• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Steve Kent blasts Nintendo, 7 rules for fixing nintendo

1st Born

Member
gofreak said:
Between Zelda and RE4, amongst the smaller names, Nintendo should retain mindshare among the hardcore going into next-gen. I don't think they can finish much more strongly in terms of gaining back marketshare, within a year, though, but keeping a good rep with "gamers" is important and they should do that.


Didn't Nintendo try this very thing at the end of the N64's life-cycle? Resident Evil 0 got pushed back to the GameCube (which didn't help much). RE4 will have a bigger impact than RE0, that's for sure, but you have to remember that the PS2 version will be available before the next-generation begins.

I too liked what DJ had to right up.
 
Whatever marketing budget Nintendo has left, they should just blow it all on Resident Evil 4.

Zelda won't need it, and the other stuff is nice, but really who cares.
 

Pimpwerx

Member
Forget Revolution. Nintendo's brand is worthless in the console market. Two flops in a row does that to you. Honestly, I think the Revolution is an exercise in futility. But whatever. They'll release it, it'll bomb in all three territories, and hopefully they devote some time to saving their last stronghold, the handheld market. Ironically, I think Revolution might end up being what kills them, not PSP. :lol Don't mind me, I've been firmly in the Nintendo is doomed camp since they dropped to $99 and still lost ground to the Xbox. Anyone thinking they have a chance in the console market is deluding themselves. PEACE.
 
I dunno, for a guys that writes for MSNBC, this article isn't all that well put together or his editor is asleep at the wheel.

I call fake.
 
I don't think they have a chance barring a miracle (but then again Super Mario Bros. and Pokemon were basically miracles) of competing directly with Sony or MS.

I do think they'll be satisfied selling 20-30 million Revolutions if they can manage that.

Knowing Nintendo's bizarre luck though, they'll end up making some anime franchise that ends up dwarfing even Pokemon.
 

Azih

Member
soundwave05 said:
Whatever marketing budget Nintendo has left, they should just blow it all on Resident Evil 4.
Even that won't help. Even if they manage to move a large number of cubes for RE4, all those gamers will finish the game, look around and go 'um, now what?.. Zelda in four months' and that will destroy all the goodwill built up by RE4.
 
Pimpwerx said:
Forget Revolution. Nintendo's brand is worthless in the console market. Two flops in a row does that to you. Honestly, I think the Revolution is an exercise in futility. But whatever. They'll release it, it'll bomb in all three territories, and hopefully they devote some time to saving their last stronghold, the handheld market. Ironically, I think Revolution might end up being what kills them, not PSP. :lol Don't mind me, I've been firmly in the Nintendo is doomed camp since they dropped to $99 and still lost ground to the Xbox. Anyone thinking they have a chance in the console market is deluding themselves. PEACE.

Amen. A right thinking corporation could turn it around by doing the things Kent was describing, but Nintendo will probably fuck it up. Oh well. Either way, we all win as gamers. Either a good competitive 3rd console or less consoles to buy and more money to spend on more games.
 

goomba

Banned
"Nintendo's brand is worthless in the console market. Two flops in a row does that to you"

I certainly wouldnt class n64 as a flop, it did around 35 million. And if the gamecube is a "failure" then so is the xbox, the difference between them is so marginal.
 

Che

Banned
junkster said:
Ya know, some of you really need to get some perspective. Nothing is ever pure good or evil, white or black, etc.

Americanize, americanize, americanize simply means "get off your stubborn, greedy, lazy asses and cater to your biggest market before you go under."

Nobody said Nintendo needs to kill Japanese influence, culture, or games. If America has become the biggest market then the goal should be to tip the balances more towards said market. Make the same stuff and add american games on top of it! Just because The Guy Game and Britney's Dance Beat come out doesn't mean you have to buy them. It really shouldn't take a business degree to understand that.

A few minor quibbles but otherwise a brilliant article. GG Steve.

Actually it's not just this sentence it was the whole paragraph under it. When he says that Nintendo should concentrate on the more brainless genres like sports and FPSs he sounds plain stupid. Who cares what the idiotic public in USA and EU wants? I prefer Nintendo becoming a niche company than watching them sell out and start publishing what the brainless mainstream crowd wants. Yeah I agree the cute characters in every single freaking game are starting to annoy me too, as Mario in every single Nintendo sports game and I agree that it might be good to start making games look more mature, but plz if they do what he's implying and concentrate on the crap genres, only bad could come from this for us gamers. I swear sometimes fans think of their favorite company's interest first, and their own far second. And the fact that only one Japanese company made it into the U.S. market’s top 10 games only prooves how stupid average joe is, and not that Jap companies need to change.

