horriblebastard on 10 August 2008
BTW, since you're implying that series using the same formula, that they have used the last ten years is a bad thing
I'm not. You are. It's interesting how the 360/PS3 gets attacked for lack of innovation in games, when you all love the first party franchises that are anything but innovative. If you were consistent, I wouldn't have even bought it up. You're only inconsistent through fanboyism, so let that go and we might get somewhere.
You know, the reason why Wiis lower power makes games better is because once Wii has been graphically maxed out, devs need to compete each other with the gameplays quality.
True for all systems, except the Wii's games maxed out will always look worse than the PS3's or 360's.
As for the logic of "why make good games, when you cash out the dummies with bad", it only further proves that PS360 has no future, since spending tens of millions to a PS360 game, when you can make a game that costs a million on Wii and cash in with it, is more profitable route.
Making innovative games doesn't always bring in the most money though, so by that logic the Wii's future is largely shovelware and cash-ins. On the occasion that companies do go out of their way to make innovative games like Zack & Wiki or Boom Blox, they don't sell for shit because it hasn't got "Created by Nintendo" on the box.
Actually Wii is played by atleast 2 yo to grannies. I think my 2 years old is a proof of that. And guess what, it's because of the games that appeal to them.
So all you are doing is agreeing with me then?
You came here to give your opinion (=troll, it seems) and people are discussing it with you - with reasonable arguments, which are proven by the history (and financials), while you have nothing to oppose those arguments.
What arguments? That the Wii makes money? That has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about. A lot of people resort to "but look how much cash Nintendo have!" when they have absolutely no other relevant points to make.
