Has Nintendo Lost Its Edge?

Thanks to GameSpy for their 'Spy/CounterSpy' editorial discussing whether Nintendo has lost its way in the increasingly competitive gaming world. On the one hand, an editor argues: "One of the few concrete things [Nintendo have] said is that the successor to GameCube is coming out sooner, rather than later, but what's the point if it's as lacking in software as its two predecessors? Or if the software is as samey as the current stuff?" But on the other, there's counterpoint and optimism: "In fact, it's the companies with lots of resources who are falling behind in the race who typically come up with the biggest and riskiest innovations. Given Nintendo's ability to create good hardware and its strategic position in the handheld space, that could mean some VERY cool things in the future."

Comments

GC 2

[bartok]

The only way I can see Nintendo taking the lead over Microsoft with it's next generation console is if the GameCube 2 can play GBA games without a GBA pluged-in. (By having a carthroge slot on the side and the regular CD player for GC & GC2 games) The GBA game library is so huge that all of a sudden, your console could play them all from the day of it's release AND have access to regular CG games.

It's so obvious that this is a wining strategy IMHO.

poor nintendo

[Phoenix Dreamscape]

Poor Nintendo... a mere $572 million in profits. How can they ever survive? Seems hopeless, eh?

With such pathetically unoriginal titles like Pikmin, Warioware, and Metroid Prime, it seems like the Gamecube is little more than trash that they through out because they refuse to let well-enough alone.

What Nintendo really needs is to start pumping out some derivative First-Person shooter titles with laggy internet support so I can get my ass kicked by cocky assholes with bad grammar.

Nintendo - the Apple of game systems

[yetanothertechie]

I'm beginning to see parallels between Apple and Nintendo, particularly in predictions about their demise. How many articles have their been since gamecube came out saying that Nintendo was going down the tubes?

The fact is, the gamecube is an excellent platform and there are a huge number of great games available, (not as many as PS2, but plenty). They also have a dedicated fan base that's not likely to embrace either of the other platforms any time soon. For those who complain that they have too many "kids" games, there will always be lots of kids playing games, so it's not like they'll have a declining market. For that matter, so many of their games are great for any age: windwaker, animal crossing, soul caliber 2, various sports games...how are these for kids only?

Why does Nintendo get bashed so much? What, you'd rather support Microsoft or Sony?!

Gamecube titles

[mr.capaneus]

The Gamecube really does not suffer from a lack of titles. The reason that it isn't selling well in the U.S. is the perception that there is a lack of titles. The console business is all about marketing and image these days. People will buy what their friends have and what they think is cool. I have both a GC and a PS2. While there are more games that I can purchase for the PS2, there are more games I want to play on the GC, by far. I had been planning on buying a Gamecube because I really wanted to play Metroid Prime and Zelda. Unfortunately I decided to "research" my decision on the web and everything I read said that the GC was inferior to the PS2. I hate to say it but I think the inertia of the market is going to continue for a while longer. Nintendo will wane. Xbox will wax. PS2 will continue to dominate.

Re:Yes

[Snowspinner]

Endless games with Mario in them? For the Gamecube, that would be... let's see... Mario Golf, Mario Party 4, and Super Mario Sunshine? Oh, right, and if you really want to count it, Super Smash Bros Melee. With two more coming - Mario Party 5, and Mario Kart: Double Dash.

Yup. That's the GC library. Except, of course, for Zelda, Metroid, Eternal Darkness, Pikmin, F-Zero, and Nintendo's lock on the Super Monkey Ball, Rogue Squadron, and Resident Evil series.

As you said, Nintendo's games are not much different from what they did before. So perhaps its your idea of fun that's changed, not Nintendo's games.

In a given year, Nintendo will make 2-3 of the best games of the year. Last year they did Eternal Darkness and Metroid Prime. This year, it looks like Zelda and F-Zero, though with Mario Kart, Pikmin 2, and their Metal Gear Solid remake, all still coming out this year, they might easily get another. On top of these instant classics, they line the edges with games that are great and worth owning - Pikmin, Mario Golf, etc.

There is no other game company that comes close to that level of quality, for either consoles or PCs. Blizzard takes 2-3 years to come out with one game as great as Zelda, Metroid, or Eternal Darkness.

Considering that, I can't imagine buying a console other than the Nintendo console. Especially since the alleged highlights of other systems - Final Fantasy X, Grand Theft Auto 3, and Halo, for instance, did nothing for me.

So, do I think Nintendo has lost its edge?

I think Nintendo are the only people left who have an edge.

Re:Nintendo's Problem

[mr.capaneus]

some of the funnest games on GC look like the type of thing that most grown Adults would avoid

translation: Some of the funnest games on GC look like the type of thing that most 14 year olds that want to act like adults would avoid.

Re:Yes

[Snowspinner]

Out of that list, all but one of the first party games are typical Nintendo franchise games. People were moaning about Lara Croft by the time Tomb Raider III was announced - I am sick to DEATH of Mario as he has been around for probably nearly 20 years.

So in your case "Mario" means "any Nintendo property that has had another game come out in the series"? That's an interesting definition.

I suppose my question would be why reinvent the wheel with new characters? Yes, they could have made Mario Golf with characters who weren't Mario characters... but why? Mario is a perfectly good franchise to use for a cartoony golf game.

Perhaps in your opinion they will, but not others. The only game out of that lot deserving high praise is Eternal Darkness. MP was just Metroid in 3D, and not as good as I had hoped. And how can Metal Gear Solid be so critically acclaimed, when it is just a remake of an older game?

I'd say Eternal Darkness is, on the whole, less inventive than Metroid Prime. Eternal Darkness is a Zelda-esque dungeon hack with some shiny insanity effects. It does a great job on them, and so is still a great game, but Metroid Prime takes the first-person-shooter in a direction it had never been taken before. More to the point, it did things with the first person shooter that people said couldn't be done - platforming sections that didn't suck, exploration based gameplay, etc.

And, I mean, what were you hoping for from Metroid Prime? Something that wasn't Metroid?

But Nintendo only developed Zelda themselves - the other two were done by other development studios.

Second party development studios that, with heavy input and control from Nintendo. I do not consider the fact that Nintendo has begun to expand and take in some other development studios to mean that those games are not Nintendo games.

You yourself said that their games do not change much - so how can they have an 'edge' if that is true?

Nintendo continues to do what it's always done - perfect styles of games, and invent new styles of games. Even their new styles of games, though, have a certain... Nintendoness to them. They display elegance of control, and are typically very easy to pick up and play, but not nearly so easy to beat, and harder still to "fully" beat (i.e. unlock everything, get 100% completion, etc).

Regardless, in every genre and style Nintendo has attempted, they are reliably among the best at it.

That seems an edge to me.