Microsoft's blatant bashing of Nintendo... your feelings?

[squid5580]

Nintendo have success with motion controls. Sony and MS try to copy that success with Move and Kinect.


I love the hypocrisy.

Copy?? Really??? Umm you should take another look at the Wii and the Kinect. I don't see any Wii games with voice controls. Anyways Nintendo copied Atari because the 2600 and the nes both used controllers duh!!!!

Who came up with motion controls isn't the issue.

The issue is that a member of MS bad mouthed Nintendo even though Kinect is clearly a cash grab at the type of audience the Wii has attracted.

Is it?? So the Wii attracts people who would play a game like Mass Effect or Ghost Recon? Or maybe the Kinect is trying to expand to cater to both types of audiences like any and all consoles should.

And it's just a massive coincidence that both Sony and Microsoft brought out a motion sensors around the same time and a few years after Nintendo?

It's a cash grab. Sure there few titles that will use the system well, but overall, you only have to look at the type of games (i.e. Wii Sports clones) on Move and Kinect to realise that they're trying to grab some of the money left over by Nintendo.

Did I wake up in some alternate dimension where corporations aren't supposed to try and make money? Where video game consoles didn't try and improve on pre existing ideas? By your logic the NES was just a cash grab. It took what Atari and Coleco did and made it better. Boo down with evolution? I for one am glad people with your mentality aren't in the business side of things. We would still be playing Pong if they were.

A straw man and a personal attack all in one paragraph.

I never said making money was bad.

I never said copying ideas was bad.

I said that someone from MS badmouthing Nintendo, when they're clearly out to do the same thing, was hypocritical.

Better luck next time eh?

lol you call that a personal attack? Or a "straw man defense" to what you call is a cash grab? MS and Sony both have every right to knock the big N. Sony moreso because they took the wiimote and made it right. They made it with 1:1 accuracy (a feat that Nintendo needed a $40 accessory to accomplish and still couldn't get it right). Nintendo getting bashed on thee MC front is so deserved it isn't even funny. Afterall they were the ones who built their entire console on it and couldn't get it right.

Sony and MS also had 4 years to improve on it.

And Nintendo had what 20? Or did you forget the power glove?

Not really the same thing now, is it.

Nintendo has had terrific success with the Wii, whether you think it works or not, it has made a lot of money for Nintendo. It's no surprise that other companies would try and imitate that success. That isn't a bad thing, but it's in bad taste to bad mouth the company you're trying to grab an audience from.

How is it not the same thing? Sure they look different and use different technology but the core remains the same. Motion controlled gaming. You are trying to draw parellels from the Wii to the Kinect which really are 2 different entities (now if we were talking the eye toy and the Kinect you might have a point which i might point out the eye toy came out years before the Wii). The fact still remains Nintendo made a console that is built on an innovation that both MS and Sony improved on and pretty much made the Wii obsolete. And for them to use these facts to gain more of the audience who wants these innovations is not bad mouthing it is competition. And that is how competition works

Again, you seem to have an obsession with the tech side of the argument, the part I don't give a fuck about. You have taken something minor from posts, and focused in on that to a ridiculous degree, i.e., a straw man argument.

Even in the business world, it is in bad taste to say 'X is a terrible company' or something to that effect.

MS can say how Kinect is the best thing on the market untill the cows come home and there's nothing wrong with that, all companies do that.

What you don't do is attack your competitors directly.

Wow and you call my points straw man lol. The power glove was designed to move hand make character on screen do actions. How is that any different from the Wii mote? or an arguement about technology?

Well you're obviously trolling now, because despite my previous post, you're still going on about the tech behind the argument, instead the actual issue.

Why is it whenever someone makes a point another can't counter it is trolling or straw man? Btw read the edited version

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Nintendo have success with motion controls. Sony and MS try to copy that success with Move and Kinect.


I love the hypocrisy.

Copy?? Really??? Umm you should take another look at the Wii and the Kinect. I don't see any Wii games with voice controls. Anyways Nintendo copied Atari because the 2600 and the nes both used controllers duh!!!!

Who came up with motion controls isn't the issue.

The issue is that a member of MS bad mouthed Nintendo even though Kinect is clearly a cash grab at the type of audience the Wii has attracted.

