No 3D Mario on Switch 2 yet seems to have short-circuited a lot of folks

[Veknoid_Outcast]

firebush03 said:

Veknoid_Outcast said:

I actually think it's totally fair to insist a system has "no games" if none of them satisfy you. It's not the responsibility of the individual to appreciate everything a company puts out, or to care if others like the line-up. If Nintendo puts out 50 games, and I dislike them all, well, then there really are no games.

Here are the problems, though:

• A lot of video game enthusiasts don't bother to actually play the games.
• Video game enthusiasts can be weirdly picky and inflexible, refusing to explore entire genres or balking because of one design decision.

This is totally fine, by the way. But you shouldn't weigh in with such confidence if you're not spending the time and energy to properly experience a game library. And I'm not talking about so-called "casual" players. They're playing their favorites and living their lives. I'm talking about us.

I highly disagree with that opening sentence: You can insist that a gaming system “has no games for me” or “has no games that I’m interested in,” but to say because the system lacks a library which fits your preference thereby must not have much of an offering (i.e. “has no games… period.”), that’s very different.

Also, it’s not about being against others holding a business accountable for their output; it’s more about convincing others to have an open mind for their own personal enjoyment’s sake. For somebody to say “Switch 2 has no games!” and be responded with “Of course it does. Look at X, Y, and Z.”, that’s not a case of bootlicking: that’s a case of “well have you considered trying these games?”

In my opinion, "has no games for me" and "has no games" are the same thing. Why would I celebrate a game library that offers me nothing, regardless of its size?