Topic: Nintendo Labo

@Tasuki would you say more often than not Nintendos gimmicks/"gimmicks" have resulted in success or failure for the company?

Personally I think you're correct, but not in the way you think - they would implode on themselves if they didn't have such radical thinking, but only because it seems to be the main reason they still exist and are able to compete against Sony and MS.

@Kidfried People are saying these "Gimmicks" ruin the Switch and its future.

I need to remind people that Labo is not all the Switch is or will be. Just like these other optional purchases that had games locked behind them, the Switch will have peripherals that do the same.

Furthermore, what is a feature like Rumble or motion considered before it becomes standardised? Gimmicks right?

Further I am right to refer to PlayLink as a periphery gimmick.

Is your phone a peripheral to the PS4, as in not part of the base purchase of the device? Yes.

Is using your phone to play PS4 games a gimmick, as defined in the English Dictionary: something that is not serious or of real value that is used to attract people's attention or interest temporarily, especially to make them buy something? Yes.

In fact in the realm of video games, a gimmick can be many things: Most notably, a gimmick involves a differentiator, namely a unique selling point. Is PlayLink a USP of the PS4, namely functionality that is only on PS4, barring a few select games on other platforms like Use Your Words? Yes.

Here's the thing: Innovation will initially be non-standard. That's just how it is. But for it to change how we play games, it has to be unique, original, different: A gimmick. Some gimmicks pan out, some do not. Labo is a gimmick. So is PlayLink, so is VR as a platform until it becomes standardised, so were motion controls for the longest time need I remind you of that?

@kyleforrester87 I'd say so. Then again most of Nintendo's moves outside of USPs have hurt them, be it carts, processor choice, disc choice, online, peripheral focus, poor game development...

@KratosMD I will ask you this. Would you be content creating a product that did one thing and one thing only, knowing fine well you could do something to attract a supplementary market and boost your bottom line, announcing said plans only after reinforcing your stance on the primary market (See that mini-Direct and a lot of announcements of games yet to release like that Fire Emblem everyone conveniently forgot is coming this year).

Releasing additional products to get more people into your system is not disappointing, it isn't stupid, it's smart and provides longevity, more sales, more dollars.

Remember Nintendo going mobile was considered a bad thing? Where is all that revenue funnelled from that casual market? Game development.

A platform has to appeal to the widest possible audience to be truly successful. It's no good being only for core gamers or only for casuals. You need to do both. This is Nintendo's way of doing it.

It's this, or they make Switch Fit, Switch Music, Switch Party, and Nintendogs.

@KratosMD A bunch of people said exactly the same when the Switch concept was revealed..a year later and they are saying the same thing about Labo.

As you said, the Switch has achieved unforseen popularity. It isn't the first time Nintendo have managed it, and I don't expect it will be the last.

@kyleforrester87 Labo will be the end of the PushSquare forums.

@Fight_Teza_Fight We aren't losing much then.

@YummyHappyPills oi, this is my home from home

@kyleforrester87 To be fair the forums are small but growing. So in quantitywe wouldnt lose much.

In quality probably quite a lot

@kyleforrester87 Did they need to rely on gimmicks to make the SNES successful? Did they rely on gimmicks to make the NES save the NA video game market? One can argue that the gimmicks have made them the third place system. I don't recall gamers asking for cardboard robot suits.

@Tasuki I dont recall gamers asking for what became the modern FPS control scheme either.

And yeah they did actually rely on gimmicks to sell the NES. To avoid the stigma of video game consoles they sold it as an entertainment system and bundled in the ROB toy.

The dictionary definition of a gimmick actually. They did something to grab attention and make sales.

@Tasuki you're talking ancient history in gaming terms anyway. They were doing pretty much exactly what Sega did. Difference is Sega didn't do what Nintendo started doing, they tried to compete directly with MS and Sony and the rest is history.

Nintendo are still alive because of "gimmicks". Some more successful than others.

@Tasuki ROB and the zapper. That's what I think of when I hear NES

@kyleforrester87 Nintendo is alive because they are Nintendo and Labo's prove it. Fanboys will just buy anything with the Nintendo name just because it's Nintendo. i never said it was bad it's just I hate seeing them turn their back on their true fans and the ones that made them who they are here in the west, gamers.

@Tasuki shows all the games we are know are coming

@Tasuki So the "fanboys" are not "true fans" they are, what.. substandard fans who don't matter? Meanwhile the true fans are.. err adults who were kids in the 90s and long to play, what, exactly? 4K 2D Mario games? I dunno man, you're confusing here if I'm honest. I understand you don't personally dig Labo, nor do I frankly. But I don't think Nintendo are turning their back on anybody here.

Its ultimately a supplemental project that will create jobs within Nintendo and a new revenue stream.

@kyleforrester87 This man speaks the truth.

People act like Bayonetta 3, Metroid, Pokemon, No More Heroes, Fire Emblem, Dark Souls, TWEWY, DKTF, Ys VIII, Hyrule Warriors, Kirby, Yoshi, Starlink, Megaman, Bloodstained, Wargroove, Dragon Quest, Octopath, and more suddenly arent coming...

Because of teo games and a peripherydesigned to expand the audience of a platform, something every company does.

You dont succeed by aiming solely at one market.

Netflix isnt just R rated shows. Thatd be too narrow a demographic. Sony isnt just targeting one age range with their own IP, nor is Microsoft. Square isnt JUST making JRPGs. Activision doesnt JUST make games for the 18+ crowd.

Doing that is foolish.

Furthermore acting like the announcement of a supplemental product line diminishes what the Switch has had, is confirmed coming, and will have in future is...well the biggest overreaction I have ever seen.

If ya want to get somewhereyou need to appeal to loads of different people.

While it may not be aimed at us core gamers it is aimed at someone - families. Creative and imaginative children. It also teaches them basic visual scripting, and engineering as shown in the trailers with little programming aspects and bug testing as you build and understand how the Labo works.

Thats two markets hit right there that a simple plug it in and play piece of software wouldnt otherwise hit - it has nothing to draw them in

@YummyHappyPills I never said they weren't coming. It's just when Nintendo decided to do a gimmick they shove it down a person's throat. As of now yeah it's a side thing but given their past, it will be only a matter of time till it's shoehorned into the next batch of games. Look at motion control for example. I won't at be the least surprised if the next Zelda has a cardboard sword and shield inculded with it.

On that not I also just saw on Twitter that Nintendo is planning more accessories and paraphernalias coming to the Switch. So yeah same old gimmicky Nintendo.

@Tasuki What will you say if this paranoia doesn't come to pass?

Not paranoia truth. It will happen this is Nintendo. Saying that Nintendo isn't going to force gimmicks into gaming is like saying Sony and MS aren't going to care about power when it comes to gaming.

@Tasuki Nintendo clearly labeled it as a toy for children. They're going to to force that onto the next Zelda game. It's clearly it's own thing, and you can easily ignore it.

Whatever else they're planning to release, we don't know yet. No reason to complain about it yet. Look, if the next Metroid or Zelda requires a weird cardboard contraption to control the game, I'm the first one here to tell you that all sanity has been lost at Nintendo. But we're nowhere near that point yet. Let's just wait and see.

Jesus christ are we going down the "We are right you just don't understand us" route now? Bugger me.

Seriously, we get it. You've been at it longer, you have a difference of opinion. We respect that, but we also can acknowledge both sides of it, the logic behind it that every company follows, and the inherent fear based on the past.

However no one can definitively say until the events come to pass. They wont come to pass and be fully judged until when the Switch is winding down and we can assess its legacy.

As it stands we must take a neutral stance, because no one can say one way or the other, with definitive proof, how things will pan out.

A truly unbiased opinion would take account of both sides equally. Your opinion, sorry to say, is biased because you aren't choosing to acknowledge or listen to the other side of the coin. You are saying "We've been here longer, we are right, you just don't understand us".

No, we understand damn well what you are saying, you are the ones not listening to the obvious logic that things don't always play out the same way every damn time, and in this industry you should damn well know counting chickens before they hatch is a stupid move.

To be unbiased means showing no prejudice for or against something; impartial. You are not being impartial. We are. We are acknowledging that yes, your fears on past evidence may indeed be founded, and when/if they are, we will acknowledge we were incorrect.

But we also have evidence to the contrary, quite an extensive list of games and announcements, that also disprove your fears, as well as evidence from a myriad of other industries, sources and businesses. We are being unbiased in the way that we acknowledge and appreciate that both sides have equal chance to pass as the events unfold.

An unbiased opinion, sadly, is not just simply saying "Oh they've done X before therefore Y will happen, even with Z good things." No. That's a biased opinion, because the conclusion you are drawing is only from half of the scenario, the half based on the past. The half you are choosing to acknowledge.