PS4 only won in Europe and still came out first worldwide. It seems like Europeans really love the PS4 or they really hate the Switch.

Although, I'd bet the real factor is the Switch is still a little too pricey in Europe and they will warm up once the price comes down.

For a start, I'm not talking about Sony, I'm talking about Nintendo, so making points about Sony's studios 'cohesive' approach is irrelevant - though I struggle to find a common thread between, say, Gran Turismo, The Last of Us, The Last Guardian, Ratchet & Clank & Little Big Planet for instance - can you?

Re. Zelda, a game can be more than one thing. It's about exploration and has a story - not really seeing your point here...

All opinions are biased and mine are biased towards quality game design - others are biased by things such as a manufacturer's logo... what's your point?

You can wait for me to show you an example of a 3rd party game outselling a Nintendo game on a Nintendo system as long as you like - because it doesn't prove anything... because a 3rd party developer doesn't need to outsell Nintendo to have a successful game or to prove that their games can sell on the system...

Also, why would a 3rd party game outsell a Nintendo game when historically, the majority of them are under-funded, cheap ports flung together by their B-teams... Please actually consider what you're writing before clicking 'submit'.

The quality & resources put into PS or MS 3rd party games ≠ quality & resources put into those on Switch - far, far, far from it...

Anyway, I can see this going round in circles while you create more irrelevant hurdles for me to jump over in order to prove unrelated points.

The_Liquid_Laser said: PS4 only won in Europe and still came out first worldwide. It seems like Europeans really love the PS4 or they really hate the Switch. Although, I'd bet the real factor is the Switch is still a little too pricey in Europe and they will warm up once the price comes down.

I swear I heard that winning only in Europe and losing in the rest would make a WW loss...

You were already pointed to the cohesion on the approach to a high fidelity look, graphical prowess and narrative games. Your point was that Nintendo have several studios so their games can't share similarities, so I pointed you to another company that have several studios and still keep similarities.

Sure Zelda, the best story in gaming, and yes others have the wrong bias because you can clearly see quality while they only see a logo, are you for real?

Yes we are going in circles, for you someone that wouldn't buy a Switch because Nintendo games doesn't make their taste is a complete prove of hate and Bias because all Nintendo games are great and so people should like the games from Nintendo that are from the genres they like... at the same time Nintendo games are so much better than all rest that they must be more liked and sold than any in the same genre.

DonFerrari said: The_Liquid_Laser said: PS4 only won in Europe and still came out first worldwide. It seems like Europeans really love the PS4 or they really hate the Switch. Although, I'd bet the real factor is the Switch is still a little too pricey in Europe and they will warm up once the price comes down. I swear I heard that winning only in Europe and losing in the rest would make a WW loss... Biggerboat1 said: For a start, I'm not talking about Sony, I'm talking about Nintendo, so making points about Sony's studios 'cohesive' approach is irrelevant - though I struggle to find a common thread between, say, Gran Turismo, The Last of Us, The Last Guardian, Ratchet & Clank & Little Big Planet for instance - can you? Re. Zelda, a game can be more than one thing. It's about exploration and has a story - not really seeing your point here... All opinions are biased and mine are biased towards quality game design - others are biased by things such as a manufacturer's logo... what's your point? You can wait for me to show you an example of a 3rd party game outselling a Nintendo game on a Nintendo system as long as you like - because it doesn't prove anything... because a 3rd party developer doesn't need to outsell Nintendo to have a successful game or to prove that their games can sell on the system... Also, why would a 3rd party game outsell a Nintendo game when historically, the majority of them are under-funded, cheap ports flung together by their B-teams... Please actually consider what you're writing before clicking 'submit'. The quality & resources put into PS or MS 3rd party games ≠ quality & resources put into those on Switch - far, far, far from it... Anyway, I can see this going round in circles while you create more irrelevant hurdles for me to jump over in order to prove unrelated points. You were already pointed to the cohesion on the approach to a high fidelity look, graphical prowess and narrative games. Your point was that Nintendo have several studios so their games can't share similarities, so I pointed you to another company that have several studios and still keep similarities. Sure Zelda, the best story in gaming, and yes others have the wrong bias because you can clearly see quality while they only see a logo, are you for real? Yes we are going in circles, for you someone that wouldn't buy a Switch because Nintendo games doesn't make their taste is a complete prove of hate and Bias because all Nintendo games are great and so people should like the games from Nintendo that are from the genres they like... at the same time Nintendo games are so much better than all rest that they must be more liked and sold than any in the same genre.

Your last paragraph introduces many false conclusions that only you are introducing, so I won't even bother responding to those points.

Gran Turismo is story driven? Rathcet & Clank & LBP are story driven? (I've not played those 2 but by the looks of them - doesn't seem like it...) Even the Last Guardian doesn't look particularly story driven, but again, could be wrong on that one.

So the 'cohesive approach' of Sony's Studios is 'high fidelity' and a 'focus on narrative' on some of it's catalogue... Do you know how many studios those 'approaches' would apply to? There's simply nothing unique there.

Nintendo puts just as much effort into 'graphical prowess', it's just that they are developing for much weaker hardware.

If Zelda had been released as a Sony IP, with visuals befitting the PS4, nobody would be saying - wow, this is so un-Sony... rather they'd be buying it in it's millions and giving it GOTY, just like on Switch.

Zelda botw is a bit story driven( not much)

Ratchet and clank is yes, and so is the last guardian, even lbp has a story mode.

Both ninty and sony creates a lot of good and interesting games,noo need for hate.

Gt is not story driven btw,

Switch launched at a lower price, $300 to $400. That also says it has less room for price cuts, which is why it wouldn't have good sales at the end of its lifespan like the PS4. Nintendo also brought their biggest AAA guns to Switch already in its first year, unlike the PS4 which only got a bunch of cross generation games and less successful titles in its first year.

PS4 will have longer legs. Switch will probably sell incredibly well for a few years and then die down while PS4 will continue production and PS4 Pro sales will rise as the years pass by, that is unless Nintendo comes with a Switch N.

I wholeheartedly agree that both companies make good games - no hate coming from me.

My issue lies with those that lazily write off Nintendo's entire output.

They create a huge variety of games in terms of style/genre/feel at a generally high level of quality - so there'll be something for the vast majority of the market to enjoy.

Would you say that Ratchet & Clank & LBP are more story driven than Zelda?

The Last of Us or Uncharted is what I thought a previous commenter meant by narrative driven / cinematic experiences. I don't see R&C or LBP falling into that category - though again, I could be wrong.

I mean, Oddysey has a story - but I wouldn't call it a narrative driven game...

So your understanding of the cohesion having those points is that all games have all of them? You are really pushing. But even so GT have the career mode that basically tells the "story" of you progressing from an Amateur to a top driver. But the graphical presentation is aligned with the others. R&C is totally cinematic and story driven, LBP also holds those modes. Last Guardian is story driven even if it doesn't have a lot of text/voice.

Nope, the focus of Nintendo isn't graphic at all, the games are polished and look pretty but they don't push graphics, that is clear to everyone. Their focus is on the gameplay aspects.

If Zelda was released on Sony it wouldn't have all the praises Nintendo fan give it, it would be a weak graphical game, the story would be bland, etc...

When you are ready to accept that as much as there are people that disregard all Nintendo games there are those that do for all 3rd parties, Sony and MS. Some had the balls to say PS4 right now doesn't have at least 5 games that are must play while Switch on its second month had 10 already (and still self named Sony fanboy). So please go away with your narrative that non-Nintendo are biased against Nintendo, but you and others Nintendo fans are unbiased, evaluating only on the merits of the game.

Just because a game has a story doesn't mean that it's narrative driven. Nearly all of the Nintendo games I mentioned have a story / story mode - but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the game's narration being the central consideration around which everything else is built - not just that it has a beginning, middle and end. You either don't get this or you don't want to get this.

And I didn't say all games have all of the traits that you're saying that Sony games have - I said - "do you know how many studios that would apply to?" - implying many studios - so obviously not all games - please read more carefully. And even if there are many studios that hold those traits in common, it doesn't mean that they all execute them as well as Sony, some do, some don't - but that's a different argument.

Re. Nintendo & visuals - go to any of Nintendo's platform and pick out the best looking games available on any of those systems - guess what, the majority are developed by Nintendo. They do make a point of making the games as beautiful as possible, it's simply the case that in recent history they've been constrained by the companies choice of hardware. The reason's for this choice is another subject entirely.

Look at the last generation in which the 3 hardware makers had rough parity in terms of power - GC/Xbox/PS2 - Metroid Prime 2, F-Zero GX,  hell even Starfox Adventures, to name a few, could go toe-to-toe with any game on the competing systems in terms of visuals.

Re. Zelda under a different IP developed by Sony - again, please read! I specifically said "If Zelda had been released as a Sony IP, with visuals befitting the PS4" - so your point about it being a weak graphical game are, again, misplaced. And a bland story... So you're telling me that GT's story mode is better than BOTW - come now...

"So please go away with your narrative that non-Nintendo are biased against Nintendo, but you and others Nintendo fans are unbiased, evaluating only on the merits of the game."

Again, you're simply being reductive & simplistic in your conclusions just to accomodate an outraged response. I have never said Non-Nintendo fans are biased. I'm happy for many consoles to exist and for many gamers to choose whichever they prefer. What I've said is that I believe that people who lazily write off Nintendo's catalogue of games as not for them are most likely holding some form of bias. I'm not asking everyone to own or even play Nintendo games, I'm asking them not to have the ignorance to write of a collection of games (which vary in every category) based on what they think they are like. And I'm more than willing to accept that there are biased Nintendo fans out there.

I've noticed that you get involved quite a lot in endless back and forths on this forum & the reason is because you don't actually argue the other person's points. You argue with the points you want them to have made. There's no point in writing a retort to a point that wasn't actually made or deliberately missing the point that they're actually trying to make in order to be pedantic.

If you look back at our discussion, you'll see that half the time has been spent by me correcting you on what you are interpretting me to have said.

Not sure if it's a deliberate move on your part, if it's not, then please see this as some constructive feedback.

Having a story and being narrative driven not being the same ok, but when you disconsider R&C as narrative driven you are wrong (and it isn't a Sony 1st party studio eitherway). Will wait for you to show that Nintendo gameplay first looks after isn't a common trait cohesive approach. Also Nintendo HW is developed with the underpower because Nintendo doesn't care as much for the graphical output as Sony and MS.

Nope, sorry Nintendo doesn't try to make games as pretty as possible, they try to do it as pretty as possible on their own line of development using cartoonish graphics that adhere to low power consumption. If they were really worried about graphics their system would have more power as well. And GC was the last gen Nintendo was at least caring as show as they stop developing the power of the system.

Have I said GT story is better than Zelda? Nope, you were the one trying to put Zelda as something that really have a story. And if you meant Zelda as being developed by Sony, HZD is selling way lower than Zelda while looking much better and having real story driven touch. But exactly what on your mind is Zelda under a different IP developed by Sony?

So you have been monitoring me, how strange for a 31 post count on a account with 1 month age... are you an alt by any chance? And nope you haven't really accept it, you think that someone disregarding the whole Nintendo IPs is because of uterior motives but don't think it is similar when Nintendo fanbase doesn't go and buy some 3rd parties at higher level than any Nintendo game on that genre.

It is simple as that: If there is a MP in a genre that is better than anything Nintendo offers there and it doesn't sell more than Nintendo games on that genre then it is clear that a good part of that userbase is dismissing all 3rd party games. You then try to put "you don't need to outsell a Nintendo game to be sucessful" that is an argument that wasn't made. It's funny that you accuse me of not addressing your points when you are inventing points that weren't made when you "correct my understanding"