No cause those are big publishers so it's kind of a different story, guaranteed to sell so they're better off letting it on there and trusting them to have not broken games. (Although at this point they should look into Ubisoft with this a bit more)
-
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.
The lack of quality control on the Nintendo eShop is getting embarrassing
- Thread starter Gonzo The Great
- Start date
No cause those are big publishers so it's kind of a different story, guaranteed to sell so they're better off letting it on there and trusting them to have not broken games. (Although at this point they should look into Ubisoft with this a bit more)
protomouse
Member
Oh a retweet. I have those off my feed, no wonder I couldn't see it. I thought NoA had tweeted the game as they did with SK or Stealth Inc.. Not good either way but not nearly what I was expecting.
Whoever retweeted and also whoever approved this should probably get slapped.
Nintendo's incompetence is getting pretty jarring... or at least, their EU and US partitions' incompetence is jarring. I just browsed the eShop today in, what, first time in 2 or 3 months? Aside from maybe Smash there is NOTHING noteworthy of news but a great slew of games that are poor excuses for carbon copies of flash games from Newgrounds or something.
It's getting ridiculous. I also remember one of them, yet another game with a terrible cover design and a generic name, but it review scores on it as well: "9.0/10 - eShoprecommendations.net, 8.8/10 - eShopenjoy.com, 9/10 sillygames.com." (I'm making these names up by the way, but it was just as ridiculous). I mean not that Metacritic is my religion or something, but those sites sound like something that shouldn't be used for professional marketing.
It's getting ridiculous. I also remember one of them, yet another game with a terrible cover design and a generic name, but it review scores on it as well: "9.0/10 - eShoprecommendations.net, 8.8/10 - eShopenjoy.com, 9/10 sillygames.com." (I'm making these names up by the way, but it was just as ridiculous). I mean not that Metacritic is my religion or something, but those sites sound like something that shouldn't be used for professional marketing.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I wouldn't laugh, Meme run will probably be the Platinum gift for Club Nintendo this year.
ShockingAlberto
Member
I imagine having strict quality judgments for what games they'll allow on the Wii U will work out great for Nintendo. It caused literally no problem 30 years ago when they were at the top of the industry, it should work out even better now that they've lost all their muscle mass and are itching for a bar fight.
ShockingAlberto
Member
No one decided Rebirth could not be on the eShop.
15 minutes of fame to due the usual suspects and their usual narrative who want to live under draconian rules.
After all the infamy The Letter gained, does it even sell anymore? Most of its sales came from the internet feeding the title attention and Ninjapig is exploiting that now.
After all the infamy The Letter gained, does it even sell anymore? Most of its sales came from the internet feeding the title attention and Ninjapig is exploiting that now.
I'm not sure if my sarcasm detector is broken, but wasn't what they did 30 years ago one of the primary reasons third parties left nintendo in droves?
I don't find the quality thing a problem. Most indie games are sub par. Seems like the good ones get good enough word of mouth to sell (shovel knight). I could care less about meme run.
Felix Andrews
Member
See also (in Europe, at least): Tested with robots! [sic]
http://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/wiiu-eshop/tested_with_robots
https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Wii-U-download-software/Tested-with-robots--941835.html
http://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/wiiu-eshop/tested_with_robots
https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Wii-U-download-software/Tested-with-robots--941835.html
Glad to see you're still posting quality threads Gonzo. Despite the fact this has been discussed a few times before.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=859783
It was the beginning seeds of what caused the problems with 3rd parties today.
There's a rating system right next to every eShop game. There's gonna be tons of shit, but at least the ratings are pretty accurate so you should be able to easily bypass the crap.
Also, the games look terrible. Obviously terrible. It shouldn't be hard to avoid the garbage and enjoy the diamonds.
That was 20 years ago. 30 years ago was the NES/SNES era.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=859783
It was the beginning seeds of what caused the problems with 3rd parties today.
