DonFerrari said:
1) R&C is more story driven than Zelda that is a fact, know you want to put another 2 games to compare against it? I would like to see you prove to the Nintendo fanbase that Nintendo doesn't focus first on the gameplay and then they will look at graphics and story. Nintendo doesn't even look at voice acting for their games because that isn't the direction they are after. 2) Nope I'm not conflicting both. It is from the same company, so if they develop hardwares for 3 consecutive gens that aren't focused on putting as much power as possible and in fact are a lot less powerful than the consoles that were released at the same time (no need to just go for "but switch is hybrid" since this started before it) it already shows that Nintendo as a company doesn't have their main concern on graphics... go and look the assets, cost of production etc of Nintendo games against the AAA of industry and you'll see they invest a lot less. Their game will look better (on your opinion) than the ones from the competition for 2 reasons, the port had to be compromised to fit on a lot weaker HW and photorealistic graphics take a higher hit on it prettyness against cartoonish/cellshaded when going to lower power system. 3) Your logic must be quite crazy to assert that since I said Zelda story is bland it must mean GT story is better than it. Sorry to burst your bubble but Metacritic is not even considered an argument on VGC because of how bad it is as a system and critics giving a game a better score doesn't mean a game is better. Or do you think "Jorney" with a 92 is factually better than all but 4 games on WiiU? With only Zelda and Mario 3D (2 games) scoring higher than it 4) Yes no bias on thinking Nintendo games are all better than the rest of the industry... and if you had an account previously you are already admitting you are an alt. 5) I ain't saying that a game should sell on Switch as much as it sell on another platform or that a game in another platform must sell more than a Nintendo game on its own platform. What I'm saying is that when you pick a game that is considered the best of its genre and is multiplatform it will sell more than the platform holders on that system, but on Nintendo system it will sell less than what Nintendo is offering. Racing genre - > Mario Kart, no multiplatform is even near that level (so no need to cherry pick F-Zero, because I didn't said no 3rd party games sell better than any Nintendo game in that genre. I said that the best seller multiplat would be lower than one Nintendo offering on that genre) Wii Music - a failure and a single game on the genre so it's basically you trying to prove that there is some case. RE4 - Are you considering it a terror game? And Eternal Darkness is just published by Nintendo not made by them. RPG - DQ X doesn't even get near Zelda Shooter - Link Crossbow Training (for crying out loud) have twice the sales of CoD 3
So I have done the work for you, per genre (as vgc classify them) Action - Lego 5,7M versus Metroid Other M 1,36M (10th place) so in this category it would have 9 games over Metroid Adventure - Zelda 7,18M vs Lego 3M I usually consider action and adventure to be on the same genre, but not important. Fighter - Smash 13M, Dragon Ball 1M Misc (???) - WiiPlay 29M Just Dance 10M Platformer - NSBW 28.5M Epic Mickey 3M Puzzle - WarrioWare 3M Gameparty 1.7M Racer - MKWii 35.8M Sonic 1.5M RPG - Monster Hunter 2.2M Pokemon 1.6M (no idea why Zelda isn't here) Shooter - Link crossbow 5M CoD 2.2M Sim - Animal Crossing 4.6M Cooking Mama 2.9M Sports - WiiSports 82.6M Mario&Sonic 8M Strategy - Pikmin 0,6M Thriville 0,4M
That clearly show how Nintendo base isn't biased towards Nintendo and that the difference in sales is totally justifiable per quality difference, in some cases over 10x. Do you need MS or Sony tables like this to see how it compares? |
1) why did your answer only focus on R&C and not GT? I'll concede the point that R&C is more story driven than Zelda (I already said that I wasn't overly familiar with the game). Qwark, above also listed LBP & Driveclub as having less of a story than Oddysey, never mind BOTW. So really, my point stands. As usual you deliberately avoid the overall point just to score a few pedantic points.
2) I already said that there are many reasons why Nintendo have gone the way they have with HW - this debate has already grown too many arms and legs. Bottom line is that they've always maxed out the hardware they've developed on. I don't think we're going to get anywhere on this one so let's just leave it.
3) My logic is fine - you asserted BOTW couldn't be a Sony game because it had a bland story. GT is a Sony game which, as you pointed out has a story mode. Conclusion GT's story meets Sony's standards of storytelling & BOTW doesn't. What is proving difficult for you to understand here...? Unless you're now conceding that GT's story is weak, which then destroys your main theory that all Sony games are based on a central tenet of story-telling...
There will always be outliers and exceptions on Metacritic / Opencritic but to suggest that there isn't a high correlation with score and quality is beyond belief. Tell you what - I'll play 10 random games from the 90+ category & you can play 10 random titles from the <50 bracket and we'll see who comes out the happier - according to you, we each have a 50-50 chance... Probably one of the most misguided things I've seen written here...
4) Here we go again - where did I say "Nintendo games are all better than the rest of the industry..." - I didn't say this and I don't believe that.
5) I stated before that your premise of trying to find 3rd party titles that sell better than 1st/2nd party titles on a Nintendo system is flawed - but I thought I'd throw out a few examples just for the hell of it. I don't agree on the categories that vgchartz splits games into, but I did site examples of games that I thought were similar enough to meet your 3rd > 1st/2nd party sales . Why the those examples have to beat ALL Nintendo games in the genre rather than just some, I don't get. But then there's a lot I don't get about your rationale.
Bottom line is that the sales reflect game quality - which is the only real bias any of us should have. Why quality isn't dictating sales to the same extent on the other systems I couldn't tell you - the transformers movies have a bigger box office than films like Blade Runner 2049 or Ex Machina - go figure...
"Eternal Darkness is just published by Nintendo not made by them."
I clearly stated SEVERAL TIMES that we're discussing 1st/2nd party.
Second-party developer is a colloquial term often used by gaming enthusiasts and media to describe three different forms of game development studios:
