Support NeoGAF

[watershed]

Two reasons are quality control and in-house development but I think these are about to be tested with the 3ds and wii u. For the 3ds specifically we've had games like Pilot Wings made by a third party, Nintendogs which felt rushed or at least sparse on changes, a new Luigi's Mansion on the way also made by a third party, etc.

According to some recent Iwata Asks Nintendo is going to be expanding their partnerships with outside developers and I think Grezzo working on Zelda is an example of this. Its gonna test their quality control on some of their big IPs.

 

[Somnid]

There's a few reasons I can think of:

-Non-yearly releases. Nintendo has a wide stable, most other publishers don't (because they've killed their other profitable franchises by overselling them). This means they can spread them out and have teams work on them for a long time. This prevents fatigue. While many have been around for a while it's rare to see more than 2 on any platform.

-High quality. They don't try to sell on brand alone but to have high quality games.

-Re-invention. This is one of the most important. Any game in a Nintendo series can stand on it's own well after sequels are released. Most other publishers try to make each better and bigger which works only for a little while and then you top out. Nintendo usually tries to give each game it's own personality and style. Who they hell is going to play MW1 and 2 after 3? Probably not many.

-Built for portables. Nintendo portable releases stand on their own as well and are often very unique and sometime branched franchises. They aren't watered down console games, they have their own unique feel that doesn't cheapen them.

-Don't over-ship. Nintendo ships enough to sell but tries to keep them out of bargain bins. This means they don't quickly depreciate in value.

 

[Takao]

it is a shame that one fell off. That seems to happen with a lot of their second party developed series. They get somewhat successful and then after awhile they just kinda die off. The same thing's probably gonna happen to fossil fighters.

Does anyone even know Fossil Fighters: Champions comes out soon? Game's being sent to die.

 

[rpmurphy]

Not only with the franchises that currently have releases, but I don't think many other big publishers put much effort in preserving their past history in small or big ways. How many IP's are lost in the depths of EA, Ubisoft, etc.?

 

[Kilrogg]

*Metroid has gone horribly wrong.
*Zelda I won't voice my opinion to avoid any sterile debate.
*Super Mario Bros. was dormant for more than 15 years, and IF the current Wii U footage for NSMB Mii is any indication (granted, that's a big "if"), they're already starting to get lazy with it (not to mention there's no SMB for 3DS).
*3D Mario saw the first direct sequel in a series that used to renew itself with every installment, and has now become a racoon-tail fest for whatever twisted reason.
*Mario Kart is handled (mostly) well I'll give you that. MKWii is God and MK7 looks awesome.
*Smash Bros. Brawl is seen as a letdown despite its pedigree (Mario, Sonic and Snake in one game? Talk about a nerd's wet dream minus Mega Man).
*Pilotwings came back from the dead as a very lazy launch title with little original content, and it bombed.
*F-Zero is nowhere to be seen.
*The last Star Fox games have all sucked or are forgettable, and the latest is just a remake.
*Punch-Out!! was brought back after too many years in the form of a quasi-remake with only one new character.
*Wii Sports Resort was good (but lacked a 4-player tennis game sadly), no question.
*Wii Play Motion didn't wow anyone.
*DKCR is a competent game, with some critical flaws (chiefly, controls), and it failed to reach the same kind of success as the original game.
*Kirby... They just keep churning those out like there's no tomorrow and experimenting with new gameplays they were supposed to use with new characters but just slapped on Kirby because why not? Thankfully Return to Dream Land seems to bring the series back to its roots.

I could go on, there are so many Nintendo games. Nintendo polishes their games like no one else, that I'll concede. I still tremendously enjoy Punch-Out!! Wii for instance. But they have a huge problem with content. Most of the time they seem content with rehashing the same exact content, only with different gameplay and weird experiments no one wants (see the narration in Other M). In that, I think they're no better than other developers at handling their game series. It's less apparent because even their most disappointing games tend to be technically solid, whereas other publishers' shitty products can often be spotted pretty easily due to visible lack of polish.

