Nintendo Ruined Video Games

[deepthaw]

This discussion makes me wish I'd paid more attention to the business & politics part when I read "I Am Error" (an excellent book on the history and technical details of the NES in the same series as "Racing the Beam.")

[Gamemoose]

Ok...there were lots of platformers. Nintendo is to blame? Wouldn't you rather look at the developers for that issue? "Platformers are selling. Let's make one!"

 

Even if the SMS beat the NES I bet we would have gotten platformers. Why? Because they were seemingly popular in Japan. Didn't SMS have a bunch of platformers? What about systems that pretty much stayed in Japan like MSX? Did that have a healthy dose of platformers?

 

Basically we could say "Mid 1980's Japanese developers ruined video games".

 

Still not comprehending what's really ruined, though. If video games were ruined, why is it so huge and a part of culture now?

[empsolo]

Ok...there were lots of platformers. Nintendo is to blame? Wouldn't you rather look at the developers for that issue? "Platformers are selling. Let's make one!"

 

Even if the SMS beat the NES I bet we would have gotten platformers. Why? Because they were seemingly popular in Japan. Didn't SMS have a bunch of platformers? What about systems that pretty much stayed in Japan like MSX? Did that have a healthy dose of platformers?

 

Basically we could say "Mid 1980's Japanese developers ruined video games".

 

Still not comprehending what's really ruined, though. If video games were ruined, why is it so huge and a part of culture now?

I’ll be a bit cheeky and say it’s a bunch of old people complaining that some gaming genres are dead. Even the genre of my generation, platformers are only done by Nintendo, Sega, and a bunch of independent studios since western AAA studios have moved on to MMOs and GAAS.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited April 10, 2018 by empsolo

[zylon]

Platformers were the in-thing then, I wouldn't consider it a fault. Beat'em ups got heavy rotation as well until fighting games took off.

[Flojomojo]

This discussion makes me wish I'd paid more attention to the business & politics part when I read "I Am Error" (an excellent book on the history and technical details of the NES in the same series as "Racing the Beam.")

 

I Am Error is featured in the Humble Book Bundle at the $15 level this week.

 

https://www.humblebundle.com/books/game-studies-books?hmb_source=humble_home&hmb_medium=product_tile&hmb_campaign=mosaic_section_1_layout_index_1_layout_type_threes_tile_index_1

[Downland1983]

For some reason the 8 bit Nes never impressed me as a kid and not even that much today. The commodore Amiga came out around the same time and just blew it away graphically even though it was incredibly expensive. I was much more into the Cinemaware titles then playing Mike Tyson's Punch Out which didn't even look as good as the arcade Punch Out. The SNES version was the first one that looked like the Arcade.

When the Sega Genesis finally came out in 89 which was a close to Amiga experience I definitely was impressed.

 

A 1985 computer graphically more impressive than a 1983 (Famicom) home console? You don't say...

The Amiga was designed as a games machine. Could they have packaged a $300 Amiga console in 1985/86 and would people have bought it?

 

 

 

I honestly think so

 

 

Amiga introductory price: US$1,295 + US$300 (monitor)

NES introductory price: $179 (US Deluxe Set)

[Lost Dragon]

Again,this is UK based, but when a games magazine annouced Ocean Software were doing an ST or Amiga game based on a film

.you just knew it was going to have platforming style levels in it,if not entirely platform based itself :-))

 

They had Robocop jumping around in Robocop II...

 

That's why D.I.D's polygon 3D Robocop III took me so much by surprise...came out of nowhere.

 

 

And MegaDrive wise..Dave Perry doing the game of the film/comic etc?

 

It'll look fantastic..but it will be a platformer.

[mr_me]

 

A 1985 computer graphically more impressive than a 1983 (Famicom) home console? You don't say...

 

 

 

 

Amiga introductory price:

US$1,295

+ US$300 (monitor)

NES introductory price:

$179 (US Deluxe Set)

A simplified Amiga without a hardrive or keyboard, low resolution, and parts negotiated at larger volumes would be priced much lower. Even Mattel Electronics started planning a 68000 based game system in 1982. In 1986 the NES was a budget system with budget technology, but that's okay. I think you could have gotten one, without the robot, in 1986 for under a $100. That's a very low price.

[DJ Clae]

If Japan hadn't swept in to revive consoles in the mid 80's I doubt I would have become the gamer I am today. Offerings from Western developers of the 80's and 90's were usually bland by my tastes at the time, especially on consoles. If only I had figured that out sooner, I probably would have wasted fewer weekends on bad game rentals.

[+wongojack]

Ok...there were lots of platformers. Nintendo is to blame?

 

I don't think they had that impact on purpose or anything, but because of the standards they imposed, they sort of cultivated a mix of interest and talent that (I believe) diminished the variety of games on the NES.

