Support NeoGAF

[Papacheeks]

The point many of us have been making is that these companies would all do well to learn from the Disney-esque model of adding to their pantheon constantly, rather than relying on the crutch of tried and true characters.

That is to say, they need to add to not merely support titles but also add to their legacy. Add to their brand association. Add to their market mindshare.

Agree 100%

It's what's wrong with Nintendo, and everyone shitting in this thread can't seem to grasp that and start battling on what's firs. thirds party, who makes exclusive IP's, bah, blah, blah.

And it just shit's up this thread, and is the reason so many Nintendo thread's become like this.

History shows if you put out a game on your console, promote it well and it's fairly well made you will find an audience.

Destiny proved that regardless of what gaf thinks, Uncharted, Halo, BASTION, Transistor, Sunset Overdrive(word is still out on how that game performed) etc.

Madworld was a cool looking game but couldn't find an audience and wasn't promoted well if at all, and Wii itself wasn't promoted at all as to being able to cater to a more mature audience.

 

[Papacheeks]

Who outside coregamers complains that they don't release new IPs?

Anyone who hasn't bought the system.

 

[Shig]

World of difference between making and marketing.

Every other major company in the industry has a handful of new IPs pretty much every gen that turn into big franchises for them, because they have a clear vision to do so; The companies are confident in them, they throw a bunch of their muscle behind them, they position them as significant new additions to their portfolio... and a lot of the time, that strategy breeds success. Sometimes it doesn't, but the effort's there.

Nintendo seems to approach creating new IPs as more of a periphery exercise. They do them as side projects, they throw them out with little to no fanfare compared to their reliable standbys. They toss them in the pool and if they don't swim, oh well, it wasn't a big deal anyway. If they do swim, a pat on the back and a "good job" may be exchanged and that seems about as far as it goes. New IPs, for them, seem to be more doodles in the margins of their notebooks than they are valuable new pieces in their portfolio.

Splatoon seems like it may finally be a turnaround on that front, but even then it seems like it arrived there by accident. The initial reveal seemed like Nintendo lightly dipping their toe into making a multiplayer shooter, and that felt like the extent of the project's scope at the time. When it turned out to be generating a ton of buzz relative to their other E3 showings, then and only then did they find the ambition to turn it into something bigger.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Honestly, I don't think anyone really cares whether a particular game is owned by Nintendo or not. What they're actually talking about is what kinds of games Nintendo seems to promote, and whether those games suit their personal tastes. It'd be one thing if Nintendo were to make a game like, say Portal and promoted it to high heavens, and then supported it with other games that reach the same kind of audience. But they don't do things like that. They'll make games like Xenoblade, barely advertise it, and then have no follow up.

Isn't Xenoblade a pretty poor example of a new IP with no follow up since it has an advertised sequel coming this year?

 

[Allan Holdsworth]

Chibi Robo had potential, but:
- First title was released towards the end of GC life
- Second title (a Harvest-Moon esque spinoff) was Walmart exclusive
- Third game didn't even release outside Japan
- Fourth game is some sort of photo taking thing, e-Shop only

RIP

 

[Oersted]

Anyone who hasn't bought the system.

Casualgamers? You are confusing.

Splatoon seems like it may finally be a turnaround on that front, but even then it seems like it arrived there by accident. The initial reveal seemed like Nintendo lightly dipping their toe into making a multiplayer shooter, and that felt like the extent of the project's scope at the time. When it turned out to be generating a ton of buzz relative to their other E3 showings, then and only then did they find the ambition to turn it into something bigger.

Anything to back your feelings up?

 

[Javier]

If we're only going to consider In-House First Party as actual IPs that belong to the company in question, then how many Sony/MS IPs don't count for them?

Serious question.

 

[A Link to the Past]

This is part of what people want as well, I agree. I don't think Nintendo was ever very good at "world building," it's just that their lack has become increasingly apparent over time.