There's a rating system right next to every eShop game. There's gonna be tons of shit, but at least the ratings are pretty accurate so you should be able to easily bypass the crap.
Also, the games look terrible. Obviously terrible. It shouldn't be hard to avoid the garbage and enjoy the diamonds.
That was 20 years ago. 30 years ago was the NES/SNES era.
SystemUser
Member
Nintendo's general licensing practices where part of it, but cartridges were the main reason. Cartridges have a way lower profit major then CDs. Nintendo forced publishers to buy cartridges before making a game. When you look at the numbers it is surprising that anyone bothered to release N64 games.
CookedChocobo
Member
OP and everyone else can't just not buy the bad games and ignore them?
The bad games make the new and pre-existing good games look better lol.
The bad games make the new and pre-existing good games look better lol.
Sure. For the record I was not defending Transformers. I think they are garbage films, and also a cash grab. But Meme Run is clearly just thrown together to try to trick people into buying it. The game has minimal effort put into it. And I think the creators know damn well they are just abusing the system here.
For all the shit you can throw at Transformers (it's lazy, it's a cash grab, the motivation for creating it is probably cynical and souless)...I still think the amount of time and effort in production, still makes it a product. Even if you think it's a shitty product. I'm having a hard time even labeling Meme Run a product. It's basically taking images that were created by others (that are free). And just having a character move from left to right with shitty physics.
EDIT: Lol thanks for sharing your story, that's funny. That sounds like an interesting job?
Last thing I want to say is. I do think ultimately, consumers are responsible for their own purchasing habits. So when I say "trick"...I more so mean, people don't know entirely that a game will work. Yes, they can look at reviews or check online for info (and should). But I think most kind of have an assumption, that the Nintendo platform would not let this garbage on it. This is basically like a 40 min project in very basic coding class in college. That someone can just throw this shit together and have it approved by Nintendo a professional fuckin platform. That is what I think is insulting. And while I do think that consumers should inform themselves (and no one forces them to buy thins blindly), I don't like the idea of platforms like this approving this kind of shit and when consumers have faith and respect for a platform. IMO this is damaging to the Nintendo brand (as a platform I mean).
CamHostage
Member
Yeah, I'm not a developer but I know friends who have produced apps that have been rejected or had apps held up for reasons unknown while other apps seemed to fly right through the various console manufacturer's gates with glaring errors and cloned concepts. I can't tell because I don't know anybody who's produced true shovelware (IMO) but it feels like the skilled developers are being scrutinized and penalized more than the fly-by-night outfits... which is good if the extra scrutiny and recognition of "importance" means that a product is more likely to be promoted or featured or launched with oomph, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
I like a good deal of what's going on with the indie revolution, but there sure are harsh growing pains that we may never get through.
I just don't understand why we can't have that middle ground. People seem to be for an all or nothing kind of solution. Either they are super strict and make it impossible for Indie games to have a platform. Or they are completely open, and let anyone that throw some shit together quickly in on it.
Why can't their bet an in between process. One that isn't too restrictive and is lenient, but still tries to maintain quality control with stuff that is THIS bad. Steam tried to do this I suppose with their Green light program. But that didn't work and is a mess. But I dunno. I just don't get why people are saying either it's one or the other.
Surely there is a better way to go about doing this. And there needs to be a better way moving forward. Not sure what that is. But I still think that Nintendo and companies that want to maintain their platform has being quality and trustworthy, need to think long and hard about letting shit like this fly on it. Then again, maybe I'm exaggerating and it really doesn't do that much harm to the brand. *shrugs*
DidntKnowJack
Member
On one hand it seems pretty shitty to have games like this up for sale. They look like blatant rip offs. On the other, there's entertainment to be had watching to see what shit someone made this week. But as always, an informed buyer is a smart buyer.
Because of the same thing that happened with Steam Greenlight.
