Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Staring into the abyss of a world where Nintendo has no games scheduled for release. Edit: The Time of Darkness Has Arrived

Sometimes I have the feeling that some people have the impression that when Nintendo in-house development teams don't come out with something new for some time that it means that they actually aren't doing anything. So even if we count 2020 as bad Nintendo year, do you actually think that these in-house teams were just too lazy that year, that they just took a long break and think: "You know what, the Nintendo Switch sells gangbusters on its own with evergreen titles - why bother to work on something new!" All these teams are hard at work but unfortunately, for us outsiders their work is sometimes invisible, sometimes for as long a 3 - 5 years after their last game. Projects get cancelled, re-worked, evolved, etc... that's just normal in creative jobs. What exactly has Retro Studios done in the last 6 years? Nothing, right? The whole comparisons between Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and between years is useless! Creative jobs are measured by their ultimate success (both commercially and by acclaim) and not by quantity units (of different games in our context).

Honestly, which AAA developer is better: 1. The one which releases 3 games in 5 years, each selling around 3 mil. or 2. the one that releases only one game in 5 years but sells 25 mil., receives several game of the year rewards and nominations and is generally accepted as an instant modern classic?

The other question we have to ask ourselves? Do we want high quality games that come at a cost (only few releases) or a fair quantity amount of games that come at a cost (only mediocre to good games)?



Around the Network

Fight-the-Streets said:
The other question we have to ask ourselves? Do we want high quality games that come at a cost (only few releases) or a fair quantity amount of games that come at a cost (only mediocre to good games)?

The problem with this choice is we need to understand Nintendo is not only a game developer, but they are a platform supplier and they are by far the one with most responsibility of having a constant supply of their own games 

I'm more empathetic with Sony releasing less games because their console got a shit ton of high quality AAA third party exclusives every year

Opposed to 3DS and DS, Switch didn't managed to get any 3rd party blockbuster release yet. I think Monster Hunter Switch will be the first if it's really a thing

All their 3rd party blockbusters (Overwatch, The Witcher, Dragon Quest) are old ports and many people already played them on PS4, PC or whatever 

Personally 

I'm really satisfied with current 3rd party support of Switch, but that's mostly because I really do enjoy indies and don't mind to play 7th gen ports because I missed most of them. Plus I bought my Switch late 2019, so Switch backlog is already wonderful 

However for people who kept in touch with releases most of time and are waiting only for new high profile stuff it has been a very painful year, the weakest for Switch so far and those people deserves their space to complain without having some Nintendo fans harassing them all the time 



Fight-the-Streets said:
Sometimes I have the feeling that some people have the impression that when Nintendo in-house development teams don't come out with something new for some time that it means that they actually aren't doing anything. So even if we count 2020 as bad Nintendo year, do you actually think that these in-house teams were just too lazy that year, that they just took a long break and think: "You know what, the Nintendo Switch sells gangbusters on its own with evergreen titles - why bother to work on something new!" All these teams are hard at work but unfortunately, for us outsiders their work is sometimes invisible, sometimes for as long a 3 - 5 years after their last game. Projects get cancelled, re-worked, evolved, etc... that's just normal in creative jobs. What exactly has Retro Studios done in the last 6 years? Nothing, right? The whole comparisons between Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and between years is useless! Creative jobs are measured by their ultimate success (both commercially and by acclaim) and not by quantity units (of different games in our context).

I think there's a difference between being mad and just acknowledging the problem.  I'm not beating my fist against the table because Nintendo's had a bad year.  It happens, and there is at least a valid excuse this time around.  But it perplexes me why people are insisting that it's not a bad year, or worse, disparaging people for acknowledging it.

Honestly, which AAA developer is better: 1. The one which releases 3 games in 5 years, each selling around 3 mil. or 2. the one that releases only one game in 5 years but sells 25 mil., receives several game of the year rewards and nominations and is generally accepted as an instant modern classic?The other question we have to ask ourselves? Do we want high quality games that come at a cost (only few releases) or a fair quantity amount of games that come at a cost (only mediocre to good games)?