A lot of people want seem to want to be immersed in a virtual, fictional world, and Nintendo has made very little attempt to indulge those consumers.

Going back to Nintendogs, I think Nintendogs could have been a great game world-building wise. While they should make sure not to take away from the fundamentals, it would have been neat if you could do more to design your house, or if the other owners had interesting personalities, or what have you.

 

[Papacheeks]

Casualgamers? You are confusing.

Anyone who could or would buy a console is a potential costumer. If Core gamer's know about it, granted we are saying anyone who buy's PS4 or a xbone is considered a core gamer, then why aren't they out right now buying a Wii U?

When you buy a product for yourself or someone especially a console you want to know that there are games for it. Wii U's 2013 was definatley a no go for alot of potential buyer's because of lack of games.

Anyone who plays games or has kids that plays games are potential buyer's I just don't lump the people who buy a console for just themselves. Anyone with grand kids, children, or whoever is a potential buyer.

If their software was more varied with well promoted games outside of their legacy franchises people would be buying them like crazy.

PS4 is selling close to Wii numbers in the time frame it's been out. And that's because of good PR and games that are also promoted well.

 

[Shabad]

Who outside coregamers complains that they don't release new IPs?

People aren't buying their console are they ;-)

 

[Opiate]

Casualgamers? You are confusing.

I think the problem is that you're thinking many of us are disagreeing with your basic conclusion when in reality we're trying to explain it.

You believe that people are ignoring a wealth of new IPs that Nintendo has created, and most of the people still in this thread agree. The question we're now asking is: well, why are these new IP being ignored? What is it that these people want which makes them say things like "Nintendo hasn't made any new IP in a long time" when even a cursory look at their releases shows that to be false? Where does a sentiment like that come from in the first place?

There's a pretty particular type of game you'll note that Nintendo is lacking. Games with huge budgets, huge marketing campaigns, aimed at the 16-35 year old male market -- the Uncharteds, the Halos, the Killzones, the Gears of War. These titles are "events" when they release, both on GAF and in the mainstream gaming press.

Nintendo does not have that particular type of game. It doesn't make the original premise we're discussing correct -- clearly, Nintendo has made new IPs -- and if all you care about is being right, well then, you're right. And so am I, since I agree with you. But if you care about understanding where people come from and why they believe the things they do, then seeing what Nintendo is missing is valuable. It could even help Nintendo: if they can understand why many gamers seem disinterested in their platforms, they may be able to correct that problem in the future.

 

[Oersted]

Anyone who could or would buy a console is a potential costumer. If Core gamer's know about it, granted we are saying anyone who buy's PS4 or a xbone is considered a core gamer, then why aren't they out right now buying a Wii U?

When you buy a product for yourself or someone especially a console you want to know that there are games for it. Wii U's 2013 was definatley a no go for alot of potential buyer's because of lack of games.

Anyone who plays games or has kids that plays games are potential buyer's I just don't lump the people who buy a console for just themselves. Anyone with grand kids, children, or whoever is a potential buyer.

I lost you, sorry. What is your point?

I think the problem is that you're thinking many of us are disagreeing with your basic conclusion when in reality we're trying to explain it.

You believe that people are ignoring a wealth of new IPs that Nintendo has created, and most of the people still in this thread agree. The question we're now asking is: well, why are these new IP being ignored? What is it that these people want which makes them say things like "Nintendo hasn't made any new IP in a long time?" They're wrong, I agree. But where does a sentiment like that come from in the first place?

There's a pretty particular type of game you'll note that Nintendo is lacking. Games with huge budgets, huge marketing campaigns, aimed at the 16-35 year old male market -- the Uncharteds, the Halos, the Killzones, the Gears of War. These titles are "events" when they release, both on GAF and in the mainstream gaming press.

