Viewing Thread:
"Anti-Nintendo rant."

(That got your attention, didn't it?)

Nintendo's arrogance annoys me.

As far as I can tell, the overriding reason most people would want to own a Nintendo console is purely because of the games, yes? All the Nintendo fans harp on about their exclusive Mario's, Zelda's, Metroid's and so forth. It's these you own the console for, and it's these which give you faith in the company.

Am I far wrong here?

Does it make sense then, that Nintendo restrict these games only to one platform? Does it make sense that a company renowned for it's games abuses this reputation in order to sell hardware which is poorly advertised, badly marketed, and fails to appeal to the majority of gamers?

Nintendo are very good at making games.
Nintendo are not very good at pruducing and selling consoles.
Nintendo care little for marketing techniques and customer service beyond their arrogant attitude that people have to get their console if they want the best games.

I don't like this.

It won't happen, but wouldn't it be a better thing for the gaming public in general if Nintendo were a software-only company?

Diverging slightly, The games industry is in a ridiculous state if you think about it. If you bought a Panasonic DVD player over a Sony one, it's not because it will have DVD's released exclusively for it. You buy it for the hardware, and the hardware alone. That's the way it should be with consoles. Games and games console should be mututally exclusive. That is to say, choosing one should not restrict or otherwise affect your choice of the other.

How long will it take for the industry to become co-operative?

You might say it'll never happen, but I'd disagree. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is that the overwhelming pace with which the technical requirements of games are increasing, prevents anyone from getting a foothold. Eventually, we'll hit a barrier. Either the games won't become noticably more demanding, or perhaps more likely, the hardware reaches it's limitations. When that happens, we'll see things settle down. Eventually, someone will cotton on to the idea that nobody has any reason to buy a new console which plays a different format of games, so it simply won't take off. We'll then see consoles released which play games currently around, and this will eventually heat up into a situation reminiscent of the VHS VS Betamax rivalry. Sooner or later, one games format will dominate. From then onwards into the forseeable future, all consoles will be released to play those games. No exclusive titles. No other considerations. Just buy the console you want because of the features it has.

And if they are still around, Nintendo will seriously have to change their attiude.

Be quiet Ant, and go and play Genric Shooter 3. Or maybe Un-inspired Action 6?

Hehe. I'm so unoriginal. ;)

Owning any console (or more than one) is a privilege, not an automatic right. It's difficult, I know, but fact is if you want to play GTA-VC (for example) you need a PS2 or PC. If you only have a GC or XBox, you can't run the game - unless you buy a PS2. This is the same for any game which is not on all three formats (4 if you include the PC). What about anyone who is still using a PS1 or N64? Should they expect a cut down version of GTA-VC or Splinter Cell just so they don't feel left out?

Games which are designed to be multi-format don't often push any of the three next Gen consoles to the max. Games which are designed specifically for one format is more likely to push that system to the "max".

OK then Ant, let me think of an example, oh, I know, Vice City, you need the Open door button, the fire button, and the go button, oh, and OCCASIONALLY the jump button. Not much difference, may I say.

Ant wrote:

> Totally agree with VB and Goaty here, I played Super Mario Sunshine
> the other day for a good long stint...and my overall impression was
> poor. I thought the game was linear, annoying and...well, to be
> honest, dull.
>
> Sony, and Microsoft to a lesser extent, cater for my tastes because
> they offer a much wider variety...bloody hell, I haven't written
> anything like this for ages. :D The PS2 is still the only next-gen
> console I have and I don't get time to play that much anymore...if I
> was given the choice of another, I would take the X-Box...but then
> again, even the X-Box's top games are on PS2 (Splinter Cell.)
>
> So overall, Sony kick bee-hind in every department. Ba-BOOM! :P

And this is why we are rivals :)

VenomByte wrote:

> Diverging slightly, The games industry is in a ridiculous state if you
> think about it. If you bought a Panasonic DVD player over a Sony one,
> it's not because it will have DVD's released exclusively for it. You
> buy it for the hardware, and the hardware alone. That's the way it
> should be with consoles. Games and games console should be mututally
> exclusive. That is to say, choosing one should not restrict or
> otherwise affect your choice of the other.

The difference is though, that all DVD's are exactly the same, but are better quality on different systems, games on the otherhand can only reach such a limit, so, they can be far better on a different console, if all of the consoles wer EXACTLY the same, which they'd have to be to be able to play games at the exact same quality, then only one console would need to exist, because of that, developers can do what they want with that console as people have no-where else to turn. So, it's completely different.

Oh, and why did you base it around Nintendo's arrogance, I love the (Microsoft owned) Bungie (or however it's spelt) games on my PS2 and GC, and I love (SOny owned) Team Soho's The Getaway and (Not sure of the developer) Ape Escape games on my GC. So buck up your idea's, sonnyboy.

Simple answer is if you feel so strongly about Nintendo, don't buy their consoles and quit ya moaning.

But multi-platform games very rarely get the best out of the console, hence it's much more beneficial for Nintendo to have their own console, and I prefer it, what about the GC/GBA connectivity? Ideas like that just wouldn't exist without it.

Goatboy wrote:
> It *will* disappear within 6 months, mark my words and keep popping
> this thread so I can say "I told you so".
> Nintendo - for the gamer that finds pushing more than 1 button
> difficult

Lol! :D

Totally agree with VB and Goaty here, I played Super Mario Sunshine the other day for a good long stint...and my overall impression was poor. I thought the game was linear, annoying and...well, to be honest, dull.

Sony, and Microsoft to a lesser extent, cater for my tastes because they offer a much wider variety...bloody hell, I haven't written anything like this for ages. :D The PS2 is still the only next-gen console I have and I don't get time to play that much anymore...if I was given the choice of another, I would take the X-Box...but then again, even the X-Box's top games are on PS2 (Splinter Cell.)

So overall, Sony kick bee-hind in every department. Ba-BOOM! :P

gerrid wrote:
> VenomByte wrote:
> I have already answered this in the post previous to the one you are
> quoting.
>
> Doesn't mean you should ignore the second part of my post though, does
> it?

Fair enough...

-----

gerrid wrote:
"Again, you seem happy with Sony not producing games at all, rather you enjoy their, what? their console? Which is vastly inferior to the other two.

Nintendo's interests are to make money and be able to make money in the future as well. Which is the exact same interests as every other private company out there. Why do you pick on Nintendo? Because you want to play their games but you can't because you don't want to buy a GC?
If you want to play Project IGI, but you have a Mac, do you get angry at the PC community for the game not being on the Mac?
If you want to read an article in a newspaper but it's not the newspaper you usuallly get, do you get angry at the publishers?"

-----

I pick on Nintendo because their attidute is in complete and total discord with my ideals. I am happy with Sony not producing games, even if only because it means they cannot use them as a tool to aggresively persuade people to buy their console.

I am frustrated with the console market.

I haven't bought a console since the N64, instead I've relied on the PC games market, or the ability to play games on the current generation of consoles my friends own.

It bothers me that whichever console I buy, I will miss out on a huge number of excellent titles. As I can't afford the money or space for more than one console, I can't resolve this problem easily.


There's little else I can say without repeating myself even more

VenomByte wrote:
> I have already answered this in the post previous to the one you are
> quoting.

Doesn't mean you should ignore the second part of my post though, does it?