CynicalSquid
Swag Master General
Even though Wii games are considered "kiddy" and the Wii sold like hot cakes so bringing up sales makes no sense.
Nintendo Kiddy?
- Thread starter Dragoncat
- Start date
Even though Wii games are considered "kiddy" and the Wii sold like hot cakes so bringing up sales makes no sense.
Stitch
AKA Patrick
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
That's what the OT was, but the subject you were responding about was how good the games are (in this case focusing on the stories)
What good were Vincent van Gogh's paintings when nobody would buy them and everybody thought they were trash?
Good sales do not equal good product
Justac00lguy
BooBoo
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2012
- Gender
- Shewhale
A lot of Nintendo's games are catered towards a younger audience, yes; however, they are not exclusive to a younger audience by any means. Nintendo games have a certain charm in which an adult can play and feel like they're reliving their childhood memories. A lot of Nintendo's games cater towards a variety of people/ages. Some of the older gamers may get the subtle references intended towards them. I like to think of Nintendo games as the popular series': The Simpsons and Futurama.
Anyway, Anime is huge amongst older crowds despite being intended for an younger audience. Think of Nintendo games like that. You're never too old for a game; just enjoy the game and let's have less arguments.
Anyway, Anime is huge amongst older crowds despite being intended for an younger audience. Think of Nintendo games like that. You're never too old for a game; just enjoy the game and let's have less arguments.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2013
- Location
- United States
Like what Matt said earlier, Nintendo's pretty much the Disney of the gaming industry. While other companies focus on more mature games, Nintendo's the complete opposite. The reason I still enjoy Nintendo games is because I get more enjoyment out of them compared to what other companies are pumping out recently (I'm looking at you, Sega & Sonic Lost World). And if Nintendo games are considered kiddy, then how is something like
childish?
Link stabbing Ganon's head in WW
Stitch
AKA Patrick
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
Umm, you must have watched different anime than I have :?
I think cartoons like Popeye or Betty Boop would be better analogies to what Nintendo is
Cfrock
Keep it strong
Nintendo's reputation for making children's games is, I feel, undeserved, and the reason why comes down to what do we mean by a 'mature' game? Most of us will have our own idea of what that means, and mine is different to those already mentioned in this thread.
To me, a 'mature' game has nothing to do with graphics, art-style, or story (although these elements can individually be mature) but more to do with design and gameplay. To briefly explain that point I'll use Call of Dutyfor an example. In Modern Warfare 2, the game begins with a tutorial stage that teaches the player how to shoot, aim, throw grenades, and crouch. it walks you through these basic actions slowly to ensure you understand them. However, in Modern Warfare 3, the game begins with the player climbing out of a jeep in the middle of a Russian attack on New York City with no instruction, expecting the player to just get on with it. To me, that approach is more mature, because it leaves, or expects, the player to figure things out for themselves; the game doesn't go out of its way to teach you things which should be obvious or will come naturally. It doesn't 'hold your hand', in other words.
Of course, there is plenty of that in Call of Duty, but that's besides the point. Actually, no, let's roll with that and compare Call of Duty: Ghosts to Donkey Kong Country Returns. The former explains every action to you as it becomes relevant and guides your character automatically at certain parts of the game. Even in multiplayer you are constantly told to 'Press X to climb', or 'Hold B to open door'. The constant repetition of instructions and the fact that it never goes away is similar to constantly having to tell a child to 'hold that with both hands or you'll spill it', or 'tie your shoe laces or you'll fall over'. On the other hand, the latter just sends you off into the game and expects you to finish it. The first level tells you how to do DK's new blowing technique, but that's about it. The game from then on leaves you to do everything alone, even discover advanced techniques like rolling into pits and then jumping in mid-air. Yes, there is the option to have Super DK (or whatever it's called) finish any level for you, but it's optional and is never forced, or even explained to you, in-game. The level design is based around a rhythm, a flow, and players are encouraged to pay attention, because each failure just teaches you a new lesson.
Ghosts is more mature in terms of art and story, sure, but I don't play games for art or story. Of those two examples, Donkey Kong Country Returns is the game more willing to treat the player as a human being with a functioning brain, one who can figure things out for themselves and loves to overcome challenge by understanding how the game is played. It has mechanics that give a helping hand, yes, absolutely, but they are there only if you want them, instead of constantly in operation. For these reasons, I would say that Donkey Kong is a more mature game than Ghosts.