Btw who earned the tag?
 

Che

Banned
Bob White said:
The hell?

Where the hell are you from then?

EU. But that doesn't really matter. Mainstream gamers have taken over the industry and they're driving it nowadays. Do you think that if real gamers were the majority, EA would be one of the best (if not the best) selling publishers? So I say screw the casual gamers and just publish quality stuff. It's the only positive thing about Nintendo's stubborness. They don't give a shit about them.
 

Bob White

Member
Mainstream gamers have taken over the industry and they're driving it nowadays. So I say screw the casual gamers and just publish quality stuff. It's the only positive thing about Nintendo's stubborness. They don't give a shit about them.

Bah. If bungie and rockstar can make good games AND make them appeal to the 'casuals', why the fuck cant nintendo do it?

People buy what they like and nintendo isn't making shit that they like. It's not their fault, it's nintendo's.
 
Che the problem with your arguments are that your taste in games = crap. Japanese games have been on the decline due to quality this gen. It just isn't there like last gen. That's a fact.

and start publishing what the brainless mainstream crowd wants."

These games seem pretty brainless: Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, etc.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Bob White said:
Bah. If bungie and rockstar can make good games AND make them appeal to the 'casuals', why the fuck cant nintendo do it?
Yeah, I mean, I'm sure you could make a game that appeals to the casuals, too, right?
 

Bob White

Member
Yeah, I mean, I'm sure you could make a game that appeals to the casuals, too, right?
If I had the power to, maybe. But what the fuck do I have to do with anything?

"Okay, Nintendo can't make games that appeal to the masses anymore but I bet YOU can't!"

???
 
Amir0x said:
Fix'd for accuracy.

I don't agree. Many Japanese games are relying on tried and true formulas in game play that have existed for 20 years. RPG's for instance have hardly evolved at all. You still walk into towns, talk to everyone and they tell you the same shit, almost all the gameplay that can be pulled from the turn based combat system has been stretched to breaking, and the storytelling is still filled with long bouts of text, and visuals remain overly colorful and without mood or atmosphere. Time for all that shit to get shelved or rethought.
 

JJConrad

Sucks at viral marketing
I still don't believe that Steve Kent would write this. Many of the points are only look at one minute aspect and pay no attention to the big picture. And what's with the use of "chic?" ....Word of the day?


1. Abandon the ‘belle of the ball’ mentality.
While this is probably the point I agree with the most, many of his opinions is far from the truth.

Nintendo is far from "in trouble." There somehow seems to be this idea that Nintendo is on a razor-thin edge of going out of business. The only publisher that gives them a challenge is EA and the two make up about half of the worldwide market.

I don't know why he's criticizing Nintendo for having a shortage of DS's. Every system has shortages at launch and Nintendo out-shipped Sony 6 to 1. Sony's had a shortage of PS2 all year and Microsoft is jeopardizing their so-called momentum by failing to meet demand this past holiday.

They probably could kiss the medias butt a little more. But I'd much rather the media stops being shills for the publishers... I know it'll never happen.

2. Forget the bottom line.
Going from, probably, his best point in this article straight to the dumbest point. If you really want to see Nintendo go thrid-party, then you'll want them to forget the bottomline.

Sega was very aggressive during the Genesis and it served them well. Unfortunately the Saturn turned on them and they were forced to rush to the next console. Forgetting the bottomline was what pushed the DC but ultimately killed it, taking Sega along with it.

Sony can't forget about its bottomline... it keeps getting smaller. Its bottomline is what has created this massive shortage of PS2s and has prevented them from getting more PSPs on the shelves. The Xbox' momentum was created by a lack of PS2s. The company as a whole can no longer afford to take losses created by hardware, we may be seeing shortages of Sony systems into 2007.

Let's face it when people say "forget the bottomline" they mean that Nintendo should be doing what Microsoft is doing. "Why should Nintendo make nearly a billion dollars a year when they can lose so much more?" For all of their momentum, they didn't keep up with demand, even though that demand wasn't that much greater than the year before and even may have Nintendo shipped more for the holiday 2003 than they did holiday 2004.

Marketshare isn’t everything. Microsoft is at a point in its history when the can loss money to gain marketshare. Nintendo, Sega, and Sony all had similar phases. What going to happen to MS when they try to cash the momentum in. Sega couldn't do, Sony is having problems.

One last point, if you look at the point in history when the PS1 surpassed the N64, it was the same time when the Gameboy name exploded in the market. Nintendo’s marketshare in the entire video game industry has been fairly steady for the last 12 years.



