So why does Nintendo put out Zelda tech demos then? The purpose of these demos is to excite Zelda fans to buy the console. Then, Aonuma does something completely different which pisses people off. And no, Wind Waker Link has not been accepted despite how many times Aonuma ‘declares’ it. If he has to ‘declare’ it, then it hasn’t been accepted.
People loved the Gamecube tech demo as well as the Wii U tech demo. They loved 2004 E3 trailer for Twilight Princess. Twilight Princess, itself, was very well received except for the beginning parts and the dog parts and the idiotic puzzle parts. It was a step in the right direction, at least.
In this interview, Aonuma is making it clear that Zelda Wii U will not look anything like the Wii U demo. That’s sad because I really liked the Wii U demo.
Not so for series director Eiji Aonuma. He straight-up hated it. “I saw that movie and I thought, ‘No, this isn’t Zelda. This isn’t Zelda at all,’” he says. “I felt like this wasn’t what I imagined Zelda to be. It wasn’t the Zelda I wanted to make. That video clip didn’t actually contain any big surprises. There wasn’t any kind of revelation going on. It was more like a continuation of the previous version.” To me at the time, I say, it looked like a scene from Ocarina of Time, but better looking. “Yeah,” he smiles. “That’s right. I wasn’t interested in it at all.”
Since when does a dish revolve around the tastes of the chef? It revolves around the tastes of the diners. The chef makes what the diners wish to eat, not the other way around. Nintendo used to believe in this as this was one of Iwata’s sayings. I have no idea why they have gone in full retard mode.
Actually, I do have an idea. This is my theory about what is going on, generally, with Nintendo lately.
Nintendo, including Aonuma and Miyamoto, had different expectations for the Wii. In their eyes, the Wii was just a remade Gamecube with a better user interface so the masses can fall in love with their incredible Gamecube games. To help gamers become gamers (and by gamers, we mean Nintendo’s idea that gamers are only those who play Gamecube games), there were ‘step up’ games like Wii Sports and Wii Fit that used the new interface to hook new players. The goal was to turn these new players into Gamecube-esque gamers. So you had the intro-level gamers such as Wii Sports, Mario Kart Wii, NSMB Wii, while you had the ‘real games’ like Mario Galaxies, Aonuma Zeldas, and Metroid: Other M. Nintendo designed these Gamecube-esque games to be as inviting as possible to these new gamers. The Mario Galaxies were simpler and even reverted to 2d Mario at times. Metroid: Other M was to all be based around the controller to help ease the player. Nintendo’s ‘expansion to the masses’ was not to get the masses playing games, but to get the masses playing Gamecube-esque games.
What actually happened is that while Wii was very successful, the new audience stuck with Wii Sports, NSMB Wii and Mario Kart Wii. They did not advance to Gamecube-esque games. Why was this the case?
Nintendo thinks, “We need to make it easier for them to get into our Gamecube-esque games”, and they come out with the atrocity called the Wii U. The Wii U shares much in common with the Gamecube especially the connectivity. The Gamepad is the equivalent of the Gameboy Advance connectivity control scheme for the Gamecube. While Nintendo publicly says Wind Waker was remade because ‘it was easy to do’, Iwata spilled the beans when he revealed, during its announcement, that Wind Wanker was remade to give ‘those who didn’t have a Gamecube the chance to experience it’. This tells us Nintendo expected the Wii U to vastly outsell the Gamecube, and that Nintendo wanted Wind Waker to succeed. Perhaps using the same brand name and similar aesthetics was Nintendo thinking they could put out a mass market Gamecube. (Keep in mind that while Yamauchi was president during the Gamecube’s creation, the Gamecube was largely Iwata’s baby.)
Nintendo is publicly saying that they must make these Gamecube-esque games because third party developers complained that making Wii games meant making games that were for people who don’t normally play games (i.e. normal people, not addicted freaks). I don’t buy this. When it comes to handheld gaming, Nintendo designs the games for people who are busy, who are on the go. I think Nintendo saw the Wii as a failure regarding their true concern: how to get the masses buy the games they actually prefer to make?
