My Thought about Nintendo

[Brian]

I guess I have had too much time on my hands at work today as I got to thinking about Nintendo's next console.

Why don't they just make a 2D optimized system? It is obvious they will not compete, and really do not want to compete, with Sony and MS. They keep talking about making games simple and bringing small teams of developers back to the fold. So, why not just go for the outright niche market? Surely, they can make a 2D system cheaply and probably at least break even on a $99 to $119 price point. The 2D games don't cost an arm and a leg to produce, they can probably get away with $29.99 on the games. And, they can open it up to Japanese developers and not even bother with region coding.

People really only want to see Mario and Zelda in 2D anyway, why not just give the people what they want. Surely, there are a list of people who want their 3D Nintendo updates, but are there enough of them to really make Nintendo a real player in the next race? I don't think so. In my view, if they want to stand out from the crowd, why put out an also-ran when you go 100% niche and appeal to enough people to make your money and create great games.

[BulletMagnet]

People really only want to see Mario and Zelda in 2D anyway...

I'd definitely raise my eyebrow at that notion...if all the fans have wanted it so badly and are willing to pay good money for it, why hasn't Nintendo (or most any other big company) caught on and given it to them?

Nintendo is far too large a company for "all-niche" productions, as far as I'm concerned...if it wanted to do something like that it'd probably end up, at the VERY least, going the way of Sega (who, as of now anyways, hasn't given Sonic a proper return to 2D on a next-gen console either). The gaming industry these days is pretty cut and dry...you can most always tell what's going to sell really well long before it's released, everything else will always be on the back burner for the guys in charge.

[BrianC]

People really only want to see Mario and Zelda in 2D anyway

If that's the case, why was Orcaina of Time one of the more successful installments of the series? IMO, Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are also killer games. Now, LttP, Link's Awakening, and Zelda 1 are still my favorites, but Zelda worked very well in 3D. The next installment of the series sounds very promising.

[Brian]

Let me re-phrase that. The people who would hypothetically buy this hypothetical system only want Mario and Zelda in 2D. Judging by the anticipation of the new 2D Mario coming to the DS, I would say that is a fair claim.

The DS was said to be niche, it really only functions in 2D, 2.5D at best, and it has been a huge hit. Hell, the supposed 2D Nintendo console could be like the DS is to the GBA; gravy.

[BulletMagnet]

Well, the DS is also a hand-held console...I don't know if the public would be as receptive toward a "full size" unit made mainly for 2D gaming. At least, I doubt that enough of the public would buy it...or if enough third-party developers would be willing to take the risk to make stuff for it.

[Rob]

That would be a real shame and wouldn't sell. I wouldn't even bother with Nintendo anymore.

[Valgar]

2D games can cost a lot to make. Also why do you hate on 3D games? S&P is my favorite game ever.

[sethsez]

The 2D games don't cost an arm and a leg to produce

Well, if you want them to look like GBA games, yeah. Otherwise, a full-scale, high res, beautifully animated game would still cost a hell of a lot.

People really only want to see Mario and Zelda in 2D anyway

This is what happens when you hang out around hardcore gamers for too long. The 3D Zeldas are by far more popular than the 2D ones, and even with Mario, the people who cry for a new 2D one are the most outspoken, but not the majority. If a 2D Mario were released on the Gamecube, somehow I don't see it doing too well. On a newer, less established system, it'd do even worse.

And what would happen to Nintendo's other franchises, like F-Zero, Metroid Prime (which is one of their aces now, moreso than the actual Metroid series), Pikmin, etc?

There's no way this would happen, and I'm glad. Nintendo would be shooting themselves in the head with a machine like this.

[judesalmon]

I think it's a good idea.

[Elixir]

Nintendo, instead of making the "revolution" a console that will have "real-time ground-breaking gameplay adrenaline rushes, and real-life identical graphics" they should just make a fully backwards compatible system so everybody who currently owns previous consoles and items from them won't have to stick with their 28-year-old NES console.

Take god-awful.png's design for example. It'd be a great idea, minus the gargoyle state I've made it appear as.

[freddiebamboo]

There must be some market for 2d mario and zelda, otherwise the GBA versions would never have been done

[sethsez]

That's not proof of a 2D market as much as it's proof of a portable market. Do you really think any of the Mario Advance games would have sold squat if they were released as-is on the GC? People were willing to spend $20 on a rerelease of NES Zelda, but it was given away for free on the GC with three other games.

There's a demand from the hardcore crowd, but the hardcore crowd can't sustain a company no matter how vocal they might be online. Kind of like how every movie lover online makes fun of Bruckheimer movies, every critic hates them, but they rake in millions.

[FatCobra]

The DS pretty much has this already taken care of. Yes, I know it's a handheld but still......

The Revolution's so called "backwards compatablity" is actually just emulation, but it's legit and those NES and SNES batteries don't last forever you know. How many of you had some frusteration getting those NES units to work?

