|Darc Requiem said:
After watching that video, I subscribed to his channel. He was so dead on it wasn't funny.
Not really. He conviently forgot some important points: Nintendo hardware has always been designed pricetag first. NES had been a 16-bit console, if 16-bit processors had not been so expensive. Yeah, NES is just about as powerful as as it gets with hardware for it's price. SNES was pretty weak hardware , even Neo Geo beat it in specs, but it's just as powerful it gets for it's pricetag. N64 fell way short of the initial 500MHz that would match SGI workstations back in the day. But, it was powerful hardware for it's price. Gamecube had it's GPU downclocked in the later stage of development to cut the cost of the hardware - but, for it's price, the specs are good.
His argument was that starting with Wii, Nintendo has changed it's philosophy - which isn't quite true. Nintendo's hardware has been powerful in relation because of the late launch. Had Wii (initially designed with "99" philosophy) been released in 2008, we'd likely had a system that would powerwise match 360, and the pricetag had been as low as it was. The same goes with Wii U, if it had later release, without the gamepad, it would be as powerful as PS4 and X1, but cheaper. The same with Switch, it's just as powerful as it gets for it's pricetag.
Another thing to consider is the market. Also conveniently forgotten in the rant. There were the game centric microcomputers that were far more powerful than any Nintendo hardware at the time, which would be the correct comparison for todays market, whereas the games consoles, such as PS4 and Xbox 1, have become the microcomputers you use for other stuff than gaming. His comparison of NES to Master System and SNES to Megadrive would be today to compare hardware of Wii U and Switch to Ouya and Shield, for example. Whereas PS4 and X1 could be something like Amiga or Atari or Commodore or Apple home computer of 80's or 90's.
Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.
Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.