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

Mythmaker1 on 12 January 2014
RolStoppable said:
Mythmaker1 said:
RolStoppable said:

Fair enough, but are you still opposed to others putting them on a pedestal?

By the way, I've looked up the definition of the phrase and aside from the definition I am familiar with ("better than others"), there was also one that implied perfection. Makes me wonder if everyone in this thread is on the same page.

There does seem to be some disgreement among definitions. The way I've always understand the terms (and which I see most often used) is that you consider something to be better than others, with the implication that it is beyond reproach or criticism. Basically, to idolize it.

With that definition in mind, I don't think people should put them on a pedestal.

That would be perfection then. So there is/was a disconnection in this thread.

Looks like it. Honestly, I didn't realize the term was used without that connotation.



I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.

Around the Network
Pristine20 on 12 January 2014
TornadoCreator said:
Pristine20 said:

Cut quote down for sake of brevity - TornadoCreator

When I say "nintendo games", I actually mean games that nintendo had a hand in developing/publishing. There was a time when Nintendo platforms were the primary option i.e NES and SNES eras so anyone who played games in that time period was likely to discover  interests on their platforms. To be fair though, I developed my interests on PS1, the same cosole that truly got me into gaming. While FF may have been introduced on the NES, it doesn't sit well with me to give nintendo credit for the interest in those games instead of Squaresoft. One could even make the argument that those games didn't gain blockbuster status till they hit the ps1 and then thank Sony instead. Most of the credit you give to nintendo simply come as a result of getting there first.

Apologies for misjudging the games you play. It seems like most people who play nintendo systems always need some back up system i.e most "gamers" with Wiis always ended up having a 360 or ps3 as well but for some reason, many these people will always give nintendo all the credit because of past accolades even when doing most of their gaming on other platforms and playing non-nintendo games. I just don't get it. I agree with you that nintendo is important. They sure have a lot of fans. However, I also do believe that gaming will go on just fine without them as well. I disagree that the old way is best but don't mind the variety.

Fair enough. I think there's a lot of high tention on this topic. Far too many people presume so much about people they don't know without considering that the person at the other end is a human being and it puts everyone on edge, so I apologise if I've come across as short-fused.

For me the golden age of gaming is pretty much right now, but then it depends on why you game. There where a few interesting threads recently that discussed this, the most recent one being "Story vs. Gameplay Gamer", which I posted in earlier. Depending on what you get out of gaming, everyone can have a very different view of what is good and bad for the medium. I do maintain that what is good for gaming and what is good for the games industry is a very different thing though. Sure like you say, if Nintendo disappeared, another company would take it's place but it wouldn't be the same. I honestly miss Sega for that reason and they still make games now. The style of games like Shinobi, Streets Of Rage, Strider, Ranger X, these where the kind of games that dragged me into gaming and following the Mega Drive they seemed to slow right down. There was a final harah on the Dreamcast, and a few games like Shinobi got a modern equivalent on PS2, but never was it the forefront of gaming again and where it does rear up again, such as the PS3 reimagining of Splatterhouse, it's always a commercial flop, a critical "meh", and results in shake-downs at companies with most of the Splatterhouse team fired following it's poor reception. Niché means precisely that, niché, but so many publishers can't accept that some styles of game, some franchises, hell, some entire genres; are lucky to get more than 1-2million sales on a game at best, and really 500,000 units is pretty damn good.

Whilst you'd not miss Nintendo quite so much, I know I would, just as I'm sure you'd miss the subtlely different approach Sega brings to RPGs with Valkyria Chronicles, Resonance Of Fate, and Shining Force, if they vanished. In essence, I think we can all agree that the loss of any major facet of gaming would be a bad thing, if not for the people who like those games or that approach, but because without the variety, we end up with the same old crap from everyone and that's never good. The more players in the industry, the more innovation, and the greater range we'll get. That can only be a good thing surely.


I certainly do not want to see nintendo go away. Any company supporting home consoles gets best wishes from me. The more, the merrier. I just do not like hearing that the gaming industry would collapse without them because I do not think that to be true. Sadly, genres do come and go as much as we wish otherwise. I don't know if it's because of technology or what. It just doesn't explain why say fighting games and beat-'em ups have dwindled in popularity.



"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

cyberninja45 on 12 January 2014
lucidium said:
seiya19 said:
lucidium said:
Metallicube said:

I'm speaking soley in terms of SOFTWARE here. Do you really think Sony's studios have been more succesful than Nintendo when it comes to games?

More successful? no.
As successful? yes.
Less successful? no.

Prove me wrong, with actual, tangible evidence.

Here are the 200 best-selling games of all time according to VGChartz:

http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=

Number of games published by Nintendo: 80 (best-selling game: Wii Sports - 81.77m, or Mario Kart Wii at 34.25 for a less bundled example)

Number of games published by Sony: 14 (best-selling game: Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec - 14.98m)

*Numbers don't include games that were only published by them on specific regions, like Professor Layton, Final Fantasy, etc. Remakes/enhanced ports and licensed games are included. Spyro and Crash games originally published by Sony are included.

Here's a list of best-selling videogame franchises from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises

Best-selling Nintendo franchises:

- Mario/Super Mario - 446.53m/262m

- Pokémon - 245m

- Wii/Wii Sports - 192.76m/109.74m

- The Legend of Zelda - 68.13m

- Donkey Kong - 53.94m

Best-selling Sony franchises:

- Gran Turismo - 70.02m

- Ratchet and Clank - over 27m

- God of War - 21.65m

- SingStar - 20m

- Uncharted - 17m

Numbers don't lie. Nintendo has, so far, being far more successful than Sony when it comes to 1st party software. And it's no secret that the success of Playstation platforms has historically got a lot to do with 3rd party support. Franchises like Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, GTA, Tekken, and Tomb Raider, for example, which Sony fans themselves associate with the brand, for better or worse.

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.

Additionally, Metal Gear Solid was the first proper Kojima produced game to release on a console, with Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake only seeing releases on the MSX computer, the NES port of Metal Gear and the sequal Snakes Revenge that appeared on the NES were not done by Kojimas team, the latter of which reviled to the point where Kojima was asked to make a "proper sequal" which is why the Metal Gear 2 was released on the MSX AFTER the the NES release of Snakes Revenge.

Many metal gear fans do not count the NES games as part of the main series but rather as spin offs.

Yes yes now lets take out gran turismo and Gow. Why? Just because I feel like it, I don't need to make sense.

Just accept that you are wrong and move on, no one would think of your post being less credible if you did.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



lucidium on 12 January 2014
cyberninja45 said:

Yes yes now lets take out gran turismo and Gow. Why? Just because I feel like it, I don't need to make sense.

Just accept that you are wrong and move on, no one would think of your post being less credible if you did.


its a matter of perspective, sday you had two products, one had been on sale twice as long as the other, would pointing to the sales difference as proof have any meaning?

It's not simply "because I feel like it", it's to keep things in perspective and relevant to the topic at hand.



Samus Aran on 12 January 2014
lucidium said:
cyberninja45 said:

Yes yes now lets take out gran turismo and Gow. Why? Just because I feel like it, I don't need to make sense.

Just accept that you are wrong and move on, no one would think of your post being less credible if you did.


its a matter of perspective, sday you had two products, one had been on sale twice as long as the other, would pointing to the sales difference as proof have any meaning?

It's not simply "because I feel like it", it's to keep things in perspective and relevant to the topic at hand.

Mario Kart Wii probably sold more than all of Sony's first party games on the PS3  combined.

I'm probably wrong, but can't be bothered to check lol.



Around the Network
cyberninja45 on 12 January 2014
lucidium said:
cyberninja45 said:

Yes yes now lets take out gran turismo and Gow. Why? Just because I feel like it, I don't need to make sense.

Just accept that you are wrong and move on, no one would think of your post being less credible if you did.


its a matter of perspective, sday you had two products, one had been on sale twice as long as the other, would pointing to the sales difference as proof have any meaning?

It's not simply "because I feel like it", it's to keep things in perspective and relevant to the topic at hand.

No it is NOT up to perspective, you were discussing which company has been more successful with software sony or nintendo. Whether it be by nintendo being there longer in the business or people buying there games to as experimental food for their dogs, the answer still remains nintendo.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Michael-5 on 12 January 2014
boogie2988 said:
nintendo should just take the hand held market and run with it and release a few new ds's

Why? Nintendo console games are completely different from handheld games. Without Nintendo on console, we would never have seen some of the best games ever made. e.g. Ocarina of Time, IGN's and VGC forums best game ever made. Followed by Super Mario (64, Galaxy, World, 3) etc.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Michael-5 on 12 January 2014
lucidium said:

I'm really happy for you, and imma let you finish.. but..

Michael-5 said:

Who introduced Analog sticks? Radofin, in 1976 then improved upon using potentiometers by atari in 1982 for the Atari 5200

Who introduced Motion Play? Sega Activator, 1993

Who introduced handheld to console play? Nintendo (You were right on this one, but wrong on the platform, the first itteration was the Super Gameboy 2, that allowed a person playing a gameboy game through the adapter on their SNES to use a gameboy link cable to play against someone playing on their gameboy.)

Who introduced shoulder buttons? Atari (Paddle controller says hi)

Who introduced dual screen gaming? Nintendo (Again right on Nintendo, wrong on platform, it was the Game and Watch)

Who introduced 3D gaming without glasses? Sharp (They briefly sold two models of laptop in 2001 that had parallax barrier LCD panels, i vividly recall playing quake 1 on it way back when they were being shown at a trade show.)

What has Sony and MS done? Microsoft made XBL and achievements. Sony made...I don't even know.

Since you don't know let me help you.

Microsoft:
Ethernet as standard on a console. (xbox) Also Nope, Dreamcast did this first.
HDD as standard on a console. (xbox)
First console with external replacable hard disk (xbox 360)
First coherant network ID system Already said XBL

Sony:
First commecial use of camera image processing to function as a method of input What was this? Before the Gameboy Camera?
First console with SPDIF port for audio (ps2)
First console with HDMI out (PS3)
First console with integrated blu-ray
First console to allow game patching (PS2 network adapter based games required a hard disk and updates/patches for said games were installed there) Nope, Dreamcast did this first.

There are more i'm sure, just as there are for Nintendo but you get the point.

Oh you're being super technical, and still wrong.

1. Radofin and Atari are Joysticks, not Analog sticks. Similar, but different. Nintendo introduced Analog sticks

2. NES Power glove beats the Sega Activator

3. That Atari Paddle is not a shoulder button. It's like a thumb button.

4. 3D Gaming - That's not a gaming platform, and more of a tech demo. 3D screens have been around in Japan for a while, but never on a dedicated gaming system. I never said Nintendo invented 3D, just was first to implement it in games (and if we go super technical, Virtual Boy is 3D and that's 1995)

As for everything else, all you managed to name for Sony/Ms was that they were the first to have various ports. LOL That means nothing for gaming.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Samus Aran on 12 January 2014
Kyuu said:
Samus Aran said:
Kyuu said:


"MGS had its definitive version on gamecube" LOL!!! That version you're talking about might be the most hated remake out there! it's not even directed by Hideo Kojima yet you call it definitive?! And who cares if Final Fantasy 7 came out on Steam a couple of decades after the original release??

Sony is easily the best in third party titles and even their first party studios are pretty comparable to Nintendo.

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. 

This game isn't developed by Sony.. so much for your proof LOL.

 

I never claimed Sony don't make average games and neither do I see it as anything disgraceful. What matters to me is the average quality of their studios. Naughty Dog, Team ICO and Santa Monica are top rated developers according to critics and gamers. I for one don't like Santa Monica all that much but they're critically acclaimed whether I like it or not.

 

And let me tell you that there are heaps of great third party titles that you wont get outside playstation platform, especially at the time of the release.


Where did I claim it was made by Sony? I'm talking about the weak roster compared to Super Smash Bros. It's obvious which company has the better mascots. Sure, Sony has the third party support. But so does my pc. 

There are also lot's of great games you're missing out on if you only play on your Playstation. PC and Nintendo is more then enough for me. And much better than just sticking with Sony I'd say. My opinion of course. 



st0pnsw0p on 12 January 2014
Michael-5 said:
boogie2988 said:
nintendo should just take the hand held market and run with it and release a few new ds's

Why? Nintendo console games are completely different from handheld games. Without Nintendo on console, we would never have seen some of the best games ever made. e.g. Ocarina of Time, IGN's and VGC forums best game ever made. Followed by Super Mario (64, Galaxy, World, 3) etc.

Not any more. Now that they have a handheld that can handle 3D graphics, there's not much difference between their handheld games and console games: SM3DW is SM3DL but with multiplayer and HD graphics, same with NSMBU and NSMBU. They're even releasing the new smash bros on Wii U and 3DS simultaneuously. There are still differences in what each can do, but they're mininimal compared to past generations.