Support NeoGAF

[Musashi Wins!]

And in brief response to Chris Kohler's [bullshit bullshit bullshit] thing, I'll simply say that I would have expected more from someone whose previous writings I've respected so much.

You must not have caught his tenure at GAF, haha.

 

[Moegames]

Shocker - Nintendo fans are getting pissy :lol

 

[Kobun Heat]

And in brief response to Chris Kohler's [bullshit bullshit bullshit] thing, I'll simply say that I would have expected more from someone whose previous writings I've respected so much.

Ouch. Alright, mea culpa. I'll respond seriously.

Regardless of your like/dislike for the DS, you absolutely do not have a leg to stand on with your assertion that Nintendo "has become a regurgitator of old games with slightly new gloss." The new, original games that have been released thus far over the lifespans of the GC and GBA -- and they represent an overwhelming majority of Nintendo's release lists -- say you're wrong.

And if you're going to argue that a few GBA ports of the SNES' strongest-selling games and a Classic NES series somehow constitute anything more than extra money on the side... well, I fail to see how you can really win there either. Or that, by implication, Nintendo is alone or foremost in cashing in on classic content, as if this is not widespread throughout the industry.

Or as if people somehow don't actually want portable versions of classic Mario games. Hate to break it to you but yeah, lots of us do. And if you personally don't, that's cool because there's plenty of original content on Nintendo systems.

Yes - I can indeed argue this with a straight face.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Ouch. Alright, mea culpa. I'll respond seriously.

Regardless of your like/dislike for the DS, you absolutely do not have a leg to stand on with your assertion that Nintendo "has become a regurgitator of old games with slightly new gloss." The new, original games that have been released thus far over the lifespans of the GC and GBA -- and they represent an overwhelming majority of Nintendo's release lists -- say you're wrong.

And if you're going to argue that a few GBA ports of the SNES' strongest-selling games and a Classic NES series somehow constitute anything more than extra money on the side... well, I fail to see how you can really win there either. Or that, by implication, Nintendo is alone or foremost in cashing in on classic content, as if this is not widespread throughout the industry.

Or as if people somehow don't actually want portable versions of classic Mario games. Hate to break it to you but yeah, lots of us do. And if you personally don't, that's cool because there's plenty of original content on Nintendo systems.

Yes - I can indeed argue this with a straight face.

I won't do the digging (I don't care enough to) but I'd love to see the actual proportion, both in sales and number of titles published by Nintendo, that are rehashes/remakes of NES/SNES games. I quick look at EB pulls up well over two dozen, most of which sold well. My point is to contest your claim that Nintendo is not "foremost in cashing in on classic content". If not them, then who? I don't see any other company doing it in the kind of volume that Nintendo is.

 

[Saturnman]

Or as if people somehow don't actually want portable versions of classic Mario games. Hate to break it to you but yeah, lots of us do. And if you personally don't, that's cool because there's plenty of original content on Nintendo systems.

You want to buy and (re-)play the ports/remakes more than followups to the same classics? Does that mean you will want Super Mario Sunshine on GBA2 as well, at the expense of a new Mario game?

Critics probably would have nothing to say if Nintendo had released all those ports as a package deal (like Super Mario All Stars), but there's something wrong when those ports are spread out and are even used as flagship software to launch new hardware.

 

[Kobun Heat]

My point is to contest your claim that Nintendo is not "foremost in cashing in on classic content". If not them, then who? I don't see any other company doing it in the kind of volume that Nintendo is.

Capcom? Midway? Namco? Atari? Nintendo might have more retro SKUs on the market than any one of those companies -- thanks mostly to the Famicom Mini line -- but if you want to talk about "selling the same game over and over again"...

 

[Kobun Heat]

You want to buy and (re-)play the ports/remakes more than followups to the same classics? Does that mean you will want Super Mario Sunshine on GBA2 as well, at the expense of a new Mario game?

1) No, I want original content more, and 2) it's not at the expense of anything. It's not an either-or proposition. It's both.

 

[captainbiotch]

No one can cash in like Nintendo because they haven't remotely put out the amount of quality software that Nintendo has. These are ports of titles you'll see in top 100 videogames of all time lists. No one is forcing you to buy them, and you can't say they are put out in place of original titles, unless you somehow know some insider information about how Nintendo has to allocate resources.

 

[maharg]

I'd say Capcom wins that crown. Nintendo exploits their franchises like no other in terms of using them in new and varied games, but they are not even close to the worst in terms of incremental upgraded versions of older games.

 

[Saturnman]

1) No, I want original content more, and 2) it's not at the expense of anything. It's not an either-or proposition. It's both.

When was the last time you played a new (2d) Mario on the GB(A) platform? Those Mario ports are at the expense of original software.

 

[krypt0nian]

Shocker - Nintendo fans are getting pissy :lol

Shocker - formerly banned for trolling junior members are pointing it out.

 

[captainbiotch]

When was the last time you played a new (2d) Mario on the GB(A) platform? Those Mario ports are at the expense of original software.

You should be a politician with logic like that.

 

[Kobun Heat]

When was the last time you played a new (2d) Mario on the GB(A) platform? Those Mario ports are at the expense of original software.

I'm not much of a list person, but between Mario vs. DK, Wario Land IV, Superstar Saga, and Kirby (et al) I doubt either Mario fans or platform buffs are really hurting for new GBA games. The profit from those ports is what helps to fund the development of new software.

 

[drohne]

ports may not come precisely at the expense of new content, but they can certainly take the place of new content. if the super mario advance games didn't exist, or if the first couple were poorly received, i'm sure nintendo would've developed an original gba mario game. and we don't even have to deal in the hypothetical: minish cap was temporarily displaced by the zelda 3 port.

edit: uh, i really liked mario vs. dk, but i don't see that some mario games and some platform games would collectively satisfy the desire for a new mario platform game.

 

[Kobun Heat]

Okay, but Minish Cap *is* done. It's not as if it was a port or a remake but not both.

And I'm just not sure about a new Mario platformer, considering that they'd dropped the idea after Super Mario Land 2 in 1992(?). Portable platformers became Wario's domain, and Mario was reserved for consoles.

edit: And, there is indeed a new Mario platformer on the way for DS.

 

[drohne]

the cynical explanation for minish cap's release would be that they only had one snes zelda game to port. i wouldn't be surprised if a new ds zelda was preempted or at least preceded by ports of ocarina and majora's mask. ports allow nintendo to leverage their properties without incurring much development expense. if they didn't have games to port, or if the market rejected ports, they would have to leverage those properties differently. it isn't quite ports or original content, but i think ports are antagonistic to original content.

though i guess you're right that wario land essentially is the portable version of mario. i hadn't considered the history of the gb franchise.

 

[Kobun Heat]

it isn't quite ports or original content, but i think ports are antagonistic to original content.

I'm still not sure that if there were zero ports on the GBA that we'd see more original content. The low dev cost of ports helps to fund other, more expensive projects, and it also supplies a system with content that automatically has a high profile and consumer awareness, which helps boost userbase, etc. I think one hand washes the other.

 

[AstroLad]

In response to the original question-

Personally, I spent a lot on 2 GBAs (first one broke) and lots of games since a good deal of the library really seemed fun to play on the road and I got very, very little use out of it. I have a laptop w/ the entire MAME library and a 4-player DS2 adapter for long plane and train rides and I just don't go on the kind of 1-hour trips that the GBA and DS are designed for (that is, where their practicality outweighs the ridiculous amount of MAME goodness otherwise available).

It's too bad, too, b/c I applaud Nintendo for being innovative, hopefully it works out well, but even if it doesn't get properly utilized, it's nice to see a company not afraid to try something more original than just having a better processor, and Nintendo has always been tops for this obviously.

However, I do have to confess that I feel kind of screwed and have not gotten very much out some of Nintendo's more recent risky innovations (card reader, GBA-GC link) b/c, well, they just haven't been very much fun to me, so that's another thing factoring into my non-purchase. Anyway, I hope I ultimately am tempted into buying it (all it took for me to buy a GC was some monkeys in balls after all) but just b/c of my life situation (no real use for portables) right now I don't even think I'll get an SP though I may slightly favor it from what I know so far.

 

[Amir0x]

I've only got twelve stars, and I've adapted fine to the d-pad (which I actually prefer to the touchscreen). Would I have liked an analog stick? Sure. Is it "royally screwed up", "detracting significantly" from the gaming experience? Not in the least, for me.

Would you acknowledge, at least, that the controls are definitely not intuitive, and unless someone is willing to spend a decent amount of time mastering them they'll never be able to fully enjoy the potential of the controls? Because I've played SM64DS for a while now, and I've become pretty good at using the controls. But it's still uncomfortable and it still can't hold a candle to straight-up analog control. So can you blame people for complaining about them? I don't think so. Does is detract significantly from the gaming experience? Not for me, but I'm not surprised that it does for some people. It's a hurdle that should not have been needed to cross.

I've also never understood the problem people have with Nintendo being a "regurgitator of old games". I'm more than happy now being able to play Mario 64 while on the go, and a whole new generation of kids are introduced to some great AAA games. I'm sure more than a few ten year olds have never played Mario 64 and/or some of the other classic ports to the GBA. If you already have a game and don't want a portable version of it, don't buy it!

Ok, you're more than happy to play ports of those games, and I'm sure other people are as well. I'm sure a bunch of nine year olds are just crying that they weren't born yet when the first SM64 came out! And that's fine for them. But I'm not a kid, and I don't want to be reintroduced to AAA titles that I played to death eighty billion times. So as you can see, for me and many others it's not exactly the best strategy to employ.

The "only" people who so carelessly are willing to accept such things are people who have never played the original before, people who are blind Nintendo fanboys or people who feel that the new stuff added to the ports are enough to justify replaying it. And there's a lot of these people around, because the Super Mario ports on GBA sold pretty damn good. But for those of us who aren't so willing to accept that, it just gets a tad bit old.

