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

Forums - Nintendo - Reggie “really chafes” when people say Wii lost the hardcore

Tagged games:

 

Will Wii U get better 3rd party support than Wii?

Yes, much better 24 27.91%
 
Yes, slightly better 37 43.02%
 
About the same support 14 16.28%
 
No, slightly worse 2 2.33%
 
No, much worse 5 5.81%
 
See results 3 3.49%
 
Total:85
S.T.A.G.E. on 18 June 2012
Mr Khan said:
EdHieron said:
JazzB1987 said:
EdHieron said:
MrT-Tar said:
EdHieron said:
"We don't need no stinking western 3rd party games, we've got the best 1st party games out there!"

It might be the Nintedo fans belief, but there's no evidence to support it.
Sony's made 14 games with a 9 or better aggregate review score on Metacritic this gen, Microsoft's made 11, and Nintendo's made 7.


It's all subjective, but if your using metacritic, surely I could just counter by using the IMO superior gamerankings (Uncharted 2 and LBP are the only 7th gen Sony 1st or 2nd party game on the first page of their all time best, compared to more from Nintendo) or perhaps Famitsu (PS3, PSP and PSV have had no 1st party perfect scores, but Wii, DS and 3DS have 3, 2 and 1 respectively).

But anyway, it's all subjective.


If you use Gamerankings, that's still 13 PS3 games made by ony with aggregate review scores of 9.0 or higher versus 8 made by Nintendo for Wii.

Since when does exluding the systems one wants to exclude make for a fair comparison?  Count DS 3ds and Wii and then you can have a good comparison  but dont forget PSP and PSV.    The best comparison would be  COMPARE all Games ever made by nintendo. Because this basically makes them the best developer.
Btw 50% of the games are just published by Sony and dont forget that Sony did not own most of the companies before they made good games. They usually buy the devs after they make good games.  
Nintendo on the other hand always co-develops or supervises the development of their games when they are done at third party studios (ibut most are done at seconrd party studions that ALREADY belong to Nintendo. They bought them way before the games come out they  like monolith and Xenoblade.

If the USA lose against canada in ice hockey  but the USA have won 1000 times before and canada just once.  still doesnt make Canada the overall better team. 

BTW COD gets better reviews than alot of really good SONY MS or NIntendo games   so now you know how much you can trust REVIEWS.

Well, we're talking about consoles and not portables here and obviously if Nintendo hadn't been so concerned with catering to the casuals with Wii, then they would have made more than 8 decent games this gen, rather than 8 decent games and the rest of their console output being crap aimed at the blue ocean market.  And, Ninteno's made it pretty clear at their recent E3 that they're still interested to a large extent in making crap to attract the blue ocean market.  Gaming should be about more than making five or six games for the casuals and five or six Mario games and no new core titles since the Super Nintendo days and pretending that's balanced.

Sony doesn't waste their time on crap.  They just try to make excellent games for the core.

And yet Sony has yet to produce a new megahit since Gran Turismo. Hmm...


Sony has yet to up their marketing as well. Sony has very marketable titles and not only do they have old titles but unlike Nintendo take risk in creating lots of new successful IP's.



Around the Network
JazzB1987 on 20 June 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Khan said:
EdHieron said:
JazzB1987 said:
EdHieron said:
MrT-Tar said:
EdHieron said:

 

 

 

 

And yet Sony has yet to produce a new megahit since Gran Turismo. Hmm...


Sony has yet to up their marketing as well. Sony has very marketable titles and not only do they have old titles but unlike Nintendo take risk in creating lots of new successful IP's.

Sony has made just a few NEW IPs. What sony does Is  it acts like EA.  Sony waits untill good games come out on the PS3 etc. and then it goes and BUYS the studios that make the games.  INFamous LittleBigPlanet  Motorstorm  etc.  all of them were not made by Sony but by independant studions that were bought by Sony after thos games were released or almost completed. They also bought Guerilla Games AFTER they made the Killzone Games.
Thats a huge difference.

In 2001 the same year Jak n Daxter was released Sony also bought Naughty Dog.  

Ratchet and Clank and Resistance for example dont belong to Sony at all. They belong to insomniac which is thank god still an independent studio.

Sony takes no risks at all. They wait for devs to make good games and buy them and they wait for Nintendo to come up with new console ideas and.....

You have a way to good view of Sony as a company.



S.T.A.G.E. on 20 June 2012
JazzB1987 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Khan said:
EdHieron said:
JazzB1987 said:
EdHieron said:
MrT-Tar said:
EdHieron said:

 

 

 

 

And yet Sony has yet to produce a new megahit since Gran Turismo. Hmm...


Sony has yet to up their marketing as well. Sony has very marketable titles and not only do they have old titles but unlike Nintendo take risk in creating lots of new successful IP's.

Sony has made just a few NEW IPs. What sony does Is  it acts like EA.  Sony waits untill good games come out on the PS3 etc. and then it goes and BUYS the studios that make the games.  INFamous LittleBigPlanet  Motorstorm  etc.  all of them were not made by Sony but by independant studions that were bought by Sony after thos games were released or almost completed. They also bought Guerilla Games AFTER they made the Killzone Games.
Thats a huge difference.

In 2001 the same year Jak n Daxter was released Sony also bought Naughty Dog.  

Ratchet and Clank and Resistance for example dont belong to Sony at all. They belong to insomniac which is thank god still an independent studio.

Sony takes no risks at all. They wait for devs to make good games and buy them and they wait for Nintendo to come up with new console ideas and.....

You have a way to good view of Sony as a company.


This is truly sad. Sony had been second party partners with most of the companies they ended up purchasing them. Sony owns those companies and direct the creation of their games from within. 

Sony takes no risks? if they didn't The Last of US, The Last Guardian, Uncharted, InFamous, M.A.G. or many other new IP's wouldn't exist. 

Whats wrong? Angry that Microsoft cannot make use of the companies they acquire? Does it make you angry that Microsoft whom is a more powerful company than Sony just cant seem to succeed without taking existing third party games from PC developers to thicken their dwindling list? Their games the majority of this generation have been uninspired completely. PC developers have been dragging Microsofts ass out of the water since their debut with the original Xbox. Bioware has been doing it since last gen and now Epic took up the reign since EA bought Bioware. 

Imagine this, Sony had more top quality titles against Microsoft last gen, this gen Microsoft took all of the third parties from Sony and basically made themselves just as relevent as Sony earlier in the gen. Sony strengthened their first party and Microsoft hasn't been able to follow since. That is the truth, that much credit is due. If you don't like it then deal with it.