Support NeoGAF

[jdstorm]

I think it's a bit of both.

As a company Nintendo is probably too small for what it needs to be to service all its IP while making new games. Nintendo should be buying up talented studios like platinum, crystal dynamics, High Moon, Mistwalker, Tantalus ect the former metroid guys behind Recore should have been given a spin off studio. Even Capcom and Sega for their IPs

Expanding their own internal talent to create new experiences/more unique experiences is something Nintendo badly need to do. Nintendo should have an Inhouse version of Turn10/Polyphony Digital that makes realistic racing games. The only reason they don't is essentially incompetance (as well as being risk averse)


Edit: As for wether they understand their own IPs. It's really hard to know since they don't have the time or budget to fully explore most of them, however everything related to Metroid has been pretty tone deaf.

Also using a combined "Nintendo Engine" like EA uses Frostbyte would solve a lot of their cost issues if every game iterated on the same engine continually adding more features

Edit 2: The clueless about their own IP arguement is definitely boosted by their handling of Splatoon. The turf war game mode is perfectly suited for Esports play. The handling of the Competitive Smash community ect. Hopefully this will improve after the companies most recent restructuring

 

[Yukinari]

After Amiibo Festival, Ultra Smash, Zip Lash, and Mario Party 10 i can safely say its a combination of Nintendo wanting to rush out some games to fill the gaps while also not giving a single shit.

Shame on Skip and Camelot especially, theyve been letting me down for years. The only company im proud of during this dark time for Nintendo is Good Feel because Woolly World is the best Yoshi game since the SNES.

 

[TheDinoman]

I think it's a bit of both.

As a company Nintendo is probably too small for what it needs to be to service all its IP while making new games. Nintendo should be buying up talented studios like platinum, crystal dynamics, High Moon, Mistwalker, Tantalus ect the former metroid guys behind Recore should have been given a spin off studio. Even Capcom and Sega for their IPs

The thing is, I'd imagine a lot of those studios you mentioned would be more happy developing games for multiple consoles rather than being forced to only work on Nintendo's hardware for the rest of their days.

Though then again, I'd imagine someone like High Moon would prefer that over being one of Activision's COD slaves.

 

[Jubenhimer]

I think it's a bit of both.

As a company Nintendo is probably too small for what it needs to be to service all its IP while making new games. Nintendo should be buying up talented studios like platinum, crystal dynamics, High Moon, Mistwalker, Tantalus ect the former metroid guys behind Recore should have been given a spin off studio. Even Capcom and Sega for their IPs

Expanding their own internal talent to create new experiences/more unique experiences is something Nintendo badly need to do. Nintendo should have an Inhouse version of Turn10/Polyphony Digital that makes realistic racing games. The only reason they don't is essentially incompetance (as well as being risk averse)

I won't doubt that expanding internal talent would be in Nintendo's best interests. But I don't think the answer would be to just buy, buy, buy. You're not really grooming talent at that point, you're just throwing money at them saying you own them. What Nintendo should be doing, and what I think they're already doing, is hiring more young designers and giving them freedom to create, experiment, and make something while putting them in the spotlight more. They restructured their internal teams to be less fragmented, and more focused on younger talent so this hopefully turns out for the better.

 

[Branduil]

Nintendo really needs to cultivate new talent and buy more studios. Having one console to develop for instead of two will help a lot but it won't fix the lack of interest their current idea guys have in a lot of their IPs.

 

[jdstorm]

I won't doubt that expanding internal talent would be in Nintendo's best interests. But I don't think the answer would be to just buy, buy, buy. You're not really grooming talent at that point, you're just throwing money at them saying you own them. What Nintendo should be doing, and what I think they're already doing, is hiring more young designers and giving them freedom to create, experiment, and make something while putting them in the spotlight more. They restructured their internal teams to be less fragmented, and more focused on younger talent so this hopefully turns out for the better.

I guess I disagree with you on that. Lots of really great studios are doing ports or assisting on other studios projects when with added resources they could be doing something really special. Buying a talented studio and giving them the resources to make the game they want can be gold. Before Halo/destiny/the talent exodus Bungie were doing support work on DK64. Before Rocket league Psyonix were supporting Edge of Reality on Galaxy on Fire a solid Space RPG for IOS.

And some studios have an even better pedigree then that.

Spoiler

Unfortunately EA usually buys them and great companies like Bioware, Dice, Criterion ect start to become part of the Borg.

 

[Sandfox]

I would have agreed with you until it turned out the Wii drought of 2011 didn't actually mean anything for Wii U support

I would imagine Nintendo was focusing on the 3DS then.

 

[Rambler]

I doubt it. It's no closer to Metroid Prime than Federation Force, and the game would probably be ripped apart for aspects like the reused bosses.

It's got the right look, it's got a campaign where you play as Samus, the new characters actually have names and backstories and unique designs, and it's got a proper deathmatch mode.

Yeah all that stuff was just barely above-average but above-average starts to look real good 6 years after Other M.

