Nintendo developers' roundtable

[Mak-X]

Part 1 http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2868095,00.html
Part 2 http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2868422,00.html
Part 3 http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2868824,00.html


Q: Does the new Zelda take place before the other Zelda games?

SM: I'm actually not all that deeply involved in the Zelda project, but that is actually the case. We have decided that the setting for the game is that it is kind of near the beginning.

Q: The one question we had was, Link apparently has a sister and therefore where did she go for the later games?

SM: Maybe we should wrap things up here!

[Laughter]

We'll actually, at another time, talk more about the storyline. But for this game, I had a talk with the director and told him it was very important for Link's sister to be in this game. We'll probably clarify that for you a little bit later. Link wanted somebody who was going to call him big brother.

hmm...


I found this interesting


Shigeru Miyamoto: With a lot of the games in Japan, people will play a game, be done with it, and sell it. There are a lot of games being sold used and purchased used, and I think that's a big issue for the industry to tackle. This is one game that we're trying to tackle it with. I think really the root of the problem with used games is that we've got to the point where most games are designed with a primary goal in mind. Once somebody achieves that goal they're done with the game and they essentially get rid of it. I think that people spend a lot of money developing games like that, and I think it's led to this problem with used games.

[The Silent Assassin]

Used game selling? Does he mean he wants to make games so good nobody wants to sell them...or make it illegal? If it becomes illegal, he can suck it...I need to buy older games sometimes that aren't for sale...if they make it illegal, they should make the fucking older games still available.

As for it taking place near the start...hell...maybe Arill dies. Finally, a dark Zelda ending...

[Mak-X]

Originally posted by The Silent Assassin
Used game selling? Does he mean he wants to make games so good nobody wants to sell them...or make it illegal? If it becomes illegal, he can suck it...I need to buy older games sometimes that aren't for sale...if they make it illegal, they should make the fucking older games still available.

You misunderstood what Miyamoto said entirely.
He's talking about games that are made with a goal in mind, such as just beating the game. Once this goal has been completed (beating the game) the player is done and sells the game. He is realting this to Animal Crossing because in this game, there is no set goal, you keep playing. The game has a calender of things that happen throughout the year.

It has nothing to do with making used games illegal to sell or money.

I found it interesting because that explains why people sell games, and its interesting why people sell their games. From a game developing point of view, its true, if a game just has this one goal of beating it, the player is going to be done and not want to play the game anymore.

[The Silent Assassin]

Make games so good, nobody wants to sell them...

I think that is impossible. F-Zero X Expansion kit is suppose to let the game "never end".

Trust me...there comes a point when a person gets tired with a game. Making it "endless" doesn't solve the problem. Making it PRICELESS, is...

[Rijuhn]

Thanks for clearing that up Mak-X, because I was pretty sure Miyamoto was talking about Animal Crossing. I will get it when it comes out.

[Mak-X]

Originally posted by The Silent Assassin
Make games so good, nobody wants to sell them...

I think that is impossible. F-Zero X Expansion kit is suppose to let the game "never end".

Trust me...there comes a point when a person gets tired with a game. Making it "endless" doesn't solve the problem. Making it PRICELESS, is...

Well duh. Eventually a game gets boring and there's nothing else to do and you don't want to play it anymore. Anything eventually gets boring. Everyone's human, no ones perfect.

Read the entire interview if you don't understand.

If the F-Zero Xpansion had come out, it would have increased the life of F-Zero X. But eventually you'd get tired of playing the same game.

I think what Miyamoto is basically saying is, too many games have 1 goal for the player to do and they are done. The best example of this I can see is a game where all you do is just beat it. Maybe someone else understands or can explain what I'm talking about.

Maybe its not exactly what Miyamoto means but I think I can relate this to Goldeneye (N64). In Goldeneye you could basically just go through each stage until you beat the game and a player could be done. But the game has 3 difficulty levels, each adding more objectives and things to do in the world. On top of that you have to race through each stage to unlock cheats. And theirs the mutiplayer mode.

I guess relating this to Animal Crossing, it would be like a Zelda game where the world always changed or had something new going on, where it didn't stop. Anyone else understand?

The simplest explaination is this: Player buys game. Player beats game. Player is done and sells game. Player buys new game...

[Rijuhn]

That's how I feel about games, and I'm surprised that companies still don't get that. Most game companies nowadays (usually amatuerish ones) just make games with the best graphics, or just add something "new and cool" to it to make it sell. But after you beat it, you could wipe you ass with it for all you care.

