The truth about Nintendo

[sundin13]

Zod95 said:

sundin13 said:

- 3rd party royalties: There is nothing bad about royalties. That is a large way every hardware producer makes money. Why are you implying this is a negative thing or something different that Nintendo does?

Please read section 2.1 of the OP

 

sundin13 said:

non-standard tech: How is this bad in any way? Innovation is bad? Oh, so everyone should make the same exact console and that would make the industry a better place? I'm pretty sure I've said this before but even when Nintendo did what everyone else did, the 3rd parties didn't support them...

Not innovation, differentiation on what is better to be the same.

For example, the N64 cartridges when CD was becoming the standard. That is not innovation, that is limiting game space.

For example, different machine architecture than others. That is not innovation, that is raising up the costs of multiplatform games.

 

sundin13 said:

- lower power than competition: Same response as above combined with one of my points from before. Lower power allows lower development costs. Here, check out this article from another thread showing how "higher power than competition" is just as bad, if not worse than "lower power than competition": http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=178978

I'm sorry but I don't need to read that pile of text to understand that high power allows low power but the opposite is not true. For example, Wii has no HD games but PS4 has indie titles. Raising up the roof is raising up freedom...to whatever devs want to use it.

 

sundin13 said:

- inadequate documentation: I'm not entirely sure what you mean and I would like proof.

- incompetent help support: I've heard far more stories of good experiences with Nintendo than bad experiences with Nintendo and for every story you could find of some random indie saying something bad about Nintendo, I could probably find five good good experiences. I think you need to prove your point a little better here.

Last paragraphs of section 2.2 of the OP (source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-secret-developers-wii-u-the-inside-story).

1. Ancient History

2. Yeah, damn that Cell Processor that made the third party games generally worse than on the 360 and generally made developing for the PS3 more difficult. Wait...that was Sony :/ (the other parts of that argument are a bit outdated)

3. If higher power is inherently better than why buy a console at all when PCs are so much stronger? There are so many other factors that you are ignoring (such as the section of the market that prefers lower priced consoles, thus bringing more people into video games which is inherently good for the industry). Good games can be made with high or low powered consoles. Additionally, as I previously stated, if you make the assumption that low powered consoles "encourage shovelware", you have to accept the inverse that high powered consoles "encourage over budget AAA games". I would personally argue that the latter is just as bad if not worse than the former. Lower power is not inherently bad and you have yet to prove to me that it is. You just state that it is "truth" and walk away.

4. Obviously you weren't around when that article came up and multiple non-anonymous developers said that while there were some problems at launch (as expected), it has all been ironed out a loooong time ago. Many devs stood behind Nintendo on that one...