Nintendo's place in the history of the video games industry is undeniable. However, this gaming generation they have stumbled. The Wii U has failed to successfully succeed it's predecessor the Wii. The quality of it's games have never wavered. This remains Nintendo's saving grace. They have always maintain that they are a game company and hardware is secondary. Nintendo has received much criticism for their business strategies, many suggesting they abandoned their hardware altogether.
Many have defended Nintendo's strategy, as being paramount to maintaining the quality of their games. Is the coupling of their games with hardware essential? Would Nintendo be better served by becoming a software maker only? Some have argued that the handheld gaming market has been taken over by mobile games. At first Nintendo felt no need to go mobile. However, they have changed course and have already begun releasing mobile games. Nintendo will not be porting their most popular games, but will utilize their vast roster of characters. Is it too late? How will this change affect their dominance in the handheld market?
Recently Nintendo has released software development kits for the NX, their next console. Rumors have been circulating that it's a hybrid of a home console and handheld. Would this solve the issue? Another rumor out on the internet is that Nintendo has finally embraced focusing on power. Can this change in strategy finally get the elusive third parties on board? Overall, Nintendo has failed to recapture the success of the Wii. Their games have continued to sell and receive critical acclaim. However, this alone cannot help them return to the top of the gaming industry they help save in the 80's. Will their next console pick up where the Wii left off? Is the gaming industry overreacting to the underwhelming reaction to the Wii U?
Even if Nintendo is struggling after the failure of the Wii-U they still will always be in the top 3 consoles. The console war between Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft I believe will always hold the top sections unless Steam or another company can get a large enough audience to begin putting their foot into the arena. Nintendo has had its ups and downs but I believe with their next line up of titles (Zelda Wii-U especially) will help drive sales. If the rumors and a few other topics I have seen are true about the NX and its power and place in the next generation of consoles I expect great things from Nintendo and the new foothold they will have and what they will be able to work with if they have a powerhouse of a system. – GiovanniZeko9 years ago
Great topic! I think it will always be in the big 3. I think what is most notable about them is that they pioneer new ways to play. Systems tend to follow suit. Nintendo has a consistent recipe that they don't let go of, which may make it feel like a stagnant console, with party games and well known repeated characters and titles. However, GameBoy and Wii changed the game and systems followed in that direction. I believe Pokemon Go will be a huge victory for them based on the buzz on the internet about it. It's basically a re-imagination of Pokemon Snap, so I believe Nintendo learns from it's mistakes and then does infinitely better. To only wait 3-4 years to announce the next console, it sounds as though something good is coming to replace a weaker investment. As whole Nintendo may be safe. – Aurianna Mansell9 years ago
Although it is still making its way in the market, I would say that Nintendo is failing at capturing audiences like it used to. It seems like most games are for parties and kids, which is fun and all but it falls short when it comes to older gamers that are looking for addicting story-lines and-game play. I know many people who sold their Wii because they got board with it. That saying Nintendo can't hold its place if it can't sustain its legendary image. – LaRose9 years ago
Until Dawn and Life is Strange are both video games this year that have tackled the idea of the butterfly effect. Both are cinematic adventure games with a heavy focus on narrative, and both are built around the consequences of choices the player makes. Does one game do things better than the other in this regard? Does Until Dawn lack a unique mechanic when compared to Life is Strange's time-travel powers, or does the latter overcomplicate things? Which game creates a better network of cause and effect, and which does a better job of maintaining that web?
I enjoyed both of these games and the only similarity between them is the idea of the butterfly effect. I think Until Dawn utilizes the idea of player choice better, simply because there is multiple endings one could acquire. In Life is Strange, no matter your previous decisions in the game, your ending is either A or B. – Lexzie9 years ago
As game developers cut costs on flashy graphics and powerful game engines, story, creativity, and unique aesthetics are becoming vital. Consider "The Wolf Among Us" from Tell Tale Games. There is action in the game, of course, but only in a minimalist sense. The game's strength is in story telling, a signature "look", player choice, and voice acting. Still, at its core, the game is a new take on the old school point-and-click detective games (think Carmen San Diego). Is this a sustainable model? Can these sorts of games and developers continue to compete with blockbuster games like Mass Effect, Halo, etc?