3. Know your market and stick to it.
Nintendo knows their market better than any gaming pundit. The market isn’t the kiddies. It’s the families. Even if little Timmy wants GTA3, that doesn’t mean Timmy’s mom wants him to have it and will buy something she thinks is more appropriate. Nintendo’s knows there market very very well.

4. Americanize, Americanize, Americanize
Nintendo will never get enough American developers to satisfy this demand. W’ve heard this complaint even on the N64 when Nintendo had Lucasarts, Midway, and Acclaim in their back pocket. Granted, Microsoft has garnered a lot of US support, but much of that success comes from the near absence of Japanese support. Short of buying EA, this will always be a stigma.

5. Keep doing what you do right
The problem is that no one agrees on what to is right. My opinion is that Nintendo needs to play to their strengths, keeps using their franchise, and keep the company financially sound. This forum is full of people who disagree.

6. Stop with the mid-course corrections and hold to the basics
I don’t understand how what Nintendo is doing is any different from any of the other consoles.

7. Either do Revolution right or don’t do Revolution at all Nintendo will stay in the console business until it proves no longer profitable to them. They are still profitable, despite the past 2 generation.

I believe that we may very well be nearing the final generation of consoles as we know them. Video games will eventually all become portables. It the nature of technology; TV’s, radios, phones and computers have all gone in that directions. As technology advances the disadvantages of handhelds will be reduced. Convenience will win out.

Nintendo has (maybe even by accident) positioned themselves very well for the future
 

Che

Banned
CrimsonSkies said:
Che the problem with your arguments are that your taste in games = crap. Japanese games have been on the decline due to quality this gen. It just isn't there like last gen. That's a fact.

and start publishing what the brainless mainstream crowd wants."

These games seem pretty brainless: Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, etc.

It's not the quality that declined it's the idiocy of the crowd that increased. And considering that licensed or marketed and hyped to death games sell more than many great Japanese games shows how stupid the mainstream gamers are. If I were you and liked (like you) every single western mainstream crap game that exists, hey, I would say the exact same thing about my taste in games. And yes most of the examples you mentioned are pretty brainless and that's why Nintendo shouldn't concentrate on them*.

*edit: but plz do not compare Nintendo's creativity even in those games with other western companies.
 

etiolate

Banned
I remember when Steven Kent actually had something different to say.

5. Keep doing what you do right

Except all the other rules would stop that. There is a lot of stuff about the industry that is assbackwards right now and Nintendo is suffering from it. It's not the other way around.

God dammit Steve you just legitimized every stupid IGN weekly update.
 

Ironclad

Member
Warm Machine said:
I don't agree. Many Japanese games are relying on tried and true formulas in game play that have existed for 20 years. RPG's for instance have hardly evolved at all. You still walk into towns, talk to everyone and they tell you the same shit, almost all the gameplay that can be pulled from the turn based combat system has been stretched to breaking, and the storytelling is still filled with long bouts of text, and visuals remain overly colorful and without mood or atmosphere. Time for all that shit to get shelved or rethought.
I have to disagree with this. First of all, you just post one genre, yet there are many different types of games that come out of Japan. You say that Japanese games are on the decline due to lack of quality, and a tried and true formula. Well, take one look at Pikmin 2. It is definetly a quality title, and does not follow this "formula" you propose.
Also, you say that RPG's out of Japan are becoming stale and unconventional. Well, I ask you to take one look at SMT: Nocturne and say that to me. Look at Xenosaga. Xenosaga is infused with so much philosophy and IIRC, the cutscenes contain spoken dialogue. SMT: N also tosses the JRPG conventions you mentioned to the curve with it's post-apocalyptic nature, and absolutely brilliant artstyle. The only RPG that I can think of that fits your description is PM: TTYD, but that was an absolutely excellent title.
 
CrimsonSkies said:
Che the problem with your arguments are that your taste in games = crap. Japanese games have been on the decline due to quality this gen. It just isn't there like last gen. That's a fact.

and start publishing what the brainless mainstream crowd wants."

These games seem pretty brainless: Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, etc.

Yeah, there is a lot of deep thought going on in Halo 2. It's a chess game with guns, dontcha know! Master Chief to Flood 12.... arrrgh you sunk my battleship!!! :lol
 

Ironclad

Member
CrimsonSkies said:
Che the problem with your arguments are that your taste in games = crap. Japanese games have been on the decline due to quality this gen. It just isn't there like last gen. That's a fact.

and start publishing what the brainless mainstream crowd wants."

