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

[azoo]

I said it isn't the most important game of the generation or an industry leader that everyone will flock to copy and learn from. I never said it wasn't an amazing fucking game, but it's no Gears of War, Call of Duty, Uncharted, or even a Galaxy.

You know why it isn't?

The marketing. :v

It's being advertised as a "look its cat mario, nyan, get together with your friends and family and play~!" thing, whenever its excelling at visual prowess on what is apparently a 'far behind' console, successfully making a 4-player co-op platformer work in 3D, and generally just being an amazingly crafted, heavy set game worth being played and praised by the masses.

No one cares as much as they did for Galaxy though because Galaxy was advertised as THE hottest isht this side of the cosmos, and that's why it got attention even when being on the Nintendo Woobly TV-Stick.

And on another note, I'm gonna say it again, I know Nintendo makes dumb decisions regarding internet and matching current standards and marketing, I've been trying to say that repeatedly myself. But if trying to defend the concept and what we got of the Wii U is "white knight"ing then I don't really know how to continue on.

[Red Cap]

pfft

 

 

But aside from that I see where Discoid's point is. Nintendo used to be the example while delivering the quality. Now they just have the quality. It's a pretty simple argument. Nobody is questioning that and they'd be foolish too. You guys are just jumping the gun rushing to defend the thing at this point.

 

 

Remember the N64 days when Nintendo literally led the industry in software quality? 

 

I'm sorry but it's kinda hard to get that from what he said, and even then I'd still say that they do. Using SM3DW as an example, just because the game didn't sell 9,000,000 copies in the first 2.5 seconds of it's release, with literally every developer ever tripping over themselves to make their own shameless rip-off of it, DOESN'T mean that it's not a great example of how a 3D 4-player co-op platformer should be.

[MegasonicZX]

Just got my wii u on saturday and I really like this thing so far, the interface is pretty nice and I like how you can control the volume and inputs on your tv from, also once again nintendo proves that no matter how awkward the control scheme looks it still feels good.

[Sami]

You know why it isn't?The marketing. :vIt's being advertised as a "look its cat mario, nyan, get together with your friends and family and play~!" thing, whenever its excelling at visual prowess on what is apparently a 'far behind' console, successfully making a 4-player co-op platformer work in 3D, and generally just being an amazingly crafted, heavy set game worth being played and praised by the masses.No one cares as much as they did for Galaxy though because Galaxy was advertised as THE hottest isht this side of the cosmos, and that's why it got attention even when being on the Nintendo Woobly TV-Stick.And on another note, I'm gonna say it again, I know Nintendo makes dumb decisions regarding internet and matching current standards and marketing, I've been trying to say that repeatedly myself. But if trying to defend the concept and what we got of the Wii U is "white knight"ing then I don't really know how to continue on.

Oh, no! Don't get me wrong, that's not what I meant by that at all. That comment was directed only at Jet, who was fucking belittling people for not enjoying the same games he does. I quite enjoy tossing ideas back and forth with you and others.

I'm sorry but it's kinda hard to get that from what he said, and even then I'd still say that they do. Using SM3DW as an example, just because the game didn't sell 9,000,000 copies in the first 2.5 seconds of it's release, with literally every developer ever tripping over themselves to make their own shameless rip-off of it, DOESN'T mean that it's not a great example of how a 3D 4-player co-op platformer should be.

But Nintendo games used to sell 9,000,000 copies in 2.5 seconds with every developer ever tripping over themselves to copy them. Naughty Dog literally called Jak & Daxter "our Mario 64" in interviews.

That is what Nintendo used to be capable of. But then they grew lazy and complacent. 3D World is an amazing game, but as a complete package and relative to its time I do not believe it to be of 64 or Galaxy's calibre. Much like Zelda hasn't set the world on fire in over a decade now. He got my point perfectly.

Don't you WANT Nintendo to do the best they possibly can? To set trends and be the leader that everyone follows again? Because right now that crown seems to be held by Activision and Sony. Everyone and their mother is copying CoD, and the Xbone's release date, rushed launch games, and share features are a direct result of the PS4. Nintendo is no longer relevant, and that's sad.

