By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo 1st party actually reminds me of Microsoft 1st party or vise versa

Snoopy said:
Slade6alpha said:

To an extent I agree with that you're saying. Where MS and Nintendo both strive for gameplay over interactive story telling. Which is why I prefer both Nintendo and MS' first party to Sony's (as of now). Would love it if Sony went back into their platform repitore. 

I liked it when Sony made Medieval, Crash, Twisted Metal,Ect. However, now it seems more and more their games are going to the story route and cinematic experiences. Even GOW looks like cinematic experience now which frustrates me.

I kinda agree with that. Crash I can play again and again, but Uncharted, TLOU, Heavy Rain etc. is enough to just play once. The gamplay is built around the story.



Around the Network

MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run. And Nintendo have more new IPs than people give them credit for



celador said:
MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run

True, but their gameplay evolves for MS as well. Halo 5 is the perfect example. Gears is a little bit more of the same, I agree.



LOL are you for real ??



KLXVER said:
Snoopy said:

I liked it when Sony made Medieval, Crash, Twisted Metal,Ect. However, now it seems more and more their games are going to the story route and cinematic experiences. Even GOW looks like cinematic experience now which frustrates me.

I kinda agree with that. Crash I can play again and again, but Uncharted, TLOU, Heavy Rain etc. is enough to just play once. The gamplay is built around the story.

Exactly. Once I get the story, thats just the end for me. I get the story and I don't feel the suspense anymore. I'm actually thinking about replaying legend of zelda wind waker again. So much fun in that game to be had.



Around the Network
celador said:
MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run

Halo 4 does not play like Halo 5. There hasn't been anything riskier than that on the market from the first party.

MS games evolve gameplay wise more than most games on market because they rely heavily on game mechanics.



Snoopy said:
celador said:
MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run

True, but their gameplay evolves for MS as well. Halo 5 is the perfect example. Gears is a little bit more of the same, I agree.

well I understand Gears 4, it was a new team who didn't want to take risks on their first go. Hopefully they are a bit more brave with the next game



celador said:

MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run. And Nintendo have more new IPs than people give them credit for

All three are guilty of this. And I can't say that's necessarily true for the Wii U era, Switch is looking much more "risks and new mechanics." or ambitious. 




Undisputed Gamer BAY BAY 

Goatseye said:
pokoko said:
Did I just stumble into an alternate reality where Quantum Break doesn't exist?

Did the OP say there are few exceptions? Wait for it... yes he did.

When you make very few games there are no "few exceptions".  



Slade6alpha said:
celador said:

MS may focus more on gameplay, problem is, it's the same gameplay in the same franchises over and over again. Nintendo does something similar, but their games are far better and take more risks and introduce more new mechanics in the long run. And Nintendo have more new IPs than people give them credit for

All three are guilty of this. And I can't say that's necessarily true for the Wii U era, Switch is looking much more "risks and new mechanics." or ambitious. 

Of course they all do it, just to varying degrees, where imo, MS are worst at it and Nintendo best