The Nintendo "Off My Chest" thread (BE CIVIL)

[Oracle Link]

It should be called Pokémon Dimensions then.
----
Wind Waker feels so conclusive and final for a Zelda game, as if it was everything the series (or at least Ocarina of Time and on) was working towards.

In fact, it's so conclusive and final, that in hindsight, it feels like anything short of a big reboot or retool would feel unnecessary with Wind Waker's "let go of the past" message. It pretty much gimped any chance for the usual Zelda tropes to be played again and be received well. I think this is a major reason why the games after it and before ALBW or BotW are so divisive, as they do feel like unnecessary followups/prequels to things that didn't need any more.

True I also think the Way Windwaker handled the whole let go of the PAst Bit Makes Sense (Unlike some things i hear nowadays)
Like Link and The regular Enemys and Bosses would all still be on the Table While they get rid of Hyrule, Sorta Zelda and Ganondorf three Things That are 100% NOT Required for a Zelda Game!
Like Nowadays it seems like people rather kick out Link than any of the Other Things which just baffles me i mean link is the LINK to the Zelda World while Hyrule is just a small Piece of zeldas world, Zeldas Basically a Macguffin and Ganondorf is not in every game!

 

[Quillion]

Basically Nintendo revolution is nice, but a Nintendo evolution tends to be nicer.

They aren't mutually exclusive though.

There're definitely fine lines between changing so much you lose the identity, changing so little that a new installment is pointless, and hitting a happy middle ground where evolution and revolution work hand-in-hand. Then you have something like Star Fox where the evolution and revolution seem to be at war with each other.

In line with that, I think Nintendo's brand of "gimmick sequels" are a fairly and inherently good way of making sequels. Better than something so unfocused like Sonic or something too focused like Call of Duty. Mario's got it down pat with the water pack, gravity, 2D mechanics in 3D, and Capturing. Zelda may be a mixed bag in its sequel gimmicks, but it's still preferable to something like NSMB. Even Kirby's modern era has the Super Abilities, Hypernova, Robobot armor, and Friend system. Gimmicks change the game up in a visible and memorable way while keeping a lot of the foundation, then they can discard that change and find some other gimmick. It makes each installment stand out from the last and next instead of running the act dry.

True I also think the Way Windwaker handled the whole let go of the PAst Bit Makes Sense (Unlike some things i hear nowadays)
Like Link and The regular Enemys and Bosses would all still be on the Table While they get rid of Hyrule, Sorta Zelda and Ganondorf three Things That are 100% NOT Required for a Zelda Game!
Like Nowadays it seems like people rather kick out Link than any of the Other Things which just baffles me i mean link is the LINK to the Zelda World while Hyrule is just a small Piece of zeldas world, Zeldas Basically a Macguffin and Ganondorf is not in every game!

I feel the best way to handle the Zelda series is to have a Link whose initial adventure involves fighting Ganon with Zelda, then make a sequel where he explores a new land without the latter two.

Yeah, I know they've done that with OoT->MM and WW->PH and ST, but it helps make the world of Zelda bigger while having the marketable elements in. TBH, I even think having a direct sequel to BotW featuring Ganondorf is rather unnecessary.

 

[UserKev]

Gonna try to be as blunt as possible. We do not need Pokemon to go "Open world" and trope might as well be dead in the water. I'm on the fence that a Pokemon open world will never simultaneously work. In the Pokemon anime, there is WAY too much to compare in comparison to what we want.

The task is beyond daunting. And if feat is ever reached, the developers will need to live up to the same massive accomplishment at stake.

 

[Quillion]

Gonna try to be as blunt as possible. We do not need Pokemon to go "Open world" and trope might as well be dead in the water. I'm on the fence that a Pokemon open world will never simultaneously work. In the Pokemon anime, there is WAY too much to compare in comparison to what we want.

The task is beyond daunting. And if feat is ever reached, the developers will need to live up to the same massive accomplishment at stake.