 

[MDX]

Their franchises leverage the selling point(s) of the hardware they appear on. This allows them to introduce new gameplay, or game design into their titles.

They tend to keep the price of their first party titles at a premium as long as possible.

 

[Penguin]

Two reasons are quality control and in-house development but I think these are about to be tested with the 3ds and wii u. For the 3ds specifically we've had games like Pilot Wings made by a third party, Nintendogs which felt rushed or at least sparse on changes, a new Luigi's Mansion on the way also made by a third party, etc.

According to some recent Iwata Asks Nintendo is going to be expanding their partnerships with outside developers and I think Grezzo working on Zelda is an example of this. Its gonna test their quality control on some of their big IPs.

To be fair, it isn't a new concept for them, F-Zero GX was made with SEGA, Capcom did a few of the handheld Zelda games, etc

And at this point, I feel like they should just buy Next Level Games (believe the ones doing Luigi's Mansion)

As for the topic at hand, Nintendo never seems too focus on milking their mainline IPs. I know Mario gets a ton of spin-offs, but they don't do a ton of Mario platformers.

Guess the best example of this would be Smash Bros and Mario Kart, where they could easily get an extra 10 million units a gen if they did a sequel or two, but they rather keep it to a once a gen franchise to make them seem like more of a special event (And allows the version to continue selling)

Or, they don't release a game until they are content it can live up to the name, probably why it has taken so long to see a Pikmin 3. And why there were 3 cancelled Kirby games before the one we got last month.

 

[AntMurda]

Two reasons are quality control and in-house development but I think these are about to be tested with the 3ds and wii u. For the 3ds specifically we've had games like Pilot Wings made by a third party, Nintendogs which felt rushed or at least sparse on changes, a new Luigi's Mansion on the way also made by a third party, etc.

Pilotwings and LM were developed by American companies, but they were still developed under the Nintendo SPD department (music, production, etc). Both Next-Level and Monster Studios have worked with SPD and have a great relationship.

According to some recent Iwata Asks Nintendo is going to be expanding their partnerships with outside developers and I think Grezzo working on Zelda is an example of this. Its gonna test their quality control on some of their big IPs.

Grezzo has been working as a contracted Nintendo developer since inception no? Line Attack Heroes for WiiWare and then the two Zelda ports. But what Iwata was discussing was having specialized partners work on things like the Wii U GUI/Shop/Media Bar/Apps/Network as opposed to using the team he pulled away from making games to develop funky cool but ultimately inferior alternatives (Wii/DSi/3DS GUI and Shop). This could potentially mean Nintendo hires Valve and Gamespy (random example) to develop this stuff, and have the team that did the Wii/3DS/DSi go back to making games.

 

[Penguin]

*DKCR is a competent game, with some critical flaws (chiefly, controls), and it failed to reach the same kind of success as the original game.

I thought DKCR has sold close to 5 million, doesn't that make it the 2nd best selling game in the franchise?

Most of the time they seem content with rehashing the same exact content, only with different gameplay and weird experiments no one wants (see the narration in Other M). In that, I think they're no better than other developers at handling their game series. It's less apparent because even their most disappointing games tend to be technically solid, whereas other publishers' shitty products can often be spotted pretty easily due to visible lack of polish.

I don't follow... so you're mad that they are rehashing the same game... with different game play? How is that a rehash?

 

[Kilrogg]

I thought DKCR has sold close to 5 million, doesn't that make it the 2nd best selling game in the franchise?

You're correct, but I expected a bit more considering how many Wiis there are out there, how long the series has been dormant and how mature and global the market is. Selling 8 million copies (DKC1) back then was much harder than it is today. For the record, I still intend to buy it, as well as Kirby's Adventure Wii. Sadly, I can't effort to be picky with my platformers in this day and age, and DKCR still looks fun to me.

