By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 said:
zorg1000 said:
curl-6 said:

I'm not ignoring them, they just don't change that 90s Sony put a higher priority on cartoon mascots. Knack and LBP3 were discreet farts compared to the importance given to Crash/Spyro.

And having 2 big kid-friendly franchises in the 90s doesn't change the fact that Playstation in 1995 & Playstation in 2015 are not significantly different in terms of marketing & the types of games that people buy the console for.

Were you gaming back when the PS1 ruled the roost? PS4 skews considerably older, cos the market now is considerably older.

Since you've already showed displeasure at the thought of Nintendo changing with the times, I surmise that you are fighting tooth and nail over this one detail because it angers you to see Nintendo criticized for their failure to adapt.

Did any currently living person fight in the American Civil War? No, but that doesn't stop millions of people from knowing what happened, there is this little thing called documented history meaning people don't have to personally experience something to know what happened. The beginnings of PS1 are well documented and it's a fact that Sony's main focus was on marketing to an older audience than the competitors. Maybe in Australia where ur from, PS1 was primarily aimed at kids but in America & Europe it was heavily aimed at teens & young adults.

Lol I have no problem with Nintendo adapting or receiving criticism, the only thing I ever said was that ur original statement is a contradiction, which it is. This whole stupid argument would have ended long ago if u simply said something like, "ya, my 1995 comparison wasn't very accurate" nobody would think less of u for admitting u were wrong.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.