Nah, it does what they said it’d do. That there’s a bonus that makes it do everything we’d dreamt it would do? Score.
Nintendo doesn’t have to do jack. It’s the third party people that are slacking. That’s about to end.
If a business seeks to actively snub a segment of its customer base, then that is a crappy way of doing business.
It should be doing what it used to do. The NES and SNES had its action junkies back in the day, as well as graphics to back it up. Also, there were more 3rd-party companies that created games on those systems. If games like The Conduit, Mad World, or No More Heroes continue to emerge and flourish on the Wii, it won’t be completely left to collect dust at home.
Except that’s not what Nintendo has done with the Wii. They’ve produced no less than half a dozen classics, a handful of great games and a trio of against-the-grain curiosities that will be talked about among game players for decades.
What more can Nintendo do?
It’s not so much ‘actively snub’ as ‘passively ignore’. They’ve taken their business in a new direction. That’s their right and certainly isn’t snubbing you. It’s like a bakery deciding they want to make pies instead of cupcakes.
And back in the day, Nintendo was competing with SEGA. SEGA. Let that sink in for a minute. Now they’re up against companies many times their size, who can do better the very sorts of things that you are telling Nintendo to do. Why should they try to compete on even footing with the likes of Sony and Microsoft?
Nintendo has been bigger than Sony for a few years now.
I love how I’m not a hardcore gamer anymore because I don’t want to play shooters and find Mario Kart Wii more fun for me than the awkward half first person-half third person view of Dead Space.
Yeah, the Wii needs more good games. But to insinuate that only kids and grandmas play it, and that anyone who likes it isn’t a ‘real’ gamer? Yeah, okay. It looks someone is trying to compensate for something…
I’m guessing he meant from an employee standpoint. I don’t have the exact numbers on hand, but NCL (Nintendo’s HQ) has significantly fewer employee’s than either Sony or Microsoft’s HQ. Plus Nintendo only deals with games, and not various other markets like the other two.
Dead Space is coming out for the Wii. So is Dead Rising. Should be fun. But I’m hoping for less ports and more awesomesauce.
Dead Space for the Wii isn’t a port. It will be an original game that is a prequel to the PS3/Xbox 360 version.
I don’t understand how this statement makes sense in the universe I inhabit. Forget what games we all like or don’t like and let me ask a point blank question: WHY should they not be doing what they’re doing?
Nintendo’s intent, I would assume, is to maximnize the profitability and viability of their company. They are succeeding. It is not a matter of opinion. It is not something that is open for you to deny. It is cold, hard fact. The Wii is a success. It doesn’t matter what you or I like; it terms of what they SHOULD be doing, it is absolutely, objectively the case that they are doing exactly what they should be doing. It’s working.
Okay, Dead Space isn’t a port. But I mean ‘original game for the Wii’ rather than ‘part of a pre-existing series’.
I would assume this deals only with the gaming divison of SCEA (or Microsoft). Sony is probably the biggest company of the three, when you include every division of theirs, while it wouldn’t surprise me if Microsoft makes the most money. Both of these companies can do things like take a loss in their games division, supported by profits from another division, if they feel the long-term will work out. Nintendo, the biggest gaming company of the three, can’t afford to do stuff like that (well, they probably can now).
I was talking strictly about market cap. And in that measurement, Nintendo’s $85 billion dwarfs Sony’s $30 billion (that’s all of Sony; TVs, movie studios, music labels, etc). Of course, Microsoft could buy and sell both of them several times over at $230 billion.
Why does this matter? New IP is rare for all three systems. Yet, even when the Wii gets a “hardcore” game, people still say it’s not enough.
I want more, more, more.
Madworld is the start. I want glory.
I want something new that uses the Wii and breaks our brains like Wolfenstein did, or like GTA3 did.
Long-time Nintendo fan here… I think I was one of the few people who held up the Gamecube as better than the Xbox or PS2. I got excited when the Wii first came out, but didn’t buy one (just tried it out at my friend’s house). I figured I’d wait for it to go down in price a bit, and have some more games come out.
By now, I couldn’t care less about it. Brawl was a huge letdown and worse than Melee, my friends all quickly gave up on it. Wii Sports is fun, but is really more of a fun demo than a real substantial game. And there’s just been nothing else that came out that’s attracted my interest or felt like a “must-have” game to me (except possibly the new Fire Emblem). I wish they were going for the two-pronged approach between releasing “typical” games meant for the Gamecube controller, as well as the genre limit-pushing games featuring the Wii controller. But there seem to be none of the former (partially due to the graphics leap on the other two, so there’s no ports of those games, but one would think Nintendo could get the non-graphic heavy games on there, like the latest Tales game, or other RPGs, etc), and the game developers still haven’t figured out how to make the latter.
Here’s my take on it:
I say I like my Wii, but the truth is, it’s a dust-gatherer. I got it for xmas 2007 and played the hell out of Mario Galaxy for about a week. I gotta admit I loved that game. Top 10 of all time. My only complaints are that it was too short and some of the stars are too hard to find once you get above 90. After that I anxiously waited several months for Mario Kart which was a HUGE letdown IMO. The wheel was cool but the game itself honestly didn’t feel like much of leap beyond Mario Kart 64 which was already over a decade old at the time. Since then I’ve tried to get into other games but haven’t really been able to. It might be more me than anything. Wii was the only console I wanted, to be fair. If I had an Xbox360 or a PS3 it would probably be gathering similar amounts of dust.
If I think they went wrong anywhere, it was by specifically trying to appeal to families and kids instead of trying to appeal to everyone. As an analogy, a lot of people don’t realize the difference between a kids’ move and an all ages movie, but it’s very significant. That’s what Nintendo/Wii missed, IMO. Too syrupy sweet in a lot of areas. I’m a guy who should be extremely easy to please when it comes to something like Miis, for instance, and even I think they’re corny. It’s almost embrassing to turn on the Wii when “the guys” are over.
What I’d be doing differently right now if I were Nintendo: I’d be churning out side-scrolling homages to the NES and SNES era at ~10-15 bucks a pop and working on a badass sequel to Mario Galaxy that doesn’t try to reinvent the wheel like SMB2/3 and Yoshi’s Island did.
I’m still looking forward to The Conduit and Punch Out, though.
Like… MegaMan 9?
To be fair here:
A) There is an exclusive Tales game on the Wii, the rather lengthily named “Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the New World”
B) The other new Tales game, Tales of Vesperia (Currently a 360 exclusive, though rumors abound of a PS3 version, there’s no proof yet.) is lovingly rendered in gorgeous high rez and might require some effort to tone down for the Wii.
C) The last Nintendo system that had a decent RPG selection was the SNES, so I wouldn’t exactly expect a lot in that arena. (Yeah yeah, both the N64 and Gamecube had a couple of winners, but I could count them on one hand.)
Like Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the New World? And Sword of Legendia? Details are lacking on the latter, but it still seems to be in the works.
Yes, very much like Mega Man 9, my 2nd favorite game on the Wii. The gimmick of limiting yourself to era graphics would wear thin quickly, though, so I’d make a few of those but many that push today’s technology as well.