd party developer again. |
I've long stated that the root-cause of most of Nintendo's problems as a publisher come from the fact that they have too few teams. If you look at what Nintendo has been putting out, they generally have teams for this and teams for that, and then have the teams like Retro that are set to whatever (though only Retro and the other American team, Nintendo Software Technology, really lack franchises that have been specifically assigned to them). Nintendo has several "homeless" franchises because they don't have the people to get them off the ground, which is indeed a bad thing.
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.