Obligatory what happened/is happening to Nintendo thread.

[gennss]

Everyone says the gamecube did horribly but there are several things that should be considered.

Even though the Gamecube was not #1 last gen, it was profitable from day 1.
Luigi's Mansion and Mario Sunshine (more the latter) were both popular games and fun to play.
PS2 had more shovelware because it has a larger install base, just like the wii does this generation.
The majority of actual players are casual gamers.

[HellHammer]

Nintendo hasn't ever been about multimedia 'extras' or options. Nintendo never, ever added any audio or video support or even CD/DVD compatibility to any system before, so why are people looking for it now? And Wii's shovelware is as easy to avoid as it was on the NES. Did you buy Track and Field or Mario Teaches Typing on NES? Then you'll probably buy WiiFit or WiiMusic. If you bought Mario or Zelda for the NES, you can still pick up Mario and Zelda for Wii.

While it's painfully evident that the 'traditional gamer' (I prefer this label, as well) is no longer Nintendo's main focus, it does still have it's traditional Nintendo-ish gems and the Wii's first party line-up is a hell of a lot better than people try to make it out to be.

[brickiemart]

I blame 3rd party developers for the crap on the Wii more so than Nintendo. Nintendo does share some of the blame though, they could have done something about quality control. Their Wii outputs, however, have been top-notch and on par with their best work. In regards to the hardcore/mature argument, I agree with the other posters who have said that this is a non-issue gamers have focused on this generation, all it does is add terminology to the vocabulary of angry fanboys.

In regards to the OP’s statement that Nintendo is not trying to attract traditional gamers, well yes and no. They didn’t follow the traditional suite of making a more powerful upgrade of their previous console, which is what the traditional gamers want and expect, but their efforts have shown that they care about making some software for old-school fans. Punch-Out comes to mind right away, they could have paid that same studio to make a Nintendo brand baby-sitting game instead.

As far as judging Nintendo and the Wii’s place and role in games, I think more time is needed. Nintendo sucked in 2008 making their fans happy. Third-party developers are not taking any risks with high-budget projects other than remakes and ports (until recently that is). Honestly, if there were an abundance of good traditional games out for the Wii I doubt gamers would care as much about shovelware or Wii Music. But 2009 has made me happy I bought a Wii and I’ve actually gotten more use of it recently than I have my 360. Given another year or two it will be clearer who Nintendo targets with their software. In my opinion it will be the casual crowd and tradtionals because both groups have proven themselves to be profitable.

Finally, I agree with Miyamoto’s argument about the idea of the Wii (the too many big dinosaurs one). It had to be different. How many consoles would Nintendo have likely sold if they released a more-powerful, dual-analogue controlled Gamecube 2? Besides Nintendo IP, what would that console have over Sony and Microsoft? I respect Nintendo for the having the brass to take a risk that could have easily been another virtual-boy. Do I think it will hurt traditional gaming? There are still triple A ‘core’ games that sell well which proves the market is there which means the demand will be met. Will the new gamers stay along for the ride? No clue, I didn’t think the DS would sell at all, let alone become the lucrative product it is because of its different approach to hand-held gaming. Only time will tell.

[corn619]

Casual games are nothing but a fad, much like Cabbage Patch Kids, Hypercolor Shirts and Tickle Me Elmos. See when times are tough casual gamers don't buy games because its not a high priority. Hardcore gamers will buy games because its a lifestyle for us. Casual gamers will get bored of the shovelware on the Wii and it will end up in the closet next to there treadmill and boflex. I give this whole Casual gamer market another 2 years or so before Nintendo begins to see there profits drop and realize who made them who they are today. There longtime fans, the same fans that saw them and believed in them through the Gamecubes darkest days.

[vash23n]

yikes... so confusing. are gamers who own and play a lot of systems hardcore gamers? thats what i always thought. now it seems to strictly apply to one system at a time... since i disperse my time over multiple systems, that makes me a part time gamer on each system. i guess that makes me a casual gamer on any individual console while a hardcore gamer when it comes to gaming as a whole. for some reason, i dont like that :-/

[t0yrobo]

I think what's been going on with nintendo is pretty simple. Awhile back they took a look at how the market was changing, and reacted to it. Something that Sony, and to a lesser extent Microsoft pretty much failed to do.

[Original_Name]

I think the problem here is a combination of the horrendous 3rd-party software and Nintendo's style of developing games. I think their style was best characterized back in the 16-bit era when Nintendo would take their precious time with every A+ game they made, whilst Sega would bombard gamers with B's (it was like Shakespeare vs. Ginsberg or Vonnegut). See, this was a great strategy back when almost every gamer was what would be called by "hardcore" by today's canon, but now that Nintendo has a system that has been pushed as the console to bring "the whole family around the controller", they seem to be having a hard time deciding which games to focus their time on: "casual" or "hardcore". They only release like, four major games a year, so they have to be very strategic about it -- they did a really bad job at that last year as far as producing wholly satisfying titles.

So it looks like they're at a crossroads -- do they keep their traditional "slow and steady" mentality and meticulously plan which few titles would be the most effective in the market place and in the eyes of gamers, or do they move to a more Sega-like approach and start focusing more on great, quick, innovative games instead of attempting to do the work of masters with every release?

EDIT: Not that Sega weren't masters in their own right, it's just that they traditionally spent less time on each game.