If Hunters was the game that got revealed at E3 2015 there wouldn't be a petition to cancel the thing, that's for sure. The game's reception probably would have gone from 'eh' to 'well at least things are back on track'.

 

[Oddish1]

I think its mostly rushed for time and an unwillingness to spend a lot of money on Wii U games that probably won't sell anyway. For Chibi Robo and Federation Force it's probably just experimentation that ended up not working out. For Chibi Robo even when it was being done the "right way" it was hardly a popular franchise, trying to reinvent it makes sense. I'm actually surprised Nintendo gave the franchise so many chances rather than binning it after the first one failed to light the world on fire.

 

[Davey Cakes]

Nintendo are clearly just using the power of IP to ride out the rest of the 3DS's and Wii U's lifespans. They're filling a hollow release schedule with projects that are "too safe" but will make them some money as they prepare for their next system's launch.

I feel like Nintendo could afford to strengthen their IPs by putting more money behind them. Just going by the Mario spinoffs, I think games like Mario Party 10 and Mario Tennis are coasting on the Mario name and aren't doing much to keep those series above average (if that). But Nintendo has a perfect example of a well-done spinoff in Mario Golf 3DS. So it's a matter of consistency and it feels like we're not getting consistently good releases because Nintendo is picking their battles with use of their IP.

 

[Skux]

They just don't have the resources to pump out sequels like an EA or Ubisoft.

 

[Yukinari]

I think its mostly rushed for time and an unwillingness to spend a lot of money on Wii U games that probably won't sell anyway. For Chibi Robo and Federation Force it's probably just experimentation that ended up not working out. For Chibi Robo even when it was being done the "right way" it was hardly a popular franchise, trying to reinvent it makes sense. I'm actually surprised Nintendo gave the franchise so many chances rather than binning it after the first one failed to light the world on fire.

Nintendo didnt even attempt to give Chibi Robo a chance, dont know what youre talking about.

The 1st game came out late in the life of the gamecube and Skip's other game Giftpia never came out in the US so nobody knew who the company was. The 2nd game, Park Patrol, was a dumbed down version of the original and exclusively sold at Walmart. The 3rd game was only released in japan but was a true sequel to the gamecube version. Photo Finder was a cheap eshop game that looked beautiful but lacked content and had to utilize the shitty 3DS camera for its main gimmick.

Then we come to Zip Lash which is the most generic platformer ive ever seen come out of a company. Not even the amiibo could save that horribly mediocre game. Oh i forgot to mention that New Play Control Chibi Robo never came out in the US.

 

[Oddish1]

Nintendo didnt even attempt to give Chibi Robo a chance, dont know what youre talking about.

The 1st game came out late in the life of the gamecube and Skip's other game Giftpia never came out in the US so nobody knew who the company was. The 2nd game, Park Patrol, was a dumbed down version of the original and exclusively sold at Walmart. The 3rd game was only released in japan but was a true sequel to the gamecube version. Photo Finder was a cheap eshop game that looked beautiful but lacked content and had to utilize the shitty 3DS camera for its main gimmick.

Then we come to Zip Lash which is the most generic platformer ive ever seen come out of a company. Not even the amiibo could save that horribly mediocre game. Oh i forgot to mention that New Play Control Chibi Robo never came out in the US.

I meant, why did they keep funding games after the first one? Not every game needs to be a franchise and there's no reason to keep bringing out sequels that Nintendo didn't even have a lot of faith in. You could argue that they weren't high quality efforts from Nintendo, but I'm not sure if trying to make a franchise out of it was with even that.

 

[Jubenhimer]

I guess I disagree with you on that. Lots of really great studios are doing ports or assisting on other studios projects when with added resources they could be doing something really special. Buying a talented studio and giving them the resources to make the game they want can be gold. Before Halo/destiny/the talent exodus Bungie were doing support work on DK64. Before Rocket league Psyonix were supporting Edge of Reality on Galaxy on Fire a solid Space RPG for IOS.

And some studios have an even better pedigree then that.

Spoiler

Unfortunately EA usually buys them and great companies like Bioware, Dice, Criterion ect start to become part of the Borg.

Nintendo isn't Sony or EA. They take pride in talent that they groom, not the talent they throw money at. They believe their best works should come from their own designers, not studios they take over. Sure they did buy a few studios, but that was simply them making an exception to the rule. This is why Nintendo should be hiring more staff, and focusing on grooming young talent, and highlighting them like Miyamoto or Gunpei Yokoi. I personally believe games, for the most part, should come from creators, not businessmen.

 

[Trago]

I'm thinking we'll be back on schedule with NX. If this thing really is supposed to be one device that all of Nintendo's first parties develop for, then there wont be the need for crummy looking spin-offs, but main entries. That being said, Their recent output hasn't been very exciting. The fact that they are spread thin between two platforms doesn't help.

If they can demonstrate a large focus on quality like they did with several of the 3DS's titles in its prime, then I think we're fine.

