|
Post by nintendolegend on Sept 23, 2011 12:19:06 GMT -5
I think Nintendo hubristically messing up their CD system and causing the birth of the Playstation is what did them in. My favorite console's library is the SNES, second favorite is the PS2. They should have dropped the family friendly shtick and pursued creativity with a more 'mature' version of themselves to aim towards older gamers. They couldn't go through with their Sony partnership. The original Playstation was a standalone machine with a CD drive and a Snes cartridge slot, and it would have been owned by Sony, meaning that Sony would have stolen Nintendo's customers. That's why they broke that deal and made another one with Phillips. Even as an accused Nintendo fanboy, from my perspective Nintendo still did more to botch that deal themselves than your post would indicate. It was a weird, conflict-of-interest idea all around once people realized what was going on, but Nintendo could have approached it better from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Saturn on Sept 23, 2011 12:29:37 GMT -5
Even as an accused Nintendo fanboy, from my perspective Nintendo still did more to botch that deal themselves than your post would indicate. It was a weird, conflict-of-interest idea all around once people realized what was going on, but Nintendo could have approached it better from the beginning. At very least, they could've sent a memo to Sony. It was the very public humiliation, and the needless one, that served as the impetus to bring Sony into a market a few years ahead of schedule. That one kinda backfired, lads.
|
|
|
Post by Jave on Sept 23, 2011 15:58:03 GMT -5
The difference I see between the DS and the 3DS is that the DS had a lot of games from Nintendo and third parties in the pipeline, and interesting enough games at launch even though the lineup left a lot to be desired. The third parties seem to be dropping their 3DS support in droves and after a hot launch, sales have cooled down dramatically. A price drop coming so quickly, something Nintendo has always been slow to do, shows Nintendo is entering panic mode with 3DS sales. I think the main difference comes in function. No matter how you slice it, the 3D adds virtually nothing of substance to any of the games. None of the games require it, no games (that I know of) have done anything novel or functional with it. Compare that with the DS's original gimmick, the touch screen, which opened up a huge wealth of possibilities in function and allowed for a (theoretically) unlimited number of buttons within a small space. The gimmick to sell the 3DS adds nothing to the gameplay and in many cases even hinders it. Did ANYONE play Pilotwings with the 3D on it? I tried and I couldn't make heads or tails of anything. If I tried to focus on my guy, I couldn't see where I was going. If I tried to see where I was going, there was a fucking Mii floating in the way and I couldn't see where I was going. When I turned the 3D off - surprise! - I could play just fine. I would dare go so far as to call that a marketing problem. They made such a big fuss about what's arguably the least significant feature of their new system, and then followed that up by failing to manage people's expectations. The thing's been out for months, and I still hear people comment about wanting a game where "the 3D is essential to the gameplay." I genuinely don't think such a thing is even possible. 3D is an aesthetic enhancement at best. That's not to say it's bad or good (I don't like it... headaches), but it doesn't really do anything other than make this thing sort of look like it's in front of that other thing. I understand they need something to market the system with, but the thing is, if "the whole point" of the 3DS is 3D gaming, then it's doomed to failure out of the gate. BUT, if 3D isn't the whole point, and this thing is merely a more powerful DS with this neat but entirely optional 3D screen (like how not every DS game needed to use the touch screen just because it was there), and gyroscope, then it at least has potential to house some fun (if graphically last-gen), creative new games.
|
|
|
Post by Warchief Onyx on Sept 23, 2011 16:10:00 GMT -5
If I play a 3DS I turn the 3D off almost immediately. It's not particularly done well and gives me headaches on top of it. Even if I could see and use the 3D well enough, it's so completely unnecessary and does nothing but be an aesthetic gimmick.
The augmented reality stuff could be a pretty big deal but right now it just comes off as extremely gimmicky.
The sad thing is that the 3DS is a reasonably powerful system. Not as powerful as a Vita, but still leagues ahead of the DS and PSP. But because of gimmicks no one's really going to take advantage of the 3DS' power. Same thing dooms the Wii to its reputation as a casual with a few token niche titles system IMO.
|
|
|
Post by ldorado on Sept 23, 2011 16:30:23 GMT -5
This 3DS stunt has really disappointed me. Also, since I've played less than half of the games they've made, I cannot give an educated opinion on their design quality.
|
|
|
Post by PooshhMao on Sept 24, 2011 1:47:17 GMT -5
I'm playing both StarFox 64 3D on the 3DS and Macross Ultimate Frontier on the PSP at the moment; both games play reasonably similar, they're space shooters; and while I slightly prefer the latter gameplay-wise and theme-wise, I miss the true depth the former has. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the 3D as far as I'm concerned. Calling it a gimmick would be the same as calling stereo sound a gimmick, or parallax scrolling a gimmick. They didn't add anything to the gameplay either. It's a technically logical progression, but unfortunately one the majority of gamesplaying people is unable to enjoy without unpleasant side effects. I don't have any of those. I love the 3D screen.
Well okay maybe stereo sound did add something to the gameplay, it helped locating enemies in FPS games. But then stereoscopic 3D helps you judge distances.
|
|
|
Post by Weasel on Sept 24, 2011 3:01:58 GMT -5
Calling it a gimmick would be the same as calling stereo sound a gimmick [...] Well okay maybe stereo sound did add something to the gameplay, it helped locating enemies in FPS games. But then stereoscopic 3D helps you judge distances. It also proved essential in the Lost Woods in Ocarina of Time, where the best way to determine the proper path through the maze was to listen for which hole the music was coming out of.
|
|
|
Post by PooshhMao on Sept 24, 2011 4:11:43 GMT -5
Indeed. Excellent example.
|
|
|
Post by Plumbum on Sept 24, 2011 13:14:15 GMT -5
Don't put words in my mouth. I don't want online gaming. Period. I don't want DLC and I don't give a damn about online multiplayer. (Local multiplayer's okay.) I recognize that puts me in the minority though. I just remember that the DS was a fat ugly brick at launch. Nintendo was actually claiming that the DS was an offshoot of the Gameboy line. That the DS and Gameboy would exist side-by-side, and that the real successor to the GBA was yet to come. Most people thought the Wii was going to be a gigantic flop. It didn't do HD graphics. It didn't have good online. Waggle was a gimmick (okay I stll think it is, but still). People have short memories. Now I'm not saying that they'll be able to pull off a repeat with the 3DS and Wii-U. But I wouldn't be too surprised either. I apologize if that offended you, but I DO share your sentiment. I see the online gaming phenomena in games lately as much more of a forced effort. It's fine for me when it isn't crammed down your throat, and it's a seperate thing from the single player. But your point begs the question: How do you feel about services like PSN and XBLA that offer features to download complete games? Does that fall under the same banner? Also, in regards to Metroid Prime Trilogy, I wasn't pointing that game out because I disliked it, I was pointing it out that it was the only game that featured a Nintendo first party character that made me think: "I might like this one."
|
|