Why Reviews Should Stop Apologising For Nintendo

[irixith]

Perhaps we should write an article entitled: "Why pithy video game reviewers should stop acting like Nintendo pandering to its audience is a bad thing".

Nintendo is making these kind of games because us die-hards that grew up with them have *demanded* it. We are the ones who have played hundreds of Super Mario World romhacks just to experience new levels, because we like the formula and we would like more of it please and thank you. We are the ones who hold the NES and SNES to such high esteem that we are never truly satisfied with anything that came afterwards. We're the ones with the disposable income to sink into this stuff now! "Fine", Nintendo says, "If you want more Donkey Kong Country that bad, here you go!" They deliver -- it's full of Nintendo magic and nostalgia and sweet, sweet, platforming perfection -- just what we asked for. The new generation of gamer says: "What the fuck Nintendo, grow up?", while the rest of us are blissfully enjoying a new game in a series that we never really expected would come, but are savouring every moment of all the same.

It's OK, angry reviewer dude. You don't have to like *everything*, and you don't even have to *understand* why other people might like it. Your job is to give the game a fair shake -- and it's OK to say that even though it brings nothing new to the table, and that you feel the mechanics/genre/whatever is dated, that's it's still a kick-ass game, and hot diggity Nintendo's still got that magic. It's not an apology, it's a fact. It's OK to be surprised that the old mechanics are still fun and in demand. Sometimes more of a good thing is still a good thing.

Lighten up, and remember that gaming is supposed to be fun!

[Ack]

Perhaps we should write an article entitled: "Why pithy video game reviewers should stop acting like Nintendo pandering to its audience is a bad thing".

Nintendo is making these kind of games because us die-hards that grew up with them have *demanded* it. We are the ones who have played hundreds of Super Mario World romhacks just to experience new levels, because we like the formula and we would like more of it please and thank you. We are the ones who hold the NES and SNES to such high esteem that we are never truly satisfied with anything that came afterwards. We're the ones with the disposable income to sink into this stuff now! "Fine", Nintendo says, "If you want more Donkey Kong Country that bad, here you go!" They deliver -- it's full of Nintendo magic and nostalgia and sweet, sweet, platforming perfection -- just what we asked for. The new generation of gamer says: "What the fuck Nintendo, grow up?", while the rest of us are blissfully enjoying a new game in a series that we never really expected would come, but are savouring every moment of all the same.

It's OK, angry reviewer dude. You don't have to like *everything*, and you don't even have to *understand* why other people might like it. Your job is to give the game a fair shake -- and it's OK to say that even though it brings nothing new to the table, and that you feel the mechanics/genre/whatever is dated, that's it's still a kick-ass game, and hot diggity Nintendo's still got that magic. It's not an apology, it's a fact. It's OK to be surprised that the old mechanics are still fun and in demand. Sometimes more of a good thing is still a good thing.

Lighten up, and remember that gaming is supposed to be fun!

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

[isiolia]

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

Isn't that basically demonstrating what the article is about? (also not true).

Kind of a double standard where it's okay to give a Nintendo game perfect scores despite not doing something new (and thus not leaving room in the ratings for one that does)...but outcry when the same logic is applied to yearly sequels or something.

[Ack]

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

Isn't that basically demonstrating what the article is about? (also not true).

Kind of a double standard where it's okay to give a Nintendo game perfect scores despite not doing something new (and thus not leaving room in the ratings for one that does)...but outcry when the same logic is applied to yearly sequels or something.

I know, that was pretty much my point.

Often times we do give a free pass to some games while criticizing others for just being "more of the same." And when a game comes out that changes something, the fan community gripes that it isn't what it was. This may be the change of a visual style, such as Windwaker's cartoonish visuals, or a change to gameplay, such as Starfox Adventures.

There is no perfect game, there is only that which appeals to your tastes versus what appeals to the tastes of others.

[ded srs]

There is no perfect game, there is only that which appeals to your tastes versus what appeals to the tastes of others.

