I don't agree with that. I actually can't see how the NSMB is being released over and over again if we have only one NSMB for each platform. Yes, just take a look into it: There's one for the NDS, one for the Wii, one for the 3DS and one for the Wii U. There are 4 Gears of War games and 4 Halos on the Xbox 360 alone for fuck's sake, yet no one complains.

How many 2D Mario games are there on home consoles since Super Mario World on the SNES? Only 2: NSMB Wii and NSMB Wii U, and we'll probably not see another 2D Mario game until the next-gen portables and consoles.

The only reason why people complain about NSMB getting "milked" by Nintendo is because of the fact that NSMB was released on the 3DS and the Wii U at the same time, without realizing that these are different platforms.

I disagree again. Nintendo is actually one of the only companies that dare to bring innovation into their franchises while keeping the main formula alive. Just look at the games yourself before making incorrect assumptions: each 3D Mario game is completely different than it's predecessor, Mario 64 is completely different than Mario Sunshine, which is completely different than Mario Galaxy (with the exception being Mario Galaxy 2, which is a direct sequel). What they have in common is that they are 3D platformers with Mario characters, but each game has it's own setting, it's own enemies and gameplay mechanics.

Zelda is another example. Windwaker, Ocarina of Time, Twilight Princess, Skyward Swords are completely different games on their own rights. Now the new Zelda for the 3DS will use a top-down view like the first ones. The last Zelda game nwith a top-down view was 4 Swords if i recall correctly, which was released almost 10 years ago.

The only thing i do agree with is that Nintendo needs to develop some new IPs. The last good IP Nintendo made was probably Pikmin. It's time for something new. But i don't agree with the idea that they are milking their core franchises. In fact, i actually think it's time to bring some franchises back, like Metroid, a 3D Donkey Kong like the one made by Rare, F-Zero, Mother (Earthbound) and Star Fox.

Yeah the "BUT REHASHES" argument has never held any water, there is more difference and changes between each iteration of a nintendo IP than between two iterations of any other franchise. Particularly the super-big popular ones.

IP reusing? Yes. Definitely, but rehashing is not something Nintendo does.

But I am not suggesting that PC games should appear only on Windows platform. I'm fine with them appearing also on Linux, Mac, or whichever platform the game maker feels it makes sense to release the game on.

A similar Nintendo-example from PC is how Microsoft quite deliberately made Halo 2 Vista-only, trying to push the new OS with it. And that move got quite a lot negative feedback from PC gamers. I don't think they could really claim that

a) it wouldn't have been technically possible to release Halo 2 for Windows XP

b) Halo 2 would have sold so poorly on XP (compared to Vista) that it wasn't worth the effort.

You are mixing up platform exclusivity to push that platform, with business decisions of where it makes sense to release a game. You would have a point if EA refused to e.g. release games on PS4 for no other reason that that they want XBox720 to sell better, or some mobile game maker refused to make an Android version of their IPad game because they don't want Android to succeed as they have vested interest to see it fail.

I am not demanding that game publishers should release all their games on all possible platforms, even the ones where they would certainly lose money. I am mostly against platform (or even service, at least if it is a pay service) exclusivity in order to push that platform.

For instance if HBO tries to restrict HBO series to their own pay channel (like I think they do), I am against that and would much rather see them offer them also on other services, even if the users would have to pay more that way. But naturally it would be even worse if you'd have to buy a separate HBO TV unit to watch HBO series.

You mean how the console market works.

Thanks goodness for small favors. We don't need more consoles (unless they all follow a standard.

Actually, I'd much rather they'd sell their hardware at a profit and actually make money selling hardware, which is what they contribute for the most part.

Artificially lowering the price of things causes waste.

Actually, it was true 3 years ago and I believe it to still be true, that you can code for most consoles in C/C++.

It's just that the lower level C/C++ API is different for every console so your code will be a complete mess of macros.

Working with it for a couple of months was enough to convince me that web development is the future.

Also, Sony is right in this instance. Open GL > Proprietary solution that will never expand beyond the console it is developped for.

Some games take advantage of cutting edge UI in some consoles, but for the most part, they just make it hard to go multi-platform.

Technically, you can make web apps now. Unless the market converges back toward very few devices, it will be the future of mobile development.

I beg to differ on the rehash that is the Pokemon Franchise.

Nnnope. Every single generation of pokaymanz has refined and added new gameplay mechanics. They keep the same basic formula, but the changes between generations are quite significant.

That's a pretty good point. The most recent Mario platformer that isn't part of the NSMB series also seemed to be coasting on nostalgia, Super Mario 3D Land is very much based on SMB3. Sure it has some twists and makes interesting use of the fact that you have depth perception, but it's very much a step backwards when compared to the proper 3D Mario games. Just as the NSMB games seem to be a step backwards from SMW...

Not if you play the NSMB games with other people. Single player? It's a tightly designed, rather easy platformer.

4 player though? Holy shit. It is an entirely different beast. And it will end relationships.

1on1 vs 2on2 i guess that is a big step. i thought people just liked pokemon cause when you pit fight your dogs at school you get expelled.

I was going mostly by NSMB itself rather than the Wii one which I don't own myself (or 3DS or WiiU neither of which I have played at all). The inclusion of simultaneous multiplayer is certainly a step forward, but there are so many steps backwards from SMW that it saddens me (I love SMW to bits). I see the same thing in 3D Land, while it's all "ooh, a 2D Mario game but with depth!", if you consider it a 3D Mario game it's a massive step back from 64. Despite the 3DS having an analogue pad you're back to holding Y to run and running to the end of the relatively linear level...

Yeah. I was pretty disappointed with NSMB when I first played it because it felt more like Mario 3 than SMW, good platforming and stuff but nothing that wowed me.

And then I did 4 player multiplayer. Worlds apart.

But that's my point: i was trying to bust the myth that the PC is an "agnostic" platform. It isn't. You are tied to one single OS (a really expensive one by the way) in order to run most games and apps. If not even the PC is an "agnostic" platform, what's the point in moaning about having different consoles?


What's the difference between games that are not released on a platform because of business decisions and games that are not released due to exclusivity deals? For the consumer, there is NONE. The only difference is the intention behind the decision to not make the game available.

Hehe, Netflix is now making their own exclusive series as well.

Which if they never put them on DVD would be annoying. Not sure whether they plan to or not.

Do PC games work on anything other than Windows? No, except for some of them. What about the mobile market? The iOS, Android and Windows Phone 7 each has it's own exclusive games. So no, it's not limited to the console market.


I'd rather have more competition, to be honest. I still dream about the day Sega makes it's triumphant return to the hardware market.


You're not being realistic here. Consoles have been sold at a loss since the PS1 era. The fact is that new hardware is expensive, especially in the first years of production. Why is cutting-edge hardware necessary? Because you need to convince adopters of the last generation to upgrade and buy the new consoles, and in order to achieve that the processing power needs to be a great step away from the previous generation.

If you don't invest in cutting-edge technology you take the risk of stagnating in the market. Isn't this the biggest complaint about the Wii?

And there's no way to sell an expensive console. History has already proven that expensive consoles do not sell (the 3DO, the CDI, the Saturn and the terrible launch of the PS3 are examples of that).



It probably is the future, but since i can't predict stuff i'm talking about the present.

I'll say this much: id like to see nintendo get smarter about their digital shops.