Can a proper gamer ignore Nintendo games?

You can, but you're missing out on a ton of the best stuff from each generation.

I can't imagine anyone would want both an Xbox 360 and PS3, rather than one of the two and a Wii. Owning both of the HD twins instead of one and a Wii is a little redundant.
 
StevieP said:
Well... I'd argue that having a PS3 and a 360 is almost the same thing, because they share the majority of their titles. I'd say it works better to have a Wii plus one of the HD consoles
or the best choice: a PC
. And that's what a great number of people did this gen. Skipping one of the HD consoles for a Wii would've given you a much wider variety of gaming.
Click to expand...
There are more top tier exclusives this generation on either the PS3 or the 360 than on the Wii though, so if being a "proper gamer" entails you playing as many of the top tier games as possible you'd have to have a PS3 and 360 before a Wii.

Its sad really. The PS3, 360, have 90% overlap. Almost all of that 90% is also on PC. Despite that in the remaining 10% of exclusive titles they each have more titles at the forefront of their respective genres than the Wii does.

jeremy1456 said:
You can, but you're missing out on a ton of the best stuff from each generation.

I can't imagine anyone would want both an Xbox 360 and PS3, rather than one of the two and a Wii. Owning both of the HD twins instead of one and a Wii is a little redundant.
Click to expand...
Unless you want to play Halo 3, Halo Reach, Gears of War 1, 2, and 3, Uncharted 1, 2, and 3, Gran Turismo, Wipeout HD, Demon Souls, etc. etc..

There is probably at least a dozen exclusive titles on either system that would be considered a cornerstone "system seller" on the Wii but gets overshadowed in the sea of multiplatform 3rd party titles on each of the HD systems.
 
EloquentM said:
Can a proper gamer ignore the "HD twins"?
Click to expand...
No sir, you can not. For they behold the utmost ensemble of glorious gaming. One would be a fool not relish their faces with the beauty that is Uncharted, or test their might in the majestic world that is Demon's Souls.
 
Dear Nintendo Power,

I just got the Master Sword in Legend of Zelda. My brother says Nintendo games suck. I don't know what to tell him except he has bad taste and he has no soul. What should I do?

Sincerely,
Perturbed Master Quester

Dear Perturbed Master Quester,

Tell him that's like his opinion bro.
 
the problem with current Nintendo home consoles is how long you have to wait for AAA 1st partygame

not counting remixes, remasters of Old Games

it's like you own and PS3 or 360 to play games all the time then dust off the Wii (formerly GC) when a 1st party game comes out on a Blue Moon.. then shelf the unit back for another year or two until the next 1st party AAA game is released

not really worth having a console for waiting for a game in 2 years
 
A proper, hardcore gamer is an enthusiast of the videogame industry that plays whatever the hell he/she wants to play. If Nintendo games aren't your thing don't play them. You'll be missing out on some great experiences but if it isn't your cup of tea, why waste money on them? Personally my three platforms of choice are 3DS, Wii, and PC, but I have been known to play games on other platforms, though its really cherry picked stuff.
 
Nintendo will always have some of the best games of each generation.

I don't give a shit about third parties on Nintendo consoles, because I buy them just to play the Nintendo games.

They were my first love and will always be strongest love when it comes to gaming.
 
Concept17 said:
To me I find the only reason people really love each new iteration of their games is more due to nostalgia than anything else.
Click to expand...
Nostalgia is the only reason that people love new iterations of Metal Gear games too? And Street Fighter? Ninja Gaiden? Final Fantasy? GTA?
 
gutter_trash said:
the problem with current Nintendo home consoles is how long you have to wait for AAA 1st partygame

not counting remixes, remasters of Old Games

it's like you own and PS3 or 360 to play games all the time then dust off the Wii (formerly GC) when a 1st party game comes out on a Blue Moon.. then shelf the unit back for another year or two until the next 1st party AAA game is released

not really worth having a console for waiting for a game in 2 years
Click to expand...

AAA games (1st party especially) have been released every year for Wii.

This is the first year that we haven't gotten multiple AAA games in a year.

