| happydolphin said: The diff between SFIV and the others though is that SFIV is leaps and bounds above the cheaper alternatives. It's not as clear-cut with platformers and with other casual games Nintendo offers. NSMB (prior to U) doesn't offer all that much detail, the gameplay is so-so it's not even as good as it was in the past imho. I'm not sure NSMB is as better than its cheaper options as SFIV is. League is a good point in that the detail isn't as good as SC2 (not even WC3), but it's F2P, and the gameplay is undeniably impeccable.
Listen Spazzy, there's a reason why we're on vgchartz and it's to talk about things like these. Nintendo may have an idea of the market indicators, but they also may not. Just last week Iwata had to apologize for failure to meet HW & SW projections. You may think they know all, but I wouldn't always put my money on it (though I have investments in their stock ironically enough). That's why I don't like these "Trust them, they know what they're doing" type of posts. |
Sorry but now You're pegging your opinion on this argument, NSMBU and other first party offerings are considered leaps ahead of other alternatives by many as well which is the point of the SFIV example some people may prefer the cheaper alternatives to SFIV but that doesn't make them equal to it. Fact is we don't care about your opinion on NSMB and the other games many still enjoy them more then the alternatives you listed, you've attempted an argument that hinges more on your opinion and views of the games then solid ground and has flaws like comparing LOL to 2d platformers, you may like LOL but me personally I have no interest in it and feel SC2 is the much better game and worth the money paid for it where as I haven't bothered with LOL even though it's free.
