17 replies to this topic

[jalio_the_brave]

But in reality, I think Nintendo is being really smart not only for their own sake, but for the sake of video gaming in general.

Why is this? Because they see that the console market is struggling.

Every year, bigger games are released, better graphics are made, and because of this gaming budgets are increasing. With that in mind, games are costing millions to develop, and it's only going to get worse if the PS4 and Nextbox are complete powerhouses.

A lot of gamers see this as a good thing. Bigger games, better graphics. How can it be bad?

We may see a repeat of the gaming crash of the 80s. Not to the extent that it was, but still would be considered a crash.

Smartphone gaming is cheaper and has a bigger audience. Console gaming is losing some of its following.

With all of these negative things about Sony and Microsoft, how does this relate to Nintendo?

Gamers say Nintendo is narrow-minded and stuck in the past. Yet Nintendo sees this impending doom and is trying to fix it. They started with the Wii, they'll continue it with the Wii U

A system that is affordable, intuitive, and takes an alternative route from the powerhouses.

Nintendo saved gaming in the 80s, and I think they're trying to keep it afloat.

So to all of those that are complaining Nintendo seems narrow-minded and losing its touch, in reality they may be the ones that let you even have the option for console gaming.

Do you guys agree? Or am I just crazy?

[uh20]

the behind the times comes from hardcore gamers, the current times are about hardcore games, and basically that means kill be killed blood graphics gore
nintendo then is certainly behind the times (which is actually a good thing) because they try to develop things that are fun, instead of our market full of shooter games

they are giving leeway to let 3rd parties go rampant on their system, so for those crazy people around here, there will be games where you can shoot someones head off and see a volcano of blood come out
in fact, theres already one:zombiu

Edited by uh20, 18 June 2012 - 07:59 AM.

[Steve]

While your theory may very well be correct, I'm not sure Nintendo is doing this intentionally. I think that they stay behind the times because they make more money, since no one can compete in price range.. they also keep it simple for the younger/older audience, and non violent since this makes cautious parents more likely to choose Nintendo consoles. I personally think going into hardcore may go badly for Ninty, since most hardcore gamers are fanboys who won't switch easily. I do think it's possible we'll have a crash, but people seem to be willing to spend a lot on games.

Edit: I think this is in the wrong topic.

Edited by Steve, 18 June 2012 - 08:35 AM.

[Falconberg]

When you think of the fact that all the "powerhouses" took five years to copy nintendos motion based gaming innovations, and then look at how the wiiu is going to have it's own social media system built into it (miiverse) I'd say nintendo is actually way ahead of the others.
They were behind the new gaming world when they refused online gaming on gamecube. They dropped the ball with their wiis online, but by the looks of what their doing on wiiu it's say they're innovating something new again. Let's see if it takes the others 5 years to catch up again.

[Deadly Virus]

Say what you want, but there's simply nothing good for gamers about having an underpowered system. Maybe you guys don't, but I remember when Nintendo had bleeding edge graphics in nearly every game and STILL managed to have the gameplay be amazing too. Nintendo is entirely capable of making a powerhouse console, so why don't they? Well, quite simple, the Wii made them more money, and they want to continue with that formula.

I'll always love their games, but as a massive fan of both the N64 and GCN, I often find myself sorely disappointed at Nintendo's utter apathy when it comes to hardware these days.



^ Examples from the times when Nintendo absolutely dominated in the graphics department

Edited by Deadly Virus, 18 June 2012 - 09:10 AM.

[Mitch]

Nintendo is not stuck in the past, if anything they are pioneers in the gaming world. look at how Nintendo made the wiimote use motion control gaming and then Sony came out with move the cheap wiimote knock off and Microsoft came out with kinect another form of motion control. Now Nintendo is going to have the gamepad so Microsoft announces Smartglass at E3 so you can play some games with your iPad as the controller and i guarantee Sony will make a tablet controller down the road. A game doesn't have to have the best graphics to be fun, it doesn't have to play in 1080p to be enjoyable, look at Pokemon red and blue probably the funnest games in the world and they don't need an HDMI cable to play

Nintendo is not behind times, they revolutionize gaming time after time and everyone else follows behind. If anyone here thinks that to be a real gaming machine it has to be ridiculously powerful and play the highest level of graphics well then you can suck Nintendos Asian nuts

Edited by Mitch13pavel, 18 June 2012 - 09:50 AM.

[Alianjaro]

This is Nintendo:

-Creators of the D-Pad (believe it or not)
-Creators of the portable gaming
-First to introduce the touch screen in gaming (+ the dual screen gaming)
-First to introduce glasses-free 3D gaming
-First to use motion-based gameplay
-First to introduce colors in home gaming
-First to untroduce asymetric gameplay
-Creators of the sidescrolling gameplay
-Creators of the RPGs
-Creators of the top-down view adventures
-First to create a game that has an actual story (Super Mario Bros.) Before that, they were all arcade games.
-First and only ones to reproduce a kind of virtual reality (Virtual Boy, even though it was a complete flop)

What's to be deducted? They are "first to" or "creators of"... What did the competitors do? they followed the wave. Even the Playstation was mainly made by Nintendo and was supposed to be called Super Nintendo Play Station. Something happened between Sony and Nintendo (I think both companies were unable to come to an agreement concerning how to split the revenue between both companies) that made them break their partnership. This is why the Playstation only belongs to Sony.

