Miyamoto: Violent games may damage “the potential of what games can do”

As does recycling the same characters and IPs over and over again.

I feel what Nintendos been doing this gen has hurt the potential of games the most. As games are starting to be seen as a serious form of media, Nintendo seems to want to drag it down to the level of nothing more then toys again.

someone should kick his ass for those comments

Can’t kick a guys ass for expressing his own opinion The1stMJC. You can however call him names over the internet

@2 +1000

Can’t agree with him, but i ain’t gonna knock him or anything. I mean, i love Mario Galaxy and can’t wait for SMG2. Yep, he IS recycling Mario and Zelda in a way..but still, SMG introduced plenty of new gameplay stuff and i have a feeling SMG2 and the new Zelda will too.

I agree to an extent, the games industry can be doing better than meatheaded games like Gears of War, Halo, Resistance, etc.

yea great games like mw2, gta 4, halo 3 and mass effect 2 are killing the potential of wii music 2 people!! OPEN YOUR EYES!!!!

ALl those people that are now playing MW2 and Bfbc2 could be playing Just Dance…..

I assume what he’s really saying is that violent games hurt Nintendos potential to gain money. Because they barely have any on the system, and no violent first party games what so ever.

LOL that’s coming from a guy who is at the forefront behind making people think games are still just for kids. Nintendo, stop embarrassing yourself.

It’s just a shame that every year during E3, big expectations come for new Nintendo stuff. And it always ends up being just a new Mario,Zelda or Metroid game. Don’t get me wrong, i love Mario and Zelda…but sigh…a complete new IP wouldn’t hurt at all.

When i look at a game like Red dead redemption for example, i don’t see a game with much limits…i see a pretty special game with lots of stuff to do. And plenty of other games.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong in demanding more out of a game than gratuitous violence, but violence for the sake of violence is and has always been a great core element for a game.

I can’t believe he brought up GTA IV to prove his point though. It was basically a life simulator that let you play a traumatized yugoslav with a paste-like personality and profusely needy friends.. Which also allowed you to shoot whores if you cared to.

If GTA IV’s developers had done the opposite of what Miyamoto suggests, and been less focused on trying to make a boring, pretentious, sociorealistic movie experience, they might’ve wound up with a decent game.

He doesn’t bring up GTAIV.

Miyamoto’s comments are actually very reasonable and considered, but apparently asking people to read something before commenting on it is too much to ask. I only wish I could say that I’m shocked.

With todays tech you could argue the same point about film. We have the ability to put whatever we can imagine on a screen.
But that does not dictate that people will be interested.

Violence has been a part of entertainment since man could communicate. It’s not going anywhere any time soon.
We do have a responsibility as adults to be far more cautious about what is appropriate for children to be playing.
What’s damaging gaming is ignorant adults buying unsuitable games for those at an unsuitable age. And then gaming gets the blame!!!

If you read the piece linked there, he says violence shouldn’t be the sole focus of games. I find it hard to understand how anyone can argue with that. He also points out that nobody should be able to stop designers doing what they want to do. In other words, they can create violent games if they want, he just hopes that’s not the only direction the industry heads towards.

Some of the comments here are genuinely quite pathetic.

Violence is a cheap theme in some games. It takes a different kind of deveoper to create a game not based around violence. Take Flower as an example. Violence isn’t bad per se but it needs to be handled carefully so that the reason for the violence is made clear and justified. I do kind of agree with the old boy on this one. I guess games like modern warfare 2 et al sell well is because we are living in a war age and a lot of people are so ingrained with this that they feel the need to play violent games. If we were more in to growing plants then we might all collectively want to play more games like Flower. Who knows

Dannybuoy said: Violence is a cheap theme in some games.

AMEN! brother, GEARS of WAR for the fucking win

What a fu”#$ loser the best thing of video games like GTA is to crash people with crs and beat the hell up to the people.

Some one shoul kick his asian ass

Yep, and in a weeks time we’re probably gonna get another statement saying that his comments were misinterpreted.

Yeah, cuz Nintendo is on the cutting edge of games showing us the potential. PFFT

Racialism.

Wow, really people?

Some ignorant violant bastards comment on the man who almost single handedly saved gaming that he should have his ass kicked just because he says that games shouldn’t be solely based on violence?

@Hero of Canton

You are, indeed, a hero.

“Nintendo seems to want to drag it down to the level of nothing more then toys again.”

Why so serious?