| LordTheNightKnight said: This is similar to companies refusing to switch to environmentally friendly methods, even though they have developed to the point where the profit margin is greater. If it involves a cool toy, like a machine that does the work of twelve people, they will jump on it, due the perfectly understandable reason of getting more money. Yet if it comes from something they hate, they won't take it. Environmentally friendly methods would be like admitting the liberals are right, even though there can be just as many conservative values served by it (more efficient methods are also proof of progress, and the reward for hard work in developing them). Thus it is with Nintendo. Yamguchi is a good businessman, but he did treat third parties almost like employees. Yet it is third parties fault for thinking twenty years ago is still happening. Iwata is a developer, and he understands their situation. It's the third parties fault if they don't want to deal with him, even if having games on the system, even smaller and multiplatform, means more money. |
Smartest thing I've heard in a while.
It makes sense that the only reason devs would still be hesitant to offer Wii support is because they're still bitter about the past.
"I mean, c'mon, Viva Pinata, a game with massive marketing, didn't sell worth a damn to the "sophisticated" 360 audience, despite near-universal praise--is that a sign that 360 owners are a bunch of casual ignoramuses that can't get their heads around a 'gardening' sim? Of course not. So let's please stop trying to micro-analyze one game out of hundreds and using it as the poster child for why good, non-1st party, games can't sell on Wii. (Everyone frequenting this site knows this is nonsense, and yet some of you just can't let it go because it's the only scab you have left to pick at after all your other "Wii will phail1!!1" straw men arguments have been put to the torch.)" - exindguy on Boom Blocks