[RadarScope1]

Corn619, I think you are lacking a sense of history. This is no fad, it is a return to form. Nintendo hasn't changed so much as we have. Hate to be the guy who plugs his blog, but I did just write something related to this topic this week.

http://wordgamesblog.wordpress.com/2009 ... -to-iwata/

What’s so remarkable about how Ninty has “changed” recently is how little change has actually taken place. In 1985, Nintendo rolled out a somewhat underpowered box in the U.S. market that appealed to a wide demographic: kids, families, both boys and girls, and plenty of people who had never spent time hanging out in an arcade in ’80s. Every time I think about the idea that Nintendo used to be hard core but isn’t anymore, I think about my best friend’s dad, who beat the original Legend of Zelda — the godfather of all ‘hardcore’ games — and never touched a videogame again, ever. There’s your “new” Wii market.

[Ack]

All I'm going to say?

Atari 2600.

I one up you with Pong.

I think you misunderstand what I meant. The Atari 2600 got a lot of people interested in gaming, so much so that it lasted in the top spot for years. But these people weren't interested in quality, and the 2600 was flooded with crappy ports of arcade games and some pretty bad original content(not all of it was bad of course, there are some awesome 2600 games). Some folks also didn't buy much in terms of games, and had no vested interest in purchasing future products, so once the 2600 went under in the video game crash of 1983, they didn't upgrade or get a different console. And sadly, it's partially because of these reasons that the market crashed to begin with...

So now we have the Wii. It's hitting tons of new markets, people are buying it in droves. But how many of them spend more than a few minutes researching games? They'll buy what's popular or what they recognize, and then simply won't bother delving into what else is out there. Perhaps they might buy a few titles, but considering the amount of shovelware, likely they'll get something crappy which will skew their view of gaming(either by thinking it's garbage, or believing that all video games are kiddie carnival games, and video games once again lose legitimacy as a new form of media).

And the two companies that are marketing themselves to an audience that is known for repeat business? Shunted to the background in terms of sales, so grandma can play Wii Fit. Let me put it this way. Three days ago, while talking to a classmate, I was told how amazing Wii Music was. You know, the game that gamers generally panned because frankly, it sounded horrendous, it looked cheap, and it had a bunch of corporate heads prancing around on stage like a bunch of ninnies. That is what Nintendo's audience currently buys. Do you expect them to go out and search for other games? And do you expect them to consider upgrading when the next round of consoles comes?

And the sad thing? The Wii actually does have some really cool games in there. But I worry that the current Wii fad will fade soon, the market collapses, and the gaming industry goes to hell for a little while.

[Zork]

All I'm going to say?

Atari 2600.

I one up you with Pong.

I think you misunderstand what I meant. The Atari 2600 got a lot of people interested in gaming, so much so that it lasted in the top spot for years. But these people weren't interested in quality, and the 2600 was flooded with crappy ports of arcade games and some pretty bad original content(not all of it was bad of course, there are some awesome 2600 games). Some folks also didn't buy much in terms of games, and had no vested interest in purchasing future products, so once the 2600 went under in the video game crash of 1983, they didn't upgrade or get a different console. And sadly, it's partially because of these reasons that the market crashed to begin with...

So now we have the Wii. It's hitting tons of new markets, people are buying it in droves. But how many of them spend more than a few minutes researching games? They'll buy what's popular or what they recognize, and then simply won't bother delving into what else is out there. Perhaps they might buy a few titles, but considering the amount of shovelware, likely they'll get something crappy which will skew their view of gaming(either by thinking it's garbage, or believing that all video games are kiddie carnival games, and video games once again lose legitimacy as a new form of media).

And the two companies that are marketing themselves to an audience that is known for repeat business? Shunted to the background in terms of sales, so grandma can play Wii Fit. Let me put it this way. Three days ago, while talking to a classmate, I was told how amazing Wii Music was. You know, the game that gamers generally panned because frankly, it sounded horrendous, it looked cheap, and it had a bunch of corporate heads prancing around on stage like a bunch of ninnies. That is what Nintendo's audience currently buys. Do you expect them to go out and search for other games? And do you expect them to consider upgrading when the next round of consoles comes?

And the sad thing? The Wii actually does have some really cool games in there. But I worry that the current Wii fad will fade soon, the market collapses, and the gaming industry goes to hell for a little while.

Now I know, and knowing is all of the battle in this case...

My mistake, I thought you were just goofing off.

To be fair, I know there are ACTUAL games on the Wii, but the number of them compared to even the PS3 is nothing. You have these...

Twilight Princess...which I immediately eliminate due to the fact that it's a Gamecube title with tedious Waggle controls...much more fun and less annoying to play on the Cube. Virtual Console stuff does not count, these are not games that were originally made for the Wii. You can throw in WiiWare later because I'll be honest, I know nothing about it because there is nothing in WiiWare that has even piqued my interest.

Super Mario Galaxy
Paper Mario
Metroid Prime 3
Zack and Wiki
Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles
House of the Dead 2 & 3 along with Overkill
No More Heroes
Madworld
Mario Kart

You know what I'm done...in the end a lot of games were going to be missing on this list and thats because in my opinion Smash Bros, Fire Emblem and a lot of these others could've been GAMECUBE TITLES. Don't take this the wrong way, I don't hate the Wii or anything, but a lot of this "Revolutionary" crap has been blown way out of proportion in my opinion. Look whats come of it thus far. The best game I have played on the Wii that didn't feel stupid or tacked on was Metroid Prime 3, I had fun with a 3D Metroid game when I couldn't on the Gamecube because it was so tedious and drab.