Nintendo: Playing It Safe - Maybe Too Safe?

http://cube.ign.com/articles/561/561400p1.html

What are your thoughts on this article?

Personally, I agree with something someone said on IGN:

While I agree with many of the points made, I can't help but wonder why we only see these kind of pieces on IGN Cube's page. If anything, the entire industry is guilty of "Playing it safe".

EA releases the same game lineup every year, but folkes still get excited about the new Madden and Bond games.

Sony has seen 3 Rachet and Clanks and 3 Jaks this generation alone. Now I know that these are just developers and not console makers, but the only reason MS and SOny don't do the same, is because there in-house devs either suck, or don't turn out games with the same frequency as Nintendo.

No matter how much I agree with the article, I can't help but feel this is another example of Nintendo being held to a different set of rules and standards than the rest of the industry.

Great read though!

Click to expand...

I definitely agree with the quote more than the article. It is true that Nintendo does rehash a lot of their games, knowing they will sell well, but that doesn't really "isolate" their audience as the article suggested. That's like saying the PS2 is isolating their audience with Madden, or the Xbox with Halo. The fact that people want to play sports games and shooters more than Nintendo games really has nothing to do with Nintendo, and isn't going to be a problem solved by not remaking classic franchises and keeping the old fans.

However, I did agree with the point made about such games as Donkey Konga, as I have made it myself several times. If Nintendo is going to rehash it's franchises, then it should stay true to the franchise, if it's going to come up with a new idea, then it should create a new franchise. The Donkey Kong license was slapped on a unique game to help boost sales, and that's just a money grab, plain and simple.

On the flipside, I remember a lot of people criticised Nintendo for not making an SSB:M sequel to challenge the sales of Halo 2, San Andreas, and so on. Saying it was silly for them to sit on a gold mine franchise like that when every other system seems to be bringing out the "big guns". But when Nintendo makes sequels to games that are sure to sell, they get criticised for rehashing all their best titles.

Frankly I'd hate to be in Nintendo's position right now. Nintendo fans seem to be fine with rehashing titles as long as it's a title they enjoy. Then they seem to be yearning for originality when a series they never enjoyed is being remade. As well, Nintendo needs to get a new audience attracted to it's console by innovating and getting fresh games out, but it needs to do that in a way so that it doesn't alienate its current fan base. It seems like no matter which way they turn they're bound to dissapoint at least half of their customers.

Edit: I also really like this quote.

The DS alone is the best reason Nintendo has ever had to create totally new franchises. How does Nintendo expect to convince gamers that the DS is something totally new, when it can't even come up with any totally new games to sell it?

Click to expand...

As far as "playing it safe", I think that's the best example in the article. However, I also find it funny how the big games that are expected to sell PSP's are sequels to Gran Turismo and Metal Gear, and yet no one seems to complain about Sony playing it safe...

good points and all neph.

but aren't you looking forward to Fire Emblem, ADvance wars GC, the New Zelda..... metroid prime 2, and some other games? There has to be more than 1.

†B†V† :hat

btw... I do agree they have been sitting back more.

BUT this leads me to believe they are concentrating heavily on Revolution and establishing better ties, working on better strategies..etc.

When the end of the N64was coming.... this same thing happened.
Both the next Nintendo and Xbox are coming relatively soon.

†B†V† :hat

*I* was the FIRST on this board to say that the PSP's game libarary was crap because it was all rehases - go back and check the E3 threads.

Click to expand...

I meant "no one" as in the good people over at IGN. Generally all they ever do is cut down Nintendo on either "rehashing too many games" or "not rehashing enough games", but there is a lack of either on the IGN PS2/PSP channels. I didn't mean "no one" as in the people on this board, as I know you're views on sequels are quite strong.

About the only thing I agree with in the article is the Dinosaur Planet/Star Fox Adventures fiasco. It should have stayed Dinosaur Planet and left the Star Fox stuff totally out. The ground-based stuff of that game was excellent...it was the Arwing based missions that made the game terrible. Not because they were bad (they weren't) but because they were totally out of place.

On the other hand, with the current state of the industry, I can understand why Nintendo would feel a need to do that. The GC had just recently come out and they needed something for it. Would people have given it a chance if it was just Dinosaur Planet? There's no way anyone will ever know now, but honestly I don't think it would have happened. Many gamers (and not just Nintendo fans) are not as willing to try out new ideas as they used to be. Awesome games on every platform underperform because of name recognition. I mean, look at how Sega had to lower the price of their sports games just to even get Madden people to think about buying it. It's like, "Well I buy Madden every year and I like it, why should I try Sega's ESPN sports line of games?"

I looked forward to Dinosaur Planet before it was rescheduled for a GC release. I remember buying the expansion pak for my 64 telling myself I would use it for Majora's Mask and Dinosaur Planet, as it was required for both, but then the bumped DP to the Cube and I was very angry about that. Then when I heard they slapped in a Starfox name I was afraid they weren't going to make a true Starfox game for the Cube. I was later to realize that fear would come true, but in a very round about way.

Either way, I wanted the game when it was hyped for the 64 under the original theme, and I only bought it for GC because of what I saw from the 64 build. I should have saved my money...

That was a good read, but man, IGN really like to contradict themselves.

I couldn't tell which way they were trying to go with that article. Some paragraphs were about Nintendo rehasing too many of their franchises, whilst others were complaining about how GC games like Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker were too different.

If you don't know what point you're trying to make, don't write anything.

I'm starting to think that the only opinion that matters when it comes to video games and such is my own
I've noticed IGN is all over the map when it comes to things like this.