Nintendo Is Hurting :(

[fastbilly1]

Why are people acting like (not here, but on the asinine internet world), even in the most disastrous of financial and business situations, Nintendo's products and Titles/IPs would vanish with them??? They'd totally be bought out/up and released by other companies, probably even using the same teams and creators currently/formerly working on such titles. Hell, someone might buy Nintendo outright and 'reboot' the entire brand.

Nintendo has made several comments in the past in that the day that they stop making hardware is the day you stop seeing new Mario and Zelda titles.

[Ack]

Has Nintendo developed a truly influential console game since Mario 64?

By "influential" I don't mean a popular game, a good or fun game, etc. but a game that demonstrated new possibilities or refined ideas to such an extent that it became a standard-bearer for change and innovation in the industry. I feel like the Mario series did that regularly until Mario 64, and that other Nintendo IPs - Metroid, Zelda, Pokemon, etc. all were seen as series that influenced other designers, were/are frequently cited in discussions of game design, etc. I don't think they've done this since.

I think WiiSports would be the most likely candidate, but frankly its legacy is still up in the air - the sports games for the Move and Kinect (and Wii) that were arguably influenced by the success of WiiSports were largely poorly received and motion controls are increasingly seen as a bygone fad instead of an important evolution in game design.

My point is this: Nintendo's Wii U is not a place for one to find interesting, cutting edge ideas about game design that leave people talking and shape the direction of the industry. If you look at "critical darlings" from the past decade or more, they are largely comprised of games that innovate around storytelling techniques, level design, visual effects, themes addressed, new kinds of interactivity, etc. Most of the games that do this well are indie games that flourish on the PC and PSN and, to a lesser extent, XBLA and iOS. Nintendo used to be a company that earned this kind of acclaim and respect in the industry. Nintendo doesn't seem to have a leg to stand on in these areas anymore on consoles...which is probably the main reason I don't find the Wii U platform interesting. In the 8, 16, and 32 bit eras they were arguably one of the few cutting edge game companies that had real, traceable influence on the rest of the industry. Unless they make a move to scrap the Wii U and begin working on a higher end device that will allow these kinds of ideas to find the right audiences, I don't see them earning many new fans.

tldr: Nintendo needs to stop taking "managed risks" on hardware and start taking the kinds of exciting risks that they used to take in game development.

What about the Wavebird and successful wireless controllers? I know, the Wavebird wasn't the first of its kind and wasn't standard, but as a result of its quality and popularity both Sony and Microsoft made wireless controllers a standard for their consoles. And while it may seem currently that motion-based control has been a fad, Nintendo was the first company to do it successfully en masse, and we may see a resurgence of it in connection with VR headsets like the Oculus Rift in the future. And the Wii U's implementation of what is effectively a table computer for a controller is at least an interesting experiment.

As for games post-Mario 64, yes, Nintendo has struggled a bit with keeping their IPs in the limelight. But the Smash series has been hugely influential, effectively creating an entire subgenre of the fighting genre. And I still think Nintendo is a company willing to innovate with its IPs. Look at Majora's Mask and Windwaker(which have both been polarizing) along with the Metroid Prime series and the likes of Star Fox Adventures. All four of these games introduced large or even radical changes to the series. Not all four were successful, but Nintendo was at least trying to keep things fresh and point them in new directions. And they further experimented with game design and control in titles like Donkey Konga, Pikmin, and Super Mario Galaxy.

In my opinion, Nintendo has attempted to be innovative and has taken risks, sometimes substantial ones. And while some of these risks have been hugely successful(Wii, Game Boy), others have not panned out well or resulted in massive failures(Virtual Boy). It used to be that we thought the idea of an analog stick was crazy. We used to think FPS wouldn't work on a console, and 4-player wasn't important. This is a company that has at times made small but important changes that have reshaped gaming forever, while at other times have attempted massive change only to face public backlash. This is a company that screwed itself in the long run by trying to save an entire industry from a crash and that is still being demonized by ad campaigns from over 20 years ago.

So, I'm not too worried. Nintendo will continue to make some interesting products, ones which innovate in ways that we cannot always foresee, but ones that still innovate.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Some are perhaps debatable, but I'd venture stuff like...

Ico
Halo
Shadow of the Colossus
Gran Turismo
Devil May Cry/3
Geometry Wars
COD: Modern Warfare
Half Life (ok, PC first)
DDR (ok, Arcade first)
Resident Evil/RE4
MGS
FF7
Burnout
Uncharted 2

I'll give you a few of those (specifically: Devil May Cry, FF7, Gran Turismo, Halo, MGS, Resident Evil, and Uncharted), but I agree that they are debatable. The only Nintendo-developed and Nintendo-published console games I can think of with those levels of influence are LoZ: Ocarina of Time and Mario Party.

During the last decade, I think that Nintendo showed most of its innovation in the handheld space, and I think Nintendo's influence on modern gaming is more apparent there.

[dsheinem]

As for games post-Mario 64, yes, Nintendo has struggled a bit with keeping their IPs in the limelight. But the Smash series has been hugely influential, effectively creating an entire subgenre of the fighting genre. And I still think Nintendo is a company willing to innovate with its IPs. Look at Majora's Mask and Windwaker(which have both been polarizing) along with the Metroid Prime series and the likes of Star Fox Adventures. All four of these games introduced large or even radical changes to the series. Not all four were successful, but Nintendo was at least trying to keep things fresh and point them in new directions. And they further experimented with game design and control in titles like Donkey Konga, Pikmin, and Super Mario Galaxy.

The Wavebird isn't relevant to my argument about influential games. Neither, strictly, is motion controls.