People think the current level of "quality control" is all good, until the millisecond that a game that looks decent is delayed or rejected, and then everyone is screaming about how the platform holder is too strict, and how come this game didn't get in when that one did, and suddenly developers are writing open letters about how you need to be more about freedom and less about control, and your entire system is completely broken.
So then you loosen the restrictions a little bit, and then the next round of complaints comes and you loosen a little more, but there's always some group who thinks "now this new batch of games is just entirely garbage" and now you're a bastard for allowing this trash on the service.
There's no winning.
I prefer it this way. Better to let everyone on there with minimal hurdles and have a few titles of questionable quality than locking out developers.
And definitely this.
And definitely this.
First, the EU eShop doesn't have the games mentioned in the OP. This issue is mainly a NoA issue (since the NoA eShop doesn't have PEGI requirement needed in the EU).
If you're looking for good eShop games, here are a couple to check out:
- Shovel Knight
- Stealth Inc. 2
- Guacamelee! Super Turbo Championship Edition
- The Swapper
- Thomas was Alone
- Art of Balance
- Steamworld Dig
- Teslagrad
- Stick it to the Man!
- Child of Light
- Pushmo World
- Tengami
- CastleStorm
- Swords & Soldiers HD
- Armillo
- XType
- Toki Tori 2+
- Trine 2: Director's Cut
- Runner2
- Squids Odyssey
- Tetrobot and Co.
From this list, Tengami, Art of Balance, The Swapper, Thomas was Alone, Stealth Inc. 2, Tetrobot and Co. were all released during the past 3 months.
The easiest way to turn this situation around is to bug all your favourite developers to release their shit on Wii U (or do it yourself if you're a developer). The only reason games like Meme Run are able to get any traction is because there's rarely anything else to talk about from week to week. There's a captive marketplace to be had, so go take it.
TheSlySoul
Member
The difference is Nintendo likes to pride itself on bringing quality games better than you can get on phones.
That is hypocritical when you let games like "The Letter" in your store.
Apple/Google's strategy is zero barriers and to promote games via "Editor's Choice". That is a totally valid strategy.
However, Nintendo fans cannot blast the strategy since Nintendo is doing exactly that with eShop. There is no middle man like PSN or XBLA for Nintendo. eShop is pretty much Playstation Mobile level.
Every store curates what they sell in their store. Why should t be different here?
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Because of how stupid it is?
When did Nintendo start touting these games to everyone or putting their name on or behind them? I mean seriously there is a big difference between letting someone self publish on a web shop and actually backing that software with money and support.
PeakPointMatrix
Member
Did you download the Nintendo Magic patch yet?
The thing is that denying games for being shitty becomes really complicated, both legally and from a business perspective.
If a developer doesn't know if they'll be able to release their game or not, who will want to make the investment of making a game for the platform?
They have to have a clear set of rules of what is required for an eshop release rather than an arbitrary notion of quality. And denying a great game because of some technically is worse than releasing a shitty title because of overly lenient requirements.
Since they're also selling they're own games on eShop, various competition laws also comes into play. A somewhat deluded egotistical developer may think that the reason they're denying his crappy shovel ware game is to make people buy more Mario games instead, and drag them into all sorts of legal trouble.
I was talking to a guy at Nintendo a while back, and I think I sensed a bit of bitterness that other service providers maybe weren't following those rules quite as strictly as Nintendo, and sometimes he wished for nothing more than to be able to tell developers how much their game sucked.
If a developer doesn't know if they'll be able to release their game or not, who will want to make the investment of making a game for the platform?
They have to have a clear set of rules of what is required for an eshop release rather than an arbitrary notion of quality. And denying a great game because of some technically is worse than releasing a shitty title because of overly lenient requirements.
Since they're also selling they're own games on eShop, various competition laws also comes into play. A somewhat deluded egotistical developer may think that the reason they're denying his crappy shovel ware game is to make people buy more Mario games instead, and drag them into all sorts of legal trouble.
