Nintendo's worst mistakes.

[Glubbfubb]

Some stupid Nitpicks I have

Not having any Nintendo Selects for switch games making them half off, even for games that were Nintendo Selects like DKC Tr and Pikmin 3.

Not using Miis on the Switch, Miitopia is great and all but most players only use Miis nowadays to play as Sans in Smash. I want Tomodachi 2.

Switch EShop Lag. Self explanatory.

 

[Geno Boost]

destroying nintendo fan projects and being out of touch of what fans would like to see is the worst.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

With the Mario movie set to come out this year, it got me thinking about a major, albeit not entirely game related error they've made; the failure to really utilize other expanded media to explore their franchises.

The underlying reason for this I suspect is rooted in the dual failures of 1993. The live action Mario Bros movie was one of the gaming's first really notable big screen failures and was seen as not holding much appeal to either general moviegoers and especially to SMB fans. Meanwhile, Phillips getting use of the Mario and Zelda licenses for the CD-I led to a series of fairly infamous releases, more known for their memes than quality of gameplay. The one two punch of both a Hollywood production critically and commercially failing the most famous Nintendo IP on top of another company's fairly inept use of their franchises may have sent a message to Nintendo that they could not trust other entities to adapt/handle their series.

There would be exceptions, of course. Various Japan only mangas would get released, odd novelties like the French DKC adaptation would pop up, and HAL Labs/Game Freak would be involved in making sure their franchises did get popular anime adaptations. But for the most part, 1994 and after is a major drop-off for a company that had been licensing several shows a few years earlier. An era that included numerous distinct Sonic animated series would not produce a single one for Mario. While this is unfortunate for my own selfish reasons (getting an actual sequel to the Nintendo Power Mario comics would have been a dream) I'd argue that it had a long term negative effect both creatively and commercially.

Story and character stagnation within different Nintendo IP's has been a problem in one fashion or another for some time now. Paper Mario's ambitious plots were moved away from, Star Fox's existing story points were underexplored outside multiple endings that were undone by a reboot, and the intriguing elements from Zelda's stories were ignored by design because most succeeding games had nothing to do with the previous one. That's not even getting into series that didn't have any constant titles or ones like mainline Mario circa the 2010s, which fell into becoming monotonous with the minimal narratives they did have.

Essentially, a lot of settings have had periods where media like comics, animated adaptations or even web shows could have been a real boon to series that experienced a creative sterility in the games proper. Maybe Mario is best served as being the Mickey Mouse of Nintendo with his mainline stories, but at least one recurring comic that really dove into the characters/elements introduced in the games could have been something to enrich the IP overall and maybe even serve as an inspiration to Mario titles themselves. And even if one argues that a mega series like Mario doesn't really need this sort of thing practically, there are many that very much could.

Given that more than a few franchises have gone into hibernation or diminishing returns when it comes to sales, EU media could be the kind of life preserver to keep them relevant in the minds of would be fans and allow them more momentum if/when Nintendo does decide to go back to them. Star Fox will likely be facing an uphill climb when it gets another game, given its sales struggles. Imagine one though that perhaps had a comic line and/or cartoon series in the past decade that showed off the scope of the SF universe and characters. No guarantee that it would greatly boost the next game's numbers, sure; however, it would at least have a stronger position in the merchandising/marketing space that a future title's promotion could then work off of.

I'm not saying that Nintendo more actively doing this in the past 30 years wouldn't have some risk or that every bit of outside material they tried would have been a slam dunk in terms of success; just that the kind of depth, range, & reach that the Sonic media empire's reached was something within reach of many first party series had there been an effort.

 

[dream1ng]

Shouldn't have been so draconian in the pre-3D era, wouldn't have hurt their relationships with third-parties so much once other viable platforms arose.

Shouldn't have backstabbed Sony.

Should be quicker to embrace new technology so as to keep up with where other companies are, making supporting Nintendo systems easier. Whether with CDs over cartridge, HD over SD, larger storage space, better online, etc. At the very least, there should be a higher-end SKU for some of this stuff.

Should've bought Rare out, they were a very valuable partner that provided IPs which covered many of Nintendo's internal shortcomings and catered to other demographics.

Shouldn't have leaned so hard into system gimmicks so that games lose the option to be played in a traditional playstyle, because after the novelty wears off, you're actively boxing out swaths of the audience. Some systems are salvageable, like the 3DS, some aren't, like the Wii U or Virtual Boy. Also makes third-party support a bigger ask, making it less likely.

Should have done about fifteen things different with the Wii U. But giving it a different name and actually marketing it properly would've been a start.

Should **** off with friend codes, it's 2022.

Shouldn't currently be so draconian with their properties online, because the vast majority of it is innocuous fan stuff. The takedowns and DMCAs are, by and large, ridiculous, and the negativity that spawns from them is a greater detriment than letting them be would be.

