I'm Done: Panda's Unbiased Look into Nintendo's "Next-Gen" Plans

People have to realize that while Nintendo may have made a less powerful console than its competitors its still a very capable machine. Not only that but is Nintendo themselves really putting out crap for this system? Did they start the parade of less than average games being ported, rushed, and developed for the Wii? No. That was actually Ubisoft. But I'd rather not put a blame on one particular dev.

Its the third party devs who saw what ubi did and now are trying to mirror that get rich quick scheme that ubisoft got away with. Only problem is im not sure that if Nintendo knew this would be happening would they still have traversed the road they did? Nintendo itself is putting out the major hits for the Wii and the blockbuster titles...that are (yes panda) fun. Likewise, developers with longstanding relationships with Nintendo are doing this also.

The developers who haven't had a good relationship with Nintendo in the previous gen are the ones trying to make a quick buck. Thank god though for Nintendo, SquareEnix, Kojima, Suda and others for taking the Wii seriously....

FoamingPanda

That's all I hear. 

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hoffgod"]

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Perception affects a market - Panda, from the viewpoint of economics, is correct. Our demand is what shapes the market. In the case of the crappy Wii games that sell hundreds of thousands of copies (red steel) - the market demanded mediocrity.
subrosian

Jaws: Unleased on the PS2 and Xbox sold more than 250k copies.
50 Cent: Bulletproof sold more than 1 million copies.
Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex for the PS2 sold nearly 5 million copies worldwide, as did Medal of Honor: Rising Sun for the PS2.
Hell, Who Wants to be a Millionare? for the PC sold 3 million copies!

But yet somehow we've made it this far with games coming out that are this good.
Something tells me it'll be okay.

I think the idea is (and I don't necessarily think it will or has to come true, its just a theory) that no console before the Wii has had such a deliberate focus on simple, easy-to-get-into games, and could lead to less developers being interested in making more complex games.

as long as complex video games continue to sell well they will always be around. Some of the largest gaming franchises are complex in design... I dont think they will go anywhere.

Rising cost of HD games and a growing market for "simple" aka cheap-to-make games will turn some eyes if it keeps up. The one thing really saving the market is that the simple games market is being completely cannibalized by Nintendo - it's really hard for a third party to guarantee sales with the juggernaut just dropping the same titles with a better character backing them (mario) and still dropping enough "****c" franchises to ensure a hardcore game can't sell as well on the Wii even to the niche audience.

have complex games stopped selling? No! Once Mass Effect comes out, look at its sales and be happy ok?

/discussion 

Flamebait dosen't require essay-like posts.

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hoffgod"]

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Perception affects a market - Panda, from the viewpoint of economics, is correct. Our demand is what shapes the market. In the case of the crappy Wii games that sell hundreds of thousands of copies (red steel) - the market demanded mediocrity.
subrosian

Jaws: Unleased on the PS2 and Xbox sold more than 250k copies.
50 Cent: Bulletproof sold more than 1 million copies.
Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex for the PS2 sold nearly 5 million copies worldwide, as did Medal of Honor: Rising Sun for the PS2.
Hell, Who Wants to be a Millionare? for the PC sold 3 million copies!

But yet somehow we've made it this far with games coming out that are this good.
Something tells me it'll be okay.

I think the idea is (and I don't necessarily think it will or has to come true, its just a theory) that no console before the Wii has had such a deliberate focus on simple, easy-to-get-into games, and could lead to less developers being interested in making more complex games.

as long as complex video games continue to sell well they will always be around. Some of the largest gaming franchises are complex in design... I dont think they will go anywhere.

Rising cost of HD games and a growing market for "simple" aka cheap-to-make games will turn some eyes if it keeps up. The one thing really saving the market is that the simple games market is being completely cannibalized by Nintendo - it's really hard for a third party to guarantee sales with the juggernaut just dropping the same titles with a better character backing them (mario) and still dropping enough "****c" franchises to ensure a hardcore game can't sell as well on the Wii even to the niche audience.

