Is the 3DS a "Pokémon machine" ??

I think that Jgames can be AAA games....for example....many wanted final fantasy type-0 on the vita. I think what it needs is its own games designed to bring out the full potential of the vita. Games like Gravity Rush.

Anyways....I believe 3ds has great games....just me personally not many attract me to buy.

Most Japanese games wouldn't quality as AAA titles, as they don't have insane development budgets or excessive promotion...although Final Fantasy would be one notable exception, as Square Enix try to solve all their problems in their games by throwing money at them. AAA is more of a Western thing, really...unfortunately, it's a stupid idea that kills creativity. But I digress.

I think a part of this perception that the 3DS is a "Pokemon machine" comes from the fact that Nintendo advertise Pokemon the most of all their handheld titles, and those are the games that everyone knows about. Comparatively fewer people know about Fire Emblem, or Donkey Kong, or other franchises Nintendo have made games for on the 3DS. Their advertising campaign has improved significantly over the last couple of console generations, but other 3DS titles just don't get as much media attention as Pokemon does.

The games are there, and they're worth playing. But they're relatively low-key by modern standards, where you can't switch the TV on without seeing an advert for the next Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty or whatever.

I dont think so....this is the age of indie games for the west....were going to be receiving less AAA titles. Or new IPs. But what im trying to say is that japanese games can be AAA. For one, Phantasy Starhas always been a great series...especially on Sony. Titles such as God Eater and Freedom Wars are also good but their too designed for Japanese players anime manga enthusiasts.

I think its about introducing more innovative yet safe IPs just for Vita.

the 3DS isn't a Pokémon machine, its more that Nintendo handhelds are Pokemon Machines. Pokemon is one of the few titles that uses every aspect of what a handheld should have. Its a game you can play on the go. Stop playing and I have yet to see a game that encourages trading between players. So its even more fun if you have friends to play along. So a fan would try to promote the game as much as possible and planning what to trade and who needs which pokemon really makes it fun.

I think its 50 but with sony and microsoft and even nintendo trying to cash in on indie developers (even to the point of calling them "nindies" which defeats the purpose of having indie in there) there is definitely a market for indie games.

dont know why you called it waifu wars....thays not how you use it. And you forget about phantasy Star....either way..Vita needs more games....but not just indie games, it needs mainstream to be the gateway to more games they werent aware of.

So far 3DS being a pokemon.machine is meh....I think each new Nintendo console is going to be an even more pokemon machine than the previous.

This being a Pokemon forum, I'm sure lots of people here bought the 3DS with at least an idea that they'd get a Pokemon game when it came out.

To get an idea of what the 3DS is all about, just look and see how many games have been sold. Sure, Pokemon is at the top of the list but this is obviously a Mario machine. 3 titles in the top 5 are generic Mario releases and there are at least 7 Mario-related games that have been released on the 3DS.

I dont see it...its just a Gods Eater clone....still....developers and fans enjoy indies. Not everyone but like I said, definitely a market.

I'm gonna be honest here, it's this "Pokémon Machine" mindset that's the reason why people aren't paying as much attention to the 3Ds' other titles; buying a console for a game or franchise alone is akin to just basically staring at a pool's surface - you haven't even touched the water yet, basically. Horrible metaphor I know

Consider taking a dip, metaphorically speaking.

No, it's not. There is still a massive market for Mario and Zelda games, they alongside Pokémon are the top three selling Nintendo franchises.

Personally though? I bought a 2DS for Pokémon. Yeah, I saw X and Y and figured I'd get on that and ended up buying one on a whim. I did get a few other games after though, Yoshi's New Island and Super Mario World were a couple I really wanted. I also got the recent Zelda game too.

The DS was. The 3DS isn't.

ChrisJavier said:

Nintendo is relevant just because Pokemon, Zelda and Mario Games. Sure, there are few exclusives that are good, but 90 percent of users buy the console just for the above.

The PSP line is better in all aspects except one; I doesn't have POKEMON!

Is kinda sad that Nintendo is just milking their franchises with low end consoles. I will give anything if they make a Zelda game similar to skyrim.

Click to expand...

nah, I disagree. Nintendo's high end consoles (like the Game Cube) were unsuccessful, and Zelda doesn't really seem like a good game for high-end devices. Also, those devices are more expensive. Why should we buy expensive hardware and games when we can get lower end devices with great games?

Pyrax said:

I'm gonna be honest here, it's this "Pokémon Machine" mindset that's the reason why people aren't paying as much attention to the 3Ds' other titles; buying a console for a game or franchise alone is akin to just basically staring at a pool's surface - you haven't even touched the water yet, basically. Horrible metaphor I know

Consider taking a dip, metaphorically speaking.

Click to expand...

No. There's no other game that interest me for the 3DS. I can't spend $45 in a little fun game, with awesome/epic games in the other side like Far cry 4. Well, I had a choice; Far Cry 4 or Pokémon ORAS. I chose the latter, totally worth it but still...

gnmmarechal said:

nah, I disagree. Nintendo's high end consoles (like the Game Cube) were unsuccessful, and Zelda doesn't really seem like a good game for high-end devices. Also, those devices are more expensive. Why should we buy expensive hardware and games when we can get lower end devices with great games?

Click to expand...

Game Cube high end device? Almost got me, almost. The reason game cube failed was it's contender; The PS2 A.K.A the Greatest console of all time.
Lower end devices = lower end games. You've already bought a $200 3DS, $200 is expensive for the technology that the 3DS brings to the table. I'm almost certain that most cellphones after 2011 can theoretically play 3DS games.

ChrisJavier said:

No. There's no other game that interest me for the 3DS. I can't spend $45 in a little fun game, with awesome/epic games in the other side like Far cry 4. Well, I had a choice; Far Cry 4 or Pokémon ORAS. I chose the latter, totally worth it but still...



Game Cube high end device? Almost got me, almost. The reason game cube failed was it's contender; The PS2 A.K.A the Greatest console of all time.
Lower end devices = lower end games. You've already bought a $200 3DS, $200 is expensive for the technology that the 3DS brings to the table. I'm almost certain that most cellphones after 2011 can theoretically play 3DS games.

Click to expand...

Hum. I didn't buy a 3DS. actually I got the 2DS instead.

Also, in comparison to the other consoles made by Nintendo, the Gamecube was indeed a relatively high-end device.
Also, lower end doesn't mean worse.

ChrisJavier said:

Mario Kart 7 There are 7 games basically the same. I mean, they don't even try to make it somewhat different. Only a few improvements. Mario Kart you can race in a car! with mario..and luigi..with your friends..ummm...ummm.. IN 3D!!!

Click to expand...

7 games in about 20 something years? That's not bad. How about Call of Duty?

Tbh, I only bought a 3DS because of Pokemon Y. But since then, aside from other Pokemon games, I got Super Smash and Mario kart 7 until now. I'm planning on getting Animal Crossing and other games. So basically Pokemon introduced me to other games that I wouldn't have bought if I didn't own a 3DS.

gnmmarechal said:

Also, lower end doesn't mean worse.

Click to expand...

Worse in a lot of ways. Still fun but definetly not great. 800x240 resolution in 2014 urgh!

LilJz said:

7 games in about 20 something years? That's not bad. How about Call of Duty?

Click to expand...

Yeah you're right. But most games drop price after 2-5 months of it release. Mario Kart 7 dropped only $10 in 3 years.

ChrisJavier said:

Yeah you're right. But most games drop price after 2-5 months of it release. Mario Kart 7 dropped only $10 in 3 years.

Click to expand...

They drop because after a new COD game is released, most of their players automatically switch to the new CoD, so everyone follows.

A new Mario Kart game comes out, the previous ones still got a high replay value and people still play those, both the new and old ones. So no need to price drop if it's still selling well.

To be honest, I originally did buy my 3DS for Pokémon X, because that's what was cool at the moment, but I've bought different stuff as well. For instance, summer of '14, bought Fire emblem, loved it basically. Then I went to explore different franchises.
I got myself Splinter Cell 3D, Kid Icarus: Uprising, Link between worlds, Smash bros. and some VC titles (Megaman 3, Mario 3, Punchout, Metroid 2)

I'm planning to buy a New 3DS soon-ish alongside Xenoblade Chronicles for it alongside Zelda: Majora's mask.

Also, saying the 3DS is a pokemon machine is like saying the Wii U is a "Mario Machine", even though the Wii U has its own great titles (Looking at you, Bayonetta 2, Xenoblade chronicles X, Hyrule Warriors and Smash bros.) Alongside some pretty good VC titles as well (Earthbound? Super Metroid? Fook yus.)

ChrisJavier said:

Worse in a lot of ways. Still fun but definetly not great. 800x240 resolution in 2014 urgh!

Click to expand...

You are so wrong. I'd rather play Tetris on my Game Boy than playing Battlefield or Call of Duty. While those are the same thing every year, because developers only focus on better graphics, the games with worse technology tend to be better. The GB used outdated technology when it was created. However, it was easier for developers to work with it, and games were great, because they weren't focusing on technology.