These games seem pretty brainless: Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, etc.
It is terribly wrong to say some has a crap taste in games just because they prefer one style of game over the other, or refuse to buy every EA game that is released. Tastes will differ. Also, Japanese games haven't been on the decline due to quality. There are many points that one could make to justify this.
 

DrGAKMAN

Banned
Hmmm...

There is no "answers" for Nintendo's "problems" especially from someone from the press. He's been talking about "Nintendo needing to shack up with MS" in his past couple of articles and it's just getting rediculous.

I would be happy if Nintendo decided to make Revolution be the "secondary console" like they sorta tried to do with GCN. The alternative to the "main" console(s). I would be happy if Nintendo lost marketshare as long as they continued to know how to make money and therefore stay afloat. I mean no one criticized (or in Nintendo's case, black-balled) NEC or SNK for their systems being less popular. Being popular isn't what Nintendo is all about...their main problem has always been their image...even when they were on top of the world with the NES, Nintendo (and gaming in general) was still *very* nerdy. If Nintendo finds it's niche, sticks with it and satisfies it then why should anyone care how much marketshare they have? If Nintendo did this and like sought out more exclussives by way of collaborations to better satisfy Revolution owners...what would be so wrong with that? Ohhhh yeah...this is ALL about winning the console "war" right?

If Nintendo continues their decrease in marketshare, but still continues to make money in it...let them. Why do they have to "win" this "war"? I'd like to see Revolution be like the NES, where Nintendo sustained THEMSELVES and captured large marketshare THEMSELVES and then 3RD parties followed...that and collaborations are what will attract 3RD parties. But if it isn't...so what...doesn't mean Nintendo will die.

I think alot of people have a problem with Nintendo saying they're competing with Sony & MS in one breath, then admitting they're going for a different market with the next. I think if Nintendo solidified their decision on which they're doing, they'd be better off. Be the alternate NeO*GeO of next generation...or go all out and compete on the "big boys" level. I think the problem with that is that they wanna satisfy more people, but can't compete in the same capacity as their competitor's 'cos Sony has the dominance and coolness factor, while MS has WAY more money making Nintendo's competitive efforts futile.
 

mj1108

Member
goomba said:
"Nintendo's brand is worthless in the console market. Two flops in a row does that to you"

I certainly wouldnt class n64 as a flop, it did around 35 million. And if the gamecube is a "failure" then so is the xbox, the difference between them is so marginal.

If it was the other way around and Nintendo was ahead of MS by 2 million or so, would people be screaming MS is doomed?? Probably not. Nintendo is getting slack is because "it's cool to hate on Nintendo" and the lead MS has just makes it open to all the trolling one GAF thread can handle.
 
I think it would be brilliant if MSFT did a set top box version of Xbox2 for say $400 and they joined forces with Nintendo and let the Revolution be the $149 (Xbox2) game only machine.
 

Azih

Member
Hell a lot of people have independantly arrived at the conclusion that Nintendo and MS in a partnership would kick a lot of ass. They are a good fit in many ways. But that's another thread.


The *problem* with Nintendo positioning their consoles as 'alternatives to #1' is that firstly, it hasn't worked, and secondly, that kind of attitude is a death knell for third party support. Third party support NEEDS a willing audience of gamers, and if they can find that in the consoles vying to be market leader then why the heck would they look at second best? Plus Nintendo catering just to a niche of Nintendo fans has been a huge problem for third parties in this gen on gamecube because Nintendo fans seem to ignore anything that doesn't have Nintendo characters in it. And I'm sure you agree that third party support is critical for a console's success.
 
Ironclad_Ninja said:
I have to disagree with this. First of all, you just post one genre, yet there are many different types of games that come out of Japan. You say that Japanese games are on the decline due to lack of quality, and a tried and true formula. Well, take one look at Pikmin 2. It is definetly a quality title, and does not follow this "formula" you propose.


Yeah, I could spend all day and list genres and break them down into their pieces but I took one of the most obvious offenders for my point. Same could be said for shooters, fighting games, adventure games, Survival Horror, etc. Evolution is coming in minor advances and normally includes stretching one or two tried and true game mechanics into something greater than it is.

PC RPGs are actually worse offenders with their collect all the pointless items as you can that pretty well amount to money anyway and gain as many levels as you can bullshit.

Pikmin is Lemmings with a open environment and more direct control. Not to say Pikmin isn't great because it is loads of fun to play. Its an advancement of a fantastic older idea.

I'm not expecting everything to be fresh and new all the time but recycling old ideas and conventions is what is bothering me.