 

[Kaisos]

You know what's really crazy? Going from market domination to Dreamcast level LTD. How do you drop from 101 mil to 13 mil just from one generation to the next? Just think about it for a second. That is so insane, it is hardly imaginable for even the least competent leadership. You can call me crazy and hyperbolic, but how else do you explain this - How does a console with a supposed ,,A+" library manage to pull this kind of car accident after winning the race singlehandedly in the previous round? I can tell you, bad marketing alone doesn't do this.
No, the WiiU library really is that bad and unremarkable. Software sells hardware, this never changed. As I've already suggested earlier in this thread, scrolling through WiiU's gamerankings list couldn't look more miserable, especially compared to all its predecessors. Nintendo's never done a worse job, they managed to appeal to almost no group of gamers, including their previous core base.

a) Quality has nothing and will never have anything to do with sales. The WiiU is largely a marketing failure, among other factors. b) You don't need me to tell you this, but the drop is due to them losing the Wii's audience of the middle-aged to the elderly, which wasn't the kind of success that could be repeated to begin with.

 

[jdstorm]

Nintendo isn't Sony or EA. They take pride in talent that they groom, not the talent they throw money at. They believe their best works should come from their own designers, not studios they take over. Sure they did buy a few studios, but that was simply them making an exception to the rule. This is why Nintendo should be hiring more staff, and focusing on grooming young talent, and highlighting them like Miyamoto or Gunpei Yokoi. I personally believe games, for the most part, should come from creators, not businessmen.

I completely agree with this sentiment. However back to my previous points about buying up studios. Platinum and Tantalus have both spent the past several years working closely with Nintendo. Platinum on Wonderful 101 and With EAD on Starfox Zero. While Tantalus has done two great WiiU ports. (Mass Effect 3 and Twilight Princess) So both would seem to fit your definition of companies that have worked closely with Nintendo and have some links to their internal talent pipeline.

I also think it's an incredibly arrogant attitude to assume there is nothing to be learned from outside sources. Nintendo makes a lot of great games, but there are certain experiences that they seem to have little or no experience with. Nintendo hadn't really done open worlds since Mario 64 until Monolith soft was bought. I can't think of any Nintendo games that have greatly used Motion and performance Capture in a way that's consistent with modern industry trends. Nintendo has also ignored making games that attempt to have photorealistic graphics.

Sure Nintendo could try and reinvent the wheel in these areas, but other studios have experience in these areas and could bring new knowledge and skills that would ultimately benefit nintendos internal teams creatively.

 

[Allan Holdsworth]

I don't see how Triforce Heroes was rushed. It's reused assets from ALBW yes, but other it has a comparable number of content to FSA.

Paper Mario isn't a traditional RPG, think of the battles as obstacles and not as an XP grind.

For Chibi Robo I'd say the problem wasn't necessary that it was a 2d platformer, but that it wasn't a particularly good one. I love Chibi Robo (the Gamecube and 2nd DS ones are up there with Zelda in the action-adventure genre for me), but sadly it just doesn't sell much so they been trying different formulas.

Based on your descriptions it sounds like you haven't played any of them and are going by what others say. It's fun to form your own opinions sometimes.

 

[Jack The Nipper]

They get stuck in thier own thoughts and ideas.

They are currently stuck in the mentality of making most titles easily accessible. Seems they have need there since 2006 and doesn't look like that's going to change unfortunately

 

[Jubenhimer]

I completely agree with this sentiment. However back to my previous points about buying up studios. Platinum and Tantalus have both spent the past several years working closely with Nintendo. Platinum on Wonderful 101 and With EAD on Starfox Zero. While Tantalus has done two great WiiU ports. (Mass Effect 3 and Twilight Princess) So both would seem to fit your definition of companies that have worked closely with Nintendo and have some links to their internal talent pipeline.

I also think it's an incredibly arrogant attitude to assume there is nothing to be learned from outside sources. Nintendo makes a lot of great games, but there are certain experiences that they seem to have little or no experience with. Nintendo hadn't really done open worlds since Mario 64 until Monolith soft was bought. I can't think of any Nintendo games that have greatly used Motion and performance Capture in a way that's consistent with modern industry trends. Nintendo has also ignored making games that attempt to have photorealistic graphics.

Sure Nintendo could try and reinvent the wheel in these areas, but other studios have experience in these areas and could bring new knowledge and skills that would ultimately benefit nintendos internal teams creatively.

I see you're point. I feel if Nintendo is to buy another studio or two, then they need to make sure it's for a functional reason, like similar development ideologies, or the studio may have expertise in a genre they're unfamiliar with like you said. But what they should not do, is buy studios just for the sake of buying studios. When that happens, they wouldn't be currating and raising fresh face talent, they would instead be literally just be throwing money at established companies and getting them to do the work, rather than doing stuff themselves.

I'm all for collaborations with outside developers, I'm all for the rare studio acquisition. But I am against Nintendo dismantling or shafting the teams of it's in-house software arm, and instead relying on acquired or foreign talent to do the work for them.

