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

Forums - Nintendo - Nintendo really needs to be more ambitious with NX titles

NX or bust.



Around the Network

Agreed.

Too many of their Wii U games were basically Gamecube games with a shiny coat of paint. Hell, you could've done 3D World on the N64.

The only games in their entire first party Wii U lineup with any real ambition are Xenoblade Chronicles X and Breath of the Wild.



Vodacixi said:

That's true. But if Nintendo has managed to keep up both things in a not that distant past... I think they can do it consistently. I mean, they have never really failed combining both things. The closest thing was Metroid Other M, and that was not that much of a faliure. I enjoyed the game a lot.

If you do it correctly, you don't need to sacrifice anything.

 

If you agree that that's true then why do you even care about ambition?



Einsam_Delphin said:
Vodacixi said:

That's true. But if Nintendo has managed to keep up both things in a not that distant past... I think they can do it consistently. I mean, they have never really failed combining both things. The closest thing was Metroid Other M, and that was not that much of a faliure. I enjoyed the game a lot.

If you do it correctly, you don't need to sacrifice anything.

 

If you agree that that's true then why do you even care about ambition?

It's true that some developers fall under their own ambition. However, Nintendo, as they have demonstrated in the past, can go with both without any issue.

I care about ambition because it's the thing that separtes a great game from a masterpiece. And I want some masterpiece from time to time. Take the Galaxy example. Man, just got to Buoy Base Galaxy. The music-, the level design, the sense of adventure... as great as 3D World is, it can't touch that. Not even close. And that's the reason I'm replaying Galaxy 9 years after its release and I'll probably play it in 9 more years. I can't say the same for 3D World. It's just not worth it.



mZuzek said:
curl-6 said:

Agreed.

Too many of their Wii U games were basically Gamecube games with a shiny coat of paint. Hell, you could've done 3DWorld on the N64.

The only games in their entire first party Wii U lineup with any real ambition are Xenoblade Chronicles X and Breath of the Wild.

I disagree about ambition being related to the hardware specifically.

Take Splatoon for example - maybe with worse graphics it could have been done on the Wii or GameCube, yes (yes?). Still, it was a captivating new IP that got people interested and hyped because it brought new ideas and was an actual game that looked like it had some real effort and money put into making it.

I think even something like Tropical Freeze was still fine enough - not ambitious at all, but the fact that it was a full fledged GAME with a lot of content and great artistic direction made it a memorable game.

In the end, although we always want some ambitious games, even the unambitious are fine when they're well made. Captain Toad is one of the least ambitious titles Nintendo put out this gen (before 2015) and yet it stood out as a great entry in a year packed with amazing Wii U games. The real problem is when they take away any ambition at all from their games, just making unambitious, uncreative, uninspired filler crap. Which is most of what they've been putting out these last 18 months.

The last paragraph pretty much says it all, although I go even further than 18 months. But that's just an opinion xD



Around the Network
Vodacixi said:

It's true that some developers fall under their own ambition. However, Nintendo, as they have demonstrated in the past, can go with both without any issue.

I care about ambition because it's the thing that separtes a great game from a masterpiece. And I want some masterpiece from time to time. Take the Galaxy example. Man, just got to Buoy Base Galaxy. The music-, the level design, the sense of adventure... as great as 3D World is, it can't touch that. Not even close. And that's the reason I'm replaying Galaxy 9 years after its release and I'll probably play it in 9 more years. I can't say the same for 3D World. It's just not worth it.

 

Sure, but that doesn't mean they should focus on making ambitious games for the sake of it. Ambition is simply not a necessity, not in order for a game to be good and not for a game to even sell well. If someone really can't enjoy non-ambitious games no matter how good they are then as Reggie would say, "Not our problem!" It's on them for having unrealistic expectations.

So ambition just somehow makes a game better, but only if the game is already great to begin with. That there is why they shouldn't focus on ambition, because it doesn't even matter unless the game is actually great. They should just make great games and if they happen to be ambitious then cool. Also, I can't take your Galaxy example because I despise that game, plus what you're saying about it I could just as easily say about 3D World.



BasilZero said:
AZWification said:

I agree with this. They better not cut corners with the next 3D Mario game! >:(

 

Super Mario 3D...Galaxy :O

The only thing I keep thinking off when I read that is the damn Champion's Road.. :/



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

mZuzek said:
curl-6 said:

Agreed.

Too many of their Wii U games were basically Gamecube games with a shiny coat of paint. Hell, you could've done 3D World on the N64.

The only games in their entire first party Wii U lineup with any real ambition are Xenoblade Chronicles X and Breath of the Wild.

I disagree about ambition being related to the hardware specifically.

Take Splatoon for example - maybe with worse graphics it could have been done on the Wii or GameCube, yes (yes?). Still, it was a captivating new IP that got people interested and hyped because it brought new ideas and was an actual game that looked like it had some real effort and money put into making it.

I think even something like Tropical Freeze was still fine enough - not ambitious at all, but the fact that it was a full fledged GAME with a lot of content and great artistic direction made it a memorable game.

