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

[The Kid]

Gligar, it is really hard to take you seriously with those examples.

[JAiRO]

Accelerometers are very minor, and implemented into everything these days. The PS3 had sixaxis....remember how many games used that? So far only one of all the games I've played on my Xbox One uses the controller "shake" functionality

 

Minor or not it's still motion control. You even admit yourself that on a very new system there is a game utilizing a minor form of motion control. ImeanImjustsaiyan

 

 

About Kinect, I'd post commercials, but like I said, these forums are buggy (If you know how to properly paste, do tell). Just look up how Kinect is promoted in say, the Xbox One "Retirement Home" commercial. It's used for snapping and chatting, not as a motion controller.

 

That's one commercial, because MS thinks it can appeal to everyone. There is literally a sea of "You are the controller." advertisements.

 

 

At first it kinda was, and it sold tons, but the motion control fad just isn't there anymore. Many people I know who got 360 kinects either use them as headsets or let them sit in a closet, especially considering how primitive the 360 version was.

 

The Wii U still requires WiiMotes for a lot of games, brah.

 

 

About the Wii motion plus, that was last gen. You didn't see any improved controller for the WiiU that was a motion controller. Sony has patents for a next generation Move, MS improved the controller/Kinect, while Nintendo still uses the 2006 sensor bar/wiimote setup. You don't need to make a new gen for a new controller (See: DualShock on the PS1, the Controller S on the Original Xbox, etc.), but yet normally companies improve on controllers each gen.

 

Sony has a patent for a next generation move? So that's still motion control. Microsoft improved the Kinect? So that's still motion control. Nintendo is still using sensor bar which means it's still relevant? So that's still motion control. They are improving the controllers, but they're adding motion control to them.

 

 

What did those three games do that affected the industry as a whole? The only one of those three I know that did was LBP, and even then there were games that let you create your own stuff on consoles (Not counting mod SDKs) years before. Halo 3 came a year earlier and had Forge mode. SMG might have racked up high scores, but what did it do to influence games? Metroid Prime from what I've played just felt eh, and there were first person games that did exploration far before Metroid Prime.

 

Super Mario Galaxy is critically acclaimed and revolutionized 3D platformers. Metroid Prime showed that first-person-shooters can utilize motion controls and still be a pretty good game. Little Big Planet let you create things using many Playstation "gimmicks" such as the PSeye, maybe Halo 3 had a level editor but tons of games did that way before Bungie did. No one took it to the level of usability while still retaining a lot of flexibility like Little Big Planet did.

 

 

I never said that. I was saying that more people talk about those two games in 2014 than they do generic installment in a series 420.

 

Did Call of Duty revolutionize first-person-shooters? Yes, undoubtedly. Did Super Mario Galaxy revolutionize 3D platformers? Yes, undoubtedly. Did Super Mario Galaxy make use of the so called "gimmick" known as motion control? Yes. Yet it still revolutionized 3D platformers? Yes.

 

FPS are a very specific genre. One that has, for whatever reason, been very popular for the last 10 years. Call of Duty 4 did not revolutionize the entire video games industry, just as Super Mario Galaxy didn't. They impacted their own genres, they raised the bar for their competitors.

 

 

Speaking of gimmicks, all I have to say is I looked it up on dictionary.com. I'd paste it if I can somehow get the paste function on this site to work, but from what it said, it had a far different definition that did not include everything and the kitchen sink.

 

I don't give a damn what www.dictionary.com says, I care about the Oxford definition.

 

If you reply to this I'm literally going to implode. Do you know how hard these special stages are on Sonic Heroes? They're kicking my ass.

 

EDIT: I think you should also take a look at SuperLink's post, he made some really good points that you're ignoring.

[Gligar13]

Minor or not it's still motion control. You even admit yourself that on a very new system there is a game utilizing a minor form of motion control. ImeanImjustsaiyan

 

 

That's one commercial, because MS thinks it can appeal to everyone. There is literally a sea of "You are the controller." advertisements.

 

 

The Wii U still requires WiiMotes for a lot of games, brah.

 

 

Sony has a patent for a next generation move? So that's still motion control. Microsoft improved the Kinect? So that's still motion control. Nintendo is still using sensor bar which means it's still relevant? So that's still motion control. They are improving the controllers, but they're adding motion control to them.

