Nintendo: Innovation is Dying

[Evil Avatar]

CNN/Money's Game Over column (http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/02/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm) sits down with Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto this week to try to worm a few Revolution details out of him. No surprise, he towed the company line - but he did have some pretty harsh criticisms for the industry, saying that innovation among game makers has become rare and today's games alienate more people than they attract. He hopes to see that change with Revolution, saying "Rather than thinking we have a new console, let's make epic games, I want [developers] to make more unique products."

[fitbabits]

Dammit, you beat me to it...

[Tricky Thumb]

I'll innovate him.

[VoodooKarma]

I used to to think the Nintendo company line about innovation dying was a bunch of B.S. but I am starting to agree more and more. I find myself being bored with a majority of game releases anymore, even the top tier titles. I find that at first I am excited playing a new title and then I get that 'been there, done that' feeling and rapidly lose interest. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Donkey Kong bongos are the answer but I definitely think developers need to start trying different ideas. It really is a catch-22 though, because when developers do try something different, it seems those titles don't sell as well. And to make things worse, with development costs increasing, more and more developers are going to be playing it safe so they don't lose money. The more I think about it, the more worried I get at the direction the industry is taking as a whole. I am starting to get the feeling that publishers like EA will be the norm rather than the exception.

[CaptStu]

Puh-lease. Loser.

[Borys]

I'm a big N fan and all I can say is:

http://img49.echo.cx/img49/5626/nintendo6do.gif

(this had to be reposted in a proper Nintendo thread)

[joruussuun]

Thought this (http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzyb.php) was a good read... from Nintendoinsider.com though, so may be slightly biased in the information department...

[Klade]

Nintendo has been ranting about innovation for the past few months. If they can pull something really amazing with the Revolution then more power to them. But so far I haven't seen or heard anything to justify all the talk. I mean they are giving away their old games for free when you download and thats fantastic dont get me wrong. And there's rumor that the controller will have a touch surface on it and thats nifty to but so far none of this is really all that innovative.

If nintendo can't do something awsome with this next console then they may become a software only company.

[Abednigo]

I'm a big N fan and all I can say is:

http://img49.echo.cx/img49/5626/nintendo6do.gif

You have to remember though, during the NES days, they had very little serious competition. With the Genesis, then the PS1, things started to even out. I'd like to see numbers for all consoles since the NES. All the Sega systems, PS1 and 2, Dreamcast, everything. I bet we'd see with the increased competition all sales numbers scaling down, with the new systems (like the PS1) going up.

Does that makes sense? Focusing on just Nintendo is only part of the industry. We need to see them all to get a better idea for how things have gone the last 20 years.

[Jacob Singer]

By the way, the phrase is "toe the line", not "tow the line".

[BabyJesus]

Yep, its so innovative to release Mario "whatever" over and over.

[Kamalot]

So everyone really wants games like 'ATV Offroad Again' and 'Driving Simulator XIV - Now with more realistic streak marks' or 'Roleplaying Angst-riddled protagonist uncovers girl's amnesia and saves the world again'?

I too used to think this was a bunch of BS, but the more I play the more I am beginning to think they are right. What really makes todays games different from games of 5 years ago? Now the water and explosion effects look nicer? Now you can shoot the coke can and watch it bounce around in a realistic manner? Does that really make the game itself that much better?

What really gets me is the number of people who WOULD play games if the games weren't catering to such a hard-core audience. In the race to make everything dark, X-treme and super-realistic, game makers seem to have forgotten that games are supposed to be about having FUN!

[PotatoNinja]

I don't agree with all the crazy stuff Nintendo pulls, but I'm glad they're around to do it. Sure, half of it fails miserably, but the other half (rumble packs, built-in four player support, analog controls) tends to turn out pretty well.

I do with they'd focus a bit less on novelty, although some setups (like the touchscreen) are a better gaming control device than I originally thought. Who knows, maybe Soul Calibur Bongo Battles will be the best game ever.

[Kamalot]

Soul Calibur Bongo Battles will be the best game ever.


LMAO!

Super Bongo Battles MELEE!

I can't wait!

[King Drewsky]

Here's a data point to plot on the graph: PS2 92,000,000 units shipped. The market is bigger. Nintendo is just out of touch with the consumers (esp US) and lacks the capital to develop hardware to compete with Sony and ***.

[Mrbunchypants]

In away I have to agree with everything that he said about innovation dying.
Game companys don't distribute there own games anymore. the cost has gone up too much for them to make and then distribute them.
When going to a distributer they want to make sure that the game sell through. Meaning no invetory left to deal with. They have there own marketing guys telling them what games will be a good buy and whats not so good. This means that the Deveplers might have a great game but can get a distributer to take the risk of it floping. There goes your innovation as the distributer tells the devs to look else where. :(

sad but true.

[A-Team]

Here's a data point to plot on the graph: PS2 92,000,000 units shipped. The market is bigger. Nintendo is just out of touch with the consumers (esp US) and lacks the capital to develop hardware to compete with Sony and ***.
Sony just announced today that they've shipped 90 million, not 92.

[King Drewsky]

Sorry, my lysdexia was acting up.

[Darkholmme]

Here's a data point to plot on the graph: PS2 92,000,000 units shipped. The market is bigger. Nintendo is just out of touch with the consumers (esp US) and lacks the capital to develop hardware to compete with Sony and ***.

Now that is just silly. Hardware-wise the Gamecube beats the PS2. Don't doubt that Nintendo could easily dump a ton of money into building a stronger system; They are choosing to take a different approach, one that may or may not work, but one that I really do need to applaud them for trying. If gamers remain on the safe side of things, then gaming will no longer be the exciting field that it used to be.

