Nintendo - E3 Digital Showcase Discussion

[machomuu]

Different = bad, apparently.

Gotta love the great fans over here at Nintendo.

 

[Eden]

I think part of the reason for the overwhelming amount of salt we see here is because people were expecting way too much after last year. I don't think anyone should count on Nintendo having two consecutive good events, considering it's a platform mostly supported by them. As a result, of course they're going to focus on games that are coming out by the end of the year. I'd understand the hate for no Zelda Wii U though...but Aonuma himself claimed that the game would most likely not turn up in March.

 

[DJTiki]

This is downright hilarious:

Spoiler:

Metroid fanbase confirm to be worse than the Sonic fanbase.

Do they not know what a Spin-Off title is? I mean, you COULD complain that this is the next Metroid game in 5 years and wait for its release OR you could CANCEL it and wait even longer. I like the former better. At least you get a game at all. XD

I also found it hilarious that people say that Nintendo "owes" them for losing E3. Does Nintendo really owes us anything? Really? An evil part of me wants Nintendo to come out and cancel the Metroid series all together. But I know it's for the best that they don't.

 

[Keiran]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBM5NTtZlt8

I hate to keep whining but this video is pretty darn accurate right now.

And I've gotta agree about the NX. :(

That video is painfully accurate, lol.

The thing I hate most about the new Animal Crossing game is that it requires each player to have an Amiibo. When Nintendo first announced Amiibos, they said they would be nothing like DLC. That's true, because they're somehow beginning to be a lot worse than DLC. This Animal Crossing game will effectively cost you $60+ $13 per player ($112 for 4-players, not counting tax) (that's also considering that you're able to buy them from retailers and not scalpers on ebay) to play. Add another $13 for each additional character. Requiring Amiibos to even play a game is absurd, and I'm worried it's going to set a precedent for future games.

 

[machomuu]

The thing I hate most about the new Animal Crossing game is that it requires each player to have an Amiibo.

Oh? I don't remember them ever saying that Amiibos were required, even despite the game's title and what they showed.

 

[Keiran]

Oh? I don't remember them ever saying that Amiibos were required, even despite the game's title and what they showed.

Spoiler:

 

[machomuu]

Spoiler:

Huh. That's a shame.

Oh well, there's time for them to 180. 'cause they'll 180. They'll have to 180. If they don't 180, that requirement wall will make the game a horrifying flop. So they'll 180.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I have seen a few people wanting Nintendo to create a game that heavily uses amiibos, and they got their wish.

 

[machomuu]

In pursuing its vision of new control schemes, expanding IPs and pushing more amiibo to us, Nintendo is in danger of losing the essence of some franchises that we love.

This is a quote from Nintendolife that I don't particularly agree with, and its for this reason that I'm not nearly as upset with this E3 as others. Apart from this whole idea of entitlement (which is to say, we aren't owed a single fucking thing), there's this idea of people not getting what they want and this meaning the end of said franchises.

But, first off, I want to look at the Nintendo Conference 2 years ago. This was one of the worst E3s I'd seen from Nintendo...ever, and it was during the E3 downfall where it was getting progressively worse and worse for...what, 3 or 4 years at that point? It was bad, reeeeally bad, and I don't think they showed a single new title or info on ambiguous titles. Not one. Not a ding-dang one, absolutely nothing. Comparing that one to this one, this was the much better conference, but the uproar here is far above what it was then.

Next year they come out with this conference in a more interesting style, making use of the fact that they're doing a digital conference to push humor and the idea that they understand that we have things to say. It was unanimously enjoyed by the masses and got quite a bit of praise but...well, gonna be honest, it was pretty much the same as this year, if less so. Splatoon of last year was supposed to be the NWC this year, and we got just about as many game announcements, if not more, they just weren't what people were expecting. And that's kinda what the meat of this is.

The last conference was a success, so they tried to do it again, but without any major negative feedback from the masses they had nothing to change, so they simply tried it again, playing it safe and building on current titles rather than announcing new ones. Sure, we got Zelda last year, but we got announcements and gameplay for more games here. Regardless (and due in part to that), people are furious- and as strange as this might sound from me...this is a good thing.

Granted, it was to be expected that people with such high expectations would be disappointed in the conference this year if Nintendo didn't up their game, but this is necessary to show that the demand is there. Buzz is simply buzz, but an outcry reaches ears. The dislikes on videos and reactions may seem a bit dramatic but ultimately they will have a positive effect on what we see out of future Nintendo Directs and the next E3(s). The company needs this sort of thing to gauge what the fans want and when it is time to provide it for them. The negative reception is a good thing that we'll probably see the impact of in the coming years, months, possibly even days.

