|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Feb 7, 2013 22:41:03 GMT -5
You're right, it's not so much the exclusivity that bothers me. I don't think it has to be that way, and I don't think it accomplishes much in the end, but I don't think that's going to change. But my problem with Nintendo is more about how fiercely they've guarded these old series instead of trying to make a good game system that's worth playing. They don't have their priorities straight at all and they're finally paying for it. PS3 is a system that caters to high-end gaming because of its specs. 360 is more affordable and easily accessible and stresses multiplayer gaming. Wii...what do they do better than either of the other two systems? And there's games available to the former two that the Wii can't handle or apply in a multiplayer setting properly. And it's killing them, but they don't seem to care as long as they've got their ironclad grip on a handful of titles. So you don't like the fact that Nintendo wont let game, like Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc that they created themself to appear on their rival's system?.......So I'm guessing Microsoft should let Halo, Gear Of War or Fable appear on PS3/Wii U and Song should let Little Big Planet, God Of War, Infamous appear on 360/Wii U too. That does seem to be what he is saying, which is quite frankly f***ing stupid, because as already said, if all the systems had the exact same games, why would there even be a need for more than one console existing on the market? The gaming market would then essentially be the lone home console vs. the PC. And gaming would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Feb 7, 2013 23:03:59 GMT -5
The thing is that Nintendo's been having trouble with third parties for their consoles for almost two decades now, mainly now for reasons none of the current leadership is responsible for. Publishers, especially Japanese publishers, have long memories and Nintendo's iron fist approach to third parties during the 8 and 16-bit days still lingers in their heads, even though Yamauchi is long gone from the company. They just stuck by the company for portable games because of how overwhelmingly dominant Nintendo is in that area, even with Sony getting into the market.
Though in terms of sheer quantity, the Wii had wonderful third party support. Just so happened most of it was shovelware crap that managed to profit anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 0:22:08 GMT -5
So you don't like the fact that Nintendo wont let game, like Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc that they created themself to appear on their rival's system?.......So I'm guessing Microsoft should let Halo, Gear Of War or Fable appear on PS3/Wii U and Song should let Little Big Planet, God Of War, Infamous appear on 360/Wii U too. That does seem to be what he is saying, which is quite frankly f***ing stupid, because as already said, if all the systems had the exact same games, why would there even be a need for more than one console existing on the market? The gaming market would then essentially be the lone home console vs. the PC. And gaming would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Because my opinion differs with yours, I am "quite frankly f***ing stupid." Hmmm. You may want to change your wording there, partner. Yeah, I do wish that companies were less concerned about hoarding their IPs, and more about improving their systems, and Nintendo is far more concerned with the former. Is it a pipe dream? Probably. That doesn't mean I can't want it to happen though. Nintendo has been content to coast along with the same handful of series since the N64 days and almost everything else since is rubbish. Nintendo pretty much began the whole "war of exclusivity" and if they had their way, game systems would be advancing at a snail's pace. They tried this with the N64. The Playstation was better. Then they did this with the Gamecube. Xbox and PS2 were better. Then it goes on with the Wii, and then the WiiU...there's a pattern here of stagnation. Every time they post inferior hardware and try to get by on their exclusive games. They think that's going to keep them afloat forever, and it's really not. No franchise can last forever. What makes PC so great? The modding. What makes Xbox so great? The community size. What makes PS3 so great? The hardware. But what is it that makes Wii so great? Besides a couple of games, sparingly little. Their third-party management has been atrocious for years and that doesn't help them. Systems can have the same games. But certain systems have inherent performance advantages over the others. Except for Nintendo's systems. If they went the way of SEGA, and doled their games out to the major consoles and to the PC, that would be fine and dandy by me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 0:40:55 GMT -5
That does seem to be what he is saying, which is quite frankly f***ing stupid, because as already said, if all the systems had the exact same games, why would there even be a need for more than one console existing on the market? The gaming market would then essentially be the lone home console vs. the PC. And gaming would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Because my opinion differs with yours, I am "quite frankly f***ing stupid." Hmmm. You may want to change your wording there, partner. Yeah, I do wish that companies were less concerned about hoarding their IPs, and more about improving their systems, and Nintendo is far more concerned with the former. Is it a pipe dream? Probably. That doesn't mean I can't want it to happen though. Nintendo has been content to coast along with the same handful of series since the N64 days and almost everything else since is rubbish. Nintendo pretty much began the whole "war of exclusivity" and if they had their way, game systems would be advancing at a snail's pace. They tried this with the N64. The Playstation was better. Then they did this with the Gamecube. Xbox and PS2 were better. Then it goes on with the Wii, and then the WiiU...there's a pattern here of stagnation. Every time they post inferior hardware and try to get by on their exclusive games. They think that's going to keep them afloat forever, and it's really not. No franchise can last forever. What makes PC so great? The modding. What makes Xbox so great? The community size. What makes PS3 so great? The hardware. But what is it that makes Wii so great? Besides a couple of games, sparingly little. Their third-party management has been atrocious for years and that doesn't help them. Systems can have the same games. But certain systems have inherent performance advantages over the others. Except for Nintendo's systems. If they went the way of SEGA, and doled their games out to the major consoles and to the PC, that would be fine and dandy by me. Umm actually N64 was more powerful then the PS and the Gamecube was more powerful then the PS2 but weaker then the Xbox. As the for the whole "war of exclusivity"....that been going on since the Atari era. I'm sorry but if every system had the same games with no exclusivity, their wouldn't be a reason for 4 different systems/PC on the market And with no competition, their wouldn't be no reason for company to improve their system or try anything new.
