But that isn't a point. He's using it as a setup for his punchline of saying Square and Compile Heart are 50-50. He was trolling, it was humorous.

Makes sense, same goes for every other comparison :-/

Well, I thought it was more sad. Either way though...

From a cold and pragmatic perspective, I'm not gonna pay 60 bucks for a game that has such outdated graphics. And I'm not gonna pay 250 for a console that is relevant only in Iwata's dreams.

As long as Nintendo keeps with the same "dogma" of cheap hardware / expensive software, I'm not interested. All this PR crap about the experience coming first means nothing to me. Why not both ?

X is doomed to obscurity unless or until it comes upgraded to a new Nintendo console that people want to buy.

A lot of people said the same thing for Suikoden II due to its use of game sprites on the Playstation 1. Just gonna put that out there. I need to also add it cost the same amount as Final Fantasy VII.

Not an apt comparison. The PS1 was not irrelevant, it was the industry standard. And of course japanese (or console oriented) rpgs were at their prime.

Right now there is NO excuse for a high profile game being so far behind the curve other than Iwata's obsession with family audiences and keeping the same percieved value on their software.

I don't hate nintendo. I just recognize that Iwata has turned the company into a parody of itself.

Sprites are a thing of their own, I'm still gonna play Disgaea 5 on the PS4 just as I played D4 on the PS3. Sprites don't mean you get to sell a game like X for 60$ on an undesirable hardware and expect for people to care as much as they do about FF XV or The Witcher 3.

This makes so little sense it's scary.

You want to know what's not an issue to the games quality? How well the system sells, what year the game was made in, or whatever image Iwata wants to have consumers view their hardware as.

The PS1 was the weakest hardware of that gen, and Suikoden 2 used last gen graphics. Those are the two points that would have any major impact on the quality of the game, and as shown, one of the greatest titles of all time faced these same issues.

As I said, it was not an apt comparison. Sprites have a very different and unique appeal, they are not exactly "worse" in the technical department. And we are not talking about a high profile game.

The vanishing of Ethan Carter is 19$ on steam, it's a fantastic game and has graphics easily comparable to the best thing out there. What's Nintendo's excuse ?

Nonsense because the fact that PS1 was weaker did not limit Suikoden. The game used sprites because it was a sprite game ! X is not looking as good as FF XV and the Witcher because it is limited not because of artistic choices or genre   choices.

Yes they are.... Lol. You can argue they do not decrease the quality of a game, but technically they are worse graphically.

You drove yourself in a corner: sprites have a limit of good they look. Disgaea 4 was not limited by the PS3 because by default they cannot look much better. It's bitmap not vector. Thus they are not "worse" graphically. Sprites are sprites.