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

Forums - Nintendo - Should Nintendo Stop Innovating And Make A Traditional Console?

 

So, what do you think?

No, not at all. Innovatio... 122 33.42%
 
Not really, but I'd like... 92 25.21%
 
Don't know. Time will tell? 11 3.01%
 
Yeah, more less. Traditional is good. 47 12.88%
 
Absolutely. PS4 and Xbox ... 52 14.25%
 
What's "traditional" anyway? 19 5.21%
 
Show me the answers! 22 6.03%
 
Total:365
Hynad on 08 February 2017
VGPolyglot said:
I honestly don't really care any more. As long as the games are good, I don't mind whether they reinvent the wheel or if they follow the book to a tee.

That's pretty much the way I see things as well. I go where the good games are.



Around the Network
superchunk on 08 February 2017

No, I can already buy plenty of those.



Lawlight on 08 February 2017
KLXVER said:
Lawlight said:

Correction - the analog stick was done by Dempa first. Similarly d-pad was done by several companies before Nintendo though one was circular to allow for 16 directions.

They were still the ones to make it a standard.

Sony made the dual analog sticks and the current double shoulder buttons the standard. One analog stick isn't used anymore.



dharh on 08 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

If asymmetric gameplay was really the main feature, why are there only 5 games total in the entire library that use the feature? 

Switch is the Wii U idea basically in exact reverse (hardware in tablet, dummy dock, versus hardware in console, dummy controller).

You can RELAX about the market appeal, just because Switch is a (logical) extension of an idea doesn't mean it's doomed to the same sales. Being actually portable instead of semi-portable is a huge difference. 

You should address my post properly. Asymmetrical multiplayer was actually advertised for the games, unlike off-TV play. Just because Nintendo couldn't come up with much to justify their two original key selling points (asymmetrical multiplayer and two-screen-gameplay for singleplayer games) doesn't negate that that was the Wii U concept. All it means is that the Wii U concept sucked, hence why it's abandoned with the Switch and why the Switch's dock is designed to cover the screen, so that it's clear to everyone that there will be no usage of two screens this time around.

My issue with your posts is not that they make me believe that Switch could sell as bad as the Wii U, the issue is that your claims don't make much, if any, sense. Off-TV play was only a small part of the Wii U, it was more of a feature that resulted because of the things that Nintendo really wanted to do. Remember, the Wii U was supposed to support two Gamepads eventually, and that number would have been bigger if it had been feasible to process graphics for even more independent screens. The core of the Wii U concept was the evolution of the GameCube to Gameboy Advance connectivity.

Couldn't it be that Nintendo pulled the two-screen-gameplay out of their ass _after_ designing the Wii U?  It certainly looks like they completely half assed it and quickly abandoned it.  If Nintendo had really intended to support two gamepads from the start, as in they designed the Wii U from the ground up to support it, they would have been able to do it.  Instead they dumped the afterthought idea for what it was, rubbish.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.
COKTOE on 08 February 2017
Pemalite said:
RolStoppable said:

If you look at the images of all the controllers one after another, you'll easily notice significant differences in the Nintendo line while Sony's and Microsoft's history is pretty much the same thing every time.

Well. It is far more difficult to make radical changes to some of the best controllers of all time. They are the best for a reason.

The original NES controller was uncomfortable to use.
The Nintendo 64 controller looked like it needed 3 Hands to operate, the single analogue stick in retrospect wasn't a good idea.
The Wii's motion controllers weren't enjoyable for me.
The Wii U's gamepad was large, heavy, cumbersome and detracts from the TV.

For me the only controllers Nintendo has ever smashed out of the park was the SNES controller and the Gamecube controller.

I'll keep some reservation on the Switch untill I can hold and use one in person.

Oh snap! Sony has The Wheel. It's a great invention. There are variations on it, but the template is always there. Now, The Wheel is a premium Nintendo product. You gotta pay extra if you want industry standard. Again. l did like the N64 controller, in spite of it's limitations.  It pushed things forward for sure. Crazy that Sega shit the bed so hard 3 years later on the DC controller though. I'm shocked everybody didn't follow the 1 analog stick+VMU concept. Cough....



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Around the Network
KLXVER on 08 February 2017
Lawlight said:
KLXVER said:

They were still the ones to make it a standard.

Sony made the dual analog sticks and the current double shoulder buttons the standard. One analog stick isn't used anymore.

Yeah ok...



the_dengle on 08 February 2017

The Switch seems pretty traditional to me tbh. They disregarded a bunch of extra features we've come to expect from modern consoles and made a box that essentially does one thing and one thing only: play video games. A multimedia machine it ain't.

Oh but it has a screen and motion controls so something something gimmick



m_csquare on 08 February 2017
the_dengle said:
The Switch seems pretty traditional to me tbh. They disregarded a bunch of extra features we've come to expect from modern consoles and made a box that essentially does one thing and one thing only: play video games. A multimedia machine it ain't.

Oh but it has a screen and motion controls so something something gimmick

Yea, because built-in voice chat is more of a gimmick than motion control is :rollingeyes:



KLXVER on 08 February 2017
m_csquare said:
the_dengle said:
The Switch seems pretty traditional to me tbh. They disregarded a bunch of extra features we've come to expect from modern consoles and made a box that essentially does one thing and one thing only: play video games. A multimedia machine it ain't.

Oh but it has a screen and motion controls so something something gimmick

Yea, because built-in voice chat is more of a gimmick than motion control is :rollingeyes:

Motion controls arent going anywhere thanks to VR.



the_dengle on 08 February 2017
m_csquare said:

Yea, because built-in voice chat is more of a gimmick than motion control is :rollingeyes:

I was referring more to web browsing, video streaming, etc.

I would guess it's for the same reason though. Wii U and to a lesser extent 3DS had a bloated and slow OS. Switch is reserving much less RAM for its OS than PS4 & XBO do. That's what extra apps that can run in the background would draw from, right?

Anyway I'm pretty sure if a game developer wants to incorporate voice chat in their game they can do so. Party chat is for talking to friends and has no direct connection to the game you're playing... so yes, I would call party chat a non-essential function for a game console. "Gimmick", if you like, although I do not.