S.T.A.G.E. said:
Ostro said:
I'd say one (out of many) reasons is that Nintendo systems have games on them and not virtual worlds/stories/entertainment. Most games on Nintendo systems are GAMES and you PLAY them (not experience, feel, be entertained, stare at visuals). GAME and PLAY are terms you'd relate to children, no adult would admit he likes playing if it wasn't for amazing virtual entertainment that is close to movies etc. That's also why every adult gamer is a "pro" at any game, it's never about luck or whatever you may call it, it's all skill! Games however, in classic thinking, are about luck and thinking/tactics at the same time so they don't get too boring. Games that are only about thinking have always been puzzles and even those can be about luck (which Tetris block is the next?).
Games in the classic sense of playing are bigger on Nintendo systems. It's not that the other consoles don't have games that are that way but they are not the big prominent uber-popular ones.
|
That has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing. PC has more that than Nintendo. Nintendo has always been considered for children because of its marketing scheme. It aims it characters at children and families and doesnt go up to Teen with all of its first party.
|
Try reading and comprehending.
- One of many reasons
- "It's not that the other consoles don't have games that are that way but they are not the big prominent uber-popular ones."
So, wow, PC has lots of "games" but which of the games that are not hollywood-like blockbusters on PC are popular and really successful? Maybe Angry Birds for being a port, nice one. Or Minesweeper because it's on Windows? Great. Tell PC gamers they are playing on a system popular for childish games instead of shiny awesome cinematic stuff. Then try posting again.
Your post did nothing but support mine in terms of reality vs. image/marketing (I said "bigger" on Nintendo, not "more" btw). Thank you for that.
