vivster said:
Oh only the Wii U and Wii? Well then Nintendo only hates potent hardware for the last 8 years. Well that's alright then. I couldn't care less what Nintendo was out to do. It's about what I the consumer want and not Nintendo. And it's not about failure since all console fail in comparison with PC. It's also not about who failed most. It's about where you will have the better experience. What little tweak could be made to make console gaming a little better. That little tweak would be Nintendo games on the other 2 consoles. You couldn't do it the other way around because games would suffer. However if you put Nintendo games on more potent hardware they will look and run better hence give the better experience. Which also has the benefit of owning one less piece of plastic gathering dust. You know this forum. If Nintendo announced that it would go 3rd party people would lose their shit because they're so happy. People who can only afford one console would be able to play all relevant games. The way you're talking is as if you are condoning having to pay for multiple consoles and having so many different ecosystems. Which seems weird since it is pretty anti consumer. Much like the Steam, Uplay, Origin trinity on PC. People would love getting all the games for PC through the same service. I can't imagine why you are against such a thing. |
The best thing for the consumer is to have strong competition. If there was no competition we would already be neck deep in DRM consoles. It's also not anti consumer at all. Every console needs their own thing to stand out, part of that with Nintendo is their games. Same goes for Sony with Naughty Dog and Sony Santa Monica. If Nintendo went third party then that would mean there is less competition for consoles and there would be even less to differentiate or reasons for the comsuers to buy them. There would be no need to improve on the console front, and no reason to try to invent something new like motion controls, kinect, VR or whatever else comes out or someone comes up with. Some of this stuff works great, some not so much but that's how it goes.
I condone purchasing multiple consoles if the consumer finds it necessary. That's the point, it's the choice. If money is an issue then the choice becomes harder. Then it's a list of pros and cons to each console I suppose, although if money is that tight, it's probably better to NOT use the money for gaming as it's a hobby.
You spoke of the best experience. Where do you find yours? What does that mean to you? Is it about the most fun with the console? Is it about the most realistic graphics? Is it about the being the most artistic? Best art style that appeals to you?
I don't understand how games would suffer by Naughty Dog developing for all the consoles as opposed to Nintendo doing it for all consoles. ND would be developing for PC, PS4, X1, Wii U and or 3DS. I really don't see how it's any different. You seem very worried about the power of the system, but the funny thing is that there isn't that large of a game between the systems. Not nearly as large as it was last gen. There would need to be some scaling, but I don't see how that ruins a game in any way, it has been being done between PC, PS4 and X1. Before that it was done between the 360, the PS3 and even Wii U on some games like COD.
If you want Nintendo games so bad, just buy their console. If you want Halo, buy an X1, if you want TLOU, buy a PS4 (or PS3 I suppose). It's no different from the auto industry. If you want OnStar, buy GM/Chevy. If you want ecoboost and SYNC get a ford. If you want a HEMI get a chrysler. ect. ect.
Gotta figure out how to set these up lol.