Nintendo does not have that particular type of game. It doesn't make the original premise correct -- clearly, Nintendo has made new IPs -- and if all you care about is being right, then, you're right (and so am I, since I agree with you). But if you care about understanding where people come from and why they believe the things they do, then seeing what Nintendo is missing is valuable. It could even help Nintendo. If they can understand why many gamers seem disinterested in their platforms, they may be able to correct that problem in the future.

I do agree that there is a discussion to be had why some are ignoring some new IPs, yes. And I do agree,Nintendo is lacking multi million dollar IPs targeted at 14- 35 white hetero males.

 

[martino]

In fact what annoy is not that they don't make new IP . It's that have yet not kill IP some don't like when they can create or use other IP they pretend they (would) prefer/buy.

 

[Interceptor]

People aren't buying their console are they ;-)

The new Joker argument for all console warrrios over the next decade.

"The Wii U isn´t selling because the Logo is pink. - It´s not pink. - Well people aren't buying their console are they ;-)"

You can´t talk nonsense and back it up with some unrelated facts. That´s not how logic works. ^^

 

[balladofwindfishes]

These titles are "events" when they release, both on GAF and in the mainstream gaming press.

Both Mario Kart 8 and Smash were "events" in the press and on GAF. Smash 4's OT was like the largest OT for a game on GAF ever.

Not new IPs, but such games do exist from Nintendo (infrequently).

 

[Papacheeks]

I lost you, sorry. What is your point?

I reiterated in my previous post more.

PS4 is selling like the Wii or close to it for the amount of time it's been out to market.

And the Wii was definitely a system the capitalized on the casual market, so to me core people are not just the only people buying consoles, or caring about what;s out for software on those consoles.

A lot of people are, not just gaf about what they are getting for software, when they buy a console.

 

[4Tran]

Xenoblade is represented in Smash, got an Amiibo, gets rereleased for new 3DS and gets a full blown sequel for WiiU.

No follow up. Just lol

But it's not unknown, not anymore. Nintendo's putting a lot of push behind the sequel.

Isn't Xenoblade a pretty poor example of a new IP with no follow up since it has an advertised sequel coming this year?

I think that this shows where the disconnect between Nintendo fans and non-Nintendo fans. Nintendo fans see a bunch of information on a game, and a bunch of fanservice tie-ins and think that Xenoblade is now well known and supported. On the other hand, non-Nintendo fans don't even know it exists. It didn't get splashy trailers and conference presentations and ads, so it doesn't have much buzz. Even avid JRPG players would see that the Wii U has no other JRPGs on it, and likely pass on the system altogether. Think back to what happened with Bayonetta 2 - it's heralded by Platinum and Nintendo diehards, but it made no impact.

This is part of what people want as well, I agree. I don't think Nintendo was ever very good at "world building," it's just that their lack has become increasingly apparent over time.

A lot of people seem to want to be immersed in a virtual, fictional world, and Nintendo has made very little attempt to indulge those consumers.

Yeah, that would help a lot. Building a solid identity would make a lot of difference, but it's not what Nintendo can do without going back to the Mario/Zelda well. It's going to be a big burden when they release the Wii U's successor.

World of difference between making and marketing.

Every other major company in the industry has a handful of new IPs pretty much every gen that turn into big franchises for them, because they have a clear vision to do so; The companies are confident in them, they throw a bunch of their muscle behind them, they position them as significant new additions to their portfolio... and a lot of the time, that strategy breeds success. Sometimes it doesn't, but the effort's there.

Nintendo seems to approach creating new IPs as more of a periphery exercise. They do them as side projects, they throw them out with little to no fanfare compared to their reliable standbys. They toss them in the pool and if they don't swim, oh well, it wasn't a big deal anyway. If they do swim, a pat on the back and a "good job" may be exchanged and that seems about as far as it goes. New IPs, for them, seem to be more doodles in the margins of their notebooks than they are valuable new pieces in their portfolio.

