I’ve mentioned this in passing, but I’ve got a
buddy who asks me about the Nintendo NX pretty much every time we cross
paths. He’s not wrong for it; the house
of Mario has been horrifically mum on the subject, and I’m at a point where I
just want them to show it off. There’s
playing the cards close to the chest, and then there’s shoving them directly
into your lungs -- at some point you’re just going to end up hurting
yourself. If Nintendo’s big reveal
doesn’t sync up with the anticipation and speculation it’s been mongering for
well over a year, then it might start the NX off on the wrong foot immediately -- which to be fair is
something that Nintendo’s already learned in the past few years.
Still, I wish the Big N nothing but the best. Even if the Wii U isn’t the most popular
console, I’m extremely grateful for
its existence. In a world where the PS4
spent 2013 through the first quarter of 2015 floundering its way to millions of
sold consoles, the Wii U won the moral victory with gusto. It didn’t rely on unkept promises from
marketing campaigns, and it didn’t coast on goodwill earned from the Xbone’s
onstage seppuku. It did the very best it
could -- and still does today -- with what really matters: the games.
But now Nintendo’s opting for a do-over -- and I’m
wary of what that means for the future.
It’s a given that we’re going to see more Mario
games. We’ll probably see them soon, if
Nintendo has anything to say about it; likewise, they’re double-dipping with Zelda by releasing Breath of the Wild on both the Wii U and the NX. If I had to guess? Based on the overwhelming sales thus far,
we’ll likely get new installments of Mario
Kart and Super Smash Bros. somewhere
down the line -- maybe soon, maybe later, but they’re no doubt coming. Fair enough, I suppose. And even if the mainline games are confined
to the handheld space, I’d wager that we’ll be getting Pokémon in some capacity.
Thanks to Pokémon GO, the
iron’s not just hot; it’s on fire and nestled deep inside a volcano.
Like I said, Nintendo prioritizes the games more
than anything else. Even if the hardware
has some flourishes to it -- dual screens, motion controls, etc. -- those are
in place to try and provide new ways to play.
Did they succeed? That’s
debatable thanks to that wretched thing
we call “different opinions”. But the Big N has done its very best with what
it’s got on tap -- which happens to be enough to stuff its latest fighting game
installment with about 50 characters. It’s about the games, and it’s about what’s
in those games: the characters, worlds, mechanics, and more we’ve come to love
over the course of decades.
Even if the Wii U’s been in dire straits for
years, it’s been holding it down with some strong showings. New Mario game! New Donkey Kong game! Two Zelda HD remakes! A Pokémon fighting game (albeit in
conjunction with Bandai Namco)! Fans all
over the world have been sated…is what I would like to say, but I know better.
To quote Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation
fame: “fans are clingy, complaining dipshits who will never, ever be
grateful for any concession you make.”
So even if we’ve gotten a new, stellar Donkey Kong game, it’s not
enough.
“Make a new F-Zero!”
they cry. “Make a new Earthbound!” they wail. “Make a new Metroid! No, not that one! Make it the way I want it to be!” And so on, and so forth. Nintendo’s taken a lot of heat for rehashing
its most reliable (and profitable) franchises for ages, but can you blame
them? When people constantly line up for
more -- and when they beg the Big N to mine the past for their future
satisfaction -- then it’s hard to fault the company for the moves it makes.
Well, it’s hard. But it’s not impossible.
At the risk of sounding like a hypocrite, I’ll admit
I’ve played both sides of the debate.
I’ve said before that even if each successive Link adventure follows a
template or overarching design philosophy, the final result is always different
-- something that makes a game unto itself.
Wind Waker is not Majora’s Mask, which is not Skyward Sword, which is not Ocarina of Time, which is most certainly
not Breath of the Wild. The same goes for the Mario games (with the
exception of the New SMB series);
just try and compare Sunshine to its
direct successor, Galaxy. Go on.
I double dog dare you.
But I understand where people are coming
from. A new Mario game might be
different, but it’s still a Mario game.
Same goes for Zelda. Same goes
for Pokémon. Can we really give Nintendo
a pass when we’ll put guys like Ubisoft and Activision on blast for milking
their franchises? Sure, Nintendo isn’t
quite so committed to annual releases, but still. They’re more than capable of stagnating. They’re coasting. I get the feeling that it’s going to take
more than just a plumber in red to help the NX get going, and offer the company a chance for a comeback.