Is it?? So the Wii attracts people who would play a game like Mass Effect or Ghost Recon? Or maybe the Kinect is trying to expand to cater to both types of audiences like any and all consoles should.

And it's just a massive coincidence that both Sony and Microsoft brought out a motion sensors around the same time and a few years after Nintendo?

It's a cash grab. Sure there few titles that will use the system well, but overall, you only have to look at the type of games (i.e. Wii Sports clones) on Move and Kinect to realise that they're trying to grab some of the money left over by Nintendo.

Did I wake up in some alternate dimension where corporations aren't supposed to try and make money? Where video game consoles didn't try and improve on pre existing ideas? By your logic the NES was just a cash grab. It took what Atari and Coleco did and made it better. Boo down with evolution? I for one am glad people with your mentality aren't in the business side of things. We would still be playing Pong if they were.

A straw man and a personal attack all in one paragraph.

I never said making money was bad.

I never said copying ideas was bad.

I said that someone from MS badmouthing Nintendo, when they're clearly out to do the same thing, was hypocritical.

Better luck next time eh?

lol you call that a personal attack? Or a "straw man defense" to what you call is a cash grab? MS and Sony both have every right to knock the big N. Sony moreso because they took the wiimote and made it right. They made it with 1:1 accuracy (a feat that Nintendo needed a $40 accessory to accomplish and still couldn't get it right). Nintendo getting bashed on thee MC front is so deserved it isn't even funny. Afterall they were the ones who built their entire console on it and couldn't get it right.

Sony and MS also had 4 years to improve on it.

And Nintendo had what 20? Or did you forget the power glove?

Not really the same thing now, is it.

Nintendo has had terrific success with the Wii, whether you think it works or not, it has made a lot of money for Nintendo. It's no surprise that other companies would try and imitate that success. That isn't a bad thing, but it's in bad taste to bad mouth the company you're trying to grab an audience from.

How is it not the same thing? Sure they look different and use different technology but the core remains the same. Motion controlled gaming. You are trying to draw parellels from the Wii to the Kinect which really are 2 different entities (now if we were talking the eye toy and the Kinect you might have a point which i might point out the eye toy came out years before the Wii). The fact still remains Nintendo made a console that is built on an innovation that both MS and Sony improved on and pretty much made the Wii obsolete. And for them to use these facts to gain more of the audience who wants these innovations is not bad mouthing it is competition. And that is how competition works

Again, you seem to have an obsession with the tech side of the argument, the part I don't give a fuck about. You have taken something minor from posts, and focused in on that to a ridiculous degree, i.e., a straw man argument.

Even in the business world, it is in bad taste to say 'X is a terrible company' or something to that effect.

MS can say how Kinect is the best thing on the market untill the cows come home and there's nothing wrong with that, all companies do that.

What you don't do is attack your competitors directly.

Wow and you call my points straw man lol. The power glove was designed to move hand make character on screen do actions. How is that any different from the Wii mote? or an arguement about technology?

Well you're obviously trolling now, because despite my previous post, you're still going on about the tech behind the argument, instead the actual issue.

Why is it whenever someone makes a point another can't counter it is trolling or straw man? Btw read the edited version

I countered your argument and you ignored it. The discussion is that it is in bad taste to bad mouth the competition, especially someone who's been in the industry as long as Nintendo. Move and Kinect most likely work much better than the Wii, but there are still ethics to follow if you don't want to come across as a massive tool.

Now you can continue to ignore my points, or you can keep on going on about the fucking power glove. Your call.

 

[squid5580]

Nintendo have success with motion controls. Sony and MS try to copy that success with Move and Kinect.


I love the hypocrisy.

Copy?? Really??? Umm you should take another look at the Wii and the Kinect. I don't see any Wii games with voice controls. Anyways Nintendo copied Atari because the 2600 and the nes both used controllers duh!!!!

Who came up with motion controls isn't the issue.

The issue is that a member of MS bad mouthed Nintendo even though Kinect is clearly a cash grab at the type of audience the Wii has attracted.

Is it?? So the Wii attracts people who would play a game like Mass Effect or Ghost Recon? Or maybe the Kinect is trying to expand to cater to both types of audiences like any and all consoles should.

And it's just a massive coincidence that both Sony and Microsoft brought out a motion sensors around the same time and a few years after Nintendo?

It's a cash grab. Sure there few titles that will use the system well, but overall, you only have to look at the type of games (i.e. Wii Sports clones) on Move and Kinect to realise that they're trying to grab some of the money left over by Nintendo.

Did I wake up in some alternate dimension where corporations aren't supposed to try and make money? Where video game consoles didn't try and improve on pre existing ideas? By your logic the NES was just a cash grab. It took what Atari and Coleco did and made it better. Boo down with evolution? I for one am glad people with your mentality aren't in the business side of things. We would still be playing Pong if they were.

A straw man and a personal attack all in one paragraph.

I never said making money was bad.

I never said copying ideas was bad.

I said that someone from MS badmouthing Nintendo, when they're clearly out to do the same thing, was hypocritical.

Better luck next time eh?

lol you call that a personal attack? Or a "straw man defense" to what you call is a cash grab? MS and Sony both have every right to knock the big N. Sony moreso because they took the wiimote and made it right. They made it with 1:1 accuracy (a feat that Nintendo needed a $40 accessory to accomplish and still couldn't get it right). Nintendo getting bashed on thee MC front is so deserved it isn't even funny. Afterall they were the ones who built their entire console on it and couldn't get it right.

Sony and MS also had 4 years to improve on it.

And Nintendo had what 20? Or did you forget the power glove?

Not really the same thing now, is it.

Nintendo has had terrific success with the Wii, whether you think it works or not, it has made a lot of money for Nintendo. It's no surprise that other companies would try and imitate that success. That isn't a bad thing, but it's in bad taste to bad mouth the company you're trying to grab an audience from.

How is it not the same thing? Sure they look different and use different technology but the core remains the same. Motion controlled gaming. You are trying to draw parellels from the Wii to the Kinect which really are 2 different entities (now if we were talking the eye toy and the Kinect you might have a point which i might point out the eye toy came out years before the Wii). The fact still remains Nintendo made a console that is built on an innovation that both MS and Sony improved on and pretty much made the Wii obsolete. And for them to use these facts to gain more of the audience who wants these innovations is not bad mouthing it is competition. And that is how competition works

Again, you seem to have an obsession with the tech side of the argument, the part I don't give a fuck about. You have taken something minor from posts, and focused in on that to a ridiculous degree, i.e., a straw man argument.

Even in the business world, it is in bad taste to say 'X is a terrible company' or something to that effect.

MS can say how Kinect is the best thing on the market untill the cows come home and there's nothing wrong with that, all companies do that.

What you don't do is attack your competitors directly.

Wow and you call my points straw man lol. The power glove was designed to move hand make character on screen do actions. How is that any different from the Wii mote? or an arguement about technology?

Well you're obviously trolling now, because despite my previous post, you're still going on about the tech behind the argument, instead the actual issue.

Why is it whenever someone makes a point another can't counter it is trolling or straw man? Btw read the edited version

I countered your argument and you ignored it. The discussion is that it is in bad taste to bad mouth the competition, especially someone who's been in the industry as long as Nintendo. Move and Kinect most likely work much better than the Wii, but there are still ethics to follow if you don't want to come across as a massive tool.

Now you can continue to ignore my points, or you can keep on going on about the fucking power glove. Your call.

you opened the door to the power glove arguement when you said MS and Sony had 4 years to improve on MC. Nintendo had 20 and still failed. So what about nostalgia? It shouldn't matter if they were the forefathers of the gaming industry. They fucked up. They showed a serious weakness and MS exploited it. Which given how everyone looks at Nintendo with nostalgia covered glasses in the first place MS wasn't given much of a choice. Ask yourself this. Does Nintendo now deserve to be defended? Not to be confused with Nintendo then.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Nintendo have success with motion controls. Sony and MS try to copy that success with Move and Kinect.


I love the hypocrisy.

Copy?? Really??? Umm you should take another look at the Wii and the Kinect. I don't see any Wii games with voice controls. Anyways Nintendo copied Atari because the 2600 and the nes both used controllers duh!!!!

Who came up with motion controls isn't the issue.

The issue is that a member of MS bad mouthed Nintendo even though Kinect is clearly a cash grab at the type of audience the Wii has attracted.

Is it?? So the Wii attracts people who would play a game like Mass Effect or Ghost Recon? Or maybe the Kinect is trying to expand to cater to both types of audiences like any and all consoles should.

And it's just a massive coincidence that both Sony and Microsoft brought out a motion sensors around the same time and a few years after Nintendo?

It's a cash grab. Sure there few titles that will use the system well, but overall, you only have to look at the type of games (i.e. Wii Sports clones) on Move and Kinect to realise that they're trying to grab some of the money left over by Nintendo.

Did I wake up in some alternate dimension where corporations aren't supposed to try and make money? Where video game consoles didn't try and improve on pre existing ideas? By your logic the NES was just a cash grab. It took what Atari and Coleco did and made it better. Boo down with evolution? I for one am glad people with your mentality aren't in the business side of things. We would still be playing Pong if they were.

A straw man and a personal attack all in one paragraph.

I never said making money was bad.

I never said copying ideas was bad.

I said that someone from MS badmouthing Nintendo, when they're clearly out to do the same thing, was hypocritical.

Better luck next time eh?

lol you call that a personal attack? Or a "straw man defense" to what you call is a cash grab? MS and Sony both have every right to knock the big N. Sony moreso because they took the wiimote and made it right. They made it with 1:1 accuracy (a feat that Nintendo needed a $40 accessory to accomplish and still couldn't get it right). Nintendo getting bashed on thee MC front is so deserved it isn't even funny. Afterall they were the ones who built their entire console on it and couldn't get it right.

Sony and MS also had 4 years to improve on it.

And Nintendo had what 20? Or did you forget the power glove?

Not really the same thing now, is it.

Nintendo has had terrific success with the Wii, whether you think it works or not, it has made a lot of money for Nintendo. It's no surprise that other companies would try and imitate that success. That isn't a bad thing, but it's in bad taste to bad mouth the company you're trying to grab an audience from.

How is it not the same thing? Sure they look different and use different technology but the core remains the same. Motion controlled gaming. You are trying to draw parellels from the Wii to the Kinect which really are 2 different entities (now if we were talking the eye toy and the Kinect you might have a point which i might point out the eye toy came out years before the Wii). The fact still remains Nintendo made a console that is built on an innovation that both MS and Sony improved on and pretty much made the Wii obsolete. And for them to use these facts to gain more of the audience who wants these innovations is not bad mouthing it is competition. And that is how competition works

Again, you seem to have an obsession with the tech side of the argument, the part I don't give a fuck about. You have taken something minor from posts, and focused in on that to a ridiculous degree, i.e., a straw man argument.

Even in the business world, it is in bad taste to say 'X is a terrible company' or something to that effect.

MS can say how Kinect is the best thing on the market untill the cows come home and there's nothing wrong with that, all companies do that.

What you don't do is attack your competitors directly.

Wow and you call my points straw man lol. The power glove was designed to move hand make character on screen do actions. How is that any different from the Wii mote? or an arguement about technology?

Well you're obviously trolling now, because despite my previous post, you're still going on about the tech behind the argument, instead the actual issue.

Why is it whenever someone makes a point another can't counter it is trolling or straw man? Btw read the edited version

I countered your argument and you ignored it. The discussion is that it is in bad taste to bad mouth the competition, especially someone who's been in the industry as long as Nintendo. Move and Kinect most likely work much better than the Wii, but there are still ethics to follow if you don't want to come across as a massive tool.

Now you can continue to ignore my points, or you can keep on going on about the fucking power glove. Your call.

you opened the door to the power glove arguement when you said MS and Sony had 4 years to improve on MC. Nintendo had 20 and still failed. So what about nostalgia? It shouldn't matter if they were the forefathers of the gaming industry. They fucked up. They showed a serious weakness and MS exploited it. Which given how everyone looks at Nintendo with nostalgia covered glasses in the first place MS wasn't given much of a choice. Ask yourself this. Does Nintendo now deserve to be defended? Not to be confused with Nintendo then.

In all honesty? Not at the moment, no. Nintendo haven't done anything lately to pique my interest. My Wii is dusty and unused. I still think it's in bad taste to insult them though. They did something other than realeasing a more powerful machine, and for the most part, it paid off and got a lot of people who usually don't game interested in the hobby. Hopefully the WiiU will have a catalogue of games actually worth buying the console for.

 

[Omegaclawe]

Nin won this console generation by almost a factor of two over their nearest rivals a while ago by perusing a business strategy those same rivals said would fail outright.

That's not accurate ...

Sure, a ridiculous number of wiis were sold, however ... not enough games were sold.
Nintendo has been posting losses recently as a result.

Um... The Wii's sold a hell of a lot of games. 716.09 million as of March 31. My Microsoft statistics are two years outdated, but I doubt they more than doubled the amount of games sold in the last two years. (353.8 million as of December 2009). (Source: Wikipeds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games )

I admit my Wii hasn't seen much use at all in the last 2 years, but if Nintendo wins back the hardcore 3rd party support with the Wii U like they've claimed, and fix the online to make it more similar to Microsoft/Sony's offerings, it could see a lot of use... until the rest of the next gen comes out, which, provided the Wii U isn't still on par with processing power, that hardcore support will all but vanish.

Also, everybody copies everybody else. The gamecube's controller, for instance, was pretty blatantly copying the PS1's dual analog style. Why? Because it was much better than the wonky-ass 64 controller. Give Nintendo some props for innovation, sure... but they aren't the only company doing it. They've only been the most successful recently. It'll be someone else's turn, soon enough.

The Kinect, for instance, has a lot of potential for doing things in completely different ways than the Wii, but it's being marketed in such a way to hide that potential, because Microsoft wants to sell Kinects, rather than have them delegated to the support role they fill so well.

It'll be interesting to see how it all goes, but all the companies have their merits, and every single one benefits from the innovations of their competition. While they are trying to "win", and people argue which one has, truth be told, it's the consumer who wins, especially where the competition is mostly even.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Competition? In the gaming industry? Talking shit about each other?
WHAT SORCERY IS THIS?!

 

[Reishadowen]

Actually, it was not Nintendos idea. Motion controls were around when the PS1 was out. Nintendo just made them popular.

Actually, come to think of it, wasn't Nintendo's Power Glove essentially a motion control system? I mean sure, it didn't really work half the time, but it still counts as motion control, right?

.

To add my own input, Microsoft really needs to figure out what it is they do best, and what they are certainly NOT known very well for. You will never get Nintendo's casual market for motion control games because anyone who fits that category already has a Wii. It's cheaper, and they are not going to buy your system if they already have something that does the job.

If you're going to make motion controls, do it in a way that will compliment the kind of games you release. I mean hell, look at your controller. Notice the two "Trigger" shaped buttons you have on there? Notice how many Action/shooting games you release? Why not make a motion control system based around a gun or a sword? This would be making motion controls that would work WITH the kind of games you already make.

I know this may seem like stereo-typing, and maybe with this strategy you'd be drawing yourself into a box(EDIT: no pun intended), but the X-Box needs to focus on what it already does, and does best. THEN, it can start to gravitate slowly out from there.

And for the record, I don't have a kinect, but I hear it is somewhat a nice little gadget. Not to mention at least Microsoft went with a new direction entirely with a camera/motion detector. Sony is just ripping Nintendo off wholesale, and somehow made their own motion control look ten times as ridiculous. Seriously, how is anyone supposed to take themselves seriously, or feel cool, when it looks like they are pointing baby Rudolph at the TV screen?

 

[Danpascooch]

Think twice about turning to Nintendo? Haven't one of their core target markets already turned to Nintendo? They do realise that almost everyone who would consider buying Kinect is already going to have a Wii, right?

Kinect sold like legalized crack, and I agree with the guy, Nintendo hasn't been good since the Gamecube

 

[squid5580]

Nintendo have success with motion controls. Sony and MS try to copy that success with Move and Kinect.


I love the hypocrisy.

Copy?? Really??? Umm you should take another look at the Wii and the Kinect. I don't see any Wii games with voice controls. Anyways Nintendo copied Atari because the 2600 and the nes both used controllers duh!!!!

Who came up with motion controls isn't the issue.

The issue is that a member of MS bad mouthed Nintendo even though Kinect is clearly a cash grab at the type of audience the Wii has attracted.

Is it?? So the Wii attracts people who would play a game like Mass Effect or Ghost Recon? Or maybe the Kinect is trying to expand to cater to both types of audiences like any and all consoles should.

