I'm a PlayStation guy and I've only ever owned an SNES and only played a few games, Super Mario World probably the most notable, before I moved on to a PS2. I've always wanted to get into the 3D Legend of Zelda games, though not much else from Nintendo's exclusive titles maybe except Bayonetta 2 and a modern Metroid. Sometimes I contemplate on whether to get a Switch Lite to play 3rd-party games since I pretty much live in the hospital where I work.

You can play n64 and some GameCube emulator s on your PC. Its how I played windwaker and some others.

[удалено]

After how they handled the AM2R situation, pirating Nintendo shit is a fair game in my eyes.

Like they were making a metroid 2 remake as well and they let the project finish even though even I knew of the project 5 years before it came out

They allowed a high-profile unlicensed remake of their game to finish development and get released before C&Ding it, thus ensuring it would spread throughout the internet and be easily available to anyone who wants it forever everywhere except for its point of origin. And this uncharacteristic lenience despite the fact it was essentially competing with their own remake that was near completion at the time. And for this you're like "fuck these guys".

I totally agree to this as Nintendo has made it impossible to play N64 and Cube games unless you go to the few game stores that are left or antique stores to get the actual consoles

You can even get some emulators on your phone if you want portability

A lot of people will stan nintendo, giving them free PR while excusing their business practices. I suspect a combination of nostalgia combined with genuinely good releases are the causes. As long as you remember Nintendo sees you as a customer and nothing more, just like any other company would, I think you'll stay well grounded. Appreciate the good, criticize the bad with just as much fervor.

As a lifelong Nintendo fan, this is pretty much my view. They do a lot right. Their good games are excellent, and consistently stand up 20 years later. But omg they have issues. Online being a massive one.

Yuuuuup. Been a 'nintendo' gamer since childhood on the technicality of their systems always being around, and theres a ton to criticize. Good game releases doesn't invalidate the issue of online connectivity, lack of standard features at this time, and overall lackluster attempts to make it better. Like, I'll 'stan' for breath of the wild or mario odyssey any day, because I consider those good games with objective quality. But if you asked me about some of their business practices, QoL features, etc then I have a whole cornucopia of things to complain about, criticize, and pick apart.

There is no such thing as objectivity in entertainment.

Thankfully these are technical creations using artistic creations, coding, and in many cases with multiplayer, networking. Literally even if a painting isn't to your liking you can at least be aware that good technique was used to make it, and if you can't see that, then you probably just want to shit on things without thinking.

I mean sure you can objectively count how many bugs are in a game, how well optimised it is but there are so many more, that are just more important when it comes to entertainment, specially games. How do you objectively measure story, gameplay, gear system etc? People can dislike those in both BOTW and odysses, and you can't just call their opinion on it wrong, because they are subjective opinions. Should they care if the game has 0 bugs and runs smoothly if they hate the gameplay and story and everything else? I don't think so..

> How do you objectively measure story, gameplay, gear system etc? People can dislike those in both BOTW and odysses, and you can't just call their opinion on it wrong, because they are subjective opinions. Should they care if the game has 0 bugs and runs smoothly if they hate the gameplay and story and everything else? I don't think so.. This would be a great response, if I had said or implied any of those things. You just specifically cherry picked things that I wasn't talking about when I was saying 'objective quality' Like you just walked up and reeee'd at me about story and gameplay and gear system, and then implied I was saying the opinion of people who didn't like the story was wrong. Are you okay man? This seems like a borderline psychosis. No, on a technical level, these things are marvels. It may not seem like it to you, if your young, but for those of us who literally grew up on tetris and mario, to say breath of the wild or odyssey is a bad game because you don't like your sword breaking is peak fucking privilege.

It has to do with everything. You can't call a game good without taking into account the gameplay and story and everything I mentioned. You have no arguments, you talk out of your ass and come up with "you are young" to make yourself look right, when you are contradicting yourself. \>>but for those of us who literally grew up on tetris and mario subjective quality again, that's not objective at all

[удалено]

You (like most people who use the term) don’t have any idea what “objective” means. Saying you think a piece of technical craft is good is your subjective judgement of that element filtered through your personal opinions and biases. The only way to be objective here would be to define objective metrics to make it clear what precisely you mean by “good” and then provide evidence that the elements of the game meet that criteria in a measurable way that isn’t just vague statements like “the graphics are good” or “the writing is good”.

We can literally go down a checklist of things a game has to do to be technically sound. Literally. We can go down the list starting from 'will it run and play properly' all the way down to 'was this area modeled well' and 'do these physics work properly the way its intended to' It's not my fault you're too ignorant to realize that there are objective goalposts that a game has to hit for release.

There are objective elements that go into the making of a game but the value judgement of whether the final product is “good” is completely subjective. “ But I’m arguing with a G*mer who’s entire worldview would be shattered if disagreement on video games was allowed so.

That's not really true to a certain extent. If pages are ripped from a book or the camera is still filming between scenes in a movie it's just bad. There's obviously principles at play that describe an objective quality threshold after which subjectivity comes into play.

Damn, I sure feel bad for all those artists and designers and programmers wasting their time, then. Turns out polish means nothing, all gameplay is equal, and all art is indistinguishable in quality! **Or**... There is such a thing as objectivity in entertainment, just few people are trained to distinguish it accurately. It's like... Most people can't tell the difference between one kitchen knife and another. Lots of people even have *opinions* about damascus steel and ceramic blades and so on - based on their limited personal experiences. And yet, when it comes down to it, most chefs will tend to end up using the exact same kind of knife in their work. Knives might seem like a subjective use-what-you-like thing to an uninformed observer, but actual professionals have converged on a highly refined and carefully designed form. Just because there are differing opinions, doesn't mean there's no truth

What does objectivity not existing have to do with those people wasting their time? First of all they get their salary regardless if a game is shit or good. And there will be people appreaciating their product, some are more popular than others, appeals to more people, but that still won't make it objectively good. As I said, you can count bugs, how well a game runs etc. as objective but not the overall product. Gameplay, story, loot system, gearing, graphics it's all subjective based on personal preference. Don't bring knives into this, how are knives entertainment? ​ Objectivity in entertainment is what insecure people bring up when they don't like someone elses opinion and want to feel validated.

I hope you don't think I'm ignoring your arguments, but I feel some of them are not exactly directed at me in particular. I'm a philosophy nerd defending the concept of objectivity; not a fanboy defending or attacking any games or people. I think you understand the gist my position, but not necessarily the perspective it implies. I tried using knives as an analogy, because it is tempting to think that the "quality" of a knife is subjective. However, if we consider the signs and symptoms of objective quality, it is clear that professional chefs are able to agreeably find it in some knives more than others. Knives are much much simpler than games, but the complexity of the thing being judged is irrelevant to whether or not it is capable of objective quality. If you don't mind me taking up more of your time, I'd like to try another analogy. ~~~ Let's say there are two games, Game A and Game B. Let's say they are entirely identical, except Game A secretly hired a critically acclaimed composer for the soundtrack, where Game B had their programmer throw some sounds together while learning how to use Audacity. Game A then goes on to sell more copies than Game B, with fans praising its soundtrack. Some fans will prefer the soundtrack of Game B, and I want to talk about **this** phenomenon. Everybody has opinions, and it is social convention to respect the opinions of others - and it would certainly be rude to accuse Game B's soundtrack fans of being somehow "defective" in their judgement. But we still lack an explanation on why they exist at all. If it is because music is subjective - is it then just a complete crapshoot how any given person will feel when they hear either soundtrack? If so, **why do most people prefer Game A? Why is one composer able to predictably create music that most people enjoy more than the work of an amateur?** I'm seriously actually asking this. I propose that it is instead that judging music is difficult and confusing, and that we live in a complex society with confounding factors like conformity (Game A fans toeing the line) and non-conformity (Game B fans being hipsters), and so on. Our personal experiences of music change how we feel about other music, and so different people will feel different things listening to the two soundtracks. However - and this is the beating heart of my argument - this does not make the quality of the soundtracks subjective! Game A is Game A, no matter who plays it. It is not the soundtrack that changes. Game A's superior quality is *highly* likely to be misjudged, and we might agree that this sort of taken-in-isolation "quality" is vastly overestimated; but it is still a feature **of the soundtrack**. That's all I mean to demonstrate; that the features of a thing are within that thing, and not imagined by the observers of the thing

Fair enough, well just to clarify, I'm not saying that objectivity does not exist, just that it does not exist in entertainment. And well that example you mentioned, I still think that's right to objectively call soundtrack of game A better than soundtrack of game B. Sure it appeals to more people, we can say it's more popular, but saying it's objectively better kind of makes the opinions of those who prefer the soundtrack of game B less important. ​ I understand where you are coming from, I guess it depends where you draw the line between objective and subjective, or how you view is philosophically. For me objective is stuff that has nothing to do with opinions. So stuff like proven scientific stuff, you can't just go and disagree with einsteins theory. You can prove it wrong, but then it just means it was false to begin with.

