Forum > Gaming Discussion > CNET: Is Nintendo's Success a curse?
CNET: Is Nintendo's Success a curse?
<< prevnext >>
avatar
Country: NL
Comments: 9419
News Posts: 9625
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Sun, 23 Nov 2008 22:58:38
Punk Rebel Ecks said:

I want Majora's Mask 2

Oh God, YES!!!

Ravenprose said:

The main problem I have with Twilight Princess was that the fields just looked too barren. There's no high grass, very few trees, and hardly any bushes. Granted, TP is a GC game, so maybe that's something that'll be changed  in the next Wii Zelda. But I'd like to have a Zelda game that has the overall lushness of Oblivion. They should keep the cartoon graphics, just fill the world in more with more trees, bushes, high grass, and animals; lots of animals! I want to see deer, rabbits, birds, insects, ect. in the game world. I want to ride a horse into a field of high grass that's swaying in the breeze, and see birds scatter in the distance as I approach. I want to be able to climb a tree just because it's there. I want the bounderies of the levels to be more organic, and less obvious.

Note: I'm not suggesting that it should be an open-world game (I don't like those much), I just want them to make it feel more ALIVE.

Those are just some of the things I'd like to see in the next Zelda, but I'm not sure if the Wii could handle that or not.

They could make the field a bit nicer, but remember Epona has a big ass, so she does need some space. Filling it too much would make it too cluttered.

Your animal talk reminds me of the early TP interview. Animals were supposed to be a central theme of the game. If you remember the beginning of the game, you had squirrels, frogs, dogs, hawk, cats, etc. But than they just stopped. I guess the run out of time or changed their plans.

And I take it you mean non-hostile enemies in the field, because I remember being changed by a lot of birds once. Annoying bastards. Yeah, it would be cool to have monkeys, a game is always better with monkeys.  Other animals would be cool too. Majora's Mask overworld was more alive especially the city. TP has a more western deserted feel about it, but I did like running trough the field and trampling all these enemies.

I have my own ideas, but I will save them for later.

P.S. where is Vader? I thought he would like these kinds of discussions!

The VG Press
avatar
Country: US
Comments: 1750
News Posts: 65
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:18:30
Iga_Bobovic said:
Punk Rebel Ecks said:

I want Majora's Mask 2

Oh God, YES!!!

  I didn't say that. Nyaa

One of the site's forefathers.

Play fighting games!

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:38:36

Yeah, I meant non-hostile animals, Iga. Monkeys would be cool, but poo-flinging monkeys would be super awesome!

Edited: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 02:37:10

The VG Press

avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 15766
News Posts: 1041
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:04:30
Ravenprose said:
Punk Rebel Ecks said:

Is the scene of fighting hordes of enemies in Kameo technicall impressive? Yes. Is it more enjoyable then horseback fighting in Twilight Princess? No.

Actually, I do think it is a bit more enjoyable. Raming dozens of enemies with Kameo's horse is just plain fun. Simialr how it's fun running over pedestrians in GTA. There's something oddly satisfying about it. Happy

Which was much more fun in previous GTAs, might I add. Nyaa

    Children, our lives have been gongs striking; clamour and boasting; cries of despair; blows on the nape of the neck in gardens.

avatar
Country: NL
Comments: 9419
News Posts: 9625
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:52:50
Punk Rebel Ecks said:
Iga_Bobovic said:
Punk Rebel Ecks said:

I want Majora's Mask 2

Oh God, YES!!!

  I didn't say that. Nyaa

Well you mentioned Majora briefly, so I just used pure logic from there! Nintendo has already given up the "epic" Zelda (read OOT clone), I would not mind a quirky one now.

Ravenprose said:

Yeah, I meant non-hostile animals, Iga. Monkeys would be cool, but poo-flinging monkeys would be super awesome!

How about monkeys with huge mini-guns, like in Timesplitters. That would be so awesome, it would tear a hole in the very fabric of reality.

GASP

I have a awesome idea. Link should be a Beast Master. He would be able to take control of animals, like hawks, rats, horses, huge seamonsters and a monkey with a AK-47.

The VG Press
avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:09:44

I still haven't played Majora's Mask. Dammit Nintendo! Start releasing the good stuf on VC!

Link the Beast Master. LOL Actually, that sounds like it could be a lot of fun. Monkey's with guns while flinging poo rule!

The VG Press

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 6351
News Posts: 411
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:41:08
Ravenprose said:

I still haven't played Majora's Mask. Dammit Nintendo! Start releasing the good stuf on VC!