This generally applies to most Nintendo games. The majority of Nintendo's games give you information once and expect you to rememeber it; they are designed to be challenging but in a way that engages, not frustrates (anyone who's done the very last world on Super Mario 3D World will know precisely how well they manage that). Franchises like Advance Wars, Paper Mario, Fire Emblem, Metroid, F-Zero, and Donkey Kong are all more challenging than they first appear. All of them hide complexity beneath a veneer or approachable simplicity, easing you in and then leaving you to do your own thing because you are human, and you have a working brain. When I play Mario Kart, for example, against my younger cousins I see them losing because they don't drift, because they don't know how to do it. I do and so I win. But more importantly, I get to teach them about it and then watch them experiment with it, learn how to use it, grow to appreciate it, fiddle with kart choice to maximise their stats, and then eventually lose to them. The game doesn't teach you that, you have to learn that on your own (or with the help of your cousin) and that to me is maturity in game design.
A lot of the 'mature' triple AAA big-name titles that get released these days are almost insulting by how they treat the player (like when a grenade kills you in Call of Duty and it pops up saying, 'You were killed by a grenade. Avoid these in future,' with a handy little picture of a grenade just incase you forgot what one looks like). Nintendo doesn't do this very often and is the better for it. It happens from time to time--I personally think it happened too much in Zelda on the DS and Wii (*cough* Fi *cough*)--but not enough to make me feel as though I am being treated as a child.
I suppose that's the best way to sum up my feelings; a mature game is one which doesn't make you feel like a child. Nintendo's games, for all of their gay whimsy and colourful cartoon characters, don't make me feel like that. They make me feel smart and skilled and bold. That is why I still prefer Nintendo games over anything else at the age of 23, and why I will still prefer them in ten years time. Nintendo will never be 'kiddy' to me because they don't treat me like a kid; they treat me like a person who can learn and understand things, and that is a pretty mature way of making video games if you ask me.
To me, a 'mature' game has nothing to do with graphics, art-style, or story (although these elements can individually be mature) but more to do with design and gameplay. To briefly explain that point I'll use Call of Dutyfor an example. In Modern Warfare 2, the game begins with a tutorial stage that teaches the player how to shoot, aim, throw grenades, and crouch. it walks you through these basic actions slowly to ensure you understand them. However, in Modern Warfare 3, the game begins with the player climbing out of a jeep in the middle of a Russian attack on New York City with no instruction, expecting the player to just get on with it. To me, that approach is more mature, because it leaves, or expects, the player to figure things out for themselves; the game doesn't go out of its way to teach you things which should be obvious or will come naturally. It doesn't 'hold your hand', in other words.
Of course, there is plenty of that in Call of Duty, but that's besides the point. Actually, no, let's roll with that and compare Call of Duty: Ghosts to Donkey Kong Country Returns. The former explains every action to you as it becomes relevant and guides your character automatically at certain parts of the game. Even in multiplayer you are constantly told to 'Press X to climb', or 'Hold B to open door'. The constant repetition of instructions and the fact that it never goes away is similar to constantly having to tell a child to 'hold that with both hands or you'll spill it', or 'tie your shoe laces or you'll fall over'. On the other hand, the latter just sends you off into the game and expects you to finish it. The first level tells you how to do DK's new blowing technique, but that's about it. The game from then on leaves you to do everything alone, even discover advanced techniques like rolling into pits and then jumping in mid-air. Yes, there is the option to have Super DK (or whatever it's called) finish any level for you, but it's optional and is never forced, or even explained to you, in-game. The level design is based around a rhythm, a flow, and players are encouraged to pay attention, because each failure just teaches you a new lesson.
Ghosts is more mature in terms of art and story, sure, but I don't play games for art or story. Of those two examples, Donkey Kong Country Returns is the game more willing to treat the player as a human being with a functioning brain, one who can figure things out for themselves and loves to overcome challenge by understanding how the game is played. It has mechanics that give a helping hand, yes, absolutely, but they are there only if you want them, instead of constantly in operation. For these reasons, I would say that Donkey Kong is a more mature game than Ghosts.
