Should Nintendo be more innovative?

First of all, let me say that their old franchises are perfectly fine and probably offer more innovation than some completely new IPs.

However, I do feel that it will take more than only making sequels to their old franchises to trully impress gamers with their upcomming console.

Now the last thing I want is that they start copying the competition and start to chuck out Modern Warfare or Halo clones left and right.

We don't need that.

What we need is fresh gaming concepts that also offer in-deepth and rewarding gameplay.

You know, the stuff that trully innovates and brings progress to the gaming industry.

I know they are capable of that, they just need to invest their resources wisely and not bet everything on proven concepts.

Talented 3rd parties willing to colaborate with them should play a role here too.

What do you think?

First of all, let me say that their old franchises are perfectly fine and probably offer more innovation than some completely new IPs.

However, I do feel that it will take more than only making sequels to their old franchises to trully impress gamers with their upcomming console.

Now the last thing I want is that they start copying the competition and start to chuck out Modern Warfare or Halo clones left and right.

We don't need that.

What we need is fresh gaming concepts that also offer in-deepth and rewarding gameplay.

You know, the stuff that trully innovates and brings progress to the gaming industry.

I know they are capable of that, they just need to invest their resources wisely and not bet everything on proven concepts.

Talented 3rd parties willing to colaborate with them should play a role here too.

What do you think?

nameless12345

Agreed. but the problem that Nintendo has is that they just rehash the same IP's with every new system. It's Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, Donkey Kong, over and over and over again. The repetition is just killing me.

I'm OK with how they do things now. I would like it if the DS was going to be supported more though. Felt like it was cut off in the prime of its life. So many great games, and then bam, drains a few good ones here and there.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

First of all, let me say that their old franchises are perfectly fine and probably offer more innovation than some completely new IPs.

However, I do feel that it will take more than only making sequels to their old franchises to trully impress gamers with their upcomming console.

Now the last thing I want is that they start copying the competition and start to chuck out Modern Warfare or Halo clones left and right.

We don't need that.

What we need is fresh gaming concepts that also offer in-deepth and rewarding gameplay.

You know, the stuff that trully innovates and brings progress to the gaming industry.

I know they are capable of that, they just need to invest their resources wisely and not bet everything on proven concepts.

Talented 3rd parties willing to colaborate with them should play a role here too.

What do you think?

Johnny_Rock

Agreed. but the problem that Nintendo has is that they just rehash the same IP's with every new system. It's Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, Donkey Kong, over and over and over again. The repetition is just killing me.

Well, I'm fine with them doing sequels to their old franchises but at the same time I'd expect some more freshness. The last prominent new IP they did was Pikmin as far as I remember.

SMG2 has more innovations in one level than some games have in the entire playthrough. What Nintendo is new IPs, not innovation. So yeah, I agree with what you are saying, but not your title.funsohng

Innovative new IPs sounds about right to me.

SMG2 was more innovative for the 3D platformer genre than any previous 3D platformer. They are plenty innovative. But then again, Nintendo can never please those who hold them to impossible standards.foxhound_fox

So expecting atleast one or two attractive new IPs per generation is "impossible standards" ?

And again, I'm not disagreeing with the above written.

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

First of all, let me say that their old franchises are perfectly fine and probably offer more innovation than some completely new IPs.

However, I do feel that it will take more than only making sequels to their old franchises to trully impress gamers with their upcomming console.

Now the last thing I want is that they start copying the competition and start to chuck out Modern Warfare or Halo clones left and right.

We don't need that.

What we need is fresh gaming concepts that also offer in-deepth and rewarding gameplay.

You know, the stuff that trully innovates and brings progress to the gaming industry.

I know they are capable of that, they just need to invest their resources wisely and not bet everything on proven concepts.

Talented 3rd parties willing to colaborate with them should play a role here too.

What do you think?

nameless12345

Agreed. but the problem that Nintendo has is that they just rehash the same IP's with every new system. It's Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, Donkey Kong, over and over and over again. The repetition is just killing me.

Well, I'm fine with them doing sequels to their old franchises but at the same time I'd expect some more freshness. The last prominent new IP they did was Pikmin as far as I remember.

But Nintendo had a lot of new IPs this gen the problem is most of them weren't released in North America or they were on Handhelds (Which is why most of System Wars ignores Nintendo's new IPs.)

Agreed. but the problem that Nintendo has is that they just rehash the same IP's with every new system. It's Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, Donkey Kong, over and over and over again. The repetition is just killing me.

