How Microsoft and Sony could learn from Nintendo

Nintendo may have been slow to embrace new gaming trends in the last couple of generations, but they are undoubtedly a gaming institution. Despite this, there has been some criticism of Nintendo for being slow to learn from other gaming companies. With this in mind, I was wondering what Microsoft and Sony, on the other hand, could learn from Nintendo’s strategy.

The first idea that would undoubtedly benefit Microsoft, especially with the reputation of its online service, is the limitation of online communication. This no doubt is a controversial idea, with this being one of Nintendo’s biggest criticisms, but on the other hand it has also led to a better online community.

Engaging with the Miiverse community is much less toxic than the other multiplayer services. With the general toxicity of gaming as a whole community any attempt at controlling the way in which we engage with one another is sadly the lesser of two evils considering the vileness that can get spewed online.

Another idea that other companies could learn from Nintendo is the value of aesthetics over graphics. While Microsoft and Sony continue to expensively battle over making their boxes render more and more detail that many wouldn’t even notice, on the other hand Nintendo focuses on making its games look beautiful in design rather than through graphical clout. The sheer beauty of the likes of Breath of the Wild and Super Mario 3D World stand as testament to the power of making a game look good on what is considered weak hardware.

The use of colour seems to be the best aspect of a Nintendo game, where, despite reinforcing that annoying ‘kiddy’ image, this results in beautiful, varied locales and games that have a visual identity. On the other hand, the majority of games on Microsoft and Sony consoles seem to be generic shooters with no real visual identity other than brown and grey. In this way, the house of Mario stands ahead of the other two in terms of their visuals, despite their use of under-powered graphics hardware. Microsoft and Sony could do with more effort in making their games look colourful and full of visual charm, rather than gunning for ultra-realism.

The third thing that Microsoft and Sony could learn from Nintendo applies more to Microsoft than to Sony at the moment, with Crash N’Sane Trilogy coming out shortly and the release of WipeOut Omega Collection showing a better intent, it seems that where Microsoft is most lagging behind is in the treatment of its intellectual property.

Nintendo have been accused of focusing too squarely on Mario and Zelda in the past, but undoubtedly the company understands which of its IP have the biggest draws. With further 3DS releases of beloved IP such as Fire Emblem, it seems that Nintendo, as well as Sony, do well with the use of their franchises. Microsoft, on the other hand, seem to have a lack of those killer franchise titles that draw gamers in. Halo 5 was ultimately a disappointment on the Xbox One and other than Gears of War 4 it is difficult to come up with many ‘killer’ apps for the console.

Nintendo may come under fire for a lot of bad decisions, particularly with their being stuck in the past in the online space. However, there are a lot of decisions that are made right with the company, and if it leaves the console race altogether then gaming will be a worse place as a result. As we move forward in gaming, we need to learn lessons from even the console manufacturers we criticise, both in what they do right and in what they do wrong. Nintendo may be mocked and disliked by a lot, but there is no denying that its approach to the console race is interesting.

2D And Aesthetics vs Graphics

3D graphics arguably first became mainstream with the fifth generation of gaming consoles, featuring among its lineup the Sony PlayStation and Nintendo 64. Graphics became a talking point for many games, and polygon counts a significant measurement of prowess. Pioneers of 3D gaming included Super Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie, which brought platforming, arguably the bread and butter of any major video game console at the time, into the next generation.

With a good thirteen years since the release of the first Sony Playstation, one could have been forgiven for thinking that with 3D graphics being achievable in most modern games for so long we would have seen the death of 2D graphics. Those old days of pixels would be looked back upon with a sad nostalgia where we would wonder how we ever could make anything out on such old technology.

Of course, many gamers know that this is definitely not the case. 2D gaming stands now as a stylistic choice rather than a limitation. Indie games are always coming out with pixel-styled graphics to pull us in on the charm of nostalgia. On top of this we have all kinds of video games where the gameplay is on a 2D plane including, yes, 2D platformers.

The reason for this is because, while graphical capabilities have multiplied, so too has the artistic merit of videogame creators. We’re no longer content with ever-more photo-realistic textures but we also want our games to have an identity, to have colour and to be aesthetically pleasing. Some may even argue that we want our games to be artful. One look at how beautiful Breath of the Wild looks, despite being on under-powered hardware, tells us all we need to know about the importance of aesthetics over graphical fidelity.

With that, the use of 2D graphics has become a valid creative choice with thematic and gameplay implications that have their own useful circumstances. Most platformers haven’t really benefited from the extra dimension, and have instead resorted to the collect-a-thon style gameplay touted by Banjo Kazooie many years ago. Instead, 2.5-D games, videogames with 2D gameplay but an extra layer of 3D graphics, seem to be stylish in the platform genre. Looking at Yoshi’s Woolly World, or New Super Mario Bros., it is clear to see why such a look would be charming. The use of the graphics in these games have helped towards creating a distinct visual style.