This generally applies to most Nintendo games. The majority of Nintendo's games give you information once and expect you to rememeber it; they are designed to be challenging but in a way that engages, not frustrates (anyone who's done the very last world on Super Mario 3D World will know precisely how well they manage that). Franchises like Advance Wars, Paper Mario, Fire Emblem, Metroid, F-Zero, and Donkey Kong are all more challenging than they first appear. All of them hide complexity beneath a veneer or approachable simplicity, easing you in and then leaving you to do your own thing because you are human, and you have a working brain. When I play Mario Kart, for example, against my younger cousins I see them losing because they don't drift, because they don't know how to do it. I do and so I win. But more importantly, I get to teach them about it and then watch them experiment with it, learn how to use it, grow to appreciate it, fiddle with kart choice to maximise their stats, and then eventually lose to them. The game doesn't teach you that, you have to learn that on your own (or with the help of your cousin) and that to me is maturity in game design.
A lot of the 'mature' triple AAA big-name titles that get released these days are almost insulting by how they treat the player (like when a grenade kills you in Call of Duty and it pops up saying, 'You were killed by a grenade. Avoid these in future,' with a handy little picture of a grenade just incase you forgot what one looks like). Nintendo doesn't do this very often and is the better for it. It happens from time to time--I personally think it happened too much in Zelda on the DS and Wii (*cough* Fi *cough*)--but not enough to make me feel as though I am being treated as a child.
I suppose that's the best way to sum up my feelings; a mature game is one which doesn't make you feel like a child. Nintendo's games, for all of their gay whimsy and colourful cartoon characters, don't make me feel like that. They make me feel smart and skilled and bold. That is why I still prefer Nintendo games over anything else at the age of 23, and why I will still prefer them in ten years time. Nintendo will never be 'kiddy' to me because they don't treat me like a kid; they treat me like a person who can learn and understand things, and that is a pretty mature way of making video games if you ask me.
DarkestLink
Darkest of all Dark Links
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
Yeah, Nintendo's kiddy. I don't really care. Honestly, I prefer a balance (generally rated T games), but I definitely prefer Rated E games to Rated M titles. I find content found in Rated M games to be too unsavory for my tastes. It ruins the experience for me, and I also have a family to consider. I can't be exposing my nephew to that crap.
I can see how older games feel that Nintendo doesn't have anything to offer them, mainly because the games are so easy. But I don't care. I replay games a lot and I seldom like to take games seriously (it ruins the fun IMO). Sooo...I'm fine with easy games. I have a lot of fun playing them. Nintendo's often called casual...and I agree. I'm a casual gamer tbh and that's why Nintendo appeals to me.
Not only are all your references from the same series, but even when compared to other games, Zelda's story isn't that big. And it's continuity is a joke.
Not that this is bad or anything...I actually think Zelda hits a good balance between story and gameplay.
I can see how older games feel that Nintendo doesn't have anything to offer them, mainly because the games are so easy. But I don't care. I replay games a lot and I seldom like to take games seriously (it ruins the fun IMO). Sooo...I'm fine with easy games. I have a lot of fun playing them. Nintendo's often called casual...and I agree. I'm a casual gamer tbh and that's why Nintendo appeals to me.
Oh
.png/500px-Midna's_True_Form_(Twilight_Princess).png)
I'm sorry
I can't hear you
Over all this story.
Not only are all your references from the same series, but even when compared to other games, Zelda's story isn't that big. And it's continuity is a joke.
Not that this is bad or anything...I actually think Zelda hits a good balance between story and gameplay.
A game that is mature dose not need blood an gore or a good story. It just needs to be thought provoking. That really depends on the player. I could go into how some one could find how the original mario brothers could be thought provoking.
Not really "any" Nintendo game. That's an overgeneralization, whenever you take a few moments to learn just how many games there are outside of the Big N's main franchises. One example I'd like to share with you is Xenoblade Chronicles, a fantastic JRPG released for the Wii. Don't let the bright and cheery screenshot fool you; story-wise, Xenoblade is actually riddled with gripping scenes (specifically an occurrence near the beginning of the game) and highly intense moments. I'll let Xenoblade's track record of positive reception and rewards speak for itself.
That said, I don't count mature themes as being an upside, but that all depends on one's interpretation of "mature". As others have said, an abundance of violence, blood, and lascivious activity is regarded as mature by many gamers, which is a misapplication of the genuine term. From the gameplay footage and screenshots I've seen on the Witcher, it plays a lot like the "mature" Xbox and Playstation titles that involve such themes. God of War immediately comes to mind; in fact I doubt it's that different from the Witcher as far as the maturity goes. But between those two, I'd say that Witcher is the more polished series (aside from an imbecilic scene of sadism therein), because God of War is complete rubbish.