I will concede Smash as influential, but it also dates to the N64 era. Ocarina would potentially be another candidate, also from the late 1990s. In all those other games you mentioned, you are talking about introducing design elements that largely existed in other places and bringing them into an existing IP instead of using an existing IP to do amazing new things (as SM64 did). I don't think you'll find many game creators citing Star Fox Adventures or Metroid Prime as key games that introduced them to new ideas or refined concepts in such a way as to influence their own work.

My point, again, is that for the past 15 years Nintendo has ceased to be what they were up until the N64: a leader in influential game creation (visual effects, design, narrative ideas, various gameplay elements, etc.). Nintendo was a company that made games which influenced the industry and created buzz about the evolution of the medium (at the level of software). They were a company who made games that gamers with an intellectual curiosity in the potential of the medium to surprise audiences would keep a close eye on. Now they aren't, and I think, for some people, that is a reason why they aren't interested in buying a Wii U.

[dsheinem]

During the last decade, I think that Nintendo showed most of its innovation in the handheld space, and I think Nintendo's influence on modern gaming is more apparent there.

Just out of curiosity, what Nintendo-produced DS/3DS games would you say can already be considered influential?

[cha cha]

Why are people acting like (not here, but on the asinine internet world), even in the most disastrous of financial and business situations, Nintendo's products and Titles/IPs would vanish with them??? They'd totally be bought out/up and released by other companies, probably even using the same teams and creators currently/formerly working on such titles. Hell, someone might buy Nintendo outright and 'reboot' the entire brand.

Nintendo has made several comments in the past in that the day that they stop making hardware is the day you stop seeing new Mario and Zelda titles.

Money talks... and well, you know the rest.

[BurningDoom]

I can agree with the assessment about Nintendo handheld being more innovative, I think.

Did touchscreen phones and tablets with gaming come out before the DS?

[fastbilly1]

Why are people acting like (not here, but on the asinine internet world), even in the most disastrous of financial and business situations, Nintendo's products and Titles/IPs would vanish with them??? They'd totally be bought out/up and released by other companies, probably even using the same teams and creators currently/formerly working on such titles. Hell, someone might buy Nintendo outright and 'reboot' the entire brand.

Nintendo has made several comments in the past in that the day that they stop making hardware is the day you stop seeing new Mario and Zelda titles.

Money talks... and well, you know the rest.

Very true, but Nintendo is a very traditional Japanese company.

I can agree with the assessment about Nintendo handheld being more innovative, I think.

Did touchscreen phones and tablets with gaming come out before the DS?

Palm Pilot - 1997

[prfsnl_gmr]

My point, again, is that for the past 15 years Nintendo has ceased to be what they were up until the N64: a leader in influential game creation (visual effects, design, narrative ideas, various gameplay elements, etc.). Nintendo was a company that made games which influenced the industry and created buzz about the evolution of the medium (at the level of software). They were a company who made games that gamers with an intellectual curiosity in the potential of medium to surprise audiences would keep a close eye on. Now they aren't, and I think, for some people, that is a reason why they aren't interested in buying a Wii U.

I don't think that characterization is entirely fair, and your earlier statements were limited to consoles. Nintendo's most influential work over the past decade has been in the handheld space, and the number of influential/innovative games it has released in that space far outnumber those from any other developer or publisher.

[Ack]

As for games post-Mario 64, yes, Nintendo has struggled a bit with keeping their IPs in the limelight. But the Smash series has been hugely influential, effectively creating an entire subgenre of the fighting genre. And I still think Nintendo is a company willing to innovate with its IPs. Look at Majora's Mask and Windwaker(which have both been polarizing) along with the Metroid Prime series and the likes of Star Fox Adventures. All four of these games introduced large or even radical changes to the series. Not all four were successful, but Nintendo was at least trying to keep things fresh and point them in new directions. And they further experimented with game design and control in titles like Donkey Konga, Pikmin, and Super Mario Galaxy.

The Wavebird isn't relevant to my argument about influential games. Neither, strictly, is motion controls.

I will concede Smash as influential, but it also dates to the N64 era. Ocarina would potentially be another candidate, also from the late 1990s. In all those other games you mentioned, you are talking about introducing design elements that largely existed in other places and bringing them into an existing IP instead of using an existing IP to do amazing new things (as SM64 did). I don't think you'll find many game creators citing Star Fox Adventures or Metroid Prime as key games that introduced them to new ideas or refined concepts in such a way as to influence their own work.

My point, again, is that for the past 15 years Nintendo has ceased to be what they were up until the N64: a leader in influential game creation (visual effects, design, narrative ideas, various gameplay elements, etc.). Nintendo was a company that made games which influenced the industry and created buzz about the evolution of the medium (at the level of software). They were a company who made games that gamers with an intellectual curiosity in the potential of medium to surprise audiences would keep a close eye on. Now they aren't, and I think, for some people, that is a reason why they aren't interested in buying a Wii U.

Admittedly though, so does Gran Turismo, Half Life, DDR, Resident Evil, MGS, FF7, and Burnout on your list, with Halo, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil 4, and Ico not too long after. And I would argue that Battlefield 2 was the catalyst for CoD:MW, which is the Madden of FPS: yearly releases, minor innovation if any.

In my opinion, Nintendo still makes games that help evolve the medium and show a level of intellectual curiosity. Engaging multiplayer players in a traditional platformer, utilizing new and unique methods of manipulating our games to provide a level of interactivity never before seen, providing in some cases entire galaxies to wander and explore, enabling new methods for us to interact and cooperate even in the likes of racing games...no, I think Nintendo is still innovative and interesting as far as gaming is concerned, far more than Microsoft and Sony have been. At least Nintendo focuses on their consoles as machines for games as opposed to lesser-quality PCs or home multimedia centers.