So is the answer really just to revive their old
IPs like Metroid, or F-Zero, or Punch-Out? Could be. As cringe-inducing as it is to admit, you
can’t divorce Nintendo from nostalgia like you would split a Twix bar. They’ve got so many recognizable names,
characters, and worlds, so tossing them out is risky business. The divine fury over Metroid Prime: Federation Force and the fervor behind various fan
remakes means that there’s still an audience for certain, mostly-dormant (or
mistreated) IPs. People want more Samus,
so why deny potential customers?
It’s certainly a way to take a big chunk of the
mindshare. Bring back Punch-Out, and there’ll be a surge of
interest at the very least(and a smattering of clicks for gaming
websites). Put a new Kid Icarus or Fire Emblem on the NX -- in glorious HD -- and it’ll breathe new
life into IPs that have already risen from the ashes. Or, hell, go buck wild and make a new Duck Hunt. The dog showed up in Smash Bros., so why not give him some time in the limelight? Why not show off what you can do with
top-of-the-line technology and an additional 30 years of experience?
Well, I can think of one reason.
What’s going to be the legacy of Star Fox Zero years down the line? I don’t know.
The
Metacritic score isn’t exactly the highest, and opinions vary pretty
wildly. With that said, opinions wouldn’t
have to vary wildly if not for some
of the choices made behind the scenes.
It should’ve been an instant win as soon as Platinum Games got involved;
instead, there have been regular complaints about the short length, the
visuals, and the controls -- just to name a few. I’d imagine it’s nowhere near a train wreck,
but the thought of a Nintendo game not getting
top honors is enough to shake anyone’s confidence, I bet. It could serve as a dark reminder of the
obvious: just because you can revive an old franchise doesn’t mean that you
should. If you screw up, then you’re
going to make a lot of die-hards question their faith -- in the franchise, in
the company, and in the whole mindset behind decades-later revivals.
I guess there’s a simple question behind whether
or not you should opt for a revival: can you do the original justice? If equaling or surpassing the original is
well within reach, then it’s arguably worth a shot (even if you’re cribbing off
past successes, but work with me for a bit).
Given that Punch-Out had
basically been frozen in a glacier for years, there was no reason for the Wii
installment to be as good as it was -- yet here we are with the legacy honored,
and its version of Little Mac immortalized in Smash 4. Alternatively, you
can take an old franchise and put a spin on it so bold that it becomes
something new; there’s been no shortage of Kirby games over the years, and a
fair number of them have opted to be as original as possible.
But I can only speak for myself here, and I have
to be honest. I’m not 100% opposed to
revived Nintendo IPs, because the inherent potential of each -- combined with
that Big N polish -- means that outside of one or two flubs, I’m in for a hell
of a time. Even if work gets passed off
to partners like Intelligent Systems, I’m absolutely
down for a new Advance Wars,
especially if it shows up on consoles again.
What’s old can be made new again.
What’s old can be made better than it ever was. Is the potential there for a massive
disaster? Of course. IS anyone forcing
Nintendo to mine the past? Outside
of legions of screeching fans, no.
And that’s why I think that the optimal state is
for the Big N to put a larger focus on new IPs.
I’m not saying that they’re BANNED from revivals, because the games
industry is getting more cutthroat by the year.
But
the success of a game like Splatoon -- the company’s very first online
multiplayer, which absolutely killed it
-- has to stand for something. It means
that you don’t always have to stroke gamers under their chins to earn their
love, respect, or money. Make a good
game, and you’ll at least make their ears perk up. Otherwise…
So yeah, I don’t think there’s a clear-cut answer
here. I hate to opt for the middle
ground, but last I checked, I wasn’t the president of a major gaming
corporation. Nintendo’s going to do what
it thinks is best, which can go incredibly right or horribly wrong. Considering how many pegs they got knocked
down -- having spent years riding high on the vanilla Wii’s success -- I’m
guessing that they’re ready to reform.
They want to do what’s best for the gamers -- not just for profit, but
for fun. And here’s hoping they succeed
with the NX.
And that’s about all I’ve got. What about you? Should
Nintendo keep reviving its IPs?
Should it bring back dormant favorites and update them for generations
old and new? Should it go full tilt with
fresh creations? Should it strike a
middle ground? What do you want them to
do? Feel free to weigh in at your
leisure. It’ll be a welcome respite from
NX speculation.
Or you could do the smart thing and listen to some
Advance Wars tracks.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
No comments:
Post a Comment