Support NeoGAF

[soundwave05]

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.

Yup.

I don't see how Nintendo really has any choice.

Its not like getting into a pissing/money spending match with either Sony or MS is realistically feasible either.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Actually, to be fair it's more of a joystick than thumbstick - was getting my controllers mixed up:

I guess the first stick that was more of a thumbstick than a full-on joystick probably belongs to... Vectrex.

That Vectrex thumbstick looks pain inducing. The reason I mentioned Nintendo is because they were the only one in the beginning of the 3D generation to introduce analog thumbstick to consoles. Also considering it was Mario64 that was the catalyst.

I wasn't trying to say they invented it. Just recognized the benefits it brought to 3d gaming.

 

[Dragmire]

Just between you and me, I know what I want. So speak for yourself, hombre!

Zelda has always tried something different, and to a lot of consumers and reviewers it hasn't hurt the series. Some like one installment more than others, none are the same, but all had critical acclaim. No one asked for it, but it worked. Perhaps sticking to one formula would have pleased certain fans, but to me it seems that trying different things kept the series from stagnation. Many other series have come and gone while Zelda has been here for twenty years. And actually, if you stick to a formula, people will demand something new, as was the case with Resident Evil, Tombraider, and other series.

Some don't like Zelda 2 or, say, Wind Waker, but the series has tried a lot more throughout its history with nonetheless critical acclaim. Zelda 3 harkened the series back to Zelda 1, but restricted the linearity greatly. Link's Awakening had jumping and platforming, something maligned in Zelda 2. Ocarina of Time obviously brought the combat into 3D to much praise. It also had horse-riding and time-based gameplay. Majora's Mask let you transform and repeated the same three days. Wind Waker's world was mostly water. Four Swords forsook the trademark nonlinearity completely. None of that was demanded by the fans, but the games were widely praised nonetheless. I'm not suggesting everyone loved everything, but it didn't hurt the series' performance. At the very least, there is no 'by the numbers' for Zelda. It's far more inventive than most series and while the new game harkens back to Ocarina of Time, it will probably be a far cry from a rehash.

And Zelda is a microcosm of all things Nintendo. They've always been about trying new things, and it seems to me an effort to keep people interested, an effort that in fact has worked. Revolution is just a big step in a new direction during a time that can definitely use it. No matter how GameCube performed, I'm sure Nintendo would have made their next system into Revolution anyway. There's always new things that can be done with the same old hardware, but instead of trying to reinvent the wheel with every game, why not give people a fresh start?

 

[psycho_snake]

Nintendo could still stand out without being innovative.l All they have to do for Revolution is

-Pick a format with a high storgae capacity, preferrably blu-ray

-Make their console backwards compatatble. Im not sure if its possible for a console to beable to play GOD and blu-ray at the same time and if thats the case, just stick with backwards compatability.

-Make the console very powerful

-For their launch, they should release a load of thrid party games that both PS3 and Xenon are getting and try and secure some big exclusive titles that can be released in later years or even for launch. Also release with Zelda, metroid and mario at launch

-Make it online!

-Make sure that Revolution looks nice, unlike the gamecube.

-Advertise well

If Nintendo did that, then Im sure nearly everyone would want one. Its got something for everyone. If they did want to innovate, they should make it so that the innovation isnt the main function of the console. That will scare people off.

 

[soundwave05]

Nintendo could still stand out without being innovative.l All they have to do for Revolution is

-Pick a format with a high storgae capacity, preferrably blu-ray

-Make their console backwards compatatble. Im not sure if its possible for a console to beable to play GOD and blu-ray at the same time and if thats the case, just stick with backwards compatability.

-Make the console very powerful

-For their launch, they should release a load of thrid party games that both PS3 and Xenon are getting and try and secure some big exclusive titles that can be released in later years or even for launch. Also release with Zelda, metroid and mario at launch

-Make it online!

-Make sure that Revolution looks nice, unlike the gamecube.

-Advertise well

If Nintendo did that, then Im sure nearly everyone would want one. Its got something for everyone. If they did want to innovate, they should make it so that the innovation isnt the main function of the console. That will scare people off.

Even if Nintendo did all that, the majority of people would probably still choose PS3. Would you want a Nintendo Blu-Ray player or a Sony one?

And its not like Nintendo can just wave a magic wand and get third party support. Most third parties will back PS3 first until Nintendo/MS make considerable headway. Its the whole chicken-and-the-egg dillemma.

Making the system on par with Sony is not an easy task, since Sony has their own factories and electronics division, meaning they can basically get just about any level of technology for cheaper than Nintendo or even Microsoft can.

 

[TeTr1C]

All about touching...I'm going to touch the developers and see how they like it.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

I think no where is the word innovation more easily used than talking about games lately. You can play it with drums, you can play it with touch screens, and if it's an average game it's an average game. These new peripherals don't leave me short of breath experiencing the major "innovation". It's like a mantra for avoiding the fact that your playing a fairly simple game. I don't get the greatly innovative part.

 

[psycho_snake]

Even if Nintendo did all that, the majority of people would probably still choose PS3. Would you want a Nintendo Blu-Ray player or a Sony one?

And its not like Nintendo can just wave a magic wand and get third party support. Most third parties will back PS3 first until Nintendo/MS make considerable headway. Its the whole chicken-and-the-egg dillemma.

Making the system on par with Sony is not an easy task, since Sony has their own factories and electronics division, meaning they can basically get just about any level of technology for cheaper than Nintendo or even Microsoft can.

Nintendocan do it, but ofcourse its going to be hard. they have opportunities to show that they have changed. E3 is the first place that they can do this. If they make revolution look really nice and show that its going to have some very good features such as online and backwards compatability, then thrid party devs will believe that putting their products on revolution will be a good idea.

They also need to advertise revolution well. GC's advertising has been pretty crap compared to Xbox and PS2. They need to get the message across that their console is just as good as the other two.

Its also very important that Nintendo make games that people want. i think its good that Nintendo are making new games such as Nintendogs, but I dont think thats what people want. If they made a FPS like Halo or an RPG as good as FF or even making sure that their current franchises are made the best they can possibly be. Zelda Gc seems to be a sign of that.

Personally, i think Nintendo are going to fuck it up next gen. They will try and make something cocky that just wont work. i do have a hope that they can make something groundbreaking that can compete with PS3 and Xenon, but from what Ive seen Nintendo do in the past, it doesnt seem likely.

 

[Manics]

Hey Synbios,

are you the same poster as "invulnerable" over at gamefaqs? This post is identical to a post there from 2 days ago:

original post

 

[djtiesto]

A traditional game with a good story and solid play mechanics will always triumph over innovation without it. Yoshi's Touch and Go is fun but it's no where near as good as Yoshi's Island. Jungle Beat left me fairly unimpressed - I prefer using a regular control pad instead of banging on bongoes. The SNES generation, when I think Nintendo hit their "golden age", featured many sequels to NES games that were hardly innovative (Zelda:LTTP, Super Metroid, Super Mario World) but they took old ideas and polished them into absolute masterpieces, coming up with some of the best games of all time.