Roma on 22 July 2011
| padib said: Thanks for explaining. I don't agree with him anyways because Nintendo provided Super Mario Galaxy 2 and NSMBWii, so it went for two simultaneous audiences. MOM was developed by a sub-contractor so it doesn't matter that much and can't be considered dropping the ball, just more of something he didn't want. I don't see value in his description. For me, when I don't like a game or I think it'll be bad, I just don't buy it. I think ultimately the problem in all this is that now we're just refering to Nintendo, but the 3rd parties play an important role there too. They can also make games with 'arcade value', some however needed to appeal to their main consumers and those were incidentally looking for cutting edge, something Nintendo didn't offer. I think Nintendo can offer that to them this time, and that's probably why Microsoft is taking the Wii-U seriously, and they're right to. I'm gonna drop the "catering to the core" argument cause I feel like that was flame-bait set by trolling and isn't even relevant to the OP. |
Underestimating your competition is the biggest mistake you can do which was shown with the Wii. I remember both Sony and MS not mentioning it as a competition even and look how that turned out.
| R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
 |
|
|