Lastly, I'd recommend watching the trailer for "X", the next installment to the Xeno franchise, if you haven't already.
[video=youtube;APWTJMyM4qg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APWTJMyM4qg[/video]
CraptainFalcon
Bored to death
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2013
- Location
- 2Fort
What keeps me liking Nintendo? Excellent IPs that never get stale. A good 80% of my gaming is either Pokemon or Zelda. I just enjoy those series and dislike the revolting levels of unnecessary gore and/or sex pumped into games like GTA.
And yet games like GTA are often lauded by rabid fans as being "mature" solely for those reasons. While this may not fit the abstract and arbitrary definition set above, it fits into the "M" rating for games, and I would certainly not expect Nintendo to go that route.
Yet another victim of the arbitrary definition mentioned above. Any game can have a serious enough plot, such as Pokemon Black/Pokemon White.
You just said earlier in your post that quote-unquote "mature" games don't have to sacrifice story, so either you're repeating yourself or making a contradiction.
Oh
I'm sorry
I can't hear you
Over all this story.
Nice.
Alright, let's talk about what keeps me away from Nintendo games nowadays.
1. As I get older, jumping on mushrooms and betting the crap outta plushie dinosaur-turtle thing isn't interesting anymore than it was was 8-10 years ago. As I get older, my tastes in games change drastically.
2. 1 freakin' word. REHASHES.
3. A console that could've been so much more. Why couldn't they just make another Cube, just much more powerful than the PS3 and Xbox and on the same generation as the PS4 and XBONE.
4. FREAKIN' IWATA. KICK. HIM. OUT.
5. Region-locking.
That's why I don't play Nintendo games as much anymore. I've moved on to Sony.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2013
What a very nice generalization of all Nintendo games. I could do the same thing for COD and AC if I wanted to. Point is, your statement is flawed.
You're obviously a fan of yearly releases, and you're accusing Nintendo's 3-5 year sequel gap as rehashes. Good job.
I agree for the most part. They could've done something innovative that was less powerful than Xbone/Ps4 theoretically, but the Wii U was not the answer.
You really need to stop listening to that ******* Michael Pachter. Guy's been wrong 90% of the time.
I play Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo games all the same. Don't know why you felt the need to exclude a group, unless peer pressure was an issue.
DarkestLink
Darkest of all Dark Links
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
What's the issue with Iwata exactly?
EDIT: So far all I've heard is "The business isn't making money or selling as much as Sony and MS!!!!" Why should we care? I know I like to speak from a business perspective a lot, but when you get down to it, why should it matter to use if Nintendo makes a big or small profit? It's not like we work at Nintendo or something and are worried our paychecks will be cut if they don't make ideal profits.
Nintendo isn't near bankruptcy and they're the only company that isn't using a sleazy rip off DLC business strategy or overpricing online, so as far as business practices go, I'm fine. It might not make Nintendo the most money, but is that really any of my concern?
EDIT: So far all I've heard is "The business isn't making money or selling as much as Sony and MS!!!!" Why should we care? I know I like to speak from a business perspective a lot, but when you get down to it, why should it matter to use if Nintendo makes a big or small profit? It's not like we work at Nintendo or something and are worried our paychecks will be cut if they don't make ideal profits.
Nintendo isn't near bankruptcy and they're the only company that isn't using a sleazy rip off DLC business strategy or overpricing online, so as far as business practices go, I'm fine. It might not make Nintendo the most money, but is that really any of my concern?
Last edited:
DarkestLink
Darkest of all Dark Links
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
I don't see how. He doesn't make the hardware or the games...heck, I'm pretty sure he doesn't even choose what the games/hardware will be like. He just runs the actual business tactics and assigns other people to do jobs.
But even so, what difference does Nintendo's profit make? Half the time Sony and MS (especially MS) make a profit, it's at our expense.
Curmudgeon
default setting: sarcastic prick
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Gender
- grumpy
The Wii U sales thread is here:
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47315
Talk about alleged kiddiness here, talk about Wii U sales (and their possible connection with Nintendo management) there.
Best,
Curmudgeon
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47315
Talk about alleged kiddiness here, talk about Wii U sales (and their possible connection with Nintendo management) there.
Best,
Curmudgeon
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2013
- Location
- United States
I have a big question here. Why is it that Nintendo always get called out for rehashing, but companies like Activision get away scot-free with the COD series? What sense does that make?