Nintendo First Party Software Problems

[Nautilus]

NawaiNey said:

John19 said:

Ok, so since you seem to swear by Metacritic, I assume you agree that Zelda OoT is the greatest game of all time?

Also, why do you only look to last gen to compare the big three and their outut/scores? Because Metacritic has a handy feature where you can easily see the average score for publishers and the amount of games they have reviewed, but I suspect you actually knew about that, but didn't bring it up/include it anywhere because it went against your narrative. For example, according to Metacritic, Nintendo has an average score of 76 from 549 game reviews, of which 314 are positive, 223 mixed, and 12 negative; the highest score from those games being a 99, and the lowest a 37. Compare that to Sony, who has an average score of 73 from 538 game reviews, of which 262 reviews are positive, 265 are mixed, and 11 are negative. The highest score from those games is a 96, and the lowest is 36. Finally, we have Microsoft, who has an average score of 74 from 367 game reviews, of which 205 are positive, 146 are mixed, and 16 are negative. The highest scored game from those are a 97, and the lowest 28. From this apparently factual and correct evidence from Metacritic, since you seem to love to use it so much of course, we can safely conclude that Nintendo makes the best games, and they also have the highest output of games.

You agree of course, right?

EDIT: Here's a link if you want to look for yourself www.metacritic.com/browse/games/company/popular

That's all well and fine if you ignore the fact that Nintendo has been in the industry far longer and has released a lot more platforms, and somehow has about the same amount of games Sony has released on far fewer systems. Which isn't all that true because the actual fact is that Metacritic doesn't have reviews for the older generations barring the really good stuff from NES/SNES/N64/PS1 days, so since only the good Nintendo games from earlier generation are counted it brings nintendo's average up since the bad games from nintendo's first 3 generations aren't bringing it down. 

That's why I use last gen because that's the only actual comlete generation we have which Metacritic has all the reviews for.

What?You go on saying that its not fair because it dosent list NES and SNES games(It does list most 64 PS1 games), but then says its ok because metacritic dosent list older generation of Nintendo games.Dosent that mean that comparison is fair then?Not only that, but many consider the 3th and 4th generation to be Nintendo golden years, so that would actually make the score go up, with score from Super Mario World, mario games in general, Nintendo RPG catalogue and so on.

And as I said previously in another post, If im not mistaken, that list, and also the list you do on your own thread, lists games that Sony published, as well as developed, and Sony published games are not first party games, or even games that are exclusive to the PS are not first party, rather they are second party(examples this gen would be Persona 5, Yakuza, Nier and so on), making those lists lean to Sony unfairly(or simply making a biased discussion), since the discussion is about first party, not exclusive games.

And I mean, in that "list" you made you conveniently ignored half of Nintendo games.I think the excuse you gave is that you wanted to compare only the home console games, but in actual discussion, as in to make arguments about which company has better first party software, you always refer as to the companies as a whole or the gen as a whole, and that obviusly should include the handheld side of things.But yeah,that goes completely ignored, for your very convinience.