Resident_Hazard said:
I'm not elitist, I'm just a regular gamer (for that matter, I'm pretty awful at most games for some reason). There really is no reason anything I'm saying should be seen as offensive or elitist. Nintendo isn't perfect and they certainly never bat 1000. What I stated, though, is really how the last three Nintendo console cycles have run: The system launches successfully, starts off with a lot of promise and 3rd party support, and then it trickles off very clearly about three years into the cycle. That's a fact, man. Sure, the N64 started somewhat slowly (with only 3 launch titles in the US), and there was strong support from 3rd party companies, like Acclaim and Midway. Towards the end, it was almost nothing. The GameCube started off far better (third party support-wise, but with lower sales than the N64), but was still pretty dry towards the end, whereas the PA2 and Xbox maintained a strong release line-up. My "generalization" isn't just fantasy that comes from no where. Third party titles sell worse on Nintendo systems, and this is a fact that just hasn't changed in three generations. They sold better, comparitively on the SNES, but that was the last time. Blaming developers and publishers and is just stupid, and foolishly ignorant. It's not their fault, it's the audience. And the audience on Nintendo systems during the N64 and GC generations was overwhelmingly Nintendo fans, and this time, Nintendo fans and the new Blue Ocean crowd. During the first two-three years of the GameCube, it received almost all the same games as the Xbox and PS2--it was GameCube owners who consistantly maintained lower sales of those things. That's not my fault, that's not your fault--that's just Nintendo fans--in general--buying Nintendo games over 3rd party titles. And let's be real, Blue Ocean gamers don't know what the hell to buy. I know plenty of those people. Trust me, my Mom has a Wii--and it doesn't matter how many times I... well, she did listen to me tell her about Muramasa... (but that's only one game). Who knows? Maybe this time, things would've been different if the Wii was technically on-par with the X360 and PS3, and the control scheme would've pushed 3rd party titles to greater success on the Wii. Had it been on the same level, technically, it certainly would've gotten a lot more of the cross-platform titles the Sony and Microsoft got, but by now, we'd have countless streamlined FPS titles, rather than Metroid Prime 3, The Conduit; and hoping four years in hoping that Goldeneye would finally get it right. I understand that there are Nintendo fans also buy third party games, but looking at sales, we're obviously in the minority. Just the way it is. That's the way it's been for three generations. And feel free to look over my collection if you like, Nintendo systems easily dominate it. I'm still surprised how much stuff I have for the Wii (and one of these days, I will get back to NMH2, but I've been too into S&P lately). Hey, seriously, I've been called a fanboy a bajillion times. ... come to think of it, I've been called that for Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony, as well as a hater of Microsoft and Sony. I think the analysis of why 3rd party games don't sell well on Nintendo would (and should) make a good conversation--but not when it boils down to retardness like just assuming game developers are morons, and not when it doesn't allow for varying opinions. The only two sides I tend to see are "developers are idiots" and "Nintendo owners don't buy third party games"--and the second argument is flamed cruelly by Nintendo fans, thus killing any kind of conversation. I looked over a profile recently that had only Nintendo systems and a PS2 with almost no games. That person's opinion on Nintendo is most likely blind and should be taken with a grain of salt--and this is the kind of person usually flaming me and treating me like an elitist. (Treat response as a generalization, this isn't geared straight at you.) |
I didn't call you an elitist. you are calling nintendo fans elitists based on your statements. I'm not normally bothered by other people's crap, but unfair generalizations really piss me off, especially when the person making the generalizations passes his/her own opinion as fact.
Let me explain to you why third-party developers are considered idiots. let's say a developer releases some lame party game with no substance on the Wii. This game performs poorly. Now, the smart thing to do in an event like this is to get the development team together and ask "what went wrong, and what can we do to improve in the future?" but no, they run around like chickens with their heads cut off blaming the consumer. On top of that, there are some developers who have seen a great deal of success on the Wii, and then decide to snub Wii gamers with their next project (Blazing Angels for example). Nintendo is so successful because they know what their audience wants. they make the kinds of games that everyone can enjoy. It has nothing to do with technical power or mature content.
I recall you mentioning Madworld in a previous thread. I rented and beat that game, and I wasn't impressed. While it is well made and a n overall good game, it has nothing other than shock value going for it. tell, me, why do you expect a black and white, ultra-violent game to succeed with the masses?
That being said, I understand that nintendo isn't perfect. They have never been perfect, and they never will be perfect. They are still leagues ahead of the competition with regards to game quality IMO. For you to say that you know what the average consumer wants better than the average consumer is not only wrong, it's rude. The analysis of why third-parties don't sell on the wii stops being a good debate when people blame the userbase. Maybe that's why you've been flamed in the past?
The bolded statement is false. The N64 and Gamecube recieved poor third-party support from the beginning, and the Wii didn't recieve any meaningful third-party support until about 18 months in.
