• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

jnWake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,108
Honestly the only problems in that list are:
2) Retro doing DK, because Retro can do lots of different things.

I don't see any problem in HAL and Good-Feel doing more Kirby and Yoshi games, as long as the games are good (and yes, they are!)

2) proven by the sheer variety of games developed by Retro?

Funny how it even contradicts the following sentence. HAL has a much larger history of varied games than Retro but it doesn't matter if they keep on doing Kirby yet if Retro does a second DK it's bad.
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
2) proven by the sheer variety of games developed by Retro?

Funny how it even contradicts the following sentence. HAL has a much larger history of varied games than Retro but it doesn't matter if they keep on doing Kirby yet if Retro does a second DK it's bad.

? Post Melee, HAL has released 16 Kirby games (though with decent variety in some of the game types), 2 Picross games, 3 BoxBoy games, Face Raiders (AR app), Face Pilot, and Common Sense training.

People want more games like Mario Odyssey and BotW and they think Retro can do those games while they think HAL cannot. DKC6 would be very nice (though I'm 90% sure it's not DKC6 or DK 3D) and good, but it's not wrong for people who want more BotW or SMO type games to want Retro to make more games like that.
 

Glio

Member
Oct 27, 2017
24,518
Spain
? Post Melee, HAL has released 16 Kirby games (though with decent variety in some of the game types), 2 Picross games, 3 BoxBoy games, Face Raiders (AR app), Face Pilot, and Common Sense training.

People want more games like Mario Odyssey and BotW and they think Retro can do those games while they think HAL cannot. DKC6 would be very nice (though I'm 90% sure it's not DKC6 or DK 3D) and good, but it's not wrong for people who want more BotW or SMO type games to want Retro to make more games like that.

But HAL is bigger. Like the double of employees
 
Oct 27, 2017
9,792
Peru
It was also incredibly rushed because Microsoft was buying the studio on September 24th, 2002, and the game had to be out before then (it released just one day before).

If Star Fox Adventures came out in late 2003 or early 2004 I guarantee it would have been more fully realized.

Possibly but still barely anything from Rare after they were acquired by MS was worth paying attention, let alone buying a XBox or X360

(I mean, I was kinda interested in Kameo and Viva Piñata but I sure as hell wasn't going to buy a console for them although I do regret not getting an X360 last gen for other reasons).
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
But HAL is bigger. Like the double of employees

I think that was true in the past, but Retro and HAL have the same amount of employees now at this point I believe. Retro has hired a ton of people to bulk up for AAA development. I'm curious if HAL does increase their hiring since at their current staff levels (150 people) they barely have enough people to make one AAA game per 3-4 years (though they seem uninterested in AAA development)

But Retro has made 3 Metroid Prime games and 2 DKC games vs. HAL making 16 Kirby games in the same time period so it makes some sense that some people view HAL as just a Kirby studio.
 
OP
OP

EAD Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,347
The sad part about it is these 2nd party teams always get some kind of delusions of grandeur and walk when ever they can get a chance. I'm talking, about Factor 5, SK, Rare, and a few others. Factor 5 basically left Nintendo because "Teh Kiddy" was the talk of the town and now look at them. I do agree new teams need time. I wish the team that made Giest could work there issues out. So many good ideas but bad execution.

That's not what happened at all. Factor 5 pitched two first-party games (Pilotwings, Kid Icarus). Nintendo briefly entertained at least Pilotwings, but eventually pulled out of both projects. Factor 5 had no choice but to look elsewhere for work.

Because the remaster of a game that sold poorly will probably sell poorly

Didn't stop Bayonetta 1+2 or the 6 consecutive Fatal Frames Nintendo produced. It's actually more sensible for Nintendo to release cheaper cost first-party games that build their portfolio. Not that I actually think any worthwhile niche remasters are happening, but that isn't the right argument.

I think that was true in the past, but Retro and HAL have the same amount of employees now at this point I believe. Retro has hired a ton of people to bulk up for AAA development. I'm curious if HAL does increase their hiring since at their current staff levels (150 people) they barely have enough people to make one AAA game per 3-4 years (though they seem uninterested in AAA development)

But Retro has made 3 Metroid Prime games and 2 DKC games vs. HAL making 16 Kirby games in the same time period so it makes some sense that some people view HAL as just a Kirby studio.