 

There are of course many examples, but to fall in line with the movie example that Lost Dragon mentions

 

Ghostbusters 1984 - a unique multi-stage game that tried to capture several different elements of the movie

Ghostbusters 1990 - a side-scrolling platformer that has almost nothing to do with the elements of the movie

 

 

Is this really Nintendo's fault? Not directly of course, but I think their often maligned entrance barriers to create games for the NES resulted in more side-scrollers and less variety. That trend just continued in the 16-bit era.

[deepthaw]

People seem really fixated on that robot. Like it or not, it helped sell systems, and got the NES on the shelves of retailers who were still feeling the sting of unsold video game crash inventory.

 

https://www.wired.com/2010/10/1018nintendo-nes-launches/

https://twitter.com/stevenplin/status/660517453680611329

 

Furthermore, a set that didn't include ROB was released that same day as the deluxe set, so you didn't have to buy it if you didn't want it.

http://nintendo.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_Entertainment_System_packages

[Gamemoose]

 

I don't think they had that impact on purpose or anything, but because of the standards they imposed, they sort of cultivated a mix of interest and talent that (I believe) diminished the variety of games on the NES.

They imposed standards....to make platform games? I would say that was a trend but not a standard. The trend of platformers, which were obviously selling, probably spurred developers to follow that trend.

 

There are of course many examples, but to fall in line with the movie example that Lost Dragon mentions

 

Ghostbusters 1984 - a unique multi-stage game that tried to capture several different elements of the movie

Ghostbusters 1990 - a side-scrolling platformer that has almost nothing to do with the elements of the movie

From a console standpoint, how well did the original Ghostbusters do? The NES was crap with the SMS version being more faithful to the computer game. I don't recall that game being all that hot when it came out on consoles. Kids I knew played it on the Apple in school.

 

Most if not all movie-to-games had little connection with the films. When did Luke Skywalker shoot Jawas ("Super Star Wars")? When did Quaid mow down a near army of bad guys in "Total Recall"?

 

 

 

 

Is this really Nintendo's fault? Not directly of course, but I think their often maligned entrance barriers to create games for the NES resulted in more side-scrollers and less variety. That trend just continued in the 16-bit era.

Again, I think it's the popularity carry-over from Japan as possibly many of those games were released there first. I'm thankful we didn't get the deluge of horse racing, Mah Jonng, baseball, soccer and such games that were released over there.

 

My question is: what do do you think was lacking?

[+wongojack]

 

 

Going back to the article, the author claims Nintendo Ruined Gaming. One of the ways the author says they did this was by reducing the variety of games. I believe this to be true from my own observations and experiences. I was used to getting what I considered to be creative and different games on computers, but after the popularity of the NES rose, the creativity slowed, and instead, I saw different settings and licenses all adapted to become side-scrolling platformers. In my opinion this was bad because I preferred the varied experiences I had been getting on computers. Variety was "lacking" and this continued to be the case through the 16 bit era.

 

The way I understand it is that developers were often asked to sign exclusivity deals with Nintendo or pay up front to release a game on the system. So filling in some gaps . . . there were a few developers who were prolific at platformers that were responsible for a lot of the games on the system. If it had been easier and less costly for other developers to release games for the NES then there would have been more variety.

 

I don't really think that viewing this discussion from a "console standpoint" is relevant to the author's point or to my own experiences. I also don't really care about the popularity of Ghostbusters. Instead, the examples you give about how movie-to-game adaptations had little to do with the films adds to what I think is bad about the trend. I thought Ghostbusters and Goonies* were fun movie adaptations in different genres that felt like they were trying to re-tell the story of the movie. When I played Batman or Star Wars for NES, I was just confronted with another side-scroller that had the license slapped on to it. It may still have been a good game, but it made it feel to me like more of a cash grab and that was bad in my opinion.

 

 

 

*[Games with variety]

There are other non-movie examples in this same category like Accolade's Comics, Archon I & II, Aztec Challenge, Beach Head I & II, Defender of the Crown, Impossible Mission, Pirates!, Raid Over Moscow, and all the Summer Games related games. I'm sure others can think of more. I liked these games and the variety they presented to the player from within the same game. There were of course many genres represented on the computer platforms along with these genre defying games.

[Andromeda Stardust]

This discussion makes me wish I'd paid more attention to the business & politics part when I read "I Am Error" (an excellent book on the history and technical details of the NES in the same series as "Racing the Beam.")

I read Racing the beam in 2012 and this book singlehandedly made me get an Atari and gave me a much deeper appreciation for the system. I've got to pick this up. Added to Amazon wishlist.

[Flojomojo]

I read Racing the beam in 2012 and this book singlehandedly made me get an Atari and gave me a much deeper appreciation for the system. I've got to pick this up. Added to Amazon wishlist.

