"This discussion is about Nintendo, it isn't about Activision or EA and neither have consoles to support. Nintendo does and I expect more from them."
It doesn't matter if the discussion is about them. Simply holding the veiw of singling them out is a double standard.
"Super Smash Bros. Brawl should come with a GC controller, otherwise it's a broken game."
The Classic Controller is another option. The game wasn't going to come with both. Why not instead of whining about the controls, get either one, and enjoy some VC games as well.
"I wasn't saying my opinion is a fact, I'm saying that it's an opinion that many people share and that the point's I make aren't actually wrong because most of them are backed up by sound arguments and examples. It's only different if you want to ignore or judge Nintendos faults. I chose to judge them and others choose to ignore them."
Not agreeing that something is a fault is not ignoring it. I just happen to find other faults Nintendo has, and I've even called out some.
"When you have a large userbase and a distinct lack of good software, it's only rational that those 67 million people will clamour to whatever's available, no matter the quality."
You got it backwards. You can't get sales that large, for either the system or the games, unless it's what people want. People didn't buy Mario Kart Wii in droves because they were starving for a game. And if you believe gamers actually do such a thing, you are insulting the intelligence of gamers, no matter who they are.
"If there is a lack of variety and quality, then whatever's available will be bought, it doesn't matter what it is."
No, that is a false belief. And it's a belief that developers have been losing money on. If you think we were supposed to buy mediocre third party games on the Wii because we were supposed to be starving for something, then... well myu response might violate the VG Charts ToS.
"Motorstorm and Resistance sold extremely well because the PS3 launch was scarce, but when competition comes along the franchises take a hit"
No, that could also mean the sequels didn't have the appeal of the first games. Again, it's insulting gamers to think they are just sheep who will buy anything if you starve them enough.
"You only provided one example and that's with an already popular franchise."
I already admitted it was just one example. You don't counter a comment with a point the comment makes.
Plus you know the Classic Controller redesign? That was working with Capcom as well. And Nintendo let third parties bundle the Motion with their games, when they could just as easily have refused. Plus Nintendo has shown they will publish even minor third party games in some regions, like the Trauma Center games.
Now you might think that's not enough, but a) that's just what I remember off the top of my head, so it's not everything, and b) you wrote "nothing", which this is already more than that.
"Nintendo being the most successful, I expect the most support."
If you mean from them, then you should also realize this support costs money, and guess what Nintendo doesn't have as much of compared to two worldwide corporations, who were willing to lose billions just to get market share? Nintendo does what they can.
"By no reason I meant that there making so much money and selling so well that they don't care about finding and supporting new ideas and projects."
No, they care. They are just also busy trying to fight disinterest first and foremost, and that actually did get done with the new IP of the Wii series. When they find a new IP that they feel can do even a fraction as much good as that series has done, they will put it on the Wii.
"They should find a middle ground then."
Well what do you call being done at E3? It showed them getting more third party support, and trying to make games that meet the old and new school better, not just for the Wii but for the 3DS. Even if you don't think that's enough, it is a step in the direction.
"Businessmen are exactly what they are, but when people on the forums parade Nintendo around as if they were the Lords of Gaming, that they are so pure and devine and that everything they do is for goodness of gaming, I puke a little."
Well that isn't what I'm about, and I don't think what others arguing with you are about.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs
