By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - What would you do if Nintendo bit the dust?

Chrizum on 02 August 2011

I'd dance around in joy.



Around the Network
o_O.Q on 02 August 2011
TruckOSaurus said:
maverick40 said:
TruckOSaurus said:
brendude13 said:
I know some of you aren't going to like me saying this, but I would be happy if Nintendo dissapeared, out of spite.

As much as I liked the NES and the SNES and the fact that gaming would barely exist today if it weren't for Nintendo, their recent consoles, games and practices are completely tarnishing their brand.

They barely release any good games and they obsessively milk all of their franchises, most of which are now decades old(1). Their hardware is last generation but with a current gen price and it usually sports some gimmick that developers like to abuse. They also like to blank their hardcore followers and treat them like crap, the perfect example being "operation rainfall".

All Nintendo want is to make the maximum amount of money with the minimum amount of effort possible.(2)

As much as I liked the old Nintendo, I was laughing while I was watching Nintendo's E3 and how poor the Wii U reveal was, not to mention the poor sales of the 3DS. Nintendo shot themselves in the foot, if they don't learn from their mistakes and they keep trying to grab money from the gullible "family" audience, then I couldn't be happier to see them disappear.

1) What wrong with decade old franchises? Do franchises have a maximum life expectancy?

2) I would argue that Sony and Microsoft are the ones who took the easy way out.

Sony guy 1: "Hey, we have to make our next gen console, what should we do?"

Sony guy 2: "The same thing everyone always does make it bigger and stronger"

Sony guy 1: "Yeah let's do that"


I don't see a problem with your story of sony guy 1 and 2. For your information, only the ps3 was the most powerfull console of the gen. The ps1 and ps2 were the least powerfull out of every console in their gen. So it is not a Sony trend mate. 

PS2 is stronger than PS1. PS3 is stronger than PS2. That's the trend I'm talking about. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo did the same thing before the Wii.


gc is stronger than n64, wii is stronger than gc

the strategy microsoft and sony used this gen from the standpoint of options provided was better than nintendos because they offered more versatility... in that for example microsoft and sony were able to offer add ons to suuport motion gaming but the wii will never be powerful enough to accomplish many of the features provided by the HD twins...

from your post you seem to be implying that providing more power and versatility is a bad thing which imo is nonsense and part of the reason nintendo is being forced to release a new console so soon



TruckOSaurus on 02 August 2011
brendude13 said:
TruckOSaurus said:
brendude13 said:
I know some of you aren't going to like me saying this, but I would be happy if Nintendo dissapeared, out of spite.

As much as I liked the NES and the SNES and the fact that gaming would barely exist today if it weren't for Nintendo, their recent consoles, games and practices are completely tarnishing their brand.

They barely release any good games and they obsessively milk all of their franchises, most of which are now decades old(1). Their hardware is last generation but with a current gen price and it usually sports some gimmick that developers like to abuse. They also like to blank their hardcore followers and treat them like crap, the perfect example being "operation rainfall".

All Nintendo want is to make the maximum amount of money with the minimum amount of effort possible.(2)

As much as I liked the old Nintendo, I was laughing while I was watching Nintendo's E3 and how poor the Wii U reveal was, not to mention the poor sales of the 3DS. Nintendo shot themselves in the foot, if they don't learn from their mistakes and they keep trying to grab money from the gullible "family" audience, then I couldn't be happier to see them disappear.

1) What wrong with decade old franchises? Do franchises have a maximum life expectancy?

2) I would argue that Sony and Microsoft are the ones who took the easy way out.

Sony guy 1: "Hey, we have to make our next gen console, what should we do?"

Sony guy 2: "The same thing everyone always does make it bigger and stronger"

Sony guy 1: "Yeah let's do that"

1) Yes, they do have a life expectancy, they also have a limit to how many variations of the same game can be released. I appreciate what they did with Mario Galaxy, that game was just pure fun and innovation, but other franchises have been milked to death. It's the same thing every time, it wouldn't be so bad if they didn't do it to every franchise they have (which is quite a lot).

2) On some level you are right, they both decided to flood the market with repetitive FPS's (this was more-so third party devs though, which is the same case with Nintendo). There is still more than enough variety for me, RPG, action, adventure. While I do miss and prefer the Japanese games of the past generations, I applaud Western developers for what they have came out with this generation on the PS3 / XBOX 360. You are still wrong though, Nintendo were the ones to take the easy way out.

Nothing wrong with making a console bigger and stronger either, at least you get what you pay for, rather than half of it. When it comes to hardware, the only evolution I need is in graphics. At least Sony and Microsoft innovate and deliver in the software department, features, services, and most importantly games.

1) Franchises can be revitalized, revived. Take Donkey Kong for example, nobody would have thought that character could possibly be relevant again before the release of Donkey Kong Country. Or take the Metal Gear franchise, Metal Gear Solid revived a franchise that was so very dead for many years.

2) It's easier to do the same thing you've always done than to think up something new.



Signature goes here!

