Slashdot Mirror
Miyamoto vs. Everyone Else
Ian_Bailey writes "Wired writes Nintendo won't grow up, because of Shigeru Miyamoto. The creator of some of the most popular franchises, and the head of most of Nintendo's creative development, constantly aims his games at children. Many other devloppers admire his creativity, and believe that a mature-themed game would rock the entire industry. A very interesting read, and a bit of insight into the 'God of Games'."
So what's wrong with colorful graphics and cartoonish characters? Do games have to feature gore and ultra-violence to be entertaining? Hell no.
yeah, he keeps making "kiddy" games, But he makes inovation in design and came up with ,well we all know what hes done. While i do enjoy mature games, i dont see the problem with not making them, he doesnt want to, what would be so much better about a mature game? blood? guns? and there are other people making mature games that are good, so we should all be happy nintendo makes "kiddy" games that ARE good
there was a game on one of the commadore or atari systems (I had both, many versions) called Mario Brothers. Luigi and mario were in a 'joust' style repeating side scroller with pipes, shell turtles, enemies and all before Super Mario Brothers on NES came out. It was by far my fav of the series. He always manages brilliant games.
pm
** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
Seamus Blackley of MS says: .... He's reinforcing stereotypes about games, not pushing them to a place where they can become something different and truly awesome."
;) .
"He is not helping things
What? All Miyamoto has done throughout his career is making truly awesome and different games!! The idea of a platform game (the original mario); the epic action adventure (zelda series); bringing videogames into 3D (mario 64). Virtually every project he has made or simply produced has been stellar.
Pikmin is a great example of a 'different' game. Has anyone played the latest Metroid (Prime)- the BEST GAME ever. And the next Zelda will be out in March (Metroid may have a short-lived stay at the top).
I've been a videogamer since 85, so I know what this man has brought to every console generation. Nintendo might have to freeze this guy like Disney froze Walt
I liked the article in general though - this man is truly a GOD. I don't care if his games are cutesy - they are the BEST!
smd4985
This all depends on how you look at it, I suppose - on one hand, the generation of kids who grew up with Nintendo are now in their twenties and thirties, and probably want games that have more mature themes, or that hark back to their favourite game characters from childhood (Notice Nintendo's heavy reliance on characters they created in the 1980's!).
OTOH, parents (hopefully) want a game console where most of the game titles would be "safe" for their children to play - Nintendo delivers.
Looks like Miyamoto wants Nintendo to take the latter.
Illegitimi non Carborundum.
I am a 30 year old gamer, I currently own and enjoy games in all three consoles, and I enjoy playing games like Splinter Cell and Eternal Darkness as I do Ape Escape and Sonic. I enjoy a game because it is addictive, it makes me want to play it more and, sometimes, because I like the story. Not because it has an adult theme, whatever that might be.
To finish of, I will say the following: the current generation of games has been spoilt with stupidly complex, hyper-hyped games with idiotic stories without any real substance (the last three Final Fantasy games being the best example) that they cannot appreciate that a game has to be innovative, simple and addictive to be good. There were no such things as "adult games" ten-fifteen years ago, yet people got by... I am looking forward to Zelda coming out in Europe, as I am sure lots of thirtysomething /.ers are. I am hoping it will maintain the standards set by Ocarina of time and Majora's mask and I do not care in the least whether the graphics are "childish" or not. Play the game, I say, not look at it.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
Yeah, some people actually enjoy a game that doesn't involve lopping off heads, dismemberment, gratuitous nudity etc, and can actually be played by a general audience.
Games like mario were playable by all ages. While the graphics have grown a bit more kiddish, I've known many parents that would happily sit down with their kid and play a game or two (and often enough, wait for the kid to go to bed so they can play for themselves).
It's my personal belief that because the "computer graphics" industry is so young, we're still trying to pack as much realism into our games as possible.
I think as the medium matures, we'll start to see more interesting and abstract art forms immerging from graphics. Games that are based around gameplay, will start to take over again, as graphics become something that you can manipulate the way you want to.
The graphics should become a way to help create an environment for the game. It shouldn't be the reason for creating the game.
~ "When I'm of that age I'm just going to live up a tree."