If anything, it'll be analagous to television. Let's face it, the masses will watch crap on TV and keep on watching the same recycled formulaic crap on TV that has been proven to work. But aren't you happy when someone takes a risk and does something innovative instead of going for a more extreme show or having a sexier cast?

Going back to your original comment about the hardware and drawing that ino this analogy, it isn't that the show couldn't do those things: they chose not to do them. The same goes for Nintendo. Now let's all hope that Nintendo DOES actually release something revolutionary, because no matter who you're rooting for in this generation, it can only mean good things for the industry if they do.

[if76]

It kindof bothers me that Nintendo seems to associate innovation with simplification. They seem to think of innovation as a way to hook nongamers rather than a way to cater to the hardcore gamers who are bored with what they've already played. Maybe this means creating games like Nintendogs and Pokemon Channel but creating games like these is more like widening the scope of videogames rather than bringing them forward. Personally I'd rather see innovation with complicated controls that allow further interaction than games have today. Grand Theft Auto was a very innovative game but it's anything but simple. Same goes to Halo 1 with its addition of vehicles to the FPS genre. To me this is true innovation.

[bapenguin]

I really miss games with high scores. I want to see more games come out with scoring systems, everything from FPS to RPGs to Arcade games. Then make them all online. Have one giant database of scores for everyone to see. Giant world competition.

[Spigot]

As for innovation, I just picked up Warioware Twisted yesterday and man, is that ever fun.

The original Warioware saved my sanity on a 13 hour train ride a couple years ago. Twisted seems to be even more addictive, plus it actually puts to use all those stupid tendencies by people to move the controller as they play a game (as though pulling to the right will somehow make your character on screen move to the right) to good use.

I don't mind playing generic RPG #9985 if it's fun to play. It's the games like Katamari and Warioware that really get me excited about gaming though.

[Borys]

I really miss games with high scores. I want to see more games come out with scoring systems, everything from FPS to RPGs to Arcade games. Then make them all online. Have one giant database of scores for everyone to see. Giant world competition.

Next Live will have something similiar (gamertags + scores in games), I don't know if this iterations has this but from what I read Forza records your every lap and sends them to a large database (on-line).

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[EvilBob46]

Yep, its so innovative to release Mario "whatever" over and over.

It's innovative to release games like Pikmin and systems like the Nintendo DS. Come on, yeah, they rehash Mario titles because fanboys want them so badly, but at least Nintendo has tried for crying out loud.

[MrTA]

lol this shit from Nintendo has to stop. The company that sells it console with remakes of it's own IP:s should try to invent something themselvs. And no, please don't come and tell me that NDS or Nintendodogs is innovative, cause that is bullshit.

In the end it is up to us consumers to decide if we want innovation or not. Do we wan't another GTA or Halo 3 or do we support something new like Beyond good and evil instead? The gaming industry is so full of hypocrites so it makes me sick. Everyone out there knows what this is all about. Establish a good IP that sells and then milk the hell out of it. In nintendos case we have mario in every damn genre now. If the IP does not sell, well, guess what, get back and start over until you sell or go do something else.

Lack of innovation lol, yeah right...

[rein]

Here's a data point to plot on the graph: PS2 92,000,000 units shipped. The market is bigger. Nintendo is just out of touch with the consumers (esp US) and lacks the capital to develop hardware to compete with Sony and ***.

Nintendo announced a net profit of 87.42 billion yen ($809 million) for the business year ended March 31, 2005

yea, they are hurting for capital... sure they will drop some profit this year because they have no new hardware being released and a blue or pink DS will not cut it. However, Nintendo has always made a profit and if they can make a console that is less expensive and still fun to play they are going to be fine. Sure, they will never make it to the top of the video game industry again as the dominate force but does it matter? As long as they can post a profit and make fun games they will not be going anywhere.

[TheBrainKills]

Yep, its so innovative to release Mario "whatever" over and over.


I agree with you, when they released Mario 64 in 3d I was mighty impressed. It seems that each time they release a new version they add something to keep it fresh.

As long as they release bright cheery games I will buy them, because you need something to keep your nieces and nephews entertained when they come over for a visit.

[Darkholmme]

Except Mario has also done its fair share of innovation. Even focusing just on this generation, Paper Mario and Mario and Luigi Superstar were two of the best RPG's of this generation because of their innovative approach and their choice to stay away from the tried and true RPG model.

And if we simply left everything to what the majority wanted and did not support innovation simply because people weren't asking for it, where do you think we'd be?

[Kyle Jones]

I know it may seem a bit like they are playing the loser game of whining that the game is rigged or that no one is as cool as they are, but they bring up a good point.

Kudos to Nintendo to sticking to what they want to do, even if the industry isn't listening. It takes big brass balls to continue along an unprofitable course for the sake of creativity. Kudos, Nintendo. Big fucking kudos.

[bapenguin]

Next Live will have something similiar (gamertags + scores in games), I don't know if this iterations has this but from what I read Forza records your every lap and sends them to a large database (on-line).

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Right, exactly. It's one of the reason I bring it up. It's pretty sweet then because you can sort the high scores then, just show people on your friend's list etc. But also Midway Arcade Treasures did this. Right now (I believe) I still have the high score for Total Carnage on there. :D

[51|RandoM]

Nintendo is mostly right, but it doesn't matter.

They're like the guy running around saying, "it is raining, we need to buy umbrellas."

My gamer perspective says "innovation is nice, but great games are what I want."

A. You don't have to innovate to make a great game.
B. An innovative game isn't necessarily a great game.
C. There are great, innovative games that still don't make any money.

With those three facts, innovation isn't making any friends in the accounting department.

[fushi]

"We asked ourselves 'why would a family need or want to have a gaming console?' The answer is what's driving development of the Revolution."

I'm mostly a "let's wait and see" kind-of guy, but being a part of the crowd (or should I say marginal minority?) who enjoys immersive gameworlds more than anything (even more than the fun-factor that is mostly number one at Nintendo), I'm slowly getting myself ready for dissappointment by all three manufacturers. I'm not really inteerested in game sthat my whole family can easily enjoy.

Superstar Saga, Pikmin or better yet, Wario Ware, are insanely fun, yet they are far away from my favourites this gen, namely ICO and Rez. Both of the latter games have actually fairly dull mechanics and from that perspective they are actually pretty mediocre, but these games were more immersive than anything else I've touched this gen (but then again, the Metroid series is good in that respect and Fire Emblem also gets bonus points for well though-out dialogues). Yet, games such as these are few and far between for depressingly obvious reasons. Most JRPGs have overly convoluted aesthetical choices and FPS games are almost completely 'meh'.

But what can you do, it's obvious that most are looking for the joy of play in games and I really can't blame them. I just wish there were games which have settings as interesting as, say, A Mind Forever Voyaging or something. Maybe I should just start learning Japanese and see what they have in the visual novel department, aside from porn.

[ I think I've done a rant like this before and I got some pretty good game recommendations after that. Here's hoping :) ]

[netcraazzy]

All this rhetoric from Nintendo is starting to bug me. Is it just me or does Nintendo seem to be pulling a page from Apple's book? Apple has "Think Different" perhaps Nintendo will start claiming they "Game Different?" Oh and the dictionary software for the DS called Touch Dic....lol classic. Perhaps they could do a cross promotion with Michael Jackson? Ok, ok I'll stop now.

[KDups]

I question why you guys have such hate for a company that's trying to do something different. Sometimes their efforts succeed (Wario Ware, Pikmin, Animal Crossing), sometimes they don't (connectivity, bongos, certain DS games). It's not like they're preventing you from buying the Halos and GTAs, nor are they forcing devs to adapt. It's more of an analysis of where the industry is heading - games are getting both wildly expensive and derivative.

And there is something to be said about simplistic interfaces. I tried to get a few of my friends to play Halo 2 and they just couldn't grasp the dual analog controls. Sure they could learn, but today's games aren't that intuitive for nongamers to just jump into and play. Not every game needs to be simple, but if you're going to get the Yahoo! games crowd (i.e. the rest of the world) then 18 button control schemes isn't going to do it.

[BabyJesus]

It's innovative to release games like Pikmin and systems like the Nintendo DS. Come on, yeah, they rehash Mario titles because fanboys want them so badly, but at least Nintendo has tried for crying out loud.

Pikmin was cool, but hardly innovative. There have been many games like it, Lemmings being the obvious example. And the DS isn't innovative in the least on any count.

[IndependentGMR]

Pikmin was cool, but hardly innovative. There have been many games like it, Lemmings being the obvious example. And the DS isn't innovative in the least on any count.

Because there have been many systems like it?

[Phades]

I think what Nintendo is doing might actually pay off for them in the end. There's a huge market out there waiting to be tapped for casual gamers. These are the gamers that play solitaire on their PC's or go to Pogo.com and download simple games.

Nintendo will continue to occasionally produce a Zelda or Mario title to keep their old fans happy while actively pursuing these new players. This is actually a good thing for everyone in the industry, Microsoft and Sony included. For some, this new Nintendo will be their first system and their introduction into the world of gaming with Nintendo's new, simplistic games. As KDups said, trying to go straight to a Halo is too complex for them. This gives them a starting ground. Later, as they discover they're getting really into gaming, they can "graduate" to the more complex fare from Sony and Microsoft. Or, as I'm sure Nintendo is hoping, just buy Nintendo's more complex games that they'll still be making. Eventually Nintendo could have themselves a huge new base that previously didn't even play many games.

Some may see this as Nintendo "deserting their hardcore fanbase." In a way it may be but after all, Nintendo is a business. They want to make money. They're good at making money. If they believe this will make them more money, they don't really care about you too much. That's just smart business.

Me? I'll still get all three systems I'm sure.

[Kamalot]

I think what Nintendo is doing might actually pay off for them in the end. There's a huge market out there waiting to be tapped for casual gamers. These are the gamers that play solitaire on their PC's or go to Pogo.com and download simple games.

All in all, it is good for all gamers to push the boundaries of what video games can be. It isn't like the Revolution will prevent someone from picking up another FPS been-there, done-that game.

[PotatoNinja]

And the DS isn't innovative in the least on any count.

Wha?

Do you know where liars go?

I thought lying made you cry :(

[mister_slim]

What really gets me is the number of people who WOULD play games if the games weren't catering to such a hard-core audience. In the race to make everything dark, X-treme and super-realistic, game makers seem to have forgotten that games are supposed to be about having FUN!
I know, Tetris, Popcap, and The Sims dropped out of sight so quickly it's easy to forget about them. This is, to me, where the Xbox library failed. The number of genres is too small. The GC had the same problem, though Nintendo polish does make genres I don't like more interesting.
Here's a data point to plot on the graph: PS2 92,000,000 units shipped. The market is bigger. Nintendo is just out of touch with the consumers (esp US) and lacks the capital to develop hardware to compete with Sony and ***.
But you can say the same thing about the handheld market, though Nintendo is profitable in both. The GC hardware was quite competitive with the PS2 and Xbox, especially for its price. Nintendo is out of touch with the US hardcore gamers, but that's a niche market anyway. The word out of IBM is that the processors for 360, PS3 and Rev are not that different and that Nintendo is very focused on making a machine for playing games.
Personally I'd rather see innovation with complicated controls that allow further interaction than games have today. Grand Theft Auto was a very innovative game but it's anything but simple. Same goes to Halo 1 with its addition of vehicles to the FPS genre. To me this is true innovation.
GTA has rather simple controls. Move/steer, shoot, steal car... and they are simple to explain. All you really have to tell someone is how to steer, how to get in and out of a car, and which button is the gas. There are a lot of flourishes, lock on, camera views, switching weapons, but they aren't necessary for someone just exploring the city. Halo's vehicles were successful because the controls were well implemented and pretty close to the walking controls.
In the end it is up to us consumers to decide if we want innovation or not. Do we wan't another GTA or Halo 3 or do we support something new like Beyond good and evil instead?
There wasn't much new in BG&E. What made it a good game was the quality with which it was implemented and the thought that went into deciding what should and shouldn't be in the game. A well told story, Zelda-like gameplay, with exceptional polish.

