Sit tight, Mummelmann.
The rebuttal will be worth the wait.

John Lucas

About time. The longer you wait, the more data I have supporting my views.

I wonder though; worth the wait for whom? I'm expecting nothing new, perhaps the same song in a different tune but that's pretty much it.

Here's hoping you can put me in my place like in the golden days of 2008;
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=518865

Seeing a lot of old faces there.Lol Avinash.

You'll also note, in some of those old threads that I was an ignorant prick back then. I changed for the better though.

What strikes me as odd though is how people can hang on the words of someone who made those claims in that post and so many others, this isn't just about making Nintendo stand out as the best thing ever but also about dooming everyone else, from Sony and MS, to mobile efforts and the PC market. It's basically a desire to see the gaming world burn and I don't get that. How can anyone feel so slighted over past occurrences?

I don't want any developer, manufacturer or publisher to go under, every loss is a step down in the big picture even if I don't personally enjoy their games or console(s) and I certainly cannot fathom why we should desire any form of monopoly, a market without competition is not good for consumers or developers.

Your gargantuan post made a lot of good points, including some good criticism of Nintendo, as well as of johnlucas and others, but there are of course some things I disagreed with.

You said, if I'm not mistaken, that among Nintendo's mistakes were bad format choices for both the N64 and Gamecube. N64 I agree with, but I fail to see how the Gamecube's mini-disc format was an issue.

You said that Nintendo also has misstepped for several generations with "weird" controllers. And yet Nintendo has IMO driven controller evolution. N64 had analog stick and rumble; Sony copies it. Wii's* motion control paradigm was adopted even more completely by MS and Sony also tried to copy it before changing their minds. We'll see if the Wii U was taking it too far with its gamepad, but I don't think the historical claim is backed up at all. The most you could say IMO is that, as the pioneer, their offerings were comparatively clumsy as opposed to the copiers, such as with the N64 controller with Rumble Pak versus the Dual Shock controller.

*Yep, I skipped the Gamecube. I don't think it fits either perspective, as IMO the controller was pretty similar to the Xbox's, which came out at a similar time, and even if MS copied Nintendo, the layout could be considered either independently reached or derivative of the Dreamcast (with the addition of another stick). So it didn't "drive controller progress" but neither could it be considered too far off the beaten path.

Finally (for this post), I am surprised how forgiving you were in regards to the Xbox One's outlook, since if I'm not mistaken you said that the audience MS was chasing with the motion controls it committed itself to has already moved on. You did say something along the lines of "MS can take the hit" but it still seemed pretty rosy in comparison to the way you viewed Nintendo chasing something that sounded similar to me.

Wait, I would have thought that homogeneization of game engines was part of the devolution of gaming that you hate.  Not so? 

I just realised what the OP reminds me of. The bitter ex girlfriend (not lucas, the actual op content).

The boyfriend (third parties) has left for a hotter model (HD twins) and the ex (Nintendo, lucas, OP?) is going all 5 stages of grief on us, denial, anger, bargaining, depression and then acceptance. Well, I don't see much of the latter. What I do see tho is denial.

"Oh that new woman he's with won't stick around, she'll leave and then he'll be FORCED to come back to me, yeah that's what'll happen!"

That's exactly what the OP is saying Sony and MS will leave and third party and gamers will come back.

Game engines? No, I don't mind that at all, older isometric RPG's, among other things, show that this can yield truly great results and it unties developers' hands from the slavery of constructing everything from absolute scratch so they can focus on content, not to mention the massive scaleability and customization possible with such engines. Unoriginal concepts, piss poor writing, cheap scripted tricks to cover poor AI, superficial gameplay features that add nothing, repetetive gameplay, polish over depth, hand-holding features to appeal to a broader audience, day one DLC, tacky dialogue added to "shock" or to be "mature" and a lot other hallmarks of the 7th gen;  yes.

On the controller issue, Kinect and Gamepad specifically:

Kinect is seemingly going into a more interface directed phase of use, it seems, voice control, gestures etc, still not nearly good enough for the price but a use at least. The thing is; you could remove Kinect entirely and the console itself wouldn't really be worse off for it, it's not a vital part of it for gameplay purposes and it still has the market constant and massive support without the need for a unique feature to lure in customers.