What I think Nintendo should do, is create a culture within Nintendo EPD, where each of the 10 or so software groups, and the division itself, operate semi-independently from eachother, and are given very relaxed standards and approval processes. This not only allows more games, but it also allows the teams and designers to freely experiment with new ideas, new gameplay concepts, and new ways of monetization without having the entire company agree upon it. This would be very similar to what Sega did in the Dreamcast era, were they broke off all their in-house teams into 9 semi-autonomus studios that were encouraged to experiment.

 

[jdstorm]

I see you're point. I feel if Nintendo is to buy another studio or two, then they need to make sure it's for a functional reason, like similar development ideologies, or the studio may have expertise in a genre they're unfamiliar with like you said. But what they should not do, is buy studios just for the sake of buying studios. When that happens, they wouldn't be currating and raising fresh face talent, they would instead be literally just be throwing money at established companies and getting them to do the work, rather than doing stuff themselves.

I'm all for collaborations with outside developers, I'm all for the rare studio acquisition. But I am against Nintendo dismantling or shafting the teams of it's in-house software arm, and instead relying on acquired or foreign talent to do the work for them.

What I think Nintendo should do, is create a culture within Nintendo EPD, where each of the 10 or so software groups, and the division itself, operate semi-independently from eachother, and are given very relaxed standards and approval processes. This not only allows more games, but it also allows the teams and designers to freely experiment with new ideas, new gameplay concepts, and new ways of monetization without having the entire company agree upon it. This would be very similar to what Sega did in the Dreamcast era, were they broke off all their in-house teams into 9 semi-autonomus studios that were encouraged to experiment.

It was never my intention to imply that Nintendo shaft their internal teams. Just that at some point it's a numbers game. Say Nintendo EAD has 10 mostly Autonomous teams, and each team takes roughly 2-3 years to make a game. With a typical console cycle taking 5 years. That would mean EAD could output 20 games per console cycle. So assuming Nintendo will keep making versions of their most successful games out of those 20 3D Mario, 2D Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Smash Bros, Splatoon, Animal Crossing, Fire emblem and Zelda. That's almost 50% of their total output predetermined every generation.

So now Nintendo teams have say 10 games each generation to do something new, since Zelda games typically have a 5 year development cycle. Which of their franchises do they choose between. Pimkin, Kirby, Starfox, Fzero, Kid Icarus, WiiSports/Resort, Yoshi, Captain Toad, earthbound, ice climbers, wave race ect that's 20 games from pre existing franchises that EAD would have to service each generation before even broaching the possibility of a new IP.

Bringing in outside studios to increase the total to say 40-60 games a generation would allow Nintendo's internal teams to experiment with new ideas and mechanics, while Nintendo as a company would still be able to service all of their most relevant IP. In addition to the added knowledge gained from bringing in studios with unique experience that EAD might not have

Edit: just like Retro have done with Donkeykong and Metroid, or Monolith with Xenoblade

 

[Jubenhimer]

It was never my intention to imply that Nintendo shaft their internal teams. Just that at some point it's a numbers game. Say Nintendo EAD has 10 mostly Autonomous teams, and each team takes roughly 2-3 years to make a game. With a typical console cycle taking 5 years. That would mean EAD could output 20 games per console cycle. So assuming Nintendo will keep making versions of their most successful games out of those 20 3D Mario, 2D Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Smash Bros, Splatoon, Animal Crossing, Fire emblem and Zelda. That's almost 50% of their total output predetermined every generation.

EAD no longer exists. It merged with SPD last year to form Nintendo EPD. Also, who's to say each game Nintendo develops must have the same development length? And who's to say that Nintendo is even sticking with the traditional console cycle. I fully suspect Nintendo Will be switching to an iOS style of platform with multiple devices, which all run the same software. NX will probably mark the beginning. The point of this was so that Nintendo can develop more games on their own and as many as they can a year. Plus, Fire Emblem is made by Intelligent Systems, not EPD.

So now Nintendo teams have say 10 games each generation to do something new, since Zelda games typically have a 5 year development cycle. Which of their franchises do they choose between. Pimkin, Kirby, Starfox, Fzero, Kid Icarus, WiiSports/Resort, Yoshi, Captain Toad, earthbound, ice climbers, wave race ect that's 20 games from pre existing franchises that EAD would have to service each generation before even broaching the possibility of a new IP.

Nintendo has a lot of IPs. But I'd rather the company focus on new ideas and experiences, and not leech sorely off of nostalgia or brand recognition just to stay afloat. Sure those things can help when you need something to fall back on, or keep consistent profits. But becoming a slave to it limits diversity and innovation. They should've learned that the hard way with Wii U.