HAL/IS under contract with Nintendo, have portions of their R&D that specifically work with Nintendo's technology team. Game software for Nintendo is not their only agenda.
 
Last edited:

MetalLord

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,323
I think, at least for me, is that it would be nice for them to at least add some variety to Nintendo's line up. Them making the billionth platformer on Wii U was extremely disappointing. I've criticized Nintendo (and Sony) for having too many of their front runner franchises be the same exact genre and style.

New Super Mario Bros 2
New Super Mario Bros U
New Super Luigi U
Super Mario Maker
Super Mario Maker 3DS
Kirby Triple Deluxe
Kirby Planet Robobot
Kirby Star Allies
Kirby and the Rainbow Curse
Every single Kirby spin off title on the 3DS the past 2-3 years
Yoshi Wooly World
Yoshi and Poochy
Yoshi 2018
Donkey Kong Country Returns
Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze
Chibi Robo Ziplash
Hey Pikmin

And they all have the same cutesy art style.

Like dang. Have some variety in your lineup. They all start to look almost the same with some basic gameplay mechanic or two to separate them.

Thankfully Nintendo has been getting better at this with the Switch. But I hope with Kirby and Yoshi coming next year I hope we don't get more.

This is why I complain about people wanting another Yoshi, Kirby, 2D Mario, or Donkey Kong. I'm just sick to death with the franchises. Theres no reason to have that many games and active franchises in a single genre. And these franchises have nothing going for them other than gameplay which just blends into every other platformer series. No interesting story or characters. They just keep recycling the same story over and over, maybe with a tiny twist. Boring, lazy, dumb.

I want variety. Variety in gameplay. Variety in art style. Variety in storytelling. Variety.
Retro deserves better than just another 2D platformer
Terrible list, you put ports and dlc from the same game in different spots, and some games are not even platformers like pikmin
 

Deleted member 19702

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,722
Nintendo got rid of them at the right time. Nothing that Rare has done after the N64 days has been particularly great.

I wish that Nintendo concentrated on Playtonic instead and funded Yooka-Laylee's sequel to give it some actual good directing, there's a lot of potential in that franchise.

That's the excuse often said by Nintendo fanboys in order to antagonize Rare and damage control the selling to Microsoft but that's silly. Rare may had some layoffs, but still it was perhaps the strongest western dev they had a the time. It was actually Microsoft's blame and their inability to properly manage Rare and it's franchises that ruined it. At Nintendo hands, it's very likely they could still keep the relevance they had. Remember, Retro also had lay offs, most of the Prime series departed, but Nintendo still managed to keep it strong and able to develop two great DK games. Rare probably would have made a sequel to DK 64 for GCN that would be a major seller, as well it's other big IPs, strongly identified to Nintendo's ecosystem and audience. Rare's IPs never managed to have the same appealing and reception from MS's crowd.

Giving away strong and highly appealing to the western crowd IPs, such as Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, etc.. took a hit into Nintendo's range diversity and it's appeal toward the western audience was severely held back. Nintendo never managed to create something close to Rare's aesthetics to properly fill the void left. There's nothing on Nintendo's library closely resembling aesthetics from Rare games such as KI, PD and Conker. This diversity was lost with Rare's sellout and consequently the lost of it's IPs. That was a very short-sighted decision from Nintendo, not only because they lost strong, western appealing IPs, but they chose to give them to it's competitor. The "Rare was on a downward spiral" excuse doesn't make any sense either. Rare developed, from 2000-2002, one of the best N64 titles such as Banjo Tooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day. Star Fox Adventures is regarded as a failure, but it's obvious incomplete and the sellout negotiations took a hit in the final product, not because Rare was "falling apart" as some claim.

Imagine if Sony sells Naughty Dog along with Uncharted and Last of Us for Nintendo? It would be a similar situation.

