Aielyn said:
You are very much out of line with your attitude, here. TheKoreanGuy has been respectful, reasonable, and has used logic in a more than acceptable manner. What you are disagreeing with is not his logic, but his subjective opinions. That your opinions differ from his does not mean that his logic is unsound. If you want to challenge a person's assertion, challenge the assertion, don't attack the person. Attacking the person is itself a form of bad logic, known as ad hominem. I'm assuming you've heard of it.
Anyway, TheKoreanGuy - although I do understand your concerns, as I said before, I don't share them. Nintendo is trying to set up an ecosystem where developers have choices. Sometimes, the games that result won't make any special use of the Upad. There's nothing wrong with that. You may recall the point made back when the Wii was launched, that many games will benefit from the Wiimote, but some wouldn't? Similarly, there's a reason why New Super Mario Bros (the DS game) really just used the touchscreen for a button to activate the stored powerup - because touchscreen just isn't necessary for 2D Mario gameplay. Not every game should try to use the Upad in a substantial way, because not every game will benefit from it. And that's fine - indeed, it's why the Wiimote is still useful with the system. If you pay close attention, you'll notice that the Wiimote and the Upro controller are both subsets of the Upad's functionality (with the exception of the Wiimote+Nunchaku's ability to track the motion of two hands independently). On the other hand, developers aren't going to ignore the Upad's new functionality. Why not? The same reason as why they get into competition with each other over how good-looking their games are. Developers don't like the idea of other developers being able to claim superiority at something. So rather than just not using the Upad, a lot of games will end up with gimmicky uses of it. What is great about the Upro is that, when they decide to make a gimmicky use of the Upad, they'll almost certainly not require it, and so you can just avoid the gimmick and play regularly. Note that, for a lot of modern third-party titles, "asymmetric gameplay" isn't a major consideration, anyway, because they aren't all that likely to even have local multiplayer - most of them seem to prefer to focus exclusively on online multiplayer, anyway. And that's where Nintendo and certain third parties will come in and address it. It really is, in this respect, very much the same as last gen, in that gimmicky controls will be common... but because of the Upro, the games aren't likely to be made worse as a result. The best that was available on the Wii was the Classic Controller, which lacked functionality of the regular controllers on the other systems, and thus made it more difficult for developers to port over for the CC. Nintendo is basically addressing one of the biggest problems with the Wii by providing the Upro. |
Will you stop insinutating that I am making some kind of personal attack when I'm not.
Quite frankyly I don't care if you agree with me but if you are going to voice your opinion about Nintendo's ideas then why do you get hostile with me when I voice my opinion of yours. It hypocritical.Nintenod has stating there goals and purpose many times. I don't see a reason to keep endlessly debating something when all facts point in another direction.
Nintendo is not an American company and its core stratedgy does not use American style marketing like what you are suggesting. Believe it or not, Nintendo is actually one of the few major companies out their that puts its ideals first.