Super Mario Bros. was the first game to present a world so complex and extensive it had to be mapped to be understood.
Shhh. Don't let Dave Lebling, Marc Blank, Andrew Greenberg, Robert Woodhead, or Richard Garriott hear that. They might die laughing.
The musical score - a first in gaming - gave areas within the gamespace a distinct atmosphere, eerie in one place, jaunty in another.
Again, this is just console-developer arrogance at its worst (or more precisely, idiot Wired journalist ignorance at its normal levels). Ultima III had an orchestral score on the Apple ][ in 1983.
OK, for one, this article totally glosses over Metroid Prime, which was an excellent game, and definitely had me a little freaked out and scared for Samus' mortality. not really a game aimed at preteens...
second, i kind of take offense at the idea that a game that doesn't drip with gore isn't aimed at adults. maybe i don't go for the garish motif of games like the Quake series. it's not because i'm unprepared to handle it; it's just that i think it's... tacky.
third, if you look at the general population of adults (not just adult gamers), i think kids are more likely to be able to wrap their minds around videogames than adults. it's sort of a stereotype, but it's true.. how many kids do you know that could wipe the floor with their parents and older relatives with any head-to-head game? so saying a game is "just aimed at kids" is sort of misunderstanding the situation a bit, imho.
Just raise the taxes on crack.
Miyamoto is doing what he does best. You don't change what you are good at, especially if you hold a strong position in a specific niche of a market or industry. If Nintendo came out with their own gory or sexy video game, I really think it would flop. Just goes to show that you don't need sex and violence to make a great product that will be loved by millions.
So he design more "childish" games, not "mature" ones. I would think that his track record speaks for itself. Mario. Zelda. Donkey Kong. You know, like, all of the biggest titles from Nintendo.
It's not like money is an issue for him or Nintendo. He could try and design anything he wanted, but this is what he want to do. No one can force him to design a "mature" game, and even if they could force him, his heart wouldn't be in it, and the game would suck.
Article summary:
He's built a huge, successful company. It's still doing well. He's always advanced the state of the art. His games are well designed. They get critical praise, and most sell in numbers that other companies would kill for. But, he didn't great GTA, so he sucks.
A.
My main problem with this article is with Seamus Blackley opening up his mouth.
I'll be honest - the Xbox has some cool ideas to it - I like the hard drive, I like the speed, and the graphics look nice. That Mr. Blackley can be proud of.
On the other hand, can somebody please tell me what game Mr. Blackley has made that was actually fun? Trespasser? (Lord, God, protect us.)
Mr. Blackley is a very good technical person and programmer - when it comes to things like physics, or making complex systems work, he's somebody to talk to.
The problem is he obviously does not know jack shit about what makes a fun game - him spouting off about how Miyamato is maintaining gaming stereotypes is the stupidest thing I've ever seen.
Miyamato has spent almost 20 years making games that are fun - always different, usually surprising and innovative. What, we're going to critique Miyazaki because he makes Spirited Away instead of "Animated Blood, Gore and Guts II"?
Miyamato has the freedom to make whatever games he likes - and I know this sounds fanboyish, but I like them. I have yet to play one that I didn't enjoy, that didn't give me hours of fun and wild-eyed enjoyment, sometimes fast and frantic (Starfox), sometimes thoughtful (Mario Brothers Sunshine), sometimes just beautiful (Pikmin and Zelda: The Wind Waker), and sometimes epic (Zelda: The Ocarina of Time).
I like a good violent romp as much as the next gamer - but when I want to play a game that does more than push my adrenaline button, you always come home to Miyamato. And I honestly thing that Mr. Blackley is a little bit jealous of that - because when the time comes, Blackley will be a footnote of gaming history, and Miyamato will be an entire book in itself.
Of course, I could be wrong.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
"The most important thing is for games to be fun," [Miyamoto] says. "I cannot tell you exactly what that means. It is something you feel, I think."
Ya know, that should be so intuitively obvious, but you look at so many games these days and it seems like this fundamental rule is not followed nearly as often as it should be.
I'd suggest you don't use Slashdot as your only news source, or you will suffer permanent brain damage.