That's the reason why there's expectations among Nintendo fans for Retro and NLG to properly fill the void left from Rare (and others ex-secord-parties). There's very few Nintendo IP's at the moment targeting the west especifically, something they had in the past.
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
That's not what happened at all. Factor 5 pitched two first-party games (Pilotwings, Kid Icarus). Nintendo briefly entertained at least Pilotwings, but eventually pulled out of both projects. Factor 5 had no choice but to look elsewhere for work.



Didn't stop Bayonetta 1+2 or the 6 consecutive Fatal Frames Nintendo produced. It's actually more sensible for Nintendo to release cheaper cost first-party games that build their portfolio. Not that I actually think any worthwhile niche remasters are happening, but that isn't the right argument.



HAL/IS under contract with Nintendo, have portions of their R&D that specifically work with Nintendo's technology team. Game software for Nintendo is not their only agenda.

I mean, sure?

But I don't think that HAL could make games that win GotY awards like SMO, BotW, Metroid Prime, or Bayonetta 2 could. And many people think Retro could make those types of games and many want them to make those action adventure, AAA types of games.
 
Oct 27, 2017
9,792
Peru
That's the excuse often said by Nintendo fanboys in order to antagonize Rare and damage control the selling to Microsoft but that's silly. Rare may had some layoffs, but still it was perhaps the strongest western dev they had a the time. It was actually Microsoft's blame and their inability to properly manage Rare and it's franchises that ruined it. At Nintendo hands, it's very likely they could still keep the relevance they had. Remember, Retro also had lay offs, most of the Prime series departed, but Nintendo still managed to keep it strong and able to develop two great DK games. Rare probably would have made a sequel to DK 64 for GCN that would be a major seller, as well it's other big IPs, strongly identified to Nintendo's ecosystem and audience.

Giving away strong and highly appealing to the western crowd IPs, such as Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, etc.. took a hit into Nintendo's range diversity and it's appeal toward the western audience was severely held back. Nintendo never managed to create something close to Rare's aesthetics to properly fill the void left. There's nothing on Nintendo's library closely resembling aesthetics from Rare games such as KI, PD and Conker. This diversity was lost with Rare's sellout and consequently the lost of it's IPs. That was a very short-sighted decision from Nintendo, not only because they lost strong, western appealing IPs, but they chose to give them to it's competitor. The "Rare was on a downward spiral" excuse doesn't make any sense either. Rare developed, from 2000-2002, one of the best N64 titles such as Banjo Tooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day. Star Fox Adventures is regarded as a failure, but it's obvious incomplete and the sellout negotiations obvious took a hit in the final product, not because Rare was "falling apart" as some claim.

Imagine if Sony sell Naughty Dog along with Uncharted and Last of Us for Nintendo? It would be a similar situation.

That's the reason why there's expectations among Nintendo fans for Retro and NLG to properly fill the void left from Rare (and others ex-secord-parties). There's very few Nintendo IP's at the moment targeting the west especifically, something they had in the past.

How is that "damage control"? Rare simply went worse, that's a fact. Yes, Nintendo lost many IPs with them but basically everything they did after they were acquired was a downgrade from their previous offerings.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,009
That's the excuse often said by Nintendo fanboys in order to antagonize Rare and damage control the selling to Microsoft but that's silly. Rare may had some layoffs, but still it was perhaps the strongest western dev they had a the time. It was actually Microsoft's blame and their inability to properly manage Rare and it's franchises that ruined it. At Nintendo hands, it's very likely they could still keep the relevance they had. Remember, Retro also had lay offs, most of the Prime series departed, but Nintendo still managed to keep it strong and able to develop two great DK games. Rare probably would have made a sequel to DK 64 for GCN that would be a major seller, as well it's other big IPs, strongly identified to Nintendo's ecosystem and audience. Rare's IPs never managed to have the same appealing and reception from MS's crowd.

Giving away strong and highly appealing to the western crowd IPs, such as Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, etc.. took a hit into Nintendo's range diversity and it's appeal toward the western audience was severely held back. Nintendo never managed to create something close to Rare's aesthetics to properly fill the void left. There's nothing on Nintendo's library closely resembling aesthetics from Rare games such as KI, PD and Conker. This diversity was lost with Rare's sellout and consequently the lost of it's IPs. That was a very short-sighted decision from Nintendo, not only because they lost strong, western appealing IPs, but they chose to give them to it's competitor. The "Rare was on a downward spiral" excuse doesn't make any sense either. Rare developed, from 2000-2002, one of the best N64 titles such as Banjo Tooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day. Star Fox Adventures is regarded as a failure, but it's obvious incomplete and the sellout negotiations took a hit in the final product, not because Rare was "falling apart" as some claim.