I don't follow... so you're mad that they are rehashing the same game... with different game play? How is that a rehash?

Yes, because while gameplay is one of the more important aspects of game design (obviously), content matters too. For instance, I'm not happy that NSMB Mii looks like it'll have exactly the same kind of graphics, music, characters (+ Miis, okay) and worlds than NSMB DS and Wii (I hope it's just because it was an early build). I'm not happy that Punch-Out!! introduced no new characters besides Disco Kid. I'm not happy that Super Mario 3D Land just tacks on SMB3 content (and rather unsubtly at that, see the racoon tail). I'm not happy that Pilotwings is basically the airplane game from Wii Sports Resort with no new island and more airborne contraptions. I'm not against homages, and in fact I think Mario Kart is handled pretty well in that respect, but Nintendo skimps way too much on content creation.

 

[Angry Fork]

Here

rofl, it's pretty weird/funny when someone gets banned in their own topic over something so random/dumb. Like he had no reason to rage like that.

 

[Cerebral Assassin]

Yes, because while gameplay is one of the more important aspects of game design (obviously), content matters too. For instance, I'm not happy that NSMB Mii looks like it'll have exactly the same kind of graphics, music, characters (+ Miis, okay) and worlds than NSMB DS and Wii (I hope it's just because it was an early build). I'm not happy that Punch-Out!! introduced no new characters besides Disco Kid. I'm not happy that Super Mario 3D Land just tacks on SMB3 content (and rather unsubtly at that, see the racoon tail). I'm not happy that Pilotwings is basically the airplane game from Wii Sports Resort with no new island and more airborne contraptions. I'm not against homages, and in fact I think Mario Kart is handled pretty well in that respect, but Nintendo skimps way too much on content creation.

NSMB Wii U was listed as a tech demo not an actual game, & 3D Land was an homage to SMB3 before it even had a name, saying it is tacked on seems a bit ott.

 

[Sapphire Dreams]

I am sorry but, Nintendo USED to be great, but since the release of the Wii they have been becoming smaller in my eyes everyday.

Lets hope Skyward Sword changes my mind.

Also the reason why they used to be as great as they were is that they give developers a good amount of Pre-Production time and they do have a good quality control.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Star Fox and F-Zero are the only franchises that come to mind Nintendo's handled pretty poorly from the start of the GCN onwards (F-Zero GX aside, though that still undeservedly bombed).

It could just be bias though since my favorite series (Donkey Kong) from the company is finally relevant again after a decade of experiments with varying degrees of quality.

I will say that they lately seem to have a big problem with creating new IP's, though that recent talk Iwata gave regarding the Wii U gives me hope they're aware this could bite them in the ass if people begin to grow tired of their 'new' Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong Countries and Wii X titles for a certain period of time.

 

[Celine]

You're correct, but I expected a bit more considering how many Wiis there are out there, how long the series has been dormant and how mature and global the market is. Selling 8 million copies (DKC1) back then was much harder than it is today. For the record, I still intend to buy it, as well as Kirby's Adventure Wii. Sadly, I can't effort to be picky with my platformers in this day and age, and DKCR still looks fun to me.

It's like saying to be let down by NSMB because it just sold 28 million copies cause:

You're correct, but I expected a bit more considering how many Wiis there are out there, how long the series has been dormant and how mature and global the market is. Selling 40 million copies (SMB) back then was much harder than it is today.

While the market was smaller back then, the two games ( SMB and DKC ) were in a much favourable environment to sell compared to today.

 

[Ranger X]

Generally speaking, Nintendo simply doesn't work like most other dev/publishers and this, in the long run, totally explain their IP park's health. I wonder if the Nintendo equation is even possible to be reproduced:


1- Consistent focus on quality - games are coming out when they are ready and not only when christmas is.

2- Long term schedules - they always work in order to not milk a franchise too much. Sometimes a game series can have only 1 game during a gen.

3- Visionnary people are trusted - At Nintendo, it's no ordinary editorial you have there, it'S fucking Shigeru Miyamoto, Iwata, etc.



All other publishers/devs are handling things almost at the opposite:


1- Consistent focus on marketing - game must be ready for christmas and this, at ALL costs.

2- Short term rush - the minute a franchise makes money, you need to release as many games as the IP can support until it dies.

3- No vision - games aren't the vision of trusted designers or editorial. It's the marketing department that decides + some focus group + some playtests.

 

[Kilrogg]

NSMB Wii U was listed as a tech demo not an actual game, & 3D Land was an homage to SMB3 before it even had a name, saying it is tacked on seems a bit ott.

I'm afraid this is going to sound all "gaming: serious business", but the line between homage and failure to understand what made a game popular is not only crossed but scornfully stomped over when you give racoon tails to

Spoiler

Bullet Bills and Bowser

. No amount of story can justify this kind of stupid decision.

@Celine: what are you talking about? At 28 million units sold, NSMB outsold the best-selling non-bundled 2D Mario by 10 million units (as well NSMB Wii, but that one has been sold as a bundle for a while now). Are you comparing the sales of NSMB to those of the original SMB, by any chance? Because that wouldn't make sense.

 

[Celine]

I will say that they lately seem to have a big problem with creating new IP's, though that recent talk Iwata gave regarding the Wii U gives me hope they're aware this could bite them in the ass if people begin to grow tired of their 'new' Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong Countries and Wii X titles for a certain period of time.

Nintendo problem isn't creating new characters and universes, although I can see why people would clamor to have more new IP from them.

What Nintendo want is to create new genre/sub genre that met from the start a good commercial success so they can then begin to iterate new version at every new hardware cycle.
Problem is create commercial successful new concepts is really really hard, even for Nintendo.
Even more now that costs associated with the production of games are very high.

 

[Outtrigger888]

Its because nintendo makes awesome games. There polished and have a charm that only nintendo brings. They make games that can still be enjoyable years or even a decade after they've been released. There games are fun and dont need the bullshit from most of the lazy crap that has been released this generation. You can tell they put there heart into everything they do, and dont cut corners. Plus they ship there games finished and dont depend on there customers to be game testers.

 

[The Technomancer]

For me one of the core reasons is how they tend to space their titles out. Not that it hurts too much when they don't (Galaxy 2 turned out fine), but having their franchises come out once or twice a generation really helps them feel like "events". I think the same thing applies to franchises like The Elder Scrolls: people get hyped for games like Arkham Asylum or the new Assassins Creed, but Skyrim and Skyward Sword both have a kind of...gravity to them.

 

[Sydle]

The visonaries, the ones who care about their craft, are the ones calling the shots or they have a very heavy hand in the company. It's along the same lines as to why Google is so successful, the engineers/programmers rule and everything is shaped around what they do.

I think Sony is pretty good at establishing and handling key franchises.

MS...if it doesn't sell millions on the first outing the franchise is over. So stupid.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Oh, I realize there's a great deal of risk behind just suddenly creating a new IP (wasn't Pikmin derived from the Super Mario 128 prototype?), but it does seem at times with games like Donkey Konga, Epic Yarn or Star Fox Adventures they would have just been better off not stapling a pre-existing franchise over the original ideas. SFA since it wound up shackling the series onwards (not that Assault is any better mind you), Konga and Epic Yarn since the DK and Kirby licences really didn't have any relevance to those particular games and they likely would of sold great regardless.

 

[Cerebral Assassin]

I'm afraid this is going to sound all "gaming: serious business", but the line between homage and failure to understand what made a game popular is not only crossed but scornfully stomped over when you give racoon tails to

Spoiler

Bullet Bills and Bowser

. No amount of story can justify this kind of stupid decision.

