I've been thinking about the controversy over Retro making Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze (which really sounds like a frozen drink you can get for a limited time at Dunkin Donuts) instead of making Metroid Prime 4 or some other epic. Part of the disappointment is definitely over the fact that the Wii U already has a decent amount of 2D platformers on the way, but I also think that there's just a general feeling that a company of Retro's talents should be putting their skills towards something more worthy of their time.

Of course, in order for this to make sense, there has to be some sort of hierarchy of genres. And I think that is born out in the way different types of games are received. Genres like FPS, 3D action/adventure, RPG, etc. just seem to automatically be considered to be of a different stock than genres like puzzle, SHMUP, 2D platformers, etc. These "lesser" genres often have a much lower ceiling when it comes to review scores. It says a lot that Ikaruga, considered by many to be the pinnacle of the SHMUP genre, is sitting around 85 on Gamerankings. Meanwhile, the "epic" genres are the ones that fans salivate over and that dominate GOTY voting.

This seems kind of strange to me. In the end, video games basically come to down to the enjoyment you get playing them. I understand that these epic games require more resources and therefore more advertising and hype than the smaller games. And it's true they often have more variety and more complexity. But in the end, the question is the quality of my time with the game. If a game like Dr. Mario, which I've spent several hundreds of hours playing competitively, gives me more enjoyment over the course of my life than even the most awe-inspiring epic, then Dr. Mario has just as much of a stake at the top of the gaming totem pole as something like Ocarina of Time.

Variety is the spice of life, so of course I want as many different types of experiences as possible. But I'm tired of certain experiences being treated like second class citizens. The best games are the best games. Just like the simplicity of a one on one game tennis can be just as great as the strategy and complexity of 11 on 11 football, even the most simple game can be as great as any other.

Do you guys agree? Are there certain genres that you think are more worthy than others?

URL to share (right click and copy)

@TheBigG753
Touche.

For the most part, I think the gaming media prefers certain genres to others. FPS games are king at the moment.

As gamers (especially on here), I think we've shown that stereotype only goes so far. We're pretty diverse. I personally prefer RPGs, but I'll play anything if it's a fun game.

@Zero

Kirby's Epic Yarn is a different game than DKCR, and it's not fair to compare the two. A more apt comparison would be Return to Dreamland, but Kirby games and Donkey Kong Country games aren't the same type of platformers. It's like comparing Sonic the Hedgehog (Genesis) to Plok.

@deathly_hallows @TheBigG753

What I look for is variety within the gaming industry as a whole. Sometimes more variety within Nintendo's specific library can lead to less variety in the entire industry. If the new Donkey Kong Returns was replaced with a traditional FPS, it would improve Nintendo's variety, but reduce the variety overall because even with the recent resurgence, there are still many more FPS's than 2D platformers out there. I do think that Retro could have been working on something that increased variety both in Nintendo's library and across the board, like Star Fox, but I still prefer what we got than many other scenarios.

Anyway, I probably shouldn't have mentioned Retro in the OP because what I'm talking about is preferring some genres over others in a vacuum. I mentioned right off the bat that there are other reasons for disappointment, but what I wanted to get at was that specific question.

@Jargon
Well I don't think one genre is inherently better than any other, but I think diversity is important for any single platform, and also industry-wide.

The DKC thing is a whole 'nother issue I guess. People aren't complaining about another 2-D platformer on Wii U because 2-D platfomers aren't fun or desirable, it's more because Wii U already has some very good high-profile platformers and maybe it would behoove them to diversify a little bit with a kick-ass Star Fox, F-Zero, or Metroid game, or a new IP.

@ludist210 I suppose so, but in a thread comparing various genres I feel somewhat ok comparing games within the same genre. I'm just saying that, generally speaking, DKCR is one of the best platformers that I've played of any kind. If we're getting more specific though I'd say that, despite the "resurgence" of platformers, there still aren't too many true traditional 2D platformers coming out that focus on the actual platforming like DKCR. Most of the indie ones I've played are puzzle / physics / etc. ones that don't actually have much hardcore platforming involved, and even the exceptions there tend to be almost "too" hardcore uber challenge platformers that don't really have much of a sense of pacing and finesse.

Jargon said:

If the new Donkey Kong Returns was replaced with a traditional FPS, it would improve Nintendo's variety, but reduce the variety overall because even with the recent resurgence, there are still many more FPS's than 2D platformers out there. I do think that Retro could have been working on something that increased variety both in Nintendo's library and across the board, like Star Fox, but I still prefer what we got than many other scenarios.

Agreed 100%. It sort of amazes me that a lot of the same people who claim to want more variety want to see Retro working on a more traditional FPS, the most overcrowded genre out there. Yeah, I get that Retro could bring their own flavor to an FPS, but that almost seems like a technicality in those discussions. I get the sense that all Retro would have to do would be to announce a cool looking FPS period and tons of people would go nuts over it. Whereas I already have access to a bunch of cool looking FPS that I don't play because it's not my favorite genre and even if I liked the genre more, I'd never run out of options there. Sure, a Retro one would be at the top of that list for me, but it's still a long list, would prefer Retro to do something that would actually add real variety to my gaming world.

Meanwhile, as I stated above, there really aren't that many traditional 2D platformers being created. Most of the indie ones are a different beast entirely. There aren't many places to go to get what DKCR offers outside of Rayman and, I guess, Mario.

Zero said:

Jargon said:

If the new Donkey Kong Returns was replaced with a traditional FPS, it would improve Nintendo's variety, but reduce the variety overall because even with the recent resurgence, there are still many more FPS's than 2D platformers out there. I do think that Retro could have been working on something that increased variety both in Nintendo's library and across the board, like Star Fox, but I still prefer what we got than many other scenarios.

Agreed 100%. It sort of amazes me that a lot of the same people who claim to want more variety want to see Retro working on a more traditional FPS, the most overcrowded genre out there.

But who says that? Who wants Retro to make a CoD clone? Personally I'd like to see what Retro would do with an RPG or a western style action game, or how about an FPS that isn't traditional but that is rife with new ideas?

Funny, I think there's less FPS's on the market today than during the height of the PC shooter market in the late '90s. Not sure why the genre gets this wrap of being over-saturated in the marketplace. Maybe because CoD is super popular and annualized?

@deathly_hallows I'm using the same term two different ways here so I'm probably confusing everyone, but by traditional FPS I don't mean "CoD clone" I just mean an FPS that is obviously an FPS, as opposed to what they did with the Metroid Prime series with lock-on and all of that jazz.

Basically, I think (I could be wrong, but I doubt it) that if Retro were to have debuted something like say... Destiny, most of the people who think that Retro doing DKCTF is boring because there are "too many" platformers would have been all over it, despite the fact that, as cool as it looks, it would be yet another FPS (and Destiny would still exist... as well as a million other upcoming FPS...)

I dunno, I just think it's weird that in any discussion about variety the go-to answer for what people want Retro to do is make a game where you run around and shoot things.

@New Forms You did see Microsoft's (and to a lesser but still very relevant extent, Sony's) press conferences, right? Compare the amount of FPS to the amount of 2D platformers shown.

I'm too lazy to do listwarz but I think it'd be a very, very tough argument to make that the FPS is not the prevalent genre of the industry, and if you include 3PS, even moreso. And the only reason it's not more prevalent is that most indie developers tend to avoid huge 3D projects.

Call of Duty is one... also Far Cry, Battlefield, Bioshock, Borderlands, Medal of Honor, Rainbow Six, Duke Nukem, F.E.A.R., Crysis, Killzone, Resistance, Brink, Halo, RAGE, Counter-Strike, Serious Sam, Left4Dead, The Darkness, Bulletstorm, Homefront, Metro, Call of Juarez, Army of Two, 007, blah blah blah.

I guess I wasn't too lazy to do listwarz. And if the argument is that all of these series aren't annualized, I'm not sure that this is a very strong argument.

@Zero
Destiny looks sweet though, not my thing since I'm not a social/multiplayer gamer, but in an alternate universe if Retro was making Destiny and not Bungie I can imagine Wii U would start looking a whole lot more enticing to millions of gamers.

@Jargon

Eh, that's just been his MO since the IGN days, it hasn't changed. Responding to the undue Nintendo praise or third party/Sony/MS bashing I've never said, instead of reading what's there.

@Zero

Well the last time Retro made a game where you run around and shoot things it worked out pretty well.

The Wii/Wii U have a wealth of platformers and almost certainly there will be more later. In that respect it is a waste of Retro's efforts to make another platformers instead of something to diversify the line-up. Besides I don't think anyone expects a paint by he numbers FPS from them. It would be some thing to a FPS like Pikmin is to a RTS, or Mario Kart is to a racing game. In the vein of, but a new take. To some extent Metroid Prime was kind of like that already. DKCR as good as it is is also incredibly safe. It's probably about as safe for a platformers as a CoD clone is for a FPS. That's the real shame.

@deathly_hallows @Stephen I'm just saying, for my tastes as a multiconsole owner, Retro doing a FPS is about the most boring thing I could imagine. Whether it would be "good for" Nintendo is a completely separate question. Probably it would be. That doesn't mean it's an exciting idea to me.

And I'm not talking about a "paint by numbers" FPS, just the idea of any FPS in general. We already have a ton of options. I'd prefer to see more options in other genres. Or just do something brand spanking new that no one was expecting.

Zero said:

Call of Duty is one... also Far Cry, Battlefield, Bioshock, Borderlands, Medal of Honor, Rainbow Six, Duke Nukem, F.E.A.R., Crysis, Killzone, Resistance, Brink, Halo, RAGE, Counter-Strike, Serious Sam, Left4Dead, The Darkness, Bulletstorm, Homefront, Metro, Call of Juarez, Army of Two, 007, blah blah blah.

Huh. I never really took notice of this, but none of those games are on or have been reporting as coming to, Nintendo's Wii U. Call of Duty being the ONE exception.

It's true that FPS games are everywhere in the industry. Just not on Nintendo's console. I'm honestly curious as to how that even came about.

Putting genres into a hierarchy is another way of pigeonholing something that is already pigeonholed. Current game genres are obscure enough as it is. A genre is best described as a style of an artform. Unlike other artforms games are multimedia presentations that also incorporate mechanics and game systems. I'm not getting all high brow and pretending genres don't exist... they do but a sports game nowadays can be a sports simulator with RPG elements, a team-owner simulator, etc. Red Dead Redemption is set in the old west but we don't call it a western we call it a third person action game.

Now I can spend time deconstructing games that have games within them. I'm playing one right now. Animal Crossing New Leaf is kind of fantasy simulator but involves many mini-game systems. It has set collection, inventory management, pickup and deliver, stock holding, and press your luck mechanics to name a few. Take any of those away and does it break the game? Not really. These same systems are in RPGs & Sim games that are great and RPGs that suck. Emergence - the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

I think when it comes to games the categories should be fictional narrative, simulation, or abstract with gameplay that is solo, competitive, and/or cooperative.

A tactics game like Fire Emblem is basically a spreadsheet and formula hidden behind narrative, art, and world design. A game like Tetris is abstract and shows its system. A puzzle game like Portal 2 comes to life with a story-driven facelift. Elegance in gameplay can come from streamlining the complexity of these mechanics and systems into something streamlined. Measuring a game solely on its genre or game mechanics would be shortsighted. True people gravitate towards FPS but they also gravitate in theaters to Michael Bay and Adam Sandler films. Of course you may have high grossing, critically acclaimed games like Bioshock Infinite or The Last of Us that transcends a cross-section of markets but so did Jaws and Inception.

Overall when it comes to quality games I look for something that is unique, interesting, innovative, or brings the artform forward. That's sort of why I've gravitated towards Nintendo but not limited to just their games and systems.

@deathly_hallows

People definitely wanted Retro to be making an FPS. Not a Call of Duty clone, but an FPS. Which, no matter how inventive it is, is still an FPS, just like no matter how great Donkey Kong Country Returns is (to most people), it's still a platformer. And that's not even counting the people who wanted another Metroid Prime which is arguably an FPS as well (but we shouldn't open that can of worms).

And your point about Destiny is exactly what I'm saying. People are hyped about Destiny despite the fact that there are tons of other FPS options on those systems. You don't hear anyone saying "I wish Bungie was making a platformer, so that there'd be more variety on the 360." But with Retro, despite the fact that there are many less 2D platformers on Wii U than there are FPS on 360, you hear it all the time. That adds to why I think it's about the genre itself to a lot of people. Also, lots of people have straight up said that 2D platformers are simplistic and less worthy. So it's definitely a factor, even if your personal concern is about variety.

Everyone (possibly not many? skimmed a lot..) trashing Sports games obviously haven't dug too deep into any title.

In Madden, THE ACTUAL GAME is secondary to the franchise management. Incredibly "RPG" this run.
(Your players earn XP in Madden '13, which can then be spent on improving specific abilities.)

@Jargon
I think plenty of people would complain if Sony (for example) had every single one of their exclusive developers working on FPS games at the expense of everything else, no more Journey, no more MLB The Show, no more Gran Turismo, no more Little Big Planet, no more Tear Away, no more inFamous, no more Gravity Rush, no more The Last of Us, no more Guacamelee, only Killzone.

@deathly_hallows

That's kind of what happened early in the PS3's life when Sony wanted its developers to focus on mature games in the vein of what the 360 was getting. Infamous instead of Sly, Uncharted instead of Jak, Resistance instead of Ratchet.

@Guillaume
That's true, and it turned off a lot of fans, people are still asking if/when Naughty Dog will go back to Jak!

I think most Sony fans ate it up, though. I don't recall having support from a lot of people when I expressed my displeasure with the PS3 library in the early days.

At any rate, if anything your list of games shows that it's not too late for the Wii U to get a diverse library of games. Let's hope that once the Wii U is a mature, 7 years old console, 2D platformers won't seem so dominant.