[Scar]

I'm just going to chime in here and say that the real problem, is Nintendo of late, seem to be focusing their attention on necessary gimmicks, when it comes to their hardware platform. They're trying too hard to "Innovate" in the console space, that they've failed to grasp the fact that what they actually need to do, is iterate. 

I'm surprised they haven't thought of this yet, cause they're absolute geniuses at iterating their software. Their big-name IP have rarely seen significant shake-ups to their formulae. Nintendo instead just refine what is already known to work, and they churn out brilliant experiences almost every time.

 

Gamepad is a cool idea, but its not necessary. What does it add to gaming? What does it add that is simply irreplaceable? What feature does it bring to the table that is just so fantastic that you can no longer live without.

 

For crying out loud, if they wanted a piece of the tablet market, they could do what Sony's doing and release a tablet app.

 

Instead of making the gamepad, they could have bumped up the basic tech-specs of the thing. Maybe a better CPU/GPU, some more RAM or whatever. People argue that power doesn't matter, but it kinda does. The Wii U is powerful, but its not in the same ballpark as the Bone and the PSQuadruple and that makes it annoying to optimise multiplatform games. Its the Wii situation all over again. Devs will either release some gimped port, or just avoid porting to the platform altogether. As you can see with a lot of third party games. 

 

More power will just put it on the same boat. It will at least bring it on a par with the competition. And when you have that, you have 3rd party support. Then Nintendo's fantastic First party line-up isn't the thing that's keeping the system afloat any more. The third parties can take care of that menial crap. Nintendo's first parties could then set their sights for the stars, and not worry about having to put out a new entry of a beloved franchise, in time to re-kindle a little interest in their platform. 

 

And there is perception. Nintendo fucked this up real bad.

First mistake was what I like to call "Fischer Price" syndrome. They made the system look like some toy for cute little families. I mean, that's a fairly big audience....the audience that made the Wii a success.....except now there's the iPad.....and Candy Crush saga... Why would they want to buy a $300 gimped kids iPad knock-off, when they already have an iPad.

There's also the issue of this aura of pure, child-friendliness, turning other gamers away from it. And when I say gamers, yeah I'm talking dudebros, but they're gamers as much as you and I. And this perception thing goes a lot deeper than the marketing too though. The aesthetics of the device make it look like a toy. Soft rounded edges. Glossy plastic finish. The white version suffers from this problem the worst.

 

The thing that Sony and Microsoft got right this time, is the who they were talking too. And that is everyone. They're pitching their product to gamers; gamers of all description. Dudebros, kids, casuals, hardcores....all possible gamers. They have multimedia for non-gamers, covered too. Sony got this really right. MS slipped at first, but they quickly put themselves back on track.

 

Oh shit...this is quite late...

 

Also, I apologise in advance for the rambliness of this post...I'm quite tired.

[azoo]

Oh, no! Don't get me wrong, that's not what I meant by that at all. That comment was directed only at Jet, who was fucking belittling people for not enjoying the same games he does. I quite enjoy tossing ideas back and forth with you and others.

Okay, glad to hear that then, I got worried for a second.

 

But Nintendo games used to sell 9,000,000 copies in 2.5 seconds with every developer ever tripping over themselves to copy them. Naughty Dog literally called Jak & Daxter "our Mario 64" in interviews.

That is what Nintendo used to be capable of. But then they grew lazy and complacent. 3D World is an amazing game, but as a complete package and relative to its time I do not believe it to be of 64 or Galaxy's calibre. Much like Zelda hasn't set the world on fire in over a decade now. He got my point perfectly.

Don't you WANT Nintendo to do the best they possibly can? To set trends and be the leader that everyone follows again? Because right now that crown seems to be held by Activision and Sony. Everyone and their mother is copying CoD, and the Xbone's release date, rushed launch games, and share features are a direct result of the PS4. Nintendo is no longer relevant, and that's sad.

Nintendo's still capable. Eiji Aonuma is trying to change effing everything with the new Zelda, going by his ramblings. Mario 3D World is insanely impressive, and IMO an even better game than Galaxy ever was (although Galaxy had its higher points and qualities).

