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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Seriously, Nintendo is not THAT Important

Samus Aran said:

Yeah, as proven by Sony All Stars Battle Royale. 

LOL.

I can buy most third party games of Sony's consoles on my pc by the way. I really have no need for an XBOX360/PS3. I'd rate Playstation over XBOX though. 

All Stars Battle Royale outsold Pikmin 3, despite being a pile of garbage.

TornadoCreator said:

The ironic part being that many of those franchises are better outside of Sony. Metal Gear Solid had it's definitive version on the GameCube, GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas had better graphics and ran smoother on the original Xbox. Tomb Raider ran far better on PC. Really it's only Final Fantasy, and even that is better on PC now, with the definitive version of FF7 on Steam (they finally fixed the calculation errors with the magic and spirit stats on that version).

To copy your FF7 route, GTA:VC and GTA:SA both looked and ran better on PC.

To then take your route and smack you in the face with it, every damn game from Wii era and earlier runs on PC and looks better in the process regardless of genre so clearly according to you, because it looks and runs better on a PC via emulation, Sony and Nintendo and by and large a waste of time and we should instead simply be using emulators instead of consoles.



Around the Network
TheLegendaryWolf said:
well not everyone likes COD style games or yearly sports games. Some people like RPG's, Action adventures, platformers, arcade racers, futuristic racers, tactical games, puzzle games, snowboarding,rail shooters, and FPA's. Nintendo is the only publisher to basically cover most types of genres.

Name a genre Nintendo cover that cannot be found on a Sony platform, go on, just one will do.



lucidium said:
Samus Aran said:

Yeah, as proven by Sony All Stars Battle Royale. 

LOL.

I can buy most third party games of Sony's consoles on my pc by the way. I really have no need for an XBOX360/PS3. I'd rate Playstation over XBOX though. 

All Stars Battle Royale outsold Pikmin 3, despite being a pile of garbage.

TornadoCreator said:

The ironic part being that many of those franchises are better outside of Sony. Metal Gear Solid had it's definitive version on the GameCube, GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas had better graphics and ran smoother on the original Xbox. Tomb Raider ran far better on PC. Really it's only Final Fantasy, and even that is better on PC now, with the definitive version of FF7 on Steam (they finally fixed the calculation errors with the magic and spirit stats on that version).

To copy your FF7 route, GTA:VC and GTA:SA both looked and ran better on PC.

To then take your route and smack you in the face with it, every damn game from Wii era and earlier runs on PC and looks better in the process regardless of genre so clearly according to you, because it looks and runs better on a PC via emulation, Sony and Nintendo and by and large a waste of time and we should instead simply be using emulators instead of consoles.

Lol, how on earth could you miss my point?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm8qqLT7FpU

Here's a hint. 



Samus Aran said:

Lol, how on earth could you miss my point?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm8qqLT7FpU

Here's a hint. 

So your point is to say "a long standing successful franchise is better than a poorly made spin off" and that somehow universally addresses the topic of third party support and the GOOD first party titles?. Right.



lucidium said:
Samus Aran said:

Lol, how on earth could you miss my point?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm8qqLT7FpU

Here's a hint. 

So your point is to say "a long standing successful franchise is better than a poorly made spin off" and that somehow universally addresses the topic of third party support and the GOOD first party titles?. Right.


Geez. Here's another hint: compare the character roster of both games. 



Around the Network
TornadoCreator said:
Pristine20 said:

Interestingly, I haven't bought a nintendo product since the SNES was around and somehow, I've been gaming since. I guess I'm not a real gamer huh? How do "we" need nintendo again?  Say "I need nintendo badly" next time and your rant may sound more objective instead of a nostalgic mess.

Read my post again, you clearly missed the point.

Nintendo's influence is such that without ever picking up a Nintendo product, if you're gaming you're playing Nintendo. Nintendo drives the games industry to do things they wouldn't normally do. Things outside of the mainstream. Without Nintendo there would be no real platformers for example. Without something like Mario, there wouldn't be games like Little Big Planet or Ratchet & Clank. Why? Because they're not mainstream enough and the other companies all tend towards homogeny. Look at the teams of old. Crash Bandicoot and Spyro The Dragon stopped why? Because those developers and production companies felt they'd be better off making games like Uncharted, Killzone and Resistance. The platformer stopped to make way for more shooting. Now is this a bad thing, not at all, if you like shooters that is.

The fact is "gamer" used to mean something. It used to be a small niche hobby and it could tell you about the likes and dislikes of a person. Just like how a "film buff" is someone who enjoys film in a way most people don't, and "bookworm" enjoys books in a way most people don't. If you watch Hollywood blockbusters you're not a film buff, you're just an ordinary person; you don't need a label because everyone watches Hollywood blockbusters. If you read the Harry Potter books, or The Hunger Games, or even something like The Da Vinci Code, you're not a bookworm, you're just an ordinary person; after all you can't get more mainstream than Harry Potter, Hunger Games and Dan Brown novels. The same is true now of gamers. If you play Call Of Duty, Fifa, and GTA5, you're not a gamer, you're just an ordinary person; everyone plays those games... they're literally the most popular forms of media in the fucking world. If everyone who plays those games is a gamer; EVERYONE is a gamer and the label loses all meaning and purpose. Have you noticed though, most film buffs dislike Hollywood Blockbusters like the Transformers films. Most bookworms consider the Harry Potter books and Dan Brown's novels to be badly written and trite... and... wait for it, most actual gamers, find Call Of Duty and Fifa uninteresting and disconnected from the larger culture that video games are built on.