What kills me, are all these self proclaimed 'advanced' developers making all these crappy games like GTA. What they don't seem to get is that their games aren't selling because they make good games. Their games are selling because the masses don't/can't/won't look beyond surface imagery. It's the same reason why television in North America is so 'blue collar', why books are a dying breed, why movies may as well just be porn for all the quality that exists in them.
Miyamoto's games shed the simple trappings of 'image' and give you substance. THAT's why they're so successful in the longterm. In 10 years, will anyone even remember GTA except as another flash in the pan violent-and-gritty-to-get-publicity games? Not likely. Will they remember Zelda, Mario, etc? Absolutely.
Console markets are cyclic (just like everything). Eventually the kids playing GTA will grow up and see that there's more to life than appearance (whether it be looking cool, glamorous, dark, etc.) and that it's the fun-factor that makes them play games. Of course, then we'll see a flood of cutesy games that suck...
- Z
There's a fine line between genius and stupidity. Genius has limits.
I think this quote by Miyamoto from the article sums it up best-
""People often talk about Grand Theft Auto. But I am not sure whether that sort of extreme subject matter is always appropriate. They also talk about the future of games being a kind of virtual reality. But I am not convinced that being more realistic makes better games."
More power to him. GTA3 is all bloody and "realistic", to be sure, but there's a reason why i've always seemed to have a copy of a Mario Bros. game at hand for the better part of 10 years now. I play games to escape reality, not to simulate it.
I'm 22 years old, and I think there's enough blood, guts, and violence in life already...Give me something bright, intricate, and engaging(and yes, "kiddy") with his name on it above the latest 3D shooter junk any day.
Children's games? I think not! Miyamoto creates GOOD games. HE focuses on playability and FUN. His games don't involve decaptiations, sex, nasty violent episodes, crime sprees, or insane murders. They are for playing and having fun. And he does it VERY VERY well. People of all ages enjoy his games, he is actually targetting a much larger demographic than most people who produce "mature" games. He makes games that you can sit down and play with your dad, and your 8 year old cousin, and all of you will have fun playing it.
Kintanon
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
I also reckon that shying away from the photo-realistic eye-candy approach also means that you have to focus on gameplay which I quite often feel is sadly lacking from a lot of the more "modern adult games"
The only Good System is a Sound System
I don't need to worry about GTA-3 showing up in Nintendo land. I haven't yet (NOTE: I said YET) seen a game with obvious gore.
Nintendo seems to be changing its tune on this topic. Blood Omen 2, Resident Evil, and several other moderately graphically violent games are available for the Gamecube.
I'd be surprised if something like Soldier of Fortune were released for their system, but I think even Nintendo realizes that they need to broaden their selection of titles to have the widest audience possible.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
I expected to see people raving about how much crap Nintendo games are. They're kiddy games etc. Thankfully few people have chimed in with that garbage.
People make fun of me for owning a Gamecube. Why would I play a bunch of goofy little kids games? I say, since when did I need to play video games to feel grown up? I can go down a couple blocks to the bad part of town, or watch the news to see violence and war. I want to get away from that for a little while.
I wish there was some there was some way that I could be outside playing basketball, in the rain, and not get wet.
In fall 2001, Nintendo's GameCube became the third entry in a hotly contested console battle that includes Sony's PlayStation 2 and Microsoft's Xbox. Currently, Sony has a commanding lead, with 40 million units sold, while Nintendo and Microsoft struggle for a distant second place with 6 million units each
While I would agree that the XBox and Playstation are in direct competition, it seems like Nintendo diferentiates itself enough to compete. Not only do they target the games differently, but Nintendo prices it's consoles $50 lower and puts them in bright colors. They don't play DVD's like PS2 or XBox. It seems like Nintendo's goal is to offer something a little different, less features for a lower price, and that could be a winning strategy. (Not to mention not using CD's as media cuts down on the mod chipping piracy)
Also, I wouldn't say all their fans are kids. 2 of my former coworkers, ages 22 and 27, were huge fans of Super Monkey Ball 3
I have blog like everyone else
Miyamoto is truly innovative and a great game designer, but his innovations are not all encompassing. He focuses on the one player gaming experience. Nintendo is notably neglecting the online experience reportedly due to Miyamoto's direction.