The two aren't mutually exclusive goals.  And I don't think smaller projects necessarily mean less quality.  I think that a console is at its best when it has a wide variety of games to go along with the AAA releases.  Just look at last year.  Outside of Sword and Shield, there really was nothing but a bunch of mid-tier games.  It was the variety and sustained quality that added up to a great overall year.

Personally, I wish Nintendo had a few more teams to work on some of their fallow IP.  Though I am glad they're farming things out a bit more these days.

So even if we count 2020 as bad Nintendo year, do you actually think that these in-house teams were just too lazy that year, that they just took a long break and think: "You know what, the Nintendo Switch sells gangbusters on its own with evergreen titles - why bother to work on something new!"

Weirdly, that was something of the theory that was batted around earlier by Nintendo's defenders.  Not that they were lazy, but that they just didn't bother to release anything because the Switch was already selling and wanted to hold it back for next year or something.



RolStoppable said:

@Cerebralbore101 

The first major goalpost moving that occured is that the thread changed from "Nintendo has no physical games scheduled for release" to "Now that they have a few games scheduled for release, let's find something else to complain about and pretend that this thread continues to have legitimitacy."

You want to be seen as rational, yet you finish your post with further goalpost moving by including a Square-Enix published game on a Nintendo list. It's bad enough that some people want to count mere publishing duties as a Nintendo game (that would be Octopath Traveler and Bravely Default 2), but you take the leap to include The World Ends With You which Nintendo has nothing to do with. Furthermore, you added the digital-only Pokémon Quest.

What's even more puzzling is your comment about four new exciting Sony games for the PS4 in 2020. What are they? I can assume that you include Dreams which flopped, so why should that be counted as an exciting game; talk about hyperbole. Then there's The Last of Us 2 which was met with a mixed reception by gamers, hence why this June release has dropped out of the PSN's top 20 list in both North America and Europe by August already; the game sold well as long as the hype lasted and that was it. Ghost of Tsushima is a game that meets the criteria of new and exciting, but what's the fourth game? The yearly MLB game? The reason why Sony can have those games in the last year of the PS4 is because they took longer than expected to finish.

But aside from goalpost moving, another popular tactic is the double standard where one company (Nintendo) will be blamed for everything while another one (Sony) will be played up as doing great when both Dreams and The Last of Us 2 weren't meant to be 2020 games to begin with and only ended up there due to mismanagement. There's no reason to be impressed by Sony's 2020 output.

Rol you are treating the thread as if it was a prediction thread, with the prediction that Nintendo would have zero new releases for the rest of 2020. But it wasn't that as evidenced by this part of OP's post...

I realize that there's a good chance this will be remedied by the end of the month. If nothing else, their fiscal year is ending and they'll want to brag about their slate and Xenoblade seems like it's already been rated in some territories so it's probably coming soonish. But I wanted to mark this strange moment in time.

So OP acknowledges that Nintendo will likely have a release in Xenoblade HD, but the thread was predicting that Nintendo would have no releases in 2020? That just doesn't make any sense. The OP makes a lot more  sense when taken as OP showing general dismay at Nintendo's overall 2020 output, and communication with fans.

TWEWY Final Remix was published by Nintendo outside of Japan, which means Nintendo did in fact have something to do with it. Whether a game is digital or physical doesn't matter. All that matters is that the game was released in 2018. But I do understand your complaints. And that's my point. We can be rational, only including new non-toy, non-free, developed games by Nintendo, or at the very least containing a Nintendo IP, or being a 2nd party offering. Or we can throw reason to the wind, and start including basically anything and everything. The funny thing is that using either method shows 2018 to be far superior to 2020. My argument is a dilemma style argument.

1. Either we can can include only non-toy, non-free, games developed by Nintendo, or at the very least containing a Nintendo IP, or being a 2nd party offering.

2. Or we can include virtually every game under the sun.

3. If we use method 1. 2018 has a better lineup.

4.If we use method 2 2018 still has a better lineup.