 

[Ridley_Prime]

With the Mario movie set to come out this year, it got me thinking about a major, albeit not entirely game related error they've made; the failure to really utilize other expanded media to explore their franchises.

The underlying reason for this I suspect is rooted in the dual failures of 1993. The live action Mario Bros movie was one of the gaming's first really notable big screen failures and was seen as not holding much appeal to either general moviegoers and especially to SMB fans. Meanwhile, Phillips getting use of the Mario and Zelda licenses for the CD-I led to a series of fairly infamous releases, more known for their memes than quality of gameplay. The one two punch of both a Hollywood production critically and commercially failing the most famous Nintendo IP on top of another company's fairly inept use of their franchises may have sent a message to Nintendo that they could not trust other entities to adapt/handle their series.

There would be exceptions, of course. Various Japan only mangas would get released, odd novelties like the French DKC adaptation would pop up, and HAL Labs/Game Freak would be involved in making sure their franchises did get popular anime adaptations. But for the most part, 1994 and after is a major drop-off for a company that had been licensing several shows a few years earlier. An era that included numerous distinct Sonic animated series would not produce a single one for Mario. While this is unfortunate for my own selfish reasons (getting an actual sequel to the Nintendo Power Mario comics would have been a dream) I'd argue that it had a long term negative effect both creatively and commercially.

Story and character stagnation within different Nintendo IP's has been a problem in one fashion or another for some time now. Paper Mario's ambitious plots were moved away from, Star Fox's existing story points were underexplored outside multiple endings that were undone by a reboot, and the intriguing elements from Zelda's stories were ignored by design because most succeeding games had nothing to do with the previous one. That's not even getting into series that didn't have any constant titles or ones like mainline Mario circa the 2010s, which fell into becoming monotonous with the minimal narratives they did have.

Essentially, a lot of settings have had periods where media like comics, animated adaptations or even web shows could have been a real boon to series that experienced a creative sterility in the games proper. Maybe Mario is best served as being the Mickey Mouse of Nintendo with his mainline stories, but at least one recurring comic that really dove into the characters/elements introduced in the games could have been something to enrich the IP overall and maybe even serve as an inspiration to Mario titles themselves. And even if one argues that a mega series like Mario doesn't really need this sort of thing practically, there are many that very much could.

Given that more than a few franchises have gone into hibernation or diminishing returns when it comes to sales, EU media could be the kind of life preserver to keep them relevant in the minds of would be fans and allow them more momentum if/when Nintendo does decide to go back to them. Star Fox will likely be facing an uphill climb when it gets another game, given its sales struggles. Imagine one though that perhaps had a comic line and/or cartoon series in the past decade that showed off the scope of the SF universe and characters. No guarantee that it would greatly boost the next game's numbers, sure; however, it would at least have a stronger position in the merchandising/marketing space that a future title's promotion could then work off of.

I'm not saying that Nintendo more actively doing this in the past 30 years wouldn't have some risk or that every bit of outside material they tried would have been a slam dunk in terms of success; just that the kind of depth, range, & reach that the Sonic media empire's reached was something within reach of many first party series had there been an effort.

Funny that you mention a Star Fox show, since there was this apparently.

Nintendo Cancelled Star Fox TV Show After Netflix Leaked Legend Of Zelda Plans

"Playtime is over, Star Fox!"

www.nintendolife.com

Netflix shouldn’t of gone leak happy, but Nintendo canceling a Star Fox show just punished Star Fox more than anything which was already a complete inactive IP.

Of all the current things Nintendo could partner with for their IPs having other media, still not happy with Illumination being chosen given their track record. Most of the revealed casting for the Mario movie does no favors for me either. I don’t expect it to be quality, but it’ll definitely make money with all the names involved. For some things, star power is all you need to get by even if it’s not good.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Funny that you mention a Star Fox show, since there was this apparently.

Nintendo Cancelled Star Fox TV Show After Netflix Leaked Legend Of Zelda Plans

"Playtime is over, Star Fox!"

www.nintendolife.com

Netflix shouldn’t of gone leak happy, but Nintendo canceling a Star Fox show just punished Star Fox more than anything which was already a complete inactive IP.

Of all the current things Nintendo could partner with for their IPs having other media, still not happy with Illumination being chosen given their track record. Most of the revealed casting for the Mario movie does no favors for me either. I don’t expect it to be quality, but it’ll definitely make money with all the names involved. For some things, star power is all you need to get by even if it’s not good.

TBF, the fact Netflix allowed such highly-classified info to leak told Nintendo that they couldn't be trusted. Remember, they were also working on a Zelda cartoon, and that met the same fate.

 

[Ridley_Prime]

TBF, the fact Netflix allowed such highly-classified info to leak told Nintendo that they couldn't be trusted. Remember, they were also working on a Zelda cartoon, and that met the same fate.