Imagine if Sony sells Naughty Dog along with Uncharted and Last of Us for Nintendo? It would be a similar situation.

That's the reason why there's expectations among Nintendo fans for Retro and NLG to properly fill the void left from Rare (and others ex-secord-parties). There's very few Nintendo IP's at the moment targeting the west especifically, something they had in the past.

That's pretty much my thoughts. Rare was a pretty massive studio too. I'm pretty sure they had something like 300 people working there back in the Nintendo days, which allowed them such a high game output. Nintendo has never really replaced that resource loss in the west.
 
OP
OP

EAD Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,347
That's the excuse often said by Nintendo fanboys in order to antagonize Rare and damage control the selling to Microsoft but that's silly. Rare may had some layoffs, but still it was perhaps the strongest western dev they had a the time. It was actually Microsoft's blame and their inability to properly manage Rare and it's franchises that ruined it. At Nintendo hands, it's very likely they could still keep the relevance they had. Remember, Retro also had lay offs, most of the Prime series departed, but Nintendo still managed to keep it strong and able to develop two great DK games. Rare probably would have made a sequel to DK 64 for GCN that would be a major seller, as well it's other big IPs, strongly identified to Nintendo's ecosystem and audience. Rare's IPs never managed to have the same appealing and reception from MS's crowd.

Giving away strong and highly appealing to the western crowd IPs, such as Killer Instinct, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, etc.. took a hit into Nintendo's range diversity and it's appeal toward the western audience was severely held back. Nintendo never managed to create something close to Rare's aesthetics to properly fill the void left. There's nothing on Nintendo's library closely resembling aesthetics from Rare games such as KI, PD and Conker. This diversity was lost with Rare's sellout and consequently the lost of it's IPs. That was a very short-sighted decision from Nintendo, not only because they lost strong, western appealing IPs, but they chose to give them to it's competitor. The "Rare was on a downward spiral" excuse doesn't make any sense either. Rare developed, from 2000-2002, one of the best N64 titles such as Banjo Tooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day. Star Fox Adventures is regarded as a failure, but it's obvious incomplete and the sellout negotiations took a hit in the final product, not because Rare was "falling apart" as some claim.

Imagine if Sony sells Naughty Dog along with Uncharted and Last of Us for Nintendo? It would be a similar situation.

That's the reason why there's expectations among Nintendo fans for Retro and NLG to properly fill the void left from Rare (and others ex-secord-parties). There's very few Nintendo IP's at the moment targeting the west especifically, something they had in the past.

I think as a Nintendo fan, that N64 era of Western derived first-party games was very special. It was amazing to see the games from RARE especially during that time. The obvious truth is that we are not going to have any developer replace the RARE output of the N64 era, because that business model doesn't exist anymore. Games require quadruple the staff and money than they once used to. Retro or NLG or anyone is never going to be RARE of N64. Even RARE can't be RARE of N64.
 

TheDinoman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,096
I mean, the dirty little secret about Metroid Prime is that had Nintendo left Retro to their own devices, it wouldn't of been anywhere near as good as it was. The game's director admitted this in an interview: http://nintendoeverything.com/metro...g-the-game-nintendos-influence-leaving-retro/

Metroid Prime was ultimately a game from both the east and west. Retro made the title, but it did so with plenty of help and ideas from staff in Japan. Had it gone differently, Pacini feels it "wouldn't have been the same game." Retro was open to Nintendo's ideas and gave them "due diligence". Had Retro worked on it entirely alone with Nintendo putting its name on the box at the end, "it would not have been anywhere as good." Pacini feels that Metroid Prime's success was "because it had that collaboration".

For instance, at some point in development, the team actually struggled how to incorporate the morphball into the game, and Miyamoto basically threatened to cancel the project unless they could figure it out.