The Gamepad does not have this luxury and it is also by far a more clumsy concept, I see a lot of people in here stating that they should simply remove the Gamepad and re-brand the Wii U. What would that make it? A less unique console, a less powerful alternative to the One/PS4 will terrible support and worse non-gaming features. That's my whole point through the last two-three years; the Wii U is designed from the bottom up with the Gamepad in mind as a unique feature to set it apart and as a gimmick to draw in customers but the Gamepad is a poorly conceived and executed idea and is in no small part to blame for the lousy sales we're seeing. To top it off; it has yet to prove itself as a meaningful addition to the ever growing world of alternative controllers, and in many cases it makes processes needlessly complicated and adds nothing of value to the gameplay.

The Gamepad is attempting to coverge two concepts and thus draw in gamers from two markets, all this from a position of absolutely no momentum and this plan is bound to fail. We're seeing it fail right before out very eyes. Imagine trying to sell a Toyota Yaris with the engine from a Ferrari 430 Scuderia, a quirky and fun concept for someone with peculiar interest but hardly a worthwhile product for the fans of either the Toyota Yaris or the Ferrari 430 Scuderia (not saying which is which, I'm just making a point here). This also ties into my point about one platform appealing to the entire breadth of the market, or two very different segments of it, it's just not doable to any significant extent.

Kinect is somewhat better off in that it can at least appeal to more than one demographic as an interface tool in the OS, if not as a controller option.

I also think, as I've mentioned, that focus will be shifted more and more away from Kinect overall. If MS decides to take it out of the equation through a new SKU, it would still be an appealing product at the core, properly aimed at the constant through breadth of software and support, as well as good integration of non-gaming features, the same cannot be said for the Wii U; removing the Gamepad gives it an even more severe identity problem and effectively makes it even more confusing to new customers and takes away the one unique feature without a proper constant to fall back on. The worst part is that with the extended development cycles compared to the 7th gen, Nintendo can't simply mass produce software and have a new batch ready almost in an instant like before, this is also probably why we're seeing such lack of proper announcements with set dates, even at a time where they should be desperate to show future promise.

Nintendo hedged their bets on the casual base from the bygone Wii-era falling for the Gamepad, as well as the core, this shows better than anything that they just can't read the market properly as it stands, they don't fully grasp what it is that makes people shell out for an iPad or a PS4/One and their constant PR blunders are also awkward to watch (Reggie making a lukewarm announcement very recently being among them).

I imagine a lot of people in here will be left hanging in their anticipation of the great return of the Wii audience, they must have missed the exodus and the fact that consumers like these move only forwards towards higher percieved value (see more detailed post for further explanation), and not back. This amazing turnaround is an illusion, it would require the utter and simultaneous collapse of several markets and providers and hinges upon circumstances so unlikely they bear no thought. This whole thread is a continuation of the 6-7 year old crusade to see the likes of Sony and Microsoft burn due to past sleights, the agenda is crystal clear if you're willing to see it.

Short burst before I get the main rebuttal out.

When you put up this old reply from me to you from February 17, 2008 stating:

Didn't the PS3 practically have a reboot in 2009? A relaunch? A total overhaul?
Didn't the 360 stymie the PS3's advantages by getting games for their system treated with priority over the PS3's through moneyhatting?
Didn't the 360 continuously undercut the PS3 in price everytime the PS3 had a chance to even up the score?

OK the year may be off by one but didn't the 360 do an even more extreme overhaul than the PS3 in 2010?
Didn't they do a relaunch, a reboot too as a response to Wii's changing of the market?
What was the Kinect & NXE (New XBox Experience) interface all about with its family focus, motion sensing, & cartoony avatars?

While the Metal Gear Solid 4 prediction didn't pan out, what you posted does not shame me.

When I deliver the main rebuttal, your points will be shut down.
It's taking long because you deserve the same quality reply I gave to guys like Zod95 & Seece.
It's probably the longest reply I have ever given on this thread which is saying a lot.
But your arguments will be unraveled once I'm done.
John Lucas

Now, that...is scary :P