Splatoon seems like it may finally be a turnaround on that front, but even then it seems like it arrived there by accident. The initial reveal seemed like Nintendo lightly dipping their toe into making a multiplayer shooter, and that felt like the extent of the project's scope at the time. When it turned out to be generating a ton of buzz relative to their other E3 showings, then and only then did they find the ambition to turn it into something bigger.

These are all fantastic points. Although I'd add that Splatoon is probably not going to do too much for outside audiences because it will seem to have overly familar aesthetics to Nintendo's other offerings.

 

[martino]

I reiterated in my previous post more.

PS4 is selling like the Wii or close to it for the amount of time it's been out to market.

And the Wii was definitely a system the capitalized on the casual market, so to me core people are not just the only people buying consoles, or caring about what;s out for software on those consoles.

A lot of people are, not just gaf about what they are getting for software, when they buy a console.

are you telling volatile target from ps2 then wii are now now opting for ps4 ?
If yes , i agree .

 

[Papacheeks]

I think that this shows where the disconnect between Nintendo fans and non-Nintendo fans. Nintendo fans see a bunch of information on a game, and a bunch of fanservice tie-ins and think that Xenoblade is now well known and supported. On the other hand, non-Nintendo fans don't even know it exists. It didn't get splashy trailers and conference presentations and ads, so it doesn't have much buzz. Even avid JRPG players would see that the Wii U has no other JRPGs on it, and likely pass on the system altogether. Think back to what happened with Bayonetta 2 - it's heralded by Platinum and Nintendo diehards, but it made no impact.


Yeah, that would help a lot. Building a solid identity would make a lot of difference, but it's not what Nintendo can do without going back to the Mario/Zelda well. It's going to be a big burden when they release the Wii U's successor.


These are all fantastic points. Although I'd add that Splatoon is probably not going to do too much for outside audiences because it will seem to have overly familar aesthetics to Nintendo's other offerings.

Couldn't agree more with all of it. All solid points on perception of NIntendo IP's, people who are Nintendo-fans vs, Non, knowing or not knowing about whats out on the system.

I would have to agree though with the last part with SHIG about how Nintendo treat's new IP's and what not.

ANd that is where the issue lies.

 

[Oersted]

I think that this shows where the disconnect between Nintendo fans and non-Nintendo fans. Nintendo fans see a bunch of information on a game, and a bunch of fanservice tie-ins and think that Xenoblade is now well known and supported. On the other hand, non-Nintendo fans don't even know it exists. It didn't get splashy trailers and conference presentations and ads, so it doesn't have much buzz. Even avid JRPG players would see that the Wii U has no other JRPGs on it, and likely pass on the system altogether. Think back to what happened with Bayonetta 2 - it's heralded by Platinum and Nintendo diehards, but it made no impact.

You made a factual wrong statement. Owe it up. But yeah, again, there is seriously a discussion to be had why guys like you ignore it.

 

[JCX]

It'd be super interesting to see Nintendo EAD do a realistic M-rated FPS/TPS. At the every least we know it would work on day one. Doubt it could happen under miyamoto's watch though.

 

[Oersted]

It'd be super interesting to see Nintendo EAD do a realistic M-rated FPS/TPS. At the every least we know it would work on day one. Doubt it could happen under miyamoto's watch though.

Nintendo pays thirdparties for that. Bayonetta, Resident Evil, Devil's Third etc.

 

[4Tran]

You made a factual wrong statement. Owe it up. But yeah, again, there is seriously a discussion to be had why guys like you ignore it.

What is there to owe up? That a game like Xenoblade X doesn't have support? Well, the truth is that it doesn't have any. If it did, Nintendo would be announcing a Mother game, a Final Fantasy game, and a Tales game to go along with it. That's what's necessary to properly support a game: the impression that the genre is alive and well, and that you can get other games like it on the same console.

And this discussion isn't about guys like me at all. I'm not trying to insist that Nintendo doesn't have any new IPs, I'm not a low information gamer, and I'm not interested in dudebro games. I'm just pointing out that the thread isn't describing the issue properly. There's a real problem here for Nintendo, and they're doing little to engage it.

 

[Shabad]

I think the problem is that you're thinking many of us are disagreeing with your basic conclusion when in reality we're trying to explain it.

You believe that people are ignoring a wealth of new IPs that Nintendo has created, and most of the people still in this thread agree. The question we're now asking is: well, why are these new IP being ignored? What is it that these people want which makes them say things like "Nintendo hasn't made any new IP in a long time?" They're wrong, I agree. But where does a sentiment like that come from in the first place?

So far I completely agree with your analysis, but...

There's a pretty particular type of game you'll note that Nintendo is lacking. Games with huge budgets, huge marketing campaigns, aimed at the 16-35 year old male market -- the Uncharteds, the Halos, the Killzones, the Gears of War. These titles are "events" when they release, both on GAF and in the mainstream gaming press.

Nintendo does not have that particular type of game. It doesn't make the original premise correct -- clearly, Nintendo has made new IPs -- and if all you care about is being right, then, you're right (and so am I, since I agree with you). But if you care about understanding where people come from and why they believe the things they do, then seeing what Nintendo is missing is valuable. It could even help Nintendo. If they can understand why many gamers seem disinterested in their platforms, they may be able to correct that problem in the future.

I don't think that's the issue at all. At least not on those forums. The average Joe may consider buying a Wii U if it had a popular FPS/TPS, ... But I don't think that this is what people expect from Nintendo, at least I don't.

Nintendo's teams are among the most talented devs in the industry. And when they try something new - something really new - and get enough support and time to have a good production value, they are brilliant. Pikmin was brilliant, Xenoblade was brilliant, Splatoon looks brilliant... But I, and others, feel that those efforts are too rare.

Now, if you want to disregard my opinion by mocking it, feel free by all mean.

PS : Considering that new IPs outside of Nintendo are rehashed shooters in grim realistic universe is just as misguided as claiming that Nintendo has no teams outside of EAD, or disregarding their second party output.

 

[To Far Away Times]

I have a feeling Splatoon could end up really special. Nintendo EAD developed, and already looking like the freshest take on a multiplayer TPS/FPS in ages.

 

[tuxfool]

The problem with Xenoblade is that non-Nintendo fans barely know it exists much less that it's made by a Nintendo subsidiary. And really, even if people knew the truth, what difference does it make? Nobody really cares whether Nintendo makes a couple of games like that.

This is the fault of Nintendo. A lot of people cared more than Nintendo, enough to make a fuss about a game that was not brought over to the NA market, despite have an english translation already. It should also be noted it was also barely marketed in Europe.

Can you believe they couldn't even bother for a product many reviewers called the best JRPG of the generation?

 

[Nightbird]

It'd be super interesting to see Nintendo EAD do a realistic M-rated FPS/TPS. At the every least we know it would work on day one. Doubt it could happen under miyamoto's watch though.

Better not. Nintendos Strength is not in realistic Games. Colourful crative Worlds is what they can do best. For realistic stuff there are people better than them out there. I would rather not see them waste their Time on that. Let Retro do it, they are waay better at this.

 

[AniHawk]

Nintendo does not have that particular type of game. It doesn't make the original premise we're discussing correct -- clearly, Nintendo has made new IPs -- and if all you care about is being right, well then, you're right. And so am I, since I agree with you. But if you care about understanding where people come from and why they believe the things they do, then seeing what Nintendo is missing is valuable. It could even help Nintendo: if they can understand why many gamers seem disinterested in their platforms, they may be able to correct that problem in the future.

i think in this case, the onus is on the people who can't articulate themselves to better articulate themselves. they should explain more precisely their dissatisfaction and actually back it up. ignoring facts is a poor way to construct an argument and back up an opinion.

