| Fei-Hung said: Not sure I can agree on nintendo being the most creative and ms being the most sophisticated hardware. Dreamcast was massively creative and sophisticated, easy ahead of its time in so many ways as was the Mega CD. Before there was a Kinect or Wii, Sony had the Eye toy and also were one of the first to bring discs to the console space, later followed by DVD and again with BR. Each of them have been creative in many ways in their own rights and sophisticated. If I were to make a comparison I would say Nintendo is more like Apple, overpriced hardware and accessories, but a strong core base of supporters along with a strong brand. Just because its overpriced doesn't make it a bad console. Like anyone with an iPhone will tell you, they're are things that they do really well and that you cannot get anywhere else. Games like Mario, animal crossing, Mario kart, smash bros, zelda, star fox and other experiences can only be found here. MS is the cheating BF /GF. Flashy with a lot of money. Can afford to brute force its way to anything. Sometimes it will give you a good time, sometimes it won't, but it always moves on quickly to the next model regardless how good the current model is. E. G. Original xbox didn't do well, support for games died up after first couple of years. 360 did incredibly well but support for games died after three years. Xbox one did fairly well, but support for games died within the first three years. Like a cheating partner, it is front loaded to entice you and then leaves you in the dust. Sony is the Asian kid growing up in the west which no matter what cannot get good enough grades to appease his parents. In the modern day in the west it has issues with confidence, goes back and forward as the years of being berated has knocked its confidence. Unlike MS that can confidently push a message, true or not, sony can't. Whether it is PSNow, the first streaming and download service, the first mass market casual product with the eye toy, wonderbook, VR, PS+ for the whole last gen that gave free games for its online subscription whilst it kept mp free. I think Sony is similar to Sega. They didn't rely on the Mario's and zelda, they tried to be creative and offer variety and kept pushing ips and in the end the people chose familiar faces. It's only looking back people realise how much Sega offered and how creative they were. If sony ever goes out, it will be a similar story. |
In response:
My perspective on the Dreamcast is that Sega made it very creative in terms of its first-party software offerings, which were released in quick succession and often original IPs, some of which (as Jet Grind Radio, Seaman, and Crazy Taxi) could be described as really their own genres. I think the Dreamcast was exceptional in that regard. I mean I thoroughly enjoyed my time with it!
The way I see Nintendo is that these, like from the Wii to the present, they're very focused on winning over people with their specific first-party games and franchises. By this, I mean that they make very unique hardware anymore; hardware that's sufficiently unique to keep the larger development community at bay to a significant extent. They're obviously aiming to compete on their own terms rather than those of their rivals, and the result is that indeed the best-selling games for Nintendo's systems are Nintendo games. You can't say anything analogous for their rivals. There's something that I, and I think a lot of people, find respectable about that. They're not sellouts or go-alongs. They make games for their fans and if other people happen to find that enjoyable then good for them. That seems to be Nintendo's general attitude as an institution anymore. And it's paid off pretty well actually, at least in general.
Nintendo's successes (like the NES, the Wii, and the Switch) are definitely good for gaming overall because they bring in new generations of gamers who then grow up and maybe get more exploratory about the offerings of Nintendo's rivals as they mature and develop a greater interest in more mature themes and contents. (I say that because it's exactly what happened to me back in the day, i.e. my progression from the NES to the Sega Genesis.) Then those adult gamers wind up having kids and maybe want to start them out on material that's family-friendlier, like a Nintendo platform, and the cycle starts over again. I think of them as sort of the Disney of video games that way. (Ya know, Disney makes few R-rated movies, Nintendo makes few M-rated games, and for this reason they're regarded as the family-friendlier brands.) In fact, it's probably not a coincidence that Disney films have been dominating the American movie landscape over the same period of time that we've seen the Switch overtake the competition in rate-of-sale terms in this medium. The two concurrent cultural trends are probably related.
Nintendo's weakness in my mind though is precisely their strength. They mainly make fan-servicy games mostly for kids and families on very unique hardware. I like Nintendo's hardware, but Nintendo's games aren't really my personal preference these days overall, as I'm 38, single, childless, and just someone who really prizes matters of the heart.
Last edited by Jaicee - on 31 May 2020