In 2017 we have Cuphead to look forward to; an interesting 2D platformer that uses modern-console capabilities to craft an eye-popping tribute to golden age animations. The levels look like they’re pulled right out of an old Disney cartoon and look stunning in motion. It seems that choosing to craft a 2D rather than a 3D experience was vital here to achieve the exact look and feel that the developers were going for artistically, and hopefully the end result will be enjoyable to play when it comes out later this year.

Don’t Starve is another example of a game that uses 2D graphics to its vast advantage to craft a cohesive visual narrative that is striking and interesting. Here the art is meant to evoke a kind of Tim Burton storybook style, with the bold black outlines and the creature designs themselves looking like something out of an Alice-in-Wonderland book. Oxygen Not Included, Klei’s next outing, looks to be utilizing a similiar art style but with more of a utilitarian Fallout Shelter overtone.

Instead of slowly going by the wayside as 3D capabilities have continued to evolve, the use of 2D gameplay has instead become an interesting and valid creative choice in gaming that a developer can use to great positive effect for their games.

It is interesting that the 2D style still hasn’t disappeared, and I think this shows that for all the graphical bombast that the latest and greatest modern titles throw at us, what is most important is the artistic choices in developing the game, and how the end result looks. We don’t need the next big graphical powerhouse with more skin pores per inch of character skin, what we do need as gamers is aesthetic; beautifully designed games made not with lofty eye-popping graphics in mind but instead made to look beautiful on their own merit. As console power hits the point of diminishing returns with graphical fidelity, we will begin to see more focus on the aesthetic and visual design rather than the power behind the game itself.

How Is 2017 Shaping Up?

Being almost a third of the way through the year already, I am starting to think about Game of The Year awards, whether I would like to write something about them, or whether I would like to have my own and how I would write such a feature. It seems early, but time just seems to be moving quicker every day and the day will come around quicker than you think.

Right now, my thinking is yes, I will write about my picks for Game of The Year. However, I am not sure whether I will pick out one game and call it ‘the best’. I think that such an exercise is futile as I don’t believe that games can be objectively ‘pinned down’. Rather, I think my GOTY will be more of a ‘top picks’ kind of feature, where I pick out a few games that came out in the year and why I think they’re significant, and why I think they deserve a top spot.

Something that struck me while thinking about such a feature was just how good 2017 has been for gaming so far. With previous years proving disappointing, I am very happy with the quality of the games that have been released so far. We’re not even in peak season for the big blockbuster titles and already we have been treated to some stellar quality.

Resident Evil 7 was my first ‘real’ pick for GOTY potential. As a statement of intent, this game hit the right notes, being squared centrally within the Resident Evil series’ most well-known horror tropes, and even embracing some of the goofier parts. More than anything, I was happy that Resident Evil 7 had an actual identity. With a sense of place and story, and some really tense scares, I think that 7 was a strong start to the year.

Then the hits just kept coming. While I haven’t picked it up, Horizon: Zero Dawn is piquing my interest. I haven’t bought it because I personally wasn’t that interested in the game, my main pick for Open-World-type gameplay being Breath of the Wild. With it being a full-price AAA title that aimed for graphical fidelity, and what seemed to be a mature, gritty story, Horizon unfortunately fell outside my radar for now. Given the excellent reception to the game, though, I will definitely pick it up as soon as I have enough money to justify such a purchase.

Breath of the Wild, however, was the big show-stealer for me so far. I have put so many hours into this game and written so much about it. It was a fitting swan-song for the Wii U and just about one of the biggest titles that could have come out this year. A few poor elements in the late-game have detracted from the experience, unfortunately, but I can honestly say that the newest Zelda title stands up there with the greats.

My dark horse pick, however, is the one I find most interesting; Subnautica. I have spoken negatively before about this game because of its practice of survivor babysitting, but I have found a lot to love in the game otherwise. I am very fond of the gameplay loop of exploration and building more elaborate tools using resources that become harder and harder to find. Building a submarine and exploring deeper and deeper into unknown, terrifying chasms is just a feeling that other games haven’t even come close to capturing. It’s a shame about the hunger and thirst meters, but I have found a lot to enjoy in Subnautica. While many would roll their eyes at the premise of a ‘survival game underwater’, I think such a simplistic statement undersells what Subnautica is about. For sheer beauty and joy of exploration, I think this game stands a real chance at besting even Breath of the Wild. However, the game has been out a few years in Early Access, and is set for ‘release’ in 2017, so should such a game count as a pick for this year?