 

[Dr. Buni]

Seeing that list made me realize Wii was one of the worst top selling home consoles of all time. What a travesty that it was anywhere near the 100 million plus list after the great library offered by the PS1 and PS2 era. God I hate the Wii library.

Weird, I loved the Wii and its library. It was much better than the underwhelming N64, for a start.

Edit: On the subject of the thread, I actually think Nintendo makes too many new IPs. I wish they would focus on the ones they already have and perhaps revive a couple dead ones, like Murasame Castle!

 

[EnergizerFellow]

You believe that people are ignoring a wealth of new IPs that Nintendo has created, and most of the people still in this thread agree. The question we're now asking is: well, why are these new IP being ignored?

They aren't "dudebro" enough. It really is that simple.

Better not. Nintendos Strength is not in realistic Games. Colourful crative Worlds is what they can do best.

And that's why they are in 3rd place.

 

[sd28821]

i think in this case, the onus is on the people who can't articulate themselves to better articulate themselves. they should explain more precisely their dissatisfaction and actually back it up. ignoring facts is a poor way to construct an argument and back up an opinion.

this oh god this

 

[4Tran]

i think in this case, the onus is on the people who can't articulate themselves to better articulate themselves. they should explain more precisely their dissatisfaction and actually back it up. ignoring facts is a poor way to construct an argument and back up an opinion.

That's true enough, but it would also help if the Nintendo fans would try to address the concerns of the ones with the poor articulation rather than just flood the conversation with lists. With that approach, any discussion is just going to get dragged into semantics arguments.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

To be frank, their new IPs aren't generally things the masses are interested in.

I mean, a JRPG and?.....stuff?

When people talk abotu new Nintendo IPs, they're talking about another (close to) Mario, Zelda, Samus level IP.

 

[A Link to the Past]

To be frank, their new IPs aren't generally things the masses are interested in.

I mean, a JRPG and?.....stuff?

When people talk abotu new Nintendo IPs, they're talking about another (close to) Mario, Zelda, Samus level IP.

Splatoon, Xenoblade, Codename S.T.E.A.M.

 

[Shabad]

They aren't "dudebro" enough. It really is that simple.

And that's why they are in 3rd place.

Just out of curiosity what exactly do you consider a dudebro game ? I am not sure insulting the creations of talented developers outside of Nintendo's realm is helpful to this discussion in any cases...

 

[Chmpocalypse]

It boils down to "Nintendo doesn't make the kind of games everybody else is making".

And they are god tier because of that.

To their cult, perhaps. Most gamers worship other gods these days, some of them Naughty.

 

[Neoxon]

And yet...who outside of the core gamers know who he is? He's not a Nintendo associated character yet. The brand isn't seen as a deeply Nintendo one yet because of it's unknown status.

Nintendo's fixing that thanks to their recent Xenoblade push. The Shulk Amiibo already sold out (granted, it could be because it was store-exclusive, but still).

 

[4Tran]

Just out of curiosity what exactly do you consider a dudebro game ? I am not sure insulting the creations of talented developers outside of Nintendo's realm is helpful to this discussion in any cases...

"Dudebro" isn't being used as an insult; it's just a descriptor for a certain gaming demographic. These are men 16-25 who tend to only buy a few games a year; primarily sports and shooter games with a smattering of third person games. Dudebro games would therefore be ones that try to cater to this demographic. Nowadays, just about all AAA games try to do this, so they're all effectively dudebro games.

 

[Shabad]

"Dudebro" isn't being used as an insult; it's just a descriptor for a certain gaming demographic. These are men 16-25 who tend to only buy a few games a year; primarily sports and shooter games with a smattering of third person games. Dudebro games would therefore be ones that try to cater to this demographic. Nowadays, just about all AAA games try to do this, so they're all effectively dudebro games.

I don't where you live, but dudebro is quite pejorative... In any cases, what's the relation to the topic at hand ? Why would new IPs be sports and shooter games ?