Thats where your wrong. Read my posts above. Nintendo isnt the one cannibalizing the gaming market. Its the lazy devs. Nintendo is partly to blame but the majority of the problems have always lied with the third party devs. FFCC sold very well on GC. RE4 did too. Lots of 3rd party titles sell very well on Nintendos systems. Unfortunately many 3rd party devs have looked at ubisofts huge profit of making these horrible ports and are trying to mirror their business model.

Its not about games to these devs. Its about Money. And some of that can be applied to Nintendo but like I said its hardly their fault that the Wii is getting the trash it has. Nintendo has only come out with stellar games. 3rd party devs don't care and won't because the crap they make keeps on selling...god knows why, but it does.

Your mostly right though. These devs can make money without taking time on the games so why the hell would they release a blockbuster title? 

Flamebait dosen't require essay-like posts.

rpg9000owner

agreed 

[QUOTE="Japanese_Monk"]

[QUOTE="Grodus5"]I stopped reading at the part it said "Nintendo games are not fun." Tell me when you have more fun playing a shooter then me playing Super Paper Mario. Oh thats right, you can wait hunderds of years, but it will never come.subrosian

Exactly he says unbiased but then he says "nintendo games arent fun". I know of plenty games that are fun...made by Nintendo. SSBM comes to mind. After all thats in MLG so theres something to say right there.

No one is unbiased. That's like claiming you've never had a life experience - every experience you have creates a bias, whether you admit to it or not. Find women attractive? bias. Like action movies? bias. Prefer wine to beer? bias. Claiming he's unbiased was a bad move on his part - frankly on anyone's part. Even if you own all three systems, c'mon, you're going to have games you like more than others.

I'm a biased, mildly elisitst, hardcore gamer and I admit it - I used to like Nintendo a lot more than I do now, I used to hate Microsoft, hey, yeah, I've held different opinions too. In any case, no one is unbiased.

The problem is, there is such a thing as unbiased writing... or looking at something from both views. Instead he takes one side and attacks as if everything he said is fact. Which means he didn't even try at an unbiased piece and should not have even tried to make us believe that it was. 

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="kansasdude2009"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Hoffgod"]

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Perception affects a market - Panda, from the viewpoint of economics, is correct. Our demand is what shapes the market. In the case of the crappy Wii games that sell hundreds of thousands of copies (red steel) - the market demanded mediocrity.
Japanese_Monk

Jaws: Unleased on the PS2 and Xbox sold more than 250k copies.
50 Cent: Bulletproof sold more than 1 million copies.
Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex for the PS2 sold nearly 5 million copies worldwide, as did Medal of Honor: Rising Sun for the PS2.
Hell, Who Wants to be a Millionare? for the PC sold 3 million copies!

But yet somehow we've made it this far with games coming out that are this good.
Something tells me it'll be okay.

I think the idea is (and I don't necessarily think it will or has to come true, its just a theory) that no console before the Wii has had such a deliberate focus on simple, easy-to-get-into games, and could lead to less developers being interested in making more complex games.

as long as complex video games continue to sell well they will always be around. Some of the largest gaming franchises are complex in design... I dont think they will go anywhere.

Rising cost of HD games and a growing market for "simple" aka cheap-to-make games will turn some eyes if it keeps up. The one thing really saving the market is that the simple games market is being completely cannibalized by Nintendo - it's really hard for a third party to guarantee sales with the juggernaut just dropping the same titles with a better character backing them (mario) and still dropping enough "****c" franchises to ensure a hardcore game can't sell as well on the Wii even to the niche audience.

Thats where your wrong. Read my posts above. Nintendo isnt the one cannibalizing the gaming market. Its the lazy devs. Nintendo is partly to blame but the majority of the problems have always lied with the third party devs. FFCC sold very well on GC. RE4 did too. Lots of 3rd party titles sell very well on Nintendos systems. Unfortunately many 3rd party devs have looked at ubisofts huge profit of making these horrible ports and are trying to mirror their business model.

