I agree. None of this "Well I don't want to play it" or "It's not exclusive because it's also on _____". The more games, the more options, the stronger the library. Period.
I agree completely. In the Borderlands thread, especially, I couldn't believe that people were trying to disparage the series and make it seem inconsequential.
Simply put, you can't expand a market without content that expands the market.
If I own a store that sells apples only, I can't get into the market for oranges unless I actually start to sell oranges. The content has to come first.
What if Nintendo landing Borderlands 3 resulted in some Nintendo fans finding out that they liked FPS RPGs? It could help grow Nintendo's ecosystem further and convince other publishers that there is money to be made with Nintendo.
The more games the Switch gets, the better.
Yeah, it reminds me of how people to this day counter the 1300+ game to 300 game disparity that the PS1 and N64 have in North America, and many people just respond with "quality vs quantity". Well, let me tell you, most people don't determine which console to get by the average rating per game on it, they buy based on how many games they want to get for it. Even if the PS1 had 800 bad games on it, that would still leave around 500 good games, which would be more than the N64, good games or bad.
| TallSilhouette said: *looks at Steam Greenlight* Technically, it can be. |
Greenlight? Just look at the front page. Steam has become a friggin' mess stuffed with shovelware.
For me, it's all about quality. Remember the N64? That sucker had 2 launch titles. One of them was Mario 64, one of the greatest games of all time. I'd change that for a gazillion mediocre games any day. Fuck Borderlands, screw Titanfall, give me dat Nintendo goodness!
Official member of VGC's Nintendo family, approved by the one and only RolStoppable. I feel honored.
Soundwave said:
And what happens if a person who likes Mario Kart or Splatoon has friends over and would like to play say ... Madden or FIFA or Battlefield or NHL? Sony/MS appeal to multiple audience bases, Nintendo is stuck catering to one smaller one. You either have to really, really like colorful/cartoony mascot games in a narrow genre set or basically Nintendo doesn't really have much appeal to you, which is problematic. Indie games are never going to sell a platform either IMO. Every system has those same indie games and their appeal on a per title basis is small. Nintendo wasn't always like this, infact they weren't for a good 12-15 years. It's probably too late now though anyway, Nintendo has kinda corned themselves into a smaller part of the market so it is what it is. Quite honestly if the NES and SNES followed the philosophy Nintendo of today has they would've been beaten both times by Sega. Doesn't matter how great Super Mario was. |
And what if a PS4/XBO owner has friends over and they would like to play say.......Monster Hunter, Runbow or Fast Racing Neo? It goes both ways.
Saying that Nintendo platforms only have cartoon mascot games is no different than saying all PS/XB have are realistic violent games........those arent even genres by the way. The Nintendo ecosystem has quality titles in the platformer, RPG, strategy, puzzle, party, action, fighting, racing, shooting genres.
I dont get how people can say the Nintendo ecosystem lacks variety then praise the variety of PS/XB which primarily consists of open-world, online shooter or sports games.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
Fewer games is good for me because I only have limited time and attention to play them. Everyone these days has so many games that they end up not playing half of them. I believe it's called a "backlog". What's interesting is, no one is realizing that sometimes too much of a good thing is not, in fact, a good thing.
| Ljink96 said: While I agree, it all comes down to the quality and need for the games. If you just get a bunch of ports from a year or two ago, it doesn't matter if you have 30 of them at launch. If they aren't quality, people aren't going to buy it. Titanfall 2 hasn't been doing to well to begin with, so why would they spend money making a Switch port and then risking near guaranteed shit sales on a device that people already claim is for diehard Nintendo fans and children? It just doesn't make sense on any level for them to even port it to Switch. In the case of the Wii U it had a ton of launch games and that didn't mean anything for the console. It's about striking a balance. |
While I can't speak for everyone, it's important to remember that even mediocre/bad games have their fans who would buy the hardware just to play that game. I bought a freaking PC just for one game (Might and Magic Heroes 6). Sure, the game wasn't great but I was such a big fan, that I ended up enjoying it. Also, many times it's all about perception. If word of mouth is that the Switch doesn't have any games, it doesn't matter if it's true, people will write it off. So some mediocre ones could help more than one may realise (or easily observe).
| pray4mojo said: Fewer games is good for me because I only have limited time and attention to play them. Everyone these days has so many games that they end up not playing half of them. I believe it's called a "backlog". What's interesting is, no one is realizing that sometimes too much of a good thing is not, in fact, a good thing. |
For YOU. Not gamers. Believe it or not, tons of gamers are either unemployed or too young to even HAVE jobs. And, for some, it IS their jobs.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