TruckOSaurus on 02 August 2011
o_O.Q said:
TruckOSaurus said:

PS2 is stronger than PS1. PS3 is stronger than PS2. That's the trend I'm talking about. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo did the same thing before the Wii.

 


gc is stronger than n64, wii is stronger than gc

the strategy microsoft and sony used this gen from the standpoint of options provided was better than nintendos because they offered more versatility... in that for example microsoft and sony were able to offer add ons to suuport motion gaming but the wii will never be powerful enough to accomplish many of the features provided by the HD twins...

from your post you seem to be implying that providing more power and versatility is a bad thing which imo is nonsense and part of the reason nintendo is being forced to release a new console so soon

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that they went with the option of doing what comes naturally, with how it was always done before, I didn't say it was a bad choice, just that it was an easy one.



Signature goes here!

o_O.Q on 02 August 2011
TruckOSaurus said:
brendude13 said:
TruckOSaurus said:
brendude13 said:
I know some of you aren't going to like me saying this, but I would be happy if Nintendo dissapeared, out of spite.

As much as I liked the NES and the SNES and the fact that gaming would barely exist today if it weren't for Nintendo, their recent consoles, games and practices are completely tarnishing their brand.

They barely release any good games and they obsessively milk all of their franchises, most of which are now decades old(1). Their hardware is last generation but with a current gen price and it usually sports some gimmick that developers like to abuse. They also like to blank their hardcore followers and treat them like crap, the perfect example being "operation rainfall".

All Nintendo want is to make the maximum amount of money with the minimum amount of effort possible.(2)

As much as I liked the old Nintendo, I was laughing while I was watching Nintendo's E3 and how poor the Wii U reveal was, not to mention the poor sales of the 3DS. Nintendo shot themselves in the foot, if they don't learn from their mistakes and they keep trying to grab money from the gullible "family" audience, then I couldn't be happier to see them disappear.

1) What wrong with decade old franchises? Do franchises have a maximum life expectancy?

2) I would argue that Sony and Microsoft are the ones who took the easy way out.

Sony guy 1: "Hey, we have to make our next gen console, what should we do?"

Sony guy 2: "The same thing everyone always does make it bigger and stronger"

Sony guy 1: "Yeah let's do that"

1) Yes, they do have a life expectancy, they also have a limit to how many variations of the same game can be released. I appreciate what they did with Mario Galaxy, that game was just pure fun and innovation, but other franchises have been milked to death. It's the same thing every time, it wouldn't be so bad if they didn't do it to every franchise they have (which is quite a lot).

2) On some level you are right, they both decided to flood the market with repetitive FPS's (this was more-so third party devs though, which is the same case with Nintendo). There is still more than enough variety for me, RPG, action, adventure. While I do miss and prefer the Japanese games of the past generations, I applaud Western developers for what they have came out with this generation on the PS3 / XBOX 360. You are still wrong though, Nintendo were the ones to take the easy way out.

Nothing wrong with making a console bigger and stronger either, at least you get what you pay for, rather than half of it. When it comes to hardware, the only evolution I need is in graphics. At least Sony and Microsoft innovate and deliver in the software department, features, services, and most importantly games.

1) Franchises can be revitalized, revived. Take Donkey Kong for example, nobody would have thought that character could possibly be relevant again before the release of Donkey Kong Country. Or take the Metal Gear franchise, Metal Gear Solid revived a franchise that was so very dead for many years.

2) It's easier to do the same thing you've always done than to think up something new.


"It's easier to do the same thing you've always done than to think up something new."

yeah...

 

 

something new...

edit :

dkcdkcr

i thought nintendo was all about pushing new things?



Around the Network
TruckOSaurus on 02 August 2011

@o_O.Q: What's the first picture supposed to be?



Signature goes here!

Chrizum on 02 August 2011
brendude13 said:
I know some of you aren't going to like me saying this, but I would be happy if Nintendo dissapeared, out of spite.

As much as I liked the NES and the SNES and the fact that gaming would barely exist today if it weren't for Nintendo, their recent consoles, games and practices are completely tarnishing their brand.

You're pretty funny. You weren't even born when the SNES was around, let alone the NES.



o_O.Q on 02 August 2011
TruckOSaurus said:
@o_O.Q: What's the first picture supposed to be?

its the le stick the first ever motion controller for consoles, the concept of which nintendo totally came up with on their own i'm sure



Chrizum on 02 August 2011
o_O.Q said:
TruckOSaurus said:
@o_O.Q: What's the first picture supposed to be?

its the le stick the first ever motion controller for consoles, the concept of which nintendo totally came up with on their own i'm sure

Totally agree man. Humans are also just copies of chimpansees and every modern pop band is a Beatles clone.



o_O.Q on 02 August 2011
Chrizum said:
o_O.Q said:
TruckOSaurus said:
@o_O.Q: What's the first picture supposed to be?

its the le stick the first ever motion controller for consoles, the concept of which nintendo totally came up with on their own i'm sure

Totally agree man. Humans are also just copies of chimpansees and every modern pop band is a Beatles clone.

yeah and the wiimote and ps move are radically different to the le stick... they aren't all wands that track motion...