It all still stands on their marketing. They aren't trying to hype-train their stuff anymore; the reason everything hit so hard back then was because they made the buildup and watched it explode with acclaim just like everyone else does (perfect example, as stated before: Mario Galaxy). If Nintendo could stop marketing to the uncaring families busy with iPhones and Angry Birds and actually show that they have the goods to the gaming populace instead of expecting them to just go "oh look, Mario, lets buy it", then they'd go somewhere.

On topic of the console being all smooth and soft-colored nowadays compared to how Ninty used to be..

...

Yeah, I miss it. I miss Ninty being all red and black and grey and ATOMIC PURPLE/INDIGO and boxy designs instead of being so smooth and pale blue + monochrome, and I miss the funky designs and the translucent controllers. But I can get over it for a good console, just like I could get over a tripod controller for the N64, because holy hell Nintendo, what was that. LOL

[Sami]

Nintendo's still capable. Eiji Aonuma is trying to change effing everything with the new Zelda, going by his ramblings. Mario 3D World is insanely impressive, and IMO an even better game than Galaxy ever was (although Galaxy had its higher points and qualities).

It all still stands on their marketing. They aren't trying to hype-train their stuff anymore; the reason everything hit so hard back then was because they made the buildup and watched it explode with acclaim just like everyone else does (perfect example, as stated before: Mario Galaxy). If Nintendo could stop marketing to the uncaring families busy with iPhones and Angry Birds and actually show that they have the goods to the gaming populace instead of expecting them to just go "oh look, Mario, lets buy it", then they'd go somewhere.

 

You can rest assured that once I see Zelda U really is as good as we all want it to be, I'll shut up, lol. But considering how good Nintendo's been at keeping promises as of late I don't think some doubt is out of reason. 

 

That's an interesting point about the marketing. I still feel like there's more to it than that, but you do raise a good point. But I mean, just look at Galaxy in comparison to 3D World. Maybe the controls and level design or whatever are better in the latter, but what of every other factor? The game starts out with a beautiful cutscene, amazing music, a fun interactive intro, and once the game goes into space, you're left with the absolutely jaw-dropping sight that is Mario Galaxy's art. Galaxy wasn't even my type of game, honestly. I wish it had more of a story and I probably would have enjoyed it much more on a handheld since portability is essential for me when it comes to "pick up and play" games like Mario, but you know what? It didn't matter. Galaxy floored me when I tried it for the first time because it did a lot of amazing new things that Mario and even the rest of the industry had never done before. Gravity, planetoid-based platforming? That's a hell of a gimmick for a game when it's something we'd never seen before. The music is incredible, the graphics were incredible, and even the story and cutscene presentation was miles beyond what we'd seen from Mario previously.

 

And then... Galaxy 2... lost all of that. What the hell happened? Seriously, just... what the hell happened? Mario Galaxy 2's opening is a fucking joke compared to the first. The game as a whole feels more like a huge expansion pack (like Super Luigi U, actually) and less like a new mainline game. 

 

3D World is a fantastic game, but it's no Galaxy. I really wish it was, but it's not. While that doesn't mean it's a bad game at all, it's not the game that the Wii U needed to really stand out and show what it can do, in my opinion.

 

It's very telling that a game in a series I don't particularly care for managed to blow my mind and keep me entertained for a good few hours; that's the quality Nintendo is capable of when they try their best. That's what I want from them.

 

No marketing team in the world can change the fact that (to me, of course, as maybe some people disagree) 3D World is no Galaxy, and never will be.

[azoo]

And with that pointer I'll agree with you on. That's mostly what I meant when I said Mario Galaxy had it's higher points over 3D World; while SM3DW is a much better game in all, Galaxy was a better experience, and Mario 64 excelled at both abloobloo will I ever get another 3D quasi-open-world Mario again ;_;

 

I have great hopes for Wii U Zelda though. Going by the praises of A Link Between Worlds and how they will be part of a new standard, plus knowing the next game will be purely fresh, that's what has got me excited for Nintendo and whatever Aonuma's got in his sleeve. Now all they gotta do is announce a whole bunch of other games that they know will be REALLY BIG DEALS (lets talk about Metroid and Star Fox a minute ok) and then maybe those third parties will give in.