You think a game that encourages exploration to find different Pokémon in different areas alongside rare items and other secret areas... shouldn't be open world?

Sure, maybe you don't like Ubisoft repetitive open worlds. Sure, there are ways to have beautiful, explorable areas without full open world as seen with the mainline Xenoblade games.

But if you honestly think that a game that even at its most linear, thrives on exploration on your own pace and has suffered when it focuses on guided linearity, well that's just anti-open world hipsterism at work. You clearly just want to not like the popular thing.

 

[Torgo the Bear]

I feel like Pokémon is one franchise that is definitely built for an open or semi-open world- it just needs to be handled a little better than Scarlet and Violet… specifically with level scaling for the Gym leaders and other main challenges. Of course, Legends also made it work pretty well with the semi-open layout, so I wouldn’t mind being left to that again. Although, that style does feel much more attuned to Legends’s style, so we’ll probably only see it again in more Legends games.

 

[HyperSomari64]

Pokémon deserves to have representation in Mario Kart. Many people ask for Kirby and their Warp Star, and i even heard a vocal minority that wants Caeda and her pegasus. But for Pokémon, NOTHING!!! (search "Mario Kart Fan Roster" and zero Pocket Monsters in it)
No matter what 31% stake can prevent from this happening. TPC is a little sissy with what content they want.
And if the "Pokémon can't drive Go-Karts/Bikes", then i request to Nintendo Pokéball-themed wheels or any of the places of the games (With Kanto Pandering is predictable to have the Pokémon Tower of the Safari Zone; and if we go to the better route, my picks are The Ultra Space and the Distortion World)

 

[Perkilator]

I feel like Pokémon is one franchise that is definitely built for an open or semi-open world- it just needs to be handled a little better than Scarlet and Violet… specifically with level scaling for the Gym leaders and other main challenges. Of course, Legends also made it work pretty well with the semi-open layout, so I wouldn’t mind being left to that again. Although, that style does feel much more attuned to Legends’s style, so we’ll probably only see it again in more Legends games.

Speaking of Pokémon, I think it’s time we stopped clinging to certain types for Gyms and instead base them on gameplay mechanics in Pokémon, especially with the more semi-open structure.

 

[Torgo the Bear]

Speaking of Pokémon, I think it’s time we stopped clinging to certain types for Gyms and instead base them on gameplay mechanics in Pokémon, especially with the more semi-open structure.

Gameplay mechanics are a cool way to do it, but I’d kind of rather have Gyms themed around ideas or environments rather than Types. Like, for example, we could have a Circus gym leader who uses Pokémon based on animals you’d see in a circus like Pyroar, Donphan, Farigiraf, and Passimian.

although yeah, the mechanics and themes should probably be combined

 

[Lenidem]

Pokémon deserves to have representation in Mario Kart. Many people ask for Kirby and their Warp Star, and i even heard a vocal minority that wants Caeda and her pegasus. But for Pokémon, NOTHING!!! (search "Mario Kart Fan Roster" and zero Pocket Monsters in it)
No matter what 31% stake can prevent from this happening. TPC is a little sissy with what content they want.
And if the "Pokémon can't drive Go-Karts/Bikes", then i request to Nintendo Pokéball-themed wheels or any of the places of the games (With Kanto Pandering is predictable to have the Pokémon Tower of the Safari Zone; and if we go to the better route, my picks are The Ultra Space and the Distortion World)

Since this is the "Off my chest" topic, I'll say the opposite: I totally dislike the cross-over aspect Mario Kart has taken on recently. I think the Mario cast can and should stand on itself. It's huge and varied, especially if you include the Yoshi, DK, and Wario franchises - and Luigi's Mansion, which is kinda already there with some tracks and karts but still lacks important drivers like E. Gadd.

If I was in charge of the roster, I would fire Link and the Splatoon and Animal Crossing teams, as well as the made-up characters (Pink Gold Peach and baby variants) and most mooks (some can stay, like Koopa or Shy Guy) to make room for "real individual Mario Extended Universe characters", like Kamek or Diddy and Co.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

If I was in charge of the roster, I would fire Link and the Splatoon and Animal Crossing teams, as well as the made-up characters (Pink Gold Peach and baby variants) and most mooks (some can stay, like Koopa or Shy Guy) to make room for "real individual Mario Extended Universe characters", like Kamek or Diddy and Co.

I actually love the idea of made-up characters for Mario spin offs - the metal and baby variants are dumb, but characters like Waluigi and Toadette are some of my favourites so it'd be nice to see more new unique characters like them, even if they're just "established character but EVIL" or "established character but GIRL" on a conceptual level. I also think there should be way more mooks in Mario Kart, where's Goomba and Buzzy Beetle's time to shine? I love playing as generic non-named species members - totally agree on crossovers and Wario/DK/Yoshi/RPG characters though

 

[Lenidem]

I actually love the idea of made-up characters for Mario spin offs - the metal and baby variants are dumb, but characters like Waluigi and Toadette are some of my favourites so it'd be nice to see more new unique characters like them, even if they're just "established character but EVIL" or "established character but GIRL" on a conceptual level. I also think there should be way more mooks in Mario Kart, where's Goomba and Buzzy Beetle's time to shine? I love playing as generic non-named species members - totally agree on crossovers and Wario/DK/Yoshi/RPG characters though

I somehow totally forgot that Waluigi and Toadette were originally made-up! In my mind, they both don't fall into the same category as other variants. Yes, their concept is basically "Evil Luigi" and "Girl Toad", but they actually feel like, well, themselves. Baby Rosalina is still Rosalina (when she was young), Pink Gold Peach is still Peach (with some unholy power-up). So yeah...

Concerning the mooks, I think it's generally better to have them as items (like Boo), or on the road as obstacles (like the Goomba and Piranha Plant), or in Lakitu's case, as the most important guy on the circuit bar the drivers. I would rather have bosses and semi-bosses as drivers. For instance, Bob-Omb is perfectly fine as an item, and rather than having him playable, I would prefer King Bob-Omb.

 

[fogbadge]

Gonna try to be as blunt as possible. We do not need Pokemon to go "Open world" and trope might as well be dead in the water. I'm on the fence that a Pokemon open world will never simultaneously work. In the Pokemon anime, there is WAY too much to compare in comparison to what we want.

The task is beyond daunting. And if feat is ever reached, the developers will need to live up to the same massive accomplishment at stake.

i had my reservations about it too but gen 9 changed that for me. out of curiosity have you played gen 9?

 

[UserKev]

You think a game that encourages exploration to find different Pokémon in different areas alongside rare items and other secret areas... shouldn't be open world?

Not what I'm stating. Semi open world is fine. "Open world" is daunting. And unsatisfying for Pokemon. Pokemon Snap while liner, has a fully breathing and interesting open world that would otherwise work wonderfully well if converted into mainline Pokemon.

Sure, maybe you don't like Ubisoft repetitive open worlds. Sure, there are ways to have beautiful, explorable areas without full open world as seen with the mainline Xenoblade games.

You can't compare Pokemon with Assassin's Creed or Xenoblade due to them being entirely different concepts.

But if you honestly think that a game that even at its most linear, thrives on exploration on your own pace and has suffered when it focuses on guided linearity, well that's just anti-open world hipsterism at work. You clearly just want to not like the popular thing.

It doesn't o_o Scarlet and Violet's open world is very poorly done. Its more BoTW than any environment Pokemon would actually live. I'll take a smaller map with fleshed out areas like Sw/Sh than hollow wide open fields.

i had my reservations about it too but gen 9 changed that for me. out of curiosity have you played gen 9?

I have Scarlet. The map is more an eyesore than actually enjoyable.