5. Therefore 2018 has a better lineup.

I already made a post naming the four games that Sony has for 2020, and no, I didn't say they were all for PS4. Sales aren't the be all and end all of whether a game is exciting or not. Earthbound, Musha, and a ton of other 16 bit games never sold well, but are now highly sought after, and emulated. Animal Crossing took longer than expected to finish as well. You can't use delays at one company to dismiss games, but ignore the delays of another company.

xPhenom08x said:

Im starting to see that random forum posters are now trying to dismiss the affect a global pandemic could have had on Nintendo. One poster claims the delay should only been 2 months lol, somehow he is an expert. Apparently 4 games from Sony during the pandemic is proof Nintendo should have more and this is all according to some random person on the internet. Armchair analyst at its finest! This thread is really starting to get embarrassing, its nothing more than this does or doesn't count because I said so. I know better than Nintendo because I said so, Nintendo is lazy and clearly struggling because I said so. My advice to you Cerebore is give that advice to Sony because clearly you are a big fan. Ninty will clearly continue to do what they believe is best because they said so!

I'd be grateful if you presented something other than a strawman argument. Thanks.

P.S. I own more games for Nintendo consoles, than I do for Sony consoles. That should tell you where my fandom lies.

Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - 5 days ago

The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

 

Cerebralbore101 said:
RolStoppable said:

@Cerebralbore101 

The first major goalpost moving that occured is that the thread changed from "Nintendo has no physical games scheduled for release" to "Now that they have a few games scheduled for release, let's find something else to complain about and pretend that this thread continues to have legitimitacy."

You want to be seen as rational, yet you finish your post with further goalpost moving by including a Square-Enix published game on a Nintendo list. It's bad enough that some people want to count mere publishing duties as a Nintendo game (that would be Octopath Traveler and Bravely Default 2), but you take the leap to include The World Ends With You which Nintendo has nothing to do with. Furthermore, you added the digital-only Pokémon Quest.

What's even more puzzling is your comment about four new exciting Sony games for the PS4 in 2020. What are they? I can assume that you include Dreams which flopped, so why should that be counted as an exciting game; talk about hyperbole. Then there's The Last of Us 2 which was met with a mixed reception by gamers, hence why this June release has dropped out of the PSN's top 20 list in both North America and Europe by August already; the game sold well as long as the hype lasted and that was it. Ghost of Tsushima is a game that meets the criteria of new and exciting, but what's the fourth game? The yearly MLB game? The reason why Sony can have those games in the last year of the PS4 is because they took longer than expected to finish.

But aside from goalpost moving, another popular tactic is the double standard where one company (Nintendo) will be blamed for everything while another one (Sony) will be played up as doing great when both Dreams and The Last of Us 2 weren't meant to be 2020 games to begin with and only ended up there due to mismanagement. There's no reason to be impressed by Sony's 2020 output.

Rol you are treating the thread as if it was a prediction thread, with the prediction that Nintendo would have zero new releases for the rest of 2020. But it wasn't that as evidenced by this part of OP's post...

I realize that there's a good chance this will be remedied by the end of the month. If nothing else, their fiscal year is ending and they'll want to brag about their slate and Xenoblade seems like it's already been rated in some territories so it's probably coming soonish. But I wanted to mark this strange moment in time.

So OP acknowledges that Nintendo will likely have a release in Xenoblade HD, but the thread was predicting that Nintendo would have no releases in 2020? That just doesn't make any sense. The OP makes a lot more  sense when taken as OP showing general dismay at Nintendo's overall 2020 output, and communication with fans.

TWEWY Final Remix was published by Nintendo outside of Japan, which means Nintendo did in fact have something to do with it. Whether a game is digital or physical doesn't matter. All that matters is that the game was released in 2018. But I do understand your complaints. And that's my point. We can be rational, only including new non-toy, non-free, developed games by Nintendo, or at the very least containing a Nintendo IP, or being a 2nd party offering. Or we can throw reason to the wind, and start including basically anything and everything. The funny thing is that using either method shows 2018 to be far superior to 2020. My argument is a dilemma style argument.

1. Either we can can include only non-toy, non-free, games developed by Nintendo, or at the very least containing a Nintendo IP, or being a 2nd party offering.

2. Or we can include virtually every game under the sun.

3. If we use method 1. 2018 has a better lineup.

4.If we use method 2 2018 still has a better lineup.