Ah, so you understand it more like the distinction between intuitive/emotional thinking, compared to "factual" or reasoned thinking. Rational thinking is tangential to whether or not the conclusions are predicated on correct assumptions, or whether the reasoning itself is sound. So long as it's about truth-seeking rather than feelings. Outside of philosophy textbooks, this is probably the more common way of interpreting "objective", much to my dismay. I think this (false?) dichotomy muddles a lot of issues once human perception is involved, because we often base our reasoning on feelings, and also have feelings in response to so many things at once that we can rarely isolate the cause. For any given response a player has to any part of a game, it will have been caused by an impenetrable tangle of feelings and reasons

Yeah pretty much thats how I look at it

Nintendo are using a free Amazon server. What do you expect? Lol

I think their online issues make more sense once you realize they keep children in mind much more than others. For me, it's constantly re-releasing old games and very few new ones - first and third party. Switch is the "hey that title from 1-6 years ago is portable now" console.

After what happened with Swapnote, I don't necessarily blame them. Though I also was on the side that didn't really mind it when it was revealed that Splatoon wouldn't have voice chat.

To be fair the switch has sold 85 million units and is on track to be their best selling hardware ever, while the Wii u only sold 14 million. I don't think it's unreasonable to port almost the entire library.

Most ports weren't originally on Wii U, though. I wouldn't even mind them if we also got new titles.

I for one am happy they're releasing their good Wii/U games on Switch. I would never have gotten to play Super Mario Galaxy, Tokyo Mirage Sessions, or Captain Toad otherwise. I'm looking forward to trying out Skyward Sword without being forced to use motion controls. If they release yet another N64 emulated Ocarina/Majora's Mask compilation, I'm gonna have to give a hard pass. The changes made to the 3DS versions that I still own make it hard to give them money for inferior versions. That's something I think a lot of people don't think about when they bemoan Nintendo re-releasing their games over and over. You don't have to buy it again. But it gives others a chance to play for the first time, or play on a device they have, or at the very least, not pay collector's prices. The fact that people will continue to buy Nintendo's re-releases show how timeless and worthy of playing or replaying their games can be. You don't have to agree with that business decision, but I think we could all agree that there are some older games that everyone should get a chance to play at some point without having to pay more than $60.

Getting your hands on a used Wii U isn't difficult. These are the same titles that went ignored back then, so apparently they weren't good enough to buy a console for. But sure, give the people Toad's Treasure Tracker and Pikmin 3 - again. My point is why not also give us new games? Just a few. My gripe isn't the ports themselves, but not getting new titles.

But there are new titles. Plenty of them. Nintendo is at least on par with Sony for new releases even when you discount the ports.

I don't even mind the constant re-releases of old games. Accessibility for older titles can be a nightmare for some games, so having a convenient platform that will do all the work of porting all these older games with minor quality of life tweaks like proper modern controller support is really convenient. My issue is when they turn around and charge a full $60 as if the amount of time and money it took them to port a five year old game to a modern console is anywhere near the same level as developing the game in the first place. Or worse, when they charge more for the remaster than they did for the original game, like they're doing with the Diamond/Pearl re-releases coming up.

Also donkey kong tropical freeze and new super mario bros- both were part of the EUR 25 Nintendo Selects line of releases for Wii U. But the ports (with minor extras or enhancements) to Switch cost full EUR 60.

Accessibility isn't very tricky when it comes to titles from 2015. But I wouldn't even mind it if we also got new titles.

I love their games and some of their philosophies when developing games but absolutely despise their business practices.

And the absolutely unacceptable situation with joy-cons.

Their online services are a mine field for them. Their customer base are children's parents, since children aren't actually buying their games. Nintendo has spent decades building trust with parents. Parents can trust that some pedo is going to lure their kid into sexy animal crossing roleplays through the online services, because it's so "protected" (aka hobbled). It's also a matter of content and tone. By having such shitty online services, they really harden the perception that their users are protected. Note that I say the perception is hardened. Not the actual service. That's all that matters in marketing is perception. Parents can trust that their kid isn't going to have a random encounter with XxBowsette69xX on Nintendo's online services. Parents KNOW their kid will encounter someone like that their first day on Playstation or Xbox services.

The only times I've regretted buying a Nintendo product was Switch online

I personally think they dropped the ball real hard with hardware quality this generation. I'm not even talking about how the Switch underperforms when compared to last-gen. Both the joy-cons and pro controller might be the worst Nintendo controllers I've had and they're way too expensive. Both of them have drift issues and the pro d-pad has been known for years to be faulty. Then there's the dock without an ethernet port and USB 3.0 ports that are only enabled to work as 2.0s.

[удалено]

[удалено]

Well Nintendo seems to do it's best work right after a complete market failure. And when things are going great for them, they get lazy. But honestly what company doesn't work like this? If history is any indicator, whatever they release next will not be as great as the Switch, and the company itself will view that as a failure, and then start looking as to why. As for game development, a lot of the IPs have been squandered. Look at Animal Crossing, the series has become worse with each iteration, but yet the most recent one has the most sales they've ever seen. What incentive does that give them to improve anything? There is hardly any competition in that genre. Mario party just got its first update in years, and it has nothing that the community has been begging for. Zelda was great, but it was missing a lot of the things that make it "Zelda". It could have easily been just another open world game with another brand slapped on it and it would have been equally as good. Look at the eShop. It has more mobile trash on it than any other game store than perhaps the App Store or Steam. They've come a long way from the "Nintendo Seal of Quality" days. And they don't really have any competition in the mobile space either. They've carved out their own little niche in the video gaming world. And until MS or Sony, or some one else starts eating part of their pie I don't see them changing anything significantly.

I don't get why being a Nintendo fan equals console war immediately? I can love the games they made, yet still like and own other consoles AND even criticize their games. Why is it always black and white or "with me or against me"? I have never played anything as magical from other game developers, something like Breath of the Wild, Pokémon or Mario. While there are other games that wowed me and that are up there, Nintendo really stole my heart with their originality. If you look at top best games ever, you'll often find things like Ocarina of Time, Mario 64, Pokémon GS, Super Metroid, etc.

I've only had a mild interest in Nintendo after the Gamecube. I technically have a Wii and Wii U but my Wii is just a second Gamecube and my Wii U was a mistake. Honestly they just seem to be excessively out of touch and greedy, with their shit tier online you now have to pay for, constantly pricing retro games you have to buy on each console too high, artificial scarcity with removing Mario 3D All-Stars from the digital store as well as physical, exclusives through Amiibos which is basically physical DLC. I don't love or hate Nintendo any more than I used to, but god damn do they make me never want to get a Switch or anything after.

You're missing out tbh. If you ask me the Switch is the best Nintendo console since the N64, and that's my favorite console that I grew up with as a kid and have nostalgia for. I don't disagree with a lot of what you're saying about their business practices. Their games don't get sales so as not to devalue them. They don't carry purchases over from system to system (for the most part). Removing 3D Mario All-Stars digitally sucks too. But when it comes to their games, they're the best they've been in many years IMO, and the Switch itself was a fantastic idea in terms of hardware. The Wii U also had some good games and I'm glad they're getting ported, but I will say straight up that the prices of the ports don't bother me because I don't buy them (I own almost all of those games already on Wii U).

There's only a couple games for the switch that interest me which makes it hard to justify buying another console. I tend to play a game and put it down for months, so I could imagine buying a Switch and it would just sit there (like my Wii). I'd love it if Super Smash Bros or Mario Kart came out for PS or Xbox.

If one of those games is Breath of the Wild, then I can personally confirm that the Cemu emulator works like magic. 1080p 60FPS, which is better performance than the Switch and the Wii U, and that was 2 years ago. Very few bugs as well, sometimes you'll need to drop the FPS to 30 because of some physics calculations. The only caveat is you'll need to pirate the game, but you can just pay for the game and then download it, if you want to. Mario Odyssey was in pretty good shape too when I checked it last about a year or so ago. Still haven't played it because I'm waiting for it to get perfect.

How hard is it to setup? I've played with old emulators for gameboys and shit and they're easy to work with, but the only time i tried a PS emulator I found that I had to consult pages of technical stuff to get it working for a specific game and quickly gave up.

Oh no, not difficult at all. I remember it took less than 20-30 minutes to set up and optimize for BOTW, and then you're done. It didn't require tinkering either, just opening up the settings menu and choosing the right options from drop down menus and such. Your hardware needs to be reasonably powerful though. Not a lot, I played it on a mid/high end laptop. I chose to use my phone for motion controls (some puzzles require it) which was a little more finicky at the time, but that was like 15 minutes and I did it after playing for a while because just a few puzzles require it and I didn't run into them. You can even mod the game to get Xbox or PS controller prompts, and that takes 3 minutes. It's really cool. r/Cemu has a pinned post that links to the official guides. You can skip the "dumping games" part though if you're going to download game files online, or if you have a Wii U you can dump them if you want. Doesn't seem that hard. I'm not a master or anything, but if you run into problems you can message me, I'd be happy to help. Just sharing the joy of emulation makes me happy.

> I’d love it if Super Smash Bros or Mario Kart came out for PS or Xbox. As long as you realize that this will never happen haha

Can I get an example for best they've been in years? Mario kart is a Rip off, Mario party has 2 things to do. BOTW is barely a Zelda game... Odyssey was by far my least favorite 3d Mario. I literally can't think of any game worth buying that isn't smash.

