• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Nintendo should diversify its line-up: yea or nay?

They release plenty of low key different games, they just bet on those because they really need the sales. And let's be honest, it's a tough position, although enviable from a certain perspective, to have those huge IPs with loads of fans expecting them.
 
Ouren said:
Like I said, those projects don't feel like they had their hearts in them.
Click to expand...

Wondeful 101 was a pretty expensive project from what I remember.

It's just beginning of the console life games, which usually include the usual suspect Mario/Zelda,etc with Smash 4 on the horizon. They actually have more diversity than the other two at the moment with the combination of their output and the small niche yet amazing games from the few third parties that support them. Unless we're just jerking off to our "ideal Nintendo".

Other than that I want online. But the Wii U's titles definitely look Unique.
 
I completely understand Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, Smash having a presence on the console, but they for sure need to diversify. And it is all the more frustrating when they do things like Wii U Fit, Party, Sports. Those things are not that exciting, what is exciting is a brand new adventure, with a brand new world, and brand new characters. They have proven they can do such things in the past and they had a great opportunity with Retro to do something like that, but instead we get Donkey Kong Country, which I know will be fantastic, but I already played DKC recently. And that is the problem with the Wii U, is that it feels like we are retreading old territory a lot. Nintendo has become the most predictable games developer, even more than EA, Activision, and Ubisoft, yes. 2014 for the Wii U I can already tell you will have a Zelda title, Donkey Kong, Smash, another Mario game or perhaps Yoshi's Yarn comes out finally, and Japan will get a RPG (X) that will take another 2 years to come to America. Oh and I bet a new Kirby is announced at E3. So with Nintendo, we are just waiting to see what these franchises will look like on the Wii U. Whereas, with other companies, we can't wait for the VGAs and E3 to find out what surprises and new experiences are in store.

I want to own a Wii U for games like X and FExSMT, but I need something new and exciting for the console as well. Part of the reason I have no problem jumping head first into the PS4 is because I know there will be new experiences in that console's life span, and we already have new IPs announced for the system with even more soon to be announced. With the Wii U there is trepidation on my part because I don't know if I will get that outside of maybe Monolith Soft's game, and I have played enough Mario and Donkey Kong in my lifetime to not need to own the Wii U to play it.

I know the counter argument to that might be well what if SM3DWorld wasn't Mario characters, or if DKC was replaced with other characters would that all of sudden make those better games in my eyes? And no it wouldn't because the same design principles still exist. Removing Donkey Kong from DKC and replacing him with Mario doesn't make it a Mario game and vice versa. the characters are simply the face of the franchise, but the franchises still have a bible they adhere to when it comes to gameplay. Replacing those characters with new characters, but using the same gameplay bible then makes it look like Nintendo is ripping off it's own franchises, which is poor form. I am asking for new IPs with fresh new ideas and no bible they have to adhere to.

Edit: W101 I don't think is a great example as it wasn't made by Nintendo, but yes more of that.
 
Ouren said:
Like I said, those projects don't feel like they had their hearts in them.
Click to expand...

You clearly didn't bother playing Wonderful 101 because that is filled with nothing but Platinum's absolute love of their craft and reverence for their thematic inspirations.
 
I get the impression that a lot of people say "diversity" when they mean: "Where's Nintendo's Uncharted, Nintendo's God of War, or Nintendo's Bloody Shoot-Bang games?"

Then there are people who just think that every game with Mario on the cover is the same as the other games with Mario on the cover.

I think what should be said is this: "Nintendo should use more of their obscure characters/franchises, more often."

Of course, when they eventually do decide to bring out franchises like F-Zero and StarFox... we'll get a whole new set of complaints from people.
 
It seems that a whole lot of people don't understand why we, as gamers, want new IP.

It's because new IP breeds innovation. So we can have new experiences. So we can play games in different ways. So new IP that doesn't sell very well is to be expected.