Link the Beast Master. LOL Actually, that sounds like it could be a lot of fun. Monkey's with guns while flinging poo rule!

Good

---

Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile
avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 03:45:51
Yodariquo said:
Ravenprose said:

I still haven't played Majora's Mask. Dammit Nintendo! Start releasing the good stuf on VC!

Link the Beast Master. LOL Actually, that sounds like it could be a lot of fun. Monkey's with guns while flinging poo rule!

Good

Is it that bad? I'll admit, I'm not too keen on the whole mask-transformation aspect much. It looks a little too weird.

Come to think about it, I really shouldn't be complaining about Nintendo's VC release of the game since I still haven't finished Ocarina of Time (damn water temple!)

The VG Press

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 6351
News Posts: 411
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 04:07:02
Ravenprose said:
Yodariquo said:
Ravenprose said:

I still haven't played Majora's Mask. Dammit Nintendo! Start releasing the good stuf on VC!

Link the Beast Master. LOL Actually, that sounds like it could be a lot of fun. Monkey's with guns while flinging poo rule!

Good

Is it that bad? I'll admit, I'm not too keen on the whole mask-transformation aspect much. It looks a little too weird.

Come to think about it, I really shouldn't be complaining about Nintendo's VC release of the game since I still haven't finished Ocarina of Time (damn water temple!)

Nah, just felt like trolling, but it's still got several issues.

---

Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile
avatar
Country: US
Comments: 14685
News Posts: 2158
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:02:44
Yodariquo said:
Ravenprose said:
Yodariquo said:
Ravenprose said:

I still haven't played Majora's Mask. Dammit Nintendo! Start releasing the good stuf on VC!

Link the Beast Master. LOL Actually, that sounds like it could be a lot of fun. Monkey's with guns while flinging poo rule!

Good

Is it that bad? I'll admit, I'm not too keen on the whole mask-transformation aspect much. It looks a little too weird.

Come to think about it, I really shouldn't be complaining about Nintendo's VC release of the game since I still haven't finished Ocarina of Time (damn water temple!)

Nah, just felt like trolling, but it's still got several issues.

I see. Yeah, most games have some issues to overcome. I'll give it a try whenever Ninty bothers to release it on VC.

The VG Press

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 31211
News Posts: 1716
Joined: 2008-06-22
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:34:58
Punk Rebel Ecks said:
Dvader said:


As for gameplay improvements. With Zelda, you are right huge worlds does not equal good gameplay, but sense of scale can help. Imagine stepping out into Hyrule and instead of the field you got in TP you have this breathtaking view of this massive world, detailed to perfection, sure you may not be able to visit it cause its not nesessary but it will give you a better sense of wonder. Its possible to add a lot more enemies. Imagine a large scale horseback battle with a ton of enemies on a large field. Imagine a dungeon where physics and small particles can play a much larger role cause the system can handle it. They could make a better fire system like in FC2. With more tech comes better tools with better tools comes more options and men like Miyamoto would do amazing things with those options.

You are living in fantasy land if you dont think a Zelda on the Wii 2 lets just say wouldn't be better off than another one on the Wii if they both are designed to their utmost potential.

No offense but your examples are just... lame. I mean more enemies on screens? Zelda already could have way more enemies on screen (just look at a Dynasty Warriors game or Dead Rising Wii). Nintendo just doesn't add more because it isn't needed. The combat in Zelda is so simplistic that adding more would just be overkill and annoying. And on horseback it would be even more annoying. I mean again Nintendo could have easily added more enemies on screen. In order to acheive the power the Wii couldn't handle you'd need like a hundred enemies and that would just be ridiculous (and extremely annoying). I mean I'm sorry why would I need to fight 100's of enemies at once? This is an action-adventure game not a hack-n-slash extraveganza. A dungeon with physics and small particles? With the physics well that's not how Zelda plays. The puzzles in Zelda have always been simple but not too simple as you move room to room solving piece by piece of a puzzle. And with physics well the Xbox could run Half-Life 2 so I'm sure what ever it is the Wii could handle it. As with small particles I don't even know what that even means so I doubt that it could be important. As with a fire system...fire system...fire system? What? I'm I going to burn villages or something? The only thing I can give credit is the better distance range as I admit that I am a huge sucker for.