You think SMB3 is remembered for/made popular by the raccoon tail? It's a power up they have been asked about for years, & judging by one of the Galaxy Ask Iwatas not only externally, either. Add that to the fact that nothing in a Mario game needs a "story" to justify its inclusion(how was it justified in SMB3?) & I fail to see any justification for that complaint.

 

[hyduK]

Really? I consider them incredibly inconsistent. They go whole generations ignoring half of there IPs, or using them for completely horrible ideas.

Mario is the only franchise that gets the attention it deserves for each platform.

 

[watershed]

A little OT but speaking of how companies handle franchises I think Sony/ND have done a great job with the Uncharted series. Even though we've had 3 in one generation they get better and better (mostly) and they don't feel rushed. Now with the next installment appearing as a launch showcase for the vita they seem to have a great handle on how to use the IP.

On the other hand I think Microsoft have really overworked the Halo franchise. I'm sure others disagree but even with Halo starting on the original xbox between 1,2, and 3, ODST, Reach, Halo Wars (or that one strategy one) and Anniversary edition coming I've been exhausted on Halo for a while now.

Nintendo is great at spacing out entries but in some cases the space between entries is too long.

 

[Celine]

@Celine: what are you talking about? At 28 million units sold, NSMB outsold the best-selling non-bundled 2D Mario by 10 million units (as well NSMB Wii, but that one has been sold as a bundle for a while now). Are you comparing the sales of NSMB to those of the original SMB, by any chance? Because that wouldn't make sense.

Fine, then replace the example with the original Pokemon and Pokemon for DS.
The point I tried to make still stand.

Why was so successful DKC back in the day ?
Don't you find that DKCR is in a less ideal market condition despite the market being nominally bigger worldwide?

 

[LuchaShaq]

Considering how they allowed Metroid to be basically ruined, forced bad motion into mario/donkey kong, and never made the console pokemon games everyone wanted I'd say they aren't all that great at handling them.

Haven't played skyward sword but from Ocarina to twighlight princess the game changed as little in that many years as the poster boy for non change COD changed from 2007 to now.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

NSMB Wii U was listed as a tech demo not an actual game

It was listed as a game on Nintendo's E3 site.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I (sort of) agree with Metroid and can see where you're coming from with DKCR, but where the hell have recent Mario games even had that much in the way of motion controls, let alone 'bad' motion controls. You lightly shake the controller for one powerup in NSMBWii and to do a twirly jump (which barley none of the game actually requires and is instead just to extend your jump) in the Galaxies and then everything else is just analog and buttons.

 

[Madao]

Does anyone even know Fossil Fighters: Champions comes out soon? Game's being sent to die.

what's even more ironic is that they localized that game and are letting it bomb ultra hard and they passed on the second DS Fire Emblem, which would have sold better given the fanbase.

 

[LiK]

Cuz Nintendo plays it safe. Whether good or bad, they keep it consistent with the look and feel.

 

[Raziel]

Pokemon? 15 years old. And a new release is still a big deal. Entire franchises have risen and fallen in that time. Tony Hawk, Tomb Raider, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot. Popular at the time, but where are they now?

It's not just because they keep making the same game over and over, contrary to what I'm sure some replies in this thread will say.

pokemon totally isnt the same game over and over - i dont care if everyone says they are, or if the replies in this thread say they are, or if its true that they are - they arent the same games over and over because i said so and because nintendo.

 

[Madao]

Considering how they allowed Metroid to be basically ruined, forced bad motion into mario/donkey kong, and never made the console pokemon games everyone wanted I'd say they aren't all that great at handling them.

Haven't played skyward sword but from Ocarina to twighlight princess the game changed as little in that many years as the poster boy for non change COD changed from 2007 to now.

and yet when they try totally different stuff like MM or the DS Zeldas, they sell less than the main games. why do they sell less if the public "wants change"?

