UltimateUnknown said:
| archbrix said:
While, in theory, a Nintendo system with absolute 3rd party parity would be unstoppable, a Ninty console is simply not going to be the place that people go to for Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto as long as Sony and Microsoft are still around and doing what they do as well as they do. Hence, why it is in Ninty's best interest to do their own thing. They just need to avoid the identity crisis result that is the WiiU, which is the absolute worst path to take, and I think we can all agree on that.
|
This is my issue. Why is it that COD and GTA are expected to not sell on Nintendo consoles? Because they are either inferior ports or Nintendo never directly competes with Sony/MS. You would never see an advertisement for COD/GTA where at the end the Wii U pops up, yet you see this all the time for PS4/Xbox One with many of the big name games. We just assume that even if Nintendo tried they won't get 3rd party sales. But really why is this the case is my real question when MS could enter the gaming market two gens ago and became a major platform for 3rd parties?
I know the counter argument to this (which Nintendo themselves have stated) is that then it'll become a case of 3 nearly identical consoles fighting against one another. But none of Nintendo's "innovations" have ever been of any significance to me. Motion controls, didn't care after 10 minutes. 3D, didn't care after 10 minutes. Touchpad on Wii U, again just didn't care. Most of these are aimed towards a different market than the "core gamer". I would much rather they made powerful consoles and made the best games they are known for making because their games aren't good due to these innovations. But perhaps that's just me and others enjoy these innovations. Or Nintendo is fine with just drifting away from the "core gamer" market they created with the NES/SNES. I do believe in the theory that a powerful Nintendo console with 3rd party support and Nintendo's 1st party is the best console we can ever have. Unfortunately that dream doesn't seem like it'll ever become reality.
|
I love what motion control brought to certain gameplay elements. For me, playing golf and bowling just can't be matched with analogue sticks. It's just much more liberating and intuitive. However, shoehorning motion into games where it's not needed is something I have a big problem with. Enhancing things like Link's spin attack in TP felt wonderful; having to swing my arm around every time I wanted to cut grass in SS... not a fan. And the motion controls certainly aren't what made me love the Wii - it was the great games. The outstanding pointer controls, however, were the console's most underrated feature, IMO. In short, to me, motion controls have their place, touch controls on DS were fantastic, again, when applied appropriately (hated what they did to the Zeldas), and 3D... yeah, I'm with you on that one. Couldn't care less about it.
Regarding Nintendo being the go-to place for third party games; the only way I could possibly see that happening is if they were to begin a new generation with their next console (or home variant) with a solid two year head-start. They would need to hit that sweet spot with tech that was noticeably better than current gen and not easily eclipsable by competition when they launch later. To do this, Ninty would likely have to take sizable losses so as not to price the system too high, not to mention that they would have to advertise the heck out of it. But if they were to accomplish all of this and make a system that 3rd parties were very happy to make games for, planned their launch perfectly, spent a lot of money, and the stars aligned perfectly for them (perhaps piggybacking off of the success of an NX handheld that fused with it), then they might have a chance of pulling a "360", but it would still be a huge (and expensive) gamble for them.
