Were the 3DS and Wii U better than Switch?

[curl-6]

burninmylight said:

curl-6 said:

And that's fine if you feel that way, I'm just saying not everyone does. There's a reason that say, SNES games on Virtual Console didn't cost as much as they did when they released brand new in the 90s, or that Wii U being able to play all Wii games didn't prevent it from selling 13% of the Wii.

Two good points. It just really comes down to the question posed originally being open-ended and open to interpretation, so it will mean different things to people. If you look strictly at game library based on what originally launched for the console, you're going to see it completely different than looking at it based on all games that are available on a console through one form or another. I understand that the former might be the majority view, but I think the latter is significant enough to bear mention.

However, if you're going to make the argument that games inherently lose value over time, then you're making the argument that newer games are superior to older games. Therefore, newer versions of IP are better than older versions. If you have a console with newer, better, more modern versions of the same IP along with access to the older versions, then you have a console with the best of both worlds.

It's less that newer games are inherently better and more that a game is more exciting when it is fresh. Every game benefits from this at first, then once this newness fades, it no longer evokes as much excitement even if it is still considered great.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time for example is still hailed by many as one of the greatest video games ever made, and is beloved to this day, yet understandably its release on Switch NSO did not generate the same excitement as when originally released on the N64, because its no longer a fresh experience.