"We didn't want to make just another first person shooter," said Kelbaugh. "We wanted to bring the morph ball into 3D. We wanted to bring the screw attack into 3D. Making a first person shooter would have been a cheap and easy way to go. But making sure the themes and concepts in Metroid were kept was something that we wanted to do. And translating those things into 3D was a real challenge. For example, translating the morph ball was one of the hardest things to do."

Said Pacini, "We used Super Metroid as our kind of Bible. But as we'd been sold on the concept of first-person; we couldn't see how to put the ball into the title. In fact, it was actually on the chopping block for a long time. We thought that concentrating on the exploration through platforming might be good enough."

He continued, "But Miyamoto's first directive was 'if we don't make the transition between the ball and first-person seamless, then we can't do this game.'"

"It took us a few months to get that correct," added Pacini. "And that was pretty scary, as it was one of the first milestones we had to reach, and thanks to our engineers ,we managed to create something that when Miyamoto saw it he said, 'okay' on the project. That was huge."

So I suppose my overall point is this: if Nintendo was able to get Retro to make one of the best games ever and turn them into one of their top devs, then I don't see how they couldn't of "redeemed" Rare, had they bought them out and made them a first party developer.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 33

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
1,457
Over the last 15 years, Nintendo created a lot of new IPs, but very few of them had universal appeal outside of Japan.

For every 2-3 successes (Animal Crossing, Wii Sports, Splatoon) they've also released many new IPs that were commercial failures (Steel Diver, Wii Music, Odama, Cubivore, The Wonderful 101, Sing Party, Doshin the Giant, Chibi Robo, Geist, Devil's Third). Even Ever Oasis, which was released this year on 3DS, is a commercial flop.

It feels like they didn't figure out the formula for a successful new IP (Strong multiplayer focus + appealing characters) until Splatoon and ARMS came along. Wii Sports also followed that formula (strong multiplayer + Miis were appealing characters).
 

Deleted member 19702

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,722
I think as a Nintendo fan, that N64 era of Western derived first-party games was very special. It was amazing to see the games from RARE especially during that time. The obvious truth is that we are not going to have any developer replace the RARE output of the N64 era, because that business model doesn't exist anymore. Games require quadruple the staff and money than they once used to. Retro or NLG or anyone is never going to be RARE of N64. Even RARE can't be RARE of N64.

Hmm... I got your point but I don't agree completely. I wasn't trying to say Retro or NLG should be the Rare of N64. I'm aware they won't be able to be as big as Rare of N64 were, but they, as western devs, still can manage to develop titles appealing for the western crowd. Today's gaming reality can't prevent Nintendo to develop titles with those aesthetics and targeting different genres and audiences.

Over the last 15 years, Nintendo created a lot of new IPs, but very few of them had universal appeal outside of Japan.

For every 2-3 successes (Animal Crossing, Wii Sports, Splatoon) they've also released a lot of new IPs that were commercial failures (Steel Diver, Wii Music, Odama, Cubivore, The Wonderful 101, Sing Party, Doshin the Giant, Chibi Robo, Geist, Devil's Third). Even Ever Oasis, which was released this year on 3DS, is a commercial flop.

It feels like they didn't figure out the formula for a successful new IP (Strong multiplayer focus + appealing characters) until Splatoon and ARMS came along.

Yep.

Nintendo was heavily dependent over their legacy IPs like Mario, Zelda, Pokémon, etc. for years and managed to create few succesful new IPs (as the ones you mentioned). This also took a hit on many other existant (and once succesful) IPs such as F-Zero, Metroid, 1080º, Wave Race, Custom Robo, Star Fox, Advance Wars, etc.. They were poorly managed or, for questionable reasons, shafted. I hope with the recent success from franchises such as Xenoblade, Splatoon and Arms, Nintendo realize the importance of new experiences and audience/ecosystem diversity.
 
Last edited:

Dark Cloud

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
61,087
Hmm... I got your point but I don't agree completely. I wasn't trying to say Retro or NLG should be the Rare of N64. I'm aware they won't be able to be as big as Rare of N64 were, but they, as western devs, still can manage to develop titles appealing for the western crowd. Today's gaming reality can't prevent Nintendo to develop titles with those aesthetics and targeting different genres and audiences.

