I think with whatever move they're gonna make that's suppose to be different from the rest might cause failure for nintendo. Because it might be hard for developers to make games into this new machine unlike sony's cell processor which is easy to work with.
Just my opinion..but it might go the other way, it depends on the developers if they want something new.
I think Nintendo wastes too much time trying to be innovative just for the sake them having bragging rights to say "were different" or "were the first to do this". They should spend less time worrying about their hardware being like nothing else ever seen on this earth and more time securing better third party games.
Just because it's innovative or new, it doesn't mean it's good. For example, someone can put out a car with only 1 tire in the center and a weight system that keeps it stable, then say "Were the first to do it, were innovative!!" but guess what, people will look at it, say "wow that's never been done before" and not give a shit.
It's supposed to be a Revolution controller that shakes and bakes the beholder into eye popping, revolutionary game feeling. I just hope it doesnt shake and breaks Nintendo's profits and future image.......
I think Nintendo wastes too much time trying to be innovative just for the sake them having bragging rights to say "were different" or "were the first to do this". They should spend less time worrying about their hardware being like nothing else ever seen on this earth and more time securing better third party games.
Just because it's innovative or new, it doesn't mean it's good. For example, someone can put out a car with only 1 tire in the center and a weight system that keeps it stable, then say "Were the first to do it, were innovative!!" but guess what, people will look at it, say "wow that's never been done before" and not give a shit.
Sure because something is different doesn't make it automatically good or great, but it's the whole adage of you don't know how it will do until you actually try it.
Cross-posted because I don't feel like typing up a new response to this silly thread.
A recent review summed it up best...
My favorite thing about [Title] is that it reminded me why I like to play games. Many developers spend the bulk of their energy coming up with ways to make their games different, to do something innovative. But that's the wrong focus. The bulk of your energy should be focused on making the game good. Who cares if you've provided me with a new move that no gaming character has ever executed before if it's wrapped up in crappy gameplay and a half-assed story? People do not play games because they break new ground. People play games because they are fun. And fun is [Title]'s greatest strength.
I like original titles. I like innovation. But you know what I like more than original titles? You know what I like more than innovative titles? Quality titles. If an original title is also quality, more for it. But there's a danger line, and it is this. Just because you make something innovative and original does not mean that "innovation" is good. It's something to remember, because it seems more like the eternal quest just to be different rather than the eternal quest to make something genuinely good. Just my two cents.
So anyway, to this thread? No, innovation isn't a bad move for anyone. But let that innovation never get in the way of what is important. In terms of sales, well, Nintendo will carve out its niche and still remain profitable so I don't give a fuck.
On a serious note, gamers don't know when innovation should occur, we want it but are afraid of it, particularly when it comes to hardware. Innovation can only be bad if its wrong in design, and poorly implemented. We shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that Nintendo is just sitting around throwing hardware together. In the gaming industry, the majority of innovation comes through software, sometimes an addition of new hardware is needed to help further the idea.
I think Nintendo wastes too much time trying to be innovative just for the sake them having bragging rights to say "were different" or "were the first to do this". They should spend less time worrying about their hardware being like nothing else ever seen on this earth and more time securing better third party games.
They should maybe do it less. Or at least have 3 big name titles in between each innovative title, rather than the other way around.
I mean I LOVE the ideas they come up with. Jungle Beat, Paper Mario, Celda's animation... Nintendo likes doing their 'own thing' and coming up with different ways of doing things. And that's great. But if you told me that a traditional Donkey Kong platformer with 3D graphics, a full-on sequel to Mario RPG, or a graphically traditional Zelda (which we are getting) wouldn't have sold significantly more, you're fucking crazy.
They're damned if they do and damned if they dont to some peoples.
Personally im waiting to see revolution this e3, and even then i dont think they'll unveil everything but it will give us a good glimpse of what they're going to do. Then i'll judge if nintendo's direction is a good one to me as a gamer. DS so far has been so so, its gonna be great for many genres but, the lack of western support for RTS, rpg and adventure games is heart breaking, AoEII is a start but, i was expecting more. Advance wars online is all i need though, i'll go live in a cave and call my DS "preciousss" like gollum for the rest of my life.