If I were to make an RPG, for instance I'd dump the typical conversation system. Why is everyone willing to talk to you? If you walked into a town or city you didn't know would you just go up to strangers to find out where to find sailors? Storytelling isn't always about jamming in thousands of lines of dialouge.

Leveling up, has always been about killing beasts in an attempt to hit arbitrary numbers as opposed to player skill and what they can actually do or what they have accomplished. What about seeking out weapon masters or mages who live in towns to up your ability? You have to train with that person to become better.

Hit points are a joke. I don't care who you are, getting struck by a sword without protection on is likely to kill you or at least do grevious amounts of damage.

The RPG convention of leveling up is pretty ridiculous anyway. It is set up so your party or characters are always at a standard level to take on anything that comes their way at that point in the game. Why even give the player levels when it is set up this way?

The typical weapon and armor purchasing system is lame (why do people try to sell you shit when you are trying to save their lives? Just give me what I need if I'm doing you a favor?) As well, let me personalize my character. A change of weapons shouldn't automatically increase damage done. If the character has gotten used to using one type of weapon they have gotten used to the feel and weight of it. Changing that should be detrimental until the point where the character has gotten used to the new weapon. This would create player and character attachments to weapon types instead of blowing through 10 differnt levels of weapons.

No random monsters and no creatures out of place. Humanoids beasts or organized groups would likely have an encampment somewhere and their kind would inhabit the nearby areas that could be invaded. Wipe out the camp and you've wiped out the creatures. Hell this can be worked back into the storyline.

Tasks as simple as wiping out a pack of wolves that have been eating up a village's livestock would figure well into creating a more beliveable environment. Once the wolves are destroyed you don't see wolves anymore and the livestock thrive and therefor the villagers become more proseperous. Thoough, that is a simple expression.

Mix matched creatures would likely not travel together nor would they fight in an organized fashion. In nature I don't see squirrels, fish, and birds teaming up to attack people. You can have a group of goblins with a tamed beast on a leash or something that figures more into the environment.

Magic, especially the generic RPG kind, always seems like another day at the beach when it is being used. Casting out a mammoth sized beast should take more effort than selecting it from a list. Imagine actually having to protect a mage while he concentrates to prepare his spell over the course of a few turns or moments of time. Getting a spell like that should take more effort. Why are these magical beasts always at your beckon call? The player should have to promise them something to gain their use.

Fighting something like a Dragon should be near impossible given it's size and armor. It should take an army to wipe out something like this but in RPGs they just appear a dime a dozen and are wasted like slimes and wasps once you get to high enough levels. Also, how many Dragons would there really be in a world, given their size and nutritional requirements?

Without question I'd want to see more realistic character designs. Something more gritty and realisic in keeping with the mood and tone. Certaily no waify angular looking characters jumping around with a sword twice their size. Are these warriors or models? Lets see the characters grow from fresh faced farm boys to grizzled veterans.

This is a lot of stuff and I wouldn't expect all of this to be dropped into a game. This is just a quick rethink of the conventions. Games are still games though so there also needs to be a suspension of disbelief and some compromises must be made. Still the wheels have been stuck for a while. I just ask that a serious attempt at evolution takes place
 

DrGAKMAN

Banned
Azih said:
The *problem* with Nintendo positioning their consoles as 'alternatives to #1' is that firstly, it hasn't worked, and secondly, that kind of attitude is a death knell for third party support. Third party support NEEDS a willing audience of gamers, and if they can find that in the consoles vying to be market leader then why the heck would they look at second best? Plus Nintendo catering just to a niche of Nintendo fans has been a huge problem for third parties in this gen on gamecube because Nintendo fans seem to ignore anything that doesn't have Nintendo characters in it. And I'm sure you agree that third party support is critical for a console's success.

Thanks for conversing on my post.

You say firstly that it hasn't worked to be the secondary or alternative console. Well, in the case of SNK & NEC doing it I don't think they had the know-how, IP's or money making power that Nintendo has. Nintendo hasn't really fully tried that approach with GCN as their original boast was to sell 50M of them. With Revolution, if they just focus on providing an alternative to the competition and use their IP power to it's fullest and not boast about how much they're gonna sell compared to the competition then what's wrong with that?

Then you say secondly that 3RD parties don't like that approach as it's seen as a "way out". But who says Nintendo really is going to get fair support from them to begin with? If Revolution is unique enough and different enough game makers may be curious to follow it as they're doing with NDS...if it attempts to be a second (behind MS) PlayStation clone then they'll still be the last choice anyways. GCN has sought and been given exclussive 3RD party support, but what good did that do if they don't stay exclussive (Sonic, Godzilla, RE, Super Monkey Ball, etc, etc). Collaborations are better however as they STAY exclussive and in the case that Nintendo allows 3RD party use of their IP's...BAM...it sells too. If Nintendo games are the only thing that sell on Nintendo consoles then why not play to that. Gives Revolution more support, more Nintendo games, more exclussives that stay exclussive and lead to more diversity of the library as well as better 3RD party relations.