I think the problem is what do the guys at Retro want to do? We don't know them or what they want to work on. We know they wanted to make TF.

Retro is different in that Nintendo owns the fully. Nintendo controls them and teaches them unlike Rare who could do whatever they wanted. That's really the key difference here. Remember Retro had like 4 different games they wanted to make? Some football game, Ravenblade and a couple of other games.

Those were probably all western focused games Retro was going to make before Nintendo stopped it (because Nintendo owned them). If Retro was second party they probably would've made a football game and looked more western focused due to not being under Nintendo's control.
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
Hopefully Retro does get to make a game they really want to make and it's good.

But a lot of people will hope it's in the style of SMO, BotW, Bayonetta, or Metroid Prime and I would enjoy that also so hopefully Retro wants to make a game like that right now ;)
 

Deleted member 5535

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,656
I think, at least for me, is that it would be nice for them to at least add some variety to Nintendo's line up. Them making the billionth platformer on Wii U was extremely disappointing. I've criticized Nintendo (and Sony) for having too many of their front runner franchises be the same exact genre and style.

New Super Mario Bros 2
New Super Mario Bros U
New Super Luigi U
Super Mario Maker
Super Mario Maker 3DS
Kirby Triple Deluxe
Kirby Planet Robobot
Kirby Star Allies
Kirby and the Rainbow Curse
Every single Kirby spin off title on the 3DS the past 2-3 years
Yoshi Wooly World
Yoshi and Poochy
Yoshi 2018
Donkey Kong Country Returns
Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze
Chibi Robo Ziplash
Hey Pikmin

And they all have the same cutesy art style.

Like dang. Have some variety in your lineup. They all start to look almost the same with some basic gameplay mechanic or two to separate them.

Thankfully Nintendo has been getting better at this with the Switch. But I hope with Kirby and Yoshi coming next year I hope we don't get more.

This is why I complain about people wanting another Yoshi, Kirby, 2D Mario, or Donkey Kong. I'm just sick to death with the franchises. Theres no reason to have that many games and active franchises in a single genre. And these franchises have nothing going for them other than gameplay which just blends into every other platformer series. No interesting story or characters. They just keep recycling the same story over and over, maybe with a tiny twist. Boring, lazy, dumb.

I want variety. Variety in gameplay. Variety in art style. Variety in storytelling. Variety.
Retro deserves better than just another 2D platformer

Well, just don't buy it then. If people want more of those games, let them do it. It's not going to change anything either way, at least three of these games are going to come and two of those are already coming with one of them being the print money for the developer and their major franchise. And of course, there's a obvious motive for why these franchise exists.

Also, Kirby and the Rainbow Course isn't a 2D platform and the "spin-offs" of the series (which aren't spin-offs, they are mini games of the main titles launched separately) aren't 2D platformers. There's only two 2D platforms which are the mainline games and these were made for 3DS in 2014 and 2016. This is a huge misconception.
 

Deleted member 5535

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,656
Over the last 15 years, Nintendo created a lot of new IPs, but very few of them had universal appeal outside of Japan.

For every 2-3 successes (Animal Crossing, Wii Sports, Splatoon) they've also released a lot of new IPs that were commercial failures (Steel Diver, Wii Music, Odama, Cubivore, The Wonderful 101, Sing Party, Doshin the Giant, Chibi Robo, Geist, Devil's Third). Even Ever Oasis, which was released this year on 3DS, is a commercial flop.

It feels like they didn't figure out the formula for a successful new IP (Strong multiplayer focus + appealing characters) until Splatoon and ARMS came along. Wii Sports also followed that formula (strong multiplayer + Miis were appealing characters).

You can put Nintendogs, Brain Age and other DS titles in the camp of success as well.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,296
HAL would probably make a decent Donkey Kong platform. Maybe not a top tier masterpiece like TF, but a very good platform nonetheless.

I don't think HAL (or Good-Feel) could make a Metroid Prime.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,296
Over the last 15 years, Nintendo created a lot of new IPs, but very few of them had universal appeal outside of Japan.