[dr_wily]

as i get older i am more into quick fix games and scores..
i dont have the patience to wade through all these huge rpg's and platform adventures..
hell i always get exited when i see a tapper upright!

[XxSATANxX]

By the way, the phrase is "toe the line", not "tow the line".

Here! Here! :D

[Furious Wang]

Beating a Dead Horse

saying that innovation among game makers has become rare

Sorry not every game developer is a brilliant genius that can churn out quality games year after year with tons of new innovations that are fun and exciting to play.

today's games alienate more people than they attract

Is he referring to WindWaker? Or Sunshine? He can't be talking about the 90 million PS2s that Sony has sold, can he? He can't possibly be that dumb.

He hopes to see that change with Revolution, saying "Rather than thinking we have a new console, let's make epic games, I want [developers] to make more unique products."

I imagine that first and foremost, developers are going to worry about staying in business. Not everycompany has a 6 billion dollar bankroll backing them up incase their gamble into extreme innovation is a failure.

Nintendo can keep repeating their "innovation is dead" line over and over. However, it doesn't hide the fact that the most innovative games this generation haven't been made by Nintendo.

Rez
Katamari Damacy
Ico
Lumines
Phantom Dust
Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders
KoToR
Okami
Oddworld: Strangers Wrath

And to a lesser degree
Psychonuts
Band of Brothers
Devil May Cry


Come on. How can they ignore these games? Its abhorrent. What has nintendo done that's more innovative than those games? I'll give them the Warioware Series but beyond that they've got nothing that compares. They've got good games, but I wouldn't call a firehose or a sailboat innovative. The best two games on the game cube (Metroid Prime and Eternal Darkness) weren't even made by Nintendo.

Once they bring out their super duper revolution controller they can start talking about innovation dying, but right now they're just as dead as everyone else.

[Stryfe01]

Gotta give it to Nintendo in the innovation depertment...for the most part. Still they cannot claim "innovation is dying" when they pump out sequel after sequel each year and console generation. Sorry don't be hypocritical. You do it just as much if not more.

[Liquidize105]

What is innovation to you? Reinventing the wheel?

Taking the player to a place never before seen is just one of the many ways to demonstrate innovation. Redefining the control scheme in a meaningful way is one way. Having original playable content is another way.

There'll be always be people who drift along with what is "in" and people who resist change.

So here's a challenge for you.

Give a practicable example of innovation.

No idea? Then you probably shouldn't be letting loose the zip between your lip and go off on those who do.

Innovation IS dying out, and somebody better do something about it. Don't be a hater cus Nintendo's got the rocks to do something about it.

[The_Reckoning]

Same goes to Halo 1 with its addition of vehicles to the FPS genre. To me this is true innovation.

Heard of such games as Tribes, you ignoramus?

[Kamalot]

Heard of such games as Tribes, you ignoramus?
No need for name calling. Tribes had a better control scheme for vehicles. Driving a vehicle in Halo may use a control scheme similiar to the walking control scheme, but is sure isn't anywhere close to driving. I still find it counterintuitive.

[see colon]

Same goes to Halo 1 with its addition of vehicles to the FPS genre. To me this is true innovation.
halo wasn't the first FPS that had vehicles. not even close, actualy. you could drive a fork lift in shadow warrior in 1997, sin had a 4 wheeler in 1998, and tribes had a plethora of vehicles (also in 1998). halo wasn't the first by a longshot.


It takes big brass balls to continue along an unprofitable course for the sake of creativity. Kudos, Nintendo. Big fucking kudos.
nintendo isn't unprofitable in the least.

Gotta give it to Nintendo in the innovation depertment...for the most part. Still they cannot claim "innovation is dying" when they pump out sequel after sequel each year and console generation. Sorry don't be hypocritical. You do it just as much if not more.
to be fair to nintendo, other than the mario party series you rarely see a nintendo published game (1st or second party) spawn more than one sequal per hardware generation anymore. there has been only one mario platformer per gen for the last 2 generations, for example.

to put this in context there are already 3 jak's, 3 ratchet's, 3 devil may cry's, 3 onimusha's, 4 .hack's (and a 5th in the pipe), 3 splinter cell's... and these are all new series to this generation. olders series don't fair any better. there are 3 gta's, 2 PoP's (and work has started on a 3rd), 3 medal oh honors, 7 resident evil's (counting the remake), 3 time crisis...

nintendo might put mario in alot of it's games, but it doesn't make the platforming sequals.

i've said it several times... the videogame industry is broken. it's evolved into the movie equivilent of the studio system, where the publishers basicly control the content. this leads to a profit driven buisness model as opposed to a content driven buisness model. i love nintendo, but honestly, they are mostly responsible for the situation the industry is in right now. i just hope they can fix it before it colapses.

[MrTA]

What is innovation to you? Reinventing the wheel?