 

Cuz that's the thing they're missing. It's not the graphics power and the console itself, it's the ambition and the marketing. They've got Zelda U and a new Smash Bros coming up. They better shape up their shit.
 

[Jet Prower]

Oh, no! Don't get me wrong, that's not what I meant by that at all. That comment was directed only at Jet, who was fucking belittling people for not enjoying the same games he does. I quite enjoy tossing ideas back and forth with you and others.

But Nintendo games used to sell 9,000,000 copies in 2.5 seconds with every developer ever tripping over themselves to copy them. Naughty Dog literally called Jak & Daxter "our Mario 64" in interviews.

That is what Nintendo used to be capable of. But then they grew lazy and complacent. 3D World is an amazing game, but as a complete package and relative to its time I do not believe it to be of 64 or Galaxy's calibre. Much like Zelda hasn't set the world on fire in over a decade now. He got my point perfectly.

Don't you WANT Nintendo to do the best they possibly can? To set trends and be the leader that everyone follows again? Because right now that crown seems to be held by Activision and Sony. Everyone and their mother is copying CoD, and the Xbone's release date, rushed launch games, and share features are a direct result of the PS4. Nintendo is no longer relevant, and that's sad.

 

Look, Discoid, I know we don't get along, but I'm not trying to belittle people. I'm calmed down now thanks to talking with a few other people. I'm sorry if you think I'm belittling you are other people for what they play. I could care less what games other people like and dislike. It a lot of the time just seems like that since my opinion differs from yours that you need to try and explain why I should think like you. I'm sorry if I put you down or others down for playing what games and such they play. I was merely trying to state an opinion. I know what COD's audience is, and often times, if you look at the commercials, you know who their main audience is as well. Just please don't get mad at me for stating that.

 

 

I can understand you liking Nintendo a lot and being critical of them, but sometimes the way you put things comes across as, Nintendo sucks, everything is done for, and we should all just throw them out and give up totally. That literally there is no hope ever and that I shouldn't like the consoles. I know that may not be what you mean, but it comes across that way sometimes. I want to try and support this thing the best I can and yes I do want to sing some praises for it.

 

Do I think Nintendo messed up though, HELL YES! Don't think I just want to be all goody goody on this all the time. Oh there are problems with Nintendo, just like there are tons of problems with Microsoft. I haven't even touched my 360 since I heard all the crap that went on with the Xbone. I switched to buying lots of nintendo and sony stuff instead. Their marketing is aimed only at familes, not the dudebro crowd or the just the general gaming community at times. Yes, their consoles may not be as strong as the other two, but people can always do the best with what they got. Some of the best games come out on the less powerful stuff all the time. Yes, the third parties are partly to blame since they don't even want to give it a chance many times, yet some of it is on Nintendo for not attracting them to the system either. They attracted Sega with their little contract, but if that's what it takes, then try contracts with others to come make games there as well.

 

Still, just don't get mad at me or others that do want to at least have some hope for the system. We do feel the same way of wanting Nintendo to be relevant again and be the top dog it used to be. I for one just don't want to see them crash and burn and end up like what happened with Sega. If it wasn't for them, things may not even exist to this day, so I just hold high respect for them, while I hold next to no respect for Microsoft.

 

Sorry to rant a bit, but I want to let you people know that I'm not some asshole that you may think I am.

[Sami]

And with that pointer I'll agree with you on. That's mostly what I meant when I said Mario Galaxy had it's higher points over 3D World; while SM3DW is a much better game in all, Galaxy was a better experience, and Mario 64 excelled at both abloobloo will I ever get another 3D quasi-open-world Mario again ;_;

 

I have great hopes for Wii U Zelda though. Going by the praises of A Link Between Worlds and how they will be part of a new standard, plus knowing the next game will be purely fresh, that's what has got me excited for Nintendo and whatever Aonuma's got in his sleeve. Now all they gotta do is announce a whole bunch of other games that they know will be REALLY BIG DEALS (lets talk about Metroid and Star Fox a minute ok) and then maybe those third parties will give in.

 

While I don't think the third parties will ever give in, I agree wholeheartedly with everything else in this post. c:

 

If they do, great, if not, I'm not disappointed. I don't think we really see things differently, but simply have opposing optimistic/cynical points of views, and some differing opinions that stem from that difference.