 

[fogbadge]

Not what I'm stating. Semi open world is fine. "Open world" is daunting. And unsatisfying for Pokemon. Pokemon Snap while liner, has a fully breathing and interesting open world that would otherwise work wonderfully well if converted into mainline Pokemon.



You can't compare Pokemon with Assassin's Creed or Xenoblade due to them being entirely different concepts.



It doesn't o_o Scarlet and Violet's open world is very poorly done. Its more BoTW than any environment Pokemon would actually live. I'll take a smaller map with fleshed out areas like Sw/Sh than hollow wide open fields.



I have Scarlet. The map is more an eyesore than actually enjoyable.

alright then

 

[Quillion]

Look, I think linearity has its place in gaming, but I really don't think Nintendo or any of their adjacent partners know how to make a good linear game anymore.

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

there is WAY too much to compare in comparison to what we want.

The task is beyond daunting. And if feat is ever reached, the developers will need to live up to the same massive accomplishment at stake.

Yo-Kai Watch games are monster collectors that have done things for years that are comparable to the Pokemon anime. It CAN be done, just seemingly not by Game Freak since they get themselves tangled in so many issues that have piled up over the years:

• "Future proofed" high polygon models that take up a ton of memory.
• Realistic height and weight values that Colosseum and Gale of Darkness handled well but newer games seem unable to.
• A 1v1 battle system that favors playing hyper offensive hence why strong and fast stuff like Abra tends to be good ingame while most RPGs, monster collectors or otherwise lean towards a 3v3 system.
• Extremely fast level growth compared to most other RPGs, etc.

 

[UserKev]

Peak Nintendo is 1985-2004. During this period, we saw a wonderfully crafted isle of innovative Nintendo masterpieces.

You can say we're in a new peak due to Mario Odyssey, Zelda BOTW, Tropical Freeze but really, Mario, Zelda, DK are extensions of that innovatively successful period. And we haven't witness incredibly innovative IP's like them since then. Arms and Splatoon will not age on the same scale as DK, Earthbound, F Zero in terms of cultural importance. And magic. And will stand in a specific niche.

 

[Lenidem]

Peak Nintendo is 1985-2004. During this period, we saw a wonderfully crafted isle of innovative Nintendo masterpieces.

You can say we're in a new peak due to Mario Odyssey, Zelda BOTW, Tropical Freeze but really, Mario, Zelda, DK are extensions of that innovatively successful period. And we haven't witness incredibly innovative IP's like them since then. Arms and Splatoon will not age on the same scale as DK, Earthbound, F Zero in terms of cultural importance. And magic. And will stand in a specific niche.

I have the same feeling, but I've withdrawn a lot from video games since then and there could very well be a strong nostalgia bias, so I can't say for sure. I have never played ARMS nor Splatoon, for instance, so how could I possibly know?

 

[Quillion]

Peak Nintendo is 1985-2004. During this period, we saw a wonderfully crafted isle of innovative Nintendo masterpieces.

You can say we're in a new peak due to Mario Odyssey, Zelda BOTW, Tropical Freeze but really, Mario, Zelda, DK are extensions of that innovatively successful period. And we haven't witness incredibly innovative IP's like them since then. Arms and Splatoon will not age on the same scale as DK, Earthbound, F Zero in terms of cultural importance. And magic. And will stand in a specific niche.

There was a lot more room for innovation back then, though; the industry was young then. Most games nowadays, even outside Nintendo, build on what's already established. The ones that don't are consigned to low-budget indie projects.

Also, you're being presumptuous about young franchises not aging on the same scale as older ones.

Also also, are you unironically saying F-Zero has cultural importance?

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Peak Nintendo is 1985-2004. During this period, we saw a wonderfully crafted isle of innovative Nintendo masterpieces.

You can say we're in a new peak due to Mario Odyssey, Zelda BOTW, Tropical Freeze but really, Mario, Zelda, DK are extensions of that innovatively successful period. And we haven't witness incredibly innovative IP's like them since then. Arms and Splatoon will not age on the same scale as DK, Earthbound, F Zero in terms of cultural importance. And magic. And will stand in a specific niche.