With that in mind, back to the quote, when has Nintendo making side or derivative games ever completely changed or sidetracked the mainline? These works are spin-offs, they won't affect the main series so much that- well, it's better to say that there's no proof that these games will have any effect on anything. They're just spin-offs. They haven't shown anything that makes them worth worrying about in that regard.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

This is just getting better. XD


https://twitter.com/TheBitBlock/status/611193545836380161


AC fans should be able to feel relieved for now.

 

[bobandbill]

It's weird that they didn't announce it in the game, but well, there goes those fears. Nintendolife confirmed it from treehouse as well - the AC Party-esque game is free to download, you just need an amiibo to play the game (and really just one of your own.) That's much more reasonable, as some people may well be tempted to get a AC amiibo for looks alone.

 

[machomuu]

And on that, I got to thinking...aren't Amiibo cards going to be coming out? This should help Demand, and it should certainly help supply. More, there are ones coming out for Animal Crossing (specifically, the designer game), that I would hope work for the game, making the game and the amiibos far more accessible.

 

[twocows]

Nintendo (and many, many other people, even many of the people complaining) are missing the point completely on why people are upset about this.

People are not upset about this particular game, even if they think they are. What people are upset about is the gross mishandling of one of their favorite franchises. Super Metroid and the Prime trilogy are widely regarded as some of the best video games of all time (the Prime Trilogy, all of it, definitely sits near the top of my list). Even Fusion and Zero Mission were widely regarded as "pretty good." People disliked Other M so much because it didn't live up to the quality they had come to expect from the Metroid franchise. And this game barely even qualifies as a full Metroid game, honestly.

This game should have been a side entry, the "Fallout Shelter" to go alongside with the main game announcement. The reason people are mad is the same reason people were mad about Deus Ex: The Fall. People had high expectations for a new Deus Ex game and weren't expecting a made-for-tablets side entry. Nintendo is billing this as their main Metroid game of this generation (they've outright said as much, too). This is not a game that headlines by itself, it's a side project. In fact, I can pretty much guarantee that if this had released alongside a real Metroid title, almost nobody would be mad about it at all.

Instead, this is (by Nintendo's own admission) our one Metroid game of this generation, and it's basically the "Deus Ex: The Fall" of Metroid games. Woo.

What fans really wanted to see was an admission that they had gone astray and that Nintendo was going to "return to form" with whatever new title they were releasing, which would have been more along the lines of Super Metroid or the Prime Trilogy. Instead, this pretty much guarantees that, unless someone who actually understands what's happening suddenly appears, we're going to get more garbage dumped on us in the coming years.

It's really disappointing that Nintendo is missing the point here and thinks this is just about this one particular game. Nobody really cares about this game, they care about the mishandling of the series in general, even if they can't fully articulate it. People want a mainline Metroid game that captures what they liked about the franchise to begin with. Super Metroid and the Prime trilogy were exemplars, they were games that showed other developers what to strive for when making a game of this sort. With this, Nintendo is acknowledging that they don't really understand what made Metroid good to begin with. And that does not bode well for the future of this franchise.

Do they not know what a Spin-Off title is? I mean, you COULD complain that this is the next Metroid game in 5 years and wait for its release OR you could CANCEL it and wait even longer. I like the former better. At least you get a game at all. XD

I also found it hilarious that people say that Nintendo "owes" them for losing E3. Does Nintendo really owes us anything? Really? An evil part of me wants Nintendo to come out and cancel the Metroid series all together. But I know it's for the best that they don't.

That's a fairly anti-consumer sentiment and you shouldn't say something like that even as a joke. Yes, companies owe the people who buy their products good products and good service, and people are absolutely in the right for calling them out when they don't get it. If people don't like the way something they like is being handled, they have every right to speak out about it. I would say it may even be more of an obligation unless they want to continue to see bad products and bad service in the future. The role criticism plays is important and not something you should brush off like that.

 

[machomuu]

That's a fairly anti-consumer sentiment and you shouldn't say something like that even as a joke. Yes, companies owe the people who buy their products good products and good service, and people are absolutely in the right for calling them out when they don't get it. If people don't like the way something they like is being handled, they have every right to speak out about it. I would say it may even be more of an obligation unless they want to continue to see bad products and bad service in the future. The role criticism plays is important and not something you should brush off like that.

Neither the company nor the consumer is entitled to anything, really. It's supply and demand, you get out what you put in, and you appeal to one to feed your pockets

Ultimately, whatever the keeps feeding the demand and filtering the supply is what works, but they're never required to make a specific product because it's in demand, and we're never expected to get such, because ultimately their goal is, simply, to make money. At the end of the day, we are still getting a product, just not what's been in demand. Regardless of whether that's better or worse for the company or the consumer, entitlement doesn't exist in video games. This isn't to say I don't think the backlash isn't for the better; as I said above, it can only result in a better future for Nintendo and its consumers. But if they do indeed bend to this idea of entitlement, they'll lose control. If the demand begets the supply, there's an imbalance, and it could turn out worse for the products we're being provided.