Bringing in outside studios to increase the total to say 40-60 games a generation would allow Nintendo's internal teams to experiment with new ideas and mechanics, while Nintendo as a company would still be able to service all of their most relevant IP. In addition to the added knowledge gained from bringing in studios with unique experience that EAD might not have

Edit: just like Retro have done with Donkeykong and Metroid, or Monolith with Xenoblade

I agree that it's good to have the help of outside studios to fill gaps from time to time. What I want Nintendo to do is use external studios to leverage brand recognition and toy around with Nintendo IP's, while the EPD teams focus on innovation and new ideas. Previously, it was done in reverse. EAD would make big brand IPs, while external studios would experiment. We've seen the results of the latter, so I want more of the former.

 

[Dremark]

Nintendo has this sort of "shield" around them that if its not a "main" title, it doesn't matter if the game is bad. Those don't count, so in everyone's mind they always release quality games. Nintendo is still known as the great game making machine because of that thought process.
I have a feeling Nintendo believes this as well. They don't care about spin offs as much as the main games. They're ok with releasing mediocre game.

Honestly, I kind of feel the same way. That thought process has seeped into my head as well. Outside of Zelda games(I'm not a Zelda fan) I just play the main games and I avoid all of the spinoffs.

I don't think that's limited to Nintendo, people make the same concessions for spin offs for other devs. If I complain about how Metal Gear Rising is a total departure from the series people will say it's fine the same way people do for Federation Force.

Also I'm pretty sure they talked about outsourcing more spin offs and such from outside devs a few years back and that's what we're getting now.

Not everything is going to be a hit out if the park especially when outsourcing.

 

[Fancyarcher]

Tropical Freeze will be a classic too.

It's starting to get some more appreciate, so it's already on it's way to classic status.

 

[30yearsofhurt]

All evidence points to 'clueless'.

 

[Fancyarcher]

NX won't sell less than Wii U.

If Nintendo actually somehow screws up the NX, I could see it selling less then Wii-U. That's a big IF of course.

 

[TwistedFreeze]

If Nintendo actually somehow screws up the NX, I could see it selling less then Wii-U. That's a big IF of course.

Even if they screw it up, it'd have a tough time selling worse. The Wii-U was handled insanely poorly. Honestly can't think of any other system in recent times that was this mismanaged

 

[EvilMario]

There is an occasional disconnect from them on what their fans want. For a while, they didn't care what their fans wanted, they were catering to a wider market. Now they've attempted to come back to it and have hit on plenty of things.. Wii U and 3DS have some of my favourite Nintendo titles ever.. but they've also swung and miss more this generation than I can ever remember for my tastes.

The A-teams are all presumably working on stuff for the NX.

Everything else is either B-team, outsourced, or filler, or projects that began while the Wii U and 3DS still had momentum.

Starfox was a Miyamoto passion project, for better or worse.

When they killed Wii's software output so early I heard the same things. "They're working on Wii U games! The launch lineup will be amazing!" It didn't exactly work out like that. I'm pessimistic that Nintendo's lack of Wii U games right now will translation to a better NX launch window.

 

[Dremark]

When they killed Wii's software output so early I heard the same things. "They're working on Wii U games! The launch lineup will be amazing!" It didn't exactly work out like that. I'm pessimistic that Nintendo's lack of Wii U games right now will translation to a better NX launch window.

Killing the Wii's software output was honestly a horrible idea. It felt like once it stopped selling so much they largely moved on and expected lighting to strike twice with the WiiU which it obviously didn't.

If they had done a better job of engaging thier newer audiences to keep them interested and actually gotten the marketing right on the WiiU, they'd be in a much better position then they are now.

 

[Fancyarcher]

Even if they screw it up, it'd have a tough time selling worse. The Wii-U was handled insanely poorly. Honestly can't think of any other system in recent times that was this mismanaged

That's why I think it's unlikely, but knowing Nintendo they might screw up the NX badly, not that I want to see Nintendo fail mind you. It's just that they'll really have to improve things drastically if they want the NX to sell-well.

 

[TwistedFreeze]

That's why I think it's unlikely, but knowing Nintendo they might screw up the NX badly, not that I want to see Nintendo fail mind you. It's just that they'll really have to improve things drastically if they want the NX to sell-well.

I don't disagree but I kind of get the feeling that they have been making the necessary changes. Stuff like Splatoon, Zelda, and the prospect of Nintendo having not only all of their software on one platform but also from handheld developers kind of gives me that feeling. I don't think it'll be perfect, mind you, but definitely a stark improvement

 

[KingBroly]

There is an occasional disconnect from them on what their fans want. For a while, they didn't care what their fans wanted, they were catering to a wider market. Now they've attempted to come back to it and have hit on plenty of things.. Wii U and 3DS have some of my favourite Nintendo titles ever.. but they've also swung and miss more this generation than I can ever remember for my tastes.

When they killed Wii's software output so early I heard the same things. "They're working on Wii U games! The launch lineup will be amazing!" It didn't exactly work out like that. I'm pessimistic that Nintendo's lack of Wii U games right now will translation to a better NX launch window.

They didn't really plan all that well with Wii U. It's like they didn't look at how the HD generation worked out for a lot of developers struggled with the change, not only from a graphical point of view, but how their hardware was made. It was a disaster on all fronts.

With NX, they've had 3 years to look at this and see how they're going to attack this thing again.

 

[jdstorm]

EAD no longer exists. It merged with SPD last year to form Nintendo EPD. Also, who's to say each game Nintendo develops must have the same development length? And who's to say that Nintendo is even sticking with the traditional console cycle. I fully suspect Nintendo Will be switching to an iOS style of platform with multiple devices, which all run the same software. NX will probably mark the beginning. The point of this was so that Nintendo can develop more games on their own and as many as they can a year. Plus, Fire Emblem is made by Intelligent Systems, not EPD.



Nintendo has a lot of IPs. But I'd rather the company focus on new ideas and experiences, and not leech sorely off of nostalgia or brand recognition just to stay afloat. Sure those things can help when you need something to fall back on, or keep consistent profits. But becoming a slave to it limits diversity and innovation. They should've learned that the hard way with Wii U.



I agree that it's good to have the help of outside studios to fill gaps from time to time. What I want Nintendo to do is use external studios to leverage brand recognition and toy around with Nintendo IP's, while the EPD teams focus on innovation and new ideas. Previously, it was done in reverse. EAD would make big brand IPs, while external studios would experiment. We've seen the results of the latter, so I want more of the former.

1. My mistake. I used EAD to describe EPD. I'm aware that games take a different amount of time to make. However 2-3 years felt like a safe average amount. Obviously some games take longer (Zelda ect) other games are much shorter, and even the games as a service model provides its own complication to that number as those titles are designed to be continually developed as long as they are profitable

2. I think it's a balance, ideally you want to continually reinvent existing brands as well as do new things. For instance Batman as a character is almost 100 years old, yet that character is more relevant today then it was when it was first created. Partly because every version caters to the modern audience of its time. Nintendo definitely became risk averse at some point and that hurt it during the Wii/WiiU era where to many its output felt stale.

3. I think ideally you'd want both in to be done in house. Just look at the profits Pokemon Go is making for a 3rd party developer. If Nintendo bought more teams those profits could be kept Inhouse.

 

[Jubenhimer]

1. My mistake. I used EAD to describe EPD. I'm aware that games take a different amount of time to make. However 2-3 years felt like a safe average amount. Obviously some games take longer (Zelda ect) other games are much shorter, and even the games as a service model provides its own complication to that number as those titles are designed to be continually developed as long as they are profitable

2. I think it's a balance, ideally you want to continually reinvent existing brands as well as do new things. For instance Batman as a character is almost 100 years old, yet that character is more relevant today then it was when it was first created. Partly because every version caters to the modern audience of its time. Nintendo definitely became risk averse at some point and that hurt it during the Wii/WiiU era where to many its output felt stale.

3. I think ideally you'd want both in to be done in house. Just look at the profits Pokemon Go is making for a 3rd party developer. If Nintendo bought more teams those profits could be kept Inhouse.

1. Understandable

2. I say the Wii U was more affected by this. Nintendo I feel was more experimental on the Wii and DS up until 2010, maybe late 2009 was when they began running dry.

3. Of course, I would expect a big 3D Mario or a new mainline Zelda to be done in-house. But I do think Nintendo should farm out their IPs to external developers more often, either for brand leverage or struggle to come up with ideas. This free's up their EPD studios to do more experimental stuff. If there's one thing Nintendo needs right now, it's a massive creative renaissance ala Dreamcast-era Sega.

 

[Oersted]

1. Understandable

2. I say the Wii U was more affected by this. Nintendo I feel was more experimental on the Wii and DS up until 2010, maybe late 2009 was when they began running dry.

3. Of course, I would expect a big 3D Mario or a new mainline Zelda to be done in-house. But I do think Nintendo should farm out their IPs to external developers more often, either for brand leverage or struggle to come up with ideas. This free's up their EPD studios to do more experimental stuff. If there's one thing Nintendo needs right now, it's a massive creative renaissance ala Dreamcast-era Sega.

OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Internally developed.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Internally developed.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.

 

[TheDinoman]

OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Internally developed.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Internally developed.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.

Intelligent Systems isn't a subsidiary of Nintendo.

 

[Oersted]

Intelligent Systems isn't a subsidiary of Nintendo.

I was never sure about them, thanks.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

a) Quality has nothing and will never have anything to do with sales. The WiiU is largely a marketing failure, among other factors. b) You don't need me to tell you this, but the drop is due to them losing the Wii's audience of the middle-aged to the elderly, which wasn't the kind of success that could be repeated to begin with.

This cannot possibly be true. About 50% of the Wii's userbase were 18 or below; if the Wii U had lost everyone above 18 and retained everyone under, it would still have been a 50 million seller. The Wii U did much worse than the Wii not only with 'casual' demographics, but also key demographics that Nintendo have always historically dominated, like 12-17 year olds. It was an all around failure.