 

[Mael]

I (sort of) agree with Metroid and can see where you're coming from with DKCR, but where the hell have recent Mario games even had that much in the way of motion controls, let alone 'bad' motion controls. You lightly shake the controller for one powerup in NSMBWii and to do a twirly jump (which barley none of the game actually requires and is instead just to extend your jump) in the Galaxies and then everything else is just analog and buttons.

Actually NSMBW controls are better for it than without it, you can do so much with the little extra movement and it's not like you can't play without it...It's just less elegant and you'll play worse but hey.
Although the biggest improvement is without a doubt the wall jump, it makes SMW play like a chore when you expect the wj to work

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

nostalgia mostly. not to say the games are bad or anything, but it's not like any of these franchises have done anything particularly innovative in the last 20 years. they're mostly just good games released by people who know how to make them.

You trollin'? I mean seriously, look at what you wrote.

 

[The Technomancer]

You trollin'? I mean seriously, look at what you wrote.

 

[Kazerei]

Considering how they allowed Metroid to be basically ruined, forced bad motion into mario/donkey kong, and never made the console pokemon games everyone wanted I'd say they aren't all that great at handling them.

Haven't played skyward sword but from Ocarina to twighlight princess the game changed as little in that many years as the poster boy for non change COD changed from 2007 to now.

I like how you just skipped over Majora's Mask and Wind Waker.

 

[Chuckpebble]

retreads

I laughed a little.

I've never played a Nintendo game and found any aspect of it glitchy or unpolished. That has some value to me.

 

[airmangataosenai]

I think the point you've conveniently skipped here is why those franchises are bigger. And being a big selling franchise is no guarantee that that will continue. See Guitar Hero, Tony Hawks or Sonic for a perfect examples of mishandled franchises.

Sonic is actually a perfect example. Despite the horrible, undeniable mishandling of that franchise even the worst games end up surpassing 1 million.

Nostalgia isn't all that's at play, none of the Mario/Zelda releases ever being outright bad (I wouldn't argue they've all been particularly good over the past decade, namely Crossbow Training and the "New Mario Bros. series), but it's undeniably what catapults it to the heights that it reaches. Had Nintendo released Super Mario Bros. US as Doki Doki Panic how do you think it would've performed? There's an emotional attachment to these characters, Nintendo knows this and mines it out for all it's worth while smartly not overexposing the franchise.

 

[Mael]

Sonic is actually a perfect example. Despite the horrible, undeniable mishandling of that franchise even the worst games end up surpassing 1 million.

Nostalgia isn't all that's at play, none of the Mario/Zelda releases ever being outright bad (I wouldn't argue they've all been particularly good over the past decade, namely Crossbow Training and the "New Mario Bros. series), but it's undeniably what catapults it to the heights that it reaches. Had Nintendo released Super Mario Bros. US as Doki Doki Panic how do you think it would've performed? There's an emotional attachment to these characters, Nintendo knows this and mines it out for all it's worth while smartly not overexposing the franchise.

Actually I don't think that Sonic 06 went anywhere close to 1 mil....

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I dunno, those Uncharted shots have a clear Green, Blue and Yellow progression.

Lookit all the green in those Zelda shots.

 

[ramine]

Nintendo games are timeless themselves.
Replay Super Mario Bros, Yoshi's Island, etc. They are still as charming as ever.

The core of their games is excellent, they just keep making more of it.

 

[Kilrogg]

You think SMB3 is remembered for/made popular by the raccoon tail? It's a power up they have been asked about for years, & judging by one of the Galaxy Ask Iwatas not only externally, either. Add that to the fact that nothing in a Mario game needs a "story" to justify its inclusion(how was it justified in SMB3?) & I fail to see any justification for that complaint.