Taking the player to a place never before seen is just one of the many ways to demonstrate innovation. Redefining the control scheme in a meaningful way is one way. Having original playable content is another way.

There'll be always be people who drift along with what is "in" and people who resist change.

So here's a challenge for you.

Give a practicable example of innovation.

No idea? Then you probably shouldn't be letting loose the zip between your lip and go off on those who do.

Innovation IS dying out, and somebody better do something about it. Don't be a hater cus Nintendo's got the rocks to do something about it.

You wan't some example of innovation? Well if innovation goes by your means we can almost count every damn game out there as innovative. Look at Halo for instance, brought veichles, squads and other cool stuff to console shooter and put the console fps to a new lvl. Same with GTA with its open worlds which you can explore as you see fit. The list goes on and on and on.

My problem with Nintendo is that they are simply not the right guys to be talking about innovation is dying and that they will change it. If I could get a cent every time I head about Nintendo and there damn revolution, innovation, etc etc I would be the rich like Bill Gates now. Nintendo is doing the same thing that every one else in this gaming industri is. Establishing IP:s and then milking the hell out of it. So don't give me that crap that Nintendo is some grand heroes that will save us all from the lack of innovation. Just look at their previous track record and see what you found there. Establish IP, milk it, establish new IP, milk it, etc etc.

So, please Nintendo, shut up and get to work.

[Reanimated]

Nintendo: We are dying.

[fushi]

Same with GTA with its open worlds which you can explore as you see fit.
By the by, in my honest to heart opinion Mario 64 was the first 3D game in which I really enjoyed walking around and exploring the game world. :) Just an opinions, not an objection.

But yah, Nintendo, Nintendo. No, I'm not going to say you are doomed, you obviously are far from it with your ridiculously high profit margins, but I'm not going to give you much credit either, because Mario has been overworking lately and I don't want to see him like that.

I'll give you a hug, though. * hugs Nintendo *
There. Now continue making the most awesome handheld games and consoles the world has ever seen! And keep 2D-gaming alive! Please!

[B_Money]

The whole "Innovation is dying" meme is a red herring. Game companies know that if they come up with one innovative game that;s fun to play, it'll sell like hotcakes, then they can rehash that idea over and over again till it dies (See Sims). Then start over with a new idea. Right now the three console companies are targeting "non-gamers" for thier next-gen consoles, and they plan on luring them in with innovative games. Just to be fore-warned, when Nintendo talks about these games, they're not planniing on selling them to hard-core gamers.

[trip1eX]

The prequel to BF42, aka "Codename: Eagle" had vehicles in it and was released long before Halo.

[see colon]

halo is only important in the console world. even it's pc release was very much a non-event.

everything halo did was done before, console gamers just never got a chance to see it.

[trip1eX]

Love my Cube. Only console I have.

But Miyamoto is getting old. He's made so many games. Played so many. He's a busy guy. Of course games are too long for him. And of course he doesn't see many new games that interest him.

I happen to agree with him but I'm starting to slide out of the target demographic myself.

[Liquidize105]

You wan't some example of innovation? Well if innovation goes by your means we can almost count every damn game out there as innovative. Look at Halo for instance, brought veichles, squads and other cool stuff to console shooter and put the console fps to a new lvl. Same with GTA with its open worlds which you can explore as you see fit. The list goes on and on and on.

My problem with Nintendo is that they are simply not the right guys to be talking about innovation is dying and that they will change it. If I could get a cent every time I head about Nintendo and there damn revolution, innovation, etc etc I would be the rich like Bill Gates now. Nintendo is doing the same thing that every one else in this gaming industri is. Establishing IP:s and then milking the hell out of it. So don't give me that crap that Nintendo is some grand heroes that will save us all from the lack of innovation. Just look at their previous track record and see what you found there. Establish IP, milk it, establish new IP, milk it, etc etc.

Don't kid around about halo, golden eye was the fps that took it up a notch. GTA is innovative, you're right. If you got more, then spit it out.

I don't even have to argue the rest of your post. Nintendo's original IPs are shockingly, kinda original. And the sequels are plenty good! :eek:

What's not original? Killzone. FEAR. Next MMO anything. Take your pick of the litter.

[Furious Wang]

What is innovation to you? Reinventing the wheel?

Well that does seem to be what Nintendo is trying to do with the DS and Revolution. The wheel of course being the controller.

Taking the player to a place never before seen is just one of the many ways to demonstrate innovation.

Are you talking about the art and character design of a game? If that's the case, just about every game out their that looks pretty with interesting graphics and characters is innovative.

Redefining the control scheme in a meaningful way is one way. Having original playable content is another way.

Yeah! And so is offering gameplay that isn't comparable to anything else out there. So is merging genres. So is offering a compelling cinematic experience. So is offering intelligent cooperative play. But mainly, innovation should be experiencing games in news ways that also happen to be fun and enjoyable.

Innovation is everywhere and in many forms.

Give a practicable example of innovation.[/liquid]
I could write a book on current innovations, but if you can't look at that list I listed previously and realize what's innovative about them, well then I really couldn't help you. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Innovation IS dying out, and somebody better do something about it. Don't be a hater cus Nintendo's got the rocks to do something about it.

But, you see, Nintendo really isn't doing anything more about it than any other game studio. What's innovative about Mario Tennis? Mario Gold? Mario Kart?

They make some games that could be considered innovative, and tons more that couldn't.

What they mean when they say "innovation is dying" is really "buy our new systems with their innovative new control schemes". But controllers aren't games and there is plenty of innovation to be squeezed out of today's regular old wheel. It seem that Nintendo just isn't up to the challenge, and therefore resorts to creating their own wheel whille repeating over and over that the old wheel is busted. They just aren't right.

[Zulu107]

lol, ok Nintendo's innovativeness...I give you that ugly red 3d thing. It was such a big hit, NOT. I can't even remember the name of it. I guess its the law of averages when it comes to Nintendo because they only had so many hits in the past year and a half.

[KamaItachi]

lol, good point, because we all know one failure means that the company has no good ideas ever, don't we.

[Phades]

halo is only important in the console world. even it's pc release was very much a non-event.

everything halo did was done before, console gamers just never got a chance to see it.

Such a non-event that it remained in the top ten list of best selling PC games for an insanely long time.

Non-event to you perhaps, but I doubt that Microsoft or the retailers selling the game would agree. After all, gaming is a business.

[Kamalot]

to be fair to nintendo, other than the mario party series you rarely see a nintendo published game (1st or second party) spawn more than one sequal per hardware generation anymore. there has been only one mario platformer per gen for the last 2 generations, for example.

to put this in context there are already 3 jak's, 3 ratchet's, 3 devil may cry's, 3 onimusha's, 4 .hack's (and a 5th in the pipe), 3 splinter cell's... and these are all new series to this generation. olders series don't fair any better. there are 3 gta's, 2 PoP's (and work has started on a 3rd), 3 medal oh honors, 7 resident evil's (counting the remake), 3 time crisis...

nintendo might put mario in alot of it's games, but it doesn't make the platforming sequals.

You know, this puts a LOT of things into perspective.

I often hear people whine and bitch about Nintendo claiming, "Why do i want a Nintendo? I already played Mario, Metroid, Zelda, F-Zero, StarFox, 1080, etc. Nintendo always makes the same stuff all over again. Nintendo isn't innovative!"

Look at other companies that continually recycle their IP over and over as fast as they can spit them out. Many of the games you list in your example are hardly sequels, but expansion packs.

Sequel city!

Maybe people can actually begin to respect that we haven't seen 'Mario Sunshine: The Lost Isles' or 'StarFox - The Next Mission Pack'.

[mister_slim]

to be fair to nintendo, other than the mario party series you rarely see a nintendo published game (1st or second party) spawn more than one sequal per hardware generation anymore. there has been only one mario platformer per gen for the last 2 generations, for example.
And the funny thing is that Nintendo's desire to bring something new to every game hurt Sunshine. The water pack was a bad decision that was not true to the character and hurt the game. Mario runs and jumps with abandon, not depending on some hover feature to save him. But it's hard to come up with level design like Mario 64, and Nintendo couldn't let the game sit until it clicked.

[fushi]

But, you see, Nintendo really isn't doing anything more about it than any other game studio. What's innovative about Mario Tennis? Mario Gold? Mario Kart?
I disagree to a certain extent. Nintendo's first party games have always had extremely refined gameplay mechanics and tons of good ideas to make a regular game of golf really fun. Whether that's innovative is debatable, but so are the innovations made by Phantom Dust, Psychonauts or Devil May Cry.

It really saddens me that Nintendo is using this vague, ambiguous word innovation to promote themselves, it really isn't helping them much.
Then again, maybe the translators just like to stir shit up :)

[51|RandoM]

At this stage of the switch to the next generation, Nintendo doesn't have anything concrete to sell you with, so you get the innovation marketing spin.

When they do have a final console design/config, playable game alphas/betas, etc., then you'll see lots of that, and not so much marketing spin.

Nintendo's next console is the only one I *know* I'll buy, because it is the only system that I *know* will have exclusives that I want to play. The other systems might end up with exclusives that will make me buy them too, but I don't know that yet. Looking at my xbox library, I probably shouldn't have bought that console. Everything I really enjoyed on Xbox got ported to PC. PS2 I had to buy, and gamecube I had to buy, because of the games that I had to play.

[BabyJesus]

Wha?

Do you know where liars go?

I thought lying made you cry :(

I have been playing touch screen games for years on my PDA. And having 2 screen is no big deal. Just because its "different" than other consoles of the same ilk does not make it innovative. I mean the PSP is the first handheld I have seen to use "spinning" media. Does that make it innovative?

[PotatoNinja]

I have been playing touch screen games for years on my PDA. And having 2 screen is no big deal. Just because its "different" than other consoles of the same ilk does not make it innovative. I mean the PSP is the first handheld I have seen to use "spinning" media. Does that make it innovative?

Wow, Baby Jesus sures cries alot :p

Once your PDA lets you play WarioWare Touched, lemme know, k?

You seem to have an interesting definition of "innovative." Since some company previously made a videogame in some point in time, there's no possible way for any videogame to ever be innovative, because they're just ripping off Pong and Pac-man. Hell, I'll go one beyond that, since some artist at some point in history created an enjoyable piece of entertainment, there's no possible way for any piece of good entertainment to ever be innovative, in any field, for any reason, ever.

[Achilles]

About innovation, most popular games have some if not quite a bit. It’s easier to say a game is innovative if you tie it in with some kind of gimmicky device like GBA connectivity or bongo drums. It’s also easier to say if you take an existing game genre like real-time strategy and give it a different control scheme (pikmin). It doesn’t matter if that control scheme is better or worse, as long as it’s different people who want to think it’s innovative will think that.

There are many people who would define innovation as what Nintendo puts out, which immediately bars anyone else from being innovative because it isn’t what Nintendo is doing. Stuff like this bugs me. Just because people who argue that Nintendo is innovative don’t want to see how an FPS can be innovative, or a real-time strategy game can be innovative, that’s their loss. They can play Nintendogs and claim that it’s more innovative because in Dogs and Cats you used a mouse instead of a stylus. Or they can play Pikmin and claim that really it’s not like the missions in WarCraft because you throw your guys at objectives instead of select them and click on the objectives. Sure these are innovations but so are tons of things done in other genres by other publishers.

I was going to break down the article by quote but basically Nintendo is saying that it’s not interested in giving people experiences and large expansive, long games, they’re interested in what are effectively indie games. They have their charm that's for sure and some of them are a lot of fun, but it's not like they're going to be any cheaper for you to buy (Nintendo games cost as much as the competition and the price stays high longer than games on either of the other two systems), and what would you rather spend your money on, Electroplankton or GTA6, Nintendogs or God of War 2? If your answer is Nintendogs and Electroplankton than you'll be able to play those games because that's what the Revolution is going to be all about according to Miyamoto.

everything halo did was done before, console gamers just never got a chance to see it. A polished FPS with enormous outdoor environments which included bump-mapping and vehicles that actually controlled well combined with a better physics engine than had been seen before and AI that rivaled HL1 had not been seen before on PC in 2000. If you played it last week and had no sense of what a timeline was than yes, it’s all been done before.

If you made it this far thanks for suffering through my overly-long post.

[mister_slim]

I was going to break down the article by quote but basically Nintendo is saying that it’s not interested in giving people experiences and large expansive, long games, they’re interested in what are effectively indie games. They have their charm that's for sure and some of them are a lot of fun, but it's not like they're going to be any cheaper for you to buy (Nintendo games cost as much as the competition and the price stays high longer than games on either of the other two systems), and what would you rather spend your money on, Electroplankton or GTA6, Nintendogs or God of War 2? If your answer is Nintendogs and Electroplankton than you'll be able to play those games because that's what the Revolution is going to be all about according to Miyamoto.
I agree which much of your post but I think these examples are poor. Electroplankton and Nintendogs are both cheap games, probably $30 or $35, and both are open-ended by design. If a player enjoys the gameplay, they can reiterate and find new things, or they can just trade it in. GTA has that same characteristic, but benefits from massive amounts of development money due to sales history. Nintendo doesn't hate short games, look at Animal Crossing or the claims they are making about Twilight Princess. They are just trying to get away from require players to spend 30 or 40 hours to see the ending, which everyone in the industry is doing.

I do agree that Nintendo gets too much credit for innovation, but they still deserve respect. Pikmin, for example, has an elegant and well-implemented control scheme tied to a cohesive experience and good RTS gameplay, which no other console developer has done a good job with. Nintendo gets credit for consistently combining their gameplay and interface progress with enough polish to show it off.

[Achilles]

I agree which much of your post but I think these examples are poor. Electroplankton and Nintendogs are both cheap games, probably $30 or $35, and both are open-ended by design. I agree that my examples are poor, but those are the ones that Miyamoto provided as a description of the kinds of games he’d like to make for the Revolution. Maybe you’re right that they’ll be cheaper than other console games, I wouldn’t just give that one to the big N but it’s certainly possible, for example I think Donkey Konga shipped at a lower price as did Pikmin 2. I woulda liked to use better examples but they haven’t announced any games for the Rev yet.

And about that, I agree with 51|Random that when they do announce games for the Revolution it won’t be Electroplankton and Nintendogs, it’ll be large games like Pikmin 3, Zelda:*, Metroid Prime 3 and Mario: Revoultion. Right now I get the feeling that they’re just trying to play damage control on the 360 and PS3 because they don’t have anything to show yet in the way of large games. But I've got to respond to what they say they're going to do since it's all we know right now.

It could also be a direction they're prepared to go in depending on how well Twilight Princess does. Personally I think it'll do great and prove to Nintendo that giving people what they want really does help, but we'll see.

[BabyJesus]

Wow, Baby Jesus sures cries alot :p

Once your PDA lets you play WarioWare Touched, lemme know, k?

You seem to have an interesting definition of "innovative." Since some company previously made a videogame in some point in time, there's no possible way for any videogame to ever be innovative, because they're just ripping off Pong and Pac-man. Hell, I'll go one beyond that, since some artist at some point in history created an enjoyable piece of entertainment, there's no possible way for any piece of good entertainment to ever be innovative, in any field, for any reason, ever.

What is innovative about having a touch screen? Or does having a wario game played with a touch screen just by osmosis make it innovative? In regards to the rest of your comment, when did I ever say that? You're going a bit too far. I just said that Pikmin was a copy of Lemmings. They added a bit to the mix, but nothing I saw as in innovation to that type of game.

Till then I'll just let you know when I CARE that there is a Warioware game on the DS. Oh, yeah I don't.

[Liquidize105]

What is innovative about having a touch screen? Or does having a wario game played with a touch screen just by osmosis make it innovative? In regards to the rest of your comment, when did I ever say that? You're going a bit too far. I just said that Pikmin was a copy of Lemmings. They added a bit to the mix, but nothing I saw as in innovation to that type of game.

Till then I'll just let you know when I CARE that there is a Warioware game on the DS. Oh, yeah I don't.
So what is being innovative to you?

Give an example.

Everybody can argue what isn't, so draw me a picture of what is innovative.

[see colon]

Non-event to you perhaps, but I doubt that Microsoft or the retailers selling the game would agree. After all, gaming is a business.
gaming isn't a buisness, it's a hobby. EBgames is a buissness. halo might have sold well, but it's release on the PC didn't shake up the industry like a release from epic or id does.


A polished FPS with enormous outdoor environments which included bump-mapping and vehicles that actually controlled well combined with a better physics engine than had been seen before and AI that rivaled HL1 had not been seen before on PC in 2000. If you played it last week and had no sense of what a timeline was than yes, it’s all been done before.
the xbox launched (in north america) november 15th 2001, so comparing it (halo) to games release almost 2 years earlier isn't even fair. regardless, at best halo took things that had already been done successfully in other FPS's. because the features you mentioned all appeared in the same title doesn't make it innovative and it certainly isn't revolutionary. it's simply combat evolved. halo is a great game, i don't mean to discredit it. but it wasn't a brand new FPS experience for me.

