Are some games companies getting more credit than they deserve?

[<nu>faust]

as much as i have utter respect for nintendo's software divison(i still think ocarina of time is the best console game ever) but i can't help feeling like they are getting more credit than they deserve in the creativity department.

Isn't nintendo the company that released 20+ something pokemon games in last 2-3 years and milked(and still milking) the franchise to the max. Isn't nintendo charging 30$ for 20 year old 8-bit games on gba/ds? Hasn't nintendo been constantly rehashing and revamping their old games and present them every goddamday for the past 10 years? Isn't nintendo the company known for never taking big risks when it come to publishing software(or when they don't have %100 complete control over it)?

I really wanna know what nintendo published games were so creative and/or revolutionary(gameplay wise) on gamecube that gives them right to critisize others so harsly when it come to creativity? Most of cube's big games such as windwaker,supemariosunshine,ssb were all graphicly upgraded nintendo 64 games!! Yes big n also released games like pikmin2(wondeRful game btw) on this gen too but still change the fact that most innovative games of this ganeration were non-nintendo games(ico, shadow of the colussus,rez,okami,psychonauts..etc) As i said before i dont mean no disrespect to nintendo,it's a known fact that their software divisions always delivered top quality games but i say they are not the ones to comaplin about sequels when they sell stuff like pokemon snap.

 

[pc999]

In this case is not if their SW division give us original games or not but it is that their controller provides the chance to everyone be very original(just like EyToy standard in PS3 would give too), they dont need to be original alone and yes they arent all originality but still provide it (sometimesmore than others), anyways this gen Nintendo has been a litle behind than it is normal but IMO N64 as been a time of very original games/IP/gameplays and I think that many want that again.

Plus one must separate criativity in terms of gameplay and in terms of IP, as there is always a lot of original IP but no criative gameplay, original gameplay but no IP (eg MP),and originalitty in both (Pikimin).

 

[see colon]

Isn't nintendo the company that released 20+ something pokemon games in last 2-3 years and milked(and still milking) the franchise to the max.

that's kind of a misleading statement, considering most pokemon games come out in triplicate to encourage the trading aspect. all videogame companies milk franchises. look how many GTA games there have been since 2001 (GTAIII, GTA:VC, GTA:SA, GTA:A, GTA:LCS, not counting collections and releases on second consoles)

I really wanna know what nintendo published games were so creative and/or revolutionary(gameplay wise) on gamecube that gives them right to critisize others so harsly when it come to creativity? Most of cube's big games such as windwaker,supemariosunshine,ssb were all graphicly upgraded nintendo 64 games!!

i think that's the problem nintendo is addressing. they're looking at what they did this generation and how well they sold, and creating a new platform where it'll be much harder to release games that mearly upgrade the graphics and call it a day.

 

[<nu>faust]

first of all i don't think nintendo had designed rev in just a radically different way just for the sake of innovation, i think they just realized that creating a 300$+ system and losing tons of money in first couple of years then trying to recoup the money with the software licensing and sales later like its competitors was not compatible with their business model.

secondly i think (imho) unlike last generation during this generation most of the innovations with the gameplay mechanics, level design did not come from nintendo but from the companies who also release countless sequels and being critized for releasing too many sequels. (just look at capcom,sony..etc)

 

[mckmas8808]

secondly i think (imho) unlike last generation during this generation most of the innovations with the gameplay mechanics, level design did not come from nintendo but from the companies who also release countless sequels and being critized for releasing too many sequels. (just look at capcom,sony..etc)

This I agree with.

 

[Teasy]

I really wanna know what nintendo published games were so creative and/or revolutionary(gameplay wise) on gamecube that gives them right to critisize others so harsly when it come to creativity? Most of cube's big games such as windwaker,supemariosunshine,ssb were all graphicly upgraded nintendo 64 games!! Yes big n also released games like pikmin2(wondeRful game btw) on this gen too but still change the fact that most innovative games of this ganeration were non-nintendo games(ico, shadow of the colussus,rez,okami,psychonauts..etc)

What makes those games you mentioned so especially creative though? I mean I can see games like Rez and Okami being especially creative but what about the rest? You're also listing games from quite a few different devs there, do you think it would even be fair to expect one developer to out do all other developers combined in creating unique games?

Oh and Wind Waker, SMS and SSB were not just N64 games with upgraded graphics, its not as if they were just carbon copies of N64 games with all the same levels ect..

Anyway here are a few games for you, Donkey Konga, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Giest, Luigi's Mansion, GiftPia, Warioware, Odama, Metroid Prime. All of those games are none typical games released this generation on GC by Nintendo and I'm sure there are more.

 

[mckmas8808]

Anyway here are a few games for you, Donkey Konga, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Giest, Luigi's Mansion, GiftPia, Warioware, Odama, Metroid Prime. All of those games are none typical games released this generation on GC by Nintendo and I'm sure there are more.

You could pull the same kinda games from Sony also. Nintendo may have a little more, but Sony's 1st party makes games that are non typical games also.

 

[fearsomepirate]

You could pull the same kinda games from Sony also.

The only two I know of are Shadow of the Colossus and ICO. Maybe God of War, too, but how innovative is it, really? It keeps getting compared to Ninja Gaiden and other 3rd-person action slashers. The problem with this whole line of discussion is that Nintendo the Software Publisher, Nintendo the Software Developer, and Nintendo the Console Manufacturer are not interchangable as far as these argument go. The majority of innovative titles weren't Nintendo-published this gen, but then, Nintendo published only around 13% of software titles this gen to begin with. While this makes them #2 overall (EA is #1 by a landslide), it means that 87% of all games sold are non-Nintendo titles. OBVIOUSLY there's going to be a lot of innovation in that 80%. But on a publisher-by-publisher basis, Nintendo is easily one of the most innovative of the top 5 publishers. Who else is even in the same league? EA, THQ, and Activision come to mind, but if you hunt around and find sales charts, the other companies publish a fraction of the number of titles that Nintendo does. And among the top 5 publishers, they're the only one with a reputation for regularly breaking new ground.

A lot of games people list are the freshman efforts by new studios. Like bringing up Psychonauts...it's Double Fine Productions' ONLY game so far, and it was a commercial failure. Let's see if they're known as an innovating powerhouse 3 years from now. Odds are they'll get eaten by EA and buried 6 feet under. That's what happens.

 

[Refreshment]

Sorry for the OT post, but is good to have other POVs.

Withouth thinking too much:

Wario Ware
Wario Ware Touch
Wario Ware Twisted
Wario Ware Inc.: Mega Party Games
Band Brothers
Kirby Kanvas course
DK Jungle Beat
Ouendan (published)
Jump Super Stars (published)
Zelda: Four Sword Adventures
Brain Training
Yoshi Touch & Go
Nintendogs
Electro Plankton (published)
Polarium
Trace Memory (not comon)
Pikmin I ^ II
Odama (publisher)

Of course they also milk alot, but they need money to found the crazy stuff. I understand the latest Mario flood because they need quick/easy money.

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Sorry for the OT post, but is good to have other POVs.

Of course they also milk alot, but they need money to found the crazy stuff. I understand the latest Mario flood because they need quick/easy money.

Nintendo has enough money to fund their titles without having to milk certain franchises. Fact is, most first party Nintendo games sell very well, even new franchises. Mario still is pretty popular, and it's always practical to have some extra titles in your line-up, that's why they're milking it so hard. I admit, I'd rather see some new Nintendo franchises, but I heard Miyamoto was heading two new projects so.

 

[Squeak]

The only real obvious milking I see from Nintendo is the Mario Party and Mario sports games, but they are made a for a special marked segment that doesn't care much about quality and longevity anyway, so just keep away from those obvious showelware products. IIRC they aren't even made inhouse.