I believe online has more than proven itself. Nintendo's stubornness to deny its gamers online experience will be seen as akin to their mistake in denying developers the CD medium (which they've finally caught up with in the GameCube with the proprietary mini-disc).
Miyamoto continues to break new ground and innovate but he does not address multiplayer issues. The online experience is open for a new generation of game designers. The PC game designers are likely to migrate to the consoles for a more controlled, reliable gaming platform, and the online gaming experience will eventually become the principal area for gaming and innovation.
Miyamoto trailblazed one player gaming. It'll be fun to see who trailblazes the next generation of games.
Just because you played Nitendo games as a kid doesn't mean that they have to suit you. This is like expecting Fisher Price to grow up with you and make sex toys now that you're 22. C'mon, if they want to target kids, let them do so, it's a hell of a profitable market really. Let Playstation 2 be the adult toy.
Does a game have to feature ultra violence and gore to be entertaining? No, of course not, but it doesn't need to feature ultra violence and gore to be adult. Morrowind wasn't a gory or ultra violent game, per se, however it featured many adult themes (drugs, assassinations, etc). I have to draw the line at playing a game "for the young at heart" when they put too many kiddy themes into it. I don't go see Disney movies in the theatre, nor do I play Disney style games at home. Playing a game with a plumber who squirts things with a fruity watergun is just too childish for me. I like my movies to be witty and thought provoking, and I like my games to feature similar themes. No cutesy bunnies or pokemon style critters for me, thank you very much
Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
Miyamoto's games--and Nintendo's games in general--are targeted toward all ages, with the exception of a group from about 15-25 who reject them as being remnants of the childhood they have left behind. The typical pattern is:
:)
Ages 6-14: "These games are great fun!"
Ages 15-25: "Nintendo games are for kids! I want mature games!" [Where "mature" means either dark science fiction or extreme violence.]
Ages 26+: "These games are great fun!"
It's been amusing to watch how often this occurs. You can see kids hit an age where the reject Mario and flock toward stuff like Resident Evil. Then after a while they work through it all and just play what's fun. Most of the time. Some people never give it up
This is silly. Miyamoto is the guy that produced Metroid Prime. Without him, it probably wouldn't have been the same. He was essentially in charge of overseeing that game- and it's far from a child's game.
This whole "kiddy" criticism of Nintendo really needs to stop. Miyamoto's games are usually brilliant. He actually realizes that he can make awesome games without hookers and crack dealers. It shows you that he is in it to make awesome games- not just make a quick buck like the folks at companies like Rockstar Games.
It's too bad that people just don't appreciate it. So what? Pikmin and Mario are cute games. They are still loads of fun. Everyone's knocking the new Zelda game because of its cartonish, cell-shaded look. But they won't be dissing it when it totally blows them away.
I think that the funniest part of the article was where Blackley, the XBox guy was like, "he's not helping the industry, he's hurting it," i guess because this genius believes, like someone who had heard about darwin but doesn't really get it, that game development is going somewhere in particular -- in this case, the guy clearly assumes that selling games to people who won't buy something without a lot of blood would mean that games have 'made it'.
What a moron. You've got the guy, the only guy who has like ten multi-million sellers under his belt, the guy who brought the console back and brought us Zelda with it, a guy who has been through two video game recessions and helped see to it that they gross more than hollywood, and he's not helping games. Ahem. Pardon me, Seamus, but how are XBox sales?
I appreciate the fact that lots of people think that games are for kiddies, and surely Miyamoto's not doing a lot in the way of evangelizing to those poeple. And I'm glad, because every minute he spends doing that (for what, by the way?) he's not making the next Pikmin or Mario or Zelda.
god is just pretend.
I think the author (and many a poster) misses the boat on just what an 'adult-oriented' game actually is and could be. Sex, violence and gore really target males aged 13-35 (which, to clarify, includes myself), but this is by no means the only adult market, nor are these the only adult themes available.
I suspect the industry's blindness to other audience's potential is twofold: (1) game development is very much a (young) male-dominated industry and (2) big business tends to go with what is already working (why take huge risks investing in a game that appeals to 50+ women when you can go for 15-35 year-old guys that will almost certainly buy?).