I'm currently working on a RPG Maker 2K RPG, and I'm trying not only to make it non-linear, but to make it free-roaming. Free-roaming means, in my terms, you don't have to beat a boss to get to a new area. I want to have it so you can just ignore the storyline, but by doing that you change some of the storyline, and you can go to an area with the most powerful enemies and get killed if you want to.

The direction of my game all boils down to fun. If the person doesn't have fun, they why play it? I'm not trying to make my game with awesome graphics, but enough variation in the graphics so the player doesn't get bored. Everything that I focus on in my game, most gaming companies lose sight of their goals by the time it's done. That's why so many people love old school gaming, because everyone was forced to make a new genre, and they were limited, so they had to find creative ways to do certain things.

I've typed a lot more than I thought I was, and I didn't even really know I could type so much so fast, but when I rant, I don't stop til my fingers hurt. I hope someone understands what I'm trying to say.

[The Silent Assassin]

No no, I get perfectly clear what you are talking about. But those games will suck and fail. People who play games WANT to have goals, want to KNOW they will beat the game...

If I were to play the new Zelda...and say...I learn the game has no one specific goal in the end...no "closure" to the story...then...fuck that...I won't bother with it.

I don't mind if there isn't a set "goal", so long as you can reach an end that concludes the game.

[Rijuhn]

TSA, you hit one of those oxymorons, or something like that. I'm the same way about Harvest Moon. I liked it because you can do basically anything, and there is no set goal, but there is no set goal. So why do I even play the game? Well, I do live happily ever after, but no nude scenes, no Hollywood explosions, nothing to make the game end with a bang. Neverending games like HM are fun, but they can't replace every game you're ever going to play, so I went out and bought Perfect Dark, the mother of all FPS. And when I got bored I'd pop in HM and play a week or two.

[The Silent Assassin]

Still...YOU have a goal...in HM...yourself. You want to end up happily ever after.

See...there is a difference between neverending games, and open ended games. Harvest Moon is open ended, as in you can chose your own path to a desired goal you wish to pursue. That is a BAD ASS type of game, something I wish more of.

A game where they tell you NOTHING, turn you loose, and you are just "there"...eh...there's already a version of that game I play...it is called life.

[Rijuhn]

Shit, I forgot to mention GTA3. I'm going to get this game. I just need to save up, and wait til my 17th birthday at the end of June.

[Mak-X]

Originally posted by The Silent Assassin
A game where they tell you NOTHING, turn you loose, and you are just "there"...eh...there's already a version of that game I play...it is called life.

Do you have any examples of games like that? (I'm just curious, not questioning what your saying. Because I'm trying to understand the differences myself)

[vegeta1215]

Originally posted by Mak-X


Do you have any examples of games like that? (I'm just curious, not questioning what your saying. Because I'm trying to understand the differences myself)

Ultima Online could be considered a game like that. My friend has it, and from what I can see, you just do what you want, and he loves it. It doesn't really seem like it has a point but to be fun.

Personally, I just like games that keep me occupied for a long time and have lots of replay value. I hate buying games that just end to abuptly or aren't fun to play over.

Example: Chrono Trigger is fun to play over cause of the new game+ feature, and the many endings. SD3 is fun to play over cause of the many combinations of parties you can make. Castlevania Circle of the Moon's different modes made the game alot of fun.

[Grasshopper]

I think hes just trying to say there are a lot of games that people play and beat in a few days and sell back and that there needs to be more games that even people who take games back frequently, would keep them for a longer time. He probably is talking about games that don't have goals, like AC, but even games with even games with several goals might have a better life span that a game with one solid goal.

[The Silent Assassin]

There is no game like the one I described, Mak. MMORPG's like EverQuest and Ultima are probably the closest, but they still are not really that close.

[Kairyu]

I like games like Tactics Ogre/Ogre Battle because of that. The game doesn't tell you what to do or where to go all the time. Often, you are given a choice of things to do-Good, bad, or otherwise. And no one choice is neccessarily better than any other. Not always, but normally. I kinda got addicted on TO:TKoL, so I went and got OB64:PoLC... Now I wanna get the SNES game(s?), so I'm probably dead since I don't have any real money right now... not until the 14th or so.

[AlexMax]

"Making it "endless" doesn't solve the problem. Making it PRICELESS, is... "

How quoteable. Very nicely put.

Seriously, replay value DOES enhance a game. But TSA is right, you can only stretch a game so far.

[Dart Zaidyer]

To me, a good game is one that takes forever to beat, and has tons and tons of ways to beat it with. Rather than just "Get super duper sword, kill boss, you win", you could try "invent your own weapon and play all 37 sidequests before beating the game in one of 10 ways". Compile with good plot and you're all set.