I think people are expecting things like Pikmin and Splatoon - although the later could be considered a shooter and hence a dudebro game, but I don't know about that >.<

 

[Chmpocalypse]

I think Nintendos biggest problem is that they just flat out suck at marketing. Not only their new IPs but even their existing ones. At least to younger audiences (though I would argue that most of their TV ads are just horrible)

If I go into any clothing store here in austria and walk into the kids section, guess what I see there: Marvel, Angry Birds and Disney. But no Nintendo.
If I walk in a random toy store, guess what I see there: Marvel, Disney, Angry Birds. Again, no Nintendo.

My little nephew (in case you are wondering why I'm running around in the kids section of a clothing store) is a HUGE Cars fan. Why? Cause some other kid in his playgroup had a Cars T-Shirt. That spiraled out of control and know he "owns" several Cars T-Shirts, Toys, the movies and he watches the TV-show that apparently exists.
He is not into videogames cause he is four years old and my sister refuses to buy a console for a four year old (which is a wise choice) but he actually likes Mario stuff. At least in theory. Cause (this might be completly different in the US and I'm making a fool out of myself) there really isn't a lot of Nintendo merchandise for smaller children.
And it's really weirding me out cause if they had a Nintendo branded toy line, I can guarantee you a whole lot of people would look at those toys just because they recognize Mario. My father doesn't play videogames and never has, but if he were in a toy store looking for a present for my nephew and there was a Mario toy he would at least stop and look at it.

Sure they now have Amiibos but.....they kinda suck for small children. They are just static figurines that do nothing. If you are not a fan of them already they do nothing for you. There is no "Skylanders" game where they can play with them. Basically there is just Smash.

Anyway, this has been another installment of: Internet-loser tells billion dollar heavy company what they should do. But it's just so mind boggeling to me.

Edit: Sorry, kinda went off at a tangent here. But my point still stands: They suck at marketing.

No, Nintendo's biggest problem is they're now a niche developer that thinks it's still on top. The king is dead, because he's out of step with what the vast majority of gamers want.

 

[Nudull]

None of them are shooters.

 

[4Tran]

I don't where you live, but dudebro is quite pejorative... In any cases, what's the relation to the topic at hand ? Why would new IPs be sports and shooter games ?

Dudebro is such a compact and descriptive term that it might as well used for marketing. If Nintendo were already associated with dudebro games, then they wouldn't need any new IPs appealing to that demographic. They don't, therefore the need for an IP that caters towards dudebros exists.

I think people are expecting things like Pikmin and Splatoon - although the later could be considered a shooter and hence a dudebro game, but I don't know about that >.<

It's not as simple as "dudebros like shooters, and Splatoon is a shooter so they should like it". The dudebro demographic might not be the most scientific group, but they are actually quite picky and a game like Splatoon probably doesn't have anything that they're looking for.

 

[Nostremitus]

Actually, this is one of my problem here.

Sunshine, Galaxy and 3D world all played differently and I would said had much more difference compared to Uncharted 1-3.

I'd argue those are three different IPs, along with the "New" series as a fourth. They have the same characters but the play mechanics are different enough to be classified a different IPs in a catalog of Mario IPs along with the various Mario sports, kart, and the Smash games. If they'd replaced Mario with an alien or astronaut in the Galaxy games I'm not sure many would have argued it was a Mario game. It would have been a new platforming IP from Nintendo even if nothing else changed other than a handful of textures and a few lines of text.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I'd argue those are three different IPs, along with the "New" series as a fourth. They have the same characters but the play mechanics are different enough to be classified a different IPs in a catalog of Mario IPs along with the various Mario sports, kart, and the Smash games. If they'd replaced Mario with an alien or astronaut in the Galaxy games I'm not sure many would have argued it was a Mario game. It would have been a new platforming IP from Nintendo even if nothing else changed other than a handful of textures and a few lines of text.

