Nintendo Never Going To Make a "realistic" game?

#41TerotrousPosted 7/9/2014 7:19:55 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96YcUotg1Rs

Wave Race and 1080 Snowboarding are also generally realistic.
---
http://www.backloggery.com/tero - My backloggery
http://whatliesbeyondnovel.blogspot.ca/ - My novel, updates weekly
#42GigerSupremePosted 7/9/2014 7:19:56 AM
pillsburyboy22 posted...
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
Why should Nintendo make a 'photo-realistic' game?

No one complains about Pixar not making realistic movies.


Pixar isn't a parent company they are subsidiary of a larger company that makes every type of movie. Pixar doesn't need to make realistic movies it is not owner, they could simply do one thing forever because the company that owns them does other movies genres.


Disney didn't buy Pixar until 2006. Pixar had already established themselves by that point and no one complained with what they were doing.

The fact that Nintendo is a parent company means they SHOULDN'T bother making a photo-realistic game. They should stick with what they are good at doing and hire other companies (like they did with Platinum and Bayonetta), to make other types of games.


THIS
#43AvirosbPosted 7/9/2014 7:20:57 AM
You'd want to check if you use the correct words next time then, just to make sure you get your point across properly.
---
Console wars are like pissing contests. So yeah.
#44QlJGamer(Topic Creator)Posted 7/9/2014 7:21:30 AM
pillsburyboy22 posted...
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
Why should Nintendo make a 'photo-realistic' game?

No one complains about Pixar not making realistic movies.


Pixar isn't a parent company they are subsidiary of a larger company that makes every type of movie. Pixar doesn't need to make realistic movies it is not owner, they could simply do one thing forever because the company that owns them does other movies genres.


Disney didn't buy Pixar until 2006. Pixar had already established themselves by that point and no one complained with what they were doing.

The fact that Nintendo is a parent company means they SHOULDN'T bother making a photo-realistic game. They should stick with what they are good at doing and hire other companies (like they did with Platinum and Bayonetta), to make other types of games.


No the fact that Nintendo is a parent company means they need a first-party studio to create different games from their other studios to expand diversity. They should adapt buying other companies to make other types of games. Why pay someone something you could learn to do. They are the only publisher who has no diversity, all there games are E. Everyone else has M, E T and alll the other thingys.

okay i getting tired.
---
guaranteed to meet or exceed the quality standards of the leading brand.
#45GigerSupremePosted 7/9/2014 7:21:36 AM
i have a feeling that the topic creator is a very naive kid who dosent understand how game development works or how creativity works in business at all.
#46GigerSupremePosted 7/9/2014 7:23:01 AM
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
Why should Nintendo make a 'photo-realistic' game?

No one complains about Pixar not making realistic movies.


Pixar isn't a parent company they are subsidiary of a larger company that makes every type of movie. Pixar doesn't need to make realistic movies it is not owner, they could simply do one thing forever because the company that owns them does other movies genres.


Disney didn't buy Pixar until 2006. Pixar had already established themselves by that point and no one complained with what they were doing.

The fact that Nintendo is a parent company means they SHOULDN'T bother making a photo-realistic game. They should stick with what they are good at doing and hire other companies (like they did with Platinum and Bayonetta), to make other types of games.


No the fact that Nintendo is a parent company means they need a first-party studio to create different games from their other studios to expand diversity. They should adapt buying other companies to make other types of games. Why pay someone something you could learn to do. They are the only publisher who has no diversity, all there games are E. Everyone else has M, E T and alll the other thingys.

okay i getting tired.


why should they?
nintendo knows its strengths and knows their audience. why betray that?

what you suggest dosent make much sense.
#47QlJGamer(Topic Creator)Posted 7/9/2014 7:26:21 AM
GigerSupreme posted...
i have a feeling that the topic creator is a very naive kid who dosent understand how game development works or how creativity works in business at all.


okay, you are entitle to your opinion. All i was saying was that of all the publisher who also develop games have greater diversity in their games libraries than Nintendo. And that I would like to see Nintendo try something they have yet to try before like a Mass Effect or Uncharted art style game.
---
guaranteed to meet or exceed the quality standards of the leading brand.
#48pillsburyboy22Posted 7/9/2014 7:26:54 AM
QlJGamer posted...
GigerSupreme posted...
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
Why should Nintendo make a 'photo-realistic' game?

No one complains about Pixar not making realistic movies.


Pixar isn't a parent company they are subsidiary of a larger company that makes every type of movie. Pixar doesn't need to make realistic movies it is not owner, they could simply do one thing forever because the company that owns them does other movies genres.


if pixar was independent, i dont think pixar would change their style suddenly.


If Pixar was still independent, they would of been completely crushed by DreamWorks and Disney as they could not compete in such an industry. Film and Video Games publishing and developing are completely different fields anyways. And Nintendo has made thousands of video games and they all have been in cartoon style. Pixar made what two movies before being brought by mickey mouse? I am pretty sure if Pixar got big and made over 50 movies they wouldn't all by animated.


This shows you know nothing about Pixar. They released at least 6 films before ever being bought out by Disney, including the likes of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles. Both of which were very successful and proved that Pixar would be successful regardless of Disney. Disney bought Pixar precisely BECAUSE they were so successful at what they were doing.
#49GigerSupremePosted 7/9/2014 7:28:48 AM
QlJGamer posted...
GigerSupreme posted...
i have a feeling that the topic creator is a very naive kid who dosent understand how game development works or how creativity works in business at all.


okay, you are entitle to your opinion. All i was saying was that of all the publisher who also develop games have greater diversity in their games libraries than Nintendo. And that I would like to see Nintendo try something they have yet to try before like a Mass Effect or Uncharted art style game.


in an industry filled with realistic graphics like that of uncharted or mass effect, max payne 3, gta 5, tomb raider, etc etc etc... why should nintendo waste the time and energy to conform and risk all that effort when there are already hundreds if not thousands of others doing the same?

it just seems really stupid to me.
#50GigerSupremePosted 7/9/2014 7:29:23 AM
pillsburyboy22 posted...
QlJGamer posted...
GigerSupreme posted...
QlJGamer posted...
pillsburyboy22 posted...
Why should Nintendo make a 'photo-realistic' game?

No one complains about Pixar not making realistic movies.


Pixar isn't a parent company they are subsidiary of a larger company that makes every type of movie. Pixar doesn't need to make realistic movies it is not owner, they could simply do one thing forever because the company that owns them does other movies genres.


if pixar was independent, i dont think pixar would change their style suddenly.


If Pixar was still independent, they would of been completely crushed by DreamWorks and Disney as they could not compete in such an industry. Film and Video Games publishing and developing are completely different fields anyways. And Nintendo has made thousands of video games and they all have been in cartoon style. Pixar made what two movies before being brought by mickey mouse? I am pretty sure if Pixar got big and made over 50 movies they wouldn't all by animated.


This shows you know nothing about Pixar. They released at least 6 films before ever being bought out by Disney, including the likes of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles. Both of which were very successful and proved that Pixar would be successful regardless of Disney. Disney bought Pixar precisely BECAUSE they were so successful at what they were doing.


rekt.