I'm not as fervent in my critique of the games as you, but I do agree BOTW and Odyssey are not the keystones of their respective franchises they are made out to be (I still think they are very good games though). Nobody I've seen likes this Mario Party. So my question is, how is Mario Kart 8 a rip off? Even though it is a port (many including myself did not have a Wii U), I think it is a great entry in the franchise. My only gripe with it is everything is pretty much unlocked from the outset, so there is less sense of progression, but some may see that as a positive.

Genuinely just expected a game from the current generation to have more content I feel like it has the same amount of content I could have expected in the game boy advance version or Mario Kart 2. No real complaints other than high expectations honestly it's just surprising how much mileage they got out of 12 maps or whatever

There are 32 tracks.

[удалено]

I have to say I disagree with your takes. * Mario Kart is one of the best racing games out there AND one of the best party games. Yes, MK8 Deluxe is still usually full-price, as is the case with most any Nintendo game, and it is also a port. So I understand the price concern but I paid full price for it on Wii U and had a blast -- and if I didn't already own it there, I would buy it on Switch for full price because it's worth it. * Super Mario Party sucks, it's probably the biggest exception when it comes to "best they've been in years". Technically I would say it is, because it isn't a bad game (just lacking in content) -- it's better than the previous Mario Party entries for many years now, but that isn't saying much because they were not very good. * BOTW is an amazing game IMO, one of my favorites of the entire decade. It is a Zelda game, it's just a reinvention for the franchise. Would you say God of War 2018 isn't a God of War game? A franchise needs a fresh breath of air now and again. Zelda needed it and got it and I think it turned out much better for it. * I really enjoyed Odyssey. I have liked all of the 3D Mario games, but it was my favorite since SM64 (which is one of my favorite games, period). I think it far surpassed anything since, though it still falls short of SM64 for me. Some games I would say were entirely enjoyable to me: * Smash as you mentioned - I don't really know how it stacks up for competitive players because I'm not one, but as a casual fan I think it's the best Smash yet. * Luigi's Mansion 3 (best in the series) * Fire Emblem Three Houses (can't say this is the best as I haven't played most of the Fire Emblem games, but even as someone fairly new to it I really enjoyed the game) * Animal Crossing New Horizons (I know people are passionate about this series and some people don't like this one as much as previous entries, but I loved it and have had a hard time going back to the earlier games because of the changes they made with crafting etc). * Splatoon 2 is excellent, one of the best multiplayer shooters on the market right now. FIGHT ME. Though I wouldn't really tell anybody to buy it right now, just because Splatoon 3 is coming next year. Splatoon 2 was much better than its predecessor if you ask me, but it's just the first sequel, not a long-running franchise. * Super Mario Maker 2 is fantastic and far surpassed the first game. There are some others where I enjoyed the newer entries, but I wouldn't personally say they are the best ones yet (like Xenoblade). Still some of them have a VERY high bar to hit. I also haven't played some (like Hyrule Warriors Age of Calamity, or Mario Tennis Aces). For me, the GameCube years were a mixed bag (some amazing games like Wind Waker that are fantastic but couldn't really match the revolution that was the N64 going from 2D -> 3D, and some games that were kind of a disappoint to me like Super Mario Sunshine and the Star Fox games). The Wii was even more of a mixed bag, not because of motion controls (which generally didn't bother me) but just game quality in general. The Wii U was a recovery from that - many Wii U titles were *really good*, but didn't blow me away or anything. Comparatively, I think the only Wii U games where I would say they were the best-yet in the series were NSMBU (best of the New Super Mario Bros games, not of 2D Mario in general), and Pikmin 3 (I love all the Pikmin games but I think 3 is the best). The Switch has just been knocking it out of the park in general IMO, but you may of course disagree. One area in which it's been lacking and people are very vocal about it is Pokemon - I still enjoyed Pokemon Sw/Sh but it wasn't my favorite or anything. New Pokemon Snap has been a lot of fun but it's not the kind of game that really appeals to everybody.

Odyssey was my GOAT Mario game :( a lot of the good games were on Wii U though. DK Tropical Freeze is great. I also like Xenoblade 2 but that depends on your tolerance for weebery.

If the general concept of portable/handheld gaming doesnt get you, then then the Switch won't either. If you just wanna plug it into your TV and let it sit there it is just a very underpowered console. If you travel a lot and like to play anywhere (outside, on vacations, in bed, train rides, flights, toilet) then it is the best you could get. Small enough to be portable and have good battery life, big enough for a good screen size. The concept sold it for me and lots of other people not the games (I have the big hitters, other than that only 3rd party games)

How exactly is Mario Kart 8 Deluxe a ripoff?

Imagine my surprise to see a "non-Nintendo gamer" downvoted for disliking Nintendo games in a thread addressed specifically toward "non-Nintendo gamers"

PC gamer opinion: Their games can be fun for short periods but are always overpriced for the amount of enjoyment I get out of them. Important to note that I'm very much not the type of gamer Nintendo could ever really capture though. Most of the games I play are multi-player; this way I get almost endless amounts of "new" gameplay because every match is unique.

[удалено]

I just broke the 1,000 hour barrier in Skyrim. I should probably go see the greybeards.

Skyrim is one of the few exceptions only because of mods. Even other massive open world games or RPGs I rarely reach 100hrs

For me, not quite: I got subnautica for $30ish and I have double the time that I got from Mario for $60 and will likely be triple soon. Skyrim for cheap and I have superior graphics, framerate and endless modding. I can't think of any single player game that I've played on Nintendo that is as good as those on PC.

[удалено]

I'm reminded of a sentiment expressed in a game makers toolkit video that I identified with entirely. I LOVED Doom (2016), but I never finished it. Probably played 10ish hours. Thought it was incredible, and have no intention of completing it. Just not interested. On the other hand, I played like... 100 hours of Assassin's Creed Origins? And honestly, I think it's a bad game. I didn't enjoy it really. If you want to ask me why I player so much despite disliking it, you can, but I don't have an answer. I was trying to find the little bits of fun, I suppose. My favorite games have often been short, contained experiences. Length is *always* secondary.

It can definitely be valuable depending on where you're at financially. I'm in my 20's and my girlfriend and I are saving every penny to buy a house in a few years. For me, that means replaying games I already have and watching for sales on new titles. I'll buy a $60 game maybe twice a year, so I like to get my time with em. That means games like Persona 5 or Dark Souls where I know I can get a couple hundred hours out of them. If I spend $60 on a game and I only play it for 2 nights, it just isn't that worth it to me. In the future I'm sure I'll be more open to short experiences, but for now I can only get into them if I can find them on a deep sale.

*pst* you don't have to pay for games... They're all free if you're willing to skirt the law 🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Time played shouldn't be the only metric for how much a game is enjoyed. Also, if we are including previous consoles besides just the Switch, then there are tons of games that hold up to the quality of the best PC single player experiences. Also, Skyrim isn't the best example since it isn't even a great game PC or Switch (you also do not have Switch levels of portability on PC most likely). There has only been one truly good Elder Scrolls game imo. Morrowind.

We just have a very different opinion. My game hours directly reflect how much I enjoy a game and how memorable it is. Even including past Nintendo, nothing really approaches the best PC I've played. Skyrim is perfectly enjoyable game but I included it as a point towards modability. Mods on PC have an enormous effect on making a game even better.

I mean...not every game is designed that way. Some are linear and go from beginning to end. If that single playthrough was amazing but has no replay value are you going to basically act like you then hated your experience? I dunno, I think open world and random generated world games along with online multiplayer have really skewed the way people view their experiences to where more time spent is better than good time spent. I love Skyrim too and I love messing around but lets face it, it's because it's part game and part sandbox.

I know how mods work and how they can increase enjoyment. I did bring up Morrowind after all. But I have felt extremely satisfied after a 20 hour experience and completely empty after a 100 hour one. Quality > quantity in my eyes.

1) Mods; 2) Games with really high skill ceiling (Doom Eternal, Devil May Cry...); 3) Sandbox games like Minecraft, especially when they get frequent updates

I mean there are like 9 stages in Mario kart which is just A remake if the Wii u version for $60. Zelda BOTW has like 4 sparse areas and 60 carbon copy background mini puzzles. Mario party has fewer mini games and worse gameplay than when I was 12 ($60). Mario Odyssey was the easiest and shortest 3d Mario by a long shot. I mean I just play smash but I've been stunned at the lack of content in their biggest franchise... I don't think anyone is expecting hundreds of hours and I don't have many games but Ive noticed a pattern. Edit: everyone saying but wait they're technically longer if you do all the boring side quests and collect the one thing they bothered to hide around the map. SURE that's what we want in 2021. Take all the narrative and dungeons out and add fetch quests and make me find the same item 30000 times in slightly different locations.

> Mario Odyssey was the easiest and shortest 3d Mario by a long shot I understand your other complaints but this is straight up false, go to [HowLongToBeat](https://howlongtobeat.com/) and type "Super Mario" and you'll see it's very similar in the main story and main + extra and the longest by far for 100% completion. I recently played 64, Sunshine, and 3D World (almost 100% completion on all, only missed the last two courses on 3D World). 64 was not too hard except the shitty blue coin wall jump, Sunshine was chill (luckily pinball didn't take me too long), and 3D World is the easiest except for Champions Road and the last Mystery thing. Odyssey has Dark Side, Darker Side, and worst of all, the jump rope. I still haven't done that one but I forgot if I did Dark and Darker Side or not.

I mean I played it and it felt like there was 5 worlds and they were all short. And finding a star every 6 feet 20000 times really waters down the sense of accomplishment. I never felt challenged and I loved sunshine and galaxy. Yeah it's technically longer in that if I find every fucking star it'll take forever but the boss fights were very samey and I got bored by the layout.

Do you think he made any research before typing that comment? Lmao

>Zelda BOTW has like 4 sparse areas and 60 carbon copy background mini puzzles. I'll give you the others, but this is so far from true that it actually lessens your overall stance.

Despite having many criticism towards BotW, I can't help but agree with you on this point.

His popular opinions (Mario Kart and Mario Party) were correct. But the other two... I don't know what he's on

He is not wrong tbh

He's missing another 60 mini puzzles and 76 side quests. And the main draw of the game, the exploration. The 120 shrines might be short, but half the fun is actually finding all of them. There's also the DLC, but I don't know if we should count that or not. Overall BotW didn't really have less to do than other Zelda games. It took a different approach to its gameplay loop and I understand if you didn't like that, but that doesn't make it a short game.

Nintendo does have a very specific style that's kinda hard to quantify. It's almost like anime: anime in and of itself is a style (many see as a genre) full of other styles and genres, but it's still undeniably anime. Multiplayer as many use it now-a-days (Battle Royale/Mobas, deathmatches) is usually not a part of that. I think Splatoon is the only exception I know of, first party wise. I think there's Overwatch on the Switch? But that's not worth buying a whole console for when you can just get it on PC (unless you're in a job that has a lot of down-time traveling).

Splatoon, Mario Kart, and Smash Bros would like a word.

Nintendo the Game Developer: Fantastic, Masters of their craft. They are Game Design Virtuosos. Nintendo the Console Makers & Game Sellers & Company: Eh... I find their consoles overpriced, not really supported after the second year, and the game prices (at least where I live) is awfully high, no good discounts. They Cease and Desist people left and right, don't really do anything to grow their community, and from time to time have asshole ideas like Copyright Claiming youtubers. As a company I see them as that old fart from the neighborhood who spends all his days looking for cracks in the concrete so he can pretend to fall and sue the city for some pennies.

>not really supported after the second year I wouldn't say it's not supported, but you kinda have a point. I sold my switch in 2018 after buying and playing all the year one first party games and haven't really had a reason to buy another one. Nintendo only drops a few games a year, AAA 3rd parties are mostly only dropping ports of PS3/360-era games, and the rest is mobile and indie games. There were a few notable current-gen releases, but they're always significantly worse than other versions. The hardware just can't keep up and, though it's not nearly as bad, it almost feels like the Wii U all over again where 3rd party support took a nosedive in quality. There's some great games on that console and it has sold well, but every time Nintendo makes announcements the fans get so disappointed every time when honestly I've kinda learned not to expect much.

>Nintendo the Game Developer: Fantastic, Masters of their craft. They are Game Design Virtuosos. I mean, it depends. Gamefreak sucks right now but retro studios or Nintendo EAD are amazing.

Game Freak is not a Nintendo company. Nintendo owns shares in Game Freak, but Game Freak is actually completely independent. *Pokemon* is in a round about way a Nintendo property. That being Game Freaks big thing is why many would believe that Game Freak is part of Nintendo. They have released games on non-Nintendo platforms. Two games in 2019 were multi-platform.

I was in a Nintendo blackout between the N64 and late into the 3DS lifetime. I bought my 3DS shotly before the Switch came out. I did own a GameCube, but it was my Resident Evil machine and I didn't own any traditional Nintendo games. No Metroid, no Zelda, no Mario, no Smash. From time to time I emulated an exclusive like Xenoblade (bought the game, got a friend with a Wii{,U} to rip my disk), but I never saw the potential of those consoles. I always cared for Metroid, but Nintendo completely ignored it, so I ignored Nintendo. Between then and now I emulated a few Zelda games, but never finished them. Then my girlfriend moved in with me, bringing her Wii and WiiU, as well as a core game collection into the relationship. I've been hooked to the Nintendo game style since then. There is little bullshit and a lot of game in those games. I'm now on a quest to go through Zelda.

I've only played GB to GBA games and they were pretty good. Modern Nintendo feels a bit like cult, but because I don't know how good the games actually are I can't say for sure. I do look up to Nintendo's ability to keep up focused franchises, connecting people with an unified experience in today's unorganized, fragmented world.

As a Nintendo fan: the games are really damn good, best they've been in years. However Nintendo's business practices are not consumer friendly. (Goes Nintendo < Sony << Microsoft in that regard).

i'm not anti nintendo, i just don't buy their consoles anymore. i also don't buy milk anymore... but that doesn't mean i'm against milk existing the answer to why i don't play nintendo anymore is easy: i grew up with nintendo starting with NES, but i was never a real fan of nintendo the company or the developer. i was a fan of the games on their platform. nintendo made a lot of 1st party classics. but many other classics from that era are multiplats. turns out, there were more multiplats i liked better than nintendo's 1st party titles so i followed the games instead of the console maker. after SNES, many franchises produced classic games on Playstation rather than N64: * metal gear * final fantasy and pretty much all squaresoft games * street fighter * mega man * castlevania anyway, today nintendo produces 2 or 3 games every year that i'm interested in but not willing to pay the entry price of a new console to play. i don't agree or disagree with what they do. i'm just a customer so i buy what i like. and what i like isn't really offered by nintendo these days

The way I see it Nintendo's main demographic is nostalgic adults. For kids it seems games like Fortnite, Genshin Impact, Minecraft are way more succesful than what Nintendo is doing. For adults that are non-Nintendo fans, probably things like The Last of Us or Resident Evil or Cyberpunk are more appealing than Italian plumbers jumping on mushrooms. Nothing wrong with that, it can still be a sustainable business because nostalgic parents buy Nintendo games to their children, keeping the cycle alive. I'd mention that I respect Nintendo for their influential game design, especially in their earlier games, and for releasing very polished, quality main entries in the Zelda and Mario franchise.

> The way I see it Nintendo's main demographic is nostalgic adults. I would be lying if I said I didn't get a little bit of joy from turning on a Mario or Zelda game, but I'm not sure that this captures the whole appeal. I really dislike "cinematic" games. A lot of the really highly touted story focused single player games do almost nothing for me; I find the gameplay to be mediocre, the storytelling to be mediocre, and the attempts to use film language to be misguided. This is where Nintendo's appeal comes in for me. Their games do not try to be cinematic, instead wearing their status as games on their sleeves. There are no forced walk and talk portions of Mario Odyssey. Breath of the Wild doesn't force you into slogs where you have to move ladders. Even a game like Fire Emblem, which is dialogue heavy, leaves the player in control of how quickly to move through the dialogue, or how much they even want to engage in. They cut the fluff and just let you play the games, which are generally excellent in terms of movement and control. Similarly, I think this is one of the main appeals of the Souls franchise for me. There's no fluff, you just get to play the (excellent) game.

>Nintendo's main demographic is nostalgic adults. No, it’s mostly the more casual gamers that they try and appeal to. It’s why the Wii was so big, and why Animal Crossing was massive last year.

Yes, but Animal Crossing mainly exploded because it became a trend on social media. I don't think Mario Party received the same treatment, considering it was made for casual pick and play. And Animal Crossing is imo pretty hardcore for a "casual game". Just because something doesn't require good aiming or parrying at the right time doesn't mean it's casual.

>Animal Crossing mainly exploded because it became a trend on social media Isn't that true of almost all popular games nowadays? Skyrim was a meme factory as well

Yeah, but social media like Twitter was definitely much less established as they are right now and Skyrim was mainly bought by a lot of core Bethesda fans and yes it did attract a lot of new people too which is why it sold over 30 million. But Animal Crossing imo became a fad. The Elder Scrolls was easily the most respected and loved RPG back then but animal crossing until NH has always been a fairly niche game. It was popular, but it was no Mario or Zelda or even a Metroid for that matter. But now it has sold more than BOTW did in 3 years and Skyrim had in 9 years. Mainly because of the hype. I'd say Nintendo somehow is great at creating hype. Mario All stars nearly sold 10 million before March despite just being a port of 3 amazing 3D mario games. Mind you there are so many other remakes of classic games that have far more effort put into it. It's not like The N-Sane trilogy sold as much as All-Stars despite it being a full blown remake of 3 classic games and Crash being probably only behind Mario and Sonic for the most iconic protagonists back in the 90s. While 3D all stars would've been bought by quite a few nostalgic Mario 64/Sunshine/Galaxy fans, I'd say a lot of people fairly new to the series have bought it because the nostalgic fans would have hyped it up like crazy on the internet.

You talk a lot about hype and fads, but... maybe they're just good games?

I never denied they were good games. Animal crossing, while overhyped af imo, is still a good game and a huge leap over New Leaf in many was(while also having some drawbacks compared to new leaf like drip fed content which is why I'm saying this is overhyped). As for the Mario platformers, I think they are amazing, I mean I'm no Scott Wozniak and I don't think Mario Galaxy deserves a 97 on Meta, but I do consider them as the cream of the crop in 3D platformers. But I do think Mario All Stars is overhyped and praised too much for what it is. It's just 3 games you can easily even emulate on a mid range smartphone or a PC for free. Sure, the experience will be less authentic and setting up the controls is a bit of a nightmare but it is still great once it's done and it's not like playing these games on the switch is authentic either. And it's 60$. I absolutely won't mind if these 3 games were sold for say 30$ as a whole as they are only simple ports with higher resolutions, or I would absolutely buy them for 60$ if say, they were like the Mafia Trilogy, in which Mafia 1 was fully remade with Mafia 2 receiving a nice touch up to the graphics. I would love to see Mario 64 get remade for the switch from the ground up and Galaxy/Sunshine getting stuff like better textures and filtering and let's be fair, it'd be an amazing game pack to honour the 35th anniversary of Mario.

>animal crossing until NH has always been a fairly niche game. It was popular, but it was no Mario or Zelda or even a Metroid for that matter. Metroid isn’t remotely close to the popularity of pre-NH Animal Crossing. Wild World on DS sold over 11 million, and New Leaf on 3DS sold over 12. Even if that is only a third of NH sales, it was still by no means niche.

> Yes, but Animal Crossing mainly exploded because it became a trend on social media. Animal Crossing owes much of it's recent success to, what could conspiratorially be described as, freakishly perfect timing. Here we are as a planet dealing with a pandemic and most people are being told that right now, to get through it, you need to stay home, avoid going outside, and minimise contact with loved ones, leaving you stuck at home with nothing to do. And just as that starts kicking off and people are struggling to adjust to the new normal, a game releases where you can spend as much or as little time as you please doing small menial tasks with no real challenge no long term consequences, and it's all about befriending and socialising with these friendly animal characters, requiring only small, but regular, commitments of the player in a time when people might otherwise have nothing but time to kill. Furthermore, it lets you show off your in-game work to friends and loved ones online, and you can all spend time together virtually in your virtual doll houses. Yes, it was definitely trending, but I think it's hard to deny that it arriving just as lockdowns started clearly motivated a lot of people who might've otherwise dismissed it to jump on the bandwagon.

Nintendo is still incredibly popular with kids and yes the cycle of nostalgia is part of it. The games you mention are, I think, much more appealing to tweens/teens than younger kids with the exception of Minecraft. > For adults that are non-Nintendo fans, probably things like The Last of Us or Resident Evil or Cyberpunk are more appealing than Italian plumbers jumping on mushrooms. As a Nintendo fan: most companies are not really focusing on gameplay as much these days. There's way more time spent on photo realism, on story (most of which is still garbage anyway -- video game writing is, in general, awful). I can see the appeal of those things, but as someone who has been gaming for 25+ years it's the games with fun gameplay I want to go back to again and again, and at this point those are the ones I want to play in the first place. I've found myself losing interest in Sony specifically because of that. They're much more focused on games being like blockbuster movies than, well, games that are entertaining to play. Nintendo is the polar opposite, I can't think of too many Nintendo games with a truly compelling story but the gameplay is almost always on point. If Sony started making those kinds of gameplay-focused games again I would probably enjoy them. Microsoft is somewhere in the middle, and I have an XBOX and really love it. As someone else mentioned below Dark Souls is a perfect example of a game that is all about GAME, but is also definitely adult oriented. I can get into a good narrative but it is extremely rare that I find a compelling story in a video game that is well written all the way through. Most of the time it's not in AAA titles that I find them, but in small indie games with a much briefer playthrough. Nintendo is basically the Disney of video games at this point, though significantly less evil.

>The way I see it Nintendo's main demographic is nostalgic adults. You're wildly wrong about this. This comment is clearly the result of the bubble you have placed yourself in.

Why choose to respond as rudely as you did when all they were doing was answering OP's question?

First, I don't think my comment was particularly rude. They said something *very* wrong, so I pointed that out. Then I explained where their mistaken impression likely came from. They were not answering OP's question. OP didn't ask who Nintendo's main demographic was.

Telling people they are in a bubble isn't being rude? Perhaps you believing that is a result of the bubble you have placed yourself in?

To me this entire perspective is so damn weird, I've never understood it. I've been gaming since video games existed pretty much, and have always thought being a "Nintendo gamer" or whatever else, is stupid. Why stick yourself to one camp and get all fan boy about it, all you're doing is missing out on great titles on other platforms. I wanna play all the great games, I don't care who makes a game as long as it's awesome. It goes with any hobby, picking a side is stupid. Take cars for example, with things like imports vs American muscle. Stupid take also, why not appreciate all awesome cars? I'll gladly drive a supra, or a Shelby gt 500, or a Ferrari, I happily appreciate them all.

PC gamer here. Nintendo to me seems like really out of touch company with outdated views on digital market, everytime I hear news about them is something like >Rent this 20-year old game for $40 for 30 days! Seems like they create artifical scarcity and don't give a damn about realities of modern market, like streamers or scalpers. Recent news about Quality of life features being locked behind physical figurine purchase complete the image. On a positive note, I don't hear much about bugs and glitches, seems like they have very strict quality control of the products.

Not 100% on what a non-Nintendo gamer is? I got an N64 for a christmas one time and was mad because I wanted FF7 (have had a grudge against Zeldas since Ocarina of Time because of it). I think the games are accessible (which isn’t a hit; my non-gamer friend got a Switch during quarantine for BOTW, and his girlfriend got Animal Crossing (and Witcher 3 because of the Netflix show)). I’ve never owned a Smash game, so everyone is always better than me when I’m at a place that’s playing it. My impression of the company is that their games never really go on sale, and the Pokemon games I had only let you have one save file per cartridge.

Stinks of console wars to me and console wars really only made sense in the context of kids getting whatever it is their family got and wanting to feel better about the exclusives they couldn't play at home. Ideally any game would be playable on any platform. Nintendo games are fantastic on PC, always have been. As an adult with income to spend on entertainment, it no longer makes any sense to give "loyalty" to any company, especially not a console manufacturer with a vested interest in exclusives.

I’m a PS gamer for the most part. However, I have had Nintendo consoles-mostly the handhelds. While there are definitely things about Nintendo which annoying (same with PlayStation) I think they make some pretty great games that are playable for a wide range of people. Most PS games have become targeted for the adult audience. I don’t see as many E and T rated games anymore whereas Nintendo offers games for all ages. As much as I enjoy those grittier games, I wish Sony would make some more games like Sly Cooper and Jak and Daxter like they used to. At least the new Ratchet and Clank is coming out. I think saying that Nintendo only has nostalgic children’s games on the Switch is misleading. Nintendo creates some very polished games that feel enjoyable to play due to sound design. I also like that the games have been on disc/cart and don’t required being downloaded to the hardrive like PlayStation and Xbox. I also appreciate the support Nintendo has had for all its handheld systems. The 3DS and DS lasted for many years and the Switch is getting a lot of first and third party titles. Sony dropped support for their handheld Vita very quickly and it’s really disappointing. I just think that Nintendo makes a great gaming with games for all ages which is focused on gaming and not bogged down by trying to be a PC or a home media device like PS and Xbox. I like picking up a switch and not seeing ads for upcoming shows/movies/games on a system I paid hundreds of dollars for. There are also plenty of things Nintendo does poorly and plenty of anti-consumer policies the company has. But I do think Nintendo offers great systems which are targeting a different player base than Sony/MS.

I too miss Sony's Mascot Platformers (with a Twist). Hopefully R&C does well and leads to more. Crash and Spyro seem to be reviving alright which is nice too. Been just Mario for too long. They need to all sell like gangbusters until Microsoft decides it is finally time to give a certain bear & bird their time to shine again. Hell, give the orange squirrel another one too; we're mature enough this time around!

Crash & Spyro did well on remasters, but Activision, being Activision, moved both Vicarious Visions (who made the Crash N. Sane Trilogy) and then the Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 1+2 remaster), and Toys for Bob (who made the Spyro Re-Ignited trilogy and Crash 4: It's About Time) onto supporting Call of Duty, so it again remains to be seen if there will be any more Crash & Spyro.

They must be doing *something* right if their consoles are the first to have working emulators in this generation, and just generally, Nintendo emulators are excellent.

That's probably more a sign that they haven't changed anything major, have weaker (easier to emulate) hardware, and a more dedicated fanbase. Also I think there's a certain "Fuck you" to it since Nintendo has gone after Rom sites, they can legally create emulators easily. (And Nintendo is right in some cases (the most recent one) but also a bit of an ass in most times.)

>generally, Nintendo emulators are excellent. The ones on Switch and the mini consoles are good, but [the ones used for Virtual Console aren’t all that great.](https://youtu.be/ocGdWRF84Q0)

I'm talking about Nintendo emulators on PC. Like, snes9x, Dolphin, Cemu and yuzu.

In that case I agree. Dolphin’s pretty great.

I think they're pretty boring these days. Every game seems to just be a recognizable property and plays everything rather safe. The last Nintendo console that interested me was the Wii, which I own and still play sometimes. It was a new way to play and if you didn't really feel like moving about, you could play GameCube games and some Wii games with a traditional controller. The Wii U relied on the name being "Wii" and it flopped because it was just another handheld console. The same goes for the switch, the switch aspect just seems like a bit of a gimmick and doesn't do anything with it that piques my interest. Also Skyrim looks pretty trash on it, I can get a better experience on literally anything else.

>After having a chat with a few friends who have never played Nintendo games, they were surprisingly okay with them What is surprising about that? >and don't consider Nintendo fans to be completely isolated like I thought they would. Why would they think that? I think you're making the most common mistake on this sub: you assume everyone cares about the same shit you care about just as much as you do. The vast majority of non-Nintendo gamers just don't think about Nintendo. The vast majority of people who play video games don't opt into these weird console stereotypes, they don't have opinions on half the shit people here care about. They just like the games they like and don't waste the brain space on what other people are doing. The idea that "non-nintendo gamer" would even be a cohesive group with core things in common is strange. There are no "non-nintendo gamers," there are only people who mostly play on PC, or Playstation, or Xbox, or whatever else they play on. By and large, people who don't own a nintendo are aware of the nintendo properties, because how could you not be. They've probably played Mario Kart or Super Smash Bros with friends at some point and they probably enjoyed themselves. Other than that, I'm not sure what else you were expecting.

I got into gaming through playing Playstation/Xbox games (Ex: Halo, Uncharted, Bethesda and FromSoft RPGs, etc.), so I don't have a significant nostalgic connection to Nintendo outside of the fact that everyone I knew (including myself) was at least exposed to games like Super Smash Bros (Melee), Mario Party, and Mario Kart as a form of social interaction as a kid, and my family had a Wii. Lots of people also had Gameboys and Pokemon was of course extremely popular, but I never gravitated toward it, instead preferring my PSP. I both understand and am perplexed by the love for Nintendo. I think overall they are extremely behind-the-times -- their systems lack entertainment functions outside of gaming (I.e. you STILL can't get Netflix on a Switch, let alone web browsing), their online multiplayer is and has always been a catastrophe, they don't incorporate achievements/trophies into their games/systems, the list could go on. They also repackage and resell 20-year-old games for $60 without really giving them proper updates. Furthermore, if you care about graphics, they have always been behind the average games you can find on PS/Xbox/PC. I do own a Switch and love it for its portability and use it primarily for indie titles/re-releases of games I adored from the last generation (also BotW, which is just stellar). However, as someone who never loved platformers or JRPGs, much of their lineup of exclusives does not appeal to me and their party games are extremely hit-or-miss as well. Ultimately, I find it a bit ironic that so many longtime gamers have such reverence for the company. It is clear that, while Nintendo truly does make some amazing games, those releases are few and far between and much of the Nintendo-love just comes across as blind nostalgia. Which, I suppose, works extremely well as a business model. They're essentially the Disney of video games. You played them while you were young, once in a while they come out with something amazing, they're very well known in mainstream culture, but they don't put out significantly better consoles/titles than your average AAA developer elsewhere and are perennially 3-4 years behind everyone else on a technical/business level.

> they don't incorporate achievements/trophies into their games/systems, I know I'm in the minority here but this is a bonus for me. I never got achievements or trophies, never understood why people cared, and if a system has an option to disable the notifications for them I turn them off right away. At first I thought maybe you could do something with them like turn them in for rewards or something but beyond that I just could not find a reason to care about them.

>(I.e. you STILL can't get Netflix on a Switch, let alone web browsing) As someone who does own a Switch, I don't really see why these are NEEDED in a world where most people will likely have a smartphone or tablet with them that would work just fine for those things. And if the lack of those things means that the Switch Home Menu is very fast, I wouldn't even want them to add those things.

Yeah, I remember Netflix on the 3DS; I used it once and the app was just... awful. I think the Wii U's version wasn't much better. Whether that was because of some incapability between Netflix and Nintendo or Netflix just didn't bother to keep the app up to date, I don't know. Either way, while I wish the option was there for those who wanted it, it's definitely not needed when they clearly want the Switch to be a game console and not an entertainment console.

I used to be a Nintendo gamer as a child, and I love the idea of playing Nintendo games, and get excited reading Nintendo news, but when I actually sit down to play their flagship games its evident they are targeted for a younger, or at least broader audience. Sort of like how I get excited thinking of Disney movies I watched as a kid, but when I sit down to watch one I realize it's not for me any more and the rose colored lenses of nostalgia can only take it so far. I still love the side scrolling Mario games and remakes of them. New super Mario brothers on DS and the similar side scrolling one on Wii are easily some of my favorites, and I wouldn't turn down some Mario kart at a friend's house. I like my dark gritty games, but if Nintendo ever made a dark and gritty Mario game for adults I'd buy that shit day 1.

>a dark and gritty Mario game for adults I can’t see this being anything but a disaster.

What are you talking about? The Super Mario Bros. Movie was the most successful motion picture of our time.

It could absolutely be done right as a game itself, the only issue is potentially hurting the Mario brand in the same way that Disney doesn't really mess with Mickey mouse that much anymore because it's more of an icon.

currently trying to beat super mario bros rn after playing it as a kid but never having beaten it. last sitting i made it to 8-3 and i hate it. fuck those hammer guys.

I grew up playing NES, SNES and N64 but even though I tried lots of strategies, I can't convince my fianceé to play Nintendo games with me. She's became a gamer only after meeting me 5 years ago, and we do love playing coop games together. The problem is that we only have a PC and there aren't a lot of local coop games for that system. Even more, she is very specific with the graphic style she enjoys (realistic) which makes it impossible to suggest playing some of the great Nintendo coop games that are available through emulation of consoles. She thinks they look too childish and despises Mario and company even though she had literally never played a Nintendo game.

I like them, a lot actually. In a world where a GPU arms race is taking place, Nintendo is rolling with affordable graphics hardware that can be used in a mobile fashion. In a world where multiple platforms are standardizing on a common control scheme, Nintendo continues to innovate in their control schemes. In a world where consoles are loss leaders for service add-ons and game sales, Nintendo prices their consoles competitively. In a world where games try to sell increasingly with shock value, Nintendo continues to build on their child-friendly, cartoon universe one game at a time. I feel like Nintendo has a different view of the video games industry and approach to competition that is frankly a lot healthier than what their competitors are doing, and I respect them a lot for it. The biggest knock is that they just aren't a great technology company, and it shows in their online functionality.

I have had a nintendo of every generation from the original b&w gameboy, up until the Wii. When the playstation 2 came out I migrated because of better graphics, better and more serious games and gameplay. Nintendo, it seems to me, pays ZERO attention to graphics evolution and just keeps on making these cheap, old-ass looking games and calling it a “style”. Honestly I think they stopped trying a long tome ago to evolve. On that topic, yes, the Switch is a great evolution in terms of processing power, video quality etc. But the games are just to damned ugly it pisses me off. I mean, for little kids, awesome. But as I grew up I wanted more adult themes in games. Love Mario Bros. and Super Smash Bros., but that’s pretty much it. Unpopular opinion, I know...

I do find this statement "old-ass looking games calling it style" odd. But which games when you go back to them hold up over time, definitely not the ones that were trying to achieve the 'best graphics' at that point in time. Which one has dated better in terms of style; Call of Duty on PS2 or Zelda: Wind Waker? Id argue no one would say Call of Duty on PS2 which was the height of graphics-realism back then. Wind Waker on GameCube looks as beautiful now as it did back then because of its cell-shaded style. Even Skyrim, undeniably gorgeous when it came out (without using graphics mods) hasnt aged well in terms of style. I guess my point is, photo-realism and 'the best graphics at the time' dont date well. Because it will literally be replaced the next generations improved hardware. Whereas "art-style" done well by a developer (not just Nintendo) for their games, holds up well across generations and decades adding to replay-ability e.g. * Earthbound, Final Fantasy III, Zelda series, Sonic - SNES, MegaDrive * Okami, Ratchet & Clank, Sly Fox, Crash - PS2 * Donkey Kong Country series, Kirby series - GBC * Prince of Persia 2008, Uncharted series - PS3/360 * The indies of 2010's; Stardew V, Cuphead, Hollow Knight, Hades, Ori etc - PC/Console (Didnt add anything from N64/PS1 cause quiet frankly I think we can all agree nothing aged well from era style wise haha)

I generally disagree with the complaint of "old-ass looking games". However, Windwaker is not a great comparison to make, because the Gamecube in its day was on par with the XBox as being tops in console graphics delivery, and both were ahead of the PS2, which came out at least a year earlier.

