General Nintendo sales/business discussion topic (previously: The Wii U Thread)

[Chooch]

Why can't they do both?

I'd love a new IP from Nintendo just as much as the next person, but I'd love for them to put out more Star Fox and F-Zero games just as much if not more because they are generally ignored.

[Scar]

Why can't they do both?

I'd love a new IP from Nintendo just as much as the next person, but I'd love for them to put out more Star Fox and F-Zero games just as much if not more because they are generally ignored.

Not that I don't like Star Fox, but honestly at the rate which Nintendo churn out previously dead or forgotten franchise, you'd think they were doing it just for nostalgia (even though the games are good) and to ensure the sale of their product to their long-term fans.

They try so much to innovate console hardware, that it seems that they've forgotten that innovating with their games and software is the biggest priority and is the thing that will get me to invest in them. I know I'm a minority and most other people will just continue to buy into Nintendo's long running franchises and franchise revivals (not to sound pretentious or anything) and so Nintendo will continue to just do what they're doing.

They're a console manufacturer, with the longest gaming history no less. They should be leading from the front with software innovation.

I must be coming off as a huge Nintendo hater here, but I'm not. I honestly wish the best for them just like I do for Sony and Microsoft, but I cannot continue to support them if they can't do something as simple as make something new.

If Miyamoto's the one to do it, then good on him. I reckon he's about the only one of the top-brass who thinks its a good idea to do so.

[JezMM]

Not that I don't like Star Fox, but honestly at the rate which Nintendo churn out previously dead or forgotten franchise, you'd think they were doing it just for nostalgia (even though the games are good) and to ensure the sale of their product to their long-term fans.

What? Which are these dead/forgotten franchises that Nintendo are "churning out"? There's Kid Icarus... and... Pikmin?

Aside from that all their recent franchise games have been from franchises that haven't skipped a console generation in ages.

Don't go pulling the "they just keep churning out Mario/Zelda/Pokémon/Kirby" bullshit because those franchises are as strong as ever.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm all for a new Nintendo IP, like, as long as it's a worthwhile idea. There's nothing wrong with more of the same when that same is of such impeccable quality. Nintendo games are full of little, subtle improvements that are always moving the series forward.

Edited January 23, 2012 by JezMM

[Ekaje]

Well it does seem that with games like Pushmo and Rolling Western, they might be using 3DSWare to put out more original IPs.

Though to be fair, they do actually put out original IPs once in a while, like Chibi-Robo, Rhythm Heaven, etc. (Xenoblade is also technically a Nintendo IP since Monolith came up with it after becoming a Nintendo first party). Though on the other hand, some of these games tend to be pretty niche, don't get much advertising, and in some cases are just not released in other regions (like Captain Rainbow) or otherwise hurt saleswise (Chibi-Robo's sequel being a Wal-Mart exclusive).

But yeah, they need to do it more often, and when they do, give original ideas more exposure. The last time I remember an original IP getting a lot of advertising was all the Wii ____ games.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Ekaje

[Conando]

There's no need for Nintendo to force a new IP when they do just fine keeping their historical franchises going strong. It's nice to see things like the Rolling Western and Pushmo but, taking risks isn't going to keep them going. As much as some people would like to believe.

[The future]

They need a 2nd party company that produces games, kinda like RARE did with the N64. Retro Studios is good, but Nintendo needs to have a few more 2nd parties with at least a dozen new franchises to make the Wii U a success in the long term.

[Candescence]

I swear Retro have said that they're not doing Metroid again, so it's obviously not that. I'm hoping for Star Fox, myself. Retro-made Star Fox in HD? OH DEAR GOD YES.

[Conando]

They need a 2nd party company that produces games, kinda like RARE did with the N64. Retro Studios is good, but Nintendo needs to have a few more 2nd parties with at least a dozen new franchises to make the Wii U a success in the long term.

[Tornado]

There is no benefit to having second party (and second party-esque) games when the development studios aren't given any form of autonomy. After the disaster that was Other:M's development, I'm still skeptical as to whether Nintendo would give any second parties a chance to do things their way or whether they would just bring in someone to fuck everything up control all aspects of the development.

And the only reason that doesn't include Retro is because of their location.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Tornado

[SuperStingray]

There is no benefit to having second party (and second party-esque) games when the development studios aren't given any form of autonomy. After the disaster that was Other:M's development, I'm still skeptical as to whether Nintendo would give any second parties a chance to do things their way or whether they would just bring in someone to fuck everything up control all aspects of the development.

And the only reason that doesn't include Retro is because of their location.

That also doesn't include Retro because they're an internal developer, not a collaborative one.

Besides, Other M's shortcoming were mainly from Nintendo's carelessness, working with a company that had little if any experience with the Wii and an animation company used to doing high end cutscenes and cinematic work just because Sakamoto liked Ninja Gaiden and thought it would be schuper cool if they made a Metroid game. Either way, Team Ninja's programming and D-Rocket's animation was the least of that game's problems next to the writing and design, all from Nintendo's end.

And whatever the case, if the Wii-U doesn't get the kind of third-party support they were hoping for I wouldn't put it past them to try another Marigul.

[Conando]

Something that confounds me about people clamoring for new IPs is the fact that most of Nintendos existing IPs already cover almost every single game genre out there (can't think of any FPS games from them, other than Metroid Prime I suppose). What would be the point of a new IP if it's basically the same thing with a new "skin"? That might come off as kind of stupid but, I don't think Nintendo is going to suddenly change the way they make a certain game just because it's a character that isn't Mario, Link, Samus, Captain Olimar, etc.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Hero Of Fate

[SuperStingray]

Something that confounds me about people clamoring for new IPs is the fact that most of Nintendos existing IPs already cover almost every single game genre out there (can't think of any FPS games from them, other than Metroid Prime I suppose). What would be the point of a new IP if it's basically the same thing with a new "skin"? That might come off as kind of stupid but, I don't think Nintendo is going to suddenly change the way they make a certain game just because it's a character that isn't Mario, Link, Samus, Captain Olimar, etc.

Why not just play Skyrim if you don't have Dark Souls? It's the same genre, so they must be the same game, just with different skins, right? Genres are just blankets that cover an infinite array of possible experiences. Why do you think film makers don't decide to make one comedy franchise, one horror franchise and one drama franchise each and call it quits? Just because it's part of the same genre doesn't mean it's interchangable with anything else in it. Sticking with a single IP limits you to a range of mechanics, tropes and tones associated with the brand unless you intend to do a very tangental spinoff like WarioWare was to Wario Land. Nintendo's been able to avoid the need to rely on creating new IPs because, well, fame sells. Super Mario Galaxy might have made more sense to develop as a new IP because it put pressure on the franchise as a whole to keep going in that direction, but Mario's more popular than Mickey Mouse these days, so it would have been stupid for Nintendo NOT to put his face on the box. Beyond that, Miyamoto's more interested in playing with existing universes to find the full potential of each of his franchises than creating new ones to explore the genre as a whole. The only reason Pikmin exists is because he couldn't find an IP in Nintendo's catalog that would justify replacing its traditional range of mechanics with what we see in Pikmin.

[Marcello]

If Retro is making Star Fox, I hope they get VS mode better than their last try. MP2's multiplayer was horrible. And after Assault's great multiplayer, I'd hope for it to improve even more.

[VO.SUPER]

You know, I was listening to one of Totalbiscuit's mailboxes, and this exact topic came up. Well, I have something to say about this. New IP is a very big risk that can easily fail when consumers don't know about it well enough. And when Nintendo has such a sprawling universe of IPs that cover variety to the Nth degree, Nintendo has very little reason to risk such happening. However, Nintendo can't keep relying on this old technique forever as it means that standards will continue to build and pressure on their older IPs until the balloon pops. This could have happened to Metroid if Team Ninja weren't the ones developing the game. Imagine if Retro were the ones at the heels of that mess and they, hypothetically, made the same mistakes? Such a stain would damage Metroid heavily.

So as is, Nintendo needs to find a way to get new IP out on the market to expand into their newer franchises so that the pressure on the older ones can simmer down. Thankfully, as is, Nintendo has many old IP that hasn't had attention in ages so they can keep a lot of that pressure away, but not for long.

So I guess the question must be begged, how does Nintendo sell new IP?

Well one of the questions that were asked to TB were, "Why developers don't use package deals to pull in sales?" The more I thought of it, the more it made sense. I mean, look at how the Orange Box sold TF2 and Portal. Does anyone seriously think that either of those games would have sold well on their own? How about when Crackdown included the Halo 3 Beta? Why not take advantage of the fame of Nintendo's old franchises to market some newer ones? I'm honestly surprised more developers don't do this. It seems like the obvious way to go.

