Why can't they be civil and normal like Xbox fans?Kanbee-san said:
Who wants Nintendo to fail?
- Thread starter missAran
- Start date
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Che said:
THIS is what bugs me about Nintendo fans. They all act as if liking big-name Nintendo games is mandatory.
Fact: I've never liked a Zelda.
Fact: I did not like SMB when it debuted.
Fact: Other than the fisrt one (which was a great, great game) I've never like a Mario Kart
Fact: I was bored halfway through Super Mario 64, and I still feel it was a huge misstep for the series
Fact: The last great Nintendo game I played was Advance Wars, and before that, Yoshi's Island. Granted I haven't played (and would probably like) Pikmin.
As far as the NES and glory days of gaming-- the glory days of Gaming were on the Amiga and Atrai ST in those years. Compare what was available on NES with what was available on computer, and it's like night and day. It wasn't until the 16-bit days that the consoles caught back up. Nintendo saved the industry, no doubt, but they also cost it huge amounts of innovation and variety. We actually had a *downgrade* of standards in those years-- finite, short games-- games expected to fit into fairly rigid molds-- tile based graphics which limited developer creativity-- replacing standard joysticks with a cheapass D-pad (a move the industry *still* hasn't really recovered from, but worked around). This is why it sticks in my craw when some Ninbot (and really, the hate is for them, not Nintendo) talks up Nintendo's "innovation." To hear them tell it, Nintendo invented 4 joystick ports and analogue controllers-- two things the last generation of consoles *before* the NES had.
Oh yeah-- and regarding the gimmcks thing-- Eyetoy *is* a gimmick too. Like all the GB addod crap and the DS, I think it's rather lame. Nintendo doesn't have an exclusive on making dumb peripherals rather than focusing on games.
:lol Bazing.Socreges said:
And honestly. Why would you want a company to fail, unless that company is threatening your way of life (EA, maybe)? Nintendo isn't making less games available for your PS2 or Xbox. They didn't kill your dog. Miyamoto didn't bone your mother. And god damnit, if he did, you need to go the police, and not the GAF.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Socreges said:
yeah some nice ownage there.
Amir0x said:
I agree with your first statement.
(Looks at balance sheet) Nintendo "failing" isn't gonna happen even if some mean spirited people may want it to. but supposing it does, it would NOT be good from a gaming developer or gamer perspective. Trickle down effect. If no. 1 goes down then the lesser houses are very vulnerable. Consolidation would lead to less risk taking game wise. This points to more mergers on the horizon for companies to protect themselves from hostile takeovers by larger corps. It MAY be in Nintendo's long term interest to merge with a software house or two to prevent hostile takeover. I'm not up snuff on Nintendo's stock holders.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Just replying in kind. We were well into "manditory opinionland" when I first posted.
Yes, that's just my opinion. It's as valid as anyone's.
I would assert, however, that the fact that gaming went mainstream under Sony was in part becuase some of the restrictive proactices of Nintendo (and to a lesser degree, Sega) were lossened. Gaming was tracking to mainstream-hood when the crash happened, and I tink Nintendo's practices in the NES years, while necessary from a financial standpoint to re-establish the industry-- hampered it from growing and wider acceptance.
Yes, that's just my opinion. It's as valid as anyone's.
I would assert, however, that the fact that gaming went mainstream under Sony was in part becuase some of the restrictive proactices of Nintendo (and to a lesser degree, Sega) were lossened. Gaming was tracking to mainstream-hood when the crash happened, and I tink Nintendo's practices in the NES years, while necessary from a financial standpoint to re-establish the industry-- hampered it from growing and wider acceptance.
Anything that reduces the nintendo fanboy population.
I dont want them to fail though. Nintendo fans keep going on about GBA being their best console this generation. Perhaps if Nintendo went handheld only and exit the home console business we'd see a major decrease of Nbots in Xbox and PS2 threads.
To them, GBA is just as important as GC, Xbox and PS2 (crazy i know). Nintendo would actually be doing them a favour, Jarrod and his minions would be on cloud 9 with the prospect of Nintendo concentrating 100 percent on DS and GBA.
Handheld only. Everyone is happy
I mean, Nintendo have been pretty much redundent this gen. Not making the strides they used to back in the day. The only outstanding game i played by EAD is Wind Waker
I dont want them to fail though. Nintendo fans keep going on about GBA being their best console this generation. Perhaps if Nintendo went handheld only and exit the home console business we'd see a major decrease of Nbots in Xbox and PS2 threads.