I'm saying exactly the contrary. There's more to SMB3 than the freaking racoon tail. This is not a comment on the awesomeness of the item, but on Nintendo's stupidity in this particular case. What they did with the racoon tail is akin to your mother suddenly starting to put apple into everything she cooks just because you've been asking her for years to bake an apple pie for you. No, actually it's worse, because an apple pie is mostly defined by its containing apple, whereas Super Mario Bros. 3 was never called "Super Mario Tanooki". The tanooki suit and racoon tail were just 2 cool items (they would allow you to fly, at least, unlike 3DL's!), but they were just a tiny part of the huge package that was SMB3. My comment on the story was a preemptive pique at those who would argue that "enemies with racoon tails make perfect sense you idiot, watch the intro sequence", because you're right: the story is irrelevant, and in fact, it should be kept to a bare minimum in Mario games.

Fine, then replace the example with the original Pokemon and Pokemon for DS.
The point I tried to make still stand.

Why was so successful DKC back in the day ?
Don't you find that DKCR is in a less ideal market condition despite the market being nominally bigger worldwide?

No. I find that DKCR came out in a context that by some respects was not favorable but, by others, was. The global economy sucks, and that has to have had an impact, if that's what you're getting at. At the same time, the Wii had already sold many more units than the SNES at the time DKC came out, NSMB DS and Wii reignited the crave for 2D platformers (note that I subscribe to Opiate's theory that some genre kings tend to act as "umbrella games" where other similar games released afterwards tend to benefit from their aura rather than compete with them, a shame developers didn't properly capitalize on that) and the competition with other platformers was effectively non-existent. Still is! Back in the SNES days, platformers were a dime a dozen, not unlike FPS games today.

 

[AniHawk]

[]http://i.imgur.com/7Dva3.jpg[/IMG]

yeah but you took the worst looking parts of the uncharted games and hte best looking parts of the zelda games.

 

[viciouskillersquirrel]

Whether a title is declared an homage, a clone, a ripoff or a retread is dependent entirely on whether or not the person making the statement likes the title in question. Which, I suppose, is completely legitimate and everyone is entitled to their own opinion… unless of course the declarant in question has pretentions to being some sort of authority on the matter and cannot articulate or defend their judgement without resorting to untruths, subjective opinion or logical fallacies. In that case, the declarant is fair game for ridicule.

 

[Outtrigger888]

Cuz Nintendo plays it safe. Whether good or bad, they keep it consistent with the look and feel.

I disagree, they make games that are simple in a sense but are made incredibly well. Big block buster releases depend on "wow holy fuck moments" that wear off in one play through, then usually become boring. Nintendo always delivers great gameplay, and doesnt require the fluff these big games need to sell copys. Plus they brought us the wii and ds, nothing about those 2 were playing it safe, and were huge risks that payed off.

 

[Takao]

what's even more ironic is that they localized that game and are letting it bomb ultra hard and they passed on the second DS Fire Emblem, which would have sold better given the fanbase.

Nintendo's quality franchise handling at work!

 

[Man God]

A big part of the reason DKC1 did so well was that it was bundled with the SNES during a very good selling period.

 

[AniHawk]

Nintendo's quality franchise handling at work!

nintendo of america's been weird for like four years now. i wonder what the hell happened, because it was always nintendo of europe that couldn't get anything done.

 

[The Technomancer]

Whether a title is declared an homage, a clone, a ripoff or a retread is dependent entirely on whether or not the person making the statement likes the title in question. Which, I suppose, is completely legitimate and everyone is entitled to their own opinion… unless of course the declarant in question has pretentions to being some sort of authority on the matter and cannot articulate or defend their judgement without resorting to untruths, subjective opinion or logical fallacies. In that case, the declarant is fair game for ridicule.

I'll make the assertion that the primary difference between Uncharted titles is story and visual design of the locales, and that the gameplay has featured only marginal changes in three entries. In contrast, between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess, the Zelda series has experimented with a variety of gameplay changes, including completely changing the structure of the game's progression (Majora's Mask), the way the overworld is traversed (Wind Waker), and in the level of complexity exhibited by the dungeons (much of Twilight Princess)
I don't know if that was addressed at me though
*Shrug*