I've been saying for a while now that the only time Nintendo has really properly attracted 3RD parties was in the NES era. And how did they do it? Did they buy support? Did they bend over to accomedate 3RD parties? Hell no. They created a large userbase THEMSELVES with THEIR OWN games first...the first two years of the NES were really a great foundation of mainly Nintendo games. Things are different now with competition and all...but really if 3RD parties are going to take Revolution seriously enough to give it equal or better support than Nintendo is going to have to again create a large userbase THEMSELVES with THEIR OWN games. Until then, I think the collaborative efforts Nintendo is making and will continue to make are a good way to get 3RD party support.
 

djtiesto

is beloved, despite what anyone might say
Warm Machine said:
I don't agree. Many Japanese games are relying on tried and true formulas in game play that have existed for 20 years. RPG's for instance have hardly evolved at all. You still walk into towns, talk to everyone and they tell you the same shit, almost all the gameplay that can be pulled from the turn based combat system has been stretched to breaking, and the storytelling is still filled with long bouts of text, and visuals remain overly colorful and without mood or atmosphere. Time for all that shit to get shelved or rethought.

...and yet they still sell well, and yet I don't seem to have a problem with it. I subscribe to the mentality of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"... plus this year we've had a lot of innovation in RPGs and their battle systems. Western developers seem to be more into the whole cash-in, with like what, the 3rd Splinter Cell in 3 years? And EA's constant rehashes...
 
Beyond RE4 and Zelda... I think I am done with GameCube. Still that RE is even on GameCube and that Soul Calibur 2 came to GameCube is impressive when you think of the lack of 3rd party support for N64
 

Ironclad

Member
Warm Machine said:
Yeah, I could spend all day and list genres and break them down into their pieces but I took one of the most obvious offenders for my point. Same could be said for shooters, fighting games, adventure games, Survival Horror, etc. Evolution is coming in minor advances and normally includes stretching one or two tried and true game mechanics into something greater than it is.

PC RPGs are actually worse offenders with their collect all the pointless items as you can that pretty well amount to money anyway and gain as many levels as you can bullshit.

Pikmin is Lemmings with a open environment and more direct control. Not to say Pikmin isn't great because it is loads of fun to play. Its an advancement of a fantastic older idea.

I'm not expecting everything to be fresh and new all the time but recycling old ideas and conventions is what is bothering me.

If I were to make an RPG, for instance I'd dump the typical conversation system. Why is everyone willing to talk to you? If you walked into a town or city you didn't know would you just go up to strangers to find out where to find sailors? Storytelling isn't always about jamming in thousands of lines of dialouge.

Leveling up, has always been about killing beasts in an attempt to hit arbitrary numbers as opposed to player skill and what they can actually do or what they have accomplished. What about seeking out weapon masters or mages who live in towns to up your ability? You have to train with that person to become better.

Hit points are a joke. I don't care who you are, getting struck by a sword without protection on is likely to kill you or at least do grevious amounts of damage.

The RPG convention of leveling up is pretty ridiculous anyway. It is set up so your party or characters are always at a standard level to take on anything that comes their way at that point in the game. Why even give the player levels when it is set up this way?

The typical weapon and armor purchasing system is lame (why do people try to sell you shit when you are trying to save their lives? Just give me what I need if I'm doing you a favor?) As well, let me personalize my character. A change of weapons shouldn't automatically increase damage done. If the character has gotten used to using one type of weapon they have gotten used to the feel and weight of it. Changing that should be detrimental until the point where the character has gotten used to the new weapon. This would create player and character attachments to weapon types instead of blowing through 10 differnt levels of weapons.

No random monsters and no creatures out of place. Humanoids beasts or organized groups would likely have an encampment somewhere and their kind would inhabit the nearby areas that could be invaded. Wipe out the camp and you've wiped out the creatures. Hell this can be worked back into the storyline.

Tasks as simple as wiping out a pack of wolves that have been eating up a village's livestock would figure well into creating a more beliveable environment. Once the wolves are destroyed you don't see wolves anymore and the livestock thrive and therefor the villagers become more proseperous. Thoough, that is a simple expression.

