oniyide said:
and see thats my problem right there. People keep saying new expeirences, but noboday is saying how. So again i ask what they should have done? Because im sure this same conversation happened at HQ. Maybe just maybe they dont know themselves, so what were they supposed to do when they realize they got nothing? Just sit the gen out? Actually maybe that wouldnt be bad. |
The problem is that Nintendo is overflowing with new ideas. You don't need one singular new idea to dominate a console, you can build your console to accept multiple new ideas: that was the genius of the Wiimote, not that it was just a waggle wand, but could be used as a lightgun pointer, tilted on its side to run like an NES controller or a cheap substitute for a steering wheel, while still getting closer to the real deal than anything aside from those expensive actual wheel controllers you can buy (with force feedback and all), or modulated with a nunchuk to function much like a "traditional" controller. Nintendo then made a bunch of different new games to flow in with these new ideas. Some were good, some... less so (say what you will about Other M, but it was certainly a "new" take on Metroid). The Zelda games for DS are often poorly regarded, but they were certainly "new", and very distinct from any Zeldas that came before. A lot of times Nintendo's new ideas don't stick, but a lot of the crazier games they make show that they certainly aren't without them.
The console doesn't need to be as bold as the Wii to do "new" things, however. It just needs to be flexible.

Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.







