Tuganuno said:
Metallicube said:
Tuganuno said:
SmokedHostage said:
So... because Galaxy is not on the PS3, Nintendo ruined this gen for you?
Let's blame Nintendo for being a market success and own the Mario IP while we're at it. |
Lol at that info manipulation. We all understood what he was trying to say - Nintendo's (overpriced) casual console has been pwning the PS3 and 360 for 4 years. Sony and MS are now more focused on the casual market because Nintendo is swimming in money, that in my honest opinion, (now ignore my PS3 tag) they don't deserve... at all.
There's no way to know if we would be better or worse without the Wii. Unless you have a time machine, go back to 2006 and burn Nintendo's headquarters. If you have one, please PM me, I have no idea where I left my wallet D:
|
Oh boo-freakedy hoo.. What the hell is that ever supposed to mean "they don't deserve it"? What did they break into Fort Knox or something for their money?
Have you ever heard of a little saying called "the customer is always right?" Nintendo obviously did SOMETHING right or they wouldn't be swimming in money.
I can just as easilly flip that around and say Sony didn't deserve their success in the PS1 and PS2 days.. See how dumb that argument sounds now?
Btw, the whole casual thing doesn't exist. It's a myth created by the industry to try and categorize gamers and give an excuse for the Wii's success. It is stupid branding and nothing else. People conisdered the NES a "casual console" back then too.
|
Nintendo doesn't deserve it, in my opinion, because: #1, it's too damn expensive. Ok this is kind of a fact, not an opinion. Nintendo has made ALOT of money on this generation with software, and hardware sales, and yet they the console's price is ridiculous. I know it's naive to think that Sony/MS don't want the same as Nintendo - money, money, money and more money - but an Arcade costs less than a Wii! An XBOX360, costs less than a console that in terms of hardware, is between this generation and the last one.
#2, if we compare the PS3/360/Wii software by metacritics score, we have... 86 games on the 360 with a score superior to 85, on the PS3 76, and 32 on the Wii. I know I shouldn't use metacritic like this - we can't simply define which console has the best software by the amount of games with a score higher to an x value, that would bestupid. But I'm not trying to do that, I'm just pointing out the lack of good games on the Wii.
Conclusion: Software and Hardware have deep flaws.
About that sentence on the PS1 and PS2... yeh you can say that. But you have nothing to support your theory. PS1 revolutionized the gaming industry - Third Party support - and the PS2 was a console that was good for casual and hardcore gaming. It has 150 games with a score superior to 85, and over 320 to 80.
And casual isn't a myth lol It's just an expression often used to define a certain type of gaming and/or gamers. Most of Nintendo's games look... well, here's the reason why I often say casual - if I say childish, people will just rage against me because they will assume that I'm saying that the Wii is for kids. Let's be reasonable please, you can't possibly compare the complexity of a MGS plot with a Mario's "Your princess is in another castle" - not saying one is better than the other just because of the plot, in fact, I'm not even comparing them because I simply can't. But if you ask me which one I'd prefer to play, between Mario Galaxy or MGS, now that's a completely different question.
Listen, or better yet read, don't take this too seriously. You can't expect to have everyone by your side, congratulating Nintendo for its success, 'cause some people simply think that MS or Sony should be on the first place, for the reasons I've listed above.
|
