Why do people say that they won't buy Nintendo consoles for the games, yet want Nintendo to put their games on consoles of their choice? They can't want the games too badly if they're willing to buy a more expensive console (Sony and Microsoft's consoles generally cost more) just to get games they want instead of paying less for the console that has said games. What these people don't realize is that most of Nintendo's profits come from their hardware. If they went third party, Nintendo would lose most of their money.
Question About Nintendo
- Thread starter VG_Addict
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Okay, assuming I've managed to correctly parse your rather awkward wording, it's because the way things are they would have to buy two consoles in order to be able to play the games they can already play in addition to Nintendo games.
If Nintendo went third party then people could play all the games on one console. Which would be nice.
Although probably not so nice for Nintendo. Which is why I don't see it happening any time soon.
Although I may be the wrong person to ask since I have zero interest in either Nintendo's consoles or their games.
If Nintendo went third party then people could play all the games on one console. Which would be nice.
Although probably not so nice for Nintendo. Which is why I don't see it happening any time soon.
Although I may be the wrong person to ask since I have zero interest in either Nintendo's consoles or their games.
That's kinda a bad example, as Twilight Princess was modeled to play like Ocarina of Time, and gameplay wise is extremely similar. Heck the Arbitor's Grounds even does the same thing Ocarina of Time did when it came to getting 4 Poes to get an elevator to the boss of the dungeon. Gameplay wise, it's very similar to OoT when you're regular Link, but storywise it's different. Better examples would be Wind Waker being said as playing the same as Ocarina of Time, or using Skyward Sword as an example.VG_Addict said:
This is coming from a person who loves a Twilight Princess and has played all the Zelda games.
Art style isn't the only thing that makes a game though. If that's the case then each Ape Escape game doesn't reuse the same gameplay styles because "they look different." You said that Twilight Princess doesn't play like Ocarina of Time. Except it does, and just looks different. That's honestly not gonna convince people for your argument at all. Examples of the games playing different would be Skyward Sword for having to swing the sword at certain angles in order to kill enemies, or Wind Waker changing certain items when you're in the boat or being able to pick up enemy weapons and use the. Twilight Princess on the other hand just mainly adds the finishers for Link, and wolf Link is what plays differently. To someone who's never played the series, they would see OoT Link and TP Link and wonder what the difference is gameplay wise, and saying "they look different" isn't gonna convince them much at all.VG_Addict said:
Main thing I'm saying here is that other 3D Zelda games would be better examples than comparing Twilight Princess to Ocarina of Time. In you example it's like comparing Ape Escape 1 to Ape Escape 3, play the exact same in most cases and only look different mainly.
I never said anything about Sunshine and Galaxy (of course these two are different, one has more linear level design while the other gives you more freedom), Punch-Out (never heard anyone saying they wanted the franchise revived), or Kid Icarus (20 years later with no plans on doing another as Sakurai has said)VG_Addict said:
We are talking about Zelda, and I was pointing out that your example could be bettered if you were to use a different Zelda game in you example.
Honestly people will complain a the time about things. You can't please everyone, and trying to do so can lead to disaster since everyone has different opinions. When people say that "gamers are so fickle" it's because they are trying to combine all gamers as having only one opinion. That's like combining all the sects of Catholisim into one to say that they have the same opinion, which more often then nought they don't. It's best to just ignore it and continue enjoying what you enjoy. If I listened to people complaining all the time then Final Fantay XIi wouldn't be one of my favorite games of all time. Humans like to complain, it's what we all do really at some point or another, and we also need to realize that nothing is perfect and there will be flaws.VG_Addict said:
Some people will like one thing, while the other despises it possibly. If people don't like the Wii U, why do you have to try and convince them to like it. Same goes for the PS4, Xbox One, and the PC. Why do you need to convince them that something is good when they either don't care or actually know about it and don't care? Others I've seen have attributed this need to do this as a way of self-validating one's self about the purchase they've made. While I can see that being the case, I personally don't think that's the full reason.
But they're taking losses on Wii U and 3DS models. There goes that argument.VG_Addict said:
More on topic, people don't want to pay an extra amount of money for a console they're only going to get for one or two games. Nintendo consoles of late have had shitty third party support and so it's common to understand that you're buying a Nintendo console specifically for their own franchises.
So if they remade the exact same game with a different art style you would call it a different game?VG_Addict said:
What an absolutely terrible thread name.
Anyways, to answer your question, it's because people dislike console exclusivity.
That's it. There is no more nuance or thought put into the requests than that.
Anyways, to answer your question, it's because people dislike console exclusivity.
That's it. There is no more nuance or thought put into the requests than that.
That doesn't mean it was from hardware.VG_Addict said:
Also, seeing how they're worth billions, $6M in a quarter is utterly pathetic.
1. $6M in a quarter is still very pathetic for Nintendo.VG_Addict said:
2. Zachary Amaranth JUST SAID they're taking a loss on the device.
EDIT: I accidentally a name. Badly.
Agreedlacktheknack said:
Nintendo is one of the few companies that seem to get more of a pass than the others. It's most likely entirely due to its place in video gaming history and just how invested older gamers are in their memories of earlier console generations.
Still, I have to agree with you in principle. When I found out The Last of Us is a PS3 exclusive and had no means of playing it on PC it got me a little peeved. I mean I guess I could eventually pick up a PS3 somewhere for cheap, I do need a Blu-Ray player eventually and their prices are dropping, but it did still get under my skin. Heck, I'm fond of Nintendo and the only reason I have a 3DS is because friends on this site are amazing. I was ready to give up on buying new Pokemon games entirely from Black 2 onwards and I love Pokemon. I was willing to stop there because Black 2 would have been the last game of the series supported by the DS Lite I carry around all the time. I guess growing older has changed my spending habits in a way that doesn't directly benefit Nintendo anymore. Maybe that's happened to a lot of people.
Anyway, going back to Nintendo right now; I think they lost in marketing in a big way by naming their newest and biggest console yet the Wii U. I mean I remember when the SNES was being compared to the N64. The name was totally different and got me excited for it. Wii to Wii U sounds kindof... like a sidegrade? Doesn't sound like much of an upgrade.
Except you can. I love Nintendo to death, Zelda even more, but you can't deny they're always re-using the same concept and the same gameplay style for each of their games, with a few tweaks and changes every now and then.VG_Addict said:
Most official Mario games will always include collecting stars or whatnot from different sets of levels, all official Zelda games have Link traveling through dungeons collecting trinkets and gadgets, and Pokémon games will always be about beating the gym leaders and catching them all.
That said, I enjoy the formulas they go for, but the complaints about the lack of variety in Nintendo games is nonetheless a legit complaint.
Well, that's just two franchises of many that they made in their early days. I myself am a little annoyed that they make so few Kirby games, and that they don't seem to be really focusing on the Metroid franchise that much anymore. (Speaking from a promotion and mascot view.)VG_Addict said:
And while Sunshine and Galaxy are different in some ways, the basic setpieces are still lingering around.
Regarding the main topic, as someone said above, Nintendo has a very limited library when it comes to it's consoles, at least in recent years. While Sony and Microsoft haven't released that much yet, at least there are promises of third-party support, while Nintendo seems set on letting their main profit in game sales come from their own franchises. Speaking as someone who will only be able to afford one current-gen console, I'd love for Nintendo to have some third-party games, but as it looks right now, I'll probably get a PS4 and skip the Zelda's and Mario's for the time being.