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Feb 8, 2013 0:47:41 GMT -5
That does seem to be what he is saying, which is quite frankly f***ing stupid, because as already said, if all the systems had the exact same games, why would there even be a need for more than one console existing on the market? The gaming market would then essentially be the lone home console vs. the PC. And gaming would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Because my opinion differs with yours, I am "quite frankly f***ing stupid." Hmmm. You may want to change your wording there, partner. Yeah, I do wish that companies were less concerned about hoarding their IPs, and more about improving their systems, and Nintendo is far more concerned with the former. Is it a pipe dream? Probably. That doesn't mean I can't want it to happen though. Nintendo has been content to coast along with the same handful of series since the N64 days and almost everything else since is rubbish. Nintendo pretty much began the whole "war of exclusivity" and if they had their way, game systems would be advancing at a snail's pace. They tried this with the N64. The Playstation was better. Then they did this with the Gamecube. Xbox and PS2 were better. Then it goes on with the Wii, and then the WiiU...there's a pattern here of stagnation. Every time they post inferior hardware and try to get by on their exclusive games. They think that's going to keep them afloat forever, and it's really not. No franchise can last forever. What makes PC so great? The modding. What makes Xbox so great? The community size. What makes PS3 so great? The hardware. But what is it that makes Wii so great? Besides a couple of games, sparingly little. Their third-party management has been atrocious for years and that doesn't help them. Systems can have the same games. But certain systems have inherent performance advantages over the others. Except for Nintendo's systems. If they went the way of SEGA, and doled their games out to the major consoles and to the PC, that would be fine and dandy by me. The Wii is the only console put out by Nintendo that wasn't/isn't more powerful then a direct rival.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Feb 8, 2013 0:55:09 GMT -5
That does seem to be what he is saying, which is quite frankly f***ing stupid, because as already said, if all the systems had the exact same games, why would there even be a need for more than one console existing on the market? The gaming market would then essentially be the lone home console vs. the PC. And gaming would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Because my opinion differs with yours, I am "quite frankly f***ing stupid." Hmmm. You may want to change your wording there, partner. Yeah, I do wish that companies were less concerned about hoarding their IPs, and more about improving their systems, and Nintendo is far more concerned with the former. Is it a pipe dream? Probably. That doesn't mean I can't want it to happen though. Nintendo has been content to coast along with the same handful of series since the N64 days and almost everything else since is rubbish. Nintendo pretty much began the whole "war of exclusivity" and if they had their way, game systems would be advancing at a snail's pace. They tried this with the N64. The Playstation was better. Then they did this with the Gamecube. Xbox and PS2 were better. Then it goes on with the Wii, and then the WiiU...there's a pattern here of stagnation. Every time they post inferior hardware and try to get by on their exclusive games. They think that's going to keep them afloat forever, and it's really not. No franchise can last forever. What makes PC so great? The modding. What makes Xbox so great? The community size. What makes PS3 so great? The hardware. But what is it that makes Wii so great? Besides a couple of games, sparingly little. Their third-party management has been atrocious for years and that doesn't help them. Systems can have the same games. But certain systems have inherent performance advantages over the others. Except for Nintendo's systems. If they went the way of SEGA, and doled their games out to the major consoles and to the PC, that would be fine and dandy by me. Never said YOU were "f***ing stupid". But the idea that no platform should have exclusive? That(which is what I was talking about in the first place) IS f***ing stupid. All that says to me is you just don't want to buy multiple systems, honestly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 0:56:27 GMT -5
Because my opinion differs with yours, I am "quite frankly f***ing stupid." Hmmm. You may want to change your wording there, partner. Yeah, I do wish that companies were less concerned about hoarding their IPs, and more about improving their systems, and Nintendo is far more concerned with the former. Is it a pipe dream? Probably. That doesn't mean I can't want it to happen though. Nintendo has been content to coast along with the same handful of series since the N64 days and almost everything else since is rubbish. Nintendo pretty much began the whole "war of exclusivity" and if they had their way, game systems would be advancing at a snail's pace. They tried this with the N64. The Playstation was better. Then they did this with the Gamecube. Xbox and PS2 were better. Then it goes on with the Wii, and then the WiiU...there's a pattern here of stagnation. Every time they post inferior hardware and try to get by on their exclusive games. They think that's going to keep them afloat forever, and it's really not. No franchise can last forever. What makes PC so great? The modding. What makes Xbox so great? The community size. What makes PS3 so great? The hardware. But what is it that makes Wii so great? Besides a couple of games, sparingly little. Their third-party management has been atrocious for years and that doesn't help them. Systems can have the same games. But certain systems have inherent performance advantages over the others. Except for Nintendo's systems. If they went the way of SEGA, and doled their games out to the major consoles and to the PC, that would be fine and dandy by me. The Wii is the only console put out by Nintendo that wasn't/isn't more powerful then a direct rival. Not actually.... NES was supposed to be weaker compare to the Master System but I'm not sure. SNES was weaker compare to the Neo Geo N64 wasn't, compare to the Saturn and PS Gamecube was more powerful then the Dreamcast and PS2 but weaker compare to the Xbox.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Feb 8, 2013 1:01:23 GMT -5