Look I'm sorry but...

This is the most "back in my day" post I've seen.

Newer generations are going to have that same spark with newer IPs like Xenoblade, Splatoon and ARMS that you had with those older games. There could easily be some day when Mario and Zelda are seen as relics of the past and aren't well remembered and some newfangled game is taking the world by storm. You don't have to like newer stuff. You can easily have preferences. But new art will always find fans in newer audiences. Saying new art will never be as popular or important as old art is ludicrous. This sounds like older generations condemning jazz, rock and rap when they were new.

Come on let's have some self awareness here.

 

[UserKev]

There was a lot more room for innovation back then, though; the industry was young then. Most games nowadays, even outside Nintendo, build on what's already established. The ones that don't are consigned to low-budget indie projects.

There's still room for innovation. Nintendo just clearly isn't trying anymore.

Also, you're being presumptuous about young franchises not aging on the same scale as older ones.

They won't. There's nothing remarkable or special about them.

Also also, are you unironically saying F-Zero has cultural importance?

F-Zero aged in a way that makes the I.P feel legendary. Arms definitely won't have this effect.

Look I'm sorry but...

This is the most "back in my day" post I've seen.

Newer generations are going to have that same spark with newer IPs like Xenoblade, Splatoon and ARMS that you had with those older games. There could easily be some day when Mario and Zelda are seen as relics of the past and aren't well remembered and some newfangled game is taking the world by storm. You don't have to like newer stuff. You can easily have preferences. But new art will always find fans in newer audiences. Saying new art will never be as popular or important as old art is ludicrous. This sounds like older generations condemning jazz, rock and rap when they were new.

Come on let's have some self awareness here.

Never said I didn't like new things. Also, its like you just disregarded everything I said. This isn't what I'm claiming in my post at all, nor is that the point I'm making. Newer I.P are honestly repetitive. They CAN enjoy newer games, but this is the Off My Chest thread, so I can write what I feel without having some lecturer yell down my throat. Your posts are usually entirely supportive of what's "fairness" so you won't completely understand like we do.

 

[Demon Dragon]

I miss the Pokémon sprites. They were so vibrant compared to the washed-out 3D models.
Also, Gen 3 of Pokémon had the best aesthetics.

 

[Quillion]

There's still room for innovation. Nintendo just clearly isn't trying anymore.

This gen and last alone we had Nintendo release a paintball game where you want to paint the terrain itself, an unorthodox fighting game based around spring coil arms, a STEM experiment using cardboard cutouts, and a genuinely intense exergame using a pilates ring. And those are just the ones that receive some big Nintendo push.

You may not think they're innovative, but you can't say they aren't trying.

They won't. There's nothing remarkable or special about them.

Maybe if you can name something that you find remarkable or special outside of Nintendo these days I'll understand this more.

F-Zero aged in a way that makes the I.P feel legendary. Arms definitely won't have this effect.

The first F-Zero was at the right place at the right time refining racing games. But it was never the biggest seller, and it went downhill from there.

I'm not knocking its quality, but the futuristic racing genre it birthed just can't support a mainstream audience. F-Zero's legacy is consigned to low-key indie projects now.

ARMS may be too unorthodox to reach a mainstream audience, but it was hamstrung by everything needing to be franchised these days, whereas F-Zero was relatively free of that limit.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

While I wouldn't call F-Zero or Metroid "iconic", I will at least agree that Nintendo did peak in the 90s... more specifically the early 90s, when Sega was giving them competition and they needed to step up their game at every turn and perfect every genre they could. Tech like the FX Chip; Rare's prerendered graphics; and Mode 7 feel almost sacrilegious to post-Wii Nintendo, but produced some great stuff both first and third party.