I was talking to a guy at Nintendo a while back, and I think I sensed a bit of bitterness that other service providers maybe weren't following those rules quite as strictly as Nintendo, and sometimes he wished for nothing more than to be able to tell developers how much their game sucked.
Why can't we keep working on getting to some where better?
I mean you have a point about the middle ground approach not working. But it failing once, does that mean it has to fail again? Maybe it was Steam's fault, and how they implemented it. Maybe it's something else. I dunno. Maybe I'm just wrong. And need to accept the best system is just a free open platform. lol
That's completely untrue. The Seal of Quality was (still is in Europe) placed on every licensed third party game, and meant it had passed the lotcheck test, and thus function correctly on the hardware, fulfil certain criteria and not damage the console. It never meant the game would be good though
PixyJunket
Member
No, because it's hilarious and accurately reflects my opinion on modern "AAA" gaming.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I hope Nintendo pays them.
ShockingAlberto
Member
It was supposed to in intention, years and years ago. Nintendo Seal of Quality meant:
1) Nintendo designers looked over the game
2) They felt it was a good fit for their hardware
3) They could demand any changes from gameplay to aesthetics to censorship of material.
Basically, it meant that Nintendo approved this game as something you could enjoy as if it were from them.
Under the same licensing rules, Nintendo would also not allow a certain number of games from the same publisher so they don't flood the market (i.e. Konami should not be allowed to make more games than Capcom even if they had the capability to) and Nintendo would decide the game's release date and production numbers. Konami wanted to produce more Simon's Quest but couldn't because Nintendo didn't produce enough carts for them and wouldn't up the number in the face of ridiculous demand.
It was untenable for Nintendo and third parties, most infamously Namco, spent the next twenty years being incredibly sore about it. It took Yamauchi's retirement and the Bandai merger before the two companies worked together in anything more than a begrudging manner.
The Nintendo Seal of Quality in the Famicom days is the biggest symbol of Nintendo's arrogance and their inability to work with third parties. Bringing it back as it was, including for shit like Meme Run, is the stupidest fucking thing I have literally ever heard. You would have to be a goddamn moron to even suggest it come back in form or in function. Or, I guess, so totally completely ignorant of history that you can at least fall back on a lack of knowledge as an excuse.
Here's why it would not work now. For one, who the fuck is the taste judge here? Miyamoto? Koizumi? The intern at NOA who gets coffee? Treehouse? Digipen graduates? Iwata? NST? These people are either all incredibly busy or incredibly unqualified to start judging game quality. And even if they were qualified, what if they block something people would like? What if they block a game that's by all accounts garbage and the following game from the same people turns out to be the next Minecraft? Oh, but we probably don't have to worry about that, Nintendo pissing off a game developer with a sudden ht hasn't come back to bite them in the ass before.
This argument just always comes down to "People should make better games." Which, you know what, they totally should. Until then, most people here are not three, they can discern what's a good game and what's not, they don't need a gatekeeper telling them that you can't play something because they don't think it's good enough and they certainly don't need the Nintendo seal of quality back like it was in the 80s.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
The idea that all retail games are shit is just as ridiculous as people that say the same about indie games.
Screamapillar
Member
To be fair, the Nintendo Seal of Quality hasn't existed since 2003. lol.
But, point taken.
I'm only talking about North America... Dunno about EU or Japan.
But, point taken.
I'm only talking about North America... Dunno about EU or Japan.
protomouse
Member
MisterGrey3000
Member
bobawesome
Member
My friend bought an awful game called Sportsball. It deserves to be in the OP.
HOLY HELL, 78 Metacritic? Nothing makes sense.
HOLY HELL, 78 Metacritic? Nothing makes sense.
Living Proof
Member
There's a level of quality that Sportsball seems to have over the truly awful games on the eShop. It looks much more polished and has actual engaging gameplay, which can't be said about at least two dozen eShop titles constantly featured on the store. You may argue the quality, of course, and the price may seem high, but I don't think it's fair to compare it to some of the phoned-in trash it's competing against.