General Nintendo thread

"Easily recognized by gamers worldwide" Yeah, that description fits Gordon Freeman.

And besides... How "Iconic" a character really is is subjective, it's true that he is nowhere near as immortalized as Ryu was but it doesn't changes the fact that he was the main character of some of the most acclaimed and well regarded games of the past decade. And many people know who he is despite having never played his game. I AM one for example.

As am I.

This debate has me thinking...are there more iconic video game characters than anime characters? (No, this actually isn't a "bats wouldn't mind anime characters" thing. This is just a simple question.)

Those video game characters have all varying degrees of iconicness/recognition.

I think some people here just say X Japanese character is TOO Iconic/recognizable then Y Western character can't be iconic/recognizable by comparison.

edited 16th Nov '15 6:34:33 AM by Malco

Well, Rocksteady has Batman, through Warner Bros.

I don't think it's really fair to say that Rocksteady has a bad relationship with Nintendo. They haven't really had the opportunity. All three of their games have been made at a time where they outstripped the power of Nintendo's current console. There's no way that Arkham Asylum could've worked on Wii, and the Wii U sure as hell couldn't handle Arkham Knight. Arkham City got ported to Wii U a year later, but the original studio isn't who works on ports, so Rocksteady didn't do that. And Arkham Origins wasn't made by them either.

They put Ghosts on the system, actually. Activision gave Call of Duty every chance to work on Wii U. The fact of the matter is that Wii U owners either don't care or will buy it for another system. You can't fault them for not putting out something that doesn't make them money.

Neither of those is a true statement. Bungie hasn't been involved in Halo since I think Halo Reach, and if they were owned by Microsoft then the PS 4 would definitely not be Destiny's primary platform.

The majority of gamers are going to recognize Master Chief, Kratos, Lara Croft, and even Nathan Drake before they recognize Shulk, or a Fire Emblem character. They haven't been around as long as Nintendo's most iconic characters, but that doesn't meant they aren't immediately recognizable to someone who cares about games. Lara's actually been around longer than half of the Smash Bros. roster. Including Cloud.

I don't necessarily think they're a good fit for Smash Bros. I don't see any problem with it being a celebration of Japanese games. If Kratos or Master Chief was suddenly announced I'd find myself very confused, but wouldn't say no.

You know what I want? I want Sakurai to make Super Smash Bros. X Playstation All-Stars.

edited 16th Nov '15 9:19:05 AM by BadWolf21

Bungie used to be owned by Microsoft but when they were working on Halo Reach they wanted their freedom from Microsoft; Microsoft granted it in exchange for the Halo IP.

Well of course Ghosts doesn't sell, because it sucks in general. Maybe if they pushed with the actually decent Black Ops series, particularly 3, on the Wii U. After all, I thought it was a great time to do it, Splatoon just came out and whet the appetite of shooter fans. Or was it too far in BO 3's development to change their minds?

edited 16th Nov '15 9:43:00 AM by Malco

Seeing how BO 3 is on the last-gen consoles (incredibly gimped), a Wii U port wouldn't be worth it even if Activision was satisfied with 100K sales worldwide.

I think you're exaggerating Splatoon's popularity. It's popular, but it's not something that would make people buy a Co D game, much less on the Wii U

Splatoon more makes me want to play a shooter as a cod.

I'd totally play Cod of Duty.

Halberdier: Which means that, in the present, "Bungie owns Halo" and "Microsoft owns Bungie" are not true statements.

http://games.rjevans.net/codod/

Enjoy! (Yes you're shooting fish in a barrel. No I cannot tell the difference from actual Co D )

I already knew about it. That's why I said it.

How did Co D do saleswise when they were ported to the Wii? Like, Modern Warfare 2 wasn't even on the Wii at all while the others were.

Well enough. Not record setting, but they did have an audience.

Not to the extent of the HD versions? Cause most people I know played the 360 versions of Co D.

Such as me.

I certainly would like to see an attempt at catering to a dudebro audience on a Nintendo console, but not to the extreme extent Malestrom wishes. I'm confident Nintendo would do something unique with it (or they already did with Splatoon). There's nothing forbidding Sony or Microsoft venturing into the casual market, is there? (points to Kinect).

Splatoon is basically the antithesis to the dudebro archetype. You could probably use it ward them off like you'd use a crucifix to ward off a vampire.

it also sold quite well from what i understand, especially in Japan. i'm surprised they didn't do anything like it until recently.

I wish they put Bro Force on Wii U.

edited 16th Nov '15 6:03:30 PM by Halberdier17

Splatoon is basically one of the few unqualified successes Nintendo has had this year. The free update model will be something they do more of going forward, I'm sure.

They're already doing it again for Super Mario Maker.

edited 18th Nov '15 5:09:00 PM by MJTrooper

They've also been kind of doing it for years with Pokemon. Sure, those are timed, but event Pokemon are always free.

Each "update" is just one Pokemon that's in the game since day one and is easily hacked into your party. The internet finds out about those events months to years before they're official advertised.

I'm not saying it's exactly the same. I'm saying that Nintendo has been doing free content for longer than they've been doing paid content.