I would argue that story and creativity are taking a back seat to flashy graphics, at least for the most part. Consider the Final Fantasy series: the 6th game, originally released for SNES, is widely considered the greatest in the series (right next to its successor, FFVII). Most of the series has incredible depth; each thought-provoking story is an exciting adventure of philosophical inquiry. However, you will notice that this characteristic begins to decline as the series reaches its later games. The number one thing we must consider in answering your question is the depth of the game in SOME defining aspect of the game. For example, games that virtually do not end, e.g. Skyrim, have a very sustainable model even though I've found much better storylines in older 2D games. My issue with the industry is this focus on the architects: building beautiful and realistic settings but leaving those settings devoid storyline depth--the "epic" nature of the adventure seems to be eroding quickly. This critique is obviously rooted in the adventure/RPG genre, since FPS is arguably the most sustainable model, yet not the most satisfying for those of us who grew up considering an array of thought-provoking stories. I can't remember the last time I played a point-and-click game, but I did watch the game play for the game in your example and it seemed like something I would indeed enjoy--an interactive comic. This type of game is considerably cheaper to produce and therefore they would be able to focus on the depth of the story, and with an array of choices that change how the game unfolds, like a text-based adventure, I think it can sustain itself against the mass appeal of the major genres. – Xeades9 years ago
Xeades, you have to remember that providing helpful notes is to provide inspiration or ideas for writers who may take this and write it out themselves. I was guilty of that myself, but we have to keep in mind that if we try to "answer" or discuss the subject, it might satiate any kind of curiosity for another writer to go out and write out the topic. Try to give suggestions as to help someone who might like to write the topic! – N.D. Storlid9 years ago
Persona 4 and it's spinoffs have tended to be everyone's go-to game when it comes to the Shin Megami Tensai series. Especially with the new Persona 5 and SMTxFE coming out, what are some other great games to start out with and prepare for some of these new games.
Talk about some other Shin Megami Tensai games that make the series the fantasic blockbuster it is such as Devil Survivor, the original Shin Megami Tensai games, Soul Hackers, etc.
This would be interesting. I think factors like mood, difficulty, genre, and contents warning(i.e. strong religious content for SMT 2) should be considered to make the list since SMT was used to be more of hardcore gamers' series; some gamers might be put off by older series' first person RPG perspective, or might not be interested in emotionally stressful scenes etc. Of course, people might be even more intrigued when there is a warning sign. – idleric9 years ago
I can understand that. Of course the term "to each his own" is a commonality in the SMT games as each series displays different gameplay and depth into each story. So it would definitely be best if when talking about a game, the writer of the article mentions mechanics that differ from other games of the series and how they may appeal to certain gamers. For example, Devil Survivor carries a style of game mechanics similar to Fire Emblem square movement mechanics mixed in with Pokemon-style battle style. Basically if you like this play style then you might like this game kinda thing. – Kevin Mohammed9 years ago
The use of various different animals in the episodic video game "Life is Strange" span from spirit animals to breeds of dogs assigned to people who buy drugs from Frank to even scientific theories (ie the Butterfly effect). There is a wide selection of animals to choose from, but the five with the most subject matter on would probably be: the deer, butterflies, dogs, whales and birds (specifically, the blue jay).
Discuss the meanings and connotations certain animals have in "Life is Strange" and perhaps which human they can be assigned with.
Does Frank's buyers list accurately reflect who he has assigned to a certain breed? Is there any significant meaning to the list at all?
What do the various appearances of the butterfly represent? Does it always show up when the Butterfly Effect in practice?
Max points out that the deer is specifically a doe and it seems to be connected directly to her. What is their relation? – LaRose9 years ago
Discuss MOBAs as a learning experience. What is there to be learned by playing these games? There are many elements one must take into consideration in a MOBA game, especially concerning teammates and teamwork. On top of strategy and planning, MOBA players who expect to be successful must be very effective at cooperating with others – especially when it comes to regularly playing with strangers. While there tends to be a stigma of the "toxic" player in popular MOBAs such as League of Legends or DotA 2, this would be a look in the other direction, seeking out the positive and constructive mindsets that find success in the game. Most importantly, this would consider how the skills learned from playing games in this genre could ultimately benefit individuals outside of the gaming world and particularly within their own careers. Could we learn to be helpful members of a team within a workplace by practicing teamwork in MOBAs? Maybe!