But personally no Zelda wouldn't be a better game if it was on the Xbox 360 or even made to push the limits of my PC because all of it is just unnecessary. I seriously do not understand the whole "if it can't be done then it has to be better philosophy". If you looked at the majority of good games that have came out this year most of them didn't even push tech. The World Ends with You, A Vampyre Story, No More Heroes, Left 4 Dead, Apollo Justice, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Braid, Little Big Planet (trust me the physics in this game are nothing impressive), Dragon Quest IV, De Blob,  Locke's Quest, Castlevania OoE, WoW:WotLK, etc. with games like Persona 4, Tat vs Cap, and many others on the horizon. I mean yes there are games like GTAIV, MGSIV, Fable II, NGII, DMC4, Gears 2, Dead Space, and the likes. But if you tally it up the amount of good games that don't push technology against the ones that do you'd find a much higher number of quality.

And the answer is really simple actually. Just because do something doesn't mean it is more enjoyable. Is the scene of fighting hordes of enemies in Kameo technicall impressive? Yes. Is it more enjoyable then horseback fighting in Twilight Princess? No. Are the intense physics and precise car building and driving through the massive detailed worlds in Banjo Nuts and Bolts fun? Well most say no but let's pretend it is. Is it better then anything in Super Mario Galaxy? No. Was Crysis a great game? Yes. Was it as great as Half-Life 2 Episode 2? No. Was anything in Crysis as enjoyable as the fight with the tripods in Half-Life 2 or the sandlions in the underground railroad? No. Just because it is technically impressive doesn't make it better then something that isn't.

You know what would make Zelda a better game? How about having the game take place on a world hub much like Super Mario Galaxy did. How about ever one of the portals in that hub lead to a different Zelda world. Like one hub contains a lot of sea and sailing like in Windwaker, another contains a skyworld region in which you can fly creatures through, another your in some planet where you can manipulate gravity, another planet where you can manipulate time. How about actually adding the ablity to talk and add bonds to characters in order to unlock certain side quests. I mean this was a very likable feature in Majora's Mask, why not make a comeback? How about instead of the game progressing by visiting unvistited towns and going to that "right" spot. Why not just have the player explore to find treasure maps in a semi-open world then have them use them to find secret dungeons and progress that way, while towns can be held for side-quests and for purchasing items. I know all this sounds a little too ambious but I'm sure it could be toned down a bit and to me it is sure far more interesting then having the same thing with the ability of lighting things on fire.

If you look at all the great developers like Valve, Nintendo, Blizzard, Atlus R & D1, etc. when they make games they don't think about tech. but they think about gameplay and what they can do with the tools that are already avaliable to them. They realize just because one idea they have can't be accomplished doesn't mean they can think of 1,000 more just as ambious that can be done with the hardware level they are working on. In this day of age especially technology is so advanced it makes more sense for developers to first think of the 1,000's of things they can do with the hardware they are working on instead of the few things that they can't. Because let's face it this generation is half over and there are very few games that I would consider to be leaps and bounds over last gens top-tier in terms of "wow" (I.E. SoTC, RE4, GoW, Half-Life 2, etc.). Compare that to last generation where we had games like GTA III,  Splinter Cell, Devil May Cry, and Metal Gear Solid 2 all in the first 2 years of the generation.

Now I'm not saying that power in games isn't needed. Metal Gear Solid 4 wouldn't have been half the game it was if it was on the PS2. All I'm saying is that power isn't the only way to go and for some developers with the type of games they make (this would be Nintendo) it doesn't make sense to go in that direction. There are games that don't use immersion for technology. The World Ends With You, Persona 3, and Phoenix Wright would gain nothing if they were on the Wii or 360 even. I mean those tools you listed that would allow some of  Miyamoto's visions to be realized, in all honesty Miyamoto has made it clear (both in words and actions) that he doesn't think that way. He creates games through his imagination of design instead of just looking at the tech. and saying "maybe we can do this now." And even if there was something that could only be done on the 360. Like say he made a Mario game that revolved around mass destructable enviornments, deforming environments, and high end physics is that game automatically better then Galaxy? Of course not. I mean I'm sure it'll be fun but just because he can now do something on more powerful hardware doesn't make it better. Fun is fun.

Don't get me wrong I see where you are coming from. Yes another Zelda on the 360 possibly could have had a few bells and whistles over a Wii version. But honestly if all a formula can offer a franchise is bells and whistles then clearly it is time to rethink the formula.

