What has Nintendo done to upset you?

[Grandpoobah]

The possible existence of an animal crossing mobile game.
Why can't they be on the actual consoles instead of phones?

 

[Tino]

Cutting the Wii U life span too soon just to make way for the NX.

 

[LancerStaff]

The possible existence of an animal crossing mobile game.
Why can't they be on the actual consoles instead of phones?

The mobile game was said to connect to an unannounced AC title, so yeah...

Cutting the Wii U life span too soon just to make way for the NX.

GC was 01 through 2006, Wii was 2006 through 2012 with the last year basically having nothing, and Wii U was 2012 through 2017, though barely. More or less it's lifespan was between the Wii and GC's, which I think is fair.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cutting the Wii U life span too soon just to make way for the NX.

Nintendo is hemorrhaging money and nobody wants to develop for the Wii U.It will have been on the market for 5 years when the NX comes out (though it sure doesn't feel like 4 years) and most everyone involved, from devs to players to Nintendo themselves, wants them to move on to something better.

 

[ThatsBullocks]

Nintendo is hemorrhaging money and nobody wants to develop for the Wii U.It will have been on the market for 5 years when the NX comes out (though it sure doesn't feel like 4 years) and most everyone involved, from devs to players to Nintendo themselves, wants them to move on to something better.

To be fair, I'd bet that a bunch of third parties are gonna backstab Nintendo with the NX like with the WiiU, because muh hard console to develop for or some excuse.

 

[Iceweasel]

To be fair, I'd bet that a bunch of third parties are gonna backstab Nintendo with the NX like with the WiiU, because muh hard console to develop for or some excuse.

There actually is some truth to that. Porting is easier than studios say but harder than most players think. In programming, we use what are called "libraries". These are collections of prewritten modules of code. Some of these exist across all implementations of a programming language (called the "standard library"), but rarely do they deal with graphics in such a way that would be useful for game development, if they deal with graphics at all.

So, each console manufacturer provides different libraries for their system, and they're each a little different. They're basically the same, but programming is the art of giving very, very, very specific instructions, so "a little different" can be the difference between a game that runs butter-smooth and one that barfs all over your screen, if it will even compile. In some cases, a simple find>replace can fix the problem, but sometimes the programmers will have to fix every occurrence of the problem differently.

On top of all that, the hardware is slightly different too. Operations that can be done in tens of microseconds on one console may take a hundred on another. This problem is mostly moot in modern systems: The PS4 and XBOne run basically on a x86_64 (PC) architecture, while Nintendo's Gamecube, Wii, and Wii U uses PowerPC. I'm not knowledgeable in hardware at all, and I've only ever worked on PC code, but I'd be surprised if that didn't have massive ramifications for the sort of high-performance computing required for games development.

If all of that wasn't enough, the simple facts are that Nintendo's consoles don't have the size of install base as Sony's and Microsoft's. The games can be ported, and it's not exactly hard, but it's expensive and the profit margins are slimmer. Resources, as these companies see it, can be better allocated by working on more games than by trying to get the same ones to every platform. It's not a question of profit, but of profit margins.




Of course, there are surely political reasons too, on both sides of the fence. Nintendo (or at least America's branch) are more protective of there trade secrets and brand image, so dev kits aren't as robust (a problem with the Wii U), their contracts may require the use of certain gimmicks like motion control, and they're more likely to veto something that doesn't fit their image. Big studios obviously don't like this, and see that they have a vested interest to see Nintendo fail until Nintendo kowtows to their demands. Large studios can also use platform availability as a branding tool. Nintendo has a reputation as the "kiddie console". We all know it's BS, and largely the result of Sega's and Sony's 90's marketing (and the Wii), but that's how the public sees it. So if somebody asks a friend to play the hottest new AAA game on their Nintendo console, big studios think it could hurt the game's reputation. This isn't even getting into backroom exclusivity deals or collusion or other potentially illegal things.

But my point is that there are technical reasons for "available on everything but Nintendo". It really sucks, and in many ways has become tautological, but when studios say "it's hard to develop for/port to this system", they're not lying, even if they're not telling the whole truth. There are more technical reasons I could give, or at least guess at, but hopefully this is enough.