Apparently the Zelda one was live action, so fans didn’t lose much sleep over it, but not getting a puppet style Star Fox show was a real loss.

Imagine if Nintendo just cancelled everything of theirs that ever got leaked somehow at any point, games included. I don’t condone the Netflix thing if that’s how it really went down, but it’s the fans of such series that are punished more than anything when these kind of things happen.


Hm… Looking at it a bit more, the Star Fox show would’ve happened in the mid 2010’s. It wouldn’t of saved the series with Star Fox Zero’s inevitable flop, but it would’ve been one last nice thing to remember SF by.

Regardless of the Netflix thing, Nintendo’s always been their own problem when it comes to getting their franchises any kind of media outside of games, or at least good media. Even Illumination I can see having been chosen since they’re known for being cheap in animation, but since they still made money, Nintendo just saw them as a low-risk choice for a quick buck. Kinda like with the DiC cartoons Nintendo greenlit back in the day.

 

[xzx]

For me it's how they have destroyed the Paper Mario series. I will never forget them for that unless they fix this problem.

 

[Dinoman96]

Funny that you mention a Star Fox show, since there was this apparently.

Nintendo Cancelled Star Fox TV Show After Netflix Leaked Legend Of Zelda Plans

"Playtime is over, Star Fox!"

www.nintendolife.com

Netflix shouldn’t of gone leak happy, but Nintendo canceling a Star Fox show just punished Star Fox more than anything which was already a complete inactive IP.

Of all the current things Nintendo could partner with for their IPs having other media, still not happy with Illumination being chosen given their track record. Most of the revealed casting for the Mario movie does no favors for me either. I don’t expect it to be quality, but it’ll definitely make money with all the names involved. For some things, star power is all you need to get by even if it’s not good.

Do note that Nintendo was working with CollegeHumor for the Star Fox show, back in 2015. It was clearly just gonna be a small web series of some kind leading up to the release of Star Fox Zero.

In the end, we ended up getting The Battle Begins anime short anyways.

 

[fogbadge]

Shouldn't have backstabbed Sony.

was this the back stabbing that stopped sony from screwing them over?

For me it's how they have destroyed the Paper Mario series. I will never forget them for that unless they fix this problem.

surely that one is down to intelligent systems?

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

It's a bit on both;

Nintendo is part of the ones responsible for the whole Mario Character Mandate.

Intelligent Systems however, despite Miyamoto only suggesting it's a bit too much like TTYD, went an entirely different route on their own merits. So they're not entirely responsible for the Toads being overused. They are responsible for lackluster mechanics. The storytelling may be partially more on Miyamoto since they took his words a bit to heart, but they also asked if people want Story in their Mario Games(not specifying RPG's), which is why it got dumbed down. The question was poorly done.

So it's on both, but it's a multi-faceted issue.

...I don't really have any good ones to list here, though.

 

[fogbadge]

It's a bit on both;

Nintendo is part of the ones responsible for the whole Mario Character Mandate.

Intelligent Systems however, despite Miyamoto only suggesting it's a bit too much like TTYD, went an entirely different route on their own merits. So they're not entirely responsible for the Toads being overused. They are responsible for lackluster mechanics. The storytelling may be partially more on Miyamoto since they took his words a bit to heart, but they also asked if people want Story in their Mario Games(not specifying RPG's), which is why it got dumbed down. The question was poorly done.

So it's on both, but it's a multi-faceted issue.

...I don't really have any good ones to list here, though.

well the whole Mario character mandate thing shouldn’t be that restricting in theory I would have thought. Assuming I didn’t misunderstand what they meant

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

well the whole Mario character mandate thing shouldn’t be that restricting in theory I would have thought. Assuming I didn’t misunderstand what they meant

It shouldn't. But it can be interpreted more than one way too.

Maybe they didn't want to make unique Toads since it'd tempt them to use those particular ones again?

I don't like the mandate either, though. It's silly.

 

[fogbadge]

It shouldn't. But it can be interpreted more than one way too.

Maybe they didn't want to make unique Toads since it'd tempt them to use those particular ones again?

I don't like the mandate either, though. It's silly.

silly it certainly is. What I want to know is if they’re restricted to what characters they can use as well. Otherwise why not borrow some characters and bosses from the games after sunshine

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

silly it certainly is. What I want to know is if they’re restricted to what characters they can use as well. Otherwise why not borrow some characters and bosses from the games after sunshine

I think that's the case, that they can't use defined characters in future games bar extremely specific ones(Bowser, etc.). Might be why Kammy got removed, since she was introduced in Paper Mario.

Either way, the thing is kind of vague. I'm curious too.