[Tornado]

That also doesn't include Retro because they're an internal developer, not a collaborative one.

Retro is still second party, just like Rare was.

Only vaguely Wii-U related, but it looks like the last game that will come out for the Wii will be Mario Party 9. I'm actually okay with this.

[Nintendoga]

So as is, Nintendo needs to find a way to get new IP out on the market to expand into their newer franchises so that the pressure on the older ones can simmer down. Thankfully, as is, Nintendo has many old IP that hasn't had attention in ages so they can keep a lot of that pressure away, but not for long.

Thing is though, Nintendo doesn't "need" to do anything to continue to sell thier games. The Gamecube was sucessful, but not because of Pikmin or Animal Crossing, it was because of the old IP's that people already know and love, and are willing to buy. The Wii, sorry if my memory is bad or not, had barley any new Ip's (Unless you wanna count Wii-Sports, which was sold with the Wii), yet the thing that sold the Wii the most, was it's old IP's that kept it's gamers.

Nintendo makes a new IP every 3-4 years,(the last one being Steel Driver argueably,) and just because it doesn't intrest you, doesn't mean it was a failure, and they should try again and again until you love it. New Ip's never sold the system, or kept it going, all they did was make a quick buck, and bring in some more gamers to the already successful systems.

The Wii-U doesn't "need" a new IP to make it sell, all it needs are the old famous IP's to grab everyone's attention and sell the system. Nintendo's kept the same franchises for over 30 years, each of them (well maybe not each,Starfox and F-Zero)are still going on as strong as ever. They don't need to change any of that for a long time.

Would it be cool if they made new Ips? Yeah.

Do they need to? Nope.

[Conando]

Retro is still second party, just like Rare was.

Only vaguely Wii-U related, but it looks like the last game that will come out for the Wii will be Mario Party 9. I'm actually okay with this.

Wouldn't it actually be Xenoblade Chronicles for the US? At least we get to go out with a bang.

[Ekaje]

And unless it was moved entirely to the WiiU, what about Dragon Quest X?

[VO.SUPER]

Thing is though, Nintendo doesn't "need" to do anything to continue to sell thier games. The Gamecube was sucessful, but not because of Pikmin or Animal Crossing, it was because of the old IP's that people already know and love, and are willing to buy. The Wii, sorry if my memory is bad or not, had barley any new Ip's (Unless you wanna count Wii-Sports, which was sold with the Wii), yet the thing that sold the Wii the most, was it's old IP's that kept it's gamers. Nintendo makes a new IP every 3-4 years,(the last one being Steel Driver argueably,) and just because it doesn't intrest you, doesn't mean it was a failure, and they should try again and again until you love it. New Ip's never sold the system, or kept it going, all they did was make a quick buck, and bring in some more gamers to the already successful systems. The Wii-U doesn't "need" a new IP to make it sell, all it needs are the old famous IP's to grab everyone's attention and sell the system. Nintendo's kept the same franchises for over 30 years, each of them (well maybe not each,Starfox and F-Zero)are still going on as strong as ever. They don't need to change any of that for a long time. Would it be cool if they made new Ips? Yeah. Do they need to? Nope.

You didn't address the main point of my post. My point was that they will need to eventually before pressure swells on their older franchise titles. It doesn't have to be address during the Wii-U's time. It just needs to be done later.

[Conando]

It's been 25 years. You would think the whole "pressue swells" thing would have happened already.

[VO.SUPER]

It's been 25 years. You would think the whole "pressue swells" thing would have happened already.

You'd think that too. It has to happen eventually.

Edited January 26, 2012 by VisionaryBlur

[Spooky Mulder]

IGN published an interesting article about how Kid Icarus needs to come to the Wii-U and I completely agree.

I wonder if there's any chance that Kid Icarus is Retro Studios mysterious project.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Spooky Mulder

[Conando]

I really don't think so. Mario is basically game Mickey Mouse, he'll never lose popularity. I always raise my previous statement, how is it being a different skin going to make the game any different? They're not going to stop making games like Mario and Zelda, so what the hell would be the point in replacing Mario and Link? We kind of get it, you don't like Nintendo but, statistics show they don't need to please YOU to continue to please a wide number of consumers.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Crow T. Robot

[Solkia]

I wonder what the modding community will do with the tablet controller this time.

[SuperStingray]

Retro is still second party, just like Rare was.

Founded in 1998, Retro Studios is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nintendo Company, Ltd.