Studios want easily portable games that can be run on powerful hardware, Nintendo's last two offerings have been weak systems with gimmicks. Gimmicks are about as non-portable as it gets, and the NX looks like it's gonna be another gimmick system. There may not be a Nintendo NX U. I don't think Nintendo will go under, but if the NX flops like the Wii U I doubt they'll stay in the console market.

 

[FallenHero]

To be fair, I'd bet that a bunch of third parties are gonna backstab Nintendo with the NX like with the WiiU, because muh hard console to develop for or some excuse.

I would predict it would have problems with getting third party games because of Nintendo's previous reputation with third parties that pretty much started with the N64 ( LancerStaff thanks for telling me that, also I will admit I was pretty misinformed when I was saying that Nintendo abandoned fans with the Wii). It will also possibly happen, because there is always the possibility Nintendo will go for making another gimmicky, under powered console like they have been for a long time. If they end up making a console with vastly different specs than the other two consoles and/or use some type of controller that is not like a normal controller, then the NX being to hard to develop for could be a very valid excuse for third parties. If the NX ends up being a flop it will likely have a little bit of third party support early in it's life before it ends up having almost no third party support from a lack of NX sales.

Studios want easily portable games that can be run on powerful hardware, Nintendo's last two offerings have been weak systems with gimmicks. Gimmicks are about as non-portable as it gets, and the NX looks like it's gonna be another gimmick system. There may not be a Nintendo NX U. I don't think Nintendo will go under, but if the NX flops like the Wii U I doubt they'll stay in the console market.

This sums up exactly what I was thinking pretty nicely. I also doubt they will be able to survive in the console market it they NX fails. I actually wonder what will become of Nintendo if they no longer are in the console market... It could potentially be not such a bad thing if they end up like SEGA and become a third party dev, though only if they make the right decisions.

 

[Dastardly Ridleylash]

Nintendo's not going to go under unless they make a ****-up on the level of the initial Xbone's design and stick to those guns to the end. They've got enough money from the sales of the Wii and the entire DS line to live through one bump.

 

[Iceweasel]

Nintendo's not going to go under unless they make a ****-up on the level of the initial Xbone's design and stick to those guns to the end. They've got enough money from the sales of the Wii and the entire DS line to live through one bump.

The Wii U IS that bump. The 3DS hasn't exactly lived up to expectations either, but at least hardware sales have been good.

 

[LancerStaff]

I remember somebody explaining that Nintendo could bleed money for like fifty years or something before they even start selling off parts of the company or IPs... So yeah, I don't think Nintendo's going bankrupt any time soon.

 

[FallenHero]

I remember somebody explaining that Nintendo could bleed money for like fifty years or something before they even start selling off parts of the company or IPs... So yeah, I don't think Nintendo's going bankrupt any time soon.

If this is true I hope Nintendo realizes they could use their money to make the NX a really powerful console instead of using under-powered hardware like they usually do. I doubt they could really survive another screw up after the Wii U, even if they do have a lot of money. SEGA ended up going from a first party to a third party and they were directly competing with Nintendo back in the 90s, so they likely had a ton of money to survive for a long time before they screwed up by spending what was likely a large portion of that money on unsuccessful consoles. Those consoles were unsuccessful because people lost faith in SEGA after the SEGA CD and 32x, and over the years people have been losing faith in Nintendo when it comes to the console market. Nintendo could easily end up like SEGA if they screw up the NX and whatever the next generation of Nintendo handhelds might be.

 

[LancerStaff]

If this is true I hope Nintendo realizes they could use their money to make the NX a really powerful console instead of using under-powered hardware like they usually do. I doubt they could really survive another screw up after the Wii U, even if they do have a lot of money. SEGA ended up going from a first party to a third party and they were directly competing with Nintendo back in the 90s, so they likely had a ton of money to survive for a long time before they screwed up by spending what was likely a large portion of that money on unsuccessful consoles. Those consoles were unsuccessful because people lost faith in SEGA after the SEGA CD and 32x, and over the years people have been losing faith in Nintendo when it comes to the console market. Nintendo could easily end up like SEGA if they screw up the NX and whatever the next generation of Nintendo handhelds might be.