 

[xzx]

Nintendo OWNS the Paper Mario series, so Intelligent Systems have practically nothing to do with how the series turned out to be. Everything is actually Miyamoto's fault. Sticker Star would basically be TTYD 2, but when Miyamoto saw that, he got angry at the team and demanded that they would "rework" the game since "it's too much like TTYD" and that stories aren't important anyway... Tanabe, who was the project manager of Sticker Star (I believe), thought that 7-year-olds were the target audience of Paper Mario games, and thus, we got Sticker ****.

fogbadge Verde Coeden Scalesworth

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Nintendo OWNS the Paper Mario series, so Intelligent Systems have practically nothing to do with how the series turned out to be. Everything is actually Miyamoto's fault. Sticker Star would basically be TTYD 2, but when Miyamoto saw that, he got angry at the team and demanded that they would "rework" the game since "it's too much like TTYD" and that stories aren't important anyway... Tanabe, who was the project manager of Sticker Star (I believe), thought that 7-year-olds were the target audience of Paper Mario games, and thus, we got Sticker ****.

fogbadge Verde Coeden Scalesworth

That's a massive exaggeration.

" Aside from wanting us to change the atmosphere a lot, there were two main things that Miyamoto-san said from the start of the project—"It's fine without a story, so do we really need one?" and "As much as possible, complete it with only characters from the Super Mario world. "
Neither are a case of him outright demanding it to be different in the way you're saying.

Iwata Asks

iwataasks.nintendo.com

In addition, the story thing was completely on Intelligent Systems(and more specifically one person), a different subset of people from regular Nintendo(yes, there's multiple divisions), who basically screwed up with their poll, asking the wrong question. For that matter, the card thing was already planned separately from anything Miyamoto said. Because they felt it was better to spice up the game with what their boss said kept in mind, the card system went from being a partial gimmick to the main way to play. (Hell, even the TVTropes page is misleading about his "demands". That's not the case here). Now, he did say it was "boring" in context of essentially being a part of the GC game. Understandably, that's a pretty major thing to hear, and since they want his approval, changed it in a heartbeat.

To further emphasize the issue with the story factor; while it's not nearly as massive as people think it is as an issue, they basically put a poll out on Club Nintendo with a poor wording. What happened is a very tiny pool of people had no clue they meant "rpg stories", thus, leading to a skewed set of answers. However, keeping in mind it's the best selling Paper Mario game to date in Japan, this also means that it caters to that audience better, which is pretty important to why the same direction was kept.

So basically; you can't blame all of Nintendo when it's a very select few people(which also makes this thread kind of weird, since it's never going to be all of Nintendo that makes an error) who caused the issue with the series for part of the fanbase, and then expect us to listen when you spread falsehoods of what actually happened. It's at most 3 people that affected this, and it's not even all of Intelligent Systems anyway. I don't like the new direction either(though some concepts of it, yes). But I also, as a game designer myself, knows it's not that simple. Frankly, I have things I'd love to blame on them too... but I know that's just pointless vitriol that rarely makes sense.

 

[xzx]

That's a massive exaggeration.

" Aside from wanting us to change the atmosphere a lot, there were two main things that Miyamoto-san said from the start of the project—"It's fine without a story, so do we really need one?" and "As much as possible, complete it with only characters from the Super Mario world. "
Neither are a case of him outright demanding it to be different in the way you're saying.

Iwata Asks

iwataasks.nintendo.com

In addition, the story thing was completely on Intelligent Systems(and more specifically one person), a different subset of people from regular Nintendo(yes, there's multiple divisions), who basically screwed up with their poll, asking the wrong question. For that matter, the card thing was already planned separately from anything Miyamoto said. Because they felt it was better to spice up the game with what their boss said kept in mind, the card system went from being a partial gimmick to the main way to play. (Hell, even the TVTropes page is misleading about his "demands". That's not the case here). Now, he did say it was "boring" in context of essentially being a part of the GC game. Understandably, that's a pretty major thing to hear, and since they want his approval, changed it in a heartbeat.

To further emphasize the issue with the story factor; while it's not nearly as massive as people think it is as an issue, they basically put a poll out on Club Nintendo with a poor wording. What happened is a very tiny pool of people had no clue they meant "rpg stories", thus, leading to a skewed set of answers. However, keeping in mind it's the best selling Paper Mario game to date in Japan, this also means that it caters to that audience better, which is pretty important to why the same direction was kept.

So basically; you can't blame all of Nintendo when it's a very select few people(which also makes this thread kind of weird, since it's never going to be all of Nintendo that makes an error) who caused the issue with the series for part of the fanbase, and then expect us to listen when you spread falsehoods of what actually happened. It's at most 3 people that affected this, and it's not even all of Intelligent Systems anyway. I don't like the new direction either(though some concepts of it, yes). But I also, as a game designer myself, knows it's not that simple. Frankly, I have things I'd love to blame on them too... but I know that's just pointless vitriol that rarely makes sense.

I get what you're saying, but remember that they still made Color Splash the way it is. Origami King changed things up a bit, but never returned to the original formula. So blaming Nintendo isn't too farfetched. This isn't a slip-up: the Paper Mario series has been on a major decline ever since Sticker Star. They would have returned to the old formula if they could. It's simple as that.

