RolStoppable said:
The stupidity of the probable zero999 alt aside, he was correct on one account. Your original point wasn't good and doesn't hold water.
Nintendo has the strongest and most diverse first party lineup as a quick look at the bestselling games of all time will confirm. No other video game publisher has such a big list of so many different IPs in so many different genres.
Beyond that, there are a few problems with your argument.
1. When it comes to PlayStation, you add third party to prove the diversity in content. That you use the word "PlayStation" instead of "Sony" is a deliberate choice. However, the topic is about first party content.
2. At one time you use sales to gauge the importance of diversity (PlayStation success), but then that flies out of the window when you call this gen Nintendo's biggest effort for more diversity in a long time. Nintendo is falling far short of what they did in the seventh generation. It's also wrong to call Nintendo's approach to game development Japanese-centric because a lot of their IPs are equally or more successful outside of Japan. In fact, no other game publisher has had as much success as Nintendo when it comes to selling games on a global basis, to both genders and across all ages. Such a feat is only possible by having the most diverse portfolio (thus appealing to many different demographics) and the next best publisher is so far behind Nintendo that it shouldn't even be an argument in the first place.
3. I don't see Microsoft having made any strides with the One in comparison to the 360. The case could be made that it's the opposite because they've cut off the Japanese-centric content this generation. Which games in particular do you see as something that Microsoft didn't have a generation ago?
|