If you demand that a new IP sell very well, you have two options: hope for some lightning in a bottle word of mouth type stuff (souls games, minecraft, wii sports), or you make a new IP that is safe enough that it will sell to the masses. And if you make a new IP that's similar to everything else, why are you clamoring for it in the first place?
 
I guess it's easier to criticize the toymaker that has to support its own hardware without the reliance of third parties.

It's earlier in Wii U's life so Nintendo has to drop their key titles that come out only once a generation and even still, while they are familiar IPs, it's never the same type of game. I thought we've discussed this already?
 
Echoenigma said:
It seems that a whole lot of people don't understand why we, as gamers, want new IP.

It's because new IP breeds innovation. So we can have new experiences. So we can play games in different ways. So new IP that doesn't sell very well is to be expected.

If you demand that a new IP sell very well, you have two options: hope for some lightning in a bottle word of mouth type stuff (souls games, minecraft, wii sports), or you make a new IP that is safe enough that it will sell to the masses. And if you make a new IP that's similar to everything else, why are you clamoring for it in the first place?
Click to expand...

This completely nails it, IMO.

Nintendo absolutely does need to expand its library, but to say that they flat out don't make new IP, or that all their games are rehashes or sequels is totally ignorant. Granted, they're not making totally derivative copies of pre-existing cinematic games like Uncharted, or third-person cover shooters etc. But if that's the shit you want, you already have that.
 
Opinionatedfish said:
I get the impression that a lot of people say "diversity" when they mean: "Where's Nintendo's Uncharted, Nintendo's God of War, or Nintendo's Bloody Shoot-Bang games?"

Then there are people who just think that every game with Mario on the cover is the same as the other games with Mario on the cover.

I think what should be said is this: "Nintendo should use more of their obscure characters/franchises, more often."

Of course, when they eventually do decide to bring out franchises like F-Zero and StarFox... we'll get a whole new set of complaints from people.
Click to expand...

Well I think it would be interesting to see Nintendo tackle a more mature game, but no I think people want legitimate new franchises from Nintendo. And it doesn't have to be answers to MS and Sony franchise. We just want new worlds, new characters, the whole shebang. It's an exciting prospect to see what Nintendo could do with complete creative license to do something brand new. Don't know why we should limit ourselves to the same franchises over and over again, and it doesn't help the Wii U I fell.
 
oh look

another thread of people who don't pay attention to the new stuff claiming there's no new stuff, then shifting the goal posts when people call them out
 
No one wants Nintendo to copy CoD, Uncharted and God of War. What we want is their unique take on genres that are lacking in their current portfolio.
 
Shaanyboi said:
This completely nails it, IMO.

Nintendo absolutely does need to expand its library, but to say that they flat out don't make new IP, or that all their games are rehashes or sequels is totally ignorant. Granted, they're not making totally derivative copies of pre-existing cinematic games like Uncharted, or third-person cover shooters etc. But if that's the shit you want, you already have that.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I remember saying this in another thread, but there's so many IPs that just try to copy/paste what makes another IP popular... therefore, a waste of a new IP (I mean, if some existing IP is more innovative than a brand new one, you got a problem).
 
Htown said:
oh look

another thread of people who don't pay attention to the new stuff claiming there's no new stuff, then shifting the goal posts when people call them out
Click to expand...

I am not trying to call you out, but instead am genuinely interested. What new stuff?

TheGreatMightyPoo said:
Two producers in the main credits though.

It was mostly Platinum but Nintendo was involved as the Iwata Asks details.

Either way, it's still a Nintendo property.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, if Sony gets credit for everything Quantic Dream and Ready at Dawn does, then they deserve credit for W101. I just wish there was more chances like that on the horizon. Sony for example has The Order coming up, Drive Club, Knack, Santa Monica is making a new game, as is Media Molecule and Guerrilla Games second team. All of that is exciting to me because I don't know what to expect, whereas with Nintendo I kinda do. And yes I understand that has no bearing on the quality of those games. some or all could be crap for all we know but it is exciting to find out nonetheless.
 