Johnny_Rock

I don't get it. Am i the only one who see's the vast differences between Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy?

Not needed really. Innovation for the sake of innovation can be far worse than no innovation. Anyway,

1. Some Nintendo sequels feel more fresth than some new IPs.
2. Nintendo made/published plenty of new IPs this gen. Many of those however, were never localized outside Japan. Xenoblade, The Last Story and Pandora's Tower are just some of the many new IPs coming from them this gen.

So expecting atleast one or two attractive new IPs per generation is "impossible standards" ? And again, I'm not disagreeing with the above written.nameless12345

The way people keep acting like Nintendo made no new IPs this gen is laughable. Nintendo made plenty of new IPs on DS and Wii. Not all were intended for the core gamer but the same can be said for Kinect Sports. So obviously Nintendo are being innovative with hardware and software or people wouldn't be copying them.

And Nintendo are milking their games no more than MS and Sony milk their IPs.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]SMG2 was more innovative for the 3D platformer genre than any previous 3D platformer. They are plenty innovative. But then again, Nintendo can never please those who hold them to impossible standards.nameless12345

So expecting atleast one or two attractive new IPs per generation is "impossible standards" ?

And again, I'm not disagreeing with the above written.

Just because the US didnt get it doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

edit: Fox beat me to it :P

Not needed really. Innovation for the sake of innovation can be far worse than no innovation.

Maroxad

Agreed. But at the same time without innovation there can be no real progress.

I don't get it. Am i the only one who see's the vast differences between Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy?el3m2tigre

They should be less "Innovative" with hardware

And more software innovation is always welcome

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]So expecting atleast one or two attractive new IPs per generation is "impossible standards" ? And again, I'm not disagreeing with the above written.foxhound_fox

See, here is the problem - I just happen not to care for traditional JRPGs. I'd rather them make "off-the-hook" stuff like, idk, Doshin the Giant? Cubivore?

Something in that vein, but also with in-deepth gameplay.

See, here is the problem - I just happen not to care for traditional JRPGs. I'd rather them make "off-the-hook" stuff like, idk, Doshin the Giant? Cubivore? Something in that vein, but also with in-deepth gameplay.nameless12345

Super Mario Galaxy has done more to the platforming genre than any other new IP has done to their respective genre this generation, and, if you are predisposed to dislike new games from a same IP, several people say that Xenoblade is yet another prime example of a massive progress in a genre (RPG and jRPG). There are other examples, but these are the most evident and unquestionable ones.

And if innovation isn't your only criteria, you have Metroid, New Super Mario Bros., GoldenEye 007 and Mario Kart Wii (just to name a few examples).

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]So expecting atleast one or two attractive new IPs per generation is "impossible standards" ? And again, I'm not disagreeing with the above written.nameless12345

See, here is the problem - I just happen not to care for traditional JRPGs. I'd rather them make "off-the-hook" stuff like, idk, Doshin the Giant? Cubivore?

Something in that vein, but also with in-deepth gameplay.

I dont know if I would call Xenoblade a traditional JRPG really.

• No random encounters
• In fact, combat does not transport you to another world
• Just like most wrpgs, gear is visible on your character. If shulk equips armor, you can see the armor on him for instance.
• Conversation options in various events.
• Each and every party member have affinity with eachother, dephending on what you say and what you do in combat, these can go up and down. Unlike typical "rpgs" made by Bioware it is not just with the protagonist, but also with the other party members.
• Combat is rtwp and characters can move around on the battlefield
• Minimal grind to beat the game. Some side quests may be a bit grindy but even there, most quests require you to kill usually no more than 3 of something.
• Once you gain your 4th party member, you no longer need to bring the protagonist along. But until a certain part of the game, it is highly recommended you bring him along if you are facing mechon.

If you want new IPs, you're free to buy them. No one is foring you to buy Nintendo games. Nintendo should keep doing whatever they want to, it has worked great for them and their fans so far.IronBass

So you're saying that if someone happens not to like Mario or Zelda games they should just forget about Nintendo?

No one is foring you to buy Nintendo games. Nintendo should keep doing whatever they want to, it has worked great for them and their fans so far.IronBass

[QUOTE="el3m2tigre"]I don't get it. Am i the only one who see's the vast differences between Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy?foxhound_fox

Excuse my ignorance, but can you tell me just how Sunshine and Galaxy progressed the genre since Mario 64?

Appart from the graphics and the water pump/gravity maipulation, I personally view Sunshine and Galaxy as steps back from Mario 64 (which was trully revolutionary in my opinion).

