this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
791 points (97.9% liked)

Games

16800 readers
709 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The different direction;

No more original IP, and 99% of profits come from litigating against end users.

(It's the same direction as before, just not including AI yet)

[–] prof_wafflez@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

List of a few of Nintendo's new IPs from the last 15 or so years:

  • Arms
  • Good Job!
  • 1-2 Switch
  • Dillon
  • Splatoon
  • Snipperclips
  • Pushmo
  • Steel Diver
  • Fluidity
  • Nintendoland

Just because you aren't buying/playing them doesn't mean they aren't making them. Let's also not ignore the amount of time to develop a game has increased significantly or how gamers overwhelmingly choose to buy games from well-known IP. They are a company and need to pay their employees. I'm not a fan of Nintendo's litigation practices, but I'm also not a fan of how whiny and bitchy gamers have become. If they aren't whining and or bitching, they are harassing developers and actors.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago

I mean, that direction is extremely lucrative, whereas AI is extremely expensive and totally unproven to be profitable.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Nintendo noticed ai exists just now and thus dodged the hype cycle

[–] Soup@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 month ago

Good for them. I’d love to see ALL industries do this but that’s going to be impossible. We’d need greed eradicated before that happens.

[–] buzz86us@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm sure it makes designing Pokémon much easier

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

That's Game Freak. Nintendo is the publisher, and it owns 32% of The Pokémon Company, but they don't actually develop the games.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Would rather be normal and not dumb.

[–] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is this the Nintendo redemption arc?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] roteradler@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Nintendo can't even do games on a technical standard higher than 2012, how should they use AI? And their hardware is way to weak as well BTW.

They're just lucky that the current AI Models are crap, otherwise this would be the next standard they're missing in their "more of the same since 1980" games.

They should use more energy and money for developing innovative games than suing every fart on the planet.

[–] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (8 children)

I'll never understand how these always get downvoted. I understand Nintendo people love their zelda and mario games, but their console is less powerful than most mobile phones. I bought disco elysium on the switch that i only have for my nephew. It has a lot of trouble running DISCO ELYSIUM!

[–] exanime@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Because even though everyone knows Nintendo's consoles are under powered, they still usually deliver a ton of gameplay fun.

In this particular case, very few people want more "AI" in their stuff... and as even OP admits, current "AI" is crap. So why would I want to pay extra $$$ for hardware that can run "AI" when my gaming experience is likely not going to improve one bit?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] exanime@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They’re just lucky that the current AI Models are crap, otherwise this would be the next standard they’re missing in their “more of the same since 1980” games.

So you are complaining they are not adopting something you admit is currently crap?!

I'm going to complain about billionaire taxes then, I mean I have no billions but I'll complain anyway

[–] roteradler@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, I'm saying, that Nintendo wouldnt benefit at all from AI, so why should they use it in the first place? And the reasons for that are:

-AI in it's current state can only support in certain areas -Nintendo's games aren't massive enough to profit from the things AI can do atm

An example: AI can do Text to Speech, but Nintendo doesn't make games like TES. Nintendo needs to optimise their games highly to run on a switch, which AI can't do.

He is just stating the obvious, like saying the sun is hot.

[–] exanime@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

He is just stating the obvious, like saying the sun is hot.

But he could say they are engineering to catch up to the trend, right? the question is not if they are to implement AI features in their current 8 year old console. The question is if AI is in their development path in the future

And the answer is no, Nintendo does not seem to see value there. I for one agree, the stuff you mentioned about AI in other comments in the thread go from "meh" to "I actively do not want that in my games". This is just my opinion as a casual gamer but I see logic in Nintendo's stance here.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›