 

#130

[empsolo]

 

Going back to the article, the author claims Nintendo Ruined Gaming. One of the ways the author says they did this was by reducing the variety of games. I believe this to be true from my own observations and experiences. I was used to getting what I considered to be creative and different games on computers, but after the popularity of the NES rose, the creativity slowed, and instead, I saw different settings and licenses all adapted to become side-scrolling platformers. In my opinion this was bad because I preferred the varied experiences I had been getting on computers. Variety was "lacking" and this continued to be the case through the 16 bit era.

 

The way I understand it is that developers were often asked to sign exclusivity deals with Nintendo or pay up front to release a game on the system. So filling in some gaps . . . there were a few developers who were prolific at platformers that were responsible for a lot of the games on the system. If it had been easier and less costly for other developers to release games for the NES then there would have been more variety.

 

I don't really think that viewing this discussion from a "console standpoint" is relevant to the author's point or to my own experiences. I also don't really care about the popularity of Ghostbusters. Instead, the examples you give about how movie-to-game adaptations had little to do with the films adds to what I think is bad about the trend. I thought Ghostbusters and Goonies* were fun movie adaptations in different genres that felt like they were trying to re-tell the story of the movie. When I played Batman or Star Wars for NES, I was just confronted with another side-scroller that had the license slapped on to it. It may still have been a good game, but it made it feel to me like more of a cash grab and that was bad in my opinion.

 

 

 

*[Games with variety]

There are other non-movie examples in this same category like Accolade's Comics, Archon I & II, Aztec Challenge, Beach Head I & II, Defender of the Crown, Impossible Mission, Pirates!, Raid Over Moscow, and all the Summer Games related games. I'm sure others can think of more. I liked these games and the variety they presented to the player from within the same game. There were of course many genres represented on the computer platforms along with these genre defying games.

 

Except I don’t think that is really true. Sure side scrolling platformers were popular but we also got games based on other formats as well. We still got games based on popular game shows and board games. Sports games still sold pretty well. The NES has dungeon crawler style rogue likes in the form of the Wizardry series. AD&D has four games on the system and the Ultimate series has a few. We also saw new genres in the form of the puzzle game, the action-adventure game, the Japanese RPG, and the first English release of what became the Visual Novel.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andromeda Stardust]

They imposed standards....to make platform games? I would say that was a trend but not a standard. The trend of platformers, which were obviously selling, probably spurred developers to follow that trend.

There are tons of games on the NES that have nothing to do with platforming mechanics at all. Puzzlers, SHMUPs, light gun games, the first Legend of Zelda, etc. Just because a large percentage of licensed cash ins were platformers trying to copy Super Mario (Tiny toons was actually quite good and inventive but I digress) doesn't mean that all of NES revolved around platforming. And there's also a huge variety even in the platforming genre. We have Run-n-guns, beat-em-ups, exploration, etc, etc. But not every single game that got released on NES has a "press A to jump, B to attack, Dpad to move" mechanic.

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

I Am Error is featured in the Humble Book Bundle at the $15 level this week.

 

https://www.humblebundle.com/books/game-studies-books?hmb_source=humble_home&hmb_medium=product_tile&hmb_campaign=mosaic_section_1_layout_index_1_layout_type_threes_tile_index_1

Thanks Flojo for the link, but I prefer to read actual books with pages in it.

[Silverfleet]

Nintendo didn't ruin anything for me but my free time.

 

While we had a Colecovision in the house, my 1st console I could call my own was a NES. I got the Deluxe Set with R.O.B. for Xmas in '87. I loved it then, and I still do now.

 

Did I use R.O.B.? Yes, I did, when it was new. Like lots of other 80's kids, I was obsessed with robots. I used to build motorized ones out of Construx back then, and having one that played games (er... Gyromite) with me was the coolest thing ever. Now, R.O.B. sits proudly on top of my Vectrex, watching over my game room. And yes, he still works!

 

Did Nintendo corner the market with their third party practices in the US? They sure as hell tried. They were trying to make money, just like everyone else. But, necessity is the mother of invention, and companies found ways around this. See Tengen, Camerica, Konami/Ultra, etc. It didn't last long.

 

Were home computers superior? In some ways yes, and in some ways, no. I remember having a friend with an IBM PC clone, and he raved about how much better it was than my NES. He could copy games from other kids, play all sorts of adventure games non-existent on consoles, and play realistic flight simulators. BUT... he was relegated to keyboard controls and his clunky Kraft joystick. I had a game pad which was much easier to use, and a host of great games to play myself. Not to mention the vast price difference between the PC and the NES hardware. I found the NES titles easier to play.