Hopefully the Revolution's controller won't be too weird. Otherwise, how would you be able to play those old games? I hope it's a better design than Sony's "boomerang" PS3 controller. I bet Link could use it as a weapon and save Hyrule yet again.

I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy to the end.

[Monkey_Man]

You have to consider that the one company considered to have kept the N64 alive was Rare(ware?). Rare's N64 offerings were all 3D.

[sjewkestheloon]

it makes me smile when people say that nintendo can't compete. true they don't have the majority market share but they turn out a hefty profit, and if i'm correct, i think that recently they actually have been making more profit than both sony and microsoft.

i still look to nintendo for some quality first party gaming. recently my love for mario 64 has been expanded ten fold. previously my 30 stars record (couldn't be arsed) has been expanded to 93 due to a portable format with an attractive backwards cmpatible console. i guess a lot of people see it the same way as i just outlined it. nintendo release very convenient and ammusing things.

just read that last paragraph back to myself and i'm not sure it makes sense. oh well take from it what you will

[Davey]

it makes me smile when people say that nintendo can't compete. true they don't have the majority market share but they turn out a hefty profit, and if i'm correct, i think that recently they actually have been making more profit than both sony and microsoft.

Seriously. I doubt Microsoft was really kicking Nintendo's ass back when they were losing money on each X-Box sold.

Besides, as long as there is a handheld market and Nintendo is in it, they'll do just fine.

[dave4shmups]

I guess I have had too much time on my hands at work today as I got to thinking about Nintendo's next console.

Why don't they just make a 2D optimized system? It is obvious they will not compete, and really do not want to compete, with Sony and MS. They keep talking about making games simple and bringing small teams of developers back to the fold. So, why not just go for the outright niche market? Surely, they can make a 2D system cheaply and probably at least break even on a $99 to $119 price point. The 2D games don't cost an arm and a leg to produce, they can probably get away with $29.99 on the games. And, they can open it up to Japanese developers and not even bother with region coding.

People really only want to see Mario and Zelda in 2D anyway, why not just give the people what they want. Surely, there are a list of people who want their 3D Nintendo updates, but are there enough of them to really make Nintendo a real player in the next race? I don't think so. In my view, if they want to stand out from the crowd, why put out an also-ran when you go 100% niche and appeal to enough people to make your money and create great games.

I agree with you 100% Brian, but I still think that it's commendable that Nintendo is more focused on gameplay over just pure eye candy, to a greater extent then either Sony or Microsoft. Heck, Miyamoto said at E3, in an interview with G4 Tv that gameplay is Nintendo's first priority.

[dave4shmups]

The DS pretty much has this already taken care of. Yes, I know it's a handheld but still......

The Revolution's so called "backwards compatablity" is actually just emulation, but it's legit and those NES and SNES batteries don't last forever you know. How many of you had some frusteration getting those NES units to work?

Hopefully the Revolution's controller won't be too weird. Otherwise, how would you be able to play those old games? I hope it's a better design than Sony's "boomerang" PS3 controller. I bet Link could use it as a weapon and save Hyrule yet again.

I guess I'm a Nintendo fanboy to the end.

I've had frustration getting NES's to work for sure, but SNES's and N64's are built like bricks, and the NEX, which will be MUCH more durable then any model of NES will go on sale next month for about $50. It will have two slots on the top; one for NES games and the other for Famicom games.

Which brings up another point; there is simply NO excuse for Nintendo not including foreign games in the Revolution's download list. And I don't think I have to tell anyone on this site that there are some damn good import NES, SNES, and N64 games. Not to mention some great unlicensed NES games out there as well.

[sethsez]

Heck, Miyamoto said at E3, in an interview with G4 Tv that gameplay is Nintendo's first priority.

All companies say this.

Anyway, I don't care if Nintendo is making money or not. I don't own any Nintendo stock so that's really of no importance to me. What I care about is the games I can play on their systems, and right now I have more PS2 and Xbox games than GC games by a fair margin.

[Monkey_Man]

Heck, Miyamoto said at E3, in an interview with G4 Tv that gameplay is Nintendo's first priority.

G4 should never be referenced in a serious debate anywhere.

[Dartagnan1083]

While I have some respect for Nintendo,
I really do think they are loosing their ablilty to compete



as for the optomized 2D thing. . .
that sort of thing went Bye-Bye with the Saturn and Dreamcast.
It's also too small a niche when you consider that the vast majority of game consumers right now seem to want little more than fillate thier favored machine's GPU. 2D, no matter how pretty it can be. . .will never have the same effect as [roughly] textured 3D models in Halo or GTA.

While Microsoft is loosing money on each console sold, it doensn't ammount to much loss when the available software is outselling Nintendos. Aside from key franchise whoring, Nintendo doesn't see much of the charts these days.

[Elixir]

In regards to the above: That's because NES consoles put consoles on the map and made people scream "OH MY GOD YOU'RE PLAYING A MOVIE" as they rushed out the door to buy one.

Now these days it's all fanboys and people who want a change from the PS2 and xbox scene.