I just want a good Golden Sun like the GBA ones. Please get Camelot off of those damn Mario Golf/Tennis games.

I really think Nintendo should just loosen the reigns on their first party studios. Let them come up with their own stuff. Occasionally have them make a game you need made but if there's nothing in the pipe why not let them do their own thing?
 
I feel as though more than anything Nintendo needs a spin off company that allows them to take chances. A spinoff company with a more experimental development team would allow them to take chances with development while not impacting the Nintendo brand superficially. It's why I've always advocated Nintendo buying Sega..They need another brand to do the things that Nintendo can't/won't do.
 
Ouren said:
I just want to see a big in-house new adventure from them on their new HD platform. You know? Something medium to large budget magic that only first party Nintendo can make. Something new. That's what I mean.
Click to expand...

This could've all been avoided if you were just straight up about it.

Diablos54 said:
Now, if you're saying you want a new IP with the development/marketing budget of say, Zelda, then I totally agree.
Click to expand...

See, Diablos nuts up and says it outright.

Echoenigma said:
So you don't want new IP, you want games that sell. There is a very large difference there.
Click to expand...

Surprisingly enough, that's pretty much the general gist of the opposition.

Shaanyboi said:
Nintendo absolutely does need to expand its library, but to say that they flat out don't make new IP, or that all their games are rehashes or sequels is totally ignorant. Granted, they're not making totally derivative copies of pre-existing cinematic games like Uncharted, or third-person cover shooters etc. But if that's the shit you want, you already have that.
Click to expand...

And Shaany knocks it out of the park.

335707206_700.gif


Good show, everyone.
 
When I think of the genres they don't have represented, I think of genres that typically receive a slew of mediocre titles with few actual quality entries, so I'm not really sure the system is currently missing anything in those regards. Open world games and rpgs have not received any real worthwhile titles in the past few years on console and shooters have been pretty lacklustre as well, outside of Halo. (Well, Halo 3, and that was a while back) Of course, this isn't to say Nintendo shouldn't go after them. I think if they put their first party effort behind them and carried the same gameplay first philosophy over, they could probably put to shame the rest of the console industry, so, yeah, I guess I would be for this too. The question is- what are they cutting to do it? We have to assume their development resources aren't infinite and I don't want them cutting titles like 3d Mario entries, which are consistently the best titles in the whole industry, to pursue a new genre they may not even succeed in, much less approach Mario quality in. It would be nice to see them toss some of their party games aside, as I don't know if the system really needs Nintendoland, Wii Party, Mario Party, Wii Sports, etc. Hell, it doesn't even look like the audience that made the Wii a success by lapping up those titles is even onboard this time around so why bother?

Also, Wonderful 101 is the best game of the year and better than any exclusive the PS3 or 360 received in their entire lifespans. Some ridiculous quotes in this thread from people who likely haven't even played it.

And, lastly, kinda OT, but I've been wondering- what exactly is the huge gap in third party support that Nintendo supposedly has? Isn't the system getting/has gotten Call of Duty, Batman, AC, and Splinter Cell this fall? I see that, down the road, some of the bigger titles like MGSV and FFXV aren't coming to the system, but lineups look pretty close right now and don't the multiplats coming to the system account for some of the "missing" genres? I don't think the games should really matter on console since you can get them on PC, but for those who think that third party multiplats are the deciding factor in a console's library for whatever reason, they're there.
 
Nintendo needs to keep making games with their old IP mixed with new gameplay ideas. People buy the IP because it's safe and familiar, and they're tricked into playing new gameplay experiences, left bewildered as to why it still feels so fresh.

It's because it could've stood on its own as a whole new franchise, but you wouldn't have bought it then, because it wasn't a safe bet.

Platinum wanted to make Wonderful 101 a Nintendo IP game, with Mario or Zelda characters. Nintendo said no, we want it to be unique. And there it sits on shelves, unbought, because it's not a safe bet. It looks kinda generic to most people, or a takeoff on Pikmin.