[QUOTE="IronBass"]If you want new IPs, you're free to buy them. No one is foring you to buy Nintendo games. Nintendo should keep doing whatever they want to, it has worked great for them and their fans so far.nameless12345

So you're saying that if someone happens not to like Mario or Zelda games they should just forget about Nintendo?

[QUOTE="IronBass"]If you want new IPs, you're free to buy them. No one is foring you to buy Nintendo games. Nintendo should keep doing whatever they want to, it has worked great for them and their fans so far.nameless12345

So you're saying that if someone happens not to like Mario or Zelda games they should just forget about Nintendo?

You've been proven wrong already, and you're just narrowing your vision to see only what you want. Nintendo has several other games, not only Mario and Zelda.

Excuse my ignorance, but can you tell me just how Sunshine and Galaxy progressed the genre since Mario 64?

Appart from the graphics and the water pump/gravity maipulation, I personally view Sunshine and Galaxy as steps back from Mario 64 (which was trully revolutionary in my opinion).

nameless12345

I dont even know what to say

And if innovation isn't your only criteria, you have Metroid, New Super Mario Bros., GoldenEye 007 and Mario Kart Wii (just to name a few examples).

iHarlequin

Let's see: okay, Metroid Other M is in 3D, but I don't see how different it is to, for example, Super Metroid in gameplay terms. New SMB. is more or less Mario Bros. in 2.5D, GoldenEye is a remake of an old FPS and Mario Kart Wii continues the Mario Kart tradition. Don't see that much innovation here personally.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"]If you want new IPs, you're free to buy them. No one is foring you to buy Nintendo games. Nintendo should keep doing whatever they want to, it has worked great for them and their fans so far.funsohng

So you're saying that if someone happens not to like Mario or Zelda games they should just forget about Nintendo?

Well Blizzard is a game company while Nintendo isn't just a game company.

[QUOTE="iHarlequin"]

And if innovation isn't your only criteria, you have Metroid, New Super Mario Bros., GoldenEye 007 and Mario Kart Wii (just to name a few examples).

nameless12345

Let's see: okay, Metroid Other M is in 3D, but I don't see how different it is to, for example, Super Metroid in gameplay terms. New SMB. is more or less Mario Bros. in 2.5D, GoldenEye is a remake of an old FPS and Mario Kart Wii continues the Mario Kart tradition. Don't see that much innovation here personally.

Quoting myself:

AND IF INNOVATION ISN'T YOUR ONLY CRITERIA.

You're not even bothering to read what we say, you just want to bash the games and the platform/company.

Well Blizzard is a game company while Nintendo isn't just a game company.

nameless12345

nintendo covers up pretty much every genre with a different franchise for each. and, like you said, they do bring innovation within those estabilished franchises. sure something awesome and groundbreaking would be amazing, but it's not the kind of thing you ask just one company to do it, much less the one that bothers with innovation the most. what i'm trying to say is that your criticism is pointed at the wrong direction.BrunoBRS

I actually wasn't criticizing them for the lack of innovation, but rather questioning whether people would like to see more innovative concepts (read: new "AAA" IPs) from them. Reading the responses I think they don't want them at all.

I certainly feel they [Nintendo] are capable of delivering new innovative IPs.

So you're saying that if someone happens not to like Mario or Zelda games they should just forget about Nintendo?nameless12345

Not really...nintendoboy16

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]nintendo covers up pretty much every genre with a different franchise for each. and, like you said, they do bring innovation within those estabilished franchises. sure something awesome and groundbreaking would be amazing, but it's not the kind of thing you ask just one company to do it, much less the one that bothers with innovation the most. what i'm trying to say is that your criticism is pointed at the wrong direction.nameless12345

I actually wasn't criticizing them for the lack of innovation, but rather questioning whether people would like to see more innovative concepts (read: new "AAA" IPs) from them. Reading the responses I think they don't want them at all.

I certainly feel Nintendo are capable of delivering new innovative IPs.

also, asking for new IPs for the sake of new IPs is pointless. kirby's epic yarn wouldn't be any different if it was really "prince fluff's yarn world of magic whatever". "but it would be a new IP!", you say, to which i reply "and did it make any difference? is the game more fun?"

using an estabilished character/IP to try out new things gives you the safety of knowing the character will back up the sales, while a new IP has yet to prove itself to the crowd, which is why most new IPs hold themselves back in terms of innovation and would rather go the safe route.

so if anything, using estabilished IPs help innovate even more than going out with a new IP that may or may not be a sales success.

