The new turn of Nintendo reps is very "...out with the old, in with the new..." to me. It seems like they are over-hauling the system, at least here in the US with NOA.This isn't necessarily a bad thing though, honestly, our generation has to take over some time (right?), so why not now, with the opening of what promises to be a very exciting era for the gaming world? That is not to say that Reggie and company will not be missed, they kept Nintendo alive through some very tough spots, but there is a closing to every chapter eventually. Granted, they will be missed, but instead of painting a sad picture of departure and of the oft felt sense of "familiarity-void," I'd like to take time to look forward and see what we (the new generation) can do for this interesting video game world of ours.

*Stares out window...wow, today's weather sucks...*

But I digress...

To open, I'd like to say, GS did a good job asking some of the questions that many have gamers have been asking, especially when the Wii comes under discussion. (So I thank them for that small favor on the Wii-lover/worriers' part).


Apparently, the gaming world's voice has been heard, if only to a small degree. Enough, at least, to where the VP for NOA's marketing was aware of the concerns and did a decent enough job addressing them when asked, even if they did seem slight and somewhat "business-as-usual-esque."

Gamers everywhere are asking questions regarding the addition to the system by way of external hardware (Hard drive, baby - HARD! DRIVE!), some regarding the console's power and what it's capable of, what Nintendo is going to do for the dedicated gamer, and ultimately, what games are being slotted for the system. Questions that have become all too familiar to anyone cruising the forums; however, when asked about the lack of M-rated games, her approach is what really piqued my interest.

GS: Though the Wii is different, it seems you have the same dearth of mature content. I mean, you've got Manhunt back now, but...

PK (Perrin Kaplan): When you say we have gaps in mature content, I'm not sure what that means. We do have a certain percentage of our games that are M rated. But to have a game that someone of a mature age wants to play does not mean it has to be M rated, either. So, for example, someone's going to play Smash who's 35 years old. He or she does not necessarily require an M rated game.

Interestingly enough, this gave me reason for pause and contemplation. I'm sure like anyone else this next point is something that has been pondered or discussed at one point or another. I, myself, can recall the occasional thread or two named in honor of this topic. The topic of Nintendo, their rather comfortable place in the gaming world, and it's seemingly lack-of and lack-luster third-party games. (Now, I know some people are going to be angry at this, but you have to admit; the great game that gets released on a Nintendo console, especially within the last few years and even now rolling into our one year anniversary of the Next-gen birth has been few and far between, and even then they have mainly been first-party developed).

Nintendo finds itself in a place, currently, all its own. They have a unique niche in that they can say that they weaned most gamers in their late 20's and early 30's. So, Nintendo doesn't necessarily have to endorse games aimed specifically at mature audiences. All they have to do is break out a new Mario game, and next thing you know they've got gamers jumping back into their "good-ole day" memories. Honestly, how many of us grew up playing Mario, Zelda, and Metroid. I mean, good grief, I remember playing Kirby in his hay-day. Back before he was able to "ability-copy" the enemies he swallowed.

Yet, relieving as that may sound, there are still questions that naturally follow. Questions that must be taken into consideration:

· How much longevity do Nintendo and the Wii have, especially when looking at the fact that by February next year their four power-house titles will have been released and by June or July they will have gamers wanting more?

· How many times can they breathe new life into their old titles?

· How long can Nintendo keep relying on these titles to float them?

· How long can they keep bringing fresh, great first party games to the table? (Especially without the third party developers fully realizing the Wii's capabilities).

· Are they thinking about giving this new generation a title like Mario to keep bringing them back for more in the future?

And those are just a few that I often think about.

Now, I must say, in light of Nintendo's "death-trap-for-games," namely the GC, I believe that both Link and Mario deserved a spot on this Next-gen fight card. But, they're releasing their third "heavy hitter," Mario Galaxy, here in November. It is my personal opinion, but I believe that the reason for SSBB's push back was so that they don't have a HUGE game title void early next year.

Granted, they've got PLENTY of titles to keep people going, and many of those eminent titles have the capability to make a huge splash, but none of them carry the backing, support, or the punch that names like Zelda, Mario, or Metroid lug around with them.

So the elusive question remains, leaving the mystery answer at large. Will Nintendo find the titles that will bring an absolute demand for quality games (?), thus eliciting solid, exciting games from third-party developers, bringing re-newed energy, more value, and a deeper sense of quality to their hot little console?

Peace and Mercy,

Ty