For every 2-3 successes (Animal Crossing, Wii Sports, Splatoon) they've also released many new IPs that were commercial failures (Steel Diver, Wii Music, Odama, Cubivore, The Wonderful 101, Sing Party, Doshin the Giant, Chibi Robo, Geist, Devil's Third). Even Ever Oasis, which was released this year on 3DS, is a commercial flop.

It feels like they didn't figure out the formula for a successful new IP (Strong multiplayer focus + appealing characters) until Splatoon and ARMS came along. Wii Sports also followed that formula (strong multiplayer + Miis were appealing characters).
It should be said that both ARMS and Splatoon had a very high production value and a great marketing. You can't say the same about Odama, Geist or Ever Oasis (or the EAD-developed Tank Troopers or Steel Diver).

It's clear Nintendo saw ARMS and Splatoon as at least AA games, whereas an Odama is a very minor project with little effort for them.
 

Deleted member 5535

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,656
It amazes me that Donkey Kong in this past 10 years is kinda "dead" without any spin-off or side games being launched. We only had the games of retro and the port in the 3DS.
 

GasProblem

Prophet of Truth
Member
Nov 18, 2017
3,150
It amazes me that Donkey Kong in this past 10 years is kinda "dead" without any spin-off or side games being launched. We only had the games of retro and the port in the 3DS.

With Universal getting a Donkey Kong attraction. I think Nintendo will do something with the IP.

Personally I hope for a 3D Donkey Kong.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,009
Regardless of owning Rare, it is really sad Nintendo never really expanded their software development operations outside of Japan. They have Retro and NLG, of which they only own the latter. They should just set up a EPD equivalent in the US and Europe.
 

Deleted member 33

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
1,457
You can put Nintendogs, Brain Age and other DS titles in the camp of success as well.

Technically, you're right. But are they still big success stories like Splatoon and Animal Crossing? I'm not entirely sure about that.

Both of those IPs took a huge hit (sales wise) during the 3DS era.

Four months after 3DS launched, retailers were selling Nintendogs + Cats for $15-$20.
 

Deleted member 5535

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,656
Technically, you're right. But are they still big success stories like Splatoon and Animal Crossing? I'm not entirely sure about that.

Both of those IPs took a huge hit (sales wise) during the 3DS era.

Four months after 3DS launched, retailers were selling Nintendogs + Cats for $15-$20.

Yeah, if we go by that then they aren't. But in their debut they were a success, and even Nintendogs sold well for a 3DS title... but yeah, it's not comparable to these two.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,009
Technically, you're right. But are they still big success stories like Splatoon and Animal Crossing? I'm not entirely sure about that.

Both of those IPs took a huge hit (sales wise) during the 3DS era.

Four months after 3DS launched, retailers were selling Nintendogs + Cats for $15-$20.

Yeah those strike me as IPs that might be moved to mobile development.
 

Dark Cloud

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
61,087
Sony was so good at developing their western studios and changing them as years went on. ND went from Jak to Uncharted. They have a handful of western studios. Now they don't have nowhere near the Japanese studios like Nintendo (funny they're opposites).
 

TheMoon

|OT|
Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,778
Video Games
It amazes me that Donkey Kong in this past 10 years is kinda "dead" without any spin-off or side games being launched. We only had the games of retro and the port in the 3DS.
*reminds CSSD that the Mario vs/& Donkey Kong games exist*

Last ten years:

2007
Donkey Kong: Barrel Blast
DK: Jungle Climber​
2009
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!​
2010
Donkey Kong Country Returns
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem​
2013
Mario and Donkey Kong: Minis on the Move​
2014
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze​
2015
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Tipping Stars​
 

Deleted member 5535

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,656
*reminds CSSD that the Mario vs/& Donkey Kong games exist*

Last ten years:

2007
Donkey Kong: Barrel Blast
DK: Jungle Climber​
2009
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!​
2010
Donkey Kong Country Returns
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem​
2013
Mario and Donkey Kong: Minis on the Move​
2014
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze​
2015
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Tipping Stars​

Oh yeah, you're right. Maybe my timeframe was off with the 10 years but compared to what we had before, we're not getting as many DK titles as the beginning of 2000s (but at that time we also didn't had a main title until DK Returns).