Patents are pointing towards an underpowered gimmick console with a Gamepad 2.0 that can be played out of the house somehow, perhaps with tactus technology that allows the screen to form buttons or textures.

Nintendo would rather aim for a blue ocean then lose a ton of cash on hardware when third parties aren't interested in Nintendo consoles anyway. I mean, that's the whole reason the "withered technology" was applied to their consoles.

 

[Dastardly Ridleylash]

Yeah, making the NX some steroid-ridden superconsole on par with the best gaming PC's isn't going to just get rid of the stigma that Nintendo has with third party publishers.

Nintendo is not aiming only for the gamer; they never have, and they never will.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yeah, making the NX some steroid-ridden superconsole on par with the best gaming PC's isn't going to just get rid of the stigma that Nintendo has with third party publishers.

Nintendo is not aiming only for the gamer; they never have, and they never will.

Then they will keep losing gamers (customers) until they are out of money. You're letting your emotions blind your rational thoughts.

 

[LancerStaff]

Then they will keep losing gamers (customers) until they are out of money. You're letting your emotions blind your rational thoughts.

Yes, because some kid on the internet knows how to run a 100+ year old company then people with actual business experience.

Number one reason the Wii U failed was because there wasn't enough clarity on what it even was. Nintendo is no longer going to announce their systems at anything not totally controlled by themselves as a result, and all evidence is pointing towards another Wii U-like system. Nintendo would rather gamble on a gimmick then automatically lose by targeting third parties.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, because some kid on the internet knows how to run a 100+ year old company then people with actual business experience.

Number one reason the Wii U failed was because there wasn't enough clarity on what it even was. Nintendo is no longer going to announce their systems at anything not totally controlled by themselves as a result, and all evidence is pointing towards another Wii U-like system. Nintendo would rather gamble on a gimmick then automatically lose by targeting third parties.

Explain why Nintendo would automatically lose by targeting third parties. Also, not a kid, but great ad hominem.

 

[wedl!!]

The Wii U not getting third party support due to its gimmick is completely valid reasoning.

Companies would be throwing extra money towards a version of the game that likely wouldn't sell very well regardless (because the Wii U was really poorly marketed and didn't make a lot of sense as a console anyways). It's less that it's difficult to develop for (which, yes, it is) and more that it would be a waste of money.

Another thing: Literally, if Nintendo didn't call the Wii U the Wii U it would've done far better. Its marketing was its downfall.

 

[LeifEriksson]

The smash 64 games still aren't on virtual console... FeelsBadMan

 

[LancerStaff]

Explain why Nintendo would automatically lose by targeting third parties. Also, not a kid, but great ad hominem.

Because nobody wants to develop for Nintendo systems besides Nintendo. Nintendo fans that want the AAA western titles already have an Xbox or Playstation, and non-Nintendo fans are really only interested in two or three of Nintendo's franchises which barely see the light of day. Sure, some games like Sonic, Rayman and Shovel Knight sold the best on Nintendo systems, but only because they were decidedly Nintendo-y to begin with.

The Wii U not getting third party support due to its gimmick is completely valid reasoning.

Companies would be throwing extra money towards a version of the game that likely wouldn't sell very well regardless (because the Wii U was really poorly marketed and didn't make a lot of sense as a console anyways). It's less that it's difficult to develop for (which, yes, it is) and more that it would be a waste of money.

Another thing: Literally, if Nintendo didn't call the Wii U the Wii U it would've done far better. Its marketing was its downfall.

Nowhere does it say you have to incorporate the Gamepad, though. Minecraft U topped Nintendo's charts without using the Gamepad beyond a controller and a copy of the TV image. DKCTF was one of the best sellers and that only gave you a toggle in a menu while the "unused" screen displayed the game's logo.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

Another thing: Literally, if Nintendo didn't call the Wii U the Wii U it would've done far better. Its marketing was its downfall.