It's easy to say that Nintendo is milking the Mario and Zelda licenses, but eight real games (counting the GB outings) in 20 years since Super Mario Bros. is that really milking? And Zelda has even fewer since 1986.
If you also take into account, that each new installment is either vastly different from the last, or contributes some completely new elements, I think all talk about milking is absurd.

Link and Mario and universes they inhabit, are iconic and prototypic anyway, to accomodate for just about any new idea.
They are concepts above all else, not some formula that are just dragged out for the n'th time.

The Pokemon franchise was (and is, to some degree) actually of pretty high quality, if you like RPGish games.

Okami shouldn't even be mentioned as a testament to Nintendo's lack of innovation. It borrows more than heavily from the recent and coming Zeldas. The whole style of the cell shading, sans the outlines, the wolf and the gameplay, all have WW and TP written all over.
SotC and ICO also would never have happened if it hadn't been for Zelda.
ICO is one giant Zelda dungeon and SotC is the overworld, plus some of the majestic boss encounters from the 3d Zeldas.

 

[mckmas8808]

Okami shouldn't even be mentioned as a testament to Nintendo's lack of innovation. It borrows more than heavily from the recent and coming Zeldas. The whole style of the cell shading, sans the outlines, the wolf and the gameplay, all have WW and TP written all over.
SotC and ICO also would never have happened if it hadn't been for Zelda.
ICO is one giant Zelda dungeon and SotC is the overworld, plus some of the majestic boss encounters from the 3d Zeldas.

Sure Zelda created planet earth too.

 

[OtakingGX]

Sure Zelda created planet earth too.

Thank Zelda for water and gravity!

 

[fearsomepirate]

Nintendo has enough money to fund their titles without having to milk certain franchises. Fact is, most first party Nintendo games sell very well, even new franchises. Mario still is pretty popular, and it's always practical to have some extra titles in your line-up, that's why they're milking it so hard. I admit, I'd rather see some new Nintendo franchises, but I heard Miyamoto was heading two new projects so.

Those outsourced franchise games sell like gangbusters, too. Look, they wouldn't be making a 7th Mario Party if people didn't want them. When you're as huge publisher, you've gotta make the stable franchise titles that people rely on. Like I said, the closest thing you can compare them to is EA, not some tiny publisher that puts out 3 titles a year. ALL the huge publishers have key franchises they rely on. It keeps them stable. You should be glad that a publisher as big as Nintendo is as creative as they are instead of resting on their laurels with nothing but rehashes. Imagine if EA and THQ were all that were around to lead the industry.

Nintendo doesn't milk Zelda. Period. I don't get why anyone says that. It's the least-milked continuing franchise in existence right now. I also don't get this whole fantasy "If every single innovative game isn't published by Nintendo, then Nintendo isn't innovative" mentality. By that standard, no publisher is innovative. Okami? Bah, Capcom milks Megaman, Onimusha, and Resident Evil. ICO? You call 989 Sports innovative? See, I can play this game, too.

 

[Powderkeg]

Nintendo doesn't milk Zelda. Period. I don't get why anyone says that. It's the least-milked continuing franchise in existence right now.

People say that because unlike you, they have a firm grasp of reality.

Since you don't, I'll give you some help.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
The Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages
The Legend of Zelda
The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

That's your idea of the "least-milked continuing franchise in existence right now"?

Time to up the dosage on your medication.

 

[Apoc]

People say that because unlike you, they have a firm grasp of reality.

Since you don't, I'll give you some help.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
The Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages
The Legend of Zelda
The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

That's your idea of the "least-milked continuing franchise in existence right now"?

Time to up the dosage on your medication.

For me it's not milking the game, as every one of them is totally different from the other, unlike gta, fifa, nba live, etc etc.

 

[Powderkeg]

For me it's not milking the game, as every one of them is totally different from the other, unlike gta, fifa, nba live, etc etc.