Spoken like a true Llama.

OT: Don't reviewers on "professional" sites hand out good score to games they think will sell well no matter what? That's the vibe I've always gotten. Also, something about that article reminds me of Zero Punctuation...

[irixith]

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

As long as the core gameplay is still enjoyable enough to warrant it, why not?

Nintendo is getting a disproportional amount of guff as of late while producing truly excellent games. We all know they're held to a higher standard, and then penalized unfairly when they produce exactly what their audience wants! The last DKC game before DKC Returns was produced EIGHTEEN YEARS AGO! One can hardly fault Nintendo for sequelitis, or producing worthless updates every 8 months. Their franchises endure, their brand of gameplay endures, and yet they're to be penalized? Bah. Ranty ranty rant.

[BoringSupreez]

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

As long as the core gameplay is still enjoyable enough to warrant it, why not?

Nintendo is getting a disproportional amount of guff as of late while producing truly excellent games. We all know they're held to a higher standard, and then penalized unfairly when they produce exactly what their audience wants! The last DKC game before DKC Returns was produced EIGHTEEN YEARS AGO! One can hardly fault Nintendo for sequelitis, or producing worthless updates every 8 months. Their franchises endure, their brand of gameplay endures, and yet they're to be penalized? Bah. Ranty ranty rant.

But they're not producing exactly what their audience wants. People want an original Zelda game, so far we've gotten an HD re-release. People want a new Metroid, it's nowhere to be found. People want "mature" games, Nintendo produces one iffy game (Zombie U) and leaves it at that. We ask for new IPs, they give us halfhearted attempts with little to no marketing.

The third party support is dire, watching PS/Xbox get all the multiplats with no Nintendo port is like reliving Gamecube in 2005/6 all over again. Sega and Capcom, Nintendo's past strong supporters, are a shadow of their former self and have gone to crap, respectively. EA has sworn off the system, 2K and Rockstar have never had any interest in Nintendo systems beyond Chinatown Wars and their opinion isn't changing. Konami never even considered putting Ground Zeroes on the U as far as I know.

Most of what they've given us with the Wii U is more

13929107189112.jpg (385.63 KiB) Viewed 457 times

of

k-hMqRXT988q_FaLzUehysvgoaIUV5vt.jpg (131.16 KiB) Viewed 457 times

the

pikminv8u58.png (333.89 KiB) Viewed 457 times

same,

windwakerHD_graphics_vs-590x330.jpg (63.67 KiB) Viewed 457 times

and in small quantities. And yes, they are to be penalized, and it's happening through sales and loss of support from other companies. PS4 is set to outdo next month (with a total of 4 months on the market, and only 1 in Japan) what the Wii U has done with 15 months.

Oh, and the latest COD? 9.9/10!

Actually, not only did that not happen with Ghosts, COD hasn't had a Metascore over 90 since MW2 in 2009, which will be turning 5 years old this November. It's quite a popular misconception amongst the retrogaming community. Very similar to how it used to be popular to hate on Halo.

[irixith]

But they're not producing exactly what their audience wants. People want an original Zelda game, so far we've gotten an HD re-release. People want a new Metroid, it's nowhere to be found. People want "mature" games, Nintendo produces one iffy game (Zombie U) and leaves it at that. We ask for new IPs, they give us halfhearted attempts with little to no marketing.

I'd argue that they are producing what their audience wants. I see you're ragging on the NSMB franchise - what does Wii U have worldwide now, 5.7 million install base, of which a staggering 3.67 million have purchased NSMBU. That's more than Nintendo Land, which was packed in with the Deluxe units! (2.82m) New Super Luigi U (arguably not up everyone's alley, it's a different kind of game) still clocks in at 1.31m. Super Mario 3D World 1.80m. In fact, the only non-Mario related game to hit over a million units is Wii Party U (1.08m). Zombie U, your "mature" example, only 600k worldwide. Monster Hunter Tri? 470k. Assassin's Creed III? 230k. Call of Duty: Black Ops II? 230k. As far as new IP goes, there was a huge push behind The Wonderful 101, which has sold a pitiful 160k worldwide. Again, Nintendo is delivering -what people are buying, which is what they have to assume their audience wants-.