And I totally forgot about Mario vs Donkey Kong but I always saw it as a spin-off from Mario.
 

TheDinoman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,096
It's still funny and also really weird to me how the first Mario vs. Donkey Kong is the complete odd man out in its own series.

The first game was a decent little Donkey Kong 94 tribute, and then afterwards it became a lemmings clone based 100% exclusively around the Minis, and never looked back.
 

jnWake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,108
Donkey Kong doesn't really get spin-offs since he's just a part of the Mario universe so he's in Kart, Tennis, Golf and all that shit.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,766
It's still funny and also really weird to me how the first Mario vs. Donkey Kong is the complete odd man out in its own series.

The first game was a decent little Donkey Kong 94 tribute, and then afterwards it became a lemmings clone based 100% exclusively around the Minis, and never looked back.
I think that was because the developers wanted to experiment with the DS' touch screen for the second game. That somehow ended up being more popular, so they just rolled with it. I like the sequels, but I think at this point, its better to just spin Mini-Mario off into its own entity and return Mario Vs. DK to its roots.
 
OP
OP

EAD Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,347
Those were probably all western focused games Retro was going to make before Nintendo stopped it (because Nintendo owned them). If Retro was second party they probably would've made a football game and looked more western focused due to not being under Nintendo's control.

If Nintendo is publishing any game, it's their full control. Full ownership or partial ownership isn't the only thing that is indicative of autonomy. There are tons of contractual situations we aren't privy of.
 

TheDinoman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,096
The massive amount of DK spinoffs in the GCN/GBA era was simply because Nintendo didn't know what to do with the franchise. Rare was its main developer, and of course they left the building near the beginning of the GCN's lifespan. So Nintendo just threw it around to different devs like Namco or PAON until they finally managed to find a proper developer in the form of Retro.
 
OP
OP

EAD Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,347
The massive amount of DK spinoffs in the GCN/GBA era was simply because Nintendo didn't know what to do with the franchise. Rare was its main developer, and of course they left the building near the beginning of the GCN's lifespan. So Nintendo just threw it around to different devs like Namco or PAON until they finally managed to find a proper developer in the form of Retro.

Remember that Nintendo's Tokyo R&D developed that amazing and unexpected bongo controller platformer in Jungle Beat. Hence, the Namco collaborations with Donkey Konga were quite natural and deliberate.

I wouldn't say the Paon games were as forced since they were also porting the DKC games to the GBA. So it wasn't a filler as much as some Nintendo producer thinking it was a good idea.
 

TheDinoman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,096
Remember that Nintendo's Tokyo R&D developed that amazing and unexpected bongo controller platformer in Jungle Beat. Hence, the Namco collaborations with Donkey Konga were quite natural and deliberate.

I wouldn't say the Paon games were as forced since they were also porting the DKC games to the GBA. So it wasn't a filler as much as some Nintendo producer thinking it was a good idea.

Um, I think you're confused about the DKC GBA ports. Those were actually handeled by Rare's handheld team, who were still allowed to produce games for Nintendo stuff because Microsoft didnt work in the handheld business.
 
OP
OP

EAD Ninja

任天堂 の 忍者
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,347
Um, I think you're confused about the DKC GBA ports. Those were actually handeled by Rare's handheld team, who were still allowed to produce games for Nintendo stuff because Microsoft didnt work in the handheld business.

I know they were coded by RARE. The point is that they had the DKC trilogy on the GBA and the DK Swing of Games weren't trying to replace the series as much as be that niche spinoff.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,296
Remember that Nintendo's Tokyo R&D developed that amazing and unexpected bongo controller platformer in Jungle Beat. Hence, the Namco collaborations with Donkey Konga were quite natural and deliberate.

I wouldn't say the Paon games were as forced since they were also porting the DKC games to the GBA. So it wasn't a filler as much as some Nintendo producer thinking it was a good idea.
Jungle Beat tried to be a reboot of the DK series thought, with none of the characters introduced in the Rare games, whereas the Konga games were a spin-off of the Rare universe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.