Nintendo NX: Thread 01

[Dogg Thang]

Nope and I've always felt I shouldn't need it.

[Nu-Eclipse]

Shouldn't need it? Perhaps. But surely so much better to have it than not have it?

[Dogg Thang]

Not sure I agree because not having camera control puts the onus on the dev to get their camera right. For me, putting in that camera control is like saying: sorry guys, we couldn't quite get it right. See if you can have a go. Those games of the early 2000s are a pain in my ass as a result. Personal taste but I see needing to hand the camera over to the player in these type of games as a failure. It's like if they had to have a separate scrolling mechanic in Super Mario World.

[Asura]

Shouldn't need it? Perhaps. But surely so much better to have it than not have it?

No, because the user can cause the problem.

If you limit the camera, as a level designer, you can create locations which give the user everything they need to see from the right perpsective. Let them move it, and they can sabotage themselves.

It isn't just that cameras have improved; it's that game design has improved as people's understanding of third-person gaming has improved.

[PaTaito]

You have a short memory. The DS was announced leading also with its touchscreen and microphone. It was led by its gimmicks front and centre and criticised for that (I know because I was one who did just that). The handheld market is not a given for Nintendo and it's funny that you're citing their stubbornness as a negative while buying into their arrogance in the handheld market. And yet we saw the same things happen with the Wii U and 3DS. The only difference is that Nintendo had little by way of direct competitors in the handheld market.

They had the same fortunate success with the DS as they did with the Wii, selling on hardware and selling well beyond usual demographics. Then they based the Wii U and 3DS around other hardware features (gimmicks if you like), expected the sales to continue, mucked up the branding and didn't support strong enough with actual games. They picked up their game eventually on 3DS but the situations are very similar. And had Sony not made larger mistakes seemingly through lack of effort or if someone else like MS had entered the handheld market, the handheld market lead position would have been there for the taking.

I never said they were arrogant regarding the handheld market at all, also see the emoticon next to my statement about their stubbornness???

The touchscreen idea was genuine innovation at the time and arguably not so much of a gimmick, especially when you look now at the mobile market. The second screen was gimmicky, but nowhere near as gimmicky as motion control. Also the other factor to consider is that DS was sufficiently more powerful than the GBA it was replacing(i bought it to play mario 64 at work upon release), this was not the case with the Wii which was a slight overclock of the same GC hardware. The point being that the DS wasnt all gimmick.

But its all pointless discussion because the fact is DS succeeded rather spectacularly both in hardware sales, and 3rd party support. Touchscreen has become the norm, and dual screens are still being used for the 3ds.

Where as WiiU abandoned Wiimotes as the primary way of playing. Gimmickry is proven over time.

[Dogg Thang]

And really when it comes to Nintendo, it's innovation if you personally like it and a gimmick if you don't. Two words for the same thing.

[PaTaito]

I think the market dictates what is truly innovative in the long run.

The touchscreen was something that became massively widespread, and the second screen has endured in 3ds. Motion controls however...well look at what microsoft did with xbone packages recently.

[Dogg Thang]

Second screen hasn't gone anywhere else. Motion controls spread further than that. And the 3DS' second screen didn't exactly help its sales so I'm not convinced the market decided it was an innovation rather than a gimmick. But like I say, two words for the same thing. As for the touch screen, the only game series I can think of that was great because of the touch screen rather than in spite of it is Ouendan. But it's all just opinion. I'm not convinced on your market deciding - if that's the case, then the best-selling DS games should have the touch screen as their core feature. Maybe they do... I haven't checked.

[nakamura]

Super Mario 3D World is simply incredible and the best looking HD game ever for me.

[PaTaito]

Second screen hasn't gone anywhere else. Motion controls spread further than that. And the 3DS' second screen didn't exactly help its sales so I'm not convinced the market decided it was an innovation rather than a gimmick. But like I say, two words for the same thing. As for the touch screen, the only game series I can think of that was great because of the touch screen rather than in spite of it is Ouendan. But it's all just opinion. I'm not convinced on your market deciding - if that's the case, then the best-selling DS games should have the touch screen as their core feature. Maybe they do... I haven't checked.

Nintendo themselves stuck with second screen, and touch controls are absolutely everywhere. The 3ds would have had no proper backwards compatibility without the second screen, and given that absolutely loads of people primarily played ds games on 3ds in the early days(even now check ebay listings for 3ds hardware) the 3ds would likely be nowhere without the second screen.