They should've brought back the NES name. Might've had less of a reason to be ridiculed.

 

[Senor Mexicano]

They should've brought back the NES name. Might've had less of a reason to be ridiculed.

What would they have called it though? New Nintendo Entertainment System? Nintendo Entertainment System U? Superb Nintendo Entertainment System?

 

[SimonBarSinister]

What would they have called it though? New Nintendo Entertainment System? Nintendo Entertainment System U? Superb Nintendo Entertainment System?

Any of those would've been better than calling it Wii U. Not sure what possessed Nintendo to come up with the name in the first place. Seriously, it sounds kind of lewd when you think about it.

The NES name might be old but at least it's iconic, something Nintendo should've sprung for. Maybe they can do it for the NX instead of calling it something stupid again (assuming NX isn't the official name).

 

[finalark]

If this is true I hope Nintendo realizes they could use their money to make the NX a really powerful console instead of using under-powered hardware like they usually do. I doubt they could really survive another screw up after the Wii U, even if they do have a lot of money. SEGA ended up going from a first party to a third party and they were directly competing with Nintendo back in the 90s, so they likely had a ton of money to survive for a long time before they screwed up by spending what was likely a large portion of that money on unsuccessful consoles. Those consoles were unsuccessful because people lost faith in SEGA after the SEGA CD and 32x, and over the years people have been losing faith in Nintendo when it comes to the console market. Nintendo could easily end up like SEGA if they screw up the NX and whatever the next generation of Nintendo handhelds might be.

Yeah, but you're forgetting that even now Nintendo is still in a better position than SEGA was. Even at their lowest, the Wii U still outsold the Saturn. Not only that, but while SEGA had lost a ton of money on the 32x and CD, Nintendo is still rolling in it thanks to the original Wii, DS and 3DS.

SEGA dropped out of the console market because of three (four if you count DC) in a row. Nintendo's only real failure has been the Wii U.

 

[Twewy]

The Virtual Boy wasn't a failure?

 

[LancerStaff]

The Virtual Boy wasn't a failure?

Well it was, but still not on the scale of SEGA's failures since it was pulled very quickly and it was quite a while ago so you can't really say Nintendo's had a string of failures because of it.

 

[finalark]

Well it was, but still not on the scale of SEGA's failures since it was pulled very quickly and it was quite a while ago so you can't really say Nintendo's had a string of failures because of it.

Pretty much this. SEGA had the CD, 32x and Saturn all back-to-back-to-back. Nintendo's failures tend to be more spread out.

 

[Uchihadark7]

I don't know all the specifics of it, but them not holding on to RareWare was a bad move in my opinion.

 

[Iceweasel]

I don't know all the specifics of it, but them not holding on to RareWare was a bad move in my opinion.

They never had Rare to begin with. Rare was its own thing, they just worked with Nintendo a lot.

 

[Uchihadark7]

They never had Rare to begin with. Rare was its own thing, they just worked with Nintendo a lot.

They owned a fraction of the company.

 

[finalark]

They owned a fraction of the company.

So did MS, ironically.

 

[Uchihadark7]

So did MS, ironically.

But not until 2002. Activision was also looking to purchase the company.

 

[finalark]

But not until 2002. Activision was also looking to purchase the company.

I mean, yeah. But at that point they bought the rest of what Nintendo didn't have, making them legally Microsoft's.

 

[Uchihadark7]

I mean, yeah. But at that point they bought the rest of what Nintendo didn't have, making them legally Microsoft's.

Yeah that's what I'm saying they did to upset me. They should have bought a larger percentage of the company in the first place and not let Microsoft buy it.

 

[LancerStaff]

Nintendo let Rare go because all their talent was gone at that point. Wasn't that hard of a decision, honestly...

 

[Synnett]

I'm just upset that Nintendo doesn't follow the classic console layout, which is a console and a normal controller. They are all over the gimmicks again, which is prone to fail. I don't want virtual reality or some cheese, a normal controller like the Gamecube would be perfect. I'd love the gimmicks to be optional, much like the microphone for the Gamecube, not something that is forced like the Wii U gamepad.