Did you forget that last year we got Monster Hunter 3, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Super Mario Galaxy 2, No More Heroes 2, Sin and Punishment 2, and Tatsunoko Vs Capcom all last year?

EDIT: And that's not counting the exclusive B-tier games that were released. People bury their head in the sand when it comes to the Wii, and I'm really not sure why.
 
I think the phrasing of the thread title hides the real issue. Let me break up the issue into naturally diverging parts:

Q1: Is it in the human nature to sometimes dismiss things for bad reasons?

A1: As a matter of fact the answer is yes. Human nature dictates that there will be times when intuition and emotion are the driving factors behind one decision or another. Wrongful dismissal is a reality of life.

Applying that logic to the thread: do some people dismiss Nintendo for the wrong reasons?



Q2: Does wrongful dismissal have any major lasting impact?

A2: For there to be a lasting impact, the problem of wrongful dismissal would need to be the sentiment echoed by the majority of the people. Question then is, is the majority of the people you've met naturally dismissive? You'd either be lying if you answered 'Yes' or you simply didn't understand the question right.

Applying that logic to the thread: Is it a concern for Nintendo that some people dismiss their products for no good reason?



Q3: Who is the bigger victim of wrongful dismissal?

A3: The victim is the side that loses more. Isn't it fair then to say that as gamers we all value quality entertainment (irrelevant of the fact that quality is subjective)?

Applying that logic to the thread: What's the bigger miss, 40 Rupees to Nintendo or 15 hours of quality gaming to the player?

All things considered I don't think the biggest crime here is "Why you dismissing Nintendo for no reason yeaw" but rather "Why you dismissing Nintendo". Notice there difference between the two questions?
 
Just out grew my love for Nintendo since I played the hell out of them during the famicom days. I'm fine with my experience and fun times with the old Zeldas, the Metroids, Rockmans and SMB's.
 
jeremy1456 said:
EDIT: And that's not counting the exclusive B-tier games that were released. People bury their head in the sand when it comes to the Wii, and I'm really not sure why.
Click to expand...
No achievements/trophies.
 
jeremy1456 said:
AAA games (1st party especially) have been released every year for Wii.

This is the first year that we haven't gotten multiple AAA games in a year.

Did you forget that last year we got Monster Hunter 3, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Super Mario Galaxy 2, No More Heroes 2, Sin and Punishment 2, and Tatsunoko Vs Capcom all last year?
Click to expand...
the bolded are not 1st party games.. we are on the subject of Nintendo 1st party games
 
Nintendork22 said:
Or should gamers be expected to play Nintendo games?
Click to expand...

As many laughs as I got from the OP I think that this was my favourite line. For some reason it calls to mind images of chubby dudebros being lead into a Nintendo re-education camp.
 
gutter_trash said:
the bolded are not 1st party games.. we are on the subject of Nintendo 1st party games
Click to expand...

I think nowadays, any game more or less exlusive to a Nintendo console - especially the Wii - could be seen as "a Nintendo game". Prove me wrong, but I think most if not all people who bought a Wii bought them for Nintendo games. If they dislike/ignore Nintendo games, they wouldn't have a Wii. Which means, they'd miss out on these games as well, hence "Nintendo (console) games".

As for me - I play whatever I want on whatever system I own. Which - yes - includes Nintendo games.

On the overall topic : If you're REALLY deep into this hobby, talking and thinking about game design, maybe even work at a studio developing games or doin' the indie walk, it would be bollocks to ignore Nintendo. Why? Even if many of their franchises seem to repeat themselves, they are mostly well designed and have an appeal that can lure in seasoned gamers as well as newcomers. Hence "franchises repeating themselves"(e.g. every Mario or Zelda game is "new", featuring new levels/ideas/mechanics (which makes old fans buy the new episodes) but is also easily playable by newcomers as a starting point (maybe except Super Mario Bros 2 jp. or Zelda Majoras Mask). As someone who thinks about game design, even something basic just as Super Mario Bros 1 can still be used to perfectly illustrate basic things good games have, like "risk/reward", "game giving feedback to the gamer" or "secrets and exploration". I'm not dismissing other studios, either. One should as well look at Naughty Dog or Bungie or Capcom etc.etc. basically every studio that is able to make good games with a (widespread?) appeal.

