Bending_Unit_22
Member
I always like in these Nintendo be fucking up threads, there are a smattering of posts like "Make Metriod or Star Fox or FZero games".
Firstly, it's funny that Nintendo gets killed for milking and yet some of the more requested games are their old ones.
but mainly, I want to know why people ask for these so much? Judging by the constant outcry for them it makes me wonder why they aren't more popular than they are.
Did the Prime games sell well? and even if they did, it seems people want another 2D entry instead....do they sell?
As for Star Fox, would simply SF64 EXTREME Edition be enough? Then with FZero, Nintendo didn't even make the last one...and it bombed (fuck the world btw).
That's my issue with threads like this where the main idea is to put out Metroid or StarFox games as a solution. I don't think those are system sellers
and if Nintendo did come out with a direct that announced all 3 of those, people would still bitch that they are re-hashing too much lol.
Im not saying I mind or don't want these games but seeing people place them as the solution to Nintendo's problems is funny.
There is far more to having a successful lineup for a console than simply finding what sells the best and milk the living hell out of that and that alone. No the Metroid and FZero games didn't sell as well as Mario, but there are a lot of people who want a Mario game and something else (sci-fi adventure, extreme racing, flying, RPG, etc) who will buy a console with Mario and the other but won't buy a console with 2 Marios. Unfortunately for Nintendo there were a lot of people who would buy a Mario game and Wii___, but they aren't around much anymore.
That means Nintendo needs to get a wide variety of games, like F-Zero, Star Fox, Metroid, Pilot Wings, Pikmin, Mario sports, real sports even, Xenoblade, Party, etc., to satisfy as many tastes as possible. Some are coming, the usual MK, SB, Pikmin, and X but much more is needed. That will far more encourage 3rd parties who make games more like the others to get onboard (though the idiotic decision to again make a much weaker/different console with poor online means it may not be enough) than giving them every 2D platformer fanatic in the world as a userbase, especially since a Nintendo console is already a must for them. It will also help the console more than burning a specific type of gamer out by milking one genre.
I don't necessarily think that it would make the most short term profit for Nintendo but that it will set Nintendo up for a much better mid to long term. The biggest threat facing Nintendo right now is that outside of kids, increasingly aging and shrinking Nintendo fans, and whoever is a 2D platformer fanatic and not in either of the previous groups, they increasingly don't matter to gamers and the gaming industry at large. At this point they need to accept that abandoning core gamers with the Wii for casuals and then ignoring casuals as Apple started courting them along with the Wii U itself were monumental F%*$ ups. The priority now needs to be keeping themselves relevant to console gamers and the gaming industry ahead and not short term profit. They have a huge pile of cash, they can burn through some over the next few years.
Nintendo is offering DLC as a full retail package for those who lack internet, yes. They are not the first to do this. However, it's only on sale in stores until the end of the year, then it's just pure DLC again
Like I said, it's pointless to argue over since your argument is easily disproven without it. Just to do so a little anyways, I can see the argument for counting NSLU as pure DLC and I know my argument that it should be considered a separate game isn't the strongest. As an actual game I have no problem considering it DLC for the most part, but in the marketplace when discussing things like this, I consider it a separate game since I think that is how consumers will treat it. I could very easily be wrong on that, but it doesn't much matter here.
Though I do see the point you are making, I believe it is fundamentally flawed due to your lack of inclusion of ports/remakes.
The 5th, 6th and early 7th generations that you decided to promote for what one may consider 'responsible/even distribution of Mario platformers' had 6 ports as well as the games you listed, 1 on the GBC, 4 on the GBA, and 1 for the DS. I believe that had Nintendo continued followed this model since we wouldn't have likely got NSMB, NSMB2 or Super Mario 3D Land as the ports fulfilled the need for Mario platformers on Nintendo portables. As a result, I believe your post is showing a somewhat distorted reality.
Aside from the responses are to an argument as it was made by JoeM86, all including the ports will do is extend backwards when the milkage began. Doesn't change much, it works for a while but eventually you've gone back to the well too many times (*cough* Guitar Hero *cough*). Given the preponderance of ports it also divides the early period of port milking and good for Nintendo to stop that and move to new games. It also doesn't change that Nintendo has ramped up new game miliking excessively of late.