5. Therefore 2018 has a better lineup.

I already made a post naming the four games that Sony has for 2020, and no, I didn't say they were all for PS4. Sales aren't the be all and end all of whether a game is exciting or not. Earthbound, Musha, and a ton of other 16 bit games never sold well, but are now highly sought after, and emulated. Animal Crossing took longer than expected to finish as well. You can't use delays at one company to dismiss games, but ignore the delays of another company.

I haven't treated this thread as a prediction at any point. This thread used to have a lot more support when it still had merit (0 or only 1 Nintendo game dated for release), but since the Mario Direct said support fell mostly apart. The following announcement of Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity sealed the deal for even more people. Now that the thread has lost its merit for good with several Nintendo games dated for release, it's basically just you and the original poster who try to frame the thread as something that it was never to begin with. It's now supposed to be a very general thread that serves as spot to complain about something Nintendo did or didn't do. I already told NightlyPoe that I'd prefer a new thread that is on topic because at least that would be honest instead of what we have in here.

Turns out that I misremembered the publishing of The World Ends With You, but as I said a few times before, I wouldn't count any third party games towards Nintendo's output. Which in turn means that the currently for 2020 scheduled Bravely Default II won't change anything for the evaluation of Nintendo in 2020 either.

Regarding double standards and being rational about comparisons, note that I said there's no reason to be impressed by Sony's 2020 output and at the same time I did not make any claims that there's something impressive about Nintendo's 2020 output. The point I was making is that you should be honest about a Nintendo vs. Sony 2020 comparison and you obviously weren't.

If Nintendo's output were comparable to Sony's, you can bet that this thread would have got a lot more support. First party software droughts, uninteresting releases (Dreams, the seventh PS4 version of MLB), a very divisive sequel (The Last of Us Part II), a DLC derived from a PS4-level game sold as standalone game as the major PS5 launch title (Spider-Man: Miles Morales), an Astrobot title that Sony doesn't dare to charge for, leaving Ghost of Tsushima as the only standout title in 2020. But not only will Nintendo have released more games than Sony in 2020, Switch owners will have also been more pleased with the offerings than PS4 and PS5 owners. That is why you won't see much support for your side in this thread, because the vast majority of discussion in here was always about subjective perceptions and as soon as someone who was discontent saw something pleasing, they abandoned the thread.

On one hand it's good to see that people hold Nintendo to a higher standard than Sony, but on the other hand people need to keep it real.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network
NightlyPoe said:

Personally, I wish Nintendo had a few more teams to work on some of their fallow IP. Though I am glad they're farming things out a bit more these days.

I agree. I can remember that Nintendo's President Shuntaro Furukawa said not too long ago that (on a Q&A of a financial report I guess) that they are currently not interested in buying 3rd party studios because it would be very difficult to infuse into them the Nintendo identity (which stands for a special Nintendo quality, creativity and innovation). Although, I personally think there are lots of talented 3rd party studios around that would complement Nintendo's lineup with more diversity and the respective 3rd party studio's own quality identity, even if we would agree with this statement it still begs the question why then not build-up new in-house teams? They have plenty of money to pay the best talents in the industry and to pay for additional space needed, hell, they could even invent their own talent pool, kind of a Nintendo university to instruct young talented people from the ground-up, surely many of them would want to work for Nintendo afterwards.

It is by far the biggest critic I have on Nintendo: Why not use some of your money to build new development teams? It would ultimately result in having much less (quality) software droughts (and would quell most of such critical threads like this one).



Fight-the-Streets said:
NightlyPoe said:

Personally, I wish Nintendo had a few more teams to work on some of their fallow IP. Though I am glad they're farming things out a bit more these days.

I agree. I can remember that Nintendo's President Shuntaro Furukawa said not too long ago that (on a Q&A of a financial report I guess) that they are currently not interested in buying 3rd party studios because it would be very difficult to infuse into them the Nintendo identity (which stands for a special Nintendo quality, creativity and innovation). Although, I personally think there are lots of talented 3rd party studios around that would complement Nintendo's lineup with more diversity and the respective 3rd party studio's own quality identity, even if we would agree with this statement it still begs the question why then not build-up new in-house teams? They have plenty of money to pay the best talents in the industry and to pay for additional space needed, hell, they could even invent their own talent pool, kind of a Nintendo university to instruct young talented people from the ground-up, surely many of them would want to work for Nintendo afterwards.