Out of the top 10 sellers worldwide, NINE of them are Nintendo developed or published. That is a company that knows their audience.

[isiolia]

I'd argue that they are producing what their audience wants. I see you're ragging on the NSMB franchise - what does Wii U have worldwide now, 5.7 million install base, of which a staggering 3.67 million have purchased NSMBU. That's more than Nintendo Land, which was packed in with the Deluxe units! (2.82m) New Super Luigi U (arguably not up everyone's alley, it's a different kind of game) still clocks in at 1.31m.

May depend on how they're counting it, since the current bundle (introduced Nov.1 2013) includes the NSMBU/NSLU combo disc (and not Nintendo Land).

[BoringSupreez]

But they're not producing exactly what their audience wants. People want an original Zelda game, so far we've gotten an HD re-release. People want a new Metroid, it's nowhere to be found. People want "mature" games, Nintendo produces one iffy game (Zombie U) and leaves it at that. We ask for new IPs, they give us halfhearted attempts with little to no marketing.

I'd argue that they are producing what their audience wants. I see you're ragging on the NSMB franchise - what does Wii U have worldwide now, 5.7 million install base, of which a staggering 3.67 million have purchased NSMBU. That's more than Nintendo Land, which was packed in with the Deluxe units! (2.82m) New Super Luigi U (arguably not up everyone's alley, it's a different kind of game) still clocks in at 1.31m. Super Mario 3D World 1.80m. In fact, the only non-Mario related game to hit over a million units is Wii Party U (1.08m). Zombie U, your "mature" example, only 600k worldwide. Monster Hunter Tri? 470k. Assassin's Creed III? 230k. Call of Duty: Black Ops II? 230k. As far as new IP goes, there was a huge push behind The Wonderful 101, which has sold a pitiful 160k worldwide. Again, Nintendo is delivering -what people are buying, which is what they have to assume their audience wants-.

Out of the top 10 sellers worldwide, NINE of them are Nintendo developed or published. That is a company that knows their audience.

Well in that case, they've decided to cater to only a very specific, small part of their audience; the Mario fans. I've said many times before that the N64 is my favorite console, and I own every Nintendo system except the Virtual Boy. On none of their systems has a Mario game ever been my favorite, nor has a Mario game ever been the driving force behind my buying the console.

Zombie U, as I said before, was of iffy quality and probably only sold as much as it did because it was a pack-in for a while. Some liked it, many didn't. It's not my cup of tea. I've never been into the Monster Hunter franchise, AC 3 is better on other systems (the Wii U version didn't get any of the DLC if I recall correctly), Black Ops 2's enjoyment factor is very reliant upon an established online community, which the Wii U doesn't have, and you say W101 had a "huge push?" I never saw any marketing at all.

Admittedly, any multiplat Wii U title is going to feel gimped because of Nintendo's underdeveloped online systems and comparative lack of hardware power. That was a mistake that can't be undone, so the only choice moving forward is for Nintendo to have third party developers make exclusive titles. That worked out on the Wii since it had such a hug install base, but that's not a benefit the U shares. That leaves no one save for Nintendo themselves.

If they would turn to their fanbase for ideas, they would have no shortage. A new Metroid, new Zelda, new Starfox, translated versions of Mother 1 and 3 on the virtual console, maybe a couple of one-off IPs like Perfect Dark on the N64 or Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, heck, maybe even a localization of Captain Rainbow from the Wii. I bet Advance Wars would work great with the Game Pad. And even just trying new things with their old franchises would be nice. As my picture pointed out, NSMB is basically the same stuff every time.

I find it kind of ironic that so many point to the Xbox and Playstation and accuse them of being brown shooterboxes, when your numbers show it's actually Nintendo that's mainly selling one genre, and one franchise at that. I guess being a Mariobox is ok.