By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why is "Nintendo" used as a qualifier for games?

 

TL;DR?

white knight harder, OP 32 33.33%
 
what's a Nintendo 17 17.71%
 
I prefer Ouya games myself 17 17.71%
 
heard you were talkin shi... 30 31.25%
 
Total:96
zorg1000 on 03 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
Talal said:
the_dengle said:
mZuzek said:
Because almost every good game you get on the Wii U comes from Nintendo. When you get a PlayStation or Xbox One, you're playing games from several different developers, which all have different names, stories and characters, and while so many of these experiences are the same, people will still think they have great variety of genres there.

Then it is about the publisher. As I said, I feel this is a nonsensical qualifier, like grouping books or movies by their publisher/producer. No one does this.

A lot of people do that. "I hate Pixar movies" "I love Disney movies" etc. Nintendo games do have a certain style. You can almost always tell if a game is made by Nintendo.

This is what I've been trying to say. Like Disney movies you can look at them and think 'that looks like a Disney movie' and more often than not you'd be right, it's the same with Nintendo games. They look like Nintendo games, take Splatoon as an example. Brand new ip, no ones seen it before, but if you showed that to someone that didn't know about it and asked them who they thought was making it there is a decent chance they would guess Nintendo.

Would the average person look at games like Xenoblade Chronicles, Metroid Prime, Fire Emblem and assume it was made by Nintendo?



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
Zekkyou on 03 December 2014

You have to remember that humans generalize by default. It's the foundation of our entire social structure after all. Terms like "Nintendo games", "cinematic games", "indie games" or "mature games" are usually said in reference to specific common traits or themes.

For example, the majority of Nintendo's major IPs are cartoony/family friendly games with little focus on story, and many also share the same characters. There are exception, and the games themselves may span several genres, but that core theme remains consistent enough for people to make the generalization.

The generalizations themselves are somewhat small minded, but they're often useful for simplify conversations. Their use is also backed by how many commonly people generalize their own tastes (in part because we enforce our own biases), such as "I dislike [Sony/Nintendo/MS] games".



the_dengle on 03 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:

Going with the Disney example... I'd expect what most people mean when they say that is what they imagine as the typical Disney movie, ie. the Disney animated ones. That's the same for talking about Nintendo games, people are referring to the typical Nintendo game. Sure, just like Disney not all of their games can be categorised as that, but you'd instantly not what someone meant if they were talking about a typical Nintendo game, right?

I don't know what someone means by a "typical" Nintendo game, which is why I made this thread. Or rather, I know what people mean, and they are wrong to consider that a "typical" Nintendo game. Nintendo makes/publishes an enormous variety of experiences, and trying to distill all of them down to a "typical" experience is just not possible. It is beyond apples and oranges, it is finding an average of many different fruits while continuing to call them apples.

 

Teeqoz said:

The term "Nintendo games" is used because Nintendo heavily rely on the same franchises that have existed for the past decades. Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, Mario Kart, SSB (I'm only talking about homeconsoles here, if you include HH, then also Pokemon, FE etc.). Because, let's face it, a large part of Nintendo's consoles library have been heavily relying on the same franchises for a long time. Thus it sort of makes sense to say "Nintendo Games" because they mostly only develop titles in existing, heavily established Nintendo franchises.

But why would your enjoyment of a game be determined by what IP it belongs to? Someone who doesn't like platformers but who loves puzzle games would dislike Captain Toad because it's a Mario game? Someone who prefers straight action games to action/adventure would dislike Hyrule Warriors because it's a Zelda game?

Forgive me, but that's an extremely petty reason to dismiss a game you could potentially enjoy. And where does it leave these people with regards to new IP like Xenoblade, Splatoon, Pushmo, S.T.E.A.M., etc?



zorg1000 on 03 December 2014
Demesne said:
They mean kiddy colorful lacking complex story characters and emotions type of games while mostly centered on just gameplay. Exceptions to the rule like a 1 zelda per gen. But the general stereotype is kiddy colors lacking maturity. That's Nintedno to most, even Miyamoto said he cares about game play not stories.


Zelda, Xenoblade, Metroid, Fire Emblem are all games that aren't kiddy and don't lack complex stories/characters/emotions



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Talal on 03 December 2014
the_dengle said:
Talal said:

A lot of people do that. "I hate Pixar movies" "I love Disney movies" etc. Nintendo games do have a certain style. You can almost always tell if a game is made by Nintendo.

Pixar is not a producer. Pixar films are produced by Disney.

Saying you like or dislike Disney movies is just as nonsensical as saying you like or dislike Nintendo games. But there is a greater awareness of what movies are actually made by Disney's animation studios (and thereby considered a part of Disney animated canon) than there is of what games are made by Nintendo EAD.

I would accept "I (dis)like games made by Nintendo EAD," I suppose. It might still bother me that Nintendo EAD is actually about seven different studios, maybe even more. But those games probably wouldn't even comprise half of the Wii U's library, so I don't see why you would base your purchase of it on that. And a lot of people tend to group whichever games they see fit under the "Nintendo game" qualifier, leading to lists counting Tropical Freeze and Smash Bros as Nintendo games, but not Xenoblade or Bayonetta.


It's not meant to be something official or exact, but games like: all Mario's, Donkey Kongs, Pikmin's and Zelda's are very Nintendo-like people know they are made by Nintendo and they have a Nintendo feel. It's true that there are also a decent bit of games that aren't very Nintendo-like, for example Xenoblade and Bayonetta, but these aren't used to compell Wii U potential buyers because games like these are plentiful on other platforms unlike the Nintendo-like games that you can't find many of on other platforms. At least that's what I think.

 

I understand your point though, Nintendo games include many genres so it doesn't make sense to group them all together, but many Nintendo games do have distinct styles that make you think they are made by Nintendo. Kresnik pointed out that it's the same for Indie games. Different genres and developers, but most Indie games have a certain style which is why people group them together.



Around the Network
the_dengle on 03 December 2014
Zekkyou said:

The generalizations themselves are somewhat small minded, but they're often useful for simplify conversations. Their use is also backed by how many commonly people generalize their own tastes (in part because we enforce our own biases), such as "I dislike [Sony/Nintendo/MS] games".

I have never seen anyone claim to like or dislike Sony or MS games as a group. I can't imagine anyone would want to group Halo and Kinect Sports into the same category, which is why it's so baffling that people are willing to group Zelda and New Super Mario Bros together.



zorg1000 on 03 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
zorg1000 said:
Ka-pi96 said:

This is what I've been trying to say. Like Disney movies you can look at them and think 'that looks like a Disney movie' and more often than not you'd be right, it's the same with Nintendo games. They look like Nintendo games, take Splatoon as an example. Brand new ip, no ones seen it before, but if you showed that to someone that didn't know about it and asked them who they thought was making it there is a decent chance they would guess Nintendo.

Would the average person look at games like Xenoblade Chronicles, Metroid Prime, Fire Emblem and assume it was made by Nintendo?

Metroid Prime... maybe, depends just how 'average' this person is. The other 2, probably not. But that's the point I was making, not all of their games fit in with what would be considered a typical Nintendo game but the core ones that seem to be their main sellers definitely do fit in with that as well as some of their smaller games.

I doubt it, take Metroid Prime and compare it to Mario/Donkey Kong/Kirby and most non gamers would probably think it's not made by the same company.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 03 December 2014
the_dengle said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Nintendo Game means 2 different things.
1. Games exclusive to the platform
2. Games developed by Nintendo or its 1st and 2nd party.

When describing it as a supergenre, (toats made that word up), its mainly 2.
When talking about the library of consoles its 1.

But that means saying "The Wii U is great if you like Nintendo games" is literally saying "The Wii U is great if its library appeals to you," which is simpler and more direct to say, and is absolutely no different from the PS4/XB1 (both of which are also great if and only if their libraries appeal to you).

That's exactly it. People just call them Nintendo games, in that regard, to downplay it instead of admitting it has a good library.

And again, I ask what is so similar about the vast range of experiences Nintendo offers that they can be presented as a single genre, super- or otherwise.

Supergenre is literally a collection of different genred tiles which are only similar in that they are developed by Nintendo.





In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Teeqoz on 03 December 2014
the_dengle said:

I have never seen anyone claim to like or dislike Sony or MS games as a group. I can't imagine anyone would want to group Halo and Kinect Sports into the same category, which is why it's so baffling that people are willing to group Zelda and New Super Mario Bros together.


You haven't? I've also seen plenty of people say "I dislike third-party games". That's even more nonsensical than any of this.



Clyde32 on 03 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:

So double platformers... Zelda, is that really not an RPG? I always thought it was. And various unreleased games...

So, with what can actually be found on the Wii U...

Platformer
Arcade Racing
Arcade Fighting
Open-world Adventure (Although I'd still argue Zelda as an RPG...)
RTS
Sports/Party
Fitness

Sure, that may change when some of the other games actually release, but that's it for now.


Ugh, seriously? @Bolded. Zelda is Action-Adventure

 

Now let's set some thing straight. There are sub-genres, and main genres. RPG in itself is a broad term. You have WRPGs and JRPGs, but then beyond that you also have Turn Based, Real Time, Action, and Strategy.

The same can be said about platformers. You have the main ones like 3D and 2D, but that goes deeper. Puzzle-platformers would not be grouped with Captain Toad, because that genre largely consists of games like Braid. You also have Metroidvania games and other games like Mario. 

Much like Shooters. Would you honestly say that a TPS is the same as an FPS?