In the end, although we always want some ambitious games, even the unambitious are fine when they're well made. Captain Toad is one of the least ambitious titles Nintendo put out this gen (before 2015) and yet it stood out as a great entry in a year packed with amazing Wii U games. The real problem is when they take away any ambition at all from their games, just making unambitious, uncreative, uninspired filler crap. Which is most of what they've been putting out these last 18 months.

There is more to ambition than just hardware, I agree, and I have very much enjoyed some unambitious Wii U games, like Captain Toad. Not every game needs to be ambitious.

But when it comes to a console that came out in 2012, I'd prefer that most of its games show me new and cool things that push the envelope and couldn't have been done on its predecessors. I don't buy an 8th gen console to play the same kind of games I played in the 6th gen, just with prettier graphics.

Nintendo is at their best when their games are ambitious; Ocarina of Time, the Metroid Prime trilogy, Super Mario Galaxy, games like these not only felt like they were pushing the limits of what their platforms could do, but also pushing gaming itself forward with bold ideas. Every aspect of them felt like their creators went all out and held nothing back, nothing was skimped on.



I actually think ALBW is really special because unlike NSMB and 3D Land/World series, there has been a lack of major 2D isometric Zelda game since the DS games. And the reception from those games were split among Zelda fans. Plus the music, personality, and charm in ALBW easily out rivals the NSMB series. I would not hesitate to buy the next 2D Zelda game if it has as much effort and love as ALBW.

But I really want a 3D Adventure game like Super Mario 64 and Galaxy 1/2 for the for NX as well. If they launch with NSMB NX/3D World 2, that would be okay, too. But only if they are releasing a big 3D Adventure Mario soon after.



curl-6 said:

There is more to ambition than just hardware, I agree, and I have very much enjoyed some unambitious Wii U games, like Captain Toad. Not every game needs to be ambitious.

But when it comes to a console that came out in 2012, I'd prefer that most of its games show me new and cool things that push the envelope and couldn't have been done on its predecessors. I don't buy an 8th gen console to play the same kind of games I played in the 6th gen, just with prettier graphics.

Nintendo is at their best when their games are ambitious; Ocarina of Time, the Metroid Prime trilogy, Super Mario Galaxy, games like these not only felt like they were pushing the limits of what their platforms could do, but also pushing gaming itself forward with bold ideas. Every aspect of them felt like their creators went all out and held nothing back, nothing was skimped on.

I 100% agree with the bolded. I often struggle why I immediately put 3D World under Super Mario 64 and Galaxy 1/2 in my top 3D Mario game list. But the bolded is exactly why. While 3D World has Mario's perfect 2D controls mixed in excellent 3D level design, it fails to push the 3D Mario series and the industry forward at its time like Super Mario 64 and Galaxy 1/2 did.


3D World simply perfects previous Mario game mechanic but doesn't dare to be something different and new. 64 was one of the world's first 3D action/adventure game and created the 3D Adventure-Platformer genre seen in 5th - 7th  generation. Its level design based on 3D platforming and 3D camera control was one of, if not, the first in the industry as well. Even the video game music of Mario was new in this game as it went from short catchy themes in SMB1 and SMW to music like Peach's Castle, Jolly Roger Bay, Bowser in the Dark World,  and more.

When Galaxy came out, the changes were immediately clear. 3D platforming was expanded by mixing in low gravity and orbital physics to allow Mario to move around  planets with a radius only five times larger than him or less! You can easily move Mario from one side of a tiny planet to the opposite with complete ease. You can also long jump and orbit around the entire planet and land on an adjacent planet as well. The music style also changed again with Nintendo EAD using a live orchestra producing amazing music like Good Egg galaxy, Gusty Garden Galaxy, Space Junk Galaxy, Buoy Buoy base galaxy, and more.

What did 3D World bring into 2013? It introduced a power up that lets you climb up walls and the addition of 4 local multiplayer thanks to its isometric game camera and sand box level design. Other than that, everything else was the seen before in Super Mario 64 or Galaxy 1/2. The game plays excellently, butoverall the gameplay and level design weren't ground breaking. The levels basically breakdown as a 2D Mario course where Mario can move in the Z axis so additional platforms are added to accomodate it. That could have been a major breakthrough in mid 90's but Super Mario 64 already introduced 3D platforming back then! To its credit, the musical style of the game changed once again with the game's soundtrack performed by a live Jazz band. But even that style isn't completely new since SMB1 - SMW's OST already has heavy elements of Jazz. The music was just created in MIDI with a simpler compositon. 

When the Nintendo's next gen conose, the NX, releases and the next big 3D Mario game follows, I hope to see the return of a series that dares to push itself and the industry forward again.  I want EAD Tokyo to remind me what this series can do for the future in video game design again. I want them to remind the industry their reputation in game design. I don't need to see them prove they can perfect their fundamentals for a next gen console. I don't even want it. On second thought, I don't even want another Mario like Super Mario 3D World for NX and refuse to accept it. I want - I need something ground breaking like 64 and Galaxy again.

And I think EAD Tokyo needs it too.