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]Not really...IronBass

That doesn't mean gamers are happy with Nintendo. They have had a negative reception towards them since N64.nintendoboy16

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]That doesn't mean gamers are happy with Nintendo. They have had a negative reception towards them since N64.IronBass

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]nintendo covers up pretty much every genre with a different franchise for each. and, like you said, they do bring innovation within those estabilished franchises. sure something awesome and groundbreaking would be amazing, but it's not the kind of thing you ask just one company to do it, much less the one that bothers with innovation the most. what i'm trying to say is that your criticism is pointed at the wrong direction.BrunoBRS

I actually wasn't criticizing them for the lack of innovation, but rather questioning whether people would like to see more innovative concepts (read: new "AAA" IPs) from them. Reading the responses I think they don't want them at all.

I certainly feel Nintendo are capable of delivering new innovative IPs.

also, asking for new IPs for the sake of new IPs is pointless. kirby's epic yarn wouldn't be any different if it was really "prince fluff's yarn world of magic whatever". "but it would be a new IP!", you say, to which i reply "and did it make any difference? is the game more fun?"

using an estabilished character/IP to try out new things gives you the safety of knowing the character will back up the sales, while a new IP has yet to prove itself to the crowd, which is why most new IPs hold themselves back in terms of innovation and would rather go the safe route.

so if anything, using estabilished IPs help innovate even more than going out with a new IP that may or may not be a sales success.

Yeah, they could just make sequels to their established franchises for the rest of their time, but my whole point is that this is not the only thing I'd like to see from them. As much as I find their flagship franchises good, I also think they would need some completely fresh ideas.

Like, I don't know, what Rare was doing once on their systems? Just a thought :)

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]That doesn't mean gamers are happy with Nintendo. They have had a negative reception towards them since N64.nintendoboy16

Were somegamers happy with some Sonic games? Are Beyond Good and Evil and Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy two of the worst games of all time? Sales do not indicate the happiness of gamers, it's just a sign of how popular a game is.nintendoboy16

We aren't talking about "some" gamers. You can find "some" people happy and "some" unhappy about everything. We are talking in general (more than "some").

Obviously people weren't happy with Sega way of handling their consoles, nor enough people showed interested in BGaE.

But people keep showing constant interest in Nintendo products.

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I actually wasn't criticizing them for the lack of innovation, but rather questioning whether people would like to see more innovative concepts (read: new "AAA" IPs) from them. Reading the responses I think they don't want them at all.

I certainly feel Nintendo are capable of delivering new innovative IPs.

nameless12345

also, asking for new IPs for the sake of new IPs is pointless. kirby's epic yarn wouldn't be any different if it was really "prince fluff's yarn world of magic whatever". "but it would be a new IP!", you say, to which i reply "and did it make any difference? is the game more fun?"

using an estabilished character/IP to try out new things gives you the safety of knowing the character will back up the sales, while a new IP has yet to prove itself to the crowd, which is why most new IPs hold themselves back in terms of innovation and would rather go the safe route.

so if anything, using estabilished IPs help innovate even more than going out with a new IP that may or may not be a sales success.

Yeah, they could just make sequels to their established franchises for the rest of their time, but my whole point is that this is not the only thing I'd like to see from them. As much as I find their flagship franchises good, I also think they would need some completely fresh ideas.

Like, I don't know, what Rare was doing once on their systems? Just a thought :)

Nintendo IS innovative. Each system released has been something new, and it looks like the tradition will continue with WiiU. I just watched a bunch of the tech demos and it looks like it will be able to put out some impressive looking games.

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]Were some gamers happy with some Sonic games? Are Beyond Good and Evil and Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy two of the worst games of all time? Sales do not indicate the happiness of gamers, it's just a sign of how popular a game is.IronBass

We aren't talking about "some" gamers. You can't find "some" people happy and unhappy about everything. We are talking in general (more than "some").

Obviously people weren't happy with Sega way of handling their consoles, nor enough people showed interested in BGaE.

But people keep showing constant interest in Nintendo products.

All I'm saying is that gamers have not been happy with Nintendo for a LONG time, regardless of high sales and critic scores. Even when they do good, they are doing wrong. Proving that they are one of the most frowned upon companies in gaming, like Activision, EA, Capcom, and Ubisoft.nintendoboy16

Just give me some more SMG games and I won't regret my Wii purchase as much. Blabadon