By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Soundwave on 19 February 2015
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

False equivalency as per usual, but I'm flattered you apparently keep my old posts on speed dial, lol. 

I stand by that post by the way, Nintendo needs to make more "blockbuster" titles like Mario Kart 8 that have all the fixings and give the impression to the consumer that they are really bringing their A-game to the table (like they did with N64 tent pole games).

That's why 14 years after the release of Majora's Mask, people still care about the game, whereas no one gives two farts about Wii Sports or Guitar Hero today. In the long term actual quality (rather than fads) is what creates long-term customers rather than gimmicks. 

The Wii U has so many problems, most centrally a fickle casual base who ditched Nintendo. Nintendo should have abandoned the ill-fated Wii brand entirely, they would be in a much better spot right now had they just used their 1 year headstart with a more sensibly designed enthusiast market console rather than thinking soccer moms and casuals would stay with them forever. 

Oh and I own both Captain Toad and Bayonetta 2 and they're both great games, neither is worth crapping on. The fact is whether you like it or not though the general gaming market is driven by violent action games. Look at any top 10 NPD of any month. Nintendo abandoning that market after Perfect Dark was always a mistake, any move to get some traction back with quality titles like Bayonetta 2 is welcome as far as I'm concerned. 

And by the way I'm not advocating a specific position in this thread, just asking an open question. 

My assessment of you as a poster is correct. Your conclusions are merely what you wish to be true because they are what you would like Nintendo to make; you don't care about anything else. Take the bolded part, for example.

You argue that actual quality as well as the things you listed in the second to last paragraph in the OP are what creates long term customers. That, however, is directly contradicted by the facts. The GameCube had plenty of sequels to N64 games, Nintendo made an effort to get mainline Resident Evil exclusively on their platform plus they developed Eternal Darkness, they upgraded to a dual analog controller and optical media and made their system powerful, they reached out to EA and had things like NBA Live that featured Mario characters, they had great exclusive Star Wars games with the two Rogue Squadron titles from Factor 5. All of the aforementioned things are exactly what you claim to drive sales, yet all of that led to a decline of Nintendo's customer base. It's like a parody at this point.


The GameCube had several (obvious) reasons why it declined in marketshare, Eternal Darkness and Star Wars games had nothing to do with the GameCube not selling well. 

Most notably the GameCube did not have proper successors to Mario 64, GoldenEye, or Zelda: OoT (not until it was way too late in the game). Instead it got a weird Mario title that felt more like a spin-off, Nintendo abandoning the FPS market, and a cartoon shaded Zelda that no one asked for. Sunshine and Wind Waker felt rushed too, whereas Mario 64/OoT were industry gold standards, no one looks at Sunshine/WW in the same way. 

All that and the silly decision to go with a purple lunchbox decision undermined the Resident Evil exclusivity. No adult other than a Nintendo fan was going to choose a GameCube over a PS2 or XBox. Which then renders Resident Evil kind of moot, though getting it was a good decision, that franchise wasn't put in a position to succeed. If N64 had Resident Evil exclusivity it would have sold huge numbers because the demographic and design of the console were more in line with that franchise, things like Turok 2 sold about 2 million, a game like RE4 on N64 would've crushed that.