Also  (not referring to anyone in this thread) why are people complaining about the Wii being underpowered? There are THREE platforms that offer cutting edge tech. Gamers always complain how companies never try anything new and how all games are the same or try nothing new. Yet when a company does (this includes others then Nintendo) gamers bitch about it. I mean really the Wii isn't suppose to be a powerhouse it has a different philosophy. I don't see games like Metal Gear Solid 4 or Crackdown on the Wii. But then again I don't see games like Zack and Wiki, No More Heroes, or Madworld on the PS3/360. Hell I don't even see any worthwhile niche games on those platforms other then Battle Fantasia, Valkyrie Chronicles, and possibly Disgaea 3. I mean do people stop to think of the advantages of having low cost less powerful hardware? But whatever it seems that in most niche groups things  that take risks only get respected when they die off. Just look at the SEGA Dreamcast, Clover Studios, the Neo Geo Pocket, etc.



Thats a whole lot to just say a better designed game is better than a poorly designed game, NO CRAP!

I was just talking about the technical side little things you could do, obviously to make a better game you actually have to design a better game. But do you not understand that with better tools, with more power you can make better games.  Give Miyamoto the power of the PS3 and the next Zelda game on that would be better than another Zelda on Wii (lets say they both have wiimotes, I am talking only about power here). There is no argument there, you can make better games with better technology. The team is not going anywhere, whatever ideas they have for a new Zelda will work on a more powerful system, it would just work better.

I dont get your argument, are you saying that if they had a more powerful system the Zelda team would just get lazy and make a better looking Zelda game and not change anything. Thats crazy, this is Nintendo, this is the best development team in the world, the stuff they would do with the tech they could have would be incredible.
660896.png
avatar
Country: US
Comments: 31211
News Posts: 1716
Joined: 2008-06-22
 
Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:36:27
Iga_Bobovic said:
Punk Rebel Ecks said:
I want Majora's Mask 2

Oh God, YES!!!

Ravenprose said:

The main problem I have with Twilight Princess was that the fields just looked too barren. There's no high grass, very few trees, and hardly any bushes. Granted, TP is a GC game, so maybe that's something that'll be changed  in the next Wii Zelda. But I'd like to have a Zelda game that has the overall lushness of Oblivion. They should keep the cartoon graphics, just fill the world in more with more trees, bushes, high grass, and animals; lots of animals! I want to see deer, rabbits, birds, insects, ect. in the game world. I want to ride a horse into a field of high grass that's swaying in the breeze, and see birds scatter in the distance as I approach. I want to be able to climb a tree just because it's there. I want the bounderies of the levels to be more organic, and less obvious.

Note: I'm not suggesting that it should be an open-world game (I don't like those much), I just want them to make it feel more ALIVE.

Those are just some of the things I'd like to see in the next Zelda, but I'm not sure if the Wii could handle that or not.

They could make the field a bit nicer, but remember Epona has a big ass, so she does need some space. Filling it too much would make it too cluttered.

Your animal talk reminds me of the early TP interview. Animals were supposed to be a central theme of the game. If you remember the beginning of the game, you had squirrels, frogs, dogs, hawk, cats, etc. But than they just stopped. I guess the run out of time or changed their plans.

And I take it you mean non-hostile enemies in the field, because I remember being changed by a lot of birds once. Annoying bastards. Yeah, it would be cool to have monkeys, a game is always better with monkeys.  Other animals would be cool too. Majora's Mask overworld was more alive especially the city. TP has a more western deserted feel about it, but I did like running trough the field and trampling all these enemies.

I have my own ideas, but I will save them for later.

P.S. where is Vader? I thought he would like these kinds of discussions!



I have been playing too many games but yes I love Zelda talk.

MM2 would be the greatest thing of all time. MM still the greatest game ever made.
660896.png
avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 15766
News Posts: 1041
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:33:04

So, futuristic Zelda... amirite?

    Children, our lives have been gongs striking; clamour and boasting; cries of despair; blows on the nape of the neck in gardens.

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 1750
News Posts: 65
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Wed, 26 Nov 2008 07:12:01
Dvader said:



Thats a whole lot to just say a better designed game is better than a poorly designed game, NO CRAP!

I was just talking about the technical side little things you could do, obviously to make a better game you actually have to design a better game. But do you not understand that with better tools, with more power you can make better games.  Give Miyamoto the power of the PS3 and the next Zelda game on that would be better than another Zelda on Wii (lets say they both have wiimotes, I am talking only about power here). There is no argument there, you can make better games with better technology. The team is not going anywhere, whatever ideas they have for a new Zelda will work on a more powerful system, it would just work better.