That doesn't mean you have to like and play these games yourself - though just completely disregarding and ignoring anything won't make for a good discussion or proper knowledge about this hobby (e.g. I dislike the Call of Duty-series. Nevertheless played through CoD4 just to know what everyone's talking about and why and how this game works. Obviously, I won't do this for every game I don't like :D But once in a while, it's interesting to analyse something or think about "Why is this regarded as something worthwhile?" Btw. This doesn't only apply to videogames).
 
Nintendork22 said:
To boil this down to it's logical extreme:

Can you claim to be a gaming enthusiast and never play a Nintendo game?

The options are:
A) Yes. There are no requirements to be a gaming enthusiast.
B) Yes. There are requirements to be a gaming enthusiast, but there are no specific games/series required.
C) Yes. To be considered a gaming enthusiast, there are requirements regarding specific games/series to be played. However, Nintendo is not included in these required games/series.
D) No. To be considered a gaming enthusiast there are requirements regarding specific games/franchises to be played. Nintendo is included in these required games/series.
Click to expand...

I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
 
This thread has made me realize that I've bought the least amount of Nintendo published games this gen than I have ever going all the way back to NES and including handhelds.
 
Nintendork22 said:
I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
Click to expand...
No one commented because its retarded to try and boil down any debate into a multiple choice cookie cutter series of answers.

Kinda like how Nintendo fans in this thread keep using vague references to how Nintendo has this superior philosophy to all the rest of the industry, are the only ones who can see the true path the making "fun" games, etc..

Its delusional.
 
"D) No. To be considered a gaming enthusiast there are requirements regarding specific games/franchises to be played. Nintendo is included in these required games/series."

Nintendork22 said:
I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the canon we have for world literature. Which is basically telling you what you should read if you want to be able to attend to sophisticated discussions about literature in general. Maybe we'll have a canon of videogames as well as soon as videogames are accepted properly as part of our culture by academics :D
 
gutter_trash said:
the bolded are not 1st party games.. we are on the subject of Nintendo 1st party games
Click to expand...

Okay then.

I just didn't know that 6 months somehow equates to 2 years by your philosophy. That was the difference between Galaxy 2 and DKC Returns.
 
Nintendork22 said:
I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
Click to expand...

You have an interesting premise and then you want to limit what people can say? What sort of driver for discussion is that? You totalitarian.
 
A PS3/Wii or 360/Wii combo brings a more complete gaming experience than a PS3/360 combo. (But obviously not as complete an experience as a PS3/360/Wii combo.)
 
Nintendork, no one (and I mean no one) here is entertaining the premise of your thread.

There's no such thing as a proper gamer.

Some gamers are active military who play nothing but Madden games every year.

Some gamers are little girls who play nothing but licensed Cartoon Network games on their DS.

Some gamers are hardcore RPG fans who play everything Atlus or Square-Enix publishes.

Some gamers are huge shooter fans.

Some gamers play only single player.

Some gamers play only online multiplayer.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only off Steam.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only from retail.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only on the handhelds.

Some gamers have tons of money and they play every platform known to man, while still complaining that there aren't enough games.

Some gamers play only games from the 80s and 90s, while complaining about all modern games.

Some gamers love motion controls.

Some gamers swear PC gaming is superior to console gaming.

None of these choices is incorrect. And you can easily change from one type of gamer to another just depending on your mood or lifestyle.
 
Nintendork22 said:
I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
Click to expand...
Hahaha everyone ignored you so that proves you're right? Really?
 
Speevy said:
Nintendork, no one (and I mean no one) here is entertaining the premise of your thread.

There's no such thing as a proper gamer.

Some gamers are active military who play nothing but Madden games every year.

Some gamers are little girls who play nothing but licensed Cartoon Network games on their DS.

Some gamers are hardcore RPG fans who play everything Atlus or Square-Enix publishes.

Some gamers are huge shooter fans.

Some gamers play only single player.

Some gamers play only online multiplayer.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only off Steam.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only from retail.

Some gamers play a little of everything, but only on the handhelds.