Nintendo has proved that games don't have to have crazy graphics to be good since they almost always sell the most. And why do we even have to complaint now that we've got the Wii U's amazing graphics?

[Alph]

Gosh, I totally agree with you man!

[jalio_the_brave]

This is Nintendo:

-Creators of the D-Pad (believe it or not)
-Creators of the portable gaming
-First to introduce the touch screen in gaming (+ the dual screen gaming)
-First to introduce glasses-free 3D gaming
-First to use motion-based gameplay
-First to introduce colors in home gaming
-First to untroduce asymetric gameplay
-Creators of the sidescrolling gameplay
-Creators of the RPGs
-Creators of the top-down view adventures
-First to create a game that has an actual story (Super Mario Bros.) Before that, they were all arcade games.
-First and only ones to reproduce a kind of virtual reality (Virtual Boy, even though it was a complete flop)

What's to be deducted? They are "first to" or "creators of"... What did the competitors do? they followed the wave. Even the Playstation was mainly made by Nintendo and was supposed to be called Super Nintendo Play Station. Something happened between Sony and Nintendo (I think both companies were unable to come to an agreement concerning how to split the revenue between both companies) that made them break their partnership. This is why the Playstation only belongs to Sony.

Nintendo has proved that games don't have to have crazy graphics to be good since they almost always sell the most. And why do we even have to complaint now that we've got the Wii U's amazing graphics?

I don't think Nintendo is behind the times. I'm just saying that's the general consensus of "hardcore" gamers. I personally believe Wii U may be one of Nintendo's most solid consoles, and I love what I've seen so far.

Edited by jalio_the_brave, 18 June 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[Deadly Virus]

I don't think Nintendo is behind the times. I'm just saying that's the general consensus of "hardcore" gamers. I personally believe Wii U may be one of Nintendo's most solid consoles, and I love what I've seen so far.

From what I can see, Nintendo loves innovation... But a little too much. They overlooked the need for a proper online network on Wii and DS because they were too focused on the controls. And they STILL overlook the need for up-to-date graphics because of this need to have an "affordable" console. Personally I think Nintendo is scared they'll have another supposed failure like the Gamecube. They always seem to point to it as if to say "See, the GCN was super powerful for it's time, and it didn't sell too well, so that means ALL consoles we make that have good hardware won't sell well!". Nintendo really needs to get past this at some point, because while I absolutely love what they do with controllers and such on every new console, they limit themselves immensely by underpowering the core hardware. Think of how much better the Wii could have been with 360 tech inside of it. Games like Mario Galaxy and Skyward Sword would have looked even better than they did, and all of this gen's multiplats could have been on the Wii too. The Wiimote was absolutely perfect for genres like FPSes and RTSes, yet because of the weak hardware the games from these genres vary rarely, if at all, appeared on it. Imagine Battlefield 3 and Starcraft 2 with Wiimote controls, it'd be brilliant!

Basically, graphics aren't everything, but the POTENTIAL for good graphics certainly IS everything. No one was asking for every game Nintendo made to have the absolute best graphics ever, but what would have been great was if the Wii was capable of displaying those amazing graphics in the first place. It needs the potential for good graphics or else most games just won't even be possible on the console. This is why I worry about the Wii U. If it's not powerful enough it could very easily be completely incapable of running PS4/720 multiplats, and what does that mean for us? Another 6 years of nothing but shovelware from third parties, which is sure to make Nintendo's reputation amongst core gamers plummet even further.

[Desert Punk]

Zelda windwaker graphics are still utterly beautiful and charming.

Lets not forget Sony and Microsoft have lost a huge amount of money producing consoles and selling them for less than they cost to make or in the case of Microsoft writing off a huge amount of money due to the RROD issue.

With regard development budgets the ps3 is massively expensive to develop for as its so complicated with soo many cpu cores. Its likely the next playstation will be x86 based and be a lot simpler to develop for.

The wii u actually helps lower development costs if it is similar in power to ps3 and 360 as you can now produce 3 versions of the same game using similar resources or 4 if you include PC. So the cost of developing the graphics for a new game can be shared over 4 versions of the same game instead of 3.

If the wii does have something like 1.5GB of memory or even just 1GB for the actual games that still might represent a game engine that uses twice the memory of 360 and PS3 games. However its more than likely going to be used to cache data due to lack of a hard drive and will probably have similar size games to ps3 and 360.

[Nin_Stream]

Nintendo IS the video gaming industry. That simple.