It is by far the biggest critic I have on Nintendo: Why not use some of your money to build new development teams? It would ultimately result in having much less (quality) software droughts (and would quell most of such critical threads like this one).

Nintendo has been hiring new graduates to be part of their development teams so they're kinda doing what you're saying in the last sentence of your first paragraph.

As far as developing teams, it would take months (if not years) before they could even start up, let alone develop a game. Nintendo is already managing multiple teams within EPD and teams such as iQue, Retro Studios, NDCube, and Monolith Soft, let alone working with developers such as Intelligent Systems, HAL, Game Freak, Good Feel, Grezzo, Next Level Games, Camelot, Genius Sonority, and Sora, Ltd. There are other teams and studios Nintendo has or are working with that we don't even mention much because they either are working on smaller titles or are mostly support teams.

I don't know what's the mindset of Nintendo in regards on what they spend and how much they spend on projects. But they seem to have a grasp on what they need or not need at this time. If they feel that a new in-house team will not be financially worth it, then that's their stance.

Edit: Not to mention Nintendo is continuously working with third party developers to develop new games. Astral Chain from Platinum Games is an example, as well as the recently announced Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity from Koei Tecmo. Koei Tecmo even developed Fire Emblem Three Houses alongside some of Intelligent Systems' team members.

Last edited by Kai_Mao - 5 days ago

Fight-the-Streets said:
NightlyPoe said:

Personally, I wish Nintendo had a few more teams to work on some of their fallow IP. Though I am glad they're farming things out a bit more these days.

I agree. I can remember that Nintendo's President Shuntaro Furukawa said not too long ago that (on a Q&A of a financial report I guess) that they are currently not interested in buying 3rd party studios because it would be very difficult to infuse into them the Nintendo identity (which stands for a special Nintendo quality, creativity and innovation). Although, I personally think there are lots of talented 3rd party studios around that would complement Nintendo's lineup with more diversity and the respective 3rd party studio's own quality identity, even if we would agree with this statement it still begs the question why then not build-up new in-house teams? They have plenty of money to pay the best talents in the industry and to pay for additional space needed, hell, they could even invent their own talent pool, kind of a Nintendo university to instruct young talented people from the ground-up, surely many of them would want to work for Nintendo afterwards.

It is by far the biggest critic I have on Nintendo: Why not use some of your money to build new development teams? It would ultimately result in having much less (quality) software droughts (and would quell most of such critical threads like this one).

I'm no business guru, but I do wish they swept up ATLUS while they had the chance. 



1doesnotsimply

RolStoppable said:

 very divisive sequel (The Last of Us Part II)

leaving Ghost of Tsushima as the only standout title in 2020. 

I agree with most of your essay but this makes no sense. Divisive or not, TLOUs is one of the most impactful and discussed games this year (probably the most commented on SNS after Animal Crossing), and is among the best sellers. With such high value production in both artistic and technical sense are very hard to say it's not a stand out title 

Pokemon Sword/Shield was also pretty damn divisive, but I don't see people regarding it as a non standout title (well, I actually see, but let's pretend I'm right cause it's not the point) 



It's insane how this thread has developed over the past few months. I'm not even sure what it is supposed to be about at this point to be honest. I realise it must've been difficult for some people when there were (almost) no new games with firm release dates. But with Clubhouse Games, Paper Mario, Hyrule Warriors, Pikmin and 3D Allstars we did get a decent amount of release dates announced. Sure, it's not as good as some other years - but 2021 is probably going to be a standout year in terms of titles with the lockdown situation getting better and Nintendo adapting to home office work. You can tell for example that the 3D World remake was supposed to be a 2020 title that got pushed back two months. It's not ideal, but it's not worth the drama.

What I don't understand is why people keep writing novels about how bad the 2020 lineup is. I have hardly ever seen a thread with such walls of text lol.