 

I think the Wii U has the potential to be a failed console with an amazing library of games and can be fondly remembered by gamers who enjoy great games, just like the Dreamcast was. That is where my DC comparison comes from. The DC failed, and SEGA goofed up really bad, but god damn I fucking love the thing for its games, and that's an opinion I want to have of the Wii U some day.

[Milo]

In defense of Galaxy 2, for what it dropped in story, presentation, and wow factor that the first brought, it at least tried to make up / arguably made up for it for more or less arguably polishing the gameplay and level design while still having great music, atmosphere, power ups, and levels amongst other things. The fact that some argue that Galaxy 2 is better (and in some cases was rated even higher) than the first game speaks a lot on whether the tradeoff worked.

 

I can't disagree with your points on it being a downgrade in terms of overall presentation, but I wouldn't say Galaxy 2 completely dropped the ball.

[Remy]

Oh, no! Don't get me wrong, that's not what I meant by that at all. That comment was directed only at Jet, who was fucking belittling people for not enjoying the same games he does. I quite enjoy tossing ideas back and forth with you and others.

But Nintendo games used to sell 9,000,000 copies in 2.5 seconds with every developer ever tripping over themselves to copy them. Naughty Dog literally called Jak & Daxter "our Mario 64" in interviews.

That is what Nintendo used to be capable of. But then they grew lazy and complacent. 3D World is an amazing game, but as a complete package and relative to its time I do not believe it to be of 64 or Galaxy's calibre. Much like Zelda hasn't set the world on fire in over a decade now. He got my point perfectly.

Don't you WANT Nintendo to do the best they possibly can? To set trends and be the leader that everyone follows again? Because right now that crown seems to be held by Activision and Sony. Everyone and their mother is copying CoD, and the Xbone's release date, rushed launch games, and share features are a direct result of the PS4. Nintendo is no longer relevant, and that's sad.

Have you played 3D World? Be totally honest, I don't expect you to have because pretty much no one has a Wii U and it hasn't been out that long, and if fine if you haven't but I'm just curious what perspective you're talking from- what the game looks like or what it is.

 

I definitely think 3D World is more than what it seems, and this becomes apparent when you play it.

 

It'll never have the impact of Mario 64, yeah but that's a pretty "time and place" bottled lightning type game. It's definitely a better game than Mario 64 though. And in my opinion- Galaxy too. Although I'm sure people will disagree with me on that. 

 

You're hung up on the "copy" thing. I don't disagree that everyone copied Super Mario 64- it was the first actually great 3D platformer, and we practically had two generations of games made in it's image.

 

But the reason it was copied isn't just because it was a good game- it was the right good game. The world had been floundering trying to make a 3D platformer and Nintendo descended and delivered unto us Mario. Laying the groundwork for an entire genre. I don't think they can do something like that again without inventing an entire new genre again. Even if you do see elements of Galaxy and NSMB's 4 player co op showing up in loads of other games. 

 

But how exactly do you "copy" 3D Land anyway? I guess everyone might start making 4 player co-op 3D platformers but the good parts of that game can't easily be copied, namely the manic, endlessly fresh levels and gimmicks throughout the game. 

 

And influence is important, ye, but when it comes to what I'd rather play I'd definietly choose 3D world over both Galaxy and SM64. 

 

In defense of Galaxy 2, for what it dropped in story, presentation, and wow factor that the first brought, it at least tried to make up / arguably made up for it for more or less arguably polishing the gameplay and level design while still having great music, atmosphere, power ups, and levels amongst other things. The fact that some argue that Galaxy 2 is better (and in some cases was rated even higher) than the first game speaks a lot on whether the tradeoff worked.

 

I can't disagree with your points on it being a downgrade in terms of overall presentation, but I wouldn't say Galaxy 2 completely dropped the ball.

Galaxy 2 is way better than the second game from a "game" perspective. The only areas in falls short in are shallow areas like story presentation and having a 2 on the box instead of a 1. Literally everything else is better

[Wraith]

I along with a lot of people always thought Galaxy 2 doesn't try hard enough to be an actual sequel. Not even talking presentation wise. I mean in regards to everything. It feels more like an add on than a sequel, which is to it's detriment.