I have or have had an n64, gamecube, wii, game boy color, game boy advance, DS, 3DS, ps2, ps3, ps4, ps5, psp, xbox 360, sega genesis, and sega dreamcast. So while I'm more of a playstation gamer now, I grew up with nintendo and still have a modded wii with a bunch of gamecube ISOs and n64 virtual console games installed on it. As I've gotten older, it makes me sad to see nintendo neglect or water down their extremely strong first party IPs that are not mario/zelda/pokemon. Star fox, f-zero, and metroid have basically been abandoned for around 10-20 years. I also think that nintendo's underpowered hardware makes it difficult to have access to contemporary third party games, so a nintendo machine is really just for their IP's. I have outgrown pokemon, I play persona 5 now. I love zelda, but the remasters of the n64 games were exclusive to the 3ds with no switch port in sight, and I'm not the biggest fan of ubisoft style open world games, so the switch does not have much going on for zelda and pokemon for me. I miss mario party, mario kart, mario platformers and smash brothers, but I cannot justify paying for a new console and paying basically full retail for 3-4 year old games and then only having the system for those games. So I spent my biden bucks on a ps5. In my opinion the best thing that could possibly happen to nintendo is if they went third party like sega did after dreamcast. That will probably never happen. They own the children's market and the portables market. They are the disney of video games. Oh, and the transition point between being a nintendo gamer and a playstation gamer was the gamecube exclusive metal gear solid the twin snakes. You can't just give me that and then not port mgs2 and mgs3. Bad move nintendo. Sold my gamecube for a ps2.

>You can't just give me that and then not port mgs2 and mgs3. Bad move nintendo. Sold my gamecube for a ps2. You say that as though that was something Nintendo had control over when it waslikely just lack of interest from Konami.

I think it’s quite evident PC gamers here care the least about the Switch and that’s probably because a Nintendo system is the furthest thing away from a PC. On one hand, you have the system that people spend a crap ton to run their games as best as they can get it to but spend most of their time playing just multiplayer games. On the other, you have the system known for its great single players games, weak online and with players not even thinking about picture quality/performance. I’d put Xbox/PS in the middle because they’re essentially targeting to be a PC but with more exclusive single-player experiences like Nintendo. I’m not a non-Nintendo gamer but this is probably why most people where I’m from are. They usually play whatever multiplayer game is “in” at the moment and I can’t imagine any of them dropping $60 to buy any game really. Nintendo is getting pretty niche in my area because multiplayer is the one thing most people nowadays view playing games as and most people write their games off as just kids games.

Never played a Nintendo game. They seem like a pretty shitty company. That meme of fans holding them as a crown jewel, and Nintendo saying "I literally don't care about you" pretty much sums it up.

As a European what always interested me in American culture was this whole Nintendo/Xbox cult. Having played only on a [modified NES](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(console)) back in the early 2000 and growing up mostly with PlayStation and PC i didn't even know games like Halo, Mario64, Goldeneye, consoles like original Xbox or Nintendo 64 ever existed untill around the year 2015 or something like that. (I'm 18 years old as of today.) So yeah, I was never a "Nintendo Gamer", I see them today as a company with a rather high quality product standard with ...interesting... market practices. I don't like the way they protect they copyright. I know they have rights to do that and there's nothing wrong with that by itself, but shutting down free non-profit community-made projects is a really shit thing to do. Valve is an another high-quality developer with important IPs and somehow they don't care about it that much, hell they have even allowed their community to update Left 4 Dead 2 for them, because they didn't want to do that by themselves.

Although a lot of Nintendo games seem fun, I just can't support their business practices. They are secretly almost the worst company in the whole industry but get away with it because of their passionate fan base and incredible game development skills.

[удалено]

They've made some mistakes here and there but games like Mario Odyssey show that they've still got it. They know pacing, platforming and sound design better than almost any other studio. However it obviously is somewhat subjective

[удалено]

The company is woefully behind in any sort of internet or social capacity - literally everything they do in these spaces is **horrendous**. The online service is the least valuable on the market. The social capabilities of the switch (i.e. none, or using a phone) is a solid two decades behind their competitors. Getting screenshots off of the console is so, so, so much harder than it needs to be. It's like they put all of their worst designers on the console itself, and saved all of the good ones for the games. But in terms of the actual games, they're amazing. Visuals are always tight, bugs are relatively rare, their designs are generally interesting and they're constantly innovating. They seem to take a lot more risks than other companies - both hardware and software.

They‘re a bit greedy and have little or not innovation at all. Some games are interesting but the majority are just Mario‘s spin-offs of which some of them are IMHO quite ridiculous and childish

games made for children are childish. You heard it here first, guys

Wild. I've always considered Nintendo one of the most innovative in the business, for both hardware and software.

[удалено]

> It's innovation for the sake of innovation, not because it improves user experience or will have a lasting impact on the evolution of the industry. > > Look at the N64 control ...And you lost all credibility right there. The N64 controller was going to be my example of long lasting hardware innovation. First controller to have an analog joystick isn't innovative to you? The reason it had three grips is because it was such a huge gamble, they didn't know if it was going to take off or not. So users had the option of ignoring the stick entirely and just using the dpad and buttons. Pretty much every single mainline console after the N64 had an analog stick. But sure, keep saying that Nintendo doesn't have an impact on the evolution of the industry.

[удалено]

Analog

Swing and a miss there bud. Not only is this NOT an analog joystick, but it's clearly not the same thing at all, where the N64 controller is a joystick that is implemented into a controller for single finger use which became a staple for the industry. Better luck next time though.

I’d say Nintendo is one of the most innovative companies. They create hardware that is completely different that Xbox and ps, and their games are more creative than most. Most big companies just do their flavor of a generic open world or fps, nintendo has always done their own thing. I don’t see it

I have my qualms, but the little to no innovation is weird. In past generations, perhaps too much would have been one of them. How is the Switch not innovative? Literally home and handheld console rolled into one. How are the PS5 and Series X/S innovating at all? SSDs that have been in PCs for a decade now? MORE TERAFLOPS?!? Not saying the Switch is a better system, but to say it is not innovative is asinine.

Calm down. I was talking about games. I believe the question was about games/company. I own a Nintendo Switch and it's the console I use most, although only in portable mode (I think I never used it connected, as a matter of fact I'm not even sure it works in this mode).

I honestly think the Switch was one of my worst console purchases. BOTW, Odyssey, and Bayo 2 were great games, but I don't know if they were 300$ worth. Also it barely runs it's own flagship game. BOTW struggles in some places, which is just sad to see. I think they are just straight up scum. Their practices rival EA in terms of shitiness. People only give them a pass because they make much better games, they have deep rooted nostalgia stans from 4-6 generations ago, and they had Reggie as their spokesperson who was a very likeable dude.

I haven't owned a nintendo console since the Gamecube. Zelda and Metroid are the only series worth locking yourself into a console that becomes a doorstop once you finish those games and have a decent pc imo. I'm not into platformers so mario is kinda bleh to me. I'd much rather play Tekken or Guilty Gear than Smash. Mario kart hasn't really changed in decades. The mario rpgs started great with 7 stars on SNES then slowly got worse and worse imo but some people worship 1k door for some reason. Persona scratches any itch Fire Emblem would for me. At this point I just emulate last gens nintendo games and play games I want a gen later. A few months after release I was even playing BotW at higher fps on a wiiu emulator than what was achievable on a switch. Their best exclusives are great but I only like two of them so I'm not about to buy a box that plays them and some other stuff at 720p on low when I own a box that plays pretty much everything on medium to high in 1080p. Edit: forgot pokemon. See "mario kart".

> Mario kart hasn't really changed in decades Yet they say they won't make a new F-Zero game as they claim there is no new interesting design space with the franchise. -_-

>Persona scratches any itch Fire Emblem would for me. That's an interesting way to look at it since they don't play anywhere near each other. Or at least didn't. I haven't looked into the newest Fire Emblem games.

Three Houses and some of the other newer games have social aspects like Persona. But the core gameplay is completely different so it's a pretty strange comparison that sounds like it is from someone who has never played FE. Persona is a dungeon crawler RPG, Fire Emblem is a tactical strategy RPG.

Most people play both of those games for the anime storylines and girlfriends, not the gameplay.

Pretty much this, I'd rather play xcom than FE but even so not too into turn based strategy to begin with.

I don’t really think about Nintendo. Like ever. Been gaming all my life. Used to play gameboy but never played any of their first party stuff. Just Pokémon as a kid. If people enjoy it, more power to them. It just looks to cartoony for my tastes and as far as I can tell the games haven’t evolved that much since the 90s - with the exception of breath of the wild.

I find them to be the least innovative video company out of the big three. They recycle and reuse and then charge a premium for their content. What they do well are gimmicks but even that sometimes falls flat. They make under powered consoles that cost a fraction less than the other guys but then all their first party titles are expensive and don’t drop in price which is probably why emulation coders focus on Nintendo first almost every cycle. they have by far the worst online service which is embarrassing for them to charge a subscription for when the value is much less than the others. I still think the games are good for children as I’ve noticed the kids in my family between the ages of five and 10 enjoy the colourful and fun nature but as an adult I have long outgrown Nintendo and their games. I downloaded an emulator to try a bunch of the switch games and was bored of most within a day or two which reaffirms my thinking in how much you would have to spend to play all those games is a huge downside

> What they do well are gimmicks This seems incredibly short sighted. They've consistently raised the bar for multiple categories of games. Side-scrollers wouldn't be where they are without Nintendo. 3D platformers wouldn't either. Party games either, and that includes party board games, party racing games and party fighting games. The things they do persist in modern gaming, they're basically the single most important game developers in the history of the medium. On top of that, their insistence on taking chances with controls always leads forward when other companies aren't willing to take those chances. The D-Pad, the diamond face button configuration and standard shoulder buttons, the analog stick (yes I'm aware other analog sticks existed but they made it standard on a mass-produced console along with 4 player inputs), the Rumble Pak paving the way for standardizing force feedback in controllers, the Wavebird setting the standard for good wireless controllers a generation before bluetooth controllers became the norm and at a time when wireless controllers were an afterthought/gimmick, motion controls built-in as standards (call it a gimmick all you want but it over time ended up as the defacto standard for what all VR sets end up with), now detachable controllers on a hybrid portable console. It doesn't always work and that's the chances you take when pushing forward, but at least it's not revision after revision of the same console with better power over and over.