Revolution being only a standard console with a controller that has a touch screen would be really lame imo..
I don't really think Nintendo's changed that much. It's just that they're publically saying "WE'RE INNOVATIVE!" when they didn't point it out to everyone before.
Game Boy Camera
Super Mario Bros
Pokemon
Super Mario 64/N64 controller/analog stick
Controllers and the D-pad
Kirby Tilt & Tumble
Rumble Pack
Donkey Kong Jungle Beat (there's been tons of music peripherals with games before, but have they ever been used for other genres, like 2D platformers?)
And now lets point out a few of their failed innovations
Sattelaview
Power Glove
ROB (ok, it was basically made for the sole purpose of selling the NES, so dunno if it can be considered a failure or not)
Connectivity
Virtual Boy.
I think Nintendo has always been an innovator. The difference is, they're pointing it out at every single opportunity they can this generation. They didn't introduce the Game Boy Camera and then talk about how they're so innovative for the next year. (At least, I don't think they did. If they did, it wasn't to the extent that they are now).
They just have to find that one thing that sets off a craze like that again. A craze that has certainly died down to miniscule proportions compared to it's height... but still managing to be on the of top franchises on any console, handheld or otherwise.
Just give them the benefit of the doubt because what we do know about Revolution is so little it's natural to be skeptical. But saying it's a bad idea is too premature.
I think with whatever move they're gonna make that's suppose to be different from the rest might cause failure for nintendo. Because it might be hard for developers to make games into this new machine unlike sony's cell processor which is easy to work with.
Just my opinion..but it might go the other way, it depends on the developers if they want something new.
I don't think so. Look at the DS. It offers a new way to play games and has been a pretty good success for Nintendo. The thing offers new ways to play games and when I show my friends some of the innovative things the DS can do they are generally impressed. Everyones favorites feauture is drawing before you start playing Super Mario 64 DS.
Hey, Jonny, I agree with you, there. I'm just speaking on what the majority of people think. And the majority of people think that connectivity sucks. (and it does in most of the cases it was used.)
Personally I think they've given me two excellent games with Donkey Kong Jungle Beat and Yoshi Touch N Go. Both which offer some pretty innovative stuff.
Personally I think they've given me two excellent games with Donkey Kong Jungle Beat and Yoshi Touch N Go. Both which offer some pretty innovative stuff.
And if one was to go by GAF's reactions to the DS, they also had anal sex with your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband, raped your children, killed your dog, oh, and got you convicted of a felony and put in jail.
Innovation is a double edged sword. By going down that direction, it can bring in new gamers but piss off old ones. Nintendo is in this situation and has been in it for a while. However, when is innovation good for gamers or just too out of left field for anyone to really enjoy? I mean, Mario 64 was a good innovation. The whole exploration aspect was good to where you had to collect a star to explore every nook and cranny of the level. That was good innovation.
Hooking up and requiring GBAs to play a game is not.
Nintendo's "innovations" recently have become less and less 'user friendly.' Its a pain in the ass to use the touch screen for DS. Metroid DS absolutely sucked for me because of it. Now we have the Revolution. Do people really want a revolution? I mean, its good that Nintendo is trying out new ideas but I hope they put fun first. The kind of fun people had during those late nights of Super Mario Kart or the people who tried to beat Super Mario Bros. without losing a life. These are the kinds of fun challenges that Nintendo offered but gamers took it and went with it.
These days Nintendo is trying too hard to be different and have yet to create a really addictive game...and gamers have moved elsewhere. Gamers still know about those classic Mario Kart 64 battles or just how awesome Mario Bros 3 is. All Nintendo has to really do is show that they are about making fun games that everyone can enjoy and can be a real classic. One to remember years down the road. Nintendo hasn't done this for over five years now. Its time for a change.
All Nintendo has to really do is show that they are about making fun games that everyone can enjoy and can be a real classic. One to remember years down the road. Nintendo hasn't done this for over five years now. Its time for a change.