To them, GBA is just as important as GC, Xbox and PS2 (crazy i know). Nintendo would actually be doing them a favour, Jarrod and his minions would be on cloud 9 with the prospect of Nintendo concentrating 100 percent on DS and GBA.
Handheld only. Everyone is happy
I mean, Nintendo have been pretty much redundent this gen. Not making the strides they used to back in the day. The only outstanding game i played by EAD is Wind Waker
Justin Bailey
------ ------
Anyone that wants Nintendo to fail because they don't like their fans has some issues. Seriously, turn the PC off and go outside or something because you're taking this waaay to seriously.
Went mainstream? Maybe in your nation of origin, but here in the US (and Japan) PlayStation basicially inherited the market Nintendo trailblazed (using a bit of Sega's promotional practices to grow jock gaming). NES actually outsold PS1 in the US, it was about as "mainsteam" as gaming has gotten.Ignatz Mouse said:
jarrod said:
That's an interesting point. I have been confused about the application of casual in regards to the console wars. In all honestly, I don't think any console has approached the broad appeal of the NES. Sony made consoles cooler--they didn't make into machines that entire family would enjoy.
DJ Demon J
Banned
Bacon said:
Yes, that must be it.
Bacon said:
No, it's much simplier than that. It's usually just stupidity. If it isn't about pissing off your least favorite fanboy, then it's the silly notion that competition is bad and that we need one console and that Nintendo should be a 3rd party developer for that console rather than its maker.
Bacon said:
Been there, done that. That block of time between 1986-1990 (or so) must have slipped your mind. Nintendo did "reign" during that time.
Maybe I should put my feelings a different way. I don't want Nintendo to fail, but I've become rather indifferent towards Nintendo's offerings since the SNES. I won't say that it wouldn't be a shock if Nintendo suddenly closed its doors, as I still hold the NES and SNES in high regard... but I'm doing just fine without a GC, GBA, or DS, and don't see myself coughing up the money on one of those platforms when there are so many software choices already available for my PS2 and XBox.
I certainly don't want Nintendo to fail because their fanpeople are so damned annoying. XBox fanpeople can be just as grating. Fanpeople have become this bad because the internet gives them a chance to be that way without any fear of consequence.
radioheadrule83
Banned
As much of a joke as that is - the only way Nintendo are getting back on top convincingly again is if they charge $1 license fees (or other realistic low alternative) and find some mega-easy way for developers to make games people will buy (money).
It's been said a billion times already: the competition is good.
It's been said a billion times already: the competition is good.
Drinky Crow
Banned
The NES, Gameboy, and the SNES had no less drek than the Playstation or later consoles, percentage-wise, and the NES probably had MORE crap licensed titles and half-baked bugware than most.
All higher third-party fees do, from a gamer's perspective, is reduce the chances of obscure and niche games getting developed or released here.
evilromero
Member
No, it's because Nintendo stole their childhood and they want it back.Bacon said:
Drinky Crow
Banned
I don't want Nintendo to fail; I just want 'em third-party. ONE CONSOLE WORLD.
evilromero
Member
I'd rather the video game industry fucking die. Let it go to shit.Drinky Crow said:
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
jarrod said:
I'm in the US, by the way
I'm pretty sure you're mistaken about PSXs and NESs sold in the US-- but no matter. The overall industry was quite a bit larger, considering it supported two popular consoles selling, combined, quite a bit more than the total consoles of the NES years.
And by mainstream, I also mean enjoyed by a much larger segment of the population than was previously. PSX years were the years adults would unashamedly admit to playing videogames on a console.
It's funny that people who are speaking about "Nintendo fanboys" are trolling 24/7 Nintendo threads while they're getting annoyed for trivial things.
And yes I'm gonna say "OMG" when someone dismisses some of the best games the last two gens according to thousands of journalists and gamers, as "boring" (what a great explanation). I didn't call him an idiot or something, I was just surprised.
And yes I'm gonna say "OMG" when someone dismisses some of the best games the last two gens according to thousands of journalists and gamers, as "boring" (what a great explanation). I didn't call him an idiot or something, I was just surprised.
radioheadrule83
Banned
I think Sony DID help push the envelope on console demographics don't get me wrong. The more cinematic approach developers took on their machines have helped snare people who wouldn't otherwise play. But we always talk like anyone and everyone plays them now, like they're as universal an entertainment as movies... but I don't know if that's the case.
In fact, in reality, even though there are new reports issued annually concerning the revenue in games VS movies -- and in spite of the fact that games has been coming out on top in recent years:
* if you were to look at bums in seats in cinemas/video-rentals/sales VS hands with gamepads in them, it wouldn't compare favourably at all. There is much more room for improvement in videogame appeal. Mainstream?
