By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
vivster said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

Some people just want to invest in a single system that plays all the games they want, and I totally respect that. In that way, it's perfectly reasonable for someone to want Super Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon on the same system as Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto, and Assassin's Creed. However, I think it's a short-sighted and ultimately counter-productive dream, as Nintendo going third-party would probably diminish the greatness and, for lack of a better word, anotherness of its games.

And then there is a more insidious group of jealous and insecure video game fans who want Nintendo to fail or to come under the domination of another company. I think for some the success of Nintendo strikes at the heart of what they believe video games should be: mature, serious, and exclusively for the video game faithful.

Let's not forget the greatness of Star Fox which was only possible to be so glorious because it was on a Nintendo console.

Seriously, we're talking about video game developers here. If they are not able to produce quality software on systems that are not made by their parent company then they probably chose the wrong job anyway. I think the notion that Nintendo games on other platforms would lack quality is grosely inappropriate and condescending to the developers which games they pretend to enjoy.

Exactly. That's a perfect example. If Nintendo had built Star Fox 64 for Saturn or PlayStation would it have bothered with a rumble pak? If PSP hosted Star Fox Command would it still have download play? How could Nintendo replicate the local co-op mode in Star Fox Zero on PS4 without asking consumers to also buy a Vita? Would it even bother with local co-op on a system designed for online multiplayer and the extra income it affords?