Some gamers have tons of money and they play every platform known to man, while still complaining that there aren't enough games.

Some gamers play only games from the 80s and 90s, while complaining about all modern games.

Some gamers love motion controls.

Some gamers swear PC gaming is superior to console gaming.

None of these choices is incorrect. And you can easily change from one type of gamer to another just depending on your mood or lifestyle.
Click to expand...


Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
 
Nintendork22 said:
Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

Okay, just so it's clear, Nintendork22 thinks that he's the arbiter of taste.
 
Nintendork22 said:
I like how no one commented on these options, because doing so would basically prove that D is the only defendable answer.
Click to expand...

Before I start out, let me say that I'm a big fan of Nintendo. Love most of their output. Their stuff clicks with me and I really enjoy it.

That said, no, D is not the only defensible answer. In fact, I don't think it's even the most "correct" answer, if there is such a thing. A and B are also perfectly valid answers, and I'd argue that B is the correct answer. I'd argue C is the only one that isn't defensible, because if you were to make a list of "required" games, certain Nintendo games / franchises would be on it simply due to their importance in the industry. And like others have said, I'd only argue for "required" games / franchises to be considered if you're attempting serious criticism of a game or the industry in general. I'd argue option B over A because I'd probably consider how much someone plays to be an indicator of whether or not they were an enthusiast. I wouldn't call someone who watches a movie once every other month to be a "movie enthusiast". But someone can certainly be a gaming enthusiast and never play a Nintendo game.

One of the joys (or drawbacks, if you're considering the negative impact on the wallet) of gaming is that there is a lot of good stuff out there. More stuff than most people have time to play. So if someone spends their time playing SpaceChem, Atom Zombie Smasher, Civ V, the Mass Effect series, X-Com, Baldur's Gate, etc and never touches a Nintendo game, I think you'd be downright wrong to not call them a gaming enthusiast.

Roto13 said:
A PS3/Wii or 360/Wii combo brings a more complete gaming experience than a PS3/360 combo. (But obviously not as complete an experience as a PS3/360/Wii combo.)
Click to expand...

I'd go with PC/Wii/one of the HD twins, if I had more money and free time.
 
Have not owned a Nintendo system since N64. But I'd still classify myself as a much bigger gamer than most of the people I know who own multiple systems.
 
Nintendork22 said:
Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

You mean he thinks people who play games regardless of genre or platform are gaming enthusiasts?
 
Nintendork22 said:
Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

This thread is still going and you're still harping on about this?

Just stop it. You're trying to identify a scholarly pursuit when you yourself are no scholar.
 
How on earth do you judge whether or not someone else is interested enough in a certain activity to be considered an "enthusiast?" How would you know?
 
yeah, all you need is a neck-beard and a self-diagnosis for asbergers. proper gamer™
 
Nintendork22 said:
Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
So?

I wonder if you're worried about being judged by gamers or worried you won't be able to do the judging.
 
Nintendork22 said:
Okay, just so it's clear, Speevy thinks that people who only play Madden or only play Cartoon Network games are gaming enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that someone who plays Madden competitively is certainly a gaming enthusiast. It even has its own annual celebrity tournament.
 
Sho_Nuff82 said:
I'd argue that someone who plays Madden competitively is certainly a gaming enthusiast. It even has its own annual celebrity tournament.
Click to expand...
And I'd argue that one could have played every game on the OP's list and still not be a gaming enthusiast.
 
Nintendo has done almost nothing to interest me since the days of the SNES, and in recent memory, gone out of their way to remain uninteresting. Eff 'em. I got my PC!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Any Xbox 360 Can be hacked now in less than 60 seconds - Modern Vintage Gamer
2
76
1K
Thanati replied
Nintendo Mentions "Nintendo Switch 2 Edition" Games, Can Only Be Played on Switch 2
2
96
9K
PeteBull replied
I buy a Nintendo system for Nintendo games.
Opinion  2 3
106
2K
Deerock71 replied
Modern Vintage Gamer: Nintendo Switch 2 Backward Compatibility Tested - It's Good!
Analysis Trailer Hardware 
23
8K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
PC Gamer Liquid Metal PSA
38
838
Buggy Loop replied
Top Bottom