Milking the game, milking the franchise, what's the difference? It's all still Zelda, and it's all relying on the Zelda name to sell. If you replaced Link with a big, burly bearded Viking warrior named the game Guðmundr Warhooth: Majora's Mask do you think it would have sold anywhere as close to as well as the Zelda branded game did?


And yes, 13 Zelda games is milking it no matter how much those rose colored glasses blind you to the truth.

Zelda has 13+ games, Metal Gear Solid has what, 4 or 5 now? GTA has 6 total I think. Final Fantasy is about the only non-Nintendo, non-sports franchise that comes even close to that.

 

[Apoc]

Milking the game, milking the franchise, what's the difference? It's all still Zelda, and it's all relying on the Zelda name to sell. If you replaced Link with a big, burly bearded Viking warrior named the game Guðmundr Warhooth: Majora's Mask do you think it would have sold anywhere as close to as well as the Zelda branded game did?


And yes, 13 Zelda games is milking it no matter how much those rose colored glasses blind you to the truth.

Zelda has 13+ games, Metal Gear Solid has what, 4 or 5 now? GTA has 6 total I think. Final Fantasy is about the only non-Nintendo, non-sports franchise that comes even close to that.

I don't agree with you, so let's agree to disagree.

 

[fearsomepirate]

People say that because unlike you, they have a firm grasp of reality.

Since you don't, I'll give you some help.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
The Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages
The Legend of Zelda
The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

That's your idea of the "least-milked continuing franchise in existence right now"?

Time to up the dosage on your medication.

The first one came out in 1987. The thirteenth is slated for 1986. Thirteen original games across 19 years and six platform generations isn't milking a franchise in the slightest. Let's compare to another franchise people don't bitch about, Final Fantasy:

NES: I, II, and III (Zelda had 2 games on NES)
SNES: IV, V, and VI (Zelda had one game on SNES)
PSx: V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX (Zelda had two games on N64)
PS2/Cube: CC, X, X-2, XI, and XII (Zelda has had 3 games on the Cube)
GB/GBC: Legend I, II, II, and Adventure (Zelda had 4 GB releases)
GBA: I & II, IV, V, VI, and Tactics (Zelda has had 3 releases on the GBA)

What other franchise could you compare it to? Including rereleases (which I would include because they're games Nintendo intends people to buy--I'm not counting the Collector's Edition pack-in for Cube, since it never appeared on shelves), Zelda averages 2.5 releases per generation if you consider handheld generations separate from console. As a continuing franchise (e.g. one that sees consistent releases across multiple platforms) that's not bad at all. In fact, I can't offhand think of any other franchise with anywhere near as old or near the popularity that sees such an even-handed pace of releases. Especially when they have yet to spin off the franchise into new genres. You know, like kart racing, turn-based strategy, card RPG, MMO...

Do we get to count the updated extra super-bonus rereleases of Metal Gear Solid? If so, we've seen 5 MGS releases this generation (II, Substance, III, Subsistence, Twin Snakes), 2 in the current handheld generation (AC!D I&II), 2 last gen (Solid and VR--does Integral count?), and one on GBA for an average of...2.5 per generation so far. Of course, PSP isn't done yet, so that could bump up the average a bit.

 

[Refreshment]

To be accurate and please correct me if im wrong:
First game released in 1987

Metal Gear (msx)
Metal Gear II (msx)
Metal Gear (nes)
Metal Gear Snake's Revenge (nes)
Metal Gear Solid (psx)
Metal Gear Solid Integral (psx)
Metal Gear Solid: Ghost of Babel
Metal Gear Solid: Sons of Liberty (ps2)
Metal Gear Solid: Sons of Liberty Substance (ps2)
Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes (gc)
Metal Gear Solid: Snake Eater (ps2)
Metal Gear Solid: Subsistence

I focused in MG series because it was the one more way off. You have to remember in FF case theres some remixes or special editions, like International.

NOt taking part one way or the other just getting the facts straight.

Btw, we are way of topic now.