When they innovate just so that they can call themselves innovative, the results are usually not very good.
Nintendo's at their best when they're innovating for a purpose. Back in the day, they used to come up with the game concept first, then create innovative solutions to make the idea feasible. Now, they come up solutions to problems that don't exist.
I've been playing Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat, and I have to admit its very unique and a ton of fun.
A console based around ideas just like that could be very, very interesting, depending on how bold they want to to get.
A touchscreen controller would absolutely suck though, hopefully Nintendo has something much better planned than that (you wouldn't even know what button you're pressing unless you're looking at the screen).
The other reason should be obvious -- Nintendo is not going to be able to make a chipset better than what Sony has. Sony owns their own fabs and electronics division, they get technology for cheaper than either MS or Nintendo. Nor will Nintendo ever greenlight a console that would take losses greater than a modest amount (Sony will).
Nintendo has to find other ways to differniate their product.
I don't really think Nintendo's changed that much. It's just that they're publically saying "WE'RE INNOVATIVE!" when they didn't point it out to everyone before.
Exactly! The word 'innovation' gets thrown around too much these days. With Nintendo, it's just their approach to making games. GameCube was actually less progressive for Nintendo in terms of hardware than N64, but they innovated the hell out of it with Pikmin, Metroid Prime, Jungle Beat, Four Swords... With N64, they got to move all sorts of franchises into 3D and it required some reworking. With GameCube, they didn't have that anymore, so they progressed in other ways.
The next step requires new kinds of hardware. The current controller is holding us back and the next step needs to be worked on. Nintendo is the only company interested in doing it, or perhaps the only one that sees the potential. Microsoft thinks the next step is in networking, which is somewhat progressive, but that's only a small part of what can be done - a part that every competitor will be working on. Look at how little of a difference the disc format has done for Nintendo's games. HD isn't going to make much of a change in games. That may be enough for customers, but Nintendo could make it so that it's not enough.
To me, it's not about pushing the envelop so much as avoiding stagnation. To Nintendo, it's how you make new games and they think it attracts new customers (though I think their characters are somewhat holding them back from new audiences). It could be anything from creating an otherworldly game (Pikmin) to taking an old series in a new direction. Imagine if Donkey Kong Jungle Beat didn't use the bongos and had similar gameplay to the (boring) DKC games or DK64. No one expected Nintendo to take DK where they did, but it created a much better product and gave people a new reason to play. Rare would have given us a new reason to collect letters and coins.
Another Ocarina of Time would be okay, but the Zelda series has never failed to try new things, even with similar design. Doing so wouldn't be Zelda anymore, and people don't realize this. Capcom's installments even provided uniqueness to the series with the Oracle games' interaction and Minish cap's shrinking. This new Zelda game looks to greatly expand on some of OOT's concepts (and hopefully Majora's Mask's), such as
horseback combat and the massive overworld.
People seem to care most about playing as Adult Link, but Nintendo knows that throwing in unexpected things like
hints of a wolf character or companion, fighting a Goron and horse-back combat
help keep the product interesting a lot more than just a welcome character design. Of course I don't know much about the next Zelda, but I believe the signs of new, different things are there. The first trailer
(only showing the horseback combat)
was to get people excited about the return of realistic, adult Link, and the newer trailer shows them more reasons to care while still revealing very little. It's sort of a perfect balance between demand and innovation. People don't know they want it until Nintendo gives them a reason to.
The thing about Nintendo is I think they have to get used to not using the security blanket of thier existing franchises so much.
That doesn't mean games have to be monotone and character-less ala Polarium, but even as a Nintendo, I'm starting to get a bit tired of Mario/Zelda/Pikachu etc.
They need to step back a bit, restrengthen the Mario/Zelda franchises but also put some more money into developing new characters.
There's good and bad innovation. Of course Nintendo is gambling but do they have a choice really?
What's do to against Sony supremacie and the rising Microsoft? -- to stand out from the crowd, get the attention. There's 2 things to achieve that: Innovation and being/act different.