Any given Nintendo game could be the start of a new IP. Kid Icarus definitely could've been something totally new, but nobody would've bought it. Every Mario & Luigi game has a really interesting central basis/mechanic that could stand on its own with new characters. Mario Galaxy could've been a game about a cartoon lemur girl with a space helmet and the only result of that "experimentation" would be lower sales.

Keep making games with old IP and new ideas, it's the best formula to get the sales for your new game and ensure future sales for the next one.
 
Holy Order Sol said:
Diversity or not, I just want MORE games from them overall.
Click to expand...

This, moreso. More diversity would be nice, but on top of the diversity we're getting which is already nice. Nintendo needs to be able to highlight how diverse they've been like some posts here have proved, and improved releasing different games in more places so people can acknowledge what they do do.
 
When people say they need a new IP, what they are really saying is that they need a new flagship franchise.

Pushmo, Dillion don't fill that. Wonderful 101 is a start? X fills that, in my mind, but we had to literally beg Nintendo to bring Xenoblade to the United States. X will definitely make it over, but Project Rainfall shows Nintendo's attitude towards new IP - they don't deserve risks. Maybe that's starting to change (with Wonderful 101 and X), but the throw-Mario-at-struggling-consoles idea is not encouraging. That is a short-sided solution to a long-term problem.

People are saying "You guys are moving the goalpost by not including these titles", but maybe we would include those titles if Nintendo treated them similarly to Zelda, Mario, etc. I really hope Nintendo is as excited as most of us for X and they hype it up.
 
BatDan said:
The thing about the "New IP" argument is that people set arbitrary goal posts on what "counts" as a New IP.

Pushmo and Dillon's Rolling Western? ESHOP DOESN'T COUNT!
Xenoblade and The Wonderful 101? THIRD PARTY DOESN'T COUNT! (even though Nintendo owns Monolith and they 100% funded 101, in fact the original plans were to use the Nintendo mascots).
Click to expand...
Heh, even when defending it...

Xenoblade is first party.
 
Yay.

I haven't enjoyed a Nintendo console since the N64 where I could find incredible shooters, platformers, fighters, etc. You name it and the N64 had it. Probably my favorite console of all time. I just don't get that from Nintendo now.
 
In one sense yes, in one sense no.

More is always good, yes. I want my Marios and Zeldas. I also want my Star Foxes and F-Zeros. I also want my quirky eshop games. And yes, I would also like new IPs. So yes, I want more diversity from them.

In another sense, compared to the general industry, Nintendo does offer plenty of diversity already. Pikmin 3, W101, X, 3D World. You don't see those genres getting a lot of love elsewhere.

So yeah, give me more, but let's not completely discount what they have now.
 
Man-is-Obsolete said:
Well I think it would be interesting to see Nintendo tackle a more mature game, but no I think people want legitimate new franchises from Nintendo. And it doesn't have to be answers to MS and Sony franchise. We just want new worlds, new characters, the whole shebang. It's an exciting prospect to see what Nintendo could do with complete creative license to do something brand new. Don't know why we should limit ourselves to the same franchises over and over again, and it doesn't help the Wii U I fell.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that Nintendo has artists who aren't the kinds of artists that make the next Silent Hill, Amnesia, or games like Corpse Party, or Day of Saya. To many of their artists, Team Flare talking about Nihilism, or games like Majora's Mask/Twilight Princess are about as "dark" as they go. This may stem from a belief amongst Nintendo that an aesthetic is interchangeable amongst concepts. They look at a concept or game mechanic and say: "Hey. What can we attach to this that will make it fun for the most amount of people and get more people to buy it?" They don't go into the game thinking: "Hey. I like gore, crime, and blood. Let's make a game with gore, blood, and crime in it." They go into a game thinking: "Hey. What if we made a 3D platforming game with 3D gravity to it. Maybe have the player hopping between small planets" or "I was watching some ants in my garden and was thinking: What if we made a game where you control a bunch of little ants."

Then they approach sequels with: "Well, people really liked this mechanic and this level in the last game. Maybe we should expand on that concept or do something else with it."


