| Michael-5 said: He's still much better then the guys at GamrReview. He at least proof reads for typos and errors, and makes an arguement with research. As for research, well Nintendo is still looking for easy answers. To be fair Super Mario 3D World plays in 60FPS 1080p, and it looks great because of that. However as technology improves, people are going to expect pixar levels of graphics. Everyone else took that big investment and learnt how to make HD games, but I think one reason why WiiU is struggling is because Nintendo doesn't have the capacity to make that many HD games. Pikmin 3 as an example was suppose to be a 2011 Wii game (one reason why I got the Wii), then it got delayed twice and moved to the WiiU only to be delayed again. Had they had the resources, this could have been a launch title, and maybe even helped out with sales. Nintendo did not cater the WiiU very much to 3rd party's. Bethesda said that by the time they were informed about the WiiU, it was already having it's final stages of production done. I think all Bethesda wanted was a more powerful rig so they can more easily downgrade PS4/XB1 titles, but the WiiU is too much like current gen machines.
|
@Bold: I personally feel I could do much better of a job. While his spelling isn't bad, it isn't really indicative of anything. I rarely make spelling errors on here, and when I do I fix them shortly afterwards. His sources are also not very good. There are quite a few things he misinterpreted about the data he's looking at as well, and many times where he jumps to a conclusion simply because of a correlation (which shows he isn't a good researcher).
@Second paragraph: I don't think it was as much about the resources as it was about Nintendo being anal about polishing a game to a certain level. I recall reading that Nintendo didn't put the game on the Wii because it didn't fit with what they wanted out of the game (hardware wasn't strong enough). In the end, Nintendo has definitely been late to the HD party and is paying the price for it. This, however, means very little in terms of the argument OP makes.
@Third paragraph: I definitely am aware that Nintendo didn't do very much to cater the Wii U to 3rd parties, but they were definitely thinking about it with the Wii U. They just made the balance for what they wanted/needed and what they thought third parties wanted/needed really bad, which translated to a system that doesn't cater very well to the majority of gamers. The games are quite possibly the only thing that can save the system, and since the system has little support it is doomed to a relatively low lifetime sales number.
Anyway, I personally feel like the OP has something personal against Nintendo because the rhetoric is clearly antagonistic.
