Should Nintendo make a mature platform (Uncharted-type) for the next gen (9th)?

[endoverend]

The issue is the games get pretty goddamn stale and not everyone wants to have the same art style they grew up with. Nostalgia goggles aren't present for everyone.

I don't think game companies should follow one generation, give them the games they want until they're done playing games, and then say, "Welp, we had a good run, closing down shop."
Nintendo doesn't focus on this generation, and a lot of people grew up with Nintendo games. And Nintendo will keep making games that people grow up with.

 

[Tiffani]

I know nothing about sports other than what I had to tolerate growing up in schools. It could work, but I don't trust companies beyond that they'll do whatever they can to make money. Yeah, there's not real point to this discussion, but it's interesting to throw ideas around. That's one of the great things about the internet.

Yeah, the biggest problem would be making these companies realize that this would make them more money in the long-run. It would also give them great stability because so many other companies would be assuming the risk as well. These companies spend a lot of money on R&D on their new consoles but imagine if they could spread that out amongst themselves? If they were really ambitious they could even sell a cutting edge console for no more than $300 dollars, maybe less depending on costs and such. You know, use the razor and blades business model.

And I agree, this kind of talk is always fun to engage in from time to time.

 

[Qtis]

I don't think game companies should follow one generation, give them the games they want until they're done playing games, and then say, "Welp, we had a good run, closing down shop."
Nintendo doesn't focus on this generation, and a lot of people grew up with Nintendo games. And Nintendo will keep making games that people grow up with.

That's the thing, they (or anyone else for that matter) aren't making the same games as they used to for a specific generation. Technology changes. Genres change. People's preferences change. The problem people seem to forget is that it's not an option of doing just X, when the competition is doing X and Y (and the PC X, Y and Z). I've owned almost all Nintendo consoles sans the Virtual Boy and have loved the games on them. Still I could see a good market point of view for a more "realistic" Zelda. Just like I can see a market segment, which would cater to Wind Waker styled Zelda.

Bayonetta 2 seems to be doing good on the review front, but the sales will tell the actual story. If it does well (or as well as it can with the limited sales of the console itself), I can see more games like that coming out. It won't replace Mario or Zelda as Nintendo's mascots, but it will give more variety, which is a huge bonus for a struggling console.

 

[TecXero]

Yeah, the biggest problem would be making these companies realize that this would make them more money in the long-run. It would also give them great stability because so many other companies would be assuming the risk as well. These companies spend a lot of money on R&D on their new consoles but imagine if they could spread that out amongst themselves? If they were really ambitious they could even sell a cutting edge console for no more than $300 dollars, maybe less depending on costs and such. You know, use the razor and blades business model.

And I agree, this kind of talk is always fun to engage in from time to time.

Sounds too idealistic and trusting to me. I'd rather see them at each others throats, because you can always trust companies to pursue money. The razor blades business model works well, but I doubt they'll go to that extreme, especially after the Dreamcast. Overall, it's not a bad idea, it just puts too much power into the hands of a select few companies for my taste. I tend to have a more pessimistic outlook than most people.

 

[stomp_442]

Back in my day, games were about gameplay, not shiny 3D graphics *shakes cane at the sky*


That is exactly what I meant by pandering. Yes, they could decide to go out and try to make the games that that demographic is buying up, but those aren't the games they have a passion for, and aren't the kind of games they've ever made. There are more than enough companies pandering to that demographic and I'm happy to have Nintendo continuing to make the games that they are passionate instead of copying the games that are saturating the market.

Nintendo making the games they always made is fine, but they need to quit taking a shit on the third party game developers. I don't know what the problem is but the third party just don't what to deal with Nintendo and that isn't good. There would be more Wii U sales if there were more third party games available. I want Diablo 3, Minecraft, and COD Advance Warfare, Destiny would have been nice too. I rarely buy any games for my Wii U because there aint any worth buying. How many times can I buy the same crap, generation after generation, it's starting to get old.

