|
Do you honestly not get it? Ownership of a Wii U doesn't exclude ownership of other gaming options. People will ask themselves if the Wii U had enough games for itself to have been worth their investment. Somebody who owns a Wii U and PS4 isn't going to look at the Wii U and dismiss it because of third party titles that are not on the Wii U; said third party games were going to be bought for the PS4 all along, so it doesn't matter whether or not they were available for the Wii U as well. In other words, the absence of third party content doesn't nullify the presence of first party content which already justified the Wii U investment. And if the games justified the console purchase, then you'll be okay with a new system being launched. The conclusion is all the same if you only own a Wii U. Is that sort of judgment free of bias? Of course it's not. The people who decide whether a console was worth the investment are the individuals themselves, and someone who doesn't like Grand Theft Auto won't care if the game was never available for the system in question. |
I agree.
But then, you are contradicting yourself with this type of comments:
"It's simple, really. The Wii U is home to some of the best games of this generation and the system didn't need three years to have a somewhat acceptable library of exclusives."
I just want the best for Nintendo, and like i previously said, if the fusion of handheld and console will make them focus entirely on a single platform, that would be the best case scenario for them and for us gamers.
But my point of view wont change, i believe in long generations.