The Wii is the only console put out by Nintendo that wasn't/isn't more powerful then a direct rival. Not actually.... NES was supposed to be weaker compare to the Master System but I'm not sure. SNES was weaker compare to the Neo Geo N64 wasn't, compare to the Saturn and PS Gamecube was more powerful then the Dreamcast and PS2 but weaker compare to the Xbox. Well he didn't say that Nintendo was flat out the strongest. The NES/Master System was about even I guess, SNES beat Genesis easily, N64 was stronger than Saturn/PS1, GameCube was stronger than PS2 and Dreamcast. Wii is the only one weaker than both opponents. Or at least clearly weaker.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 1:05:06 GMT -5
Not actually.... NES was supposed to be weaker compare to the Master System but I'm not sure. SNES was weaker compare to the Neo Geo N64 wasn't, compare to the Saturn and PS Gamecube was more powerful then the Dreamcast and PS2 but weaker compare to the Xbox. Well he didn't say that Nintendo was flat out the strongest. The NES/Master System was about even I guess, SNES beat Genesis easily, N64 was stronger than Saturn/PS1, GameCube was stronger than PS2 and Dreamcast. Wii is the only one weaker than both opponents. Or at least clearly weaker. Yea I know but every system has it strength and faults.
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Feb 8, 2013 1:40:58 GMT -5
Except the hardware isn't worse. Reading comprehension: "in some areas." Not all. The RAM especially is much worse and it's why games that run UE3 struggle on the Wii U compared to 360 and PS3. Nintendo had to cut corners in a lot of areas thanks to the expense of the tablet controller. This is already the first console Nintendo's ever made that's actually sold at a loss. I believe the GPU is better than the 360's or PS3's, but the next Xbox and Playstation will likely blow it out of the water. Posts like this make me wonder why Nintendo couldn't have just integrated the main console into the tablet controller. Would it have been that difficult to accomplish?
|
|
King Ghidorah
El Dandy
On Probation for Charges of two counts of Saxual Music.
How Absurd
Posts: 8,330
|
Post by King Ghidorah on Feb 8, 2013 3:08:19 GMT -5
Video game threads are always funny.
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on Feb 8, 2013 4:19:57 GMT -5
This is what Nintendo gets for being cagey with all their exclusive stuff. Which is a death wish when you're competing with Microsoft and Sony. So now you have Mario and Zelda, so what? You honestly think those alone can sell your entire system and the other, mediocre ancillary games? They deserve to go under for pulling this for so many years. No game should have to be exclusive to any system. Well, it worked for the Wii and the DS. But more seriously, I disagree on no game having to be exclusive. It's always worked that way in gaming and it never really hurt, especially since "exclusives" don't tend to remain so very long these days. Besides, it would be tough for any of the system manufacturers to really make money if they didn't have anything to stand out from the crowd. You're right, it's not so much the exclusivity that bothers me. I don't think it has to be that way, and I don't think it accomplishes much in the end, but I don't think that's going to change. But my problem with Nintendo is more about how fiercely they've guarded these old series instead of trying to make a good game system that's worth playing. They don't have their priorities straight at all and they're finally paying for it. PS3 is a system that caters to high-end gaming because of its specs. 360 is more affordable and easily accessible and stresses multiplayer gaming. Wii...what do they do better than either of the other two systems? And there's games available to the former two that the Wii can't handle or apply in a multiplayer setting properly. And it's killing them, but they don't seem to care as long as they've got their ironclad grip on a handful of titles. So you don't like the fact that Nintendo wont let game, like Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc that they created themself to appear on their rival's system?.......So I'm guessing Microsoft should let Halo, Gear Of War or Fable appear on PS3/Wii U and Song should let Little Big Planet, God Of War, Infamous appear on 360/Wii U too. I think he meant the real problem he has with their policy is that they focus almost entirely their old franchises rather than trying to create anything new or at least encouraging third-party developers to actually release their products on their consoles, which is quite true (hence why the general opinion on the Wii seems to have become "well it's nice and all, but there just isn't much to do with it") and is a problem Nintendo has had since at least the N64. So just to clarify, my point is: exclusives are (mostly) a good thing, focusing solely on them is a bad thing.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,372
|
Post by Push R Truth on Feb 8, 2013 7:48:10 GMT -5
Video game threads are always funny. For the life of me I just can't figure out how they always devolve into "Oh yeah, the systems I prefer are better than the systems you prefer!" And then people start pulling random stats and specs out to back up their claim. It's as if buying X system insults somebody's ancestors as if you were taking a dump on their grave.
