| padib said: As much as I'd love to agree with you, for some people those were the games to talk about. The way he worded it is wrong, the Wii had a ton of 3rd party support. Just in a certain type of game, it was completely lame. And for many people who buy PS and XB, those were the games to talk about and Nintendo wasn't part of the party. But the part where he said only people who are happy to buy the same old Nintendo da da da. That was just a really bad dogma that just keeps getting propagated. Nintendo created a ton of new IPs especially during the Wii era. Most of the games in Nintendo's main series are constantly evolving, feeling like different games many times. The most notorious series on this chameleon style of creation are Mario and Zelda. Saying that Nintendo makes games for everyone doesn't make their games childish. It's just that they are for everyone. And since when is that a bad thing? People could say that Sony always makes games for older people, games that lack originality and follow money trends. But even if there might be a portion of truth to that, why would it be a bad thing? Each company brings their strength to the industry and that is perfectly fine. |
The's a big difference in saying Wii didn't have enough of a certain type of game and saying the wasn't good third party support, if someone's taste is heavily geared towards one specific type of game and such then yeah it wouldn't appeal to them but the library itself did provide something for everyone and had a large varied selection.
Many peolple who bought the PS3 and 360 also had Wiis as well as a result because the over lap in the library of the Wii to the libraries of the other platforms was low making people purchase it for it's unique offering.