All in all, I really just think that Nintendo should be a more immediately receptive company in the way of feedback-response. They're traditionally a company that does what they want and while the last E3 was pretty consumer-savvy, it was addressing things that have been in their faces for years with little attention being publicly given to them. This idea of "Hear no evil, see no evil" is likely to keep these flames a risin' until they settle down on their own. It says something about the importance of the consumer to Nintendo.

 

[twocows]

Neither the company nor the consumer is entitled to anything, really. It's supply and demand, you get out what you put in, and you appeal to one to feed your pockets

Ultimately, whatever the keeps feeding the demand and filtering the supply is what works, but they're never required to make a specific product because it's in demand, and we're never expected to get such, because ultimately their goal is, simply, to make money. At the end of the day, we are still getting a product, just not what's been in demand. Regardless of whether that's better or worse for the company or the consumer, entitlement doesn't exist in video games. This isn't to say I don't think the backlash isn't for the better; as I said above, it can only result in a better future for Nintendo and its consumers. But if they do indeed bend to this idea of entitlement, they'll lose control. If the demand begets the supply, there's an imbalance, and it could turn out worse for the products we're being provided.

Demand does drive everything, though. If people don't want something, they have no reason to buy it. The role of a company is to fulfill the demands of the consumer. Nintendo is not only failing to produce anything desirable with this popular franchise, they're further irritating their customers by running the franchise into the ground with games the fans don't want and don't like.

And I fail to see how giving people what they want could turn out worse for anyone involved. There's an old saying, "the customer is always right." Yes, people don't always know exactly what they want, but they usually have a fairly good idea. It's one thing to read between the lines and use proper judgment when interpreting consumer demand, it's an entirely different thing to ignore what the people want altogether. Ignore your customer base at your own peril.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

It's hard to believe that the same well-respected people in debates who I assume believe that video games shouldn't be part of politics, as they're a non-issue to more serious problems right now, are treating the average digital event as if it were part of politics, which sounds hypocritical.


And just so you know, Nintendo has confirmed that Samus will appear in Federation Force, as well as metroids and possibly Sylux, but not in playable form: https://www.gamnesia.com/news/metro...ederation-force-more-details-rev#.VYLVd_5RGUn


Can we stop moaning about this game already? Your precious bounty hunter and my primary waifu isn't done yet.

 

[machomuu]

It's hard to believe that the same well-respected people in debates who I assume believe that video games shouldn't be part of politics, as they're a non-issue to more serious problems right now, are treating the average digital event as if it were part of politics, which sounds hypocritical.

I take issue with this. People always say that they're "just games" and they "don't matter", but clearly this is a big problem for someone, even if they're exaggerating to the highest degree. If you're invested something and it's a big part of your life, it can stand to be a lot more important than the elephant dying in Africa. It's tragic, but not only does one of these things have more to do with you than the other, one of them also has a larger effect on you than the other.

While I do think the outcry's pretty silly, this idea that in, the grand scheme, video games "aren't important" doesn't gel well with me. It takes a shot at the idea of true subjectivity which, in this case, would be the idea that any single issue to one person can leap mountains above the most critical problem of another. You're major interests and investments are a strong part of you and your character, and if you hold them in low regard...well. Again, they're apart of you.

Demand does drive everything, though. If people don't want something, they have no reason to buy it. The role of a company is to fulfill the demands of the consumer. Nintendo is not only failing to produce anything desirable with this popular franchise, they're further irritating their customers by running the franchise into the ground with games the fans don't want and don't like.

And I fail to see how giving people what they want could turn out worse for anyone involved. There's an old saying, "the customer is always right." Yes, people don't always know exactly what they want, but they usually have a fairly good idea. It's one thing to read between the lines and use proper judgment when interpreting consumer demand, it's an entirely different thing to ignore what the people want altogether. Ignore your customer base at your own peril.

I'm not really saying that giving them what they want is ever really a problem so much as bending solely to it can be bad for a company's control over the products they make. It's happened in a few cases that I can think of.

But as far as Metroid Prime is concerned, I really don't see any reason to get upset about this. People are taking it as if they're saying "We want Metroid Prime to be this", when in reality it looks more like "We want to try this side-project for the franchise and see if people like it." I don't see any sign of this game changing the franchise and I see little reason to look at this project as blasphemic because there was no plan to make this game a main Metroid Prime title to begin with. It doesn't look like a response to demand so much as just wanting to try something new on the side, but the rage, after all, is in the name rather than the intention.