Many more games are set to come out that will be potential picks. The new Prey looks derivative, but it may shape up to become an excellent shooter. Middle Earth: Shadow of War is another potentially hot pick, especially if the Nemesis system in the game is properly expanded upon. Then we have Super Mario Oddysey, a potential system seller for the new Nintendo Switch. Sonic Mania may end up being another dark horse if it lives up to its retro-styled potential; the same goes for Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, the HD remaster coming up in just a few months’ time. This is not mentioning some amazing indie titles that will no doubt hit us from nowhere, and even some titles that I just haven’t gotten around to playing yet; I have a sneaking suspicion that Torment: Tides of Numenera may end up being just as brilliant as any game on this list.

2017 looks to be an exciting year to be a gamer. Not just for sequels, but for a wide array of excellent titles. We’re only coming up on a third of the way through the year and already we have been treated to pure videogame joy. At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, this may be a year that features on many ‘best years of video games’ lists in the future, and may be the defining year for this console generation. 

The Zelda Cycle and Popularity Backlash

Looking up a few more things about Breath of the Wild, I noted significant backlash from a few camps, those rare people that believe the game is complete trash. Murphy’s Law applies here, of course, that some people are just satirising the games community, but I also believe that many of Breath of the Wild’s detractors are serious in their disdain for a game that I believe is hard to hate.

It’s pretty interesting to watch the backlash from some of these people regarding Breath of the Wild and, while some can dispute the occurrence, ‘Metabombing’ has occasionally occurred, as with any other game, where a vocal minority of people are hitting the game’s Metacritic page with zero-reviews, as if changing an arbitrary number on a flawed site is going to make their lives qualitatively better somehow. This is an unusual occurrence, but it is one that I believe has reasoning behind it, that I like to call popularity backlash.

Taking a step back, however, people have also wrapped this up in something called ‘The Zelda Cycle’; the idea that says a Zelda game is reviewed with critical acclaim at its launch, only to be viewed with disdain in hindsight. Hindsight, of course, is 20/20, and many have decried Skyward Sword as one of the worst Zelda games ever made, which seems strange given its almost universal love from critics that it received at the time.

I think some may take the backlash and occasional Metabomb as an aspect of the Zelda Cycle, that now that some time has passed, people are looking back at Breath of the Wild with a more critical eye, but I don’t believe this is the case, nor do I believe that the Zelda Cycle exists in the way that most view it.

Instead, I think that the Zelda Cycle is more to do with the aforementioned popularity backlash. To use a painful example, look at Frozen; the movie was viewed with love by most when it first came out, but over time, that almost universal praise turned to scorn and even backlash. Over the repeated ‘Let It Go’ references, memes and rehashes, people just got annoyed at the thing that was popular. A significant backlash occurred and now, Frozen is the butt of many jokes that are aimed toward such elements. A similar thing occurred with Minions from Despicable Me; those little yellow shits once thought of as harmless slapstick elements in a relatively harmless film, thanks to over-marketing have now become this toxic gimmick viewed with scorn.

Now, I am not suggesting that Zelda is anywhere near the level of Minions, but what I am suggesting is that near-universal praise and popularity can in some cases be a massive turn off for people in its own right. Thanks to hipsters and the ‘I liked it before it was cool’ mentality, or the ‘I never liked that new popular thing, look how cultured I am’ trend, I think that universal acclaim for any property makes it suddenly the cool thing to hate, as an anti-culture trend. People think it’s cool to stand out from the crowd, just because, and dislike arbitrary things as a result of this strange phenomenon.

I do think there are parts of Breath of the Wild that I didn’t see before that make the game less enjoyable in my view, especially rain, those creepy fairy animations that occur once you start upgrading high level gear, or a dubious Gerudo section that so far is giving me nothing to enjoy, but I do believe that at its core, Breath of the Wild is a good game. Building further on that point, I believe that most Zelda titles are good games.

I think we have to take a step back and look at what older, now-disliked Zelda titles really are; they are more highly polished than most games, offer a reasonable challenge and are well-designed at their core, so I don’t think that any could be considered truly bad, not even Skyward Sword for all of its disdain; it’s just that critics were looking at the technical quality of the game, not the use of the tropes within the game that departed from the Zelda formula. Certain Zelda games may not have felt particularly Zelda-like, but they were undeniably well-made experiences.

I think we need to take a step back when we’re viewing popular items with such disdain, and try to look at what we are actually trying to say. Of course, in the case of Minions, popularity backlash was ultimately accurate in the way that the final disdain for the film was perfectly justified and the marketing was so cynical that many were left feeling disgusted, but Breath of the Wild is a different creature. It is, at its core, an enjoyable experience that admirably tried to capture classic Zelda tropes, while at the same time iterating and improving upon open-world design. Whether or not the game is deserving of the total acclaim that it has received is up for debate, but I do believe that at its core, like many before it, Breath of the Wild is a good game.