Soundwave said:
Osc89 said:
| Soundwave said:
I'm seriously tempted to make this my sixth point.
F*ck Metroid.
Pardon my french, from a marketing POV, Nintendo's strategy of having no answer to the need for a older-skewing franchise other than throwing Metroid at people over and over again has been a disaster. Metroid is not a big time franchise for core players and never will be unless the entire game play is changed dramatically.
The mass audience does not like slow paced, solitary games for the most part.
The 4 Metroid games (the 3 Prime + Other M) combined have sold less than GoldenEye on the N64. The two Metroid games on the Wii actually somehow managed to sell less than the two on the GameCube despite having 4x the userbase.
Nintendo needs a GoldenEye. Not these small potatoes.
Metroid is a fine series by its own merits. It's just not the franchise that Nintendo tries to keep positioning it as, and no doubt even they probably have gotten the message by now. Metroid has had 10+ years from Metroid Prime to make its case as a true top tier core gamer franchise and the numbers simply aren't there. No excuses, time to move on and let some other IP have a real chance.
If Nintendo won't invest in a new character because they're too scared to take the risk, then like I said, I've suggested they go sign a deal for the Bond license which is currently free and apparently available. They have history there, it works for them, and I'd virtually gauruntee a high quality Bond game from Nintendo with a good multiplayer component would outsell any Metroid game they make.
|
Wouldn't there be some issues with a license? It seems like most of the Bond games have been direct promotions of films, meaning they may have had to comply with the tone of the Bond series at the time. It would work better if Nintendo were given more freedom, like with Rocksteady and the Batman series. It wouldn't work if the film series takes a lighter turn, and Nintendo then has to make a lighter game.
|
I do recall EA had free reign to be able to do things like made Bond games based on the Connery era (From Russia With Love) and even make up their own Bond "movies" in effect (Everything or Nothing), so I imagine whoever gets the license next would have a good deal of flexibility.
I think the main restriction might be that Nintendo has to make a certain number of games starring whoever is the current Bond, but they probably would want to for relevancy sake anyway.
|
In that case, I reckon they could do well and make some pretty great games. But they are then tied to the film franchise, and any fade in popularity of the films will probably reflect on the games.
Also, I'm not sure how licensing works, but with the films on a current high does it cost them more? It would be annoying for them to spend a lot now only for the Bond films to decline.