I think it says a lot that the only reason I picked up Super Mario 64 DS was because there was simply no other quality software to be had. The best alternative was Feel the Magic XY/XX, and even it is disappointing in some respects. Thankfully SM64 DS does add enough that I don't feel exactly robbed. Those mini-games are unbelievably fun. But you can't simplify it to "You don't like it? Don't buy it!" Forums are for [hopefully] intelligent discussion on the issues; one of the issues happen to be someone's displeasure of constantly seeing these ports.

Someone claimed that these ports fund original titles, and that's bullshit - Nintendo has enough money to fund original content all on its own. It's a business, and it so happens the ports do make them money. I can't fault them for that. But I can't complain that I'm tired of seeing ports, because frankly I don't give a fuck about those ten year old bastards who haven't played SMB3. But that's my take.

Most reviews also seem to agree that Mario 64 DS is much more that a port with "slightly new gloss", and I'd have to agree. There are so many differences, both big and subtle, that I feel like I'm playing an entirely different game at times.

Don't exaggerate. If you replaced Yoshi with Mario at the opening, removed Wario and Luigi and gave back Mario all his powers, the game would be exactly the same save for a few underwhelming extra levels used to extend the game into 30 extra stars. The mini-games are basically the huge difference here, and it's an awesome bonus. But there's never a moment, at least for me, when I feel I was playing a new game.

The fact that Nintendo was able to launch the DS and release Mario 64 DS within a year of being announced is a huge achievement. I'm looking forward to the next wave of first party software coming out within the next three months or so. WarioWare, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing and Yoshi's Touch & Go...

Ok, nothing about releasing Mario 64 DS in time with the launch of the DS was an accomplishment. Don't fool yourself there

 

[heavy liquid]

meh.

 

[Random_Hajile]

Ridge Racer PSP

Ridge Racer Nightmare on NDS

 

[Hellraizah]

Congratulations are in order for anyone who can master the new touch control system of SM64-DS. My feeling is that SM64 succeeded to the extent that it did because it made Mario's complex moves/controls so simple for anyone to enjoy. SM64-DS makes the same moves and controls a chore to learn and master.

Couldn't say it better.

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

I'm skipping DS because it's a POS and GameBoy next is inevitable.

 

[Sho Nuff]

You're tired of seeing ports? Don't buy any!

I'm not, but they're still making them!!!!

/me skips DS

 

[mumu]

Damn this thread is still going on? This got to be the thread with the most responses to a simple flamebait in quite some time.

 

[J. Horwitz]

http://www.ipodlounge.com/images/uploads/VB-DS.jpg

Thanksgiving at my family's house. I like Nintendo's older products as much as (maybe more than) the next guy, but I can't be deluded into believing the company has anything close to a perfect track record on hardware or software - far from it. (Collectors may note the number of VB titles in the stacks; at least these titles were (save a few) original to the platform.)

>Regardless of your like/dislike for the DS, you absolutely do not have a leg to stand on
>with your assertion that Nintendo "has become a regurgitator of old games with slightly
>new gloss." The new, original games that have been released thus far over the
>lifespans of the GC and GBA -- and they represent an overwhelming majority of
>Nintendo's release lists -- say you're wrong.

My feeling, without going back through TRST lists, is that Nintendo's first-party release list for the GBA platform considerably outdistances that for the GameCube, for which software releases have been nothing short of anemic (and, in many cases, disappointing). It's also very hard to ignore the tens of unedited NES re-releases on the GBA's list (2 or 3 tens, that is), say nothing of the several Mario/Yoshi SNES ports to that platform, and Zelda, just to name a few. This qualifies as (mass) regurgitation in my book. Though it's not necessary to do so as it further proves the point, I will omit Nintendo's retrofit of the original F-Zero title from this list because they at least re-did the maps and made some gameplay tweaks, and Metroid because they again made some tweaks and somewhat updated the maps, and put aside the double counting of inherently similar Pokemon titles for the GB platforms.

>Or as if people somehow don't actually want portable versions of classic Mario games.
>Hate to break it to you but yeah, lots of us do. And if you personally don't, that's cool
>because there's plenty of original content on Nintendo systems.

I'm sorry to say that what I've been waiting for (almost endlessly, I might add) is Super Mario Bros. 5 (counting SMW as 4, not counting Yoshis), or the long-promised 100 Marios, or Mario 128, not more re-releases of SNES and NES games. There was a point (given your historian's background, I'm sure you recall, post SMB2-JPN) in Nintendo's history where the bump from Mario to Mario wasn't just a re-draw of graphics or maps, but was a complete rethinking of core gameplay mechanics, level designs, etcetera. This yielded the jaw-dropping SMB3 and SMW, plus the original Yoshi. Of course, it also yielded Zelda 2, but then it yielded 3 and Ocarina as well.

While I'm aware that some people are just fine re-playing old titles with updated backgrounds, Luigi, and Mario Bros. forgettably appended, I think this wore thin long ago. But that's just my feeling.

Nintendo doesn't need to re-release classic titles to fund its development efforts. It has long boasted of its $5+ billion cash reserve, which last I checked was a bit bigger than the budget of any of the games that made the company successful. Rather, Nintendo needs to stop screwing around with hardware gimmicks and get back to making excellent software, the sort that used to embarrass competitors like Sony rather than emboldening them.