So a bit misguided.

But we are way too hung up on ds here, its hardware was sufficiently more powerful than GBA meaning forgetting gimmicks it already had one over the Wii...as i already said i bought a DS just to play Mario 64 at work, regardless of "hardware first". DS was a 3rd party success thanks to devs embracing its innovations properly too.

Only nintendo themselves truly innovated on the Wii when it came to software, and now the market appears to be well and truly over motion controls it would seem.

[Dogg Thang]

The reason you've given for the second screen sticking is basic backward compatibility practicality, not your innovation. The reason we were on the DS has been somewhat lost in all of this but it began because the DS makes the Wii more than a one-off. They are a pair. Again your power comparison provides another similarity. You're right that it had more power than the GBA but significantly less than the PSP so a similar standing among its competitor to the Wii. Neither were hurt by lack of power. As for your last statement, again you're just picking and choosing what you happen to like and labelling that innovation rather than gimmick. That's fine, we're all going on opinion here.

To be honest, I reckon the innovation thing lost all meaning back in the early days of the DS and Wii where it was wheeled out on a whim to cover anything Nintendo did regardless of whether it made games actually better or not. One thing this generation shows is that it's time to get back to the actual games.

[PaTaito]

The reason you've given for the second screen sticking is basic backward compatibility practicality, not your innovation. The reason we were on the DS has been somewhat lost in all of this but it began because the DS makes the Wii more than a one-off. They are a pair. Again your power comparison provides another similarity. You're right that it had more power than the GBA but significantly less than the PSP so a similar standing among its competitor to the Wii. Neither were hurt by lack of power. As for your last statement, again you're just picking and choosing what you happen to like and labelling that innovation rather than gimmick. That's fine, we're all going on opinion here.

To be honest, I reckon the innovation thing lost all meaning back in the early days of the DS and Wii where it was wheeled out on a whim to cover anything Nintendo did regardless of whether it made games actually better or not. One thing this generation shows is that it's time to get back to the actual games.

Not true. You argued the second screen didn't help sales of the 3ds, i'm saying it most certainly did. Nothing to do with the innovation and rather to do with your previous statement.

The fact that nobody appears to be bothered about motion controls now, hell look at microsoft shifting their focus onto pushing its hardware capabilities and ditching kinect, kind of proves that motion controls were a gimmick which didn't last.

Even if you think dual screens were a gimmick, are you seriously going to argue that touch screens were anything but a massive innovation?

Furthermore from a horsepower point of view the DS was nothing like the Wii situation, for it to be the same nintendo would have released a dual screen GBA, next to the PSP.

The Wii was pretty much a gamecube with novelty controllers.

[Dogg Thang]

Man, you're seriously not seeing how meaningless your innovation stuff is. It does simply mean gimmick you liked. That's cool - I have no problem with that. As for the rest, the DS was underpowered, so was the Wii. Far more similar than they were different. We just have a different perception here, which is also cool.

[PaTaito]

Man, you're seriously not seeing how meaningless your innovation stuff is. It does simply mean gimmick you liked. That's cool - I have no problem with that. As for the rest, the DS was underpowered, so was the Wii. Far more similar than they were different. We just have a different perception here, which is also cool.

Your argument that gimmick and innovation are one and the same simply has no legs...and i will not get drawn into arguing about this further. DS was indeed underpowered, but the significance comes from the fact that under the hood it was a proper generational upgrade over the GBA, which the Wii was not when compared to the GC.

DS had something going for it without the novelty factor. In 2004 playing mario 64 on a portable was reason enough for me to buy the DS.

Would i have bought the DS without the double or touch screens? yes.

Would i have bought into the Wii without the motion controls? not a chance, given it really didn't improve on the gamecube, hell even twilight princess was a gamecube game.

Ironically i ended up hating the motion controls...and it looks like its something people in general are well and truly over.

[Dogg Thang]

I fully agree - the DS has loads going for it. A massive amount of games were awesome in spite of the innovation. But yeah, the innovation stuff is meaningless because it is just based on your personal preference and you're aiming to twist things to back up your own personal world view. Like the DS touch screen being innovative because it became widespread (just a single other comparable system - Vita, and look how that's working) but motion control is not because it didn't (Sony and MS both adopted it for their consoles). You just can't make it fit. But that's because you're trying to rationalise what is really a personal preference and in that case, yes, the term becomes meaningless.