 

[trumpet-205]

Part of the problem with Nintendo is that they rarely branch out to other IP. You can only milk Mario and Zelda for so long.

 

[avran89]

oops wrong thread

 

[endoverend]

That's the thing, they (or anyone else for that matter) aren't making the same games as they used to for a specific generation. Technology changes. Genres change. People's preferences change. The problem people seem to forget is that it's not an option of doing just X, when the competition is doing X and Y (and the PC X, Y and Z). I've owned almost all Nintendo consoles sans the Virtual Boy and have loved the games on them. Still I could see a good market point of view for a more "realistic" Zelda. Just like I can see a market segment, which would cater to Wind Waker styled Zelda.

Bayonetta 2 seems to be doing good on the review front, but the sales will tell the actual story. If it does well (or as well as it can with the limited sales of the console itself), I can see more games like that coming out. It won't replace Mario or Zelda as Nintendo's mascots, but it will give more variety, which is a huge bonus for a struggling console.

I love Nintendo games, and I agree, a "cool" Zelda game might actually be fun. (But Twilight Princess is the closest we're gonna get...) But the problem is, Nintendo has an image to maintain. Parents who grew up with Nintendo would know that they would never put anything remotely questionable in their games, so they know it's safe for their kids. If Nintendo made a "mature" console, their safe image would be degraded, and their major demographic would be ruined. It's just not realistic, nor would it be beneficial for Nintendo.

 

[Gahars]

I love Nintendo games, and I agree, a "cool" Zelda game might actually be fun. (But Twilight Princess is the closest we're gonna get...) But the problem is, Nintendo has an image to maintain. Parents who grew up with Nintendo would know that they would never put anything remotely questionable in their games, so they know it's safe for their kids. If Nintendo made a "mature" console, their safe image would be degraded, and their major demographic would be ruined. It's just not realistic, nor would it be beneficial for Nintendo.

I don't buy that. If Sony can offer a range of titles that appeal to a variety of demographics (from Little Big Planet to God of War, Sly Cooper to Uncharted, etc.) and find success, there's nothing stopping Nintendo. No parent is going to ignore the T or M rating just because of the Nintendo logo. It's not like we got a wave of protests over Eternal Darkness when Nintendo published that.

People like to use Disney as the go-to example, but Disney makes everything from G-rated cartoons to PG-13 action flicks and beyond (even more if you count their subsidiaries).

 

[endoverend]

I don't buy that. If Sony can offer a range of titles that appeal to a variety of demographics (from Little Big Planet to God of War, Sly Cooper to Uncharted, etc.) and find success, there's nothing stopping Nintendo. No parent is going to ignore the T or M rating just because of the Nintendo logo. It's not like we got a wave of protests over Eternal Darkness when Nintendo published that.

People like to use Disney as the go-to example, but Disney makes everything from G-rated cartoons to PG-13 action flicks and beyond (even more if you count their subsidiaries).

I'm not opposed to having M-rated games on their consoles. No More Heroes was an amazing M-rated game for Wii. I think it would be ridiculous to make an entire console devoted to more hardcore games. Changing their image like that isn't Nintendo's goal right now.

 

[Foxi4]

I'm not opposed to having M-rated games on their consoles. No More Heroes was an amazing M-rated game for Wii. I think it would be ridiculous to make an entire console devoted to more hardcore games. Changing their image like that isn't Nintendo's goal right now.

Dedicated is a strong word, I'd say "a console that's capable of supporting them", and that goes outside of the realm of M-rated games and well into the realm of simple cross-platform development. Performing inadequately in comparison to the competition is not a good idea unless you have a strong install base you can rely on.

 

[Gahars]

I'm not opposed to having M-rated games on their consoles. No More Heroes was an amazing M-rated game for Wii. I think it would be ridiculous to make an entire console devoted to more hardcore games. Changing their image like that isn't Nintendo's goal right now.

