| Veknoid_Outcast said:
The restaurant analogy is an interesting one. I think that's why those people who really love video games (and have the disposable income) buy all three major systems. So they can eat at all three buffets, so to speak. But at the same time, using your analogy, wouldn't it make more sense for the chef to keep making the dishes his/her customers order the most? I think maybe where we disagree is what in a video game has intrinsic value. And this is a question I think all enthusiasts should ask themselves. What is essential for a good game, and what is merely window dressing? There isn't an easy answer. |
But if there's a chef you really like, wouldn't you like to see him take a serious stab at what you like in the other chef, at least do some serious research and try to follow at least with 1 studio. Sony is trying to emulate Nintendo, why shouldn't Nintendo also try, especially when once upon a time they were able to make it happen (OP). Of course the games themselves don't sell, but they would increase the credibility of the system in the eyes of the market that is buying the competing systems. That's from a business point of view.
From a game-making point of view, if Nintendo truly are the best, they should be able to compete with Sony on all levels and genres, imho.
For a chef to limit himself to one menu is for that chef to stop reinventing himself.
Essay Pro