With recent game releases such as "Starwars Battlefront," a lot of gamers are frustrated with the lack of content on the base, $60 game, with most content locked away behind an additional $50 price tag. While some DLC can add a lot to a game, such as extra story missions in the "Borderlands" series or new playable characters in "Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and 3DS," other DLC feels like the developers are just showing their inner greed (ex. downloadable content that is almost crucial to understanding the game's full story.) Explore the ethical issues when developers, almost intentionally, leave games unfinished and devoid of content. When does DLC become less of a "reward" for players looking for more content and more of a quick, money-making business scheme?
(Make sure to capitalize the words in the title). I think this is a really interesting and relevant topic. It could also be interesting to talk about what the cause of the trend toward including DLC is, and why its becoming so omnipresent. – Null9 years ago
I don't view this as an ethical issue, as both parties are using their free exercise to create video game content, and to purchase that content (or not in either case). I see this more as a question of motives for creating content. – JDJankowski9 years ago
'Hardcore' gamers often separate themselves from other gamers because they play for more than just completion, or the standard definition of 'fun'. Dark Souls may be a tough-as-nails RPG, but some players have completed it never levelling up, or naked (the character, not the player), or with only shields as weapons. The most popular levels on Super Mario Maker are usually the hardest, with players like PangaeaPanga making diabolical levels like Skyzo and Bomb Voyage (youtube them!). Pretty much any single-player game can become highly competitive once you decide to play it 'hardcore', especially if you want to speedrun it.
The charity speedrunning event Awesome Games Done Quick for instance, in progress at the time of writing, is a showcase of the hardest of hardcore gamers. The entertainment those runners provide, also including races between runners and gimmicky events like '2 Players 1 Controller' for Dark Souls II and blindfolded runs of Super Punch Out!!, is a powerful force for fundraising. The last event of this kind, Summer Games Done Quick in 2015, raised $1,215,601.49 for Doctors Without Borders.
This article would explore the benefits of playing 'hardcore' in consideration of the above and other aspects such as, potentially, the impacts of challenging yourself with video games using research on the psychology/sociology of the issue. Why is hardcore gaming popular, to watch and to do yourself? What does it take to be a speedrunner, to spend weeks or months playing the same game daily before you beat your last Personal Best? How can this relate to the science and psychology behind competitive sports in general, and are hardcore gamers really playing with or against each other?
For balance, however, some drawbacks should also be considered. The general focus of the article could be on how the risk/reward system of game design extends into how one chooses to play games in the first place. If research however outweigh the positives of such gaming, the article could suggest that hardcore gaming, while 'hard-nosed', may be harmful to the gamer when pushed too far. The subject can be taken in many, many more ways.
When I read this I thought of the Nuzlocke challenge in the Pokemon games where people impose upon themselves restrictions of number of pokemon to be caught, where they may be caught and that they are considered dead and to be released should they faint etc. Pokemon is not a hard game and is highly forgiving so it's interesting that people adhering to the challenge want to heighten the difficulty. – Slaidey9 years ago
Perhaps completionists could be talked about here? For the record, completionsists aren't just people who beat the whole game, but who get all of the Achievements (Xbox) or Trophies (PlayStation). There could be some interesting psychology behind the idea of Achievements too, and how your worth as a gamer can be measured by your Gamerscore. – ericg9 years ago
Competitive game communities could be talked about as well. In the smash bros (particularly melee) community, there is often drama and legitimate hate between the players, but also many of the top players have found their best friends through it. Also, there's the idea of what part of a game is lost when you play it 'hardcore,' as well as what parts you discover. It seems like it often changes the way we play them. – Null9 years ago
I instantly thought of Super Smash Bros. Melee as well, and its growing competitive scene. Personally, it's the only game I've learned to play on a competitive level. What I like about it is the range of options for the player. You don't have to play competitively if you don't want to. The game is still just as fun for a casual, party style multiplayer experience. If anything, in addition to joining a community, competitive play opens up entirely new ways to play the game that even the developers may not have considered (ex. wave-dashing in Melee as a major aspect of the competitive scene). – Filippo9 years ago
I suggest reading Alasdair MacIntyre and his thoughts on intrinsic/extrinsic motivation. – Rael649 years ago