Mix matched creatures would likely not travel together nor would they fight in an organized fashion. In nature I don't see squirrels, fish, and birds teaming up to attack people. You can have a group of goblins with a tamed beast on a leash or something that figures more into the environment.

Magic, especially the generic RPG kind, always seems like another day at the beach when it is being used. Casting out a mammoth sized beast should take more effort than selecting it from a list. Imagine actually having to protect a mage while he concentrates to prepare his spell over the course of a few turns or moments of time. Getting a spell like that should take more effort. Why are these magical beasts always at your beckon call? The player should have to promise them something to gain their use.

Fighting something like a Dragon should be near impossible given it's size and armor. It should take an army to wipe out something like this but in RPGs they just appear a dime a dozen and are wasted like slimes and wasps once you get to high enough levels. Also, how many Dragons would there really be in a world, given their size and nutritional requirements?

Without question I'd want to see more realistic character designs. Something more gritty and realisic in keeping with the mood and tone. Certaily no waify angular looking characters jumping around with a sword twice their size. Are these warriors or models? Lets see the characters grow from fresh faced farm boys to grizzled veterans.

This is a lot of stuff and I wouldn't expect all of this to be dropped into a game. This is just a quick rethink of the conventions. Games are still games though so there also needs to be a suspension of disbelief and some compromises must be made. Still the wheels have been stuck for a while. I just ask that a serious attempt at evolution takes place
Well, I must say that I like your idea. I can already see some of the conventions being kicked to the curb in upcoming titles like DDS, Jade Empire, and Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. I do see where you are coming from, I just thought that you were heading in the wrong direction. If you look at the Japanese market as compared to the rest of the world, you can draw some obvious comparisons so you could easily say the same thing about a genre that comes mainly from a certain region.
 

Ironclad

Member
djtiesto said:
...and yet they still sell well, and yet I don't seem to have a problem with it. I subscribe to the mentality of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"... plus this year we've had a lot of innovation in RPGs and their battle systems. Western developers seem to be more into the whole cash-in, with like what, the 3rd Splinter Cell in 3 years? And EA's constant rehashes...
I agree wholeheartedly. I loved Growlanser Generations, SH: C, and SO III and they followed their set paths yet they still managed to feel fresh, and that is just as hard to pull off as innovation. If you can great a game that makes the fans happy, but manages to increase the fanbase, then there should be nothing stopping you from doing so. Resdient Evil 4 is a prime example of this, even though it's not an RPG. :lol
 
I would like to know why almost all monsters carry cash or items. When I take a walk through the park I don't see racoons with dollar bills taped to their backs nor do I see birds carrying fresh healing herbs. :)
 

Ironclad

Member
Warm Machine said:
I would like to know why almost all monsters carry cash or items. When I take a walk through the park I don't see racoons with dollar bills taped to their backs nor do I see birds carrying fresh healing herbs. :)
The items are on the inside ;)
This is something that is rampant in most games though, ranging from LOZ to Ratchet and Clank.
 

Odnetnin

Banned
Warm Machine said:
Hit points are a joke. I don't care who you are, getting struck by a sword without protection on is likely to kill you or at least do grevious amounts of damage.

The RPG convention of leveling up is pretty ridiculous anyway. It is set up so your party or characters are always at a standard level to take on anything that comes their way at that point in the game. Why even give the player levels when it is set up this way?

just wanted to say that you should NOT play video games then... because hit points is in EVERY genre (except racing/fishing.sports...) and guess what.... your realism-whoring ain't working / this sort of gaming isn't about logic.

FPS = take a bazillion bullets but survive
BTU = take a bazillion punches/cuts/etc but survive
adventure = ditto
basically any genre needs that sort of play mechanics
 

Jonnyram

Member
Warm Machine said:
I don't agree. Many Japanese games are relying on tried and true formulas in game play that have existed for 20 years. RPG's for instance have hardly evolved at all. You still walk into towns, talk to everyone and they tell you the same shit, almost all the gameplay that can be pulled from the turn based combat system has been stretched to breaking, and the storytelling is still filled with long bouts of text, and visuals remain overly colorful and without mood or atmosphere. Time for all that shit to get shelved or rethought.
Perhaps the issue is that you only hear about the big-selling Japanese games so you don't know about the smaller games that are evolving. It's the same in the US too. From the perspective of someone who lives in Japan and is pretty out of touch with the US game scene, big names like GTA:SA, Halo 2, POP2, etc are hardly pushing the envelope. Conversely, 2004 has seen fresh ideas like Monster Hunter, Katamari Damacy, Mawaru Made in Wario and the DS come out of Japan.