 

 

Super Mario Galaxy is critically acclaimed and revolutionized 3D platformers. Metroid Prime showed that first-person-shooters can utilize motion controls and still be a pretty good game. Little Big Planet let you create things using many Playstation "gimmicks" such as the PSeye, maybe Halo 3 had a level editor but tons of games did that way before Bungie did. No one took it to the level of usability while still retaining a lot of flexibility like Little Big Planet did.

 

 

Did Call of Duty revolutionize first-person-shooters? Yes, undoubtedly. Did Super Mario Galaxy revolutionize 3D platformers? Yes, undoubtedly. Did Super Mario Galaxy make use of the so called "gimmick" known as motion control? Yes. Yet it still revolutionized 3D platformers? Yes.

 

FPS are a very specific genre. One that has, for whatever reason, been very popular for the last 10 years. Call of Duty 4 did not revolutionize the entire video games industry, just as Super Mario Galaxy didn't. They impacted their own genres, they raised the bar for their competitors.

 

 

I don't give a damn what www.dictionary.com says, I care about the Oxford definition.

 

If you reply to this I'm literally going to implode. Do you know how hard these special stages are on Sonic Heroes? They're kicking my ass.

 

EDIT: I think you should also take a look at SuperLink's post, he made some really good points that you're ignoring.

It's about as much motion control as that of an iPod...of all things. Do you see the game using it as a main feature? Nearly everything that could be done with that could be done with a button press on an Xbox controller, remember the pressure sensitive buttons used on the PS2, PS3, and Original Xbox controllers?

I haven't seen those commercials in years. I have seen plenty of these though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv9bQ-siFKg

What do you see in this commercial? The graphics, a physical controller, and the voice commands that are nearly everywhere nowadays (Cell phones, 'nuff said). Wii?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsbeQeiwW9o

Even if the WiiU requires the WiiMote for many games, that's kind of a silly move. It's like if you bought a brand new launch console and boom you have to buy a PS1 controller to play some games. It only serves to add more confusion.

At the same time, you're ignoring that motion control is not front and center anymore. Remember the e3s of 2010/11 where Sony and MS pretty much spent the whole presentation on motion control games? Now look at the newer e3s and notice the difference.

You're kinda wrong about Metroid Prime....it was actually a GameCube game. Unless you meant Metroid Prime 3, in which case the motion controls weren't that good. Nobody plays FPSes with motion controls outside the small Wii audience. Plus, like I said, Halo 3 had easy to use map editing tools that even a kid could use.

About CoD4, it was actually more influential than you'd like to believe. Even racing games will use a similar unlock progression system. It's just like how GTA III gave rise to many games being open world, for example this game has SP as a rank up system, done by doing tasks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9WNO__Z2Uk

[JAiRO]

It's about as much motion control as that of an iPod...of all things. Do you see the game using it as a main feature? Nearly everything that could be done with that could be done with a button press on an Xbox controller, remember the pressure sensitive buttons used on the PS2, PS3, and Original Xbox controllers?

I haven't seen those commercials in years. I have seen plenty of these though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv9bQ-siFKg

What do you see in this commercial? The graphics, a physical controller, and the voice commands that are nearly everywhere nowadays (Cell phones, 'nuff said). Wii?

Even if the WiiU requires the WiiMote for many games, that's kind of a silly move. It's like if you bought a brand new launch console and boom you have to buy a PS1 controller to play some games. It only serves to add more confusion.

At the same time, you're ignoring that motion control is not front and center anymore. Remember the e3s of 2010/11 where Sony and MS pretty much spent the whole presentation on motion control games? Now look at the newer e3s and notice the difference.

You're kinda wrong about Metroid Prime....it was actually a GameCube game. Unless you meant Metroid Prime 3, in which case the motion controls weren't that good. Nobody plays FPSes with motion controls outside the small Wii audience. Plus, like I said, Halo 3 had easy to use map editing tools that even a kid could use.

About CoD4, it was actually more influential than you'd like to believe. Even racing games will use a similar unlock progression system. It's just like how GTA III gave rise to many games being open world, for example this game has SP as a rank up system, done by doing tasks.

 

I can't tell if you're trolling or...

 

Someone tag out with me, I gotta get these emeralds.

[Sami]

I think the only gimmicky things in gaming that never really worked were the Virtual Boy and the Six axis controller. I mean really, was the latter totally necessary?

But gimmicks are a part of gaming! We need gimmicks for gaming because otherwise gaming in general would be really boring. I might not like Kinect much but hey, it's pretty effective for controlling your console without pressing buttons and shit.

 

Gyro/Accelerometer support is nice to have in the controllers, but yeah the early PS3 games that felt obligated to use the Sixaxis' primitive motion sensor were pretty silly.

 

 

Ignoring the Wii U's system upgrades and updates, up-scaling in graphics compared to its predecessor, off-tv gameplay,and improved motion sensors and whatnot seems like a bit of a cheap tactic to argue that it's not featured any "real improvements".

 

Why you're on board with Sony's touchscreen but cold towards Nintendo's escapes me as well. Exclaim to me how the PS4 and Xbone's controllers are "improved" when they're practically the same as their predecessors. And Kinect improved!? Pfff. Based on the wave of complaints still arising over Kinect Hijinks, it's certainly not shown significant improvements on par with that of Wii + for the Wii motes. And speaking of which, gotta give Nintendo kudos for pulling off a PS2 move and actually making the Wii U's predecessors controllers compatible with the Wii U, especially considering how much controllers can cost these days.

 

Oh and as for none of the three 8th gen consoles' primary controllers supposedly not using motion controls; that notion of yours is debunked by the existence of the Wii U gamepad's motion abilities. Granted you don't own one, I might understand how you managed to severely overlook that fact.

 

I know this isn't directed at me, but I do want to address this - to many, including myself, the fact that the X1 and PS4 controllers are functionally the same is a good thing in comparison to what Nintendo does. Both the Dualshock 4 and X1 controller are wonderfully ergonomic and feel great to play with. Both have a few new kinks and features like the touchpad and the rumble that don't get in the way of anything and do nothing but add just a bit to the experience. 

 

While some people (including you, I assume) may find this boring in comparison to the GamePad, I disagree. The GamePad is expensive and unnecessary in my eyes, eating up resources that instead could have gone to better specs. $70 can absolutely get some tech that would make the Wii U noticeably better. It's a neat controller and all, but no, I really do prefer sticking to what's worked for years and using that money towards something more useful.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

It's not innovation if it falls out of favor in a few years without being even a building block for the next big thing. Just look at FMV games, plastic controllers for each game, etc. 

Okay you apparently do not know the definition of innovation. Innovation is CREATIVITY. The ability to introduce new concepts and/or products, inventions, anything new,  changes applied to things already established, etc. No matter how long something is "in favor" it is an innovation by definition for being something new to this world, be it a brand new invention, a rube-Goldberg device, and whatnot.

 

But hey, let's play along with the notion that motion controls aren't an innovation because they've supposedly "fallen out of favor"--oh wait no they haven't. Last I checked, all of the big three do feature motion control capabilities, and need we not forget Microsoft's shilling of the Kinect 2.0 back in the Xbone's earlier marketing days. So even by that gauge,  motion controls are an innovation.

 

There's a reason companies are moving away from selling stuff with motion controls.

WHa-!?

Dude, ever since the Wii, Sony and Microsoft have been hot up the trail of marketing motion controls with the Move and the Kinect and have NOT moved away from it by a longshot. Hell, originally, the "primary controller" for the Xbone was your body functions working in tangent with the Kinect 2.0!

 

Can you honestly say that with a straight face in this generation of gaming where even handheld games, and app games are using motion controls today?? Oi vey.

 

 

Many of the gimmicky games are forgotten about in a year, while the ones that innovate have their influences felt far beyond even a single genre.

What, are we talking the "bad kind" of gimmicky games like the majority of the Kinect's library and Call of Duty? And funny you should say that, considering that the CoD franchise that you're so into, has been criticized for severe lack of innovation, progression, and depth.

 

Don't use gimmicks as a "this sucks" marker, especially considering that pretty much any gimmick, whether it be praised or hated is innovation by definition to the franchise.

 

Just look at the past, more people talk about CoD4 or BioShock than say, Pokémon DP, and you can feel the influence as well.

Comparing hand-picked games from franchises instead of the respective franchises in general, for an opinionated stance that you have not presented proof for.