Its not about games to these devs. Its about Money. And some of that can be applied to Nintendo but like I said its hardly their fault that the Wii is getting the trash it has. Nintendo has only come out with stellar games. 3rd party devs don't care and won't because the crap they make keeps on selling...god knows why, but it does.

Your mostly right though. These devs can make money without taking time on the games so why the hell would they release a blockbuster title?

[QUOTE="rpg9000owner"]

Flamebait dosen't require essay-like posts.

wklzip

agreed

agreed X2 

[QUOTE="NATATO"] And Nintendo games aren't fun? Sounds pretty biased to me. I don't think you've played Wii SPorts, WWSM, LOZ: TP, or SPM. FoamingPanda

Absolutely, out of the games you mentioned, I find that only Wiisports is fun (and only fun in its most limited, primitive, and base meaning of the term).  See my blog post on pleasure for an explanation (Panda's are extremely lazy and hate typing).

Self-owned.

[QUOTE="LinkChicky"]I really, truly hope you're done after this because your constant whining and moaning about Nintendo is way past old. It's pretty much all you do. Stating your displeasure every once in a while is all well and good, but doing so almost daily is entirely unproductive and tiresome. If you're really that disgusted with the way the company is going, try to start a letter writing campaign of some kind. Then you can at least say you did something. In other words, put up or shut up. Kthanxbye.FoamingPanda

And I find it horribly disturbing to watch people advocate and support the collective genocide of meaningful gaming on a daily basis, as much as you find my valid and unbiased critcism tiresome.

Define "meaningful gaming" with some examples, please.  And don't refer me to any of your blogs, I don't wanna read that crap. 

Not everything Nintendo has released has been "stellar" - Twilight Princess? Solid. Wii Sports? Fun. Wii Play? eh... Excite Truck? eh.....

I think that's an important point - if devs can make money by being cheap, what's the incentive to create a product like Resident Evil 4? Really push the system? Nintendo does it to keep loyalists, but what about Ubisoft? What's the incentive?
subrosian

Infereior games that are very popular have been around forever as one person has already pointed out.  These games make tons of money nad let the devs. ride off of it and make more.  The only thing that keeps these games alive is that.  There's no way to stop it either, it is just going to happen.  You can't complain about the Wii propigating this when the games on the Wii are actually solid games but simplistic in design.  What does it matter when you have an overly complex game with a 2 mile draw distance, 1080i rez., a trillion polygon character model, and an interlacing story line that spans many characters andplaces when you can play a flash game that is much more fun and ingaging?  The only reason you want to play the more complex game is to see where the story goes next, where as the flash game is one dimensional and will get boring and you will probably never play it again.  So, in the end, the complex game will beat out the simplistic games, but only after the simplistic games have been done to death.  So don't worry, complex games still have a market.

I come back from a fulfilling meal and yet still no response, positive or negative to my  first post and no answer to my second?  Can you guys read my writing, or does it only show up in responses?SA--X

Not everything Nintendo has released has been "stellar" - Twilight Princess? Solid. Wii Sports? Fun. Wii Play? eh... Excite Truck? eh.....

I think that's an important point - if devs can make money by being cheap, what's the incentive to create a product like Resident Evil 4? Really push the system? Nintendo does it to keep loyalists, but what about Ubisoft? What's the incentive?
subrosian

True. Wii play is a definate eh...but it was after all a tech demo and the inclusion of a controller is more than enough to warrant a purchase of any tech demo.

 Anyway that completely right. Theres absolutely no incentive to make an excellent product on the Wii when you can make a horribly port of an xbox game like Splinter cell or Far cry. Thats my only gripe about the Wii. I have no problems with Nintendo itself except there online structure.