Some of that comes down to marketing, I agree entirely. Some comes down to hardware - the gamepad's screen was poorly utilized by almost all games, and could have been removed to reduce the hardware price, or partially reduce the hardware price and put a little more graphical power in. But much of the blame comes down to software. I love Tropical Freeze, I love Mario Kart 8, but the Wii U has in general a very poor line-up compared to every other Nintendo console - there's a few gems but almost no depth to the library.

 

[Spieler Eins]

a) Quality has nothing and will never have anything to do with sales. The WiiU is largely a marketing failure, among other factors.

When it comes to flagships, it sure as hell does. Franchises like Mario and Donkey Kong would never crater like that, if their games were still as good and unique as in the past. You could have called the console Wii2, thrown a trillion ads at New Mario Bros 5 and its dumb 3D version, all of its unbearable minigame collections or crippled Starfox rehash, but WiiU wouldn't have sold that much more. WiiU titles simply are as unremarkable as it gets while being way too onesided. If you had a Wii, there's almost no experience you didn't already get last gen and the rest is either niche or mediocre.

WiiU objectively has the smallest franchise/genre variety of any Nintendo console, it objectively has the smallest amount of games with high critical acclaim, it objectively has the smallest amount of IPs shaking up their core formula or evolving.
It's an awful library for any gamer that expects value for 300 bucks, casual or core. It's gullible to solely blame marketing for the biggest sales dropoff ever and some of the most famous franchises completely losing hardware selling power plus usually having each franchises worst selling entry to date - including Gamecube. It's impossible to ignore the elephant in the room: Their games have become mostly average or crappy and unless NX proves otherwise, Nintendo's been bleeding talent for years.

 

[Oersted]

snip

If you are trying to say that the high quality software output moved hardware despite the hardware being WiiU than you are right for once.

 

[VLQ]

OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Internally developed.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Internally developed.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes partly outsourced

 

[PSFan]

If you are trying to say that the high quality software output moved hardware despite the hardware being WiiU than you are right for once.

He's not saying that at all. He's saying that if the software was as high quality as some people here on gaf keep trumpeting, they would have moved more WiiU hardware.

 

[Oersted]

Zelda Triforce Heroes partly outsourced

Okay okay lol.


OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Partly outsourced.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Outsourced.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.

He's not saying that at all. He's saying that if the software was as high quality as some people here on gaf keep trumpeting, they would have moved more WiiU hardware.

My post was a apparently a not clever enough way to say he is talking rubbish. Gonna be more on the nose next time.

 

[Chezzymann]

This cannot possibly be true. About 50% of the Wii's userbase were 18 or below; if the Wii U had lost everyone above 18 and retained everyone under, it would still have been a 50 million seller. The Wii U did much worse than the Wii not only with 'casual' demographics, but also key demographics that Nintendo have always historically dominated, like 12-17 year olds. It was an all around failure.

Some of that comes down to marketing, I agree entirely. Some comes down to hardware - the gamepad's screen was poorly utilized by almost all games, and could have been removed to reduce the hardware price, or partially reduce the hardware price and put a little more graphical power in. But much of the blame comes down to software. I love Tropical Freeze, I love Mario Kart 8, but the Wii U has in general a very poor line-up compared to every other Nintendo console - there's a few gems but almost no depth to the library.

But the first party line up was fine. If anything in my opinion it's miles better than Sony or Microsoft's output. It's that there was almost no third party support to be found.

The reason the Wii U failed was not because of first party problems, it's because of third party problems. The lack of big fall releases, sports games, licensed games, etc. The library doesn't have enough variety to justify a purchase, it only works as a companion console. I'd imagine the number of people who ONLY own a Wii U this gen is astronomically low

 

[Shiggy]

But the first party line up was fine. If anything in my opinion it's miles better than Sony or Microsoft's output. It's that there was almost no third party support to be found.

The reason the Wii U failed was not because of first party problems, it's because of third party problems. The library doesn't have enough variety to justify a purchase, it only works as a companion console. I'd imagine the number of people who ONLY own a Wii U this gen is astronomically low

The first party lineup was also an issue as it gave Wii and 3DS owners little reason to actually buy a Wii U. A lot of games were just too similar to their Wii or 3DS versions (NSMB, Mario 3D, Wii Fit, Wii Sports, DKC, Wii Party). The really differentiating titles didn't come until 2014/2015 (Mario Kart 8, Hyrule Warriors, Splatoon, Mario Maker).

On its own, the lineup might have been fine. For most people who played Wii and 3DS, it was just not enough reason to go for a more or less sameish experience again.

OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Partly outsourced.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Outsourced.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.

Nintendo develops lots of titles together with other studios. If we're going by that metric, there are only 10-15 internally developed Wii U titles made by Nintendo. They cannot create enough products internally to sustain two systems.

 

[PSFan]

Okay okay lol.


OP names

Star Fox Zero. Partly outsourced.

Metroid Prime Federation Force. Outsourced.

Zelda Triforce Heroes. Partly outsourced.

Paper Mario Color Splash. Outsourced.

Chibi-Robo Zip Lash. Chibi Robo was never developed by Nintendo.