However, while I wouldn't call it the "dark ages" per say, I think the N64 and GBC were a lull point for Nintendo and vastly overrated - the N64, while home to some great offerings, had a very samey lineup. If you're not a fan of party multiplayer or 3D platformers, the console may as well be a doorstop. Even the Saturn had a more varied game lineup than the N64. The GBC had a similarly samey lineup (albeit one that appeals more to my personal tastes with arcade ports and 2D platformers in abundance), but Nintendo themselves barely contributed to it, a funny opposite to the N64's first party/Rare domination.

 

[fogbadge]

While I wouldn't call F-Zero or Metroid "iconic", I will at least agree that Nintendo did peak in the 90s... more specifically the early 90s, when Sega was giving them competition and they needed to step up their game at every turn and perfect every genre they could. Tech like the FX Chip; Rare's prerendered graphics; and Mode 7 feel almost sacrilegious to post-Wii Nintendo, but produced some great stuff both first and third party.

However, while I wouldn't call it the "dark ages" per say, I think the N64 and GBC were a lull point for Nintendo and vastly overrated - the N64, while home to some great offerings, had a very samey lineup. If you're not a fan of party multiplayer or 3D platformers, the console may as well be a doorstop. Even the Saturn had a more varied game lineup than the N64. The GBC had a similarly samey lineup (albeit one that appeals more to my personal tastes with arcade ports and 2D platformers in abundance), but Nintendo themselves barely contributed to it, a funny opposite to the N64's first party/Rare domination.

I seem to recall you telling me the other day that the reason you hate the n64 is cause you hate it’s fans

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

I'd actually argue the 2001-2016 era was one defined by Nintendo still maintaining and experimental and innovative spirit, but often failing to balance it with a more practical strategy for the general gaming market when it came to their home consoles and at times focusing on reinvention to the detriment of certain titles. The Wii U period was one defined by continual exploration of new ideas (see the birth of Splatoon) but was also the one where they alienated both casuals and hardcores because the library was not strong enough in its foundation to be of interest to either group.

The Switch works so well in my estimation both because the new IP's and Nintendo's innovations have been so thoroughly embraced by a younger audience, while the older franchises as well as the indie market has provided the games the older audience is actually interested in. The latter especially has been critical to elevating a library that would otherwise be a bit underwhelming to certain fans that its effectively counterbalanced the still somewhat shaky major third party support. Even as someone still disappointed at Nintendo's spotty record with certain older series in the last 10 years (DK, F-Zero, Advance Wars, Star Fox) I can also say there are loads of spiritual successors filling in that gap and that the Switch allows for experiencing them.

The company has most certainly shifted their emphasis (one could argue that the current console is in a lot of ways mostly a follow-up to the DS line and even the Vita given the constant JRPG focus), but that doesn't mean the new games aren't special or that their current direction doesn't have merit. Its just one that doesn't often have my personal interest or is incentivized towards the kind of games I often most enjoy.

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Maybe if you can name something that you find remarkable or special outside of Nintendo these days I'll understand this more.

• Yo-Kai Watch Games
• Dragon Quest Games
• Pizza Tower
• Spark the Electric Jester 3
• Disc Creatures
• Disc Creatures World
• Rivals of Aether
• Freedom Planet

Those are some that come to mind for me anyway that are both older and newer that feel like they have more of a sense of magic to them outside of the Nintendo scope compared to newer Nintendo stuff especially since some of them are partially inspired by older Nintendo ideas or even just iconic older games in general like Sonic.

Especially in the case of Pizza Tower.

Nowadays, many look back on the Wario games as being innovative and interesting how they play off Wario's immense power and even his speed with Wario Land 4 over the weaker, slower Mario and Pizza Tower plays off those as well. They've pretty much abandoned innovating on side characters like that given the fact the last true Wario Land game was about 15 years ago as of writing this.

Mario games even seem like alot of the magic is gone even from the spinoff games with how they just put out updates months or years after to games that lack many features and come off as hollow like Strikers, Party, Golf and Tennis Aces compared to their GameCube and N64 counterparts.