I do not own a Wii simply because what 3rd party devs are doing to it. I feel they are raping it of any dignity and respect that it had gained. Right now my gaming system of choice is the 360. And that probably won't change unless I see a change in the way 3rd party devs treat the system. Hopefully Brawl, SMG, Final Fantasy,  and no more heroes can convince me otherwise...

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

[QUOTE="LinkChicky"]I really, truly hope you're done after this because your constant whining and moaning about Nintendo is way past old. It's pretty much all you do. Stating your displeasure every once in a while is all well and good, but doing so almost daily is entirely unproductive and tiresome. If you're really that disgusted with the way the company is going, try to start a letter writing campaign of some kind. Then you can at least say you did something. In other words, put up or shut up. Kthanxbye.svetzenlether

And I find it horribly disturbing to watch people advocate and support the collective genocide of meaningful gaming on a daily basis, as much as you find my valid and unbiased critcism tiresome.

Define "meaningful gaming" with some examples, please. And don't refer me to any of your blogs, I don't wanna read that crap.

oh but don't you see? If he refers you to his blogs he knows no one will read them, and then you can't argue back. FoamingPanda knows what he is doing people... its not as if he just likes to do flaimbait, but he enjoys the idea of being above others. If he can prove that you are not having fun with your games, it makes his displeasure all the more pleasurable (but of course I mean that in the most basic use of the word). 

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Not everything Nintendo has released has been "stellar" - Twilight Princess? Solid. Wii Sports? Fun. Wii Play? eh... Excite Truck? eh.....

I think that's an important point - if devs can make money by being cheap, what's the incentive to create a product like Resident Evil 4? Really push the system? Nintendo does it to keep loyalists, but what about Ubisoft? What's the incentive?
SA--X

Infereior games that are very popular have been around forever as one person has already pointed out. These games make tons of money nad let the devs. ride off of it and make more. The only thing that keeps these games alive is that. There's no way to stop it either, it is just going to happen. You can't complain about the Wii propigating this when the games on the Wii are actually solid games but simplistic in design. What does it matter when you have an overly complex game with a 2 mile draw distance, 1080i rez., a trillion polygon character model, and an interlacing story line that spans many characters andplaces when you can play a flash game that is much more fun and ingaging? The only reason you want to play the more complex game is to see where the story goes next, where as the flash game is one dimensional and will get boring and you will probably never play it again. So, in the end, the complex game will beat out the simplistic games, but only after the simplistic games have been done to death. So don't worry, complex games still have a market.

I actually bit a chunk of my lip off when you said "1080i rez" - interlacing is a sin. If there's one thing Nintendo did right this generation, it's having more readily available component cables, making it so third parties could make component cables, and supporting 480p both on Wii and GCN games. The worst thing they did was making some of the VC games 480i only. T

Interlacing looks like crap on non-CRT sets, and with CRT sets pretty much gone from the market (it's hard to find a quality CRT anymore, like a Sony Wega, Philips, et cetera - high / medium end is gone) and with CRT going to be completely gone in the next ten years we really need to make sure every source is progressive scan.

I mean, I like to go back and play old games every now and then - you don't want them to be unplayable because they don't make TVs that work with that signal anymore...

[QUOTE="peaceful_anger"][QUOTE="SA--X"]I come back from a fulfilling meal and yet still no response, positive or negative to my  first post and no answer to my second?  Can you guys read my writing, or does it only show up in responses?SA--X

Panda, you suck at everything you attempt, which is already little as it is.  You blow at repsonding to anything worth it and your words are too big for the little people.  Answer my questions because you are an ungodly troll that burdens us day to day.

Your font sucks, I rule, Nintendo wins.

That good?

[QUOTE="peaceful_anger"][QUOTE="SA--X"]I come back from a fulfilling meal and yet still no response, positive or negative to my  first post and no answer to my second?  Can you guys read my writing, or does it only show up in responses?SA--X

Panda, you suck at everything you attempt, which is already little as it is.  You blow at repsonding to anything worth it and your words are too big for the little people.  Answer my questions because you are an ungodly troll that burdens us day to day.

