Original title: Nintendo, Revolution, mainstream and some random toughts. Originally posted on Nintendo Revolution forums.

I always thought Nintendo was all about hardcore and older gamers on the last two generations, after Sony and later MS joined the business. They kept ignoring marketing and mass-appeal games, and kept focus on gameplay. I was afraid for a moment that Nintendo would cease their console operations on usa, where the market was dominated by their competitors, and lock themselves on japan and exports to europe.

Oddly enough, while browsing some 3rd party websites, most of the poll show a great interest on Revolution. Sega and EA have Revolution on first with 40%-50% of the voters interest. There are others where NRev is on first or second place. But these companies aren't focused on hardcore gamers; how can a console which specs, features, release date/price, upcoming games and controllers are almost all unknown, released from the company on the last place, often referred as kiddie and ignorant of their customers wishes etc can get that much interest over the other console and they makers?

I don't think the whole backward compatibilities, which is great and by itself is a reason why I would buy it, or the "THIS IS GOING TO BE REVOLUTIONARY" is enough to sparkle that much interest. Or maybe it is? Maybe not releasing any info on the console created more hype than showing extreme graphically enhaced videos of games running on high definition and superb physics; why you ask? Possibly because all the features are on the gamers imagination right now. If you check this same forums, you can find a whole of "What If" posts. We are all talking about rumors, what we do expect, what we imagine on the hints, or what we want to be there when we open the box, like I did when I was a kid, opening my christmas gift that was an Atari 2600.

So, I think marketing is not just about having a specs war, realtime/prerender discussion on every board across the world, 42" plasma TVs that 1% of the gamers can afford, sheeps, cows or even lemmings. But that worked before, right? And this is the reason it won't work now. It happened before, it's past, been there, seen that; now what? We don't know, we can just imagine. And I think it'll be good. I want it to be good. Actually, I need it... well, you got my point.

Nintendo isn't going anywhere. They had a good fight with Sega, they were first, almost had the monopoly over the world gaming industry, but then abused 3rd party developers and consumers, and now they are paying for it. I don't think they are stupid enough to not learn from their mistakes (how could a company that stupid be #1 after all). Each generation is a step on the unknown, and this will not be different. No one knows what to expect, at least from Nintendo.

Each generation, from the Intellivision/2600 (that's what I remember) to the N64/PSX/DC (don't bash my for including DC on the previous generation ), I've seen an evolution. Each generation, faster processors gave birth to better graphics, better sound, but most important, new ways of gaming (like the born of online gaming, FPS, TPS, TPA). Sidescrolling in 2D turned into isomeric, which then turned in polygonal full 3D. Then what? PS2/GC/Xbox came to polish the rough surface of the polygons and textures. Instead of million of colors, we talk about million of polygons per second. Instead of how many megabits, we talk about how many teraflops. Instead of 2/4 split screen, we have 32 players online and link features.

But, now, just upgrading horse power, doesn't seem to continue this evolution. Online isn't something new. Backward compatibility is 15 years old at least. Graphics and sound get better each generation, but it's something that must happen, not an added feature. The added features are mostly about turning a console into a multimedia device/computer hybrid. PC gaming is faded to die and to be the ultimate form of gaming at the same time?

But now, what about gaming? Nothing new, the same old franchises, the same old gameplay, the same "controller held with both hand we invented ourselves" (Satoru Iwata if I'm not mistaken).

I believe that deep down in our minds, everyone want something that some gaming companies can't see: new ways of gaming. Something to surprise, blow us out of the water. It's not like we can forget that we already played one game, and a sequel with the very same gameplay will do that. But that's what we have been offered for this generation. I agree there were some surprises, I can only think of PC and Nintendo games because that's what I have in my hands, but I do not ignore the other ones. I've been a Sega fanboy in the past, a big mistake that I don't plan to repeat, but yet, I don't have enough time and money to be a multiconsole hardcore gamer. So I stick to what apeal to me.

New ways of gaming has been a Nintendo BIG marketing slogan. Reggie speaks that a lot in Nintendo's E3 press conference. They even show that with some Nintendo DS. Even tought these are bashed as hell by fanboys and mainstream gamers, for being for kids, some of these games are selling big. I think it's like I felt when playing Final Fantasy VI a few years ago, Skies of Arcadia a few months ago or Final Fantasy I&II a few weeks ago: "I absolutely love J-RPGs, but I can't play more than half and hour anymore. I can't stand the random battles. I love the story, they should turn this into a movie, but I can't enjoy this awesome game. What's wrong with me?"

Now I see that nothing is wrong with me, but after playing three of these games, what's the point? Good story? Ok, turn it into a movie and I'll enjoy it. But I can't stand the random battles anymore. Why don't you try a faster peaced game? Ow, it's there already, and it's not J-RPG. Zelda? Yes, pretty cool, but been there already.

I feel strange. I can't enjoy these games anymore, but I still love them. I'm trying to finish FF6 for the third time. I can't play for more than 10 minutes, but I force myself to do so. I'm playing Guild Wars, because I loved Diablo, but it gets boring after some time. I want to play these games, even if I don't have a good time. The same happens to FPS and RTS games.

I'm so attached to these genres I love, to the same formula that worked before. I can't see myself playing Nintendogs instead of Command and Conquer. Or electroplankton istead of Guild Wars. I feel like I would love to play the NES/SNES games, but now, I'm a bit afraid of the deja-vu effect. These are the classics, that build the pillar to the genres we have today. But we did that already. Will we enjoy it? Probably. Will we feel nostagic? Obviously. Will it surprise anyone? Not even the kids.

The most weird part of today gaming refers to the kids. Gaming is for kids, my father told me when I got my gamecube last year, you are 21 and should focus on your university and work. I used to think the same. But with the ammount of mature games coming around, game publishers seems to disagree. More than that, games for kids are bashed now. But bashed by the very same audience they are intended to. This is the MTV, Resident Evil and Playboy era. Kids don't want colorful graphics. The need dark hallways with mutant soldiers and a big -censored- gun. Adult players like those as well, to the same extent, but I don't see they bashing Pikmin i.e. J.Allard (Microsoft press conference) pointed the hardcores as 18-28 (or was it 18-34?) years old. But that's because the games are rated 18+, so in theory, only 18+ plays these games. What isn't true. You can easily check that by playing a mature game that supports voice comm.

So, what's the point? Let's feed them with blood, bfgs, bouncing breasts and linking park. These sell. Guaranteed. Don't forget bloom effects, by the way.

It feels like the game industry reached a point where it can't go forward. If someone try something new, people will bash it for being for freaks, nerds, kids or any other minority that people think they are not part. If it's more of the same, people will bash for being a sequel/rehash/copy, but it'll sell anyway, and the publishers will continue to feed us that.