Power Tennis came WITH an opening 3D cutscene and a bunch of extra Special Games while Tennis Aces didn't even have an opening cinematic until version 3.0.

 

[Quillion]

Mario games even seem like alot of the magic is gone even from the spinoff games with how they just put out updates months or years after to games that lack many features and come off as hollow like Strikers, Party, Golf and Tennis Aces compared to their GameCube and N64 counterparts.

Power Tennis came WITH an opening 3D cutscene and a bunch of extra Special Games while Tennis Aces didn't even have an opening cinematic until version 3.0.

Well, as LiveStudioAudience said in the Donkey Kong thread, the skyrocketing costs of HD and beyond development is probably the primary factor that gimps the Mario spin-offs these days. Same goes with Wario.

Still, I never cared too much about the spin-offs, and I actively like that main series Mario is only a once/twice in a generation deal.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the fact that Smash and Mario Kart got as a big and evergreen as they did meant that many of the various other spin-offs were gradually given less priority as a result. Even as early as the Wii, we got neither a golf title on the system nor a new Tennis title (with the GC version given new play control and slapped on to store shelves). Strikers was ignored for nearly a decade and half after that, and there's never even been a hint of Sluggers coming back.

Its a bit cold, but its entirely possible that many of the wide variety of Nintendo franchises from that time period that were so beloved essentially faded away or were greatly paired down because the company increasingly saw less practical necessity for them. Why release an F-Zero or a DK racing title now when MK8 Deluxe gets insane numbers? Realistically what is the ceiling for a Golden Sun when Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, & Pokemon are filling in the Tactical, Action, & and traditional RPG genres pretty strongly?

 

[fogbadge]

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the fact that Smash and Mario Kart got as a big and evergreen as they did meant that many of the various other spin-offs were gradually given less priority as a result. Even as early as the Wii, we got neither a golf title on the system nor a new Tennis title (with the GC version given new play control and slapped on to store shelves). Strikers was ignored for nearly a decade and half after that, and there's never even been a hint of Sluggers coming back.

Its a bit cold, but its entirely possible that many of the wide variety of Nintendo franchises from that time period that were so beloved essentially faded away or were greatly pared because the company increasingly saw less practical necessity for them. Why release an F-Zero or a DK racing title now when MK8 Deluxe gets insane numbers? Realistically what is the ceiling for a Golden Sun when Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, & Pokemon are filling in the Tactical, Action, & and traditional RPG genres pretty strongly?

well let’s not forget that the last couple f-zeroes did badly as did dark dawn

and I think a lot of the sports games were made by companies that have gone bust

that’s not to say hasn’t lost interest in them or the people who were interested have left the company but there’s probably many factors

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Its a bit cold, but its entirely possible that many of the wide variety of Nintendo franchises from that time period that were so beloved essentially faded away or were greatly pared because the company increasingly saw less practical necessity for them. Why release an F-Zero or a DK racing title now when MK8 Deluxe gets insane numbers? Realistically what is the ceiling for a Golden Sun when Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, & Pokemon are filling in the Tactical, Action, & and traditional RPG genres pretty strongly?

Assuming this IS the case, it's funny in a really sad way.

Nintendo is often remembered as that company that saved the video game industry.

They were taking a big risk in the first place with the crashing video game industry and took all kinds of risks even back then with more out there games with the variety of Mario spinoffs among other games.

Nowadays, despite being plenty big that they could easily afford a risk or two and consider the fan input, the idea is just old-fashioned now.

 

[fogbadge]

Assuming this IS the case, it's funny in a really sad way.

Nintendo is often remembered as that company that saved the video game industry.

They were taking a big risk in the first place with the crashing video game industry and took all kinds of risks even back then with more out there games with the variety of Mario spinoffs among other games.