Your font sucks, I rule, Nintendo wins.

That good?

Now you're talking. :P 

I guess trollings not my thing. let me go back and read the first post of this thread and take pointers...SA--X

Sheep will fall into anything... me being part sheep... I know. Nintendo gets picked on too much for being one of the best developers ever. If Nintendo continues to make a butt-load of money, and they continue to invest in high quality game makers, then Nintendo will have no use for 3rd party and the sheep will be forever happy! :D 

[QUOTE="SA--X"]I guess trollings not my thing. let me go back and read the first post of this thread and take pointers...kansasdude2009

Sheep will fall into anything... me being part sheep... I know. Nintendo gets picked on too much for being one of the best developers ever. If Nintendo continues to make a butt-load of money, and they continue to invest in high quality game makers, then Nintendo will have no use for 3rd party and the sheep will be forever happy! :D 

nintendo made majora's mask. That game failed because it was too much of a work of art, and only a true video game fan could appreciate it, in every respect. So if you like art over popularity, you should give nintendo a little more credit. They will make another game like MM, you just wait. Those games are rare though, so it will be later than sooner.GunSmith1_basic

MM was amazing. To me it was the best Zelda. better than OOT and TP. With ALTTP closely following behind. 

I stopped reading at the part it said "Nintendo games are not fun."  Tell me when you have more fun playing a shooter then me playing Super Paper Mario.  Oh thats right, you can wait hunderds of years, but it will never come.Grodus5

hmm I stopped reading when I realised who posted it.

Supporting Nintendo, particuarly their 20 year old franchises that create an enormous feeling of nostalgia, has become rationally unplausible this generation because Nintendo has offered a console that is over three years obsolete in terms of hardware.  A fan might love Nintendo with all their heart, but, if they were to judge Nintendo by an objective or historical standard, they would find that they were supplied with an antiquated console that does not take full advantage of next-gen tech. 

Nintendo games on the market today are not "fun." 

FoamingPanda

[QUOTE="SA--X"]I guess trollings not my thing. let me go back and read the first post of this thread and take pointers...kansasdude2009

Sheep will fall into anything... me being part sheep... I know. Nintendo gets picked on too much for being one of the best developers ever. If Nintendo continues to make a butt-load of money, and they continue to invest in high quality game makers, then Nintendo will have no use for 3rd party and the sheep will be forever happy! :D 

Oh teh Utopia!!!!! 

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

[QUOTE="SA--X"]I guess trollings not my thing. let me go back and read the first post of this thread and take pointers...SER69

Sheep will fall into anything... me being part sheep... I know. Nintendo gets picked on too much for being one of the best developers ever. If Nintendo continues to make a butt-load of money, and they continue to invest in high quality game makers, then Nintendo will have no use for 3rd party and the sheep will be forever happy! :D

Oh teh Utopia!!!!!

I hope nintendo buys out Factor 5 next... they have always had a good relationship! 

Foamingpanda, do you have any life outside of video games? laughingman42

Ironically, the Wii is the best shot in this generation of enhancing the perception of gaming beyond that of a child's toy.

Panda doesn't realize that because he's too attached to his subjective assessments of quality.

Iyethar

To expand upon this thought, let me say that interactive entertainment cannot dispel prejudice by dint of any measure of sophistication, quality or artistic merit.  There can be two types of prejudices concerning interactive entertainment - the first being prejudices about the nature of the thing in itself, the second being prejudices about the nature of its users.  Either type will prevent its holder from experiencing the merit in any example of interactive entertainment.  Those who hold such prejudices will avoid it or dislike it, and they do not trust its proponents.

Therefore Nintendo's focus on accessibility is key.  Panda questions the value of casual/weekend gamers to the game market, to which I answer that they are essential.  To dispel prejudices against gaming and its users, every person must know that many of their peers consider the activity part of a healthy and good life.  To accomplish this is a simple matter of selling a game console to as many people as conceivably possible, and providing as much software as possible for as many types of users as possible.