Mario Tennis Ultra Smash. Outsourced.





My post was a apparently a not clever enough way to say he is talking rubbish. Gonna be more on the nose next time.

But he wasn't talking rubbish, he's right. All you have to do is look at their dwindling console sales from gen to gen. With the Wii being an outlier because of the casuals.

 

[Chezzymann]

The first party lineup was also an issue as it gave Wii and 3DS owners little reason to actually buy a Wii U. A lot of games were just too similar to their Wii or 3DS versions (NSMB, Mario 3D, Wii Fit, Wii Sports, DKC, Wii Party). The really differentiating titles didn't come until 2014/2015 (Mario Kart 8, Hyrule Warriors, Splatoon, Mario Maker).

On its own, the lineup might have been fine. For most people who played Wii and 3DS, it was just not enough reason to go for a more or less sameish experience again.

Eh, I disagree. 3D world was a wonderful sequel to 3D land and really fleshed out the format. Yes its the same type of game, but in the same way that Super Mario World was the same type of game as the original super mario bros. DKC tropical freeze I hear is fantastic and has some of the best music/artwork in the series. I dont really know enough about the Wii series. But to me their first party line up was great and provided a lot of unique experiences. Hell even Captain Toad was an awesome little unique game with the inventive level design you expect from EAD.

I'd bet that if there was basic third party support like the Wii or gamecube the sales would have been better, but even then a lot of their audience was taken away by mobile. Mobile gaming has nearly replaced console gaming in japan, and is growing in the west. And the confusing marketing was absolutely an issue, and its strange to see people downplaying that. There's still lots of people who think the Wii U was just a Wii extension like the wii fit balance pad. And the majority of people dont even know it exists.

So its a large combination of factors, but I dont really think first party quality is one of the primary reasons for it collapsing. Hell if you compare its first party titles to playstation or xbox to me its not even a contest, Wii U is miles better and has a lot more quality. But they're selling fine, and thats mainly because of a successful marketing message for the most part (outside of xbox's DRM screwup in early 2013 lol) and strong third party support. Also, targeting a market that still buys consoles like they used to still helps. They don't need a large amount of high quality first party titles to sell their console.

Honestly this is just a strange thread. All the general consensus opinions about the wii u's failure I usually see around here are flipped. Maybe its the title.

 

[Oersted]

But he wasn't talking rubbish, he's right. All you have to do is look at their dwindling console sales from gen to gen. With the Wii being an outlier because of the casuals.

Rubbish, bullshit, nonsense... pick your word.

But here is Chezzymann's post, explaining the blatantly obvious reality in a more detailed manner.

Eh, I disagree. 3D world was a wonderful sequel to 3D land and really fleshed out the format. Yes its the same type of game, but in the same way that Super Mario World was the same type of game as the original super mario bros. DKC tropical freeze I hear is fantastic and has some of the best music/artwork in the series. I dont really know enough about the Wii series. But to me their first party line up was great and provided a lot of unique experiences. Hell even Captain Toad was an awesome little unique game with the inventive level design you expect from EAD.

I'd bet that if there was basic third party support like the Wii or gamecube the sales would have been better, but even then a lot of their audience was taken away by mobile. Mobile gaming has nearly replaced console gaming in japan, and is growing in the west. And the confusing marketing was absolutely an issue, and its strange to see people downplaying that. There's still lots of people who think the Wii U was just a Wii extension like the wii fit balance pad. And the majority of people dont even know it exists.

So its a large combination of factors, but I dont really think first party quality is one of the primary reasons for it collapsing. Hell if you compare its first party titles to playstation or xbox to me its not even a contest, Wii U is miles better and has a lot more quality. But they're selling fine, and thats mainly because of a successful marketing message for the most part and strong third party support. Also, targeting a market that still buys consoles still helps. They don't need a large amount of high quality first party titles to sell their console.

Honestly this is just a strange thread. All the general consensus opinions about the wii u's failure I usually see around here are flipped. Maybe its the title.

 

[PSFan]

Rubbish, bullshit, nonsense... pick your word.

But here is Chezzymann's post, explaining the blatantly obvious reality in a more detailed manner.

But it's none of those words either. And that post you quoted is only an opinion. And my opinion is that Chezzyman's post is a lot of the words you said. I found 3DWorld boring as hell, and it really felt like a NSMB game in 3D to me.

 

[Oersted]

But it's none of those words either. And that post you quoted is only an opinion. And my opinion is that Chezzyman's post is a lot of the words you said. I found 3DWorld boring as hell, and it really felt like a NSMB game in 3D to me.

You are a picky soul with words.

Your opinion on 3D World is irrelevant. As irrelevant as thinking Uncharted Golden Abyss is a great/bad game.

Unappealing hardware. Bad marketing. Irrelevant thirdparty support. Those were the issues.

The high quality first party output has, as we have seen again and again, moved consoles.

Also, it is incredible naive to think that quality equates great sales. Ask FZero/Wipeout fans.