Nowadays, despite being plenty big that they could easily afford a risk or two and consider the fan input, the idea is just old-fashioned now.

the fact that Metroid prime 4 exists proves that they are

 

[Lenidem]

the fact that Metroid prime 4 exists proves that they are

Metroid Prime 4 exists? Did I miss something?...

 

[UserKev]

This gen and last alone we had Nintendo release a paintball game where you want to paint the terrain itself, an unorthodox fighting game based around spring coil arms, a STEM experiment using cardboard cutouts, and a genuinely intense exergame using a pilates ring. And those are just the ones that receive some big Nintendo push.

You may not think they're innovative, but you can't say they aren't trying.

I'm almost entirely certain that there is way more critical thought behind Punch Out than Wonderful 101.

Maybe if you can name something that you find remarkable or special outside of Nintendo these days I'll understand this more.

We're we only discussing Nintendo? But if you really want me to list some examples, I will. Innovation is indeed very predominant in the indie market. I even stated this in another similar topic. Hyper Light Drifter is innovative. Raji Ancient Epic is certainly innovative. Greyhill Incident is innovative. I'm 100% following the india market and will say with open arms that they are 100% innovating.

The first F-Zero was at the right place at the right time refining racing games. But it was never the biggest seller, and it went downhill from there.

I'm not knocking its quality, but the futuristic racing genre it birthed just can't support a mainstream audience. F-Zero's legacy is consigned to low-key indie projects now.

This isn't a bad thing. Earthbound is even in a similar boat. F-Zero probably won't see a new project, but its unforgettable flavor is a great reminder of what it was.

ARMS may be too unorthodox to reach a mainstream audience, but it was hamstrung by everything needing to be franchised these days, whereas F-Zero was relatively free of that limit.

Arms is in no way innovating. And is straight ripped from Blizzard. I.P is barely "Nintendo" like. And is really no different from Luffy's gum gum.

 

[Zerp]

You know what drives me crazy? The Switch's themes menu. I mean, just look at it.

Spoiler: Large Image

Like, really, why even bother including a themes menu if you only have two options? Would it really kill Nintendo to let me use a pink theme!?

And, oh hey, what's this?

Leftovers found in a pre-release version of the Switch's OS (0.8.5) show that Nintendo was planning to include multiple theme colours, but removed this feature shortly before launch for unknown reasons.

(Screenshot: GRAnimated) pic.twitter.com/PylNYIyEAI

— Rare Gaming Dump (@raregamingdump) January 21, 2023

Sooooooo.... We almost had more themes, and they just decided to not go ahead with it? I can't even think of a good explanation for this, it's harmless content. Is Nintendo allergic to colors or something?

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Elements and even overall menu aesthetics are an area where Nintendo has unambiguously lost its charm and soul. The Wii and the Wii U still have a certain magic even now, but the Switch's home look seems so basic and lifeless, I'm surprised Lorem Ipsum text isn't still there.

 

[fogbadge]

Raji Ancient Epic is certainly innovative.

since when?

This isn't a bad thing. Earthbound is even in a similar boat. F-Zero probably won't see a new project, but its unforgettable flavor is a great reminder of what it was.

not really. f-zero is not getting another game cause the last two did badly and earthbound isn't getting a new one because the creator of the series is done with it. it's finished it's done it's over.

 

[Quillion]

I really, really want a morally gray Zelda game. We need more than just glimpses of the good guys acting underhanded and the bad guys having noble qualities.

 

[fogbadge]

I really, really want a morally gray Zelda game. We need more than just glimpses of the good guys acting underhanded and the bad guys having noble qualities.

well i don't really think you could do it with the main cast. especially not ganon who's an incarnation of hate

 

[Quillion]

well i don't really think you could do it with the main cast. especially not ganon who's an incarnation of hate

Link and Zelda maybe not.

But Ganon was a far more compelling character when WW gave him some honorable traits. He's just gotten boring with those hints thrown out.

And even disregarding them, we could still have species groups who want to either be independent from Hyrule or want to take over without Ganon's help. Would make the universe more alive and compelling.