This necessarily encompasses software for those who do not care about cinematic gaming or complex and dynamic simulations.  It doesn't exclude those that do, however.  The software design of games has much room in which to progress, most of which is not limited by the Wii.

There are many cases in which a person's direct interests and preferences may dictate that an HD console is a better choice than a Wii.  Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of those cases involve persons who are already participating in the home console market.  For those who historically haven't participated in the console market, the improvements of the HD consoles over the last generation don't have value.

The Wii is a good value proposition to prior participants and new users alike, and provides lower development costs to developers.  It's a good platform to accomplish the goal of having large numbers of users and a large number of games.  Quantity of users makes anti-gaming prejudice harder to hold.  Quantity breeds variety, and a variety of users and a variety of games designed for them makes new prejudices harder to form.

I also have two pieces of advice for Panda.  The first is that claiming to be unbiased is absurd by definition and alerts the suspicion of a clear and rational thinker.  The second is a recommendation from William Strunk, Jr. - omit needless words.

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

[QUOTE="laughingman42"]Foamingpanda, do you have any life outside of video games? Shinobishyguy

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

CJL13

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985.  For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right.  Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game.  They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985.  For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right.  Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game.  They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

Teufelhuhn

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

[QUOTE="CJL13"]

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

Teufelhuhn

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985.  For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right.  Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game.  They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

I think the main reason for that is due to all the spinoffs Nintendo characters have been in. It's ok for someone like Snake to be a secret character in a couple games, but when you have someone in several spinoffs it's hard to make a story without screwing up with the timeline. Nintendo stories have evolved somewhat, but I agree that the main point (Good vs. Evil) remains the same.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

CelineDion

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

When did I say Metroid sucked?  I'm a big fan of the series.  :? 

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="CJL13"]

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

CJL13

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

I think the main reason for that is due to all the spinoffs Nintendo characters have been in. It's ok for someone like Snake to be a secret character in a couple games, but when you have someone in several spinoffs it's hard to make a story without screwing up with the timeline. Nintendo stories have evolved somewhat, but I agree that the main point (Good vs. Evil) remains the same.

Personally I would like to see them attempt some more complex material in new franchises, then they wouldn't have to worry about screwing up continuity or making longtime fans upset. 

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

CelineDion

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

This post is made of win. 

[QUOTE="CJL13"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="CJL13"]

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

Teufelhuhn

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

I think the main reason for that is due to all the spinoffs Nintendo characters have been in. It's ok for someone like Snake to be a secret character in a couple games, but when you have someone in several spinoffs it's hard to make a story without screwing up with the timeline. Nintendo stories have evolved somewhat, but I agree that the main point (Good vs. Evil) remains the same.

Personally I would like to see them attempt some more complex material in new franchises, then they wouldn't have to worry about screwing up continuity or making longtime fans upset. 

That's the thing though, everytime Nintendo has done something creative and diferent (story wise at least) critics failed it, fans turned away, and casuals ignored it.  So basically, Nintendo would rather make a new IP about it, even if it is just one game, then put Zelda, Mario, or Metroid on the line to do it.

[QUOTE="CelineDion"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

Teufelhuhn

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

When did I say Metroid sucked? I'm a big fan of the series. :?

Then there isnt really a problem with the series.... Why do we need emotions in games if you can have fun with a game like metroid? 

[QUOTE="CJL13"]

Let's compare shall we?

These pics alone prove that Nintendo has evolved. Nintendo doesn't take 20 year old ideas and slap a Nintendo character on them.

Teufelhuhn

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

Zelda always has a different story going on... you may know who is good and who is evil, but the plot has twists and is presented in a unique way. OoT had an epic feel to the story surrounding gods, nature, music, and time. I thought it was brilliant! MM was more orgainic in its story telling. You found out about the story by going around these 3 days helping people. Very unique and amazing in its own rights. WW is probably the least story bound... and is pretty simplistic. TP on the other hand has a story that edges you between the difference of good vs. evil. Who is the bad characters? Is Midna to be trusted? Who is Zant? ect.

