Oh dear.



And so Ninja Gaiden II will be the last ever Ninja Gaiden. Hopefully he will create his own team now and bring us something new.

Some updates on the issue:



http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/879/879035p1.html

I'm guessing we'll probably see another Ninja Gaiden eventually. Tecmo will probably bring in a new team to work on it either that or we'll see Itagaki bring out a "spiritual successor" elsewhere. Ninja Gaiden 2 brought nothing new to the series anyway unless you count awful camera angles.

Who has the rights to NG? They can make them without him.

Hey maybe this means I'll get my port of NG2 somehow yet.

Off to gen gaming, as well.

I think Ninja Gaiden 2 was co-developed/published with Microsoft so I don't think it will got to PS3 (at least not any time soon). The original Ninja Gaiden was published by Tecmo so Microsoft didn't really have much say on the PS3 port.

Right but does Tecmo still have the rings to NG? This could mean future NG titles ( If made ) would go multiplatform.

Even if Microsoft does have the rights it may not be a complete exclusive... As in we could see it a year or two down the line ported which seems to happen from time to time. That's basically what I'm getting at. Not any time soon as you said, but it could be a possibility.

Either way good news to gamers everywhere, especially us PS3 owners.

Itagaki is to Ninja Gaiden in the same way that Kojima is to Metal Gear. These franchises were meant to be created by these creators (just look at Snake's Revenge on the NES). Tecmo's stock even significantly dropped after he left the company. I guess he was telling the truth when he said that this was going to be his final Ninja Gaiden.

God of War II turned out pretty well without David Jaffe, an exception?

A Japanese company promising money that the employee in turn never sees? Whaaaaaaaat!?

Guess that's one less media whore to worry about besides Jack Thompson. Plus they do a PS3 port like they did the last time, then uses the same sucessor to make Dead or Alive 5. Hell, these companies do it all the time.

Rumor from Joystiq : Three dozen Team Ninja devs leaving with Itagaki, suing Tecmo.

It seems his team likes working with him and will probably follow him where ever he goes. That just pretty much assures that the next NG/DOA will probably drop in quality. I wonder where they will head off to?

They can join forces with LucasArts.

Yet he wasn't even a part of the Ninja Gaiden Sigma development, and it turned out just fine. Of course, since it's a remake, him and his team had already layed out most of the groundwork, but Yosuke Hayashi proved that he is equally capable of working on the game engine. And as the article points out, Itagaki isn't the only one who had important roles in the development of these games.

If Hayashi can make a nice game engine for the game, then who cares about Itagaki? For the story?

Highly doubt that, since the story isn't of utmost importance to most DOA fans, and as for NG it's usually the gameplay that speaks louder than the story. Besides the story for NG is usually your typical action flick, as opposed to the MGS series which is your action flick/long ass monologues and dialogues combined.

Well there you go. Pass the torch to Hayashi. Itagaki can go and do whatever he wants, but I doubt it will affect the future of Ninja Gaiden much since Hayashi created Sigma on his own.

Hayashi made a remake of a remake! The game was basically the same, except that they added some additional graphics boosts and a couple of features. I just take it you are not fond of Itagaki's rockstar attitude and whorish ways ( I find them hilarious), but his skill in creating NG and DOA cannot be simply brushed away because of that. Let's just take a look at Snake's Revenge as an example.

Team NINJA is made up of Microsoft fan boys, especially Itagaki. To be honest, I wouldnt be surprised if the members that left, as well as Itagaki, formed a new team under Microsoft Game Studios especially after the fact that Microsoft published Ninja Gaiden 2 rather than Tecmo (Which was odd in the first place until this news was released).

You missed the point then. It is exactly because he made a successful remake that he shows his capability in creating a new entry in the series. The graphics were updated, changes were made to the world with new areas, and changes were made to the game engine which allowed players to shoot arrows in midair, fight on water surfaces, ect. The battle system was tweeked and a whole new character was made playable, among other things.
And what exactly is a sequal to an action based 3D game if not precicely that? Upgrades to the game system that were appreciated by the fans. Because Ninja Gaiden certainly isn't about the story.

And lets not blow too much smoke up Itagaki who with his game didn't bring anything revolutionary, but rode the waves of the revolution DMC brought to the 3D action genre.


