mZuzek said:
Because when I think of golden age, I don't think of sales, I think of amazing games that left a legacy and a following. Wii/DS certainly had plenty of great games, but not so many were that spectacular. Prime 3 was a stellar entry in the Metroid franchise, but not as good as its predecessors; Skyward Sword, though a great game, was very divisive and definitely underwhelmed a lot of fans (also, both the Metroid and Zelda entries on the DS were also very divisive); Star Fox went missing except for a pretty crappy early DS game; Pokémon had no console spin-off of the same quality as the GameCube ones, and had again, divisive main entries on the DS; both Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. had some of their worst entries on the Wii (though at least MKDS was good); and overall most of Nintendo's output was just focused on tiny casual games. There was definitely a lot of good during that era, but certainly not enough for me to call it a "golden age" when compared to the likes of the NES, SNES and maybe even N64, all of which produced tons of timeless classics. |
Disagree even with the focus on catering to casuals Wii did have many good games Corruption imo is better than Echoes when the latter doesn't have MC which got added to the Trilogy pack made for Wii anyway, but if we ignore that and get to some of the Wii's other notable games we get Galaxy, Galaxy 2, MH Tri, Tatsunoko vs Capcom, Xenoblade, Pandora's Tower, Last Story, Red Steel 2, Mad World, Little King's Story, Zack and Wiki, DKCR, Sin and Punishment 2, Okami, Fire Emblem, NHM 1+2, NSMBW etc...
On it's own it had a library to stand out even with out the third party support of the 360 and PS3 and DS had a massive library with quality games, I'd agree with him it was a golden era for them as the was overall more good during that era that any era that is non-Snes to the point that 2010 was one of the best years for any owner of a Nintendo platform owner.
