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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why do we still look forward to Nintendo's E3 directs?

zorg1000 said:
DélioPT said:

Also, Nintendo's strategy of scattering announcements throught the year is good when you have a lot to show. When you don't [have], that makes each announcement less impactful.

Kind of a silly notion. Here are the things they announced or shown first footage of at the Directs so far this year.

The World Ends With You

Hyrule Warriors DX

Mario Tennis Aces

Tropical Freeze

Captain Toad

Dark Souls

Okami HD

Undertale

No More Heroes

Little Nightmares

Crash Bandicoot

South Park

Daemon x Machina

Fortnite

Paladins

Dragon Ball Fighter Z

Overcooked 2

Mario Party

Pokemon Lets Go

Fire Emblem

Smash Bros

 

They have had a bunch to show this year and have more in upcoming Directs.

MS talked about 50 games at their press conference, whereas Nintendo talked about 21 games, YTD.
Even if we count the games that are going to be announced - which clearly won't be 29 - the difference is more than visible. Also, it's a platform in it's second year versus a platform in it's fifth year.

This is what i mean that Nintendo doesn't have enough to show for.
Even if Nintendo packed everything into a single presentation, they would pale in comparison; 



Around the Network
Nautilus said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
By anything I mean the fact that 1st party holds more weight than 3rd party, thus directs are rated mostly by the 1st party showings. How you extrapolated that into me not caring about 3rd partys again I'll never know, but I'm not even gonna word my response any differently, just gonna straight up copy-paste.

"No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct."

Also I never disagreed with the direct being better without leaks, only that it would make a difference to how it's perceived, but again this a moot point.

I didnt extrapolate anything, Im just pointing out that you are dismissing the third party games shown there as mostly inconsequential, shown by your lack of interest in them with frases as "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better" or the non acknoledgement of its success found with the consoles through its sales numbers and such.So it seems you are misunderstanding me once again, so let me rephrase:

Nintendo games usually do the heavily lifting of the consoles sales, and its not much different with the Switch.However, in a matter that is usually uncharacteristic to Nintendo hardware, 3rd party games are generally selling extremelly well on the Switch, and all of them are not shovelware.So it stands to reason that a considerable number of Switch owners and thus, people watching the Nintendo presentation, wouldd have been more thrilled with the presentation itself if such games as DB Fighters Z, Fortnite and Overcooked 2 werent leaked ahead of the presentation.For an example of such an "adoption" of one of these games is Fortnite, which was downloaded over 2 million times in a single day.Yes, its a free to play game, but people wont download anything unless they are interested.

In conclusion, what I mean to say is that all your talk about third parties being mostly irrelevant compared to Nintendo games being shown and that the show would be 0.2% better if those same games hadnt been leaked is complete BS, especially because you are looking at this in a personal way, and Im using data to back up my claims.

And I'm using data to back up my claim of 1st party holding more weight, thus directs are rated mainly by their 1st party showing. That some 3rd partys have seen moderate success doesn't change this. That quote of mine, "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better," is not dismissing the games themselves rather than the effect surprise factor has. 2 million people myself included still downloaded Fortnite day 1 despite everyone knowing it was coming. Mario + Rabbids was still a hit despite being spoiled months in advance.

So if surprise factor means little, and most people mainly care about 1st party which is why the direct is getting heat in the first place, then I think it's less bs and more common sense to say thay the leaks had no effect on how the direct is being percieved.

DélioPT said:
zorg1000 said:

Kind of a silly notion. Here are the things they announced or shown first footage of at the Directs so far this year.

The World Ends With You

Hyrule Warriors DX

Mario Tennis Aces

Tropical Freeze

Captain Toad

Dark Souls

Okami HD

Undertale

No More Heroes

Little Nightmares

Crash Bandicoot

South Park

Daemon x Machina

Fortnite

Paladins

Dragon Ball Fighter Z

Overcooked 2

Mario Party

Pokemon Lets Go

Fire Emblem

Smash Bros

 

They have had a bunch to show this year and have more in upcoming Directs.

MS talked about 50 games at their press conference, whereas Nintendo talked about 21 games, YTD.
Even if we count the games that are going to be announced - which clearly won't be 29 - the difference is more than visible. Also, it's a platform in it's second year versus a platform in it's fifth year.

This is what i mean that Nintendo doesn't have enough to show for.
Even if Nintendo packed everything into a single presentation, they would pale in comparison; 

and the PS conference only showed 8 games...so does that means it a dying console?



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Miyamotoo said:

 

 

DélioPT said: 
Nintendo seems to have a new angle for E3.
When Zelda Botw was all the rage a couple years ago, they thought they could focus on a major game for E3 and people would love it.
Zelda, Mario Odyssey and now Smash.