So what about us, the elder Nintendo gamers, the descendants of the 8-bit and 16-bit Eras? Nintendo doesn’t want us. Anytime we object, they immediately use their ‘nostalgia card’. “You are just full of nostalgia.” Nintendo then lectures us about how games must have ‘new things’ in them even though the content is decades old. This is all cover for Nintendo developers believing they are entitled to do what they want (follow their ‘creativity’) instead of responding to commercial forces (like everyone else does in business). Nintendo would be happy for all the 8-bit and 16-bit Nintendo fans to drop dead. Add to that, the Wii fans.
But there is another context out there. What if the Wii was successful because it replicated gaming as done by the Atari 2600 and the NES? Hell, the marketing was the same. What if the Gamecube failed not because of ‘user interface’ issues but because the public was repelled by the games? What if the Gamecube games were BAD QUALITY instead of good quality? And what if designing games more like the Golden Age of Gaming, such as Wii Sports, were considered GOOD QUALITY? For example, the typical person would perceive NSMB Wii to be GOOD QUALITY while Mario Galaxy to be BAD QUALITY. Bad quality in that ‘the game is not fun to play’ to that person. What if Miyamoto was totally wrong about the ’3d revolution’?
Look how people responded to the Virtual Console. Look how Super Mario Anniversary Collection sold out. Look at the 2009 December Wii NPD sales. People were responding to signals that Nintendo was returning to Classic Nintendo. People were very excited and hopeful to see Mario and Zelda be Mario and Zelda. Not Mario as a 3d playground and not Zelda as puzzles-with-bad-story. We love new games, but there is a reason why Mario and Zelda became franchises in the first place. Mario didn’t become popular because of 3d. And Zelda didn’t become popular because of puzzles.
Consider Metroid. Sure, there is Metroid in the 3d form which Retro explored fairly well. However, does ANYONE want Metroid to not be Metroid? Does anyone want Metroid to be about ‘story’ and ‘dialogue’? Do we not want Metroid to have, at least, the same quality if not better of Super Metroid? This is why Metroid: Other M bombed. In the same way, is it wrong to want Zelda to have the same quality as Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time? Is it wrong to want Mario to have the same quality as Super Mario Brothers 3 or Super Mario World?
The maelstrom going on inside Nintendo is not about ‘what Zelda should or should not be’. The maelstrom is about Nintendo developers clawing desperately, wildly, at the notion that they should be in the driver’s seat. Should they? The classic Nintendo games were made because the developers didn’t want to make them at the time. Miyamoto did not want to make Super Mario World or Link to the Past. Yamauchi made him do it. You can see how the C-team at Nintendo is put in charge of NSMB games today because no one there wants to make them. Since a Nintendo game developer is now president, this has tipped the order of things. Iwata is granting license to Nintendo developers to ignore commercial interests and do whatever they want.
3d failed with the 3DS. Gamecube Plus has failed with the Wii U. Facing the reality that people are rejecting Nintendo’s Gamecube ideology (again and again), I honestly think some of these Nintendo developers are snapping. Doesn’t Aonuma sound angry in the interview? He keeps using the word ‘me’ and ‘I’ constantly. “My feelings.” “My vision.” It’s like he is saying, “You don’t like it? Too bad. Here is more of it!”
The move to Nintendo Directs and using only reporters that agree with them on the Gamecube ideology for the Nintendo beat is Nintendo using the press to try to shape and mold us all to believe that ‘Everyone has accepted Toon Link. Because Aonuma said so.” as if Aonuma has no self-interest in saying such a statement. Nintendo is shutting down discussion, not opening it up. They don’t like how the discussion has zeroed in to become anti-Gamecube ideology or anti-3d.
THIS is the result of decades of ‘god worship’ for game developers. They have become monsters. They literally do think they are gods. “Market forces be damned. Economic depression be damned. It’s time to make more Gamecube sequels. And if you don’t buy the Gamecube sequels, you just aren’t sophisticated enough to understand it.”
This is a Nintendo of anger and rage.