Also, why Sticker Star sold so well is because the game launched early on the 3DS, which was a success,

 

[fogbadge]

I get what you're saying, but remember that they still made Color Splash the way it is. Origami King changed things up a bit, but never returned to the original formula. So blaming Nintendo isn't too farfetched. This isn't a slip-up: the Paper Mario series has been on a major decline ever since Sticker Star. They would have returned to the old formula if they could. It's simple as that.

Also, why Sticker Star sold so well is because the game launched early on the 3DS, which was a success,

there’s absolutely no proof that IS want to return to the early formula

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

there’s absolutely no proof that IS want to return to the early formula

In fact, it looks a lot more like the opposite. They made the statement it's the new direction. The formula introduced in SS was outright the director's idea, not Miyamoto's. After the original plan was pretty much "Eh, I don't like it", a new direction was hard changed.

At the very least it's still turn-based, but the gimmicks really need fine-tuning(or more so, they can do better than having a very gimmicky battle. These are cool for boss battles, but terrible for regular ones...).

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

With the Mario RPG's I'd say the biggest mistake wasn't necessarily the shift in Paper Mario given that Color Splash was the only title that did weak sales. (Granted that's talking the financials, in terms of game quality the series does feel like it's never quite recovered from the drop after SPM.) I'd say the significant error was letting the Mario and Luigi series fall by the wayside and actually going with the remakes of Superstar Saga and Bowser's Inside Story for the dying 3DS, which not only had some of the lowest numbers of any Mario spin-off but also led to the end of AlphaDream.

Beyond the loss of a fairly solid developer that could have done work on other IP's eventually, the Switch itself lost a potential series that could have continued being an alternative for fans that wanted a more traditional Mario RPG and might have had the momentum to become a tent pole release for the company. It feels like a wasted opportunity we didn't see a true M&L sequel by Alphadream for Switch in 2018, Origami King in 2020, and perhaps another M&L sequel now.

 

[HYRULESHERO42]

Not sure if this is a 'worst mistake' but they shouldn't have stopped doing the Original Nintendo Seal of Quality. Would've definitely limited the amount of shovel ware the Wii had.

I do wish Nintendo would've bought Rareware back in the day just so the IPs would be 1st party. Banjo, Battletoads, Kameo - ah what could have been...

The name of the Wii U was and still is bad. I worked at a Best Buy in 2013-14 and the amount of customers that didn't know the Wii and Wii U were different things was very high. Funny enough the amount of dads who understood me when I'd say 'The Wii U is the super nintendo to the Wii's original nintendo' was extremely satisfying.

 

[Diddy Kong]

The Wii era where Nintendo clamored too much to the casual fan base was definitely up there. It impacted a lot of games, also those originally not meant for the casual fan base. It also lowered the difficulty in many games, and probably led to Brawl being such a slow game too.

Mario games from New Super Mario Bros up forward , another thing I felt was weak on their part. Mario becoming more casual as time went by, up until Odyssey probably.

In general the favoritism of the Mario franchise, Donkey Kong is as much as their poster child or should've been. It's weird how both branched from the same source game but one gets all the attention and the other next to nothing. Nintendo should've actively put both Rare and Retro Studios as dedicated Donkey Kong producers with the same ambitions as they started out with the original Donkey Kong Country, and DKC Returns.

 

[Ridley_Prime]

Ya know, while I gave Nintendo a fair defense in an earlier post when it came to the Sony thing pre-Playstation, their arrogance still cost them. Nintendo also screwed over the likes of Argonaut at the time with the unreleased Star Fox 2 who didn’t get a dime off of making that game. Have to face that Nintendo’s been inept and alienated outside partners, even in what was seen as their golden years. That ineptitude later led to them losing Rare and other partners. If one was to really break it down, Nintendo has a bad track record of getting along with anyone that isn’t well, them.

Is why even Western studios that they do own like Retro have been some of the most mismanaged in the entire industry, whom Nintendo lets rot until they’re occasionally brought in to do some game. We may never know what Retro was doing in between DKCTF and MP4 for instance, but even the cordial Metroid fans aside from myself agree that the rebooted DKC series should’ve gotten a 3rd game by them before moving on. Even with MP4 and the belief that it’ll finally get shown more soon, it’s not a good look when their last game was TF a decade ago. If Retro was anywhere near well managed, you'd see a better release schedule. Is why it's good that Metroid later got MercurySteam whom are fans of the series but not owned by Nintendo itself.


To make matters worse, DK got put on a hiatus again for no good reason. At this point too, DKC's been without a new game longer than the period between the Microsoft Rare buyout and when Retro first touched the series. I never cared much for the lukewarm spinoffs DK got during that period in between, but still.

