Euphoria14 said:
Kasz216 said:
Euphoria14 said:
Mr Khan said:
Euphoria14 said:
Mr Khan said:
So we've established that everyone has low expectations for third parties. Good.
|
I never said that.
|
You said that third parties can't be responsible for building a market. Ergo, third parties aren't responsible for leadership or outside-the-box thinking. Thus, low expectations.
|
Building a shooter market.
Nintendo built a fitness market and 3rd parties followed. Nintendo built a party games market and 3rd parties followed. Nintendo built a platformers market, 3rd parties followed.
Nintendo doesn't seem to want to build a 1st person or 3rd person market, so why would 3rd parties do it for them? Especially if they have enough of a market to work with already on PS3, 360 and PC?
Until Nintendo puts in the work as well to built that market, them don't expect to see them until the WiiU userbase grows.
|
I would argue that Sony and Microsoft didn't build a shooter market. Argueably you could argue that 360 expanded it with Halo.
Playstation was just popular when third parties made the shooter market what it is today... and Nintendo... was the N64. It had goldeneye, and perfect dark but... that's about it.
The only market I could see you argueing Sony made was the racer market... but that's still a market they mostly dominate.
|
What I was saying was that Sony put forth an effort to establish a shooter base from the get go by creating them while Nintendo isn't. MS also makes them while paying out for others.
|
I don't think that is what established the shooter base though. I think the shooter base is on Sony platforms, because people who like shooters like Sony. Afterall, that doesn't explain why various other third party created bases exist where they do.
Why is 360 the Madden Box.... Microsoft never created a Sports base.
With Nintendo it was just a lack of proper timing.
Had Nintendo did exactly what they did in the PS1 era (outside being douches who scared off third parties) and they got PS1 level support. I'd be positive the Wii U would have an already established shooter base that rivals Sony's shooter base today.
Furthermore, I would guess that even if Nintendo made the most revlutionary shooter since Wolfenstein... it still wouldn't matter.
Videogame markets are weird in that it seems like brand assosiation is EXTREMELY important.
There is of course plenty of value to go "counter stream" with a product to appeal to Wii U shooter fans... but Crysis really isn't that game.
I still think Nintendo should make a shooter though. Call it "Return to Castle Bowser" make it a downloadable game in the vein of an oldschool shooter. Would be good fun. Fire Flowers, Hamer Bro Hammers, shells etc.
