| guiduc said: Yeah, but think of that as a chance for us to bring Nintendo on the right way. If Mario doesn't work, then they'll have to take risks... and then create new intellectual properties. |
I can't really agree with the premise that Nintendo hasn't taken risks, though. Admittedly, this was probably their "safest" E3 in years, but even a casual glance at E3's offerings shows that they're very much continuing to zig where the rest of the industry has opted to zag.
Said zag has involved some incredibly stupid decisions, most notably on the hardware side: "ugh" best summarizes my opinion on the 3DS/Wii U hardware. Although twice expecting third-parties to fill in software gaps before Nintendo blazed the way made me wonder if anyone in Kyoto has been paying attention the past, oh, two decades. That said, Nintendo remains one of the few that seems to largely recognize that there is a very broad audience that isn't obsessed with Call of Duty: not that there's anything wrong with that type of gaming per se, but it's about as Red Ocean as one can possibly get, and getting redder by the day. Oh crap, I'm entering Rant Mode: abort, abort!
*Ahem* I wouldn't object to Nintendo creating even more new IPS, but I understand that they've dug themselves into a nasty hole and feel the need to fill it ASAP. I also further disagree that they're not taking risks: they may not take the form of new IPs, but they're going against the Industry's flow, which is something of a risk in and of itself.*
*I secretly believe it's much less risky than what the rest of the Industry is doing. But leaving the herd, even when the herd is a bunch of lemmings charging off a steep cliff, is still kind of a "risk"...right?
