Miyamoto pledges Nintendo will return focus to passionate gamers, not widest market

[Radio]

Yeah, it does feel a bit cheesy when it's just a straight upgrade with numbers, rather than new mechanics and what not.

Numbers upgrades are fine if they're used to make mechanics dangerous instead of trivial, such as making you actually have to dodge that telegraphed attack that you used to just take to the face. It still adds gameplay and does require the effort on the developers part of tuning individual mechanics rather than just tuning up a scalar.

This works best in games where you can't upgrade your defensive stats regularly/at all or where the developers tune the numbers around the upgrades you're expected to have at that point. Also there should only be 1-2 levels of these kinds of improvements, otherwise they should really be adding additional mechanics.

[Daws001]

Weird statements. I'm a bit confused by them and also a bit put-off.

Can't do both, two crowds want specifically different things from games. One group of people wants games to be challenging and have long learning curves (see: depth) the other group wants games they can pick up and put down for an hour a week and don't have to remember anything or learn anything. Those are extremely conflicting wants and can't really exist in the same game, people have tried and failed.

Of course you can do both, what are you talking about? Those games already exist.

[Unholydevil]

Before Nintendo can start pleasing gamers they actually have to release some games on there console. When your console is going to be entering its 4th year before a true "must own" game comes out for it then something has gone terribly wrong.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Can't do both, two crowds want specifically different things from games. One group of people wants games to be challenging and have long learning curves (see: depth) the other group wants games they can pick up and put down for an hour a week and don't have to remember anything or learn anything. Those are extremely conflicting wants and can't really exist in the same game, people have tried and failed.

I am not 100% certain on that. There's so many games and can have both a laid back and a very interactive experience.

[Menedude]

Take the original street fighter 2 as an example.

Set the game to 1 star difficulty - casual can clear it.
Set the game to 8 star difficulty - gamer can clear it
Play against other gamers - hardcore players enjoy it.

BOOM one game with 8 playable characters just covered all crowds. In 1991.

[Menedude]

Judging by the logic that people use in regards to LFR, today most people would say, "I finished it on one-star and saw the ending, there's no reason for anyone to go to 2-star or above, so it's casual!"

It's like if i'd set street fighter to 1 star and called it a stupid casual game even though I never try 2 or more stars.

and also people expect 8 stars to reward you with items to show off and tell the 1 star players how much they suck at street fighter.
Back in the day what mattered was your own personal experience.

[Edge-]

It's like if i'd set street fighter to 1 star and called it a stupid casual game even though I never try 2 or more stars.

and also people expect 8 stars to reward you with items to show off and tell the 1 star players how much they suck at street fighter.
Back in the day what mattered was your own personal experience.

And having the highest score (i.e. that thing that you could show everyone else to show how much they suck at Street Fighter compared to you).

[Menedude]

And having the highest score (i.e. that thing that you could show everyone else to show how much they suck at Street Fighter compared to you).

True, but comparing that to wow wouldn't an achievement that you cleared it be equal to a high score? It even contains the cleared date which adds to the prestige. But people are asking for mounts, tabards, titles, unique armor sets, extra bosses and some would even want more than half of the game to be completely inaccessible to the 1 star players. A simple high score wouldn't be enough these days.

[cncrules45]

Historically, what have brought customers to Nintendo that people would call hardcore? They've had plenty of difficult games, sure. All of the early Mario games were tough, same with Mario Karts and most of the early Donkey Kong games. Do any of these fall under Nintendo's definition of "hardcore"? I'm just not seeing any "hardcore" console-defining games that Nintendo has ever propped up and then been propped up by. Maybe early Zelda games. Maybe. But anything OoT is going to be straight up the "casual gamer's" alley. Maybe I'm missing something?

EDIT: 007. I'll give them 007.

[Pickynerd]

Nintendo really had gotten away from making amazing games, for the sake of pleasing everyone.

[Edge-]

True, but comparing that to wow wouldn't an achievement that you cleared it be equal to a high score?

These are social games. Imagine it more akin to an arcade machine. Your top score scrolls for all to see very easily. They don't have to go look things up to find out how awesome you are, you can simply point to the screen and "bam". That's the easy visual cue on arcades for things like Street Fighter in days of old that is missing from something like achievements but is there from something like a mount/title/piece of gear etc.

[Krommm]

Nintendo caters mostly to fans of their main IPs. They have games that range from faceroll easy to "I hate this level please gouge my eyes out" hard. I think they already appeal to "passionate" gamers because the games they make often do exactly what you expect them to. I think he should focus more on innovation without having to make a gimmicky console or the same old flagship IPs.

What I mean by this, is that there should be new types of games made without having to cater specifically to hardcore or casual games. (and not making the same Zelda/Mario/Sonic/Metroid etc games)

If they want to get me and others excited they need to really amp up their typical IPs or develop some new engaging fresh ones. I love playing the new Donkey Kong/Zelda/Mario games, but they don't particularly stand out perse.

Super Mario Galaxy was one of the greatest changes to an old IP, that kept some familiarity yet brought new engaging gameplay. Not Nintendo, but say how Borderlands was a combination of a typical shooter, but also combined RPG elements with loot drops and talent choices. Just some examples, eventually I'm sure there will be something new and exciting to come out.

This isn't to say generic game type staples are bad, just not inspiring. (ARPGs,MOBAs, MMOs, fighters, racing, RPGs, FPS can all be fun, but there hasn't been much changes to the formula. Perhaps for good reason. safe sales)

[Crissi]

Yeah, I remember some levels on SMG making my tear my hair out, so I think they can still make something hair tearing out worthy without turning off people that just wanna play a few hours a week. Or just make the occasional game that surprises everyone, like what was done with Bravely Default but with Nintendo IPs. That was insanely fun. I dont necessarily think they need to completely make a 180 from all casual to all hardcore. Just narrow down the audience for any game you want to make, instead of trying to make everyone like a certain game.

[Concatto]

Soooooooo... Does that mean we'll get another Metroid game that ISN'T Other M? Like... One made by Retro Studios?

That would be really good. Probably too good to be true, unfortunately.

[Menedude]

These are social games. Imagine it more akin to an arcade machine. Your top score scrolls for all to see very easily. They don't have to go look things up to find out how awesome you are, you can simply point to the screen and "bam". That's the easy visual cue on arcades for things like Street Fighter in days of old that is missing from something like achievements but is there from something like a mount/title/piece of gear etc.

You make a good point, I just feel like some push it too far sometimes. Like the only joy they can get from a game is to brag, living the experience itself no longer counts.

That would be really good. Probably too good to be true, unfortunately.

Maybe Hyrule Warriors is a step in that direction

[Radio]

That would be really good. Probably too good to be true, unfortunately.

I'm sure they at least realise that Other M wasn't well-received. Retro Studios would be ideal, but we can at the very least expect that they won't return to the Other M formula again.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

I'm sure they at least realise that Other M wasn't well-received. Retro Studios would be ideal, but we can at the very least expect that they won't return to the Other M formula again.

I think the forumla wasn't THAT bad. I mean the concept was good IMO it just didn't do well.

[Savoir Faire]

I've been replaying some of the Zelda games these last few months that I haven't played in years, and the comments in this thread really ring true. I was embarrassed by how much I died on Link to the Past, when I am pretty sure I didn't die at all in Link between worlds on easy mode (as I would call it). I was also playing Zelda 2 on the Wii U just a few weeks ago, and was proud of myself for not using the save points...until I got to the last boss (well, next to last...). Its funny how the old tactics of winning eventually came back to me, but I couldn't get over how unforgiving the game was. I do remember the punishing games from the NES/SNES era, and I miss them, to an extent.

I wonder exactly what Miyamoto means, however. Is Nintendo going to do this, or just encourage others to do this? My hope is that Nintendo's support of Platinum Games, Monolith, and whomever is making devil's third is an indication that they are looking for support outside their core IPs (and company) and pushing these devs to make the games they (meaning the devs) want, and not just copying what has been done ad naseum.

[Immitis]

i have completed it on hero mode, 2 deaths one on the first dungeon only 3 hearts = no room for error and i hadn't played it in months was clumsy, second was taking an 8 heart hit before getting the blue mail in lorule lol. sure it gives more of a challenge but it's really nothing compared to, link to the past.

link to the past wasnt hard at all so i dont know what you're talking about. maybe you just werent as good at games back then

[Jester Joe]

Yeah, I remember some levels on SMG making my tear my hair out, so I think they can still make something hair tearing out worthy without turning off people that just wanna play a few hours a week. Or just make the occasional game that surprises everyone, like what was done with Bravely Default but with Nintendo IPs. That was insanely fun. I dont necessarily think they need to completely make a 180 from all casual to all hardcore. Just narrow down the audience for any game you want to make, instead of trying to make everyone like a certain game.

Those Green Star Galaxy levels.Hrk.