Also, Nintendo's strategy of scattering announcements throught the year is good when you have a lot to show. When you don't [have], that makes each announcement less impactful.

Reason why they decided hole E3 2016. only to Zelda BotW is because they didn't want to talk about Switch games yet that they were saving for January presentation, so E3 2016. was exaption and really can't be compared with any other E3.

 

But it's very obvious that Nintendo has staffs to show through the year:

-January: Kirby, Mario Aces, Dark Souls, DKTF, The World Ends with You: Final Remix, Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition, Ys VIII: Lacrimosa of Dana, Celeste, Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle DLC, SNK HEROINES Tag Team Frenzy, Labo...

-March: Smash Bros, Splatoon 2 Expansion, Okami HD, Sushi Striker, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, Travis Strikes Again: No More Heroes, Undertale, Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, Little Nightmares, South Park...

-May: Pokemon Let's Go Pikachu, Pokemon Let's Go  Eevee, Pokemon Quest.

-June: Fortnite, Paladins, Daemon X Machina, Xenoblade Chronicles 2 DLC, Fire Emblem: Three Houses, Overcooked 2, Killer Queen Black, Dragon Ball FighterZ, Starlink, Fifa 19..

Offcourse they could show more staffs at E3 if they wanted, but they didnt want that, and we can expect at least 2-3 more Directs in rest of year where we will have more 2018. announcements.

But that doesn't take away from what i said: Nintendo clearly thought it could use a major game at E3 and get away with it.

It worked. So why not do again? Of, course they haven't been as focused (on a single game) as before, for the obvious reason. 
Thing is, this time, people obviously expected more (it's a new console in it's second year already).

Of course Nintendo could show more, as could MS, Sony and other companies. 
I don't know how many Indies MS is getting, but i bet it's not 2-3. They could have also showed more, too.

The difference here is that it's clear Nintendo does not have enough to do what the other do - see MS, for exemple.
So, their strategy can't be reveal all that at E3 and then scatter those many throughout the year during NDs. And because of that, they create less impact.

Are you expecting regular NDs or specific NDs?
If it's specfic, like last year, then i agree. One for Smash, one for Pokémon and another specific ND; If it's your regular ND, i don't see that happening. If you look at last year - as an exemple - they only had 1 regular ND after E3. The rest was directed towards specific games coming out in 2017.



DélioPT said:
Miyamotoo said:

Reason why they decided hole E3 2016. only to Zelda BotW is because they didn't want to talk about Switch games yet that they were saving for January presentation, so E3 2016. was exaption and really can't be compared with any other E3.

But it's very obvious that Nintendo has staffs to show through the year:

-January: Kirby, Mario Aces, Dark Souls, DKTF, The World Ends with You: Final Remix, Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition, Ys VIII: Lacrimosa of Dana, Celeste, Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle DLC, SNK HEROINES Tag Team Frenzy, Labo...

-March: Smash Bros, Splatoon 2 Expansion, Okami HD, Sushi Striker, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, Travis Strikes Again: No More Heroes, Undertale, Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, Little Nightmares, South Park...

-May: Pokemon Let's Go Pikachu, Pokemon Let's Go  Eevee, Pokemon Quest.

-June: Fortnite, Paladins, Daemon X Machina, Xenoblade Chronicles 2 DLC, Fire Emblem: Three Houses, Overcooked 2, Killer Queen Black, Dragon Ball FighterZ, Starlink, Fifa 19..

Offcourse they could show more staffs at E3 if they wanted, but they didnt want that, and we can expect at least 2-3 more Directs in rest of year where we will have more 2018. announcements.

But that doesn't take away from what i said: Nintendo clearly thought it could use a major game at E3 and get away with it.

It worked. So why not do again? Of, course they haven't been as focused (on a single game) as before, for the obvious reason. 
Thing is, this time, people obviously expected more (it's a new console in it's second year already).

Of course Nintendo could show more, as could MS, Sony and other companies. 
I don't know how many Indies MS is getting, but i bet it's not 2-3. They could have also showed more, too.

The difference here is that it's clear Nintendo does not have enough to do what the other do - see MS, for exemple.
So, their strategy can't be reveal all that at E3 and then scatter those many throughout the year during NDs. And because of that, they create less impact.

 

Are you expecting regular NDs or specific NDs?
If it's specfic, like last year, then i agree. One for Smash, one for Pokémon and another specific ND; If it's your regular ND, i don't see that happening. If you look at last year - as an exemple - they only had 1 regular ND after E3. The rest was directed towards specific games coming out in 2017.

It don't really matters at end, their strategy works, Switch keeped momentum and it will keep selling great, Switch games are also selling great, and Switch will definitely sell much better than XB1 in any case.