Hit points are a joke. I don't care who you are, getting struck by a sword without protection on is likely to kill you or at least do grevious amounts of damage.

The RPG convention of leveling up is pretty ridiculous anyway. It is set up so your party or characters are always at a standard level to take on anything that comes their way at that point in the game. Why even give the player levels when it is set up this way?
This is just as bad in the US as Japan, though. How many of these RPG conventions are broken by games like WoW, EQ2, KOTOR2, etc?
 

M3wThr33

Banned
I never understood people's logic for Nintendo to go only handheld. They friggin' OWN that market. Why bother putting MORE resources in it?

You don't criticize Microsoft for branching out after owning the desktops, then why is it an issue for Nintendo, especially when they still profit on the GameCube?
 

cvxfreak

Member
CrimsonSkies said:
Che the problem with your arguments are that your taste in games = crap. Japanese games have been on the decline due to quality this gen. It just isn't there like last gen. That's a fact.

Fact for Japanese deprived Xbots.
 

Odnetnin

Banned
M3wThr33 said:
You don't criticize Microsoft for branching out after owning the desktops, then why is it an issue for Nintendo, especially when they still profit on the GameCube?

because its NINTENDO. Haven't you been on GAF long enough to understand this? :)
 

Pellham

Banned
Steven Kent's article makes him sound like a true disgruntled Nintendo fan who wants Nintendo to succeed (which he is, more or less).

I do have to say that I agree with him on pretty much all of his points, but I doubt Nintendo will do much to change it.
 

Pimpwerx

Member
mj1108 said:
If it was the other way around and Nintendo was ahead of MS by 2 million or so, would people be screaming MS is doomed?? Probably not. Nintendo is getting slack is because "it's cool to hate on Nintendo" and the lead MS has just makes it open to all the trolling one GAF thread can handle.
Nintendo's been losing ground forever now. They have not made any forward progress since the SNES. This can't be that hard to see. It's true, the Xbox's lead is only a couple million, and both companies have been bitchslapped by Sony, but the Xbox is a legit second option in the US. MS can at least ride some momentum over here. Nintendo isn't a success anywhere. It's survived on the fact that the sum of three mediocre performances amounts to just enough to still trail what MS is doing mostly in one territory. Nintendo's going backwards, been so for years. MS is at least holding station. PEACE.
 

Saturnman

Banned
M3wThr33 said:
I never understood people's logic for Nintendo to go only handheld. They friggin' OWN that market. Why bother putting MORE resources in it?

Good point. Let's divide our ressources supporting two handhelds instead of just one when the first serious rival in a decade comes in the picture.

It's brilliant.
 

Floyd

Member
It would be cool to see Nintendo do what Microsoft do. Simply become the consumers little bitch and throw billions of dollars into a product to gain market share.

If they had done that i wonder what position they would hold right now. Profit wise it would be a disaster obviously but gaining market share and building momentum for the future looks to be the better option.

I say looks, because i don't have a clue wtf im talking about, but everyone seems to think MS stance is the one to follow.
 
The Gamecube has had a great selection of games IMHO, waaaay better than the N64 which was starved for AAA titles. The other day I was thinking how just three titles I love, Echoes, Ikaruga and Viewtiful Joe represent variety I would never have gotten on the 64.

But the market is changing fast and Nintendo needs to try new things without being stubborn. I am LOVING my DS, that IS the way to go. The touch screen coupled with an old school SNES button layout kicks, stylus minigames are a workplace lifesaver and I cannot wait to take my friends on with Bomberman and Mario Kart (now just give us some wifi already!!!) But with Revolution, they are getting rid of A and B buttons? Sure, the controller will probably feel really neat but will it be so exotic it drives away folks from trying a Nintendo system for once and for all? As a die hard Nintendo and Sega fan from the 80s and on I don't wanna see them end up a third party liscence. Gah.

The Cadillac analogy is dead on, image revamps and more importantly, NEW approaches really work. At first I though with his kicking and taking names speech, Reggie Fils Aime would do an awesome job helping the company. That and the fact he's responsible for such addictive shows on VH1 like I love the 80s, ect. But so far all I see are ads that are as boring or even more so than they were before he jumped on board. Remember the beautiful and long Metroid Prime trailer? Compare that to the stupid Echoes TV ad with the blonde woman walking down the alley and almost nothing else. The problem is both NOJ and NOA sometimes personify boring old business men who are too set in their ways.

Didn't read beyond Kent's editorial (catching up on the thread now), EDIT: It DOES sound like Matt wrote it and not Steve now that I skim over it again. Yikes.
 
Top Bottom