 

Plus I always thought the level design was a bit worse and relied on 2D and gimmicky levels too much but I've pretty much always been alone on that front so yeah.

[Dejimon11]

Galaxy 2 was meant to be an expansion pack that's why the story was lack luster also since when do we play mario games or platformers for story any ways? If I want to play a game where story is the main focus ill play an RPG or better yet read a comic book

[VO.SUPER]

Galaxy 2 was meant to be an expansion pack that's why the story was lack luster also since when do we play mario games or platformers for story any ways? If I want to play a game where story is the main focus ill play an RPG or better yet read a comic book

I don't think they were just going for story. More like presentation and things that really were jaw dropping and grand.

And yeah; Galaxy was that sort of game. It went above and beyond to make itself seem like it was not just a new Mario game, but a huge new Mario experience.

My analogy is that Galaxy was the original movie made for theaters, while Galaxy 2 was the direct to video sequel. It may still be good or better in many regards, but it didn't go above and beyond what the original did.

[SIXTH-RATE SOMA]

Galaxy 2 is way better than the second game from a "game" perspective. The only areas in falls short in are shallow areas like story presentation and having a 2 on the box instead of a 1. Literally everything else is better

 

No sir, I refuse to let that statement fly by. The narrative of a game is a vital organ; trying to replace its absence by merely buffing another still leaves a game crippled. Can Mario have a game that ignores the narrative side and still be fun? Certainly. But in losing this layer, a game loses depth. At the end of the day, Galaxy 2 is very good, but it could have been better. That's a bit of a shame.

[redhellc]

Galaxy 2 was meant to be an expansion pack that's why the story was lack luster also since when do we play mario games or platformers for story any ways? If I want to play a game where story is the main focus ill play an RPG or better yet read a comic book

Well if I must be honest I think a sequel should improve on every aspect of the first game.

 

I must say I never played any of the Galaxy games, but that should apply to every game.

 

Also, I think we can all agree that Nintendo screwed up with the Wii U one way or another. Still I think even if the console his not that successful, I hope quality titles continue to be produced to it.

 

It's true that one great game most probably wont save a console, but a lot of them could. And I have a good feeling for 2014. At least one of my favorites games will get a sequel.    

[Dejimon11]

If your thinking about how can they make bowser kidnaps peach in space interesting again?

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

If your thinking about how can they make bowser kidnaps peach in space interesting again?

If it was Wart who took peach, and imprisoned bowser

[Dejimon11]

If it was Wart who took peach, and imprisoned bowser

 

if only that was the story to dream team

[Gabz Girl]

I think I read somewhere that they might be returning to the Super Mario Galaxy style of gameplay after 3D World, but that could be years from now. Still, it's good news for me (and probably Discoid!) since I loved those games!

 

After beating SM3DW though, I think that game beats SMG by a small margin. Gameplay and level design are better and the boss battles are amazing compared to Galaxy. Remember the final Bowser battle in SMG2? >.>

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

if only that was the story to dream team

Oh, and then Bowser teams up with mario, but he does not betray them because Wart has Bowser Jr trapped in a mech, and after saving him, he is forced to help mario destroy an even worse creature Wart has released, and appears destroyed, although he escapes it ends on a cliffhanger for the next game

[Milo]

My analogy is that Galaxy was the original movie made for theaters, while Galaxy 2 was the direct to video sequel. It may still be good or better in many regards, but it didn't go above and beyond what the original did.

 

I wouldn't use the terms "direct-to-video" sequel as a analogy to compare, Galaxy 2's much better than that. _{Seriously how many DTV sequels are better than it's predecessor?}

 

I'd just say it's more of those usual movie blockbuster sequels that (speaking in your terms, I personally think they're for the most part both on par) doesn't surpass the original, but nonetheless is still pretty damn good in it's own right. Like Fantasia 2000 or The Dark Knight Ris- *is booed off the stage*

[Remy]

People talking in this thread like 3D world doesn't look and sound like 10x better than galaxy does, anyway SMH.

[Conando]

What Remz said. The music especially. It may not be space opera orchesration, but the big band style seriously comes out on top.