Mario is probably the only franchise who's story has been the same throughout.

I really dont see what you getting at, but o well... 

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="CelineDion"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

RedLobsterpwns

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

When did I say Metroid sucked? I'm a big fan of the series. :?

Then there isnt really a problem with the series.... Why do we need emotions in games if you can have fun with a game like metroid?

what are you TALKING ABOUT!?!?!? Zelda thrives on emotion, and Metroid gives off an erie chill. Sure its good to have fun, but games like Zelda and Metroid are more complex than that. Stop thinking that Nintendo only creates simplistic affairs and that the only thing good in a game is to have fun.

Nintendo creates a wide variety of games and is great at all types. 

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

kansasdude2009

I liked Metroid Prime's style of storytelling, my point was that once you'd pieced it all together it was still just "the space pirates are bad, Samus and the Chozo are good".   

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

Teufelhuhn

I liked Metroid Prime's style of storytelling, my point was that once you'd pieced it all together it was still just "the space pirates are bad, Samus and the Chozo are good".   

What about prime 2?  It had a great story that was above the space pirates vs Samus.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="CelineDion"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

Those games may have evolved in terms of graphics in gameplay, but in terms of their story and subject material they're still stuck in 1985. For a game like Metroid, its still perfectly obvious who the good and bad guys are and there's no ambiguity about what your purpose is or whether what you're doing is "morally" right. Nothing really makes you think, or even stimulates you emotionally.

Of course I'm not saying thats what a Metroid game should be like, but Nintendo hasn't even gotten anywhere close to attempting such a game. They seem quite content to stick with the "hero-against-all-odds" scenario for all of their games.

RedLobsterpwns

The same could be said about the original Star Wars Trilogy or Lord of the Rings.

Do they suck, too?

When did I say Metroid sucked? I'm a big fan of the series. :?

Then there isnt really a problem with the series.... Why do we need emotions in games if you can have fun with a game like metroid?

Again...I never said there was a problem with the series, I just used it as an example of Nintendo's typical plot devices.  I've enjoyed Metroid games since the NES, I still enjoy them.  But I need more than just games where I don't have to think, I like to be challenged every once in awhile.  I like games like Killer7 and Shadow the Colossus where I think to myself:  "what am I doing, and why am I doing it?  Is this character really a 'good guy', or is there more to this than meets the eye?"

If you don't need games like this, then that's your prerogative I suppose.   

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

SA--X

I liked Metroid Prime's style of storytelling, my point was that once you'd pieced it all together it was still just "the space pirates are bad, Samus and the Chozo are good".

What about prime 2? It had a great story that was above the space pirates vs Samus.

It was Luminoth (good) vs. the Ing (bad).  The polarization was so obvious, it extended into the gameplay and visuals. 

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

Teufelhuhn

I liked Metroid Prime's style of storytelling, my point was that once you'd pieced it all together it was still just "the space pirates are bad, Samus and the Chozo are good".

ok, I guess im confused then. I suppose I understand what you mean, but that type of story usually involves political and religious systems that are corrupt, and are usually found in RPG's... not action titles. 

[QUOTE="SA--X"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

Actually, Metroid Prime had one of the most unique ways of telling a story... but you had to be patient. It wasn't thrust in your face, but you slowly found out about the Chozo, the Space Priates, and how you were affecting them. It gave me chills sometimes... I loved Metroid Prime :D

Teufelhuhn

I liked Metroid Prime's style of storytelling, my point was that once you'd pieced it all together it was still just "the space pirates are bad, Samus and the Chozo are good".

What about prime 2? It had a great story that was above the space pirates vs Samus.

It was Luminoth (good) vs. the Ing (bad).  The polarization was so obvious, it extended into the gameplay and visuals. 

Good job, you anylized who's side everyone is on, now get into the story parts of the game...