Because they see it as a Bait and Switch, which they shouldn't, really, because Nintendo intentionally gave the game a quick, non-theatric reveal and never really implied that is was a major title. Sure it's not what we expected, but what I'm saying is pretty damn extreme and definitely wouldn't have happened if nothing'd been announced at all. And it may be "justified" by the law of Supply-and-Demand, but you rarely see outcry like this in the case of other franchises, which makes it seem much more like it's just E3 rage and it'll blow over. Whether that's how it should be or whether it could turn out to help anyone that way's up in the air. I suppose we'll see.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I take issue with this. People always say that they're "just games" and they "don't matter", but clearly this is a big problem for someone, even if they're exaggerating to the highest degree. If you're invested something and it's a big part of your life, it can stand to be a lot more important than the elephant dying in Africa. It's tragic, but not only does one of these things have more to do with you than the other, one of them also has a larger effect on you than the other.

While I do think the outcry's pretty silly, this idea that in, the grand scheme, video games "aren't important" doesn't gel well with me. It takes a shot at the idea of true subjectivity which, in this case, would be the idea that any single issue to one person can leap mountains above the most critical problem of another. You're major interests and investments are a strong part of you and your character, and if you hold them in low regard...well. Again, they're apart of you.

So that means I was right about video games being part of politics the first time before I was told otherwise by another PC user here.


Also, it truly frustrates me that everyone at youtube, including the one gaming website I visit for non-bias articles, are thinking that Nintendo is done with the Wii U and moving onto the NX, which we know absolutely nothing about other than being their next gaming device that'll possibly be region-free, all because of the lineup for the next 6 to 8 months. If anything, Nintendo may be done with the 3DS, and based on patterns, the NX may as well be their next-gen handheld game, which explains why there were so many 3DS titles announced, as a last hurrah to the 3DS before moving onto the next handheld. It happened before at E3 2010 when Nintendo announced a ton of Wii titles and announced the Wii U a year later.

 

[machomuu]

So that means I was right about video games being part of politics the first time before I was told otherwise by another PC user here.

That's not at all what I meant, just that there's nothing wrong about expressing yourself about something that's important to you, and that there's nothing wrong with holding video games higher than Politics if they really mean something to you.

Video games are video games. Politics are politics.

Also, to Animal Crossing fans, this:
https://kotaku.com/the-new-animal-crossing-is-finally-letting-you-choose-y-1712344472

All these ideas for the Designer game...I wasn't much interested at first, but I'm kinda getting excited in the next AC. Looking forward to a 2016 announcement.

 

[twocows]

I take issue with this. People always say that they're "just games" and they "don't matter", but clearly this is a big problem for someone, even if they're exaggerating to the highest degree. If you're invested something and it's a big part of your life, it can stand to be a lot more important than the elephant dying in Africa. It's tragic, but not only does one of these things have more to do with you than the other, one of them also has a larger effect on you than the other.

While I do think the outcry's pretty silly, this idea that in, the grand scheme, video games "aren't important" doesn't gel well with me. It takes a shot at the idea of true subjectivity which, in this case, would be the idea that any single issue to one person can leap mountains above the most critical problem of another. You're major interests and investments are a strong part of you and your character, and if you hold them in low regard...well. Again, they're apart of you.


I'm not really saying that giving them what they want is ever really a problem so much as bending solely to it can be bad for a company's control over the products they make. It's happened in a few cases that I can think of.

But as far as Metroid Prime is concerned, I really don't see any reason to get upset about this. People are taking it as if they're saying "We want Metroid Prime to be this", when in reality it looks more like "We want to try this side-project for the franchise and see if people like it." I don't see any sign of this game changing the franchise and I see little reason to look at this project as blasphemic because there was no plan to make this game a main Metroid Prime title to begin with. It doesn't look like a response to demand so much as just wanting to try something new on the side, but the rage, after all, is in the name rather than the intention.

Because they see it as a Bait and Switch, which they shouldn't, really, because Nintendo intentionally gave the game a quick, non-theatric reveal and never really implied that is was a major title. Sure it's not what we expected, but what I'm saying is pretty damn extreme and definitely wouldn't have happened if nothing'd been announced at all. And it may be "justified" by the law of Supply-and-Demand, but you rarely see outcry like this in the case of other franchises, which makes it seem much more like it's just E3 rage and it'll blow over. Whether that's how it should be or whether it could turn out to help anyone that way's up in the air. I suppose we'll see.

The problem is that people want a new main series Metroid title and Nintendo is pursuing side projects instead of putting that out. The correct way to do things would have been to do a side-by-side release. That's what Bethesda chose to do with the new Fallout game and the biggest complaint people have about their side-game is that it's not out on Android yet.

People are mad because it's been eight years since the last Metroid hit (Prime 3) and now it's been confirmed we get to wait several more before even having a chance at another good Metroid game.