People my dad's age who were obviously 20 years younger when the NES came out... they typically didn't play games... 20 years later, they still don't play games. Girls are still heavily in the demographic minority. The constant in all of this? People our age are still playing games... and shock horror, we're older. Kids are still playing them too. I mean wasn't growth inevitable?
In fact, in reality, even though there are new reports issued annually concerning the revenue in games VS movies -- and in spite of the fact that games has been coming out on top in recent years:
* if you were to look at bums in seats in cinemas/video-rentals/sales VS hands with gamepads in them, it wouldn't compare favourably at all. There is much more room for improvement in videogame appeal. Mainstream?
People my dad's age who were obviously 20 years younger when the NES came out... they typically didn't play games... 20 years later, they still don't play games. Girls are still heavily in the demographic minority. The constant in all of this? People our age are still playing games... and shock horror, we're older. Kids are still playing them too. I mean wasn't growth inevitable?
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Find one troll on a Nintendo thread by me.
Nope, it was in an 80 page NPD report released earlier this year. NES was 38 million while PS1 was 35 million irrc. The difference in Japan is similarly close (but with PS1 in the lead). JediMike can probably send you the link, I don't have it anymore.Ignatz Mouse said:
Sure, but the industry naturally expands any way. NES saw the most rapid expansion however, and the 32bit years could only account for about 20 million over the 8bit years. So 20 million consumers on top of a 40 million consumer market a decade later marks the sudden shift to "mainstream"?Ignatz Mouse said:
What PlayStation did is inherit the growing market Nintendo cultivated. It wasn't so much "gaming grew up" as "gamers grew up" and Sony took the lead from Sega in appealing to them.Ignatz Mouse said:
NES also had a faily diverse base in the mid-late 1980s. Games were targeted to children primairly, but NES had a wide ranging appeal anyway. The media in general went wild over Nintendo. Mario was a cultural icon. Macintosh predicted Nintendo would be their biggest competition. Hell, even my grandparents had a NES. The concept that PlayStation brought gaming to the masses is revisionist history at work.
jarrod said:
I don't view it so much as Sony "bringing gaming to the masses" as it was Sony targeting the non-gaming crowd with their advertising and then profiting from the mix of existing gamers wanting the "next big thing" and "newbies" wanting to see what all the fuss was about.
That's my view, though, and certainly not gospel.
How did Sony target the "non-gaming" crowd though? In America their advertisiting philoshy was essentially "do what Sega did, but better" while their hardware and software support was essentially "do what Nintendo did, but better". PlayStation was an excercise in effective revision, not effective invention (though arguably, so was NES to a degree). I think the idea that Sony brought in some phantom mass casual market is overblown, and the market base would've gone the same way regardless of wether PlayStation existed or not. N64 and Saturn were more adult minded machines too, both in hardware design and software selection... I just don't see where this PlayStation miracle comes in? Well, besides Europe anyway.DJPS2 said:I don't view it so much as Sony "bringing gaming to the masses" as it was Sony targeting the non-gaming crowd with their advertising and then profiting from the mix of existing gamers wanting the "next big thing" and "newbies" wanting to see what all the fuss was about.
That's my view, though, and certainly not gospel.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Che-- yeah, it must be being told I'm crazy here, and over in the thread I started on handheld gaming how, if I am not satisfied with the GBA, I must be somehow lacking. 
I asserted than games got more mainstream with Sony's handling, and I may be wrong. But to my original point-- NES era was hardly a golden one for everyone. Anyone who preferred twitch gaming of the early 80's was out of luck, and as I said, console standards were set back a couple of ways-- controllers and lack of pack-ins.
I don't begrudge anyone their Nintendo love, but stop acting as if it's a universal constant and anybody who disagrees is nuts.
For all the comments abotu the gaming industry "going to shit" lately-- that's how I, as a hardcore gamer of the early 80s, felt about the NES years. I was glad to see them gradually end.
I asserted than games got more mainstream with Sony's handling, and I may be wrong. But to my original point-- NES era was hardly a golden one for everyone. Anyone who preferred twitch gaming of the early 80's was out of luck, and as I said, console standards were set back a couple of ways-- controllers and lack of pack-ins.
I don't begrudge anyone their Nintendo love, but stop acting as if it's a universal constant and anybody who disagrees is nuts.
For all the comments abotu the gaming industry "going to shit" lately-- that's how I, as a hardcore gamer of the early 80s, felt about the NES years. I was glad to see them gradually end.
jarrod said:
Your point is well taken. Perhaps I'm a little misled in my view