I won't claim any great insight into making games that will appeal to these other audiences. But I am pretty certain innovations to draw them in won't come from developers that can't see beyond the current audiences. I am also certain that traditionalists like the author of the article will sneer at whatever these new games are since they will defy the conventions of what a game 'should be' (until the profits roll in anyways). A quick example of this would be the Sims. The Sims has a pretty strong appeal to certain types of gamers, especially female ones, and is selling in quite solid amounts. Yet, among the hard-core gamers that I know, it is frequently sneered at as being very dull and un-interesting.
So where does this leave us? Mostly with the author parroting the game industry's main strategy: sell to males 15-35. Not exactly a recipe for growth (or innovation).
The wired article is laughable. Miyamoto (and Nintendo as a whole) have consistently made amazing games. Since when does blood and sex make a "Mature" game. If you want nudity, go rent some porn. If you want blood and gore go rent Hannibal. Nintendo realizes games are about the gameplay, not the shiny graphics or violence. Look what seperates two "mature" games, GTA3 and BMX XXX from smash-hit to lame gimmick. GTA3 has unique and innovative gameplay. It is fun and polished. It has guns and explosions and hookers. Look at BMX XXX. It has even more guns and explosions and hookers. But noone cares, because beneath it all is a poor bicycle game. The only people who think a game needs guns and hookers to be suitable for adults are people too stuck up on their machoism and hormones to realize what fun is. Nintendo is not perfect, but as long as they keep pumping out games that are different from the norm I'll be buying.
This discussion will continue to falter so long as "mature" remains code for "juvenile." In most cases I've seen "mature" game is one with blood, boobs, and base language. But this is not truly mature; it's really juvenile since it is appealing to a person's base instincts. Likewise, "childish" is code for "cartoon." It has little to do with the game story or themes.
An easy example is found in movies: "Toy Story 2" is considered a "kiddie movie" because it's a cartoon. Though it readily appeals to children, it addresses the mature themes of friendship, loss, and death.
Likewise, most "mature" action movies are largely juvenile, appealing to people's desire to see stuff get blowed up real good. They don't actually have any mature themes.
I welcome truly mature games, and there are some out there. But let's make the discussion easier by not mislabeling the juvenile games as "mature" and not calling games "kiddie" just because they have bright colors.
ShoutingMan.com
Higginbotham's 'bouncing spot on an oscilloscope' hack in the fifties could only be called a video game in the broadest possible sense of the word. It was a nice hack but it never went anywhere, and the man himself didn't see the potential in it either.
As to Bushnell and Baer, they started the arcade and home video games industries, for which all credit is due to them, but I wouldn't call them great video game designers. Great businessmen, yes.
Miyamoto has been a visionary in many of his games, ahead of his contemporaries, over a period of several decades. Even if you insist on drawing a line from Bushnell & Baer to Miyamoto, I think you will have to admit that the student has surpassed the masters.
Great games
The sales of his Mario series alone has done $7billion. Comparison in the article to the Star Wars movies doing only $3.5billion.
His games are entertaining, and playable. A kid can enjoy them all, and adults usally enjoy most of them. Just because you are the opinion that his games suck, or are lame, boring, whatever; is fine. There are other games out there for you. But there should be games for the little guys too, just as there were when we were younger (I was 10 when the NES came out).
I say let Sony and Microsoft ignore the 'kids games' and let the master do what he shall.
" Seamus Blackley of MS says: .... He's reinforcing stereotypes about games, not pushing them to a place where they can become something different and truly awesome.""
"He is not helping things
And that right there is the huge difference between Miyamoto and Sony and Microsoft. Miyamoto has never "pushed" in his life. He doesn't make games to "push the technological envelope" (but they usually end up doing so). He doesn't make games to "push to a new demographic" (which he doesn't need to do, he hits everybody).
Miyamoto writes games! Miyamoto games are the perfect example of ars gratia artis. He doesn't make these games for the money or the fame, he writes them for himself. Which is exactly why he gets all the money and the fame.
It's just a shame so many people refuse to understand this one simple concept.
... if no movies were G-rated.
I cringe when I hear people saying Nintendo should grow up. Hey, if you want gory FPSs, get an Xbox or a PS2.