I dont get your argument, are you saying that if they had a more powerful system the Zelda team would just get lazy and make a better looking Zelda game and not change anything. Thats crazy, this is Nintendo, this is the best development team in the world, the stuff they would do with the tech they could have would be incredible.


.....I REALLY think you should read my post again because you really aren't getting what I am saying at all.

"Thats a whole lot to just say a better designed game is better than a poorly designed game, NO CRAP!"

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying just because an event pushes tech more then another said event doesn't make it better or more fun. That's it.  Why don't you try actually reading what I typed before getting all worked up.

"I was just talking about the technical side little things you could do, obviously to make a better game you actually have to design a better game."

When did I ever debate this? Actually I supported this statement.

"Give Miyamoto the power of the PS3 and the next Zelda game on that would be better than another Zelda on Wii (lets say they both have wiimotes, I am talking only about power here). There is no argument there, you can make better games with better technology."

It what way and how? Seriously before you couldn't give me a solid example. All you listed were things like physics and "small particles" (what does this even mean?) which are things the Wii could probably do for a Zelda game. There is a reason why you rarely see anything that isn't a shooter or a progressive action game on the "next gen powered consoles" and that's because nothing else fits or can really evolve. How can JRPG's benefit from more power? How can platformers? Hell these genres are so aliented by power that developers are forced to "innovate" by trying to harnass it and end up failing by creating RPG's with tons of pointless fetch quests or Platformers that are more about building cars then well platforming, and oddly these games biggest drawbacks was that they used too much tech. (Banjo Physics?).

And honestly Zelda falls into that category. While Twilight Princess was fun, outside the graphics there really wasn't anything that truly pushed the Gamecube. Zelda isn't a game like Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid where it relies on raw power for immersion or its gameplay. Just look at how the game's design I mean the majority of it is transfering from room to room. I mean the only thing I can see Zelda PS3 benefiting from is better graphics, and even then it isn't like Nintendo can't make a eye candy Zelda game, they did it with Mario.

This isn't 1998 anymore. There are extremely few things that have been left unexplored by developers due to limiting technology. This is why every modern game evolves due to progression by design and not technology. I can't even think of a game outside of Dead Rising, Crackdown, and Metal Gear Solid 4 that progressed in big part due to the extra horsepower. The majority of games progressed by learning from past games mistakes and exploring new methods. "The Witcher", you that game I'm always praising, hasn't progressed a bit from technology just solely by its design. Hell take out the detailed texutres and draw distances the game could have easily been done on the Wii. Technology has progressed far enough to a point where "raw power" doesn't make much of a differences anymore unless you're on the topic of just mere bells and whistels.

"The team is not going anywhere, whatever ideas they have for a new Zelda will work on a more powerful system, it would just work better."

One of the site's forefathers.

Play fighting games!

avatar
Country: CY
Comments: 7370
News Posts: 30
Joined: 2008-06-24
 
Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:41:31

I have to say i very much enjoyed the debate so far.  there have been some excellent points on either side, mostly very well presented.

my personal views seem to be more closely alligned to what punkRebel (and partly Iga) has been expressing so i will avoid repeating too much.  but what i feel the need to say is ... is there something wrong with me for still being wowed by last generation graphics?  honest to god i still play ps2/ngc/psp/wii (won't include xbox as my console and entire collection were lost when my flat in london was burgled a couple of weeks ago ... won't include N64 for the same reason) and i'm thinking goddamn this looks awesome!  maybe i'm more easily satisfied!  i'm still wowed by movies on DVD and honestly feel no need for anything looking even better than that (at the cost of paying 4 times as much for the movie and needing a new and expensive setup to begin with).

i'm not against progress by any means but to me the current generation of consoles (and even movie players) were forced upon people just so they had to buy new hardware all over again (just so they could play new games).  People have been buying CDs for 25 years (and vinyl which is my personal preference for over 50-60 years) ... has that stopped people from making new and exciting music?  has that stopped them from using new technology?  HELL FUCKIN' NO!

even if some of you feel that the graphical leap from the ps2 to the 360/ps3 was really necessary ... and were willing to pay the premium for it, will you be again ready to buy another console with marginally better graphics (call me crazy but i see the graphical difference between current and last gen as marginal) in a year or two?

