8th July 2005, 5:02 PM
Anyone else see how many times that article begs the question?
That last sentence begs the question, HAS Nintendo been absent in the birth of most of this generation's innovations? Has this generation even had any innovations? It's important to nail down the answer to this before making any assumptions based on this.
Okay, first of all yes it IS arguable that it's the most significant creative shift of the 21st century. VERY arguable. You run around doing random stuff in a stale world. That's not new at all. Whether you love it or hate it must be accepted that it is certainly not innovative.
As for success with stuff like the Eyetoy or the "Singstar" (never heard of that one), that's debatable. XBox Live on the other hand, that's a good thing, a great feature which is succesful, but not innovative. Too often people seem to ignore the PC when it comes to whether or not to call some new thing on a console "innovative" or not. I myself have been guilty of this too. However, in no way can it really be called innovative, so much as a great addition to that particular market.
This begs the question, IS Nintendo not producing stellar titles compaired to the other companies? Yes, this is certainly an argument in and of itself, but if it's not established either way, it's wrong to draw conclusions based on the assumption that the answer is one or the other.
Here is about the only thing that's factually and logically sound in the article. We can't really say anything else about it, because this particular set of statements only goes as far as what the data tells us.
Quote:A smaller company than its rivals, but one boasting perhaps the world's best game designers, Nintendo's line of attack has instead been to champion creativity over technology. The story has played well to the press; the surprising reality is GameCube has been absent in the birth of most of this generation's innovations.
That last sentence begs the question, HAS Nintendo been absent in the birth of most of this generation's innovations? Has this generation even had any innovations? It's important to nail down the answer to this before making any assumptions based on this.
Quote:The gritty urban reality settings and the freedom of play engendered by Grand Theft Auto 3 and its sequels - arguably the most significant creative shift in 21st Century gaming so far - passed GameCube by. Invention and success with add-on peripherals has come from Sony, with SingStar and EyeToy. Microsoft's Xbox Live has left Nintendo for dead in the online and multiplayer space.
Okay, first of all yes it IS arguable that it's the most significant creative shift of the 21st century. VERY arguable. You run around doing random stuff in a stale world. That's not new at all. Whether you love it or hate it must be accepted that it is certainly not innovative.
As for success with stuff like the Eyetoy or the "Singstar" (never heard of that one), that's debatable. XBox Live on the other hand, that's a good thing, a great feature which is succesful, but not innovative. Too often people seem to ignore the PC when it comes to whether or not to call some new thing on a console "innovative" or not. I myself have been guilty of this too. However, in no way can it really be called innovative, so much as a great addition to that particular market.
Quote:This might not matter if Nintendo's AAA-franchises were still delivering peerless gameplay experiences unavailable on other platforms, but Metroid is Nintendo's only top flight franchise to make real progress on the GameCube. While Super Mario Sunshine was fun, it wasn't a groundbreaker in the Super Mario 64 mould. Equally, The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker is no Ocarina of Time (even leaving aside its controversial cel-shading). The upcoming Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess looks fantastic - but there is such a thing as turning up unfashionably late, even for the most glamorous babe.
This begs the question, IS Nintendo not producing stellar titles compaired to the other companies? Yes, this is certainly an argument in and of itself, but if it's not established either way, it's wrong to draw conclusions based on the assumption that the answer is one or the other.
Quote:Without a significant body of third-party industry support, the game extensions that were enabled by GameCube have failed to take off. The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure, while graphically primitive, makes excellent use of the Nintendo's much-discussed the GameCube/GBA link-up. Little else does. The GameCube's broadband adapter has fared even worse. Phantasy Star Online I&II - and that's it. A multiplayer offering serving up one old Dreamcast game speaks volumes about Nintendo's inability to persuade publishers to back its machine, not to mention how Nintendo often seemingly takes its loyal audience for granted.
Here is about the only thing that's factually and logically sound in the article. We can't really say anything else about it, because this particular set of statements only goes as far as what the data tells us.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)