 

[criticalhit1992]

What Synnett said, I'm not a fan of the forced GamePad and motion control. They should've made the Pro Controller the main controller for the console later on in its life.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

I think the time of gimmicky games has long since passed. It was fun for a while during the Wii's lifetime, but during the Wii U era it felt like Nintendo was trying to make gimmicks their new standard of gameplay. It's gotten old at this point, and I fear that this is the path set for the NX. I'm not saying the NX will have terrible games, just that I'll be somewhat disappointed if they indeed continue this trend of games being designed with super gimmicky controls in mind. Of course, I'm still holding onto hope that Nintendo will prove me wrong.

What Synnett said, I'm not a fan of the forced GamePad and motion control. They should've made the Pro Controller the main controller for the console later on in its life.

Nintendo had a near-flawless controller design for the GCN. They should've stuck with it, refining it along the way.

 

[LancerStaff]

I'm just upset that Nintendo doesn't follow the classic console layout, which is a console and a normal controller. They are all over the gimmicks again, which is prone to fail. I don't want virtual reality or some cheese, a normal controller like the Gamecube would be perfect. I'd love the gimmicks to be optional, much like the microphone for the Gamecube, not something that is forced like the Wii U gamepad.

Cube still failed though... And the DS line is loaded with gimmicks and still going strong.

Gimmicks =/= failure. Arguably gimmicks make the console, like the PS2 playing DVDs and the PS4 and XBONE being multimedia boxes. People don't want to buy video game systems for just being video game systems unless there's a particularly novel concept behind it. In Nintendo's eyes it doesn't hurt to experiment because they don't have anything to lose in trying a gimmick.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

Cube still failed though... And the DS line is loaded with gimmicks and still going strong.

Gimmicks =/= failure. Arguably gimmicks make the console, like the PS2 playing DVDs and the PS4 and XBONE being multimedia boxes. People don't want to buy video game systems for just being video game systems unless there's a particularly novel concept behind it. In Nintendo's eyes it doesn't hurt to experiment because they don't have anything to lose in trying a gimmick.

....What? Dude... The whole purpose for buying a video game console is to play video games. Anything else that one might be able to do on it is merely a bonus. Sure, it's nice to be able to play Blu-Rays on my PS3, surf the net on my 3DS or watch YT videos on my Wii U, but they are all just optional features (useful, but not necessarily needed). The primary attraction of a gaming machine is the library of games we play on it and it should be treated as such, otherwise, why even bother calling it a gaming machine?

On what grounds are you judging the GCN as a failure? It may not have sold as much as the PS2 or the Xbox, but I wouldn't call it outright a failure. I mean, it had some of the most enjoyable games in Nintendo's history, and with no gimmicks required to fully enjoy them. And I'd be willing to bet that they are still fondly remembered to this day. That's the big takeaway here. Nintendo doesn't need to rely on overly pervasive controller gimmicks to make good games. They just need to make good games with good controls that everyone can enjoy, as they had done in the past.

 

[LancerStaff]

....What? Dude... The whole purpose for buying a video game console is to play video games.

People can't justify it by itself anymore unless it does something else or it's "amazing" like the Wii was... Most people spend more time watching then playing on their gaming systems nowadays. If TVs had the hardware then we'd see the equivalent of Candy Crush outselling even the biggest names in gaming.

On what grounds are you judging the GCN as a failure?

Sales, third party support, same things as the Wii U really.

I mean, it had some of the most enjoyable games in Nintendo's history, and with no gimmicks required to fully enjoy them.

Subjective. Of the six Nintendo consoles I'd put the GC at second to last, only after the N64. Wii and Wii U I'd put at 1st and 2nd. "Gimmick" here is just a derogative buzzword that can apply to literally any game, and it's usually indicative of somebody coming in on modern Nintendo wanting to hate a game. LoZSS and SF0 are going to be looked back as masterpieces misunderstood for their time much like LoZMM was.

Anybody can enjoy any modern Nintendo game regardless of so-called "gimmicks." "Gimmicks" made Nintendo to begin with.