Adding some mature titles to its lineup wouldn't change Nintendo's image; it's more accurate to say that would broaden its horizons.

Maybe there's a handful of exceptions, but for the most part, no one's seriously asking Nintendo to only make corridor shooters or for Mario to start hijacking prostitutes and banging cars. They just want some variety, especially if there's a dearth of third party support to pick up the slack. Plus, keep in mind that "mature" doesn't mean blood, guts, tits, etc. The "Mature" rating and actual maturity don't always go hand-in-hand.

(Of course, we could always get more non-Other M Metroid games, but I'm going to play Kanye West here: Nintendo doesn't care about Metroid fans)

I'd like to see a mature title straight from Nintendo, one that let's them take their focus on fun gameplay design and run wild with some new ideas or settings. They could probably come up with something really wild. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, but at least it'd be an effort, and it's not like they still wouldn't have the staple of Mario/Zelda/Pokemon, etc. to fall back on.

 

[endoverend]

You guys are both right, but the OP specifically put in the title that Nintendo should make a mature platform, not mature games.
I think that in order for Nintendo to keep their family-friendly image and at the same time satisfy their more edgy fans, they should make some new IP that is more mature.

 

[Gahars]

You guys are both right, but the OP specifically put in the title that Nintendo should make a mature platform, not mature games.

>Taking WiiCube seriously

Ah, a fatal mistake.

 

[endoverend]

>Taking WiiCube seriously

Ah, a fatal mistake.

Wait, this is a WiiCube thread...?
What the fuck am I doing?

 

[cdoty]

So yeah if Nintendo wants to approach the mature audience they should consider new potential franchises while also keeping the classic ones alive too (Mario, Zelda, Smash, Kart, Metroid, F-Zero, Pikmin)

It would probably have to be a adult targeted console. Very few gamers are going to buy a system for one game, especially if the prospects of getting another one are very slim.

I'm trying to think what gimmick Nintendo could use for an adult oriented console. I think we can rule out anything Fleshlite like. The heart rate monitor could've been a thing, but Apple and Android have pretty much taken over that.

VR might be the best they can come up with, but too many companies appear to be ahead there, and there's that Virtual Boy thing that will haunt them if they try.

They don't have the mature IP, or third party support, to take on Microsoft or Sony.

 

[zeello]

I had an idea for a while now that Nintendo should reboot Metroid and this time Samus is a robot. (and maybe she should be named Metroid)

The idea didnt have many specifics other than that, and the fact that it being a robot makes morph ball more realistic. I was wondering if maybe it would be sort of like Avatar where humans are fighting aliens and you play as sort of a mediator between the two sides.

But recently I thought of a new version loosely based on Super Metroid. There is a space station with about 300 Samuses being built, as a top secret project. Suddenly the federation decides to pull the plug on the whole thing and chooses to have the space station self destruct. However, the Chozo scientist on board the space station lets one of the robots free. The robot makes its way into an escape pod and drifts into space before crash landing on some desolate alien planet.

Optionally:

Spoiler

the planet is Earth

and/or:

Spoiler

humanity is extinct

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I had an idea for a while now that Nintendo should reboot Metroid and this time Samus is a robot. (and maybe she should be named Metroid)

The idea didnt have many specifics other than that, and the fact that it being a robot makes morph ball more realistic. I was wondering if maybe it would be sort of like Avatar where humans are fighting aliens and you play as sort of a mediator between the two sides.

But recently I thought of a new version loosely based on Super Metroid. There is a space station with about 300 Samuses being built, as a top secret project. Suddenly the federation decides to pull the plug on the whole thing and chooses to have the space station self destruct. However, the Chozo scientist on board the space station lets one of the robots free. The robot makes its way into an escape pod and drifts into space before crash landing on some desolate alien planet.

Optionally:

Spoiler

the planet is Earth

and/or:

Spoiler

humanity is extinct

I hope this isn't serious. This sounds like Other M-tier awful.