Let's not compare DOA or NG to MGS. Replying to that comment might give the impression that it might be a fair comparison, but I'll humor you.
Metal Gear is not only about it's gameplay like NG and DOA, but much of it's fandom comes from the story. Even back during the NES days the game was filled with conversations through codec and from encountering NPC's. One reason Sanake's Revenge wasn't liked much isn't just the gameplay, (which didn't even follow Kojima's recipe at all, but Hayashi did follow Itagaki's recipe, so I don't even see how you make that comparison) but also because of it's story which didn't make sense and plain sucked so much that people concider it to be non canonical and instead concider "the game they never played" as the canon story to that chapter.

And just because there is an example of when a different developer has failed in making a sequel or remake doesn't make it a good comparison in every other case, nor in Hayash's for that matter. It sounds like you were just thinking "Snake's Revenge failed without Kojima, so naturally NG would as well."

Kojima has proved that he can and did revolutionise the stealth genre with Metal Gear Solid. And the failed sequel/remake for NES didn't follow his recipe whatsover, neither in gameplay nor story. But Hayashi did follow the recipe of NGB, and story is not of a big importance in NG. So he proved that he could create a succesful sequel to NG without Itagaki, because if he wasn't restricted by the fact that it was a remake and had to keep certain things simmilar, then with new areas and even more different weapons and new characters etc, it might as well have been called a sequel because that's precicely the differences we tend to see in sequels to action games such as DMC, and it hardly takes a pulizer prize winner to write the story of NG.

While it was his own creation, Itagaki made a DMC clone and hasn't earned the right to be mentioned in the same sentence as Kojima regarding that matter. There's a difference between making a clone and creating something entierly original, and Kojima has shown that he is capable of that more than once. It's harder to follow in Kojima's footsteps regarding Metal Gear because of it's heavy story influence and the fact that every game is tied together by it, than it is to make a sequel to an action 3D game where the story is just a biproduct. What a 3D action game sequel needs is precicely what NG Sigma got.

I know you couldn't have known since this news was posted today, but Team Ninja and all the employees at Tecmo has sued for overdue overtime payments and falsifying the books. So depending on how the situation ends we may or may not see Team Ninja doing another Ninja Gaiden or Dead or Alive game. I have a feeling that after this whole thing is over that a lot of Team Ninja employees are going to leave Tecmo and probably join Itakagi.

Link: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168270

Tecmo doesn't seem to be looking to good right about now and any future NG or DOA games is up in the air.

@Athrun
Comparing Ninja Gaiden and DMC is like comparing DMC with Castlvaninia 64. They are action games. DMC did not invent the 3D action game and Ninja Gaiden is not a clone of DMC. NG is more of a fighting game with platforming elements while DMC is more of a combo and puzzle solving game.

Hayashi didn't setup the levels ,plan out the bosses, or the overall flow of the game. Sure the story is forgettable, but that's not the games focus. Hayashi augmented to an already existing game (Simga is basically the same game, but it looks a bit prettier). Not saying that if he made a game it would be crap (since his work on Sigma was good), it just wouldn't be the same without Itagaki behind the helm. Itagaki is the master of overly exaggerated jiggle, obscene violence, and extremely hard difficulties.

I was never debating if NG or MG is better ( I personally prefer MG and have been playing them since it was released on the NES in NA), I was making the point that it's not a safe bet to pass the reigns of any series to someone else (such as the case with Snake's Revenge). Not sure why you would even debate that.

A fighting game? o.o' Ninja Gaiden is far from a fighting game. Perhaps you're refering to the side scrolling fighters such as Final Fight? If not, I really can't see how you're comparing NG to a fighting game at all. Even so, the 3D action game is a genre of it's own, and certainly not a fighting game. Ryu uses kicks in some attacks, but it's no different than the DMC concept for that matter.
It's a DMC clone, even if it's different. Just like Splinter Cell is a MGS clone. It doesn't matter if Ryu kicks and Dante uses a shotgun. DMC set the bar for 3D action games. But whether we agree or disagree on that matter, it's not really the point. The point is that NG wasn't anything revolutionary or original. It didn't create and set the standard of the genre. It is simply just another 3D action game. Kojima on the other hand created the stealth genre. And before he made MGS, there was nothing like it. The creativity behind the gap between Metal Gear and Metal Gear solid is worlds appart compared to the "creativity" you need to create Ninja Gaiden when a game like Devil May Cry already exists. So I wouldn't mention Kojima in the same sentence as Itagaki.

But the mention of Castlevania 64 is also important. Because DMC wasn't really the first in it's field. But it was the game that made it big, and did it the best first.


Actually he made some significant changes, such as new levels, new weapons, etc. And he did plan those. And those changes were well recieved by the fans. I haven't heard anything about "Hayashi's levels, weapons, and the new playable character feels out of place". On the contrary, they felt just right in contrast to everything else, and the game as a whole was well recieved.

So in other words, Hayashi built on the same recipe, and succesfully. He did it to a lesser extent than he would in a sequel, but that's because this was supposed to be a remake.


Well my point was only that the changes made to Sigma were well recieved. If they were not, I would agree with you, but he managed to make some changes that were appreciated by the fans, and those traits of the game are what marks a good sequel to a game in this genre.


Well I thought I couldn't express myself any more clearly why Snakes Revenge is an irrelevant example. The "Situation A must equal Situation B" mentality is errendous.
Snake's Revenge did not follow Kojima's recipe, neither in gameplay nor story. Two fundamental parts of the game.
Ninja Gaiden Sigma did though, and was succesful.

I still disagree with your NG is a clone of DMC statement, but let's not run around in circles with that argument.

Did you actually play Ninja Gaiden on Xbox before playing Sigma? It's the same game with a couple of touch ups! Ninja Gaiden is a flippin awesome game either way and Itagaki is it's master ninja designer whether you like him or not. You think Itagaki means nothing to Ninja Gaiden (I'm guessing because he doesn't much like the PS3) and I believe he is the reason Tecmo was put back on the map. Let's just disagree and move on.

Well if you're suggesting to move on, then you could do it without being condecending. My oppinion of Itagaki is just based on his dislike of PS3? And what of what I have said so far is not true to make you resort to cheap shots like that? (Disregarding the DMC clone disagreement.)

First of all, when have I ever claimed that Itagaki means nothing to NG? He created it. And creating something new is harder to do than following the same recipe, which is pretty much what a sequel in this genre is. Itagaki did the major work the first time arround. But it requires less effort to make a sequel than it does to create the concept starting from scratch with nothing. For someone else to carry on the work, some times it works, some times it doesn't. In Ninja Gaiden's case, it worked with Sigma. The things that Hayashi did add were appreciated by the fans, and it worked well. It didn't feel out of place. The only thing that separates Sigma from a sequel is the amount of these things he put in. Or rather, didn't due to the restrictions of it being a remake.

In Metal Gears case, not only is it much harder for someone else to do because of the heavy story influence, but in Snake's Revenge specifically, it didn't even follow Kojima's game gameplay wise.
The Snake's Revenge director tried to be original, and failed. Hayashi tried to stay true to the original in the same manner you do when you create a sequel to a game of that genre, and succeeeded.


Yeah I did. And I can use that same comment to describe DMC 2, 3 and 4 compared to DMC 1. I wonder why?
Because like I said, those minor changes are what marks a sequel in this genre. And that's what Hayashi managed to do succesfully in Gaiden, but at a smaller scale. And some of Hayashi's changes such as dual weilding weapons carried on to Ninja Gaiden II.

I'm sorry if you saw that as cheap shot. Just having a bit of fun It wouldn't bother me if NG2 or NG3 (if that ever happens) came out on PS3. In all honesty it would be good for fans of the series to keep playing after they played through Sigma. I don't have NG2 at this moment, but I will get it after I'm done with MGS4.

I don't see how you can compare a game in a series to a remake. Those are completely different the last time I checked. Even if Hayashi didn't totally mess up the formula (considering it was basically the same game), it was not a sequel and so it shouldn't be considered as one.

I disagree with your statement that it requires less work when working on a sequel. Sequels tend to be harder especially if the original is a big success. Does the developer just give people more of the same ( which would make people that they were just milking the series), or do they try and go a different route to impress people all over again (which might upset people who would have loved playing an expansion pack). The answer is between those two. Finding the correct balance is extremely difficult. I think that if a series can live through it's first or second sequel, it becomes a well established franchise. Otherwise it fades into oblivion.

It almost seems as if you are comparing DMC development to something like Madden or Fifa. Just a couple of gameplay changes here, some graphical changes there, and a new number at the end of the title. Everything in the game has to be planed heavily before it goes into production. I believe it takes some serious talent to pull it off and not as easy as simply making a couple of changes.

Well I'm not a NG fan, even though I played a few games from the series, so I wasn't even talking about that. Just the continuation of the series even after Itagaki leaves. But I see why you get so defensive about it now. If the NG series can continue to be a good game without Itagaki, then Playstation 3 might get a good game, rather than a crap game, as you're hoping. Am I right?


Because a new instalment to a game in this genre contains exactly the things he added to Sigma, and succesfully. But at a larger scale of course.
And it's funny that you say that, when NG II uses a lot of things that Hayashi added to Sigma. Yet if you weren't aware of Sigma, you'd concider the dual weilding of weapons and water surface battles to be something new added to NG II. That's ironic, don't you think? When you refuse to aknowledge the changes made to Sigma as those that would normally be used in a sequel.


So you're saying that it's more dificult to make a sequel to a game where you already have the game engine and all? And that it's easier to create something from scratch starting with nothing?


Yeah you just basically summed up Devil May Cry 2, 3 and 4. I've played through the DMC games far too many times. I know what changes have been made to them. I'll quote something Rhadamanthus told me earlier. "DMC 4 is DMC 3." And if I look at a video of NG II it's hard to tell it appart from Sigma.
The differences aren't as many when you stick to the same game engine, because you have to keep a lot of things simmilar. I think you're exaggerating the process of making a sequel in this genre. It's no easy work for sure. But you're talking about the planning almost as if everyone else but Itagaki is incapable of this process. If it was a heavily story influenced game, then sure. Only the author of it knows how he envisioned it would turn out. But this is just a 3D action game we're talkinga bout. There are a lot of people capable of designing those. Hayashi's extra levels, bosses, weapons, etc worked just fine. In a sequel you don't create much from scratch at all. It is indeed mostly abbout adding some new things and tweeking some others.

Itagaki's main accomplishment is not his ability to plan yet another 3D action game, but what he created from scratch originally. Many people can make sequels, but few can create a new concept successfully. The Metroid series creator died before Super Metroid. Yet his team carried on the work without him and succesfully. Why? Because they already had the genius concept he made available at hand, and all they needed to do was follow his recipe. And Super Metroid became the most popular game in the series.

Tell me what changes to the game Hayashi didn't make, that are needed in a sequel? You said planning bosses, etc, but he added new stages and bosses, which were all planned from scratch. Like I said before, he added pretty much everything that marks a sequel for a game in trhis genre, but not as much of it because it's a remake.

And yeah everything in the game needs to be planned, but that's what you have your team for. One person doesn't do everything, and as Team Ninja said themselves, Itagaki speaks of these games as if they were his own creations alone.

I saw an Interview with the guy and he came off as pompous and totally full of himself. He was discussing how he is such a great game designer and he is like the "rock star" of video games.

He is a self-processed graphics whore. That is the reason he moved exclusively to the XBOX because they had the best graphics. I honestly think his ego got too big for him. Besides DOA & Ninja Gaiden, what has he done? You made two games and all of their sequels have basically been the same. Congratulations. Now that you don't have anybody backing you, hopefully he will make something new and different.

Like I said Sigma was a good remake and the NG series should be on PS3 as well. I don't think that if someone can create a remake, they can move a series forward (hell many original designers have trouble moving a series forward). You mentioned Metroid as an example as how a series can move on, but Nintendo is a different beast all together. They are more like Disney. They have a ton of ultra talented designers and can interchange them (along with the fact that Miyamoto overseas most of the projects). They have a philosophy that is unmatched. That's why 99% of the games they make tend to be successful.



In a remake you take a pre existing game and just change some things from the original (doubly true of a remake of a remake). A sequel falls much harder on the designer than any remake ever will since they lose the naiveness they had while they were creating the original. It's much harder to come up with a concept a second time around that will amaze fans of the original, but not alienate new comers. To say that you simply add some stages and moves is like saying that these games are nothing more than expansions. I never criticized Hayashi (which I had never heard of until these posts), my point is that Itagaki (which many hate for his crude attitude) basically revitalized Tecmo and the games he has worked on will not be the same without him. Could a different designer have success with the series? Sure. They could also completely mess it up.

Lunar... You act like making a beat 'em up is impossible without the original creator.

They're perfectly capable of continuing the series without Itagaki and his team.

Dead or Alive and Ninja Gaiden will be continued too.