| vivster said: *image* |
This, pretty much. Every time this topic comes up, someone bothers to point out all the many new IPs that Nintendo has produced over the years, yet the goal-posts keep being moved over and over again... And worst of all, using arguments that somehow don't apply to Sony and Microsoft (the use of external developers, digital-only games, lack of popularity, etc). Nintendo can't win no matter what.
The fact is, Nintendo has more popular IPs than Sony or Microsoft, so just taking care of them (and their spin-offs) demands a lot of resources. And they have historically expanded their gameplay experiences through the use of these familiar characters, as many of them are flexible enough to pull this off. There's nothing wrong with this, as you don't need new IPs to provide new experiences, nor are new IPs always original or innovative. They still produce at least a few ones every gen when they need to, and this gen is not the exception.
Another thing that gets usually ignored here is that the gaming market not only consists of gamers who have been playing games for a decade or more, but also of ones that have started gaming relatively recently. For them, old IPs are as new as the rest.
Finally, I'll just echo what Rol is saying here and say that while there's always room to expand and improve Nintendo's 1st party lineup, mimicking what Sony and Microsoft do by going for the same audience is a recipe for disaster. These gamers already have them to satisfy their needs, so they're unlikely to get another platform for more of the same. They need to go for the gamers that are being currently ignored nowadays, which in part are already doing with the likes of Bayonetta 2, The Wonderful 101, X, Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem and the so called "casual" games, not to mention keeping platformers as a priority. And any gamer that appreciates diversity can understand how this is a good thing for the industry, not just Nintendo.