Nintendo's right where they should be. Their stuff sells like crazy, and SOMEBODY's gotta make games for the kids and the kids-at-heart. I'm 33, just bought a Gamecube with Mario Sunshine last week, and I'm having a great time with it.
This article reminds me a lot of the old American football saying, about how fans give their coach too much blame when the team loses and too much credit when the team wins. American McGee's comment is a great example of this:
"Grand Theft Auto is basically a rip-off of Zelda, because Zelda invented massive-world games that let players explore freely, rather than following a linear path. Miyamoto innovates, so he's pushing the form. End of story."
I'm sorry, but Ultima III and the Wizardry series were doing massive-world free-exploration games long before the NES even existed. And even those had predecessors. And from the way this article sounds, you'd think Miyamoto was the first to ever use 3D or a camera in a game.
This seems to be an underlying theme in the article -- that the video game industry is looking to Miyamoto for guidance, blaming him for not guiding them in the right way, and giving him way too much credit for its current state. It's as if Miyamoto is successful due to some magic he alone possesses, rather than because he was able to build on lessons of the past in the right ways.
It seems ridiculous to me.
Children are permanently stoned. Seriously, watch a four year old for a while and then watch someone on ecstacy. The only difference is the size. So yeah, they're games for kids or stoners, take your pick.
Bite the hand.
The games aren't AIMED at kids - this is a myth perpetuated by small minded individuals who think they are somehow 'lessened' by enjoying something that would also appeal to children. Nintendo's games are more often like 'Family' games - they appeal to a wide range of ages.
Practically all of Nintendo's big "kids" games are just raw FUN. Mario Sunshine is an incredibly huge, fun, and (in places) difficult game, for example. Having cartoony graphics doesn't detract from this in any way, and you can spend hours playing it and enjoying yourself. Isn't that the point of playing video games? To have fun while you waste your time? I know that's why I play.
And this is why I like my PS2 and Cube, and will never buy an Xbox - the games are all being created with this ridicuous "kids stuff can't be good" mentality, so instead all the games are being created with flashy 'realistic' graphics, and almost no thought given to gameplay.
Nintendo sold Rare because Rare hadn't made them a significant quantity of money in years. Combine that with Rare's penchant for massive delays and overbudget development and suddenly you see why Nintendo no longer cared. DK64 (mediocre game, sold much less than expected), Perfect Dark (sold well, but not as well as they hoped), Conker's BFD (sold terribly), and Starfox Adventures (BLECH!) all disappointed people. Nintendo made no mistake cutting Rare loose.
:)
You want a "mature" game on Cube? Play Metroid Prime. Play Eternal Darkness. Don't worry about Rare and their slow asses.
Why do I need backwards compatibility? My SNES still works fine. And if it ever breaks it'll cost, on sec, about $20 to $30 right now on EBay. My N64 is still going strong, probably won't need to replace that for years to come. Who needs backward compatibility when I still have all the systems?
More importantly to all of this we understood that a very corrupt, erroneous and backwards lesson was being taught. War was not only cooler than it ever had been, even more than during the two World Wars, but now it had absolutely no consequence! WOOOOOHOOOOO!
Yet it would have been considered "mature" had they introduced some mindless sexual situations, cussing and/or death even given the illogical and "childish" approach at the entire series.
Mature to me is not limited to adding boobs, sexual innuendo or a dead body or two. "Mature" are situations that are considered too deep or "uncool" to most kids and require more analytical, critical, logical and reflective (experience) thought than the average child is willing or able to put forth.
I only say this because too many are confusing the issue, and usually in an attempt to "help." (the kind of help like someone angrily throwing a rock at a cop that just pulled a buddy over, thus escalating it to everyone being arrested... all for nothing. Hmmm, that would be childish behavior in an adult-ish body) Please don't help unless you are willing to think out the consequences of your actions.
On the issue specific to Nintendo and Miyamoto, I would like to say that like many here (I am guessing) I consider many of his works to be some of the best games if only from a perspective of them setting the standards we use now and being ahead of his time. I think that Zelda for example was fantastic and I really enjoyed some of the later installments of that. However, like with FF it bacame rather old when the exact same plot was hatched over and over again. Plus the simplistic, requiring no thought and absolutely non-linear gameplay just did not grow with the times. Instead we had better graphics and sound... all things that to gamer and not an exhobitionist is just superficial candy coating. I sincerely hope that one day I will see a Zelda game that is not some kiddy hack... that would be great.
I'm so very tired of the "Nintendo is teh kiddy!" argument. I'm happy the way things are. While Nintendo's kid-friendly reputation may keep it nipping at the heels of the Xbox and PS2, the bazillions of copies of Pokemon and Gameboys that are sold every year will keep them afloat to make more games like Metroid Prime and Zelda.
is a games quality judged by the killing and blood in the game. yes i enjoy "mature games" (fallout) but i also enjoy a number of games that are viewed as childrens. so i don't see why everyone makes such a big deal about this issue. how good a game is should be based on it's gameply rather then if it's mature or not.
Are there enough mod points left to mark me as -1, Troll to kill the presence of a dissenting opinoin?
It seems today's par for the coarse is "you don't need blood/violence/etc. to make a game fun, despite what everyone thinks" I agree entirely, however nearly every tired post in this discussion has carried the implication that it has NO place in gaming, which I contest.
To crudely break down the spectrum of games, for the purpose of my argument, you have games which function as toys on the tv screen/monitor and what the suggestive masses have referred to as "mature" or "realistic." To summerise simply, its everything else.
Miyomoto-esque games are toys. Just that. At a conceptual level, they are playtime with a controller.
The "other" games find their base in conflict in some form. Violence easily serves as a vehicle for the conflict the game is based around and just that; and it can be done extremely well. To cite an example, I point towards Half-Life where the player is dropped into a brutally hostile environment with a group of other bystanders where the goal is to survive to live another day (which boasts familiarities with some other aspects of life... heh) or any of the Marathon Trilogy in a universe where the player is kicked around and manipulated by entities with more power and insight into the larger situation than he.
Yes, games don't HAVE to be violent to be fun, but they CAN use those elements to make it so, and I think that's a fair conclusion.
Bored with karma, be a fan/freak
This might have been said before, but ah well.
Does anyone else notice how this article seems to think that sex/violence == a mature game == a good game? I mean, sure, the content could probably rate it an NC-17 rating, but does that necessarily mean the game is worth the money you pay for it?
What about a game like Final Fantasy Tactics, and how it portrayed the brutality of social rank, among other issues (eh, that might be a bad example)? Or what about a series like Arc the Lad, a trilogy of games that asks the question: How far will humanity go in their pursuit of power and knowledge?
I suppose I could pose the question of the maturity of these games, given the fact that they don't portray "mature content" in a way that GTA does, but a better question would be what will happen to the production of games like these if the industry hops on the GTA Bandwagon?
...we would loose games that let us be childs again :-) And, BTW, what's wrong about targeting children and never-grown-ups ? As long as they are able to pay (or let pay) for Nintendo's consoles and games, everything is OK.
Without Miyamoto Nintendo would be toast already, I guess. And I wouldn't love Nintendo as much as I do without him. Except for the GameCube which I have yet to buy I own every console Nintendo has released in Europe and the charm of Mario and Zelda is... unique. And they managed to make a cult out of it.
One strength of Miyamoto's games is simple gameplay. They are easy to learn and understand but yet get challenging lateron in the game, without getting boring. And this is something very special that is not often found in games, unfortunately. And I guess focussing on children helps him keeping this concept of easy to use/learn games that get challenging (but seldom unfair).
That, as others have said, is a view of those wanting to be mature (such as the under-18's).
Nintendo games do not fall into the basic PC/Box/PS2 format of being a clone of three major genres:
1) 3d Shoot them up.
2) Resource harvest, build, send them to war.
3) Sword. Orc. Better Sword. Orgre. Better Sword. Dragon.
Even within each genre a slightly original tweak of gameplay as heralded as revolutionary.
Miyamoto develops games which are outside this stereotype. So he's stylistic and makes them brightly coloured. They are games for people who _love_ games.
The critics who level the maturity thing at Nintendo are the same type of people who would call themselves critics, based on the facts they go and see all the top blockbuster movies.
When in reality none of the three main PC genres would exist today with their level of innovation. We'd all be debating the latest incarnation of Solitaire or The Sims...
Whoops...