It's commonly believed that Prime 4 was being developed by Bandai Namco Singapore first (going by a LinkedIn profile mentioning a FPA exclusive for Switch), then Retro Studio rebooted it with the development restart. While Namco’s not flawless at developing games, I can’t picture them doing that badly to the point of the game being scrapped and rebooted by another team. There must’ve been some kind of clash between them and Kensuke Tanabe. Meanwhile, Retro just does what they’re told, for better or worse. I genuinely would've liked to see how a mainline Prime game would've been under a different team, but I guess we gotta live with the mentality that only Retro can do it, and anything else they may have been working on be damned.

 

[fogbadge]

Ya know, while I gave Nintendo a fair defense in an earlier post when it came to the Sony thing pre-Playstation, their arrogance still cost them. Nintendo also screwed over the likes of Argonaut at the time with the unreleased Star Fox 2 who didn’t get a dime off of making that game. Have to face that Nintendo’s been inept and alienated outside partners, even in what was seen as their golden years. That ineptitude later led to them losing Rare and other partners. If one was to really break it down, Nintendo has a bad track record of getting along with anyone that isn’t well, them.

Is why even Western studios that they do own like Retro have been some of the most mismanaged in the entire industry, whom Nintendo lets rot until they’re occasionally brought in to do some game. We may never know what Retro was doing in between DKCTF and MP4 for instance, but even the cordial Metroid fans aside from myself agree that the rebooted DKC series should’ve gotten a 3rd game by them before moving on. Even with MP4 and the belief that it’ll finally get shown more soon, it’s not a good look when their last game was TF a decade ago. If Retro was anywhere near well managed, you'd see a better release schedule. Is why it's good that Metroid later got MercurySteam whom are fans of the series but not owned by Nintendo itself.


To make matters worse, DK got put on a hiatus again for no good reason. At this point too, DKC's been without a new game longer than the period between the Microsoft Rare buyout and when Retro first touched the series. I never cared much for the lukewarm spinoffs DK got during that period in between, but still.

It's commonly believed that Prime 4 was being developed by Bandai Namco Singapore first (going by a LinkedIn profile mentioning a FPA exclusive for Switch), then Retro Studio rebooted it with the development restart. While Namco’s not flawless at developing games, I can’t picture them doing that badly to the point of the game being scrapped and rebooted by another team. There must’ve been some kind of clash between them and Kensuke Tanabe. Meanwhile, Retro just does what they’re told, for better or worse. I genuinely would've liked to see how a mainline Prime game would've been under a different team, but I guess we gotta live with the mentality that only Retro can do it, and anything else they may have been working on be damned.

according to someone from microsoft, nintendo, activision were in a bidding war with them for rare

 

[Ridley_Prime]

Heard about the bidding war thing before, but took it with a grain of salt.


Also, one other thing about Retro Studio that slipped my mind mentioning, is most don't know the development cycles behind all 3 Prime games were disasters and mired in issues such as crunch and employee abuse; not just the grunt level programmers but also artists and whatnot. Nintendo bought out Retro after Prime 1 to mash some heads together and even then it appears the culture there is very messy.

Despite the Matt McMuscles What Happened episode on Prime 1, all the DidYouKnowGaming videos on it and the trilogy, etc, it's amazing how much you still learn as to the behind-the-scenes development on the Prime series over time, for better or worse. Wild how such a poorly managed studio had come out with nothing but banger games, including the two DKC titles after. That said, I have little doubt that Prime 4 will have had crunch and all that stuff too. Maybe Rare got lucky in a way not being bought by Nintendo, far as employee welfare goes.

Back when I was younger and ignorant, the idea of working at something like Retro Studio was a dream job of mine, especially considering that I live in Texas like them, but like with most things as I later learn more about them, I got disillusioned.

 

[fogbadge]

Heard about the bidding war thing before, but took it with a grain of salt.


Also, one other thing about Retro Studio that slipped my mind mentioning, is most don't know the development cycles behind all 3 Prime games were disasters and mired in issues such as crunch and employee abuse; not just the grunt level programmers but also artists and whatnot. Nintendo bought out Retro after Prime 1 to mash some heads together and even then it appears the culture there is very messy.

Despite the Matt McMuscles What Happened episode on Prime 1, all the DidYouKnowGaming videos on it and the trilogy, etc, it's amazing how much you still learn as to the behind-the-scenes development on the Prime series over time, for better or worse. Wild how such a poorly managed studio had come out with nothing but banger games, including the two DKC titles after. That said, I have little doubt that Prime 4 will have had crunch and all that stuff too. Maybe Rare got lucky in a way not being bought by Nintendo, far as employee welfare goes.

Back when I was younger and ignorant, the idea of working at something like Retro Studio was a dream job of mine, especially considering that I live in Texas like them, but like with most things as I later learn more about them, I got disillusioned.

did the videos cite their sources?

