The truth about Nintendo

[Michael-5]

MDMAlliance said:

Michael-5 said:

You should be a professional journalist. 

This is why I feel Sony is 1st with their PS4. Nintendo is back a gen with the WiiU, not willing to spend $$$ to do some R & D and catch up, and not designing a system in mind for 3rd party studios (Bethesda has spoken about them not making games for WiiU). MS tried to force rediculous policies which would hurt the gaming ecosystem.

Yet Nintendo has always made quality handheld games. Next gen, I don't know what Nintendo is going to do in the handheld market. Like you said a lot of their games rely on old architecture, and true Nintendo handheld games probably sell well because they are simple....,but there is only so much people will take. I don't exactly see Batman and Assassin's Creed selling that well on 3DS/DS...

I disagree with the bold.  Too much of his bias is mixed into it for him to go professional.  Throughout this entire thread he still hasn't even tried to address the issue with his "article" as you may call it.  Sure, he can try to be a journalist.  However, a professional would research better and try to be as objective as possible, which he clearly wasn't doing.

@Italics, I don't think they are unwilling to spend the money to do R&D and "catch up."  This most likely has to do with what Nintendo deems a worthy investment.  Believe it or not, Sony's R&D cost was so high for PS4 that they actually don't expect to break even with PS4 sales until 2 years after it's been out.  Of course Nintendo would see these level of costs as something of a gamble and Nintendo probably thinks it's better off doing what it did with the Wii U (which was invest less on the development and more into the idea or "gimmick" as people love to call it).  

@Underlined, do you mean the hardware architecture or do you mean the games mechanics?  Depending on what you mean here, I'm not sure if I would say I agree.  And when we talk about "simplicity" and "complexity" like the OP, then I don't think it's a bad thing.  A lot of games aim for simplicity as they are easy to pick up and go with.  But it is also a false assumption to say that all Nintendo games are like this.  There's a lot of complexity even in games that control simply (or have simple mechanics).  Example being such as complexity of level design.  

edit:  I actually forgot to add with the Italics section that Nintendo did cater the Wii U somewhat to 3rd parties, but they didn't take it far enough.  To assume they didn't try at all is misunderstanding completely why the Wii U is failing as badly as it is.

He's still much better then the guys at GamrReview. He at least proof reads for typos and errors, and makes an arguement with research.

As for research, well Nintendo is still looking for easy answers. To be fair Super Mario 3D World plays in 60FPS 1080p, and it looks great because of that. However as technology improves, people are going to expect pixar levels of graphics. Everyone else took that big investment and learnt how to make HD games, but I think one reason why WiiU is struggling is because Nintendo doesn't have the capacity to make that many HD games. Pikmin 3 as an example was suppose to be a 2011 Wii game (one reason why I got the Wii), then it got delayed twice and moved to the WiiU only to be delayed again. Had they had the resources, this could have been a launch title, and maybe even helped out with sales.

Nintendo did not cater the WiiU very much to 3rd party's. Bethesda said that by the time they were informed about the WiiU, it was already having it's final stages of production done. I think all Bethesda wanted was a more powerful rig so they can more easily downgrade PS4/XB1 titles, but the WiiU is too much like current gen machines.

I was refering to the game mechanics. Nintendo is very good at making fairly complex and well designed games, which are very very easy to pick up at play. Pokemon is a great example, it's easy and anyone can play it, but at the same time if you play competetively it's very complicated and there is no single perfect team.

I think one reason Nintendo games are so good is because they know how to integrate puzzles and complex game mechanics into very simple games. Meaning casual and core can play alike. Even then there are some complete casual games (like Mario Party), and some full out core titles (like XenoBlade).

-----

Personally I feel Nintendo is a company on the fence. I can't ditch them because I know every system they have (except the WiiU) will have at least a couple AAA 9.5/10 games. Had I missed out on XenoBlade and Last Story last gen it would have been a real shame (even though I feel Lost Odyssey is better). Because of the example Nintendo makes, I now make it a habit to own every console, and buy all the games I feel I would enjoy best. This is ironic, but because of Nintendo I started to buy some retro games for my older PS and Sega consoles, to really have a full library of games.

Nintendo is good, gaming is good.

---

P.S. If we had no Nintendo, handheld gaming would be dead. PSP was awesome, but Vita just feels like a portable PS3 to me. Nintendo on the other hand has been very good at making dedicated handheld experiences. Without Nintendo, we'd all be playing on smartphone.....glad they were around to make things better.