[FatCobra]

In regards to the above: That's because NES consoles put consoles on the map and made people scream "OH MY GOD YOU'RE PLAYING A MOVIE" as they rushed out the door to buy one.

Now these days it's all fanboys and people who want a change from the PS2 and xbox scene.

I got fed up with my PS2, so I exchanged it for a DS at EB Games. Never been happier. Sony and Microsoft can kiss my ass.

Sure, Nintendo is dead last and they ain't they used to be, but I still have faith in them and it just feels better (at least for me) to be playing high quality (if whored out often) franchises such as Metroid and Zelda.

And for all you Nintendo dissers, go to hell, because without Nintendo, you guys wouldn't be playing videogames today.

[Elixir]

They ain't they used to be? afk seizure

I'm not "dissing" nintendo. I'm just saying, it's not as if they're going to make something as revolutionary as the SNES. Rumours have it that the Revolution will contain all Super Mario titles from NES and SNES(basically, All Stars built-in).

[jp]

Nintendo is still making profits...


They aren't going anywhere...


And yes, they'll be last in the next-gen and probably all gens following. But they'll still be the only ones focusing on being innovative and creating fun gameplay experiences. Sony is obsessed with making what a modded Xbox basically is and Microsoft is... well... I really don't know what Microsoft is doing... but they like 2D gaming so I have to give them some props.

[llabnip]

Sony is obsessed with making what a modded Xbox basically is and Microsoft is... well... I really don't know what Microsoft is doing... but they like 2D gaming so I have to give them some props.

I haven't seen a single 2D game from Microsoft yet. If you mean the games that are developed for the console, the import Sony has a ton more 2D gaming experiences over the XBOX (including shmups! -- not counting emulation).

Anyway, Nintendo peaked with the SNES, IMO. The N64 was the most atrocious P.O.S. I've ever gamed on and the Gamecube was a step up from the N64 but both huge steps down from the SNES days.

Nintendo once firmly controlled the marketshare for console gaming - the NES brought them a huge fanbase as they single-handedly brought back console gaming after the video game "crash" circa 1983-1985. The SNES was their summit - now they were Playing With Power.

Nintendo hedged their bets on the next generation and even had Sony on board to help develop a potential next-gen system. Sony stepped up and offered them the "Nintendo PSX" and Nintendo turned them down. Sony decided to publish the system on their own as the PlayStation. Nintendo wasn't worried... they had come out of the SNES-Genesis battle reasonably unscathed and felt that newcomer (to the console world) Sony wasn't much of a threat.

And in the next 2 years Sony punched them hard enough in the gut that they dropped to 2nd place in market share and now with Sony and Microsoft pounding the market, they have fallen to 3rd and will remain so for the forseeable future. Will they remain? Probably so... but the Nintendo console glory days are gone.

I would love to see a return of Nintendo to its former glory. In some ways, it may be better for them to just focus on the handheld market (where they still dominate sales but they should take a quick look over their shoulders...).

[Dartagnan1083]

I'm not dissing nintendo per se.

But they really haven't done very much to fix their situation.
Rather, they've been on a [slight] decline since the middle years of the N64.
They have been doing a little better since then, but they seem content to maintain the kiddy image that the N64 years earned for them.

Handheld wise...they will always be on top.
But I don't see their console bussiness staying very strong for much longer.


While I will [tenativly] get a Revolution before getting a PS3. . .they'll need to do more to regain the support they once had.

[llabnip]

That's because NES consoles put consoles on the map

Atari put consoles on the map. The NES picked up the pieces after the golden age passed into history. (one could argue that the Odyssey by Magnavox set the stage but it was Atari 2600 that made consoles a household name).

And for all you Nintendo dissers, go to hell, because without Nintendo, you guys wouldn't be playing videogames today.

I would. Nintendo revitalized the industry in 1985 but the early explosive and innovative era of Video Games (1977 to 1983) came and went and Nintendo only had a minimal impact on that (mostly in the form of Donkey Kong - Colecovision style!).

More than half my big console games selection come pre-Nintendo 1985. I still play them daily.

[system11]

I'll have to join the Nintendo-dissing camp too. Home consoles would always have been big without them (as far as I could tell, in Europe the SMS was ahead of the Nintendo, and the Megadrive ahead of the SNES too). They were much bigger in the states, but if they hadn't been there, Atari would have. They brought virtually nothing to the arcades too - a small number of good titles, and a flood of NES adaptions - we'd hardly notice if they hadn't been there in fact.

Their contributions have been hugely overrated. However, they do make quality handheld games, and seem to have some belief in what they're trying to do. I can respect that, but it doesn't always lead to the best gaming. Sad to hear (if the rumours are true) that the Revolution will NOT in fact offer a huge list of retro titles, but only selected big names from the appropriate region - a missed opportunity.

[UnscathedFlyingObject]

I hate Nintendo. Nintendo systems are like paperweights once you play the five or so games worth playing. The only reason I'm buying a DS is because of Castlevania DS.