By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
Sal.Paradise said:

Stretching your point a bit with most of those examples, but in essence I don't disagree with you (your 'parody' point, not the reason you made this thread).

I don't think there is a third party conspiracy to make the Vita fail, and I think Ubisoft, Activision, Konami have sound business reasons for not continuing their franchises on the Vita so I just can't be angry at them - I don't expect third parties to support platforms by default, that's not how being a third party works.

This isn't about conspiracy theories to make platforms fail, it's about the blame game that is played on forums. Namely putting forward the argument that consumers have the power to change the effort that third parties are willing to put into their games and if consumers don't buy old/bad/gimped/overpriced games, then they don't deserve any better. Which becomes all the more insulting when the games in question are titles that the person who puts the argument forward would never buy either.

Essentially, it's about gamers telling other gamers to buy trash and blaming them for not buying trash. Something that is ridiculous, yet still common practice.

And to put it in other words, when it comes to the question why certain people don't buy Nintendo home consoles, the usual answer is something along the lines of "I don't care about Nintendo games and the third party games are subpar." So if the third party games aren't good, then why should actual owners of Nintendo home consoles buy them in droves?

I know your headline is a reaction to a very specific argument used to troll Nintendo fans, but I felt you were using the whole thing as a springboard to criticize the third party's platform decisions, hence my post on the subject. If you didn't intend to do that at all, I was just projecting your usual disposition onto an unrelated thread and that's my mistake.