 

For the record, I wasn't even currently invested with pokemon at the time Diamond/Pearl came out, but I still "felt" influence from them as opposed to CoD4 and its brethren. I suggest you speak for yourself.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

 

 

 

 

I know this isn't directed at me, but I do want to address this - to many, including myself, the fact that the X1 and PS4 controllers are functionally the same is a good thing in comparison to what Nintendo does. Both the Dualshock 4 and X1 controller are wonderfully ergonomic and feel great to play with. Both have a few new kinks and features like the touchpad and the rumble that don't get in the way of anything and do nothing but add just a bit to the experience. 

 

 

Same can be said for the Wii U's gamepad. Never really did find its optional features to get in the way. Maybe it's becuase I'm more adaptable, but the Wii U never really felt all that different from holding the Playstation/gamecube controllers. Although, my comment there was more aimed at the absence of an actual explanation on Gligar's part.

 

 

While some people (including you, I assume) may find this boring in comparison to the GamePad, I disagree.

You assume incorrectly. I hate it when people do that, especially when it's aimed at me.

 

 

The GamePad is expensive and unnecessary in my eyes, eating up resources that instead could have gone to better specs. $70 can absolutely get some tech that would make the Wii U noticeably better. It's a neat controller and all, but no, I really do prefer sticking to what's worked for years and using that money towards something more useful.

See, I and many others, find the Wii U pad more versatile than the other controllers. Off-tv gameplay, amongst many features, has been quite the heavenly benefit to a great portion of owners, not to mention the the fact that Nintendo is in the works of optimizing usage for the pad in games, making it mean something much more and bolstering its advantages. So in a manner of speaking, we've likely not even seen the gamepad's "final form".

 

[Gligar13]

Okay you apparently do not know the definition of innovation. Innovation is CREATIVITY. The ability to introduce new concepts and/or products, inventions, anything new,  changes applied to things already established, etc. No matter how long something is "in favor" it is an innovation by definition for being something new to this world, be it a brand new invention, a rube-Goldberg device, and whatnot.

 

But hey, let's play along with the notion that motion controls aren't an innovation because they've supposedly "fallen out of favor"--oh wait no they haven't. Last I checked, all of the big three do feature motion control capabilities, and need we not forget Microsoft's shilling of the Kinect 2.0 back in the Xbone's earlier marketing days. So even by that gauge,  motion controls are an innovation.

WHa-!?

Dude, ever since the Wii, Sony and Microsoft have been hot up the trail of marketing motion controls with the move and the Kinect and have NOT moved away from it by a longshot. Hell, originally, the "primary controller" for the Xbone was your body functions working in tangent with the Kinect 2.0!

 

Can you honestly say that with a straight face in this generation of gaming where even handheld games, and app games are using motion controls today?? Oi vey.

 

What, are we talking the "bad kind" of gimmicky games like the majority of the Kinect's library and Call of Duty? And funny you should say that, considering that the CoD franchise that you're so into, has been criticized for severe lack of innovation, progression, and depth.

 

Don't use gimmicks as a "this sucks" marker, especially considering that pretty much any gimmick, whether it be praised or hated is innovation by definition to the franchise.

 

Comparing hand-picked games from franchises instead of the respective franchises in general, for an opinionated stance that you have not presented proof for.

 

For the record, I wasn't even currently invested with pokemon at the time Diamond/Pearl came out, but I still "felt" influence from them as opposed to CoD4 and its brethren. I suggest you speak for yourself.

Please don't fill replies up with GIFs.

Even when there was the "shilling" you didn't see it up front and center besides the fact that it had to be connected. Especially when they actually showed off the games, most were not casual motion games. Did I mention that the PS4 has little move support so far?

Most iPod games rarely rely on motion controls, except for driving games/temple run ripoffs, and those have terrible controls either way.

CoD isn't that gimmicky. Maybe the later IW ones were, but the treyarch ones have changed gameplay, and I've played them all (Check my usernames in my profile). Plus there are far more gimmicky games, Pokémon XY anyone?

I named those games because they came out in the same year. 2007. That year was known for many big name gmaes coming out.

Please elaborate on Pokémon's influence. Because a certain game did the same thing years before....only it wasn't watered down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lu4DF_LsuQ

[Mauro Fonseca]

That certain game wasn't a global marketing blitz.

[8ther]

Plus there are far more gimmicky games, Pokémon XY anyone?

 

Come again? How is  X and Y gimmicky?