[Alianjaro]

I don't think Nintendo is behind the times. I'm just saying that's the general consensus of "hardcore" gamers. I personally believe Wii U may be one of Nintendo's most solid consoles, and I love what I've seen so far.

Yeah I know I wasnt breaking your argument. In fact, I totally agree with the initial post! And also, those who call themselves "hardcore" are nothing more than FPS fanboys. I've got nothing against FPS', but I hate when those "ZOMG GRAPHICS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING AND NINTENDO SUCKS" call themselves hardcore.

From what I can see, Nintendo loves innovation... But a little too much. They overlooked the need for a proper online network on Wii and DS because they were too focused on the controls. And they STILL overlook the need for up-to-date graphics because of this need to have an "affordable" console. Personally I think Nintendo is scared they'll have another supposed failure like the Gamecube. They always seem to point to it as if to say "See, the GCN was super powerful for it's time, and it didn't sell too well, so that means ALL consoles we make that have good hardware won't sell well!". Nintendo really needs to get past this at some point, because while I absolutely love what they do with controllers and such on every new console, they limit themselves immensely by underpowering the core hardware. Think of how much better the Wii could have been with 360 tech inside of it. Games like Mario Galaxy and Skyward Sword would have looked even better than they did, and all of this gen's multiplats could have been on the Wii too. The Wiimote was absolutely perfect for genres like FPSes and RTSes, yet because of the weak hardware the games from these genres vary rarely, if at all, appeared on it. Imagine Battlefield 3 and Starcraft 2 with Wiimote controls, it'd be brilliant!

Basically, graphics aren't everything, but the POTENTIAL for good graphics certainly IS everything. No one was asking for every game Nintendo made to have the absolute best graphics ever, but what would have been great was if the Wii was capable of displaying those amazing graphics in the first place. It needs the potential for good graphics or else most games just won't even be possible on the console. This is why I worry about the Wii U. If it's not powerful enough it could very easily be completely incapable of running PS4/720 multiplats, and what does that mean for us? Another 6 years of nothing but shovelware from third parties, which is sure to make Nintendo's reputation amongst core gamers plummet even further.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that the Wii U's graphics are bad?

Nintendo IS the video gaming industry. That simple.

LOL nuff said

[Deadly Virus]

Tell me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that the Wii U's graphics are bad?

We don't know yet, but it's a possibility. What we do know is that Nintendo aren't going for strong hardware here, so basically it all depends on how it lines up against Xbox 720 and PS4.

[Alianjaro]

We don't know yet, but it's a possibility. What we do know is that Nintendo aren't going for strong hardware here, so basically it all depends on how it lines up against Xbox 720 and PS4.

Oh well, I guess only time will tell then

[SolarLune]

Note that good graphics does not mean cutting-edge. The Wii was somewhere between the GameCube and the 360 (or at least, those two generations) and still managed to output great graphics, and enough to impress. Zelda: Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy, and Super Smash Brothers all had great graphics. Just because they weren't exceptional doesn't mean that they weren't good. Now the 3DS looks pretty close to a Wii, so I don't think people should worry about the U's graphical power.

Edited by SolarLune, 18 June 2012 - 09:01 PM.

[Usman Mohammad]

Nintendo is behind graphical games, they're behind the gameplay changes and expectations that have changed when we went into the HD era, as much as I don't agree with Shane Satterfield with Skyward Sword lacking a surprise, but his idea about that general games have changed over the past 5 years that have made Zelda look like it's stuck in the past in terms of game progression.

I don't really believe in that but Nintendo is deffinetely behind the times in the online space.

Though one could say they deffinetely are behind the times since the jump to HD began 6-7 years ago and that all these "new" network functionalities and immersive games have already been experience on 360, PS3 and PC. Then again Nintendo wants to improve how you play the game, then there's that arguement that generations should focus on game control. Another counter argument could be that it's not just graphics that matter but jumping to a HD GPU you have more processing power, more power to render and populate more things on the screen.

Nintendo behind the times? Yes, HD happened ages ago.

[Keviin]

Say what you want, but there's simply nothing good for gamers about having an underpowered system. Maybe you guys don't, but I remember when Nintendo had bleeding edge graphics in nearly every game and STILL managed to have the gameplay be amazing too. Nintendo is entirely capable of making a powerhouse console, so why don't they? Well, quite simple, the Wii made them more money, and they want to continue with that formula.

I'll always love their games, but as a massive fan of both the N64 and GCN, I often find myself sorely disappointed at Nintendo's utter apathy when it comes to hardware these days.



^ Examples from the times when Nintendo absolutely dominated in the graphics department

Exactly! I'd rather pay a bit more for a console that has the same position the Gamecube had back in the day, but since that didn't earn them much money... I understand their choice, and the upside for us is that we get cheaper consoles.

Also:
http://www.back-catalog.net/gallery/metroid_prime/19_chozo_ruins_exterior.jpg

This is a 2002 game. By Nintendo. Damn... Kind of makes me wish that they would focuse more on specs again. But I understand this direction too.