It may be awhile before they are ready but it seems Nintendo may already be working on the next newest video game consoles:
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/nintendo-c ... 15955.html
What would you like to see featured in the new consoles?
Parma Ham wrote:Wolf Bird wrote:I'd like to see new IPs and ideas and for Nintendo to let their old, tired franchises finally rest. I know they can get creative if they'd just stop recycling the same characters, ideas and settings.
I'm way out of the gaming loop, but every now and then I listen to a podcast or read an article about the current state of affairs. I've been hearing this sentiment expressed about Nintendo a lot, but I don't think it's necessarily right. Yeah, Nintendo is still making the same handful of franchises they were 10, 20, even 30 years ago. But those are some of the most acclaimed franchises in gaming history. And while 'same old same old' is a little boring for those of us who've played enough Mario and Zelda to last a lifetime, there's always a new generation of gamers who are coming to these titles for the first time. I'm not sure what the actual buying public is putting their money into, but I doubt Nintendo would keep pushing their well-known IPs out there if they weren't selling. From a game company's standpoint, commerce trumps creativity any day.
Parma Ham wrote:I thought it was interesting that MatPat seemed to think Nintendo is over-innovating rather than rehashing. Again, I don't really know the score, so I might be misunderstanding him, you, and everything else. But I wonder: Are you criticizing Nintendo for rereleasing the same games over and over with no substantial changes from version to version? Or, is your complaint that they keep reusing their flagship characters, regardless how different all the individual titles might be? For example: Mario Bros. and Mario Kart are totally different games with different mechanics; the characters/setting are all they have in common. Do you feel that's still an example of "rehashing"? (Serious question; I'm just trying to understand your criticism.)
Wolf Bird wrote:But in games, you have tons of developers and more options on where to put your material. When one of them is sticking to the same thing repeatedly in a market that is more dynamic, that strategy may eventually start failing when many others innovating. I see it with Nintendo, IMO, but it's not unique to Nintendo. It seems plenty of big devs are reusing the same franchises repeatedly. There are games I love and enjoy, but that doesn't mean I want a new installment every other year. Now, of course, those franchises are often commercially successful (look at Halo, Call of Duty, etc.), and innovation and creativity may get ignored (Remember Me). Creativity can also win accolades and be hugely successful (Portal). But how long can a huge portion of an entire industry largely recycle the same things and basically rely on them, while giving only token appreciation to creativity? I don't know the answer to that. But I at least think the gaming industry, as a whole, is going to have to start answering that question. Being classic is not a reason to go on in perpetuity. People criticize Halo or Call of Duty for their undying, repetitive natures with new installments out every year, but then give Zelda and Mario a pass on it just because they're considered classic or iconic. It's a double standard at best, IMO. Where, exactly, is the threshold for classic, and what even makes a classic?
Parma Ham wrote:Someone once said that a lot of game designers are wannabe filmmakers. I think that's probably true. Modern games look like they're drowning in cinematics, and that's not the right approach to video game storytelling at all. (See PS4 for an example of cinematics done right. I still love those manga panels. )
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests