The other day, Nintendo of America's president Reggie Fils-Aime stated how Nintendo isn't very good at making mature games. The beefburger boss has since elaborated on his comments, stating that part of the reason is that Nintendo simply doesn't enjoy creating them.
"It's a priority for us bringing a range of entertainment. It's a priority for us to have a range of third party licensees see success on the platform," claims the medium rare executive. "It's a priority for us to make sure that every consumer has content that they're going to enjoy.
"Now, the challenge for us is that we, ourselves, Nintendo, don't create that type of content. We're not experts at it. Our developers don't particularly enjoy making that content. They probably could make stellar content, if they chose to. We choose to do something else. So it really is up to the third party developer to create that great content and bring it to life on the platform."
Did Reggie just pull the "We could totally do that if we wanted, we just don't wanna" card? Either way, you can't fault a developer for sticking to its strength. The Wii, in the past year, has seen some great support from third parties and I hope it continues. If only the Wii consumers would, in turn, support those third parties, everything would be great.
Reggie: Nintendo Devs Don't Enjoy Making Mature Games [MTV Multiplayer]
Contest:
10:40 AM on 03.19.2010
| 
I'd be lying if I denied part of me wants the Wii to tank in the sales picture just so he won't look so smug all the time. Yeah, it's immature, but looking at smugness does that to people.
When I look back on the games I've played that I still enjoy today, not a lot of them are explicitly mature. I've had my fun with those kinds of games too, but I know I won't always enjoy ripping off heads and shooting up aliens. I will, I believe, always enjoy something like Super Mario Galaxy.
Look as far as I remember, Metroid was a really serious dark type game for Nintendo and SNES. Now its just another Wiiiiiiiiii game.
Look even EA admitted that they don't understand the Wii market because the majority of games they have released for the Wii did not sell as well as in the PS360.
Yes and I can fly but I don't want to.
also, hawks
How about a Super Mario Galaxy where you rip off heads and shoot aliens? Hell yeah!
On a serious note, I appreciate Nintendo as one of the few developers to really stick to their guns and continue making traditional games and platformers that everyone can enjoy.
At the same time, they've stuck to their guns a little too much in some areas, what with re-using the same four characters in all their games.
I'd also like to see my real dad give me a hug but a man can dream.
Just stick to what you're good at.
Does anyone REALLY want a Zelda game where Link says "it's the wallet that says bad mother ****er on it"?
Also didn't they make an M rated game recently, the one that looked cool with the sorta behind the back slanted camera.
Do you even have to ask? I'd be picking that up day one.
Yeah, maybe that was a bad choice. "Pulp Zelda" could have some great one-liners.
Link: "Oh, man. I think I shot Tingle in the face."
Midna: "Well what the **** did you do that for?!"
I don't enjoy tap dancing.
Captain obvious.
Its kinda sad they wont give more mature games a go, I'm pretty sure they would have a very different approach to it from other developers.
Really, Nintendo doesn't need to cater to the "M" audience. These kids already went ahead with the other systems, so Nintendo caring about them now is like, "why bother?". There are superb titles on the Wii that slide into what the cool kids are asking for - if they choose to ignore it, though, it's their loss.
As for my personal example, I'm great at the violin. I've never cared much for it, though.
You expect gamers to take you seriously.
This whole generation and the previous N64 and GC ones, have been all about that 'i don't want to' attitude. Its the noose they put around their own neck.
'Don't want GC or Wii to play dvd, because we don''t
'Don't want to use cds on N64, when they've been around since the 70's, and want all that cart licencsing money'
'Don't want GC online, because online is evil'
'Don't want to make a up to spec console in Wii@
All this bullshit back stepping and tangoing, instead of just doing, may be their undoing in the end. So tired of your lame excuses.
You don't enjoy making mature games for gamers? Wake up, Nintendo. By and large, you make what's desired by your audience. And if you don't know how to do so, you learn new tricks. Sony did this from nothing, and now command awesome IP stuff like God of War, LBP and Uncharted. WTF is your excuse? Why on earth do you think MW and MW2 sold so much?
So Nintendo are saying, its okay for them to learn to make new games like Brain Training, Wii Fit etc, but the thought of trying to make new mature games, makes them wet the bed in fear at night. Absolutely fucking pathetic. And this is why you want to lean on other devs so much. If you can't even try, I'm starting to wonder why you want to be in this industry, apart from the money.
@Crunshii: "Look even EA admitted that they don't understand the Wii market because the majority of games they have released for the Wii did not sell as well as in the PS360."
like Face Breaker? yeah that was a real gem, and totally sold like crazy on PS3/X360 unlike the Wii version, then again theirexclusives totally support your theory, stuff like Boogie, Boogie Superstar, EA Playground and Hasbro Family Game Night are like TOTALLY H4RDC0R3! (read: what any gamer would want).
At least they actually tried with Boomblox and sales must not have been bad since the gave that one a sequel.
@Byronic Man: I think he meant mature-like content and yeah, IMO SMG is stellar
@EvilTw1n: I LOL'd!
I understand you need them, but I've had enough of Mario, Link and Samus. I'd like some Captain Falcon, Captain Olimar, Fox McCloud, Isaac and maybe even some Mr. Saturn on the Wii. Or hell, a compelling new IP that doesn't involve heavy use of Miis.
what nobody seems to want to talk about is the fact that nintendo has been the company to push innovation in the industry moreso than anyone else. think about it, nintendo invented the d pad, snes controls (which sony is still ripping off), analogue control, 3d graphics, portable gaming, and now motion control. i could go into detail about gameplay innovation, but i think i made my point. this is really small potatoes.
I agree with you. Even GC had more varied product, and N64 before it. Besides that, I believe Nintendo have forgotten how, or lost the vital talent to make such stuff, with any kind of compelling story or content that pushes the boundaries. Even from their existing IP, a good Star Fox, Pilotwings etc game might have convinced me to get a Wii, but it has none of that, and Nintendo can't be bothered to try.
While even I was in question of a QTE laced Heavy Rain, atleast its doing something compelling and interesting for the gamer to experience. Nintendo don't have to go that mature, but when I see them giving gamers something fresh beyond casual stuff the rely on now, I'll come back to them.
Seems its going be a long damn wait, judging by Reggie.
It bugs me that every now and then there's a Wii game like No More Heroes or Sin and Punishment that I want to play. I don't want to buy a console when I don't like the vast majority of its games, it seems like such a waste.
If you want to be the Disney of games, that's fine but not realistic in a business sense. Even Disney, with their child friendly image have owned movies studios that make mature content, without the Disney name stamped all over them.
Nintendo could do the same with games, but their lack of will power to try it, just for gamers, or for the potential money they could earn, says enough.
@Sqwuak
Nice list there, but those are Wii games, but not from Nintendo themselves.
@boboyo
We are well aware of Nintendo's advancements over the years, thanks. No one is questioning that. get back to the topic at hand, sir. If Nintendo games are the ones that sell, and they could sow up the mature games bit themselves, they wouldn't need third parties as much. Think about that for a second
.
Thw Wii still shackles such progress, along with Nintendo's stubborn to change mindset. But who knows. They love their Wii, so maybe they'd get the best out of it, that other devs fail to.
RE4 Wii Edition was the best-selling version of RE4. Modern Warfare Reflex has sold pretty well on the Wii. But these are *quality* games that have had a lot of effort put into them and give the player a great experience, and over a long period of time, not just for a few weeks or days, and then they trade it back in. And both of those games at least benefited from the Wii controls. Well, I know RE4 most certainly did. I can't play a shooter on any other console because the controls feel gimped in comparison.
Madworld bombed because it didn't benefit from the motion controls and did nothing to differientiate itself from the values of the HD system, and the hyperviolence killed it with the Expanded Market. It replaced button-mashing for waggling. Dead Space Extraction was a joke. No effort was put into that game. It doesn't help that as few railshooters as there are, they were already flooding the market. They would have been much better off "dumbing down" the graphics of the first Dead Space and giving it the same precision controls of RE4. The tradeoffs to gameplay would have been well worth it and the game would have probably seen healthy sales. Then there are games like Shiren and the like that are too niche even by Core Gamer standards. Fragile has gotten bad reviews, and a lot of the complaints come back to the combat being poor. And the way the developer talks, they were more concerned with making a movie than they were with making a fun, exciting, action-packed game. That's why it probably won't sell much. RE4 proved you can have an atmospheric, intense roller-coaster ride of terror, horror game and it didn't have to have shit gameplay. It could actually just be as fun to play the hundredth time you played it as much as it was the first. Game developers need to have this mindset with making games on the Wii.
I will say it again: Most game developers seem to have HD tunnel vision. When they are challenged to make games outside of that context, they completely fail. The Wii audience doesn't want movie-games. They don't want half-hour cutscenes intruding after every five minutes of gameplay. They don't want hyperviolence in games they want to play with their families and friends.
That said, mature games CAN sell on the Wii if an actual EFFORT is put into them. The graphics must be decent, the controls must benefit from the Wii controls to set them apart from other mature games on the HD systems, and the games must above all be fast-paced and fun. I've hardly seen any games on the Wii that looks as good as God of War 2 on the PS2. That's just pathetic. The Wii can do better graphics than that, but the developers feel they can just phone it in. Then the developers cry that their games won't sell when we have evidence contrary to this.
I'm honestly tired of games trying to be overly "mature" and graphic. I'm gonna go ahead and call this decade of gaming the "Rob Liefield" Era because that's what it feels like with all these game developers trying to be "edgy" and realistic. Dante's Inferno? Are you kidding? The guy sews a fucking...whatever that was...into his skin. AND WHY? What purpose does it serve other to be shocking? Games can do it cartoonishly and without being off-putting to players (like in Reginleiv, expect that to get an American release date at E3 this year).
I said it before, and I'll say it again. Third parties either are not talented enough to make games on the Wii, or they show no respect for the tastes of the Wii audience, or even Core Gamers that own Wiis by putting out shitty games that try to sell themselves on violence and nothing else beyond that.
Zelda: Twilight Princess, WarioWare: Smooth Moves, Super Paper Mario, Mario Strikers Charged, Metroid Prime 3, Battalion Wars 2, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, and Super Mario Galaxy were all out before the one year anniversary of the Wii's launch.
But instead of bringing over top-tier content, third-parties ported over shoddy or late-to-the-party titles that most folks passed on or had played on the PS2/Xbox. The one exceptional success was RE4: Wii Edition, and a lot of that was predicated on its $30 MSRP and collection of content from the GC and PS2 versions (and, of course, the controls).
There's certainly more to the story beyond the short-sightedness of third-parties, and Nintendo certainly shares in the blame for their own woes with those publishers. But, it is what it is. Everyone's made their decisions, and now it's up to Nintendo to push valued content to the moon or be content with all of that Mario/Wii Fit money.
As for the specific topic at hand, I don't think that Nintendo is incapable of creating enthusiast-centric content. However, I believe that it's a conscious choice by the developers to not outright exclude some folks via overly violent gameplay and colorful language. The only game (at least in recent memory) that I can think of that they've authorized that type of stuff was Disaster: Day of Crisis. And even that was a MonolithSoft product rather than, say, an R&D1 project.
*reads Vanor and GohanGVO*
what they said
Part of RE4 Wii success is down to that games engine, being used by Capcom for fashioned around the GC, thus it still looks great on Wii, and RE4 was an awesome game to boot. When this same engine, was used on Dead Rising CTYD, it couldn't handle what was being thrown at i,t and thus looked poor and naturally bombed. As a result Capcom haven't used it again. This is why the RE light gun games on Wii looks so different, they use a different more up to date engine.
I know what you say about Dead Space sounds possible in theory, but for developers to downgrade a 360/PS3 game to Wii standard, wouldn't be worth the potential technical trouble or the experienced man power to do it. For developers, making a second game just for Wii is a royal pain in the ass, ten fold more so if it doesn't even sell. However, if you can make Dead Space 2, and have that one game ported to 360/PS3 and PC, you are killing three work birds with one stone, saving both time and development money. I expect EA went with a rail shooter for Extraction, out of easy of production and lack of man power to devote to Wii (some devs are making a few project games at the same time, in different teams, not just one game at a time, so that should also be considered). Wii, with its decade old interenal spec, can be a beast (one that lack the bite options of others), when all your dev people are learning new dev skills and PC packages on a yearly basis, and thus few bother with it.
Disaster Day of Crisis was cool, and the kind of game Wii needed, but if I recall, the mighty Nintendo, didn't even want to publish it in the U.S (go figure why). Like you say, it was still not made by Nintendo's in house team, more than likely because they haven't got a clue how to create such a game and do it well. The best part of life is learning new stuff, and if Nintendo aren't prepared to try, even for you loyal gamers that have supported them for many years, that doesn't fill you with confidence. I'd like to see more stuff like Disaster (wishful thinking I guess) on Wii, from Nintendo.
But hey, you can't say anything against Nintendo and their crap, because they are Nintendo, and they can do no wrong in the eyes of some. So long as the games are good, none of what I'm saying matters at all, apparently. I think not.
@Edgy
Bitching? Just sharing views. If you can counter argue my points well enough, feel free to do so.
The Wii is a toy. All video game systems are toys. I certainly don't start up my console to conduct serious business. After all, that's what the Internet is for. ;)
While I think the points I make are valid, I haven't seen one counter argument to help defend your mighty Nintendo fortress against, probably what you might see as some kind of corporate net terrorism. All I offer is my opinion, as well as try to ask the right questions about Nintendo and their motives, etc.
Ignorant and close minded? Certainly not me at all. There are some, who want to play their games, and not be interested in what those who make games do or say. Fine if that's your thing. However, as a gamer, I like to look at the big picture and ask the hard, Jeremy Paxman like questions, some don't want asked or want to think about. I'd do the same if it were Sony, MS, Apple etc in the dock, but right now, its Nintendo.
*grins* awight
"Part of RE4 Wii success is down to that games engine, being used by Capcom for fashioned around the GC, thus it still looks great on Wii, and RE4 was an awesome game to boot. When this same engine, was used on Dead Rising CTYD, it couldn't handle what was being thrown at i,t and thus looked poor and naturally bombed. As a result Capcom haven't used it again. This is why the RE light gun games on Wii looks so different, they use a different more up to date engine."
So basically you're saying companies need to tailor their games to the Wii's strengths AND make them good instead of their usual subpar graphic crap with shitty gameplay? imagine that, crazy! right?.
"I know what you say about Dead Space sounds possible in theory, but for developers to downgrade a 360/PS3 game to Wii standard, wouldn't be worth the potential technical trouble or the experienced man power to do it."
That's because you imagine that "downgrade" with DR:CTYD graphics, did you see the footage for the original Xbox of DS? that's the effort i want to see, and that's where 3rd parties fail (besides poor advertising).
"For developers, making a second game just for Wii is a royal pain in the ass, ten fold more so if it doesn't even sell. However, if you can make Dead Space 2, and have that one game ported to 360/PS3 and PC, you are killing three work birds with one stone, saving both time and development money."
As opposed to how cheap it is to make one for HD consoles? or about the woes of fixing each one's problems when porting? remember the shitstorm with Bayonetta's PS3 version? Silent Hill 5 PC version? how about all version of AvP? what happens when (and it's very often) they don't spread their resources too thin/don't give enough time to polish all versions instead of doing a good job on all of them? you think the sales on the properly polished one compensate the flop of the botched one? be real man!.
"I expect EA went with a rail shooter for Extraction, out of easy of production and lack of man power to devote to Wii (some devs are making a few project games at the same time, in different teams, not just one game at a time, so that should also be considered). Wii, with its decade old interenal spec, can be a beast (one that lack the bite options of others), when all your dev people are learning new dev skills and PC packages on a yearly basis, and thus few bother with it."
So you basically admit that EA took the easy/lazy route and you still blame it on the Wii? i'm losing my respect for you by the second.
"Disaster Day of Crisis was cool, and the kind of game Wii needed, but if I recall, the mighty Nintendo, didn't even want to publish it in the U.S (go figure why). Like you say, it was still not made by Nintendo's in house team, more than likely because they haven't got a clue how to create such a game and do it well."
No, i tried that one, it was a like liking different minigames one after the other and adding an action movie plot, mediocre is more like it.
"The best part of life is learning new stuff, and if Nintendo aren't prepared to try, even for you loyal gamers that have supported them for many years, that doesn't fill you with confidence. I'd like to see more stuff like Disaster (wishful thinking I guess) on Wii, from Nintendo."
You mean the same loyal customers that almost killed when they left for the PS2 them back at GC era? look, in fairness of opinion i can understand them back then, the GC had a limited amount of 3rd party games as opposed to the constant 3rd exclusives on PS2, but what i found DAMN HYPOCRITICAL is that the same people now bitch incessantly that Nintendo decided to try to expand their market to survive and left them in the cold/betrayed them/sold out, you know what? grow the fuck up! their games are as awesome as they have ever been, if you're too much of a whining graphics/HDD/Blue-ray whore that's your damn problem.
"But hey, you can't say anything against Nintendo and their crap, because they are Nintendo, and they can do no wrong in the eyes of some. So long as the games are good, none of what I'm saying matters at all, apparently. I think not."
What you say is your opinion, that doesn't make it magically legit, disproves facts or make your arguments any less empty.
Personally, I love Nintendo's first-party franchises because their simply fun. The majority of their franchises have a kind of innocence to them which I find is part of their charm. Although, I would like to see a darker approach to the next Zelda game like how Majora's Mask was kind of done in.
I'm not arguing for Nintendo, I'm explaining why third party games don't perform on the Wii. And it's usually the third parties' fault. Nintendo has provided the install base, the low-production costs, and the simple and easy-to-develop-for hardware. So what else do the third parties need? They need talent. And a lot of third parties don't have the talent to make games on the Wii. GAMES, not interactive movies with gameplay tacked on as an afterthought.
This is why Nintendo is helping advertise Monster Hunter Tri. It's a GAME, not a movie. It also has the potential to be a blue ocean game. Having a potential blue ocean online game on the Wii would be a tremendous asset on the Wii, which can provide the series the opportunity to make new gamers, and then take them further upstream in further installments and on new tech over time.
It's also the same reason why Nintendo is publishing Dragon Quest 9 over here in the States. The series is huge in Japan, and they believe they can make it big over here, and if they can, then they can definitely get DQX to sell over here in the States on the Wii. These games have the potential to be big.
A lot of these "mature" third party games don't. They're either from too niche genres (Shiren is a roguelike), or too violent and in poor taste to reach a large audience (NMH, Madworld), or too poor in quality to do well (Dead Space Extraction, Fragile).
With some developers, like Suda51, they might not sell much but they can still make enough to keep making games. He couldn't do that on the PS3 or 360. So at least on the Wii, smaller developers and third parties can put their games out, and overtime, these games might be judged as classics, as opposed to the PS3 or 360 where they might not have ever been made at all.
But the reality still prevails: Make games like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXY-L37qROM&feature=related
And your games will sell. RE4 showed us that we can have excellent aiming control in a game. I want to see action-packed third-person shooters on the Wii. We can have games where you fly using the wii controls. We could have a lot of unique and innovative games on the Wii, but game developers are showing an utter lack of passion, interest, imagination, or just flat-out laziness to make games like this. And they would sell if an effort was put forth, but they don't. And that's not Nintendo's fault. That's entirely on the feet of the third parties.
To the first point about RE4, it was EASIER for Capcom to port RE4, than make fresh one from scratch like RE5. Unfortunately, you fail to see the light here. Would you have Capcom build a new engine for Dead Rising port? They'd probably see that as not cost effective for 10 year old tech. Besides, Capcom have other projects that demand more expert help, time and man power such as Lost Planet 2, Dead Rising 2, SSFIV, Final Fight Double Impact etc
To my next point about EA and Dead Space, it was EASIER for them to make a rail shooter, than a dedicated Wii exclsuive Dead Space. Think about EA and all the other games they were making at the same time that year. I didn't like the fact they did this either, but thinking again, from OUTSIDE OF A GAMERS THINKING, I understood why they did so.
EA and Capcom have to look out for themselves at the end of the day, and if Wii not profitable for them, and they can't define who they are selling to, such decisions like this get made. I don't like everything that's done, but that's the kind of split Wii has made in the market. It didn't have to be the way it is, but that's the nature of the situation at large.
Better still if a developer chooses to opt out of Wii development, they do so out of their own reasons, not to piss off gamers. Call them lazy, I'm sure even I have done so, but thinking a little deeper of the bigger picture, I get it.
I notice, Dear Edgy, that while you down play or dismiss much of what I say, in response to this news post, and lamely defend Nintendo, but you've not responded to the fact that Sony had no inhouse devs studios as such when they entered the market, and built some, creating some new IP and catering the mature many. From Syphon Filter, Spyro to God of War and Uncharted, they've done a grand job. Edgy, you give no valid reason, that if Nintendo can't make the type of games Reggie is talking about, why they cannot learn to create them (regardless of whether they do it through small dev buying or not).
There is no valid excuse for them, and no sign of even trying such content is telling, for such a seasoned industry veteran. Perhaps this also explains, why they have need help with the Metroid series, from Retro and now Koei Tecmo. But I guess some can't read between the lines on such stuff, or don't want to.
It's not just graphics, nearly all the games not by Nintendo (and even some that are) simply aren't very good, not for visuals, but the game as a whole.
Which is why the console sells out of control, but the games don't. (not in the numbers keeping up with the installed base)
Allow me to speculate as to why Nintendo does not create that type of content.
I think it boils down to not wanting to alienate a large swath of potential consumers. The games they create tend to be for most anyone rather than the 18-30 year old male with a lot of disposable income, and it seems to me the company has ALWAYS been that way.
Now, is that a fault? It can definitely be perceived as one, especially if that's the type of content one wants from a developer.
On the other hand, perhaps those consumers that have "graduated" beyond what Nintendo offers should accept the fact that they themselves have changed. Maybe it's even a bit unreasonable of "us" to expect Nintendo to move away from what's made them successful for many decades.
Capcom didn't have to do much to RE4, to get that kind of control out of Wii.
The Heavy Rain example I give, as an example when you have a system that progressively meets with a developers approval, enough that they can realise and create a game like Heavy Rain.
I doubt its a matter of laziness, like many simple gamer minds might think, as making games is hard work (or so I hear from my industry friends. Wii just isn't technically efficient enough for some of them. Sorry to burst the bubble, but HD, hard drives, online access etc matter more to their grand game designs, so they go where such options can be delivered and exploited the best, those are the harsh facts many dismiss. They mattered, from the moment Xbox entered the market. This could have been Wii, but funnily, even after what Xbox did, Nintendo failed emulate Xbox in Wii, and the rest is history. Most developers want to move forward with all options available, to give gamers the best experiences possible, not backwards or sideways like Nintendo seem to negatively do (motion controls and DS aside .
@ GohanGVO
Noted, but if Disney (Nintendo's nearest similar company) can manage to the same thing with films, why can't Nintendo do the same with games? Disney own Marvel and Miramax, who produce some adult stuff, hasn't tainted them. It can be done, but Nintendo lack the will to change, simple as, that's always been their crutch, from gen to gen. Keep thinking like that, Nintendo and the competition won't have any mercy crushing or hurting you.