But if Mario Galaxy wasn't a Mario game, we could have had vastly different themes, designs, tones, etc. We might have even had an awesome story. That's the point that needs to be made about why people want more new IPs - there's more to games than just how they play, but also their look.

 

[EnergizerFellow]

"Dudebro" isn't being used as an insult; it's just a descriptor for a certain gaming demographic. These are men 16-25 who tend to only buy a few games a year; primarily sports and shooter games with a smattering of third person games.

Urban Diectionary's definition of dudebro is shockingly accurate.

Dudebro games would therefore be ones that try to cater to this demographic. Nowadays, just about all AAA games try to do this, so they're all effectively dudebro games.

Just out of curiosity what exactly do you consider a dudebro game ?

Dudebros are so consistent in their taste in games that they can be simply summarized as "Call of Halo Battlefield #234", "FIFA Madden Calendar Year", and "Grand Theft Asscreed".

I think people are expecting things like Pikmin and Splatoon - although the later could be considered a shooter and hence a dudebro game, but I don't know about that >.<

Splatoon is so anti-dudebro it's almost comical. How do you think Splatoon's "bright kiddie graphics" are going to be perceived by guys who play Call of Duty on Live like it's their fucking job?

It's not as simple as "dudebros like shooters, and Splatoon is a shooter so they should like it". The dudebro demographic might not be the most scientific group, but they are actually quite picky and a game like Splatoon probably doesn't have anything that they're looking for.

A thousand times this.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Who outside coregamers complains that they don't release new IPs?

You're right. They don't complain about a lack of IPs. Non-core gamers don't even buy Nintendo systems! That speaks to the weakness of their offerings.

Nintendo's fixing that thanks to their recent Xenoblade push. The Shulk Amiibo already sold out (granted, it could be because it was store-exclusive, but still).

Given how many amiibos have sold out, I'm not going to put too much stock into that meaning much.

 

[Neoxon]

None of them are shooters.

Splatoon says hi.

 

[?oe?oe]

Dudebros don't sell on Nintendo. Why did you think 3rd parties left, they sell dudebro games to dudebros. Nintendo has a few dudebros, but not even the dudebros complaining about the lack of dudebro games on Nintendo are buying the dudebro games on Nintendo so unless you go out and buy the dudebro games on Nintendo, stop complaining there aren't enough dudebro games on Nintendo. You got enough dudebro elsewhere.

 

[Nostremitus]

But if Mario Galaxy wasn't a Mario game, we could have had vastly different themes, designs, tones, etc. We might have even had an awesome story. That's the point that needs to be made about why people want more new IPs - there's more to games than just how they play, but also their look.

The theme design and story could all be the same. The story of that game was about Rosalina and her Lumas. The parts with Bowser and Peach were few and far between and only served to introduce the Mario fan to the new and completely different story, themes, and play style. Nothing would have changed had they been replaced.The look, though? That's artistic direction. Do you honestly believe that would have changed anyway? Did it change for Pushmo or Splatoon?

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

There seems to be a huge disparity between Nintendo and other developers when it comes to cooperative development. I think one huge difference, is that Nintendo doesn't separate their publisher logo from their internal R&D.

Basically, I've noticed the instance a "second" or "third" studio is revealed to be developing or contributing to a game, people come to the conclusion that Nintendo had no development involvement in the product. "Oh, Nintendo just published it". Which in many cases, is far from the truth.

For example:

Sora or Mystwalker are perfect examples of companies who have like 3 employees but their logo presence in front of game, qualifies them as a developer. Meanwhile, you can spot dozens of Nintendo developers on certain games, even in the director and producer role, with no credit to them as a developer.

The most internal core of Nintendo, (kyoto and tokyo internal R&D offices), have created several intellectual properties every generation. In many cases, they've been obscured the past couple of generations behind Japan-only releases, "casual appeal", or even eshop exlusive. Splatoon, in many ways does seem like the first AAA debut from the company's core in a long time.