Nintendo does diversify their line-up, but they do so in concepts and not characters.
 
Of course Nintendo should diversify themselves, they haven't touched every branch, style or genre of gaming yet. I'm also certain that they have the chops for it.
 
Mario is tied for my all time favorite franchise, but yea, 5 of my 9 3DS games have the word Mario or Luigi in it, as will all 3 of my Wii U games as of November 22. I'm loving it but I'd totally understand someone being burnt out on it.
 
Fantastical said:
When people say they need a new IP, what they are really saying is that they need a new flagship franchise.

Pushmo, Dillion don't fill that. Wonderful 101 is a start? X fills that, in my mind, but we had to literally beg Nintendo to bring Xenoblade to the United States. X will definitely make it over, but Project Rainfall shows Nintendo's attitude towards new IP - they don't deserve risks. Maybe that's starting to change (with Wonderful 101 and X), but the throw-Mario-at-struggling-consoles idea is not encouraging. That is a short-sided solution to a long-term problem.

People are saying "You guys are moving the goalpost by not including these titles", but maybe we would include those titles if Nintendo treated them similarly to Zelda, Mario, etc. I really hope Nintendo is as excited as most of us for X and they hype it up.
Click to expand...

NoA does not equal Nintendo.

There were plenty of new ips on the wii. Saying they don't count because they didn't fit some extra limiting criteria that only Nintendo seems to be subjected to doesn't change that.

Nintendo doesn't announce a new iteration of a big ip on a new console so people panic that it isn't coming and when they do people just whine that Nintendo doesn't make anything new.
 
They have a lot of new IPS that they have developed over the years on Wii and DS, but most of the titles are kind of b-titles or, as lately, small e-shop games.

They need to offer new things now with the ambition and the scope Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Kid Icarus had for their time on the NES and SNES.

I also think they can reboot some old forgotten games like they did with Punch-Out!! and Kid Icarus Uprising, both of them did pretty well, specially the first one. Maybe Murasame's Castle, For the Frog the Bell Tolls, rework Chibi Robo to make it globally appealing, maybe try to introduce Mother to the western audience further with some up to date remake... They can surprise us in many ways with their old IP, but I think what they really need is to have a new brand under the same aura of prestige and cuality of more modern classics. Otherwise they will seem affraid of doing anything big wich doesn't have one of their old names attached to it, wich can be a prettry negative perspective for a company so invested in their own percieved uniqueness.
 
Raw64life said:
Mario is tied for my all time favorite franchise, but yea, 5 of my 9 3DS games have the word Mario or Luigi in it, as will all 3 of my Wii U games as of November 22. I'm loving it but I'd totally understand someone being burnt out on it.
Click to expand...

Then buy some of the ones that don't have Mario or Luigi in the title. Both platforms have quality games that lack those characters.
 
BlackJace said:
That's not Nintendo's fault that you decide to cast those aside.
Click to expand...

Yes of course, a game like W101 bombing is not Nintendo's fault. Maybe Nintendo should try and make new IPs that actually feel meaningful, and have success potential. As opposed to making small time, nobody cares, new IPs. Like X, now that looks like a big time effort from Nintendo.
 
Chie Satonaka said:
Absolutely.

I think that Nintendo needs to update more of it's forgotten IPs as they did with Kid Icarus. I'd love to see that.
Click to expand...

Still wish Kid Icarus was on the Wii instead. It would have been awesome with the Wii-mote and nun chuck. I couldn't bring myself to finish it on the 3DS. So a Kid Icarus on the Wii U would actually be awesome.
 
Can Crusher said:
Yes of course, a game like W101 bombing is not Nintendo's fault. Maybe Nintendo should try and make new IPs that actually feel meaningful, and have success potential. As opposed to making small time, nobody cares, new IPs. Like X, now that looks like a big time effort from Nintendo.
Click to expand...

Nothing smalltime at all about The Wonderful 101.