|
|
amaron
Samurai Cop
I yam what I yam.
Posts: 2,212
|
Post by amaron on Feb 8, 2013 13:26:12 GMT -5
Except the hardware isn't worse. Reading comprehension: "in some areas." Not all. The RAM especially is much worse and it's why games that run UE3 struggle on the Wii U compared to 360 and PS3. Nintendo had to cut corners in a lot of areas thanks to the expense of the tablet controller. This is already the first console Nintendo's ever made that's actually sold at a loss. I believe the GPU is better than the 360's or PS3's, but the next Xbox and Playstation will likely blow it out of the water. The RAM is half the bandwidth, but not half the speed because of the Wii U's memory controller. It's low latency and there is more of it. The GPU is ~50% faster than the PS3 and 360 using the 352 GFLOPS number being thrown around, and that number could be higher because the Wii U GPU is completely custom and no one really knows. Some of the items the 360 and PS3 GPUs have to handle are hard coded into the Wii U board freeing the GPU from having to deal with them. The CPU is on par with the 360s, if not a bit faster. It is not as good as the cell processor in the PS3, but no one has been able to really use that effectively. As far as the ports go: Writing CPU intensive code won't work as well on a console that is GPU and efficiency based. Don't know what to tell you. I'd appreciate it if you kept the snarky comments to yourself. I can read just fine, it's just all I read was comments without any real substance behind them other than 'Wii U sucks lolz'. I responded in kind.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Feb 8, 2013 13:42:25 GMT -5
Reading comprehension: "in some areas." Not all. The RAM especially is much worse and it's why games that run UE3 struggle on the Wii U compared to 360 and PS3. Nintendo had to cut corners in a lot of areas thanks to the expense of the tablet controller. This is already the first console Nintendo's ever made that's actually sold at a loss. I believe the GPU is better than the 360's or PS3's, but the next Xbox and Playstation will likely blow it out of the water. The RAM is half the bandwidth, but not half the speed because of the Wii U's memory controller. It's low latency and there is more of it. The GPU is ~50% faster than the PS3 and 360 using the 352 GFLOPS number being thrown around, and that number could be higher because the Wii U GPU is completely custom and no one really knows. Some of the items the 360 and PS3 GPUs have to handle are hard coded into the Wii U board freeing the GPU from having to deal with them. The CPU is on par with the 360s, if not a bit faster. It is not as good as the cell processor in the PS3, but no one has been able to really use that effectively. As far as the ports go: Writing CPU intensive code won't work as well on a console that is GPU and efficiency based. Don't know what to tell you. I'd appreciate it if you kept the snarky comments to yourself. I can read just fine, it's just all I read was comments without any real substance behind them other than 'Wii U sucks lolz'. I responded in kind. Well one thing I think we can all agree on is, if the PS4 and Nextbox match their rumored specs, Nintendo will be faced with another Wii situation in that Sony's and Microsoft's offerings will out pace their machine in the technical standpoint making most developers unwilling to make a Wii U port because they would have to make an entirely different build for the Wii U, and that'll make the development costs increase for any game that goes to Wii U, PS4, and Nextbox. So essentially most of the Wii U's games will either be Nintendo's own games or games made exclusively for the platform by third parties. And maybe a handful of inferior ports of select multiplatform games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 14:04:46 GMT -5
It sucks for the Wii U, but sucks even more for the game in general, as it may lose overall interest, especially with a second lengthu delay.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,465
Member is Online
|
Post by Dub H on Feb 8, 2013 14:16:24 GMT -5
My few cents.Yes.Nintendo can indeed sell their consoles only with their own IPs.second.
You complain of NINTENDO keeping exclusives games when they have the least exclusive games?Sorry that does not make sense.
Nintendo can never win i guess,either they don`t have enough exclusive,or they should not have exclusives.
|
|