 

Were things different outside of the US? Yes, yes they were. Nintendo didn't have the foothold the various 8 and 16-bit computers (and Sega for that matter) had in Europe and other areas of the world. In 1989, I visited family in Italy for a few weeks. I was missing my NES BIG TIME. My dad and I went to a local department store there and they were selling NES consoles! Problem was... they were really expensive compared to the states. They also had Sega stuff, but wanted the NES. I ended up just waiting until I got home and soldiered on with my Tiger LCD Double Dragon and Simon's Quest handhelds. I want to say that the one we saw in the store also came with Mike Tyson's Punch Out, which makes no sense to me now. Was that even a real bundle?

 

Were Nintendo's later consoles terrible? Not at all. The SNES ruled, and introduced some of my favorite games to the world. Game Boy revolutionized portable gaming. Virtual Boy is weird and headache-inducing, but kinda cool. N64's controller did suck, but they were trying new things, and there were some great games for it. GameCube was awesome, as was the Wii, DS, GBA, 3DS, and the Switch. The WiiU was a better Wii, so I'll give it a pass as well. All of these except the Virtual Boy and WiiU are in my collection, right next to all the Atari, Sega, and other brand consoles. I love them all. I also love old-school PC gaming, for that matter,

 

I still don't get hating on game consoles. I like video games, period. They are sprinkled about on all sorts of consoles and computers,and have been since the beginning. Yes, it's annoying to have to own a bunch of different ones to play the games I want to play, but I don't see the need to resent a particular company for trying to make their console successful. There are far better ways to waste time and energy than arguing about games, like playing them.

[Gamemoose]

 

 

*[Games with variety]

There are other non-movie examples in this same category like Accolade's Comics, Archon I & II, Aztec Challenge, Beach Head I & II, Defender of the Crown, Impossible Mission, Pirates!, Raid Over Moscow, and all the Summer Games related games. I'm sure others can think of more. I liked these games and the variety they presented to the player from within the same game. There were of course many genres represented on the computer platforms along with these genre defying games.

Well, NES got 3 (4 if you count Impossible Mission 2) out of that list. Don't forget the Track and Field games, World Games, M.U.L.E., Taboo:The Sixth Sense, Rocket Ranger, The Three Stooges, just to name some.

 

Variety was there, it just possibly got drowned out by the popularity of platformers.

[Flojomojo]

Thanks Flojo for the link, but I prefer to read actual books with pages in it.

 

I read words, not ink on dead trees

[deepthaw]

Thanks Flojo for the link, but I prefer to read actual books with pages in it.

 

 

 

I read words, not ink on dead trees

 

Joke's on both of you: I exclusively read text on stone tablets.

 

(I have both a Kindle PaperWhite and a fair collection of hardback books. I purchase in print those I'd like to keep around or hand down someday, read disposable light reading material on the Kindle.)

[Flojomojo]

Joke's on both of you: I exclusively read text on stone tablets.

 

(I have both a Kindle PaperWhite and a fair collection of hardback books. I purchase in print those I'd like to keep around or hand down someday, read disposable light reading material on the Kindle.)

 

 

[zzip]

Going back to the article, the author claims Nintendo Ruined Gaming. One of the ways the author says they did this was by reducing the variety of games. I believe this to be true from my own observations and experiences. I was used to getting what I considered to be creative and different games on computers, but after the popularity of the NES rose, the creativity slowed, and instead, I saw different settings and licenses all adapted to become side-scrolling platformers. In my opinion this was bad because I preferred the varied experiences I had been getting on computers. Variety was "lacking" and this continued to be the case through the 16 bit era.

I agree with this as well. Yes early consoles had too many 'space invader' clones and whatnot, but from around 1982 on there was a lot of innovative ideas tried in games, not all of them worked. But it's something I really didn't see on NES or any consoles of that era

 

 

The way I understand it is that developers were often asked to sign exclusivity deals with Nintendo or pay up front to release a game on the system. So filling in some gaps . . . there were a few developers who were prolific at platformers that were responsible for a lot of the games on the system. If it had been easier and less costly for other developers to release games for the NES then there would have been more variety.

Wasn't there a 5 -title per year limit imposed on developers on NES as well? If you are only allowed to publish 5 titles per year, you are going to pick your 5 that will sell the most, and that usually means whatever the hot genre of the moment is.

[deepthaw]

I agree with this as well. Yes early consoles had too many 'space invader' clones and whatnot, but from around 1982 on there was a lot of innovative ideas tried in games, not all of them worked. But it's something I really didn't see on NES or any consoles of that era

 

 

 

Wasn't there a 5 -title per year limit imposed on developers on NES as well? If you are only allowed to publish 5 titles per year, you are going to pick your 5 that will sell the most, and that usually means whatever the hot genre of the moment is.

 

I wonder how much of the lack of creativity was the result of graphics becoming progressively more realistic and hence abstract ideas becoming less appealing?

 

And I know the titles per year limit was the reason for Konami's thinly veiled subsidary Ultra games. (Did anybody actually fall for that one? Even I figured it out as an eight-year old with minimal access to magazines and zero Internet.)