Legend11 said:
I agree... People who haven't experienced something don't miss it or have any idea what it's like. The thing with Nintendo is that a lot of their games don't require online (Mario platform games, etc) or would have to have major rework in order to become an online game. Nintendo has very little experience making online games so it's obvious that they're going to take baby steps until they get there. But you can't ignore things like World of Warcraft and other subscription based games that are bringing in millions of people and generating massive amounts of money for gaming companies. They're also addictive and usually if you lose a player to online they usually stay online and find single player games missing something (at least in my experience). |
Since neither one of you seem to have seen my other post I will re-post it.........
I have played many online games: City of Heroes/Villian (lvl 40 Mastermind/Villian), World of Warcraft (lvl 35 Mage), Star Wars Galaxy (lvl 28 Jedi), Halo 2 (Xbox), Call of Duty 2-3 (Xbox 360), Gears of War (Xbox 360), and it's another war game that was 360 can't think of the name though. I'm not saying that online is a bad thing or that it's a step in the wrong direction, but I am saying that I don't think it's required. I don't think that a home console without ANY online would lose that many sales. And people who WoW play it online because that's the only way to play it, what I mean by that is you can't compare games that have no single player campaign to games that are built for online. Plus, PC is different from home consoles. I'm just comparing home consoles.
Edit: Halo 2 made me hate online gaming on the Xbox, but I did enjoy playing Call of Duty 3 online.