And it's just a massive coincidence that both Sony and Microsoft brought out a motion sensors around the same time and a few years after Nintendo?

It's a cash grab. Sure there few titles that will use the system well, but overall, you only have to look at the type of games (i.e. Wii Sports clones) on Move and Kinect to realise that they're trying to grab some of the money left over by Nintendo.

Did I wake up in some alternate dimension where corporations aren't supposed to try and make money? Where video game consoles didn't try and improve on pre existing ideas? By your logic the NES was just a cash grab. It took what Atari and Coleco did and made it better. Boo down with evolution? I for one am glad people with your mentality aren't in the business side of things. We would still be playing Pong if they were.

A straw man and a personal attack all in one paragraph.

I never said making money was bad.

I never said copying ideas was bad.

I said that someone from MS badmouthing Nintendo, when they're clearly out to do the same thing, was hypocritical.

Better luck next time eh?

lol you call that a personal attack? Or a "straw man defense" to what you call is a cash grab? MS and Sony both have every right to knock the big N. Sony moreso because they took the wiimote and made it right. They made it with 1:1 accuracy (a feat that Nintendo needed a $40 accessory to accomplish and still couldn't get it right). Nintendo getting bashed on thee MC front is so deserved it isn't even funny. Afterall they were the ones who built their entire console on it and couldn't get it right.

Sony and MS also had 4 years to improve on it.

And Nintendo had what 20? Or did you forget the power glove?

Not really the same thing now, is it.

Nintendo has had terrific success with the Wii, whether you think it works or not, it has made a lot of money for Nintendo. It's no surprise that other companies would try and imitate that success. That isn't a bad thing, but it's in bad taste to bad mouth the company you're trying to grab an audience from.

How is it not the same thing? Sure they look different and use different technology but the core remains the same. Motion controlled gaming. You are trying to draw parellels from the Wii to the Kinect which really are 2 different entities (now if we were talking the eye toy and the Kinect you might have a point which i might point out the eye toy came out years before the Wii). The fact still remains Nintendo made a console that is built on an innovation that both MS and Sony improved on and pretty much made the Wii obsolete. And for them to use these facts to gain more of the audience who wants these innovations is not bad mouthing it is competition. And that is how competition works

Again, you seem to have an obsession with the tech side of the argument, the part I don't give a fuck about. You have taken something minor from posts, and focused in on that to a ridiculous degree, i.e., a straw man argument.

Even in the business world, it is in bad taste to say 'X is a terrible company' or something to that effect.

MS can say how Kinect is the best thing on the market untill the cows come home and there's nothing wrong with that, all companies do that.

What you don't do is attack your competitors directly.

Wow and you call my points straw man lol. The power glove was designed to move hand make character on screen do actions. How is that any different from the Wii mote? or an arguement about technology?

Well you're obviously trolling now, because despite my previous post, you're still going on about the tech behind the argument, instead the actual issue.

Why is it whenever someone makes a point another can't counter it is trolling or straw man? Btw read the edited version

I countered your argument and you ignored it. The discussion is that it is in bad taste to bad mouth the competition, especially someone who's been in the industry as long as Nintendo. Move and Kinect most likely work much better than the Wii, but there are still ethics to follow if you don't want to come across as a massive tool.

Now you can continue to ignore my points, or you can keep on going on about the fucking power glove. Your call.

you opened the door to the power glove arguement when you said MS and Sony had 4 years to improve on MC. Nintendo had 20 and still failed. So what about nostalgia? It shouldn't matter if they were the forefathers of the gaming industry. They fucked up. They showed a serious weakness and MS exploited it. Which given how everyone looks at Nintendo with nostalgia covered glasses in the first place MS wasn't given much of a choice. Ask yourself this. Does Nintendo now deserve to be defended? Not to be confused with Nintendo then.

In all honesty? Not at the moment, no. Nintendo haven't done anything lately to pique my interest. My Wii is dusty and unused. I still think it's in bad taste to insult them though. They did something other than realeasing a more powerful machine, and for the most part, it paid off and got a lot of people who usually don't game interested in the hobby. Hopefully the WiiU will have a catalogue of games actually worth buying the console for.

To me it is more than just the games Nintendo has to work on to win my trust back. The Wii looked interesting until I bought one and realized how broken it is. Accuracy should not be an afterthought nor should owners be charged extra for it. Reggie got alot of my money for a half assed broken innovation that they didn't deserve. So to hear a company that did essentially the same thing only made it work properly bash company A then all I can do is smile and cheer.

The Wii U does look interesting but i do question the practicality off it. I don't have a mile wide tv and the controller (based on appearance alone) doesn't look like it is built for marathon gaming. Not to mention how you are supposed to power it in the first place.

 

[TastyCarcass]

Microsoft sucked ass at this conference and should be very very worried about Nintendo now that they are starting to return to hardcore gaming

 

[Thespian]

I don't think you can say "Microsoft" did this if it was one employee during an interval. It's a shitty thing to do IMHO, but not so bad as, say... Devoting an entire website to it... [http://www.yaybuttons.com/]

 

[Teddy Roosevelt]

w-o-w,1st,the kinect has something nintendo has only failed at,voice control,2nd,only idiots think nintendo is the best since that have don't anything all that great in the past 10 years,hell all nentendo 3ds titles seem like copy and paste jobs,not like any of their other games haven't been already

go ahead and bash my opinion here,as it will only prove that nintendo fans are in fact to dumb to have noticed the facts stated here.

Past ten years? Alright, how about these two:

Super Smash Brothers Brawl
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

There are more to be mentioned, but I think those two would suffice to anyone who knows anything about good games.

The only people to think Nintendo games are all copy and past, even acknowledging the few recent "3-D" remakes of old games, are the people who are so very bad at seeing the true qualities of a game that they see Call of Duty, or their other favorite, mundane casual gaming experience, as, for all intents and purposes, the very incarnation of God. Maybe Mario games have a difficult time finding new material, but I'm pretty sure that after 26 years of damned fine successes, you have the right to get bogged down in the innovation the gaming community demands.

Though, if you knew anything about Nintendo, you'd know that, back in the early days, Nintendo planned on building its foundation on two sister franchises: Super Mario Bros. and The Legend of Zelda. As far as I can tell, that is still the plan. Mario would serve as Nintendo's linear game base, consisting of platformers and all those games Mario is good at.

The Legend of Zelda games were the non-linear puzzle/adventure games, and they obviously still are. Of course, those two types go hand-in-hand pretty damn well.

So, when I see/hear people complaining that Mario games are all the same blah blah blah, I have no choice but to think:

Well, no shit. Mario games are mostly platformers. Why would you want a platformer to change drastically? An improvement on such a game is to make longer levels with different layouts and possibly some extra enemies if the development team feels so inclined. Some extra gadgets would be cool, too, but, deep down, when I play a platformer, especially Mario, I don't care about the complexity of my controls. What I care about is playing some more Mario.

As far as Zelda, well, to be very frank, blunt, and quite honestly a bit rude, you have to be either blind or very daft to actually believe that Zelda games are all carbon copies of each other. Play Ocarina of Time[footnote]Incidentally, this game holds the Guinness World Record for highest rated game in history. I'm sorry, Call of Duty fans, but your sales numbers are meaningless. [/footnote], then play Twilight Princess.

Both of those Zelda games follow the Link-to-the-Past formula for Zelda titles, and are even part of their own chronology (while I do not believe in all of those timeline theories, these two are undeniably prequel and sequel, respectively). However, they are, in no, way, shape, or form, the same. The dungeons, plots, world maps, and all the important things are different. The game mechanics are very nearly the same, but that is what you want form a Zelda game. I don't want to play a Zelda where Link's control scheme is changed. Controls are one of the things characteristic about Mario and Zelda games, as well as many other franchises. I can see how someone might be baffled by and get stuck in multiple Zelda games and claim they are nearly identical because they are all similarly hard, but that is not the game's fault. It is the gamer's for not being good enough to read into the game.

So, once you're done raging and bashing the superior corporation of Nintendo (numbers don't lie, they are more successful), you may return to your generic, unrealistic "realistic shooters."

 

[masher]

I guess it's a good thing Nintendo's not the type of company to return fire via mud-slinging.
Least I hope so... fanboys are one thing, but if the companies themselves were to indulge in it... I don't want to think about it.