Call Of Duty and Fifa are not made for gamers, for "geeks", they're games that appeal to the "jocks", and that's OK. There's nothing wrong with them having games too. My point is that they're no more gamers now than they where in the late 80's, and there's plenty of reason for antagony here.

Nintendo still perpetuate games for gamers, and them doing so pushes others to do the same, if only to compete with Nintendo because that's how capitalism works. That said, if Nintendo didn't make those games, would the other companies bother? Would they have the connection to the medium that Nintendo had to create these games intependently. I'd bet not. This is why we need Nintendo; for the same reason that we need the Sundance Film Festival, because just as film buffs honestly don't give a shit about mainstream films, gamers don't give a shit about "mainstream" games and that's what Sony and Microsoft are pushing.

I think you're reaching to give nintendo credit they don't deserve.  I'm an RPG fan mostly, huge on SRPGs (a very niche genre), JRPGs and WRPGs. What exactly has nintendo done to influence my interests? Save for the fire emblem games, nothing they have done since SNES has made me think...man, I'd like to play that. I do not disagree with your assessment of gamers but your mistake is in thinking that those who do not like nintendo games are into blockbusters. I've never bought a FIFA or GTA game and the only Call of Duty game I've bought is COD4, mostly because at the time it released in november 2007, there was absolutely nothing else to play on ps3. BTW, my definition of 'gamer' does parallel yours in the sense that I don't consider anyone who only knows heavily advertised games, a gamer.

Some of my favorite games include the likes of Disgaea 3 and 4, Parasite Eve II, SMT: Nocturne, Valkyria Chronicles, Vagrant Story, Wild Arms XF, Dragon's Dogma, Resonance of Fate, Dragon Age Origins, Shining Force EXA, Arc the Lad : Twilight of the Spirits, etc...not exactly household names. You may think nintendo somehow influenced these games but I'm sorry, I'm not buying it.  Nintendo themselves are overtly reliant on blockbusters. Why slap the Mario name on everything? When you've been stuck in ninty's closed ecosystem for so long, it's easy to start believing there's no light outside. Broaden your horizons a bit and you may be surprised.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

lucidium said:
Samus Aran said:

Yeah, as proven by Sony All Stars Battle Royale. 

LOL.

I can buy most third party games of Sony's consoles on my pc by the way. I really have no need for an XBOX360/PS3. I'd rate Playstation over XBOX though. 

All Stars Battle Royale outsold Pikmin 3, despite being a pile of garbage.

TornadoCreator said:

The ironic part being that many of those franchises are better outside of Sony. Metal Gear Solid had it's definitive version on the GameCube, GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas had better graphics and ran smoother on the original Xbox. Tomb Raider ran far better on PC. Really it's only Final Fantasy, and even that is better on PC now, with the definitive version of FF7 on Steam (they finally fixed the calculation errors with the magic and spirit stats on that version).

To copy your FF7 route, GTA:VC and GTA:SA both looked and ran better on PC.

To then take your route and smack you in the face with it, every damn game from Wii era and earlier runs on PC and looks better in the process regardless of genre so clearly according to you, because it looks and runs better on a PC via emulation, Sony and Nintendo and by and large a waste of time and we should instead simply be using emulators instead of consoles.

You like boiling peoples points down to something no longer representing their position then strawmanning them in order to drive it to the point of absurdity. Sure, what I said wasn't effectively a casual statement amounting to "look these games are on loads of different platforms and often they're superior there, here are some examples", but it was "rah rah, PC can do everything, emulators for the win", wasn't it.

Why don't you just fuck off instead of trying to push people into an argument with what is clearly trolling. It's sad and wastes everyones time.

 

User was warned for this post.

yo_john117



  Nintendo  introduced some big gameplay innovations such as platforming ( Donkey Kong), Z-targeting  ( Ocarina of Time), 3D camera control ( Mario 64) and many others..



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

lucidium said:

now compare sales performance for first party games that were new IP's on comparative systems, keeping in mind that no comparative games were available prior to the PlayStation 1, and of course ignoring heavilly bundled titles such as Wii sports.

Comparatively software based from:

PS1 - N64
PS2 - Gamecube
PS3 - Wii

It's all very well throwing out numbers such as lifetime sales of entire franchises when they span 11 major device models in the past 30 years compared to just 5 in the past 19, but that doesnt exactly paint a picture a sane person would call accurate.

I'm sorry, but I'm not interested. You can do it yourself if you want, the data is all there. As far as I'm concerned, ignoring the entire history of Nintendo prior to the existance of Playstation doesn't make any sense. Not only completely ignores the value and impact of those franchises created at the time, but it also ignores the fact that Nintendo would have created many new IPs with the resources they had after that time if Mario/Zelda/Metroid/etc didn't exist.

The fact that Nintendo has a much bigger history than Sony in gaming is one of their accomplishments, and quite relevant to the topic at hand. I'm not going to ignore this for a revisionist view that minimizes their achievements just to make Sony look better. After all, if Sony were much more popular than Nintendo as some claim here, they would've surpassed them by now. They clearly had the install base to do so, with PS1 and PS2 being far bigger than N64/GC.

lucidium said:

To then take your route and smack you in the face with it, every damn game from Wii era and earlier runs on PC and looks better in the process regardless of genre so clearly according to you, because it looks and runs better on a PC via emulation, Sony and Nintendo and by and large a waste of time and we should instead simply be using emulators instead of consoles.

No, no, no... Putting unofficial emulation in the same level as official PC releases is disingenous... Not to mention how it ignores the nature of said emulation, which is available years after the platform is released and is a long-term development with many flaws along the way.



Great yet another "let's hate on Nintendo yet again" threads

some of the replies really disgust me.



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints