| Play4Fun said: You're right, they're not on another level. They're on their very own level. Untouchable! |
Yea, like no one wants to touch them, not even with a 10 foot pole.
| Play4Fun said: You're right, they're not on another level. They're on their very own level. Untouchable! |
Yea, like no one wants to touch them, not even with a 10 foot pole.
phaedruss said:
Yea, like no one wants to touch them, not even with a 10 foot pole. |
Well, of course. They can't compete.
Play4Fun said:
|

| Intrinsic said: Definitely titanfall, played it on my PC. Its a good game, but just feels... incomplete. I don't get those that say Infamous. Unless of course they don't know what it means for a game to be overhyped. If anyone has played infamous 1 and 2... then they would know that second son is the best infamous game of the lot. Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if the poeple saying infamous have never actually played it. |
Except it's not the best. It's actually the worst full title. The story is terrible and the powers are boring. 2 had the best powers and 1 had the best story.

It's foolhardy to deny that Nintendo 1st party IPs probably account for the majority of console games with 90+ universal acclaim over the past couple of decades.
Now they might not bridge the appeal gap to those who are particularly into more gritty/realistic games, and that's fine. But the quality and stability of what's there is impressive. I've yet to run into a Nintendo title where I'm like 'man, this is unfinished, look at this placeholder texture here, or this weird slowdown/tearing!'. I'm talking their version of AAA, eg; Mainline Mario, Zelda, Metroid (whoops @ other M, lol), Kart, Smash, etc.
It IS fair to say that when they decided to 'go small' on the hardware guts end, along with their Japan-centric licensing/development tactics, that they basically guaranteed an exodus of major 3rd party support over the years. It began with the N64, and they have continued to struggle to this day. Even ~100M Wii consoles couldn't break that open really due to non-core-IPs selling poorly on the consoles even when they're available (some of that due to the kind of people who buy Nintendo consoles, some of that due to people that want to play those consoles owning better platforms for those types of games, and some of that due to the hardware power or lack thereof to do those titles justice to begin with).
One thing I do really admire Nintendo for historically is their ability to thrive in a non-bloated manner though, and I suppose managing costs and not going berzerk with bleeding edge tech/etc helps them achieve that. Which is exactly why I believe the hugely expensive tablet for the U was a crucial, nearly deadly error. If they didn't have to account for that on the BoM sheet, the MSRP of the system could be massively less, and their market penetration would be a lot higher.
I'm a great example, I do most of my gaming on other platforms than Nintendo systems, but I still like and want the Nintendo systems. But there is a price point which I won't breach for a console that's fundamentally a step below what else is out there, and I don't see value in the tablet. So for me, $149, $179, even $199 bundle would have gotten me in by now, purchasing their big IPs. But $249/$299 is just not a great value for how much I would use it.
Nintendo took a risk and brought their most ambitious product ever out in terms of BoM cost, and it bit them HARD. However, amortization and the lowering of costs over time has the U finally able to reach some level of success in my opinion. If historical trends prove accurate in time elapsed before major price reductions are brought into play on the supply side, and Nintendo can source much cheaper displays thanks to huge global tablet sales, then we could (should) be looking at $199 bundles this holiday that aren't money losers for Nintendo.
At that point, I'll bite. I already like my 3DS quite a bit, and liked the Wii enough to still have it connected for the occasional game.
| Max King of the Wild said: Titanfall followed by MK8. Reserve my judgement on destiny till launch. |
Destiny alpha was pretty good so no.
Dark Chaos said:
Its for people who play Halo Multiplayer. Halo 1 never had online and Halo 2 is shutdown. Halo 3's netcode is horrible. +60fps+1080p+dedicated servers+DLC All this for only $60. THe hype is well deserved |
From what I hear, none of the Halo's will run in native 1080p resolution. Halo 2 Anniversary I agree about, it's looking to be a great game, but Halo 1/3/4 are just ports of the 360 version and are old.
I mean it's a nice addition, but there are 4,000 achievements (...... :-/) and the hype makes it seem as if this is going to be bigger then Final Fantasy VII was when it released.
-----
Also if I could add anything else, I would also mention Assassin's Creed Unity and Call of Duty. Both annual iterations, showing very little new stuff.
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






darkshadow23 said:
|
Opinions, how do they work? Titanfall was and is also good. But not what people expected it to be.

Michael-5 said:
From what I hear, none of the Halo's will run in native 1080p resolution. Halo 2 Anniversary I agree about, it's looking to be a great game, but Halo 1/3/4 are just ports of the 360 version and are old. I mean it's a nice addition, but there are 4,000 achievements (...... :-/) and the hype makes it seem as if this is going to be bigger then Final Fantasy VII was when it released. |
Share with us what you heard - which resolution are the games going to be rendered at instead of 1080p?
And which hype? I didn't see hundreds of threads here or on GAF and media is also not that overwhelming mass producing articles about it.
