Mr Khan said:
The big Nintendo franchises work because the appeal is immediate and understandable: Pokemon is like a trading card game in appeal: you build and customize and fight with NPCs and friends, and trade with NPCs and friends. The platformers are all about simplicity of game design and getting from A to B. Zelda is a very basic adventure game where the adventure is the focus, rather than the story, focusing on exploration, dungeon-crawling, combat, and building your character. You don't need to know much about the fantasy world, you can just dive right in to almost any Zelda game, play, and understand. That's part of why Wii Sports and such did so well: beyond the gimmick of motion controls, Nintendo had and still has a fundamental understanding that simplicity of mechanics + depth of content is how you make a successful game (Sports didn't really have depth of content, unfortunately, though Sports Resort did...) What is Wonderful 101? Can you describe it's function in two sentences or less? That's why W101 did so poorly, i think. New IP didn't help the fact at all, but it wasn't a marketable concept. I think Nintendo understood that, because as anemic as their marketing has been since, really the late Wii generation (which is one problem that Nintendo can solve very quickly if they wanted to, unlike their other challenges which mandate slow, long-term solutions. Fire your North American marketing team and rebuild that whole damn enterprise), w101 was really just sent out to die. Nintendo couldn't wrap their heads around "selling" w101, and I don't particularly blame them because it's a hard concept to sell. |
thats funny, you werent saying that prior to the game releasing when it was supposed to do well. Guess hindsight is 20/20