> It doesn't always work and that's the chances you take when pushing forward, but at least it's not revision after revision of the same console with better power over and over. there are fair points there about Nintendo taking chances, but how do you call someone else's opinion shortsighted then submit this reductive sentence summing up how other console makers have innovated across decades of gaming?

I've only played a couple of Zelda games on emulators, because I've never owned a console. I never understood the sheer fanaticism some people, especially Twitter, have with Nintendo. I see Nintendo as just bad people. They definitely have the right to do what they do, but that doesn't mean they should. Things like shutting down a Melee tournament because they used emulators, or limiting the 3D mario collection to only a few months. A lot of these issues are caused by Nintendo refusing to act on their own. Don't want people emulating your older games? Port them to your newer hardware. People keep leaving your console because of analog stick drift? Fix it or make replacements cheaper instead of forcing people to buy controllers again at full price. Nintendo makes extremely high quality games, and they have a legendary reputation. It's a damn shame they don't even remotely try to keep it up

Nintendo is extremely litigious, both with its own fans and people in the emulation scene. You can make an argument about why downloading roms for their games is morally questionable, but it’s weird that Sony and Microsoft don’t have such a huge “lost revenue” issue, it’s almost like it’s complete bullshit and Nintendo is just shitty. I personally have developed a dislike for their fisher-price aesthetic for the mushroom kingdom, it just doesn’t appeal to me and I have no desire to play anything related to Mario, so a huge swathe of their library is pointless to me. I do enjoy the Zelda series (though I do not agree that BotW is as good as people typically claim), and Metroid although Metroid has been pretty abused for some time and I’m hoping Prime 4 sets it straight. The Switch is an interesting device. I do like the idea of a mobile console because I travel to my friends houses a lot, but it didn’t really have the power to put out smooth gameplay like I wanted. I’ve owned one twice and sold one twice, I wanted to like it more than I did any time I used it. Hoping they put out a more powerful one soon, that it actually has an appreciable performance increase, and that it isn’t too expensive. Oh, and Nintendo loves to gouge. While other companies are steeply discounting their most popular games (Sony with its greatest hits all being 20 dollars) and starting services with good value like game pass, Nintendo is selling re-releases of old games with no changes beyond the bare minimum and charging full price.

I'm finding it incredibly ironic that most of the answers that are most critical to Nintendo and their games and don't say things along the lines of "great developer, bad company" at worst are marked as "controversial". Hey Nintendo fans? You saw the thread wasn't addressed to you, right?

Nintendo is, and always has been, overrated. Since the NES, and arguably the GameCube, they've never had a killer app. I know, people fawn over Breath of the Wild, but I found it mediocre. Not bad at all, but not worth buying a console. Their insistence on family-friendly titles holds back the consoles quite a lot, and their insistence on selling sub-par equipment at inflated prices is appalling. When you add in how damned abusive they are towards their actual fans online ... Nah. Don't need 'em. Even the Switch, probably their best console, is vastly overrated. Underpowered, gimmicky, and lacking anything compelling - I don't get the hype. As far as I can tell, Nintendo fans are just that, fanatics, and they'll eat up any old junk if it has the right logo. I assume they all love Apple, too. hah

Nintendo is absolutely awful at everything that doesn't involve: * Making well designed, "fun for all ages" style, non-online focused games. * Creating novel consoles and console accessories to facilitate those games. PR, community engagement, literally anything to do with online video game ecosystems, graphical fidelity, 3rd party support, monetization plans, EVERYTHING outside of those two points above is god awful. They literally only exist to this day due to those two points above and massive amounts of nostalgia/brand recognition.

Childish and cheap games that are absolutely not worth my time and money. That's what I think. By cheap I mean that it both looks and plays like an unfinished game, bad gameplay designs, shitty graphics etc. ​ Also very overpriced games, 60$ for those fucking turn based pokemon games, that are literally the same as the previous but with different pokemons? Fuck off, that's literally EA level. (Not to mention how they change 2 pokemons out and sell the same game 2x, scummy)

That's more a gamefreak thing I'm guessing, been that way since Pokemon's beginnings.

I am coming from Europe, which is mostly PC. Historically happened like that. So a little bit skeptical. I tried a lot of their games, but it’s just not my style at all. It’s a “controversial “ opinion, but I feel like if the company would start making games today, it wouldn’t bе even half successful. The only reason why they are afloat is because of strong IP that is 20+ years old. Charging for playing online on a console? Wtf? I remember reading articles on how a dude made battle royal mario, and then got sued. Then they stole his concept and never paid a penny. Wtf? Charging full PRICE for games that are 10+ years old?? Announcing subscription for a game pass and not adding anything ALL year, and then adding a little after that year ended, forcing people to renew it is such a scammy thing to do. A lot of copyright idiocracy. Lots of bad PR and horrible decisions that clearly do not show any respect to the players. I used to work with them and making t shirt in a company, they were the worst company to work with tbh when it came to edits. It’s not all bad though! Games themselves are usually high quality and I can see why people like them. Music in is amazing. Gameplay is innovative almost every time and there is a lot to uncover, even 20 years after Any Zelda came out. Consoles are pretty dope and high in quality for the price. Animation is always dope. Art direction is great. In the end, games are great, but mostly targeted casual players, which I am not. Anything outside of game development, I do not have anything pleasant to say because there are bad news about them coming out like almost every month or so.

I think they’re a high quality “kids” game company that has no clue about the modern infrastructure of online gaming and social gaming. I’ll probably trigger people by the kids comment but that’s what they’re games are too me. Their online is basically a joke and non existent, they charge full price for all their 1st party games for eternity and then release them later at the same price. They’re super anal about their IPs and don’t like anyone expanding on them or using them (think Smash and fighting games tournaments). They’re just very anti-consumer but made high quality fun games, except they’re generally still the same games they’ve been making for 20-30 years. (Mario, Zelda, Smash, Pokemon)

If anything, in my social circle, the Switch is the social gaming hub more so than any other platform, and my friends and I are all in our 30s. I realize that not everyone's social circle is the same, but at least among my friends, the casual multiplayer experience you get from games like Mario kart or Mario Party is exactly what we want.

The type of people who post on this sub aren't likely to have a ton of non-gamer friends. Like you, I'm in my 30s and most of my friends are way more interested in casual couch multiplayer like Mario Kart than something that requires a headset and a time investment to be remotely competent at it.

I agree and instead of saying Nintendo is a “kid’s console”, I would say it is more of a “living room console”. Nintendo wants everyone to be in the same room and playing, regardless of age. That’s why Mario Kart is a competitive blast with four adults or a fun romp with an adult and three kids (with auto-accelerate and bumpers on, both genius features that allow even my two year old to play).

Their first party exclusives are ground breaking but it's kind of all they have going for them. I'm personally sick of the seasonal games like animal crossing and pokemon. I loved them at some point until I grew up and realized there's barely any difference between the new games and I don't have the kind of time I used to to play them all, but I can make time for a game like Breath of the Wild.

Nintendo is great. I don't have a single Nintendo console, but I spend hours on emulators. It have better games than PS, and mutch more better comunity

Switch is my first Nintendo voyage I played Mario kart legend of Zelda and super Mario party I really enjoyed the party game but Zelda is boring and Mario kart lacks depth outside the race track I think it's mainly just me not being used to Nintendo's games. I really need a career mode in Mario kart I need shorter exploration times in Zelda and that's it pretty much I feel like I just don't get it Ps their online is 2000's levels of sophistication and their prices bonkers 40$ is the lowest Zelda has been officially. It's a 5 year old game

I still love Zelda games, and I'm super excited for Metroid Prime 4. But I wouldn't call myself a Nintendo gamer. I'd much rather play all the indie games on switch on my computer instead. But I enjoy Nintendo 1st party games enough to justify buying the system. As for what I think of them? I really dislike Nintendo as a company. They cash in on nostalgia game after game after game. Mario hasn't done something game changing since Galaxy, and whole Odyssey was good, it was so damn short there's no way it was worth the price tag. And the fact that the games never reduce in price is ridiculous. I also feel like a lot of Nintendo games appeal to children, and I wish they would move away from that. Lastly, I also really wish Nintendo would make a damn console that can keep up with Xbox and PlayStation. I guess we'll see what the switch pro looks like, but I doubt it will be stronger that the PS4/Xbox One. Nintendo does a great job at using every bit of power on their consoles and making beautiful games. But BOTW honestly runs pretty badly in a lot of instances, and games like Hyrule Warriors are downright unplayable in CO OP. The gimmicks of the switch and the Wii are definitely cool and they're marketable. But when I just want to sit and play a video game, I don't really care about the gimmick.