[Mauro Fonseca]

It has things that hold the player's attention, such as

 

colours. A gimmick to distract from the pure gameplay of Pong.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Gligar, why do you constantly associate gimmicks with only negative terms?

 

Gimmicky games =/= bad/forgotten games.

 

And outside of the Mega Evolutions, I don't see how Pokemon Y/X, which got me re-interested into the Pokemon franchise, is anymore gimmicky than its predecessors.

[Gligar13]

Come again? How is  X and Y gimmicky?

Mega Evolutions, the fact that the emphasis was on terrible 3d graphics, sitting on benches, and hyped up features like riding on certain Pokémon.

[Willsy]

Point is, there are good gimmicks and bad gimmicks. The Wii U gamepad was a little bit too excessive for my tastes.

[Conando]

So my understanding is that you want games to stay exactly the same with no experimental additions? Jesus Christ.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Mega Evolutions, the fact that the emphasis was on terrible 3d graphics, sitting on benches, and hyped up features like riding on certain Pokémon.

Aside from the Mega Evolutions, that's a terribly opinionated stance. For one thing, graphics are not a gimmick, they're a natural part of games. Secondly, I fear that you're peering way too deeply into this obsession if you honestly think that sitting and riding were anything new to the Pokemon games franchise, let alone pushed as heavily as you make it out to be.

[Gligar13]

So my understanding is that you want games to stay exactly the same with no experimental additions? Jesus Christ.

Gimmicks and failed attempts at staying relevant pushes a company into the red. Just look at the past. All the gimmicky arcade games that failed you don't find anymore in arcades, while you can still find Daytona in every arcade.

There's a difference between innovations like the dualshock, and gimmicks like the pressure sensitive buttons used in the PS2/3/Xbox.

[Mauro Fonseca]

Yes. That difference is:

 

Dualshock: Is a gimmick that stuck

 

Pressure sensitive buttons PS2/3/Xbox: Is a gimmick that didn't stick

 

How do you not understand you're stubbornly insisting in a false definition of a word

[Conando]

DualShock was an innovation? It literally copied analogs from the Atari and rumble from the Nintendo 64 Gamepad.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Hey you guys, I just built this thread for this type of discussion, would you mind moving it over there, and leave the wii-u thread in peace?

 

[JAiRO]

Mega Evolutions, the fact that the emphasis was on terrible 3d graphics, sitting on benches, and hyped up features like riding on certain Pokémon.

 

That's like saying Halo Reach was all about the forklift.

 

[Gligar13]

DualShock was an innovation? It literally copied analogs from the Atari and rumble from the Nintendo 64 Gamepad.

The Atari did not use Analogs. Neither did many arcade games. If you've ever felt an arcade joystick (Especially the eastern style ball ones), they are always 8 way, while the dogbone joysticks simulate an analog stick. Analogs didn't catch on in consoles until the n64/PS1, and no modern console uses the n64s design.

Plus, if you did your research, Sony actually created a dual analog stick setup that was miniaturized for the later controllers a few months before the n64 came out, while Sony's rumble system used the more modern setup with two rumble motors in a controller, a small one and a big one.

[Brad]

Mega Evolutions, the fact that the emphasis was on terrible 3d graphics, sitting on benches, and hyped up features like riding on certain Pokémon.

 

A-are you serious? Benches?

 

You seem to think gimmicks are only experimental features that'll be thrown away instantly, and were never intended to enhance a user's experience with a piece of software or hardware? The very root of a gimmick is to find the possibility of something that will innovate. Without gimmicks, technology would be severely hindered. You'd probably be playing your Xbones without Kinect and your PS4s without the touchpad, these things that  most people consider almost a complete necessity in modern technology. Hell, MS think Kinect is the future.

 

Also note - if Pokemon hadn't had experimented ever, you would have no new Pokemon. Online play would never have happened in any shape or form. New styles of evolution wouldn't have happened. Advancements in the inner mechanics of training your Pokemon and battling them which has only made the franchise more enjoyable and accessible for both casual and hardcore audiences wouldn't have happened either. 

[MegasonicZX]

Since when the heck did sitting on benches become a gimmick? 

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Since when the heck did sitting on benches become a gimmick? 

I have no idea. I think I'll need to consult my Gliscor. (And NO, that was not a personal jab.)

 

Seriously, though, sitting in benches and chairs has technically already been in the Pokemon games since Gen 1. "New hyped gimmicks" my ass.