___

Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu

The VG Press

avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 46392
News Posts: 59731
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:53:06
Cool that this is ongoing. I am too tired and want to give the discussion the responses it deserves. This is a topic that can run and run.

avatar
Country: NL
Comments: 9419
News Posts: 9625
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:29:47
bugsonglass said:

my personal views seem to be more closely alligned to what punkRebel (and partly Iga) has been expressing s

Yeah, I have beem mostly asking questions, I did not talk alot about my personal view!

Should I open a new thread just about the future of Zelda? I think we could focus the discussion a bit more!

Edited: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:30:45
The VG Press
avatar
Country: UN
Comments: 15766
News Posts: 1041
Joined: 2008-06-21
 
Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:29:27

I'll just say one thing, Punk, even though you hate Warioland you is my hero!

    Children, our lives have been gongs striking; clamour and boasting; cries of despair; blows on the nape of the neck in gardens.

avatar
Country: US
Comments: 31211
News Posts: 1716
Joined: 2008-06-22
 
Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:00:15
Sorry I haven't responded in a while. Punk if I misread something sorry. My opinion still stands, you can do better with better tech. I feel a game like MGS4, hell something like Assassin's Creed, Gears, Dead Rising, there are a lot, they would be worst if it were a last gen game. I am not saying they cant be done(some aspects of those games cant like the worls and population of AC, or the amount of zombies in DR)but what the better graphics, the hightened production values of it all brings to these games makes them better. Yes there are ton of games this gen that are basicall last gen games with new coats of paint like say DMC4, and they are not better than last gen games but thats on the developers.

And thats the part that never changes, the developers have to make these games great and with better tech they can make better games. We are seeing companies like EA actually making excellent titles now. Sure they borrow from a lot of games but I really think the power of these systems allows them to create their own nitch or at least polish up their games. In general games are of higher quality this gen than the last, I see it from all sorts of games that last gen would be nothing, this gen they at least have something interesting going for them. Take Dark Sector, its poor mans RE4, last gen this would be a nothing game, but this gen they made something of good quality. I think companies are a lot more careful with their spending and its resulting in better games.

You are saying that we have no where to go gameplay wise, true we have done most that we can. So if progress in technolgy is the only thing we have to look forward too then way do you want it to stop. You have not given me one good reason as to why we shouldn't have better tech. Everything you mentioned with Zelda can be done on a system with better tech and the game would be better overall. Even if its just the visuals that got a boost, if they are equal games the one with the better visuals is the better one. We should always be striving to move forward, there is no reason to want to stop this.

660896.png
avatar
Country: GB
Comments: 53
News Posts: 0
Joined: 2008-10-28
 
Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:55:45

I actually think next generation is going to be more critical to Nintendo than this one, when I say that I mean - where do they go after the Wii (or DS for that matter)?

It's clear-cut for traditional consoles, you beef up the hardware, you show a few videos/screenshots and half of the gaming population sits up and takes notice.  This, however, is difficult to do in Nintendos case if they still decide to adopt the mainstream audience.  You can't demo Wii Music 2, Wii Fit 2 etc. and expect people to immediately appreciate the differences in front of them, obviously Nintendo will advertise the hell out of Wii 2 like they have done with the Wii and the mainstream audience will take notice, but when you think long and hard about it, it's not immediately obvious what you could do with the next-gen Wii, and this is what's going to be fascinating about next gen, even more-so than this one.

Due to the significant hardware differences it's been difficult for 3rd parties to simply port titles over to the Wii, for this reason the Wii is missing out on some fantastic titles that are really blowing up on the PS3/360.  If Nintendo can afford to it would be really great if they could try and match-up in the hardware aspects of their next console, not only will it consume more 3rd party offerings it would keep Nintendo in the 'core' market, it will also keep the punters happy as well (an no Nintendo, besides the size of your wallet not everyone is thrilled about the selection).

So do they string out the Wii into Wii 2, or do they step up, use their profits and make a console that will not only storm the mainstream but also consume the core-gamers? Or, an even better question, have they already gotten the core gamers attention, 'does' every 360/PS3 own a Wii already?  If the answer is Yes they don't have to do jack shit and I can stop speculating about what I know deep down will never happen because it's what I want and not what Nintendo want Laughing.

Interesting times ahead.


Generated by FriendHorde.com.
Codes generated by www.friendhorde.com.
<< prevnext >>
Log in or Register for free to comment
Recently Spotted:
Foolz (4m)
Login @ The VG Press
Username:
Password:
Remember me?