pokoko said:
A picture of the Sega logo? What does that even mean? That all companies are the same? That if something happens once, it will always happen throughout time? Sorry, but I can't even wrap my head around that. I remember when people were like, "the most powerful hardware can never win a generation because it's never happened before," and I was like, "what the hell are you talking about?" That's not even logic. It means nothing unless you can tell me why Nintendo and Sega are the same. Make an argument other than, "well, it happened to this one other company." All I can gather is that people seem to think Nintendo's developers are so bad that they can't work on any other platform but their own, which doesn't even make sense to me. That's an amazing lack of faith. The only valid argument I can think of is that Nintendo games wouldn't generate nearly as much revenue as before, which is probably true, but they should still move a ton of software, more than enough to fund the company going forward. The only way that wouldn't happen is if it turned out that Nintendo fans were fans of the hardware and not the actual games and that would just be pathetic |
No it means the premise of this topic is stupid. The same as the logic for Sega going third party was. Actually it's worse. Nintendo is not billions in debt like Sega. Going multiplatform will scatter their fanbase while increasing development costs. Instead of developing for a single platform, they'll be developing for mutliple platforms to garner the same audience.
