| fastyxx said: @famousringo No one's disqualifying Halo or GTA. You're missing the point. Take the Wii-fan glasses off for a second, because I am not dissing the system. I have one. You and I are saying the same thing. Yes. People play Wii Play a lot. My point is exactly that. There are a lot of people who play it forever and don't buy more stuff. And that's bad for gaming, because that game is not even close to what games can be or do, on that system or any system. And instead of companies trying to nudge those people to explore further, they are often just trying to make the next clone of that Wii Play and to cash in on the non-discerning buyer. These developers would have, in the past, been working on something that took a bit more thought to reach a a market. The Atari 2600 once was thought to be untouchable too, until shovelware buried it like a dead family pet. |
No, you are missing a very large point here. If Halo and Wii Play are comparable in terms of lasting appeal, then they are comparable in terms of effect on other games sales. If you assume people playing it forever is bad for the industry, then you must assume any game that has a similar effect would also be bad for the industry. In other words, you are arguing that Halo 3 is bad for the industry because people play it forever and never move on. If you disagree with that sentiment, then you also disagree with Wii Play being bad since it is the exact same effect.
Edit: Atari 2600 was not killed by shovelware. The games released simply did not work which made consumers wary of buying games and the console. The reason the draconian rules Nintendo enforced were tolerated early on was because that was what saved the industry by insuring every game worked.