 

[Epicspoon]

w-o-w,1st,the kinect has something nintendo has only failed at,voice control,2nd,only idiots think nintendo is the best since that have don't anything all that great in the past 10 years,hell all nentendo 3ds titles seem like copy and paste jobs,not like any of their other games haven't been already

go ahead and bash my opinion here,as it will only prove that nintendo fans are in fact to dumb to have noticed the facts stated here.

Past ten years? Alright, how about these two:

Super Smash Brothers Brawl
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

There are more to be mentioned, but I think those two would suffice to anyone who knows anything about good games.

The only people to think Nintendo games are all copy and past, even acknowledging the few recent "3-D" remakes of old games, are the people who are so very bad at seeing the true qualities of a game that they see Call of Duty, or their other favorite, mundane casual gaming experience, as, for all intents and purposes, the very incarnation of God. Maybe Mario games have a difficult time finding new material, but I'm pretty sure that after 26 years of damned fine successes, you have the right to get bogged down in the innovation the gaming community demands.

Though, if you knew anything about Nintendo, you'd know that, back in the early days, Nintendo planned on building its foundation on two sister franchises: Super Mario Bros. and The Legend of Zelda. As far as I can tell, that is still the plan. Mario would serve as Nintendo's linear game base, consisting of platformers and all those games Mario is good at.

The Legend of Zelda games were the non-linear puzzle/adventure games, and they obviously still are. Of course, those two types go hand-in-hand pretty damn well.

So, when I see/hear people complaining that Mario games are all the same blah blah blah, I have no choice but to think:

Well, no shit. Mario games are mostly platformers. Why would you want a platformer to change drastically? An improvement on such a game is to make longer levels with different layouts and possibly some extra enemies if the development team feels so inclined. Some extra gadgets would be cool, too, but, deep down, when I play a platformer, especially Mario, I don't care about the complexity of my controls. What I care about is playing some more Mario.

As far as Zelda, well, to be very frank, blunt, and quite honestly a bit rude, you have to be either blind or very daft to actually believe that Zelda games are all carbon copies of each other. Play Ocarina of Time[footenote]Incidentally, this game holds the Guinness World Record for highest rated game in history. I'm sorry, Call of Duty fans, but your sales numbers are meaningless. [/footnote], then play Twilight Princess.

Both of those Zelda games follow the Link-to-the-Past formula for Zelda titles, and are even part of their own chronology (while I do not believe in all of those timeline theories, these two are undeniably prequel and sequel, respectively). However, they are, in no, way, shape, or form, the same. The dungeons, plots, world maps, and all the important things are different. The game mechanics are very nearly the same, but that is what you want form a Zelda game. I don't want to play a Zelda where Link's control scheme is changed. Controls are one of the things characteristic about Mario and Zelda games, as well as many other franchises. I can see how someone might be baffled by and get stuck in multiple Zelda games and claim they are nearly identical because they are all similarly hard, but that is not the game's fault. It is the gamer's for not being good enough to read into the game.

So, once you're done raging and bashing the superior corporation of Nintendo (numbers don't lie, they are more successful), you may return to your generic, unrealistic "realistic shooters."

that was probably the best "the reason you suck speech" I have EVER seen. kudos to you.

 

[Epicspoon]

Who gives a shit? Everyone knows that the Wii is more geared to kids and casual gamers and that they're literally rolling in money because of that choice. I could call nintendo the worst thing since Hitler and they wouldn't care all that much because they have more money than god.

that's because money is a physical object existing only in the corporeal realm.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

Who gives a shit? Everyone knows that the Wii is more geared to kids and casual gamers and that they're literally rolling in money because of that choice. I could call nintendo the worst thing since Hitler and they wouldn't care all that much because they have more money than god.

that's because money is a physical object existing only in the corporeal realm.

Yeah, but religions can't seem to get enough of it and they always say it's for god,

 

[Epicspoon]

Who gives a shit? Everyone knows that the Wii is more geared to kids and casual gamers and that they're literally rolling in money because of that choice. I could call nintendo the worst thing since Hitler and they wouldn't care all that much because they have more money than god.

that's because money is a physical object existing only in the corporeal realm.

Yeah, but religions can't seem to get enough of it and they always say it's for god,

*high fives* lol while I do sort of agree with you I have to point out that they aren't totally lying. the money is used to help keep the church running which in a way supports god i suppose.