Uh, technically it is. Game developers make the games for the console, then Nintendo releases them. CLEARLY they are at fault for distributing varied quality video games that hold no interest for the more dedicated gamer society. As for a sequel to Wiisports, you might as well just turn off the console and jog vigorously around your block for a good half an hour, risking midnight stabs (if you're into midnight exercise), and it'd STILL be more fun than flicking your wrist at a TV.BowieZ said:It ISN'T NINTENDO'S FAULT...
Let me start of by saying I competely agree with you with whole milking sequal stupidity talk.BowieZ said:Do you people who criticize the Wii stop to realize how stupid you sound? It ISN'T NINTENDO'S FAULT most of the games on its console are crappy. Blame *game developers* for exploiting a popular console and creating cheap and easy games to make a buck. Not only that, but crappy games aren't unique to Wii...
Secondly, Nintendo's first-party (and second-party) games are awesome. If you don't like Zelda or Mario Galaxy or Smash Brothers or Donkey Kong or the upcoming Metroid 3 or Animal Crossing, then you simply don't like games period, or you prefer looking cool to actually having fun.
Thirdly, what's with this "Nintendo milking money with sequels" idea? Have you ever heard of:
Halo 1-3
Final Fantasy 1-12
GTA 1-4
Call of Duty 1-4
God of War 1-3
Gears of War 1-2
Doom 1-4
Mortal Kombat/Street Fighter 1-4
Tekken 1-6
Tomb Raider 1-9
Madden Every Year
Tony Hawk 1-Forever
Uncharted 1-2?
Yeah, how dare Nintendo release a sequel to Wii Sports... and how dare people get "suckered into" buying it and "fooled" into having fun...
i smell a fanboyBowieZ said:^ But your criticisms apply to Sony and Microsoft too... they all licence a lot of **** to be made, they all want to make a profit... but just because Nintendo's crappy games look "cartoony" while MS's look "hardcore" because of some nondescript grainy, bloody violent appearance, Nintendo cops the flak?
By the way, Nintendo has many more first-party franchises than MS or Sony, so I'm not sure what your point is unless you're blaming them for being so successful that people aren't interested in other titles... so what's the problem? Blame the masses for liking the status quo? Well Nintendo totally upended the status quo with the Wii controls -- whether you like it or not -- so you kinda need to give them some credit.
And Mario Kart Wii is awesome. I don't get what you can dislike about it... it has Bowser's Castle, DK's Jungle Parkway, Mario Raceway and Sherbet Land from N64 plus 16 new tracks... plus a whole lot of new stuff/characters/bikes/abilities/power-ups/online functionality/steering wheel?
Dude... All I heard was "Bla Bla Bla, Ilovemahwiilolz!!1!"BowieZ said:^ But your criticisms apply to Sony and Microsoft too... they all licence a lot of **** to be made, they all want to make a profit... but just because Nintendo's crappy games look "cartoony" while MS's look "hardcore" because of some nondescript grainy, bloody violent appearance, Nintendo cops the flak?
By the way, Nintendo has many more first-party franchises than MS or Sony, so I'm not sure what your point is unless you're blaming them for being so successful that people aren't interested in other titles... so what's the problem? Blame the masses for liking the status quo? Well Nintendo totally upended the status quo with the Wii controls -- whether you like it or not -- so you kinda need to give them some credit.
And Mario Kart Wii is awesome. I don't get what you can dislike about it... it has Bowser's Castle, DK's Jungle Parkway, Mario Raceway and Sherbet Land from N64 plus 16 new tracks... plus a whole lot of new stuff/characters/bikes/abilities/power-ups/online functionality/steering wheel?
See this is where I think you are missing the point of the comments here. Blanks said that Sony started the motion thing with the Eyetoy, while it was more successful, they certainly didn't come up with the idea. That idea was tried on the Nintendo system years ago which was the only point I made. You are the one trying to show off how much time you spend on wikipedia by adding that it was a flop, like that is relevant to either of our comments. Just because someone tried something and it failed doesn't mean anything, they still did it first. Heck, it could be argued that the Eyetoy is not a motion controller as much as video recognition device. In that case the Nintendo system still wins for having the first motion controller and the first successful one.runtheplacered said:It is a fact, but it's not really trivial or random. Flopping means it was poorly implemented by Nintendo. Surely somebody should be acknowledged for being the first to implement something that was actually worth using, right? Well, that wouldn't be the Power glove according to its poor sales figure and poor reception.Monshroud said:I stand corrected on who made the power glove, and re-reading I see how I mis-phrased my sentence, it should have said: "It started with the Power Glove for the NES". Don't know what it flopping has to do with it. . . Random trivial fact?runtheplacered said:That's not funny. Because Nintendo didn't make the Power Glove. Mattel did. Also, it flopped, hard.Monshroud said:That's funny, cause I thought Nintendo started it with the Power Glove back in the 80's before Sony had a console.Blanks said:As fun as listening to that review was, everyone knows Sony started the motion sensor stuff with that blasted eyetoy
If I invent the flying car but it's a horrible piece of crap and nobody would dare try to use it, then O.K., that's a random trivial fact. It seems like, I'd rather be the guy that actually innovates the flying car into something people can actually use and would want to purchase.
Keep blocking your ears to reasoned argumentation. You're impressing everyone.WaffleGod said:Dude... All I heard was "Bla Bla Bla, Ilovemahwiilolz!!1!"BowieZ said:^ But your criticisms apply to Sony and Microsoft too... they all licence a lot of **** to be made, they all want to make a profit... but just because Nintendo's crappy games look "cartoony" while MS's look "hardcore" because of some nondescript grainy, bloody violent appearance, Nintendo cops the flak?
By the way, Nintendo has many more first-party franchises than MS or Sony, so I'm not sure what your point is unless you're blaming them for being so successful that people aren't interested in other titles... so what's the problem? Blame the masses for liking the status quo? Well Nintendo totally upended the status quo with the Wii controls -- whether you like it or not -- so you kinda need to give them some credit.
And Mario Kart Wii is awesome. I don't get what you can dislike about it... it has Bowser's Castle, DK's Jungle Parkway, Mario Raceway and Sherbet Land from N64 plus 16 new tracks... plus a whole lot of new stuff/characters/bikes/abilities/power-ups/online functionality/steering wheel?