I definitely expecting at least one big regular direct probably in September like was last year, with around 2 specific ones also, but at E3 they said they have more announcements in coming weeks and months maybe we could have two regular Directs.



Around the Network
DélioPT said:
zorg1000 said:

Kind of a silly notion. Here are the things they announced or shown first footage of at the Directs so far this year.

The World Ends With You

Hyrule Warriors DX

Mario Tennis Aces

Tropical Freeze

Captain Toad

Dark Souls

Okami HD

Undertale

No More Heroes

Little Nightmares

Crash Bandicoot

South Park

Daemon x Machina

Fortnite

Paladins

Dragon Ball Fighter Z

Overcooked 2

Mario Party

Pokemon Lets Go

Fire Emblem

Smash Bros

 

They have had a bunch to show this year and have more in upcoming Directs.

MS talked about 50 games at their press conference, whereas Nintendo talked about 21 games, YTD.
Even if we count the games that are going to be announced - which clearly won't be 29 - the difference is more than visible. Also, it's a platform in it's second year versus a platform in it's fifth year.

This is what i mean that Nintendo doesn't have enough to show for.
Even if Nintendo packed everything into a single presentation, they would pale in comparison; 

Yes and how many games were shown when adding in the two other directs this year and how many will be shown in the inevitable directs later this year?

E3 is like the only big reveal event for MS each year while Nintendo splits their reveals into a half dozen or so smaller events.



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

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Nautilus said:

I didnt extrapolate anything, Im just pointing out that you are dismissing the third party games shown there as mostly inconsequential, shown by your lack of interest in them with frases as "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better" or the non acknoledgement of its success found with the consoles through its sales numbers and such.So it seems you are misunderstanding me once again, so let me rephrase:

Nintendo games usually do the heavily lifting of the consoles sales, and its not much different with the Switch.However, in a matter that is usually uncharacteristic to Nintendo hardware, 3rd party games are generally selling extremelly well on the Switch, and all of them are not shovelware.So it stands to reason that a considerable number of Switch owners and thus, people watching the Nintendo presentation, wouldd have been more thrilled with the presentation itself if such games as DB Fighters Z, Fortnite and Overcooked 2 werent leaked ahead of the presentation.For an example of such an "adoption" of one of these games is Fortnite, which was downloaded over 2 million times in a single day.Yes, its a free to play game, but people wont download anything unless they are interested.

In conclusion, what I mean to say is that all your talk about third parties being mostly irrelevant compared to Nintendo games being shown and that the show would be 0.2% better if those same games hadnt been leaked is complete BS, especially because you are looking at this in a personal way, and Im using data to back up my claims.

And I'm using data to back up my claim of 1st party holding more weight, thus directs are rated mainly by their 1st party showing. That some 3rd partys have seen moderate success doesn't change this. That quote of mine, "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better," is not dismissing the games themselves rather than the effect surprise factor has. 2 million people myself included still downloaded Fortnite day 1 despite everyone knowing it was coming. Mario + Rabbids was still a hit despite being spoiled months in advance.

So if surprise factor means little, and most people mainly care about 1st party which is why the direct is getting heat in the first place, then I think it's less bs and more common sense to say thay the leaks had no effect on how the direct is being percieved.

And therein lies your mistake.You are so obssesed with selling the idea that since the first party games shown there werent as exciting as people thought they would be, the presentation failed to live up to expectations, that you cant actually read what im defending.Im not saying that if the games in general werent leaked beforehand the presentation would be amazing, Im saying that it would have been better.As a show, as something that people will rate their excitement over, surprise is essential.After all, for you to excite people, to surprise them, you have to excite them with something they never seen, they never experienced.And thus, having its games not spoiled before is beneficial for the presentation.Plus you say you are talking facts and all, but you go and throw a 0.2% there, as if you can actually quantify something like that, with that precision.Please.

And all the sales data I presented serve to prove that the Switch userbase is more diverse than your usual Nintendo console.They are not only buying Nintendo games and games associated with its platforms(which is still where the big chunck of software sales comes from), but also buying stuff that are not only not common on the platform but also that are from different genres, like DOOm, Skyrim, Fifa and all the indies.If the Switch userbase is more diverse, the chance of them liking stuff other than Nintendo is higher.And thus, by consequence, the number of people that would have been happy with a surprise announcement of something like Overcooked 2 would be significant, which in turn would increase the percentage of people satisfied with the presentation.Thats all.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

DélioPT said:
Miyamotoo said:

 

 

Reason why they decided hole E3 2016. only to Zelda BotW is because they didn't want to talk about Switch games yet that they were saving for January presentation, so E3 2016. was exaption and really can't be compared with any other E3.

 

But it's very obvious that Nintendo has staffs to show through the year:

-January: Kirby, Mario Aces, Dark Souls, DKTF, The World Ends with You: Final Remix, Hyrule Warriors: Definitive Edition, Ys VIII: Lacrimosa of Dana, Celeste, Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle DLC, SNK HEROINES Tag Team Frenzy, Labo...

-March: Smash Bros, Splatoon 2 Expansion, Okami HD, Sushi Striker, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, Travis Strikes Again: No More Heroes, Undertale, Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, Little Nightmares, South Park...

-May: Pokemon Let's Go Pikachu, Pokemon Let's Go  Eevee, Pokemon Quest.

-June: Fortnite, Paladins, Daemon X Machina, Xenoblade Chronicles 2 DLC, Fire Emblem: Three Houses, Overcooked 2, Killer Queen Black, Dragon Ball FighterZ, Starlink, Fifa 19..

Offcourse they could show more staffs at E3 if they wanted, but they didnt want that, and we can expect at least 2-3 more Directs in rest of year where we will have more 2018. announcements.

But that doesn't take away from what i said: Nintendo clearly thought it could use a major game at E3 and get away with it.

It worked. So why not do again? Of, course they haven't been as focused (on a single game) as before, for the obvious reason. 
Thing is, this time, people obviously expected more (it's a new console in it's second year already).

Of course Nintendo could show more, as could MS, Sony and other companies. 
I don't know how many Indies MS is getting, but i bet it's not 2-3. They could have also showed more, too.

The difference here is that it's clear Nintendo does not have enough to do what the other do - see MS, for exemple.
So, their strategy can't be reveal all that at E3 and then scatter those many throughout the year during NDs. And because of that, they create less impact.

Are you expecting regular NDs or specific NDs?
If it's specfic, like last year, then i agree. One for Smash, one for Pokémon and another specific ND; If it's your regular ND, i don't see that happening. If you look at last year - as an exemple - they only had 1 regular ND after E3. The rest was directed towards specific games coming out in 2017.

I can see a Smash ND before launch and a regular ND. For Pokemon, I don't think having another direct is how the Pokemon Company promotes their games, especially that close to their releases. Remember Pokemon S/M and US/UM? They only had one direct respectively for those pair of games and those were just before E3. Other than that, they didn't host another direct. They either show more content through smaller trailers or in a few big trailers before release from this point on (from June onwards until release).



Because we didnt give up the hope that nintendo moved from 373 BC to 1412.



Nautilus said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
And I'm using data to back up my claim of 1st party holding more weight, thus directs are rated mainly by their 1st party showing. That some 3rd partys have seen moderate success doesn't change this. That quote of mine, "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better," is not dismissing the games themselves rather than the effect surprise factor has. 2 million people myself included still downloaded Fortnite day 1 despite everyone knowing it was coming. Mario + Rabbids was still a hit despite being spoiled months in advance.

So if surprise factor means little, and most people mainly care about 1st party which is why the direct is getting heat in the first place, then I think it's less bs and more common sense to say thay the leaks had no effect on how the direct is being percieved.

And therein lies your mistake.You are so obssesed with selling the idea that since the first party games shown there werent as exciting as people thought they would be, the presentation failed to live up to expectations, that you cant actually read what im defending.Im not saying that if the games in general werent leaked beforehand the presentation would be amazing, Im saying that it would have been better.As a show, as something that people will rate their excitement over, surprise is essential.After all, for you to excite people, to surprise them, you have to excite them with something they never seen, they never experienced.And thus, having its games not spoiled before is beneficial for the presentation.Plus you say you are talking facts and all, but you go and throw a 0.2% there, as if you can actually quantify something like that, with that precision.Please.

And all the sales data I presented serve to prove that the Switch userbase is more diverse than your usual Nintendo console.They are not only buying Nintendo games and games associated with its platforms(which is still where the big chunck of software sales comes from), but also buying stuff that are not only not common on the platform but also that are from different genres, like DOOm, Skyrim, Fifa and all the indies.If the Switch userbase is more diverse, the chance of them liking stuff other than Nintendo is higher.And thus, by consequence, the number of people that would have been happy with a surprise announcement of something like Overcooked 2 would be significant, which in turn would increase the percentage of people satisfied with the presentation.Thats all.

You're the one not listening, as I just showed, surprise is in fact not essential, the content itself being good is what matters. Another example, Animal Crossing Amiibo Festival. That sure was quite the surprise wasn't it? I mean come on, as if those who are interested in Overcooked 2 suddenly don't care anymore because it was spoiled rather than being happy to see gameplay and a release date.