It's as polished and complete and cool a game as there is this year.

Niche game or not, the game delivers on all levels.

The game has great production values and it's obvious money was spent on it as well.
 
Heyt said:
They have a lot of new IPS that they have developed over the years on Wii and DS, but most of the titles are kind of b-titles or, as lately, small e-shop games.
Click to expand...

People consider them B-titles because they are not classic IP. There is an automatic assumption that the game must not have had the same kind of care and attention put into its creation as a big name.

To outsiders, Wonderful 101 looks like a B-title.

Anyone trying to establish a new IP gets pissed on for it at this point. None of them are taken seriously, none of them sell in this climate of blockbuster or nothing. They're all one-offs at best.
 
Can Crusher said:
Yes of course, a game like W101 bombing is not Nintendo's fault. Maybe Nintendo should try and make new IPs that actually feel meaningful, and have success potential. As opposed to making small time, nobody cares, new IPs. Like X, now that looks like a big time effort from Nintendo.
Click to expand...

Why does X look like a "big time effort" but W101 doesn't? Why is one meaningful, but the other isn't?
 
TheGreatMightyPoo said:
Nothing smalltime at all about The Wonderful 101.

It's as polished and complete and cool a game as there is this year.

Niche game or not, the game delivers on all levels.

The game has great production values and it's obvious money was spent on it as well.
Click to expand...

Polished and complete have no bearing on what I said. Being niche does, and great production values seems to be completely open for interpretation if we compare it to actual big budget games in the market. The marketing was also lackluster, and as evidenced by reviews at large and sales numbers.... The game failed to reach the quality expected from Nintendo, and was a commercial failure.

The point here isn't to please 300 thousand Nintendo fans.
 
Nintendo should focus on a new big franchise ala Mario, Pokemon or Zelda.

New games such as W101 are fun. But that's not really a game that'll turn into a memorable franchise. Just like Sony's Puppeteer and Rain won't make it as new franchises. They're just there, nothing else.

Nintendo should brainstorm about a new big IP that can turn into a big franchise. If Sony can do that with Uncharted, Infamous and possibly TLoU this gen, and with many other franchises last gen, I don't know why Nintendo keeps on focusing just on the same olde decennia old formula.

It's a shame, really.
 
There's absolutely nothing about the W101 that makes it unsuitable for franchising. I'd argue it's far more suitable for another entry than the Last of Us, which was mechanically spent by its end and concluded perfectly story wise.
 
Shaanyboi said:
Why does X look like a "big time effort" but W101 doesn't? Why is one meaningful, but the other isn't?
Click to expand...

Scale of the effort seems to be much higher in technical terms, and the complexity of the game systems at hand seems to go way beyond what 101 ever tried to achieve (technically). It simply looks like a much bigger production.

The fans have reacted accordingly too, with X receiving 10x the amount of hype 101 ever did. It's meaningful because it clearly is a project that will appeal to a much wider audience than 101.

Let's not sugar coat it just because Nintendo is behind these games. 101 was a complete non event on all levels.

traveler said:
There's absolutely nothing about the W101 that makes it unsuitable for franchising. I'd argue it's far more suitable for another entry than the Last of Us, which was mechanically spent by its end and concluded perfectly story wise.
Click to expand...

Success dictates franchise potential, not the mere concept. Advent Rising had franchise potential. Mechanically spent? Absolute bollocks. The story is perfectly open for continuation, but it has the added benefit of not needing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Dark Souls Path Tracing mod, yay or nay?
2 3
123
1K
Gp1 replied
Has Nintendo lost its mojo?
2 3 4 5 6
264
2K
jason10mm replied
  • Poll
Nintendo should revisit the clamshell design for Switch 2 Lite or a different model
26
726
CuteFaceJay replied
  • Locked
Why has Nintendo and only Nintendo been allowed to get away with locking its games to its own expensive hardware?
42
696
DonkeyPunchJr replied
Nintendo should buy Rare Studio back
2
66
1K
taizuke replied
Top Bottom