 

[Ridley_Prime]

The videos didn't really cover the crunch part; that came from other people. I don't remember all of which the videos cited far as what they did cover, but I vaguely recall them citing some things.

 

[fogbadge]

The videos didn't really cover the crunch part; that came from other people. I don't remember all of which the videos cited far as what they did cover, but I vaguely recall them citing some things.

well what people?

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Ya know, while I gave Nintendo a fair defense in an earlier post when it came to the Sony thing pre-Playstation, their arrogance still cost them. Nintendo also screwed over the likes of Argonaut at the time with the unreleased Star Fox 2 who didn’t get a dime off of making that game. Have to face that Nintendo’s been inept and alienated outside partners, even in what was seen as their golden years. That ineptitude later led to them losing Rare and other partners. If one was to really break it down, Nintendo has a bad track record of getting along with anyone that isn’t well, them.

Is why even Western studios that they do own like Retro have been some of the most mismanaged in the entire industry, whom Nintendo lets rot until they’re occasionally brought in to do some game. We may never know what Retro was doing in between DKCTF and MP4 for instance, but even the cordial Metroid fans aside from myself agree that the rebooted DKC series should’ve gotten a 3rd game by them before moving on. Even with MP4 and the belief that it’ll finally get shown more soon, it’s not a good look when their last game was TF a decade ago. If Retro was anywhere near well managed, you'd see a better release schedule. Is why it's good that Metroid later got MercurySteam whom are fans of the series but not owned by Nintendo itself.


To make matters worse, DK got put on a hiatus again for no good reason. At this point too, DKC's been without a new game longer than the period between the Microsoft Rare buyout and when Retro first touched the series. I never cared much for the lukewarm spinoffs DK got during that period in between, but still.

It's commonly believed that Prime 4 was being developed by Bandai Namco Singapore first (going by a LinkedIn profile mentioning a FPA exclusive for Switch), then Retro Studio rebooted it with the development restart. While Namco’s not flawless at developing games, I can’t picture them doing that badly to the point of the game being scrapped and rebooted by another team. There must’ve been some kind of clash between them and Kensuke Tanabe. Meanwhile, Retro just does what they’re told, for better or worse. I genuinely would've liked to see how a mainline Prime game would've been under a different team, but I guess we gotta live with the mentality that only Retro can do it, and anything else they may have been working on be damned.

Part of the issue feels rooted in that there are certain more Western oriented series that Nintendo struggles to understand their core popularity, feels reluctant to utilize former developer's concepts, or doesn't really know how to go particularly deep with themselves.

They had neither Rare nor Retro for some time and failed to really build on the momentum the DKC series had during that, with even the solidly designed Jungle Beat failing to make many waves because of it being tied to a gimmick peripheral. None of the three most likely explanations for era (this being a failed attempt to rebrand Donkey Kong, Nintendo not trusting various studios or themselves to make a proper Country followup until Retro, failing to see the value of another actual DKC game) really paints their competence with the IP in the best light. The Rare GBA remake of DKC1 being the best-selling Donkey Kong title from 2000-2009 is in many ways is a telling indictment of Nintendo's decision-making from the time; a remaster of a near decade old game made by a competitor owned developer being an easier sell to the market than all the experiments they were trying.

Metroid has suffered from similar problems at times, and also went through an era where Nintendo was seemingly at a loss to know what to really do with it. Some of that is from the Metroidvania taking off more in North America/Europe than Japan, and some of it is the franchise being a darker one that the company has struggled to effectively market. While it's impossible to know if the relatively mild commercial success of Other M had a significant effect, Nintendo resorting to three different Western studios for its subsequent games (Next Level, Mercury Steam, & Retro) does potentially suggest a lack of confidence in handing the keys of the franchise to any other developers back home.

In taking certain Japan appealing IP's like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade and getting them worldwide acclaim, Nintendo has been very good in the last decade. Doing the inverse has been very touch and go.

 

[fogbadge]

Part of the issue feels rooted in that there are certain more Western oriented series that Nintendo struggles to understand their core popularity, feels reluctant to utilize former developer's concepts, or doesn't really know how to go particularly deep with themselves.

They had neither Rare nor Retro for some time and failed to really build on the momentum the DKC series had during that, with even the solidly designed Jungle Beat failing to make many waves because of it being tied to a gimmick peripheral. None of the three most likely explanations for era (this being a failed attempt to rebrand Donkey Kong, Nintendo not trusting various studios or themselves to make a proper Country followup until Retro, failing to see the value of another actual DKC game) really paints their competence with the IP in the best light. The Rare GBA remake of DKC1 being the best-selling Donkey Kong title from 2000-2009 is in many ways is a telling indictment of Nintendo's decision-making from the time; a remaster of a near decade old game made by a competitor owned developer being an easier sell to the market than all the experiments they were trying.

Metroid has suffered from similar problems at times, and also went through an era where Nintendo was seemingly at a loss to know what to really do with it. Some of that is from the Metroidvania taking off more in North America/Europe than Japan, and some of it is the franchise being a darker one that the company has struggled to effectively market. While it's impossible to know if the relatively mild commercial success of Other M had a significant effect, Nintendo resorting to three different Western studios for its subsequent games (Next Level, Mercury Steam, & Retro) does potentially suggest a lack of confidence in handing the keys of the franchise to any other developers back home.

In taking certain Japan appealing IP's like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade and getting them worldwide acclaim, Nintendo has been very good in the last decade. Doing the inverse has been very touch and go.

in fairness it was Nintendo who was looking to make a new DK game when they handed it to retro

 

[Ridley_Prime]

well what people?

A former Retro dev, for one.

https://www.ign.com/articles/metroid-prime-crunch-retro-studios

Apparently one thing I had overlooked thing was attempts to end crunch at Retro, so that is good to hear.

Part of the issue feels rooted in that there are certain more Western oriented series that Nintendo struggles to understand their core popularity, feels reluctant to utilize former developer's concepts, or doesn't really know how to go particularly deep with themselves.

They had neither Rare nor Retro for some time and failed to really build on the momentum the DKC series had during that, with even the solidly designed Jungle Beat failing to make many waves because of it being tied to a gimmick peripheral. None of the three most likely explanations for era (this being a failed attempt to rebrand Donkey Kong, Nintendo not trusting various studios or themselves to make a proper Country followup until Retro, failing to see the value of another actual DKC game) really paints their competence with the IP in the best light. The Rare GBA remake of DKC1 being the best-selling Donkey Kong title from 2000-2009 is in many ways is a telling indictment of Nintendo's decision-making from the time; a remaster of a near decade old game made by a competitor owned developer being an easier sell to the market than all the experiments they were trying.

Metroid has suffered from similar problems at times, and also went through an era where Nintendo was seemingly at a loss to know what to really do with it. Some of that is from the Metroidvania taking off more in North America/Europe than Japan, and some of it is the franchise being a darker one that the company has struggled to effectively market. While it's impossible to know if the relatively mild commercial success of Other M had a significant effect, Nintendo resorting to three different Western studios for its subsequent games (Next Level, Mercury Steam, & Retro) does potentially suggest a lack of confidence in handing the keys of the franchise to any other developers back home.

In taking certain Japan appealing IP's like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade and getting them worldwide acclaim, Nintendo has been very good in the last decade. Doing the inverse has been very touch and go.

It still hurts knowing about the cancelled Metroid 3DS game by Next Level that ended up becoming Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon. Then Next Level's name got attached to Federation Force which got out of development hell... Their scrapped game at least had Samus as the main character though which there was some concept art for.

I do believe Next Level could've given a decent Metroid if given the chance, but unfortunately they'll just be remembered for a mistimed spinoff. Team Ninja on the other hand, while decent in their own right, probably wasn't a good fit for Metroid in hindsight. Sakamoto was fortunate to get MercurySteam on his radar after the critical failure of Other M.

And yeah, is good that Nintendo can get worldwide appeal with their Japanese handled IP's at least. Weebs are a thing though, so of course FE and the like was gonna get traction over in the West too.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

in fairness it was Nintendo who was looking to make a new DK game when they handed it to retro

And that's definitely to their credit. It's just that one does wonder if it was a case of wanting Retro on it and having to wait till Prime 3 was done, or if Nintendo resigned itself to the idea of a Western studio being the best fit for it after their own mixed successes.

I think a factor that was at work was that Nintendo had a long hiatus from doing their own platformers, and it wasn't until the latter part of the aughts that they got back into it. It's easily forgotten now, but there was a near decade long period (July 96 through April 06) where there was only one new mainline Mario title in Sunshine. Everything else was ports, re-releases, or spin-offs. And if even the Golden Goose like that is not getting brand new mainline releases, DK probably wasn't going to either; possibly because 2D wasn't back in vogue and a 3D followup to DK64 lacked a strong advocate by anyone in the company. The big mega sales of NSMB (in combination with the surprisingly strong numbers by the GBA DKC remakes) may have been the thing to get Nintendo really back into the genre and sense that traditional 2D platforming was an area Donkey Kong could thrive in beyond the experimental context that birthed something like Jungle Beat.

 

[Sucumbio]

Prolly already mentioned but

NSO ... I don't mind what we got but it's pretty terrible compared to VC

NWC ... Brawl online was pretty aggravating at times. It got better since but hopefully one day Nintendo will invest in better online

I may think of more.

 

[fogbadge]

And that's definitely to their credit. It's just that one does wonder if it was a case of wanting Retro on it and having to wait till Prime 3 was done, or if Nintendo resigned itself to the idea of a Western studio being the best fit for it after their own mixed successes.

no from what i read miyamoto was wanting someone to do it and someone recommended retro so he handed it over to them