By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fireburn95 on 13 January 2015
Edit Thread
Aielyn said:
fireburn95 said:
If lego city undercover was a new IP, it wouldn't be called lego! It relies ont he lego brand to sell. It can be completely different, hell it can be a first person ballerina dance simulator, it's still 'Lego'.

Nintendoland was me being kind to them, ideally it shouldn't be there. What objection do you have to Devils third? Afaik it is a new IP published by nintendo, I was doubtful to give them initially because it wasn't intended for Wii U initially. But that doesnt de-constitute a new IP, so thats fine.

And thanks for telling me about sing party, I did say I might have missed a few, I am human.

I have ironically included 'TBA' titles for all consoles. Just some may not really have that many.

Because Destiny is a console exclusive? Grow up.

If you enjoy those filters, fine make your own thread. But my 'filters' were "at the time of the titles launch, it was a new IP for said console"
So games like Helldivers, ps4+3+v, are fine because they have launched on PS4 as a new IP, published by Sony.
If you can find any equivelants published by nintendo or microsoft for more than one console (inc PC and phone) go for it.

I am not making an exclusive games war here. If microsoft were to publish a new IP for both WiiU and Xbox, it would still go in the xbox list.

Last point: Aint nobody got time fo' dat.

Like I said, "Lego" describes the style, not the IP. Lego Batman is part of the Batman IP. Lego Harry Potter is part of the Harry Potter IP. If you're even remotely willing to consider Hyrule Warriors a distinct IP, then you MUST accept Lego City Undercover a distinct IP. It has completely unique Intellectual Property, simply using the aesthetics of Lego. By your reasoning, every single realistic game ever is simply using real world IP, and thus can't be called a "new IP". It's like declaring that Wii Fit is the same IP as Mario Kart 8 because they both use Miis.

I didn't have an objection to Devil's Third, you did (although you have since edited it out), by saying that you'll "give them" Devil's Third, as though you're being generous to count a new IP being published by Nintendo, when you have no qualms about listing Super Time Force.

You claim to have just "missed" Sing Party... but the fifth reply to the thread mentioned it, and you ignored it.

You included TBA titles for all consoles, despite knowing that Nintendo doesn't typically announce many games more than a few months ahead of launch, especially if they're not major releases or specifically announced to go with a message they're sending (like "we're working on various crossover titles, like this one, SMTxFE" - note that Hyrule Warriors was announced in December 2013 for release in 2014, as an example of them waiting longer for another announcement). Any title listed as "TBA" may not make it at all, or might turn out to be non-exclusive.

Expanding it to include third party titles is basically a way to further bias against Nintendo, because you KNOW that third parties are doing a shit job of supporting the Wii U, and have been doing so since launch (there's no "because it's selling poorly" when EA ceases development except for promised titles prior to launch, or when Ubisoft delay key titles in order to make them non-exclusive despite the system not having been out long enough to judge any sort of support). If you were interested in new IPs in general, you could list all new IPs. Instead, you're trying to make it into a console war, and biasing the terms of the argument against Nintendo (and against MS to a lesser extent) from the outset.

You claim to not be "making an exclusive games war"... what, exactly, would you call it, then? A list of games that are, by the definition you've come up with, exclusive to specific systems (because Sony isn't going to publish on Xbox One, and MS isn't going to publish on Wii U, and Nintendo isn't going to publish on PS4), under the claim that, and I quote, "A mighty impressive list by Microsoft and Sony, probably the reason why they are doing so well", thereby suggesting that new IPs are what make a console sell... and then having a list with a heap of games available also on the previous gen system (thus the new IP itself couldn't possibly be the reason for the console selling).

Also, Destiny isn't an exclusive of any sort. It's on both Xbox One and PS4. Sony published it in Japan for the same reason as why Square Enix publishes Call of Duty in Japan - Activision doesn't have a Japanese publishing arm (and there wasn't value in publishing it on Xbox systems in Japan). Like I said, you're trying to bias the listing.


Whether or not it is a new style or genre, it's still mothahubbing Lego. 
If you're right, then anyone can call their game lego, and it wouldnt breach copyright.

Super time force was a new IP at it's launch on xbox one published by microsoft afaik.

Oh well excuse me for missing sing party, didn't know I had to monitor the thread 24/7.

Well that's nintendo's problem not mine, tell them to announce titles earlier and they can be added.
Dont get what the issue is there.

"Bias against nintendo"
How on earth could I make the list less bias then?
By only including titles that start with a letter N, maybe Q?
Dude it's a list of new ip's published by the console makers, if that upsets you then there's a window somewhere in the room you're in, you know what to do.

Well two top selling IP's of this gen are new, and didnt launch on the console that is doing least well.

And you said mentioning destiny means we cant have a serious convo, lol honestly bro you're really desperate to blame someone for nintendo's shortcomings, why not try the local rub and tug?