[Achilles]

because the features you mentioned all appeared in the same title doesn't make it innovative and it certainly isn't revolutionary. It does actually. There were games that did it all separately, like Delta Force for outdoor environs, Shadow Warrior for vehicles, etc with the exception of bump mapping, but I don't think you're giving Halo enough credit for bringing it all together in a way that worked. That's innovation too because systems don't just act smoothly all on their own, they need to be redesigned to work together. Now Tribes is a pretty close example, but even that wasn’t a single player game and was lacking some other elements, so it’s still not Halo. Since then Far Cry and Half Life 2 have tried to bring together the same elements while adding their own innovations such as squad control, swimming, player controlled turrets, etc.

If your definition of innovation is so narrow that it only includes games that have ideas and mechanics which have never been seen before anywhere, than it's too narrow to be of any use to you. People can take any game that comes out and go ‘game X did it years ago, that’s not innovation’ (I did it earlier with Nintendogs and Pikmin just to prove my point. Further, Katamari Damacy is the same idea as Marble Madness that must not be an innovative game either) but what they’re missing is what the game is and what new ideas and ways of doing things that it has that make it unique. I swear people take such a narrow view of innovation just so they can be disgruntled about something.

[mister_slim]

It does actually. There were games that did it all separately, like Delta Force for outdoor environs, Shadow Warrior for vehicles, etc with the exception of bump mapping, but I don't think you're giving Halo enough credit for bringing it all together in a way that worked. That's innovation too because systems don't just act smoothly all on their own, they need to be redesigned to work together.
Umm, I think we should keep 'innovation' and 'iterated and polished' as far apart as possible. Nintendo gets too much credit for innovation, but we should push up the bar for them, not lower it for everyone else.

[Furious Wang]

They are just trying to get away from require players to spend 30 or 40 hours to see the ending, which everyone in the industry is doing.



What in the *hell* are you talking about? What 30-40 hour console games? If anything, the majority of games are far too short and fall in the 8 - 15 hour range. The longest recent major game I can think of is RE4 and clocked in around 20 hours.

Anyway, I don't know about you but I don't spend my time playing a game to see the ending, I spend my time playing a game to play the game.

But go ahead, keep letting Sony and Nintendo think for you. We know you have trouble doing it yourself.

[see colon]

If your definition of innovation is so narrow that it only includes games that have ideas and mechanics which have never been seen before anywhere, than it's too narrow to be of any use to you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation
Innovation is the introduction of new ideas, goods, services, and practices which are intended to be useful
there are no new ideas in halo. it's a FPS (done before) with a sci-fi story (done before) and vehicles (done before). it's a good game, i enjoyed playing it. halo did a lot of things right, but those things were all done before.

there really aren't any innovative games anymore. there haven't been in a while. not even from nintendo. hell, the most innovative thing i've seen come out of nintendo recently is ectoplankton, and it's really not that groundbreaking of a concept, and nintendo is quick to point out that it's not even really a game.

a game doesn't have to be innovative to be good. and innovative games often aren't.

[BabyJesus]

So what is being innovative to you?

Give an example.

Everybody can argue what isn't, so draw me a picture of what is innovative.

A HD in a console, so memory cards are not needed.

[mister_slim]

What in the *hell* are you talking about? What 30-40 hour console games? If anything, the majority of games are far too short and fall in the 8 - 15 hour range. The longest recent major game I can think of is RE4 and clocked in around 20 hours.

Anyway, I don't know about you but I don't spend my time playing a game to see the ending, I spend my time playing a game to play the game.

But go ahead, keep letting Sony and Nintendo think for you. We know you have trouble doing it yourself.
You really need to deal with that reading comprehension problem. To make this simpler for you:
They are just trying to get away from requiring players to spend 30 or 40 hours to see the ending, which everyone in the industry is [also] doing.

[Achilles]

there are no new ideas in halo. it's a FPS (done before) with a sci-fi story (done before) and vehicles (done before)… there really aren't any innovative games anymore. That’s what I was talking about, you're talking about innovation in such broad strokes as “it includes vehicles” or “it has a sci-fi storyline” as to make the word useless to you. How about it includes a new mechanic for driving those vehicles, or a new mechanic for how the camera moves when getting into a vehicle so that it doesn’t disorient the player. Or possibly how the AI works in a hierarchy system where they react to different allies in a different way. Maybe the whole idea of acceleration and adhesion which made Halo playable on a console. All of those are new ideas. And take Halo 2, it was the first FPS game to have a functional way to do multi-weapon-swapping. These are innovations, maybe the're too small to be acknowledged by people who just casually look at what a game is, but they affect the play experience none the less and they are studied by people who make games.

[Furious Wang]

You really need to deal with that reading comprehension problem. To make this simpler for you:
They are just trying to get away from require players to spend 30 or 40 hours to see the ending, which everyone in the industry is doing.


Maybe you should work on your ability to communicate ideas through text.

Your sentence reads that everyone in the industry is requiring players to spend 30 to 40 hours to see the ending - whether you include the "also" or not. The addition of "also" simply implies that Nintendo has also had a habit of doing so.

Your sentence should have been written as follows:

Like everyone in the industry, [Nintendo] is trying to get away from requiring players to spend 30 or 40 hours to see the ending of a game.

Simple enough for you? I mean, that's Jr. High curriculum.

[mister_slim]

Maybe you should work on your ability to communicate ideas through text.
You are right, the sentence was poorly phrased.