Barozi said:
Mr Khan said:
Barozi said:
Quick question to you.
Would you rather have bought a slightly gimped version of Ninja Gaiden 2 that is still quite a bit better than Razor's Edge or an upgraded port based on a bad Ninja Gaiden 3 (aka Razor's Edge) ?
|
I would have, but i'm a Nintendo-only gamer. I buy what i like, and while i might gripe about what was done to certain games (like the favoritism shown towards the PS360 version of Sonic Unleashed), if the end product is still good enough to buy on its own, i will.
It's more about people who have options. Anyone who has a capable PC, PS3, or 360 would have ZERO reason to buy Mass Effect 3 on Wii U, and due to increasing rates of multiplatform ownership, that means that the third parties get bitten when they try to shortchange one platform (whether deliberately, as in EA's case, or not)
I, meanwhile, overlook Mass Effect 3 because i have doubts about BioWare's ability to design gameplay after Sonic Chronicles and KOTOR. Story and mythos wise, KOTOR was great, but that gameplay...
|
But at the same time what reason had PS3 owners to buy Mass Effect 2 when it launched a whole year later on their platform ?
Obviously they didn't care enough to buy a 360 for it or a decent PC, had no clue about the story of the first game and yet they still bought it at full price and it sold 41% of the 360 edition.
Well to summarize the launch. Third parties and Nintendo did a lot of mistakes. The interest was there but Nintendo failed to recreate a Wii Sports that drove the (casual) masses to the consoles, while third parties chose to go the cheap way and port their classics and hoped for people to buy their products as 2nd or 3rd games. But can you nowadays expect third parties to make quality exclusive games for your new platform without any kind of guarantee that it does well ?
|
It doesn't need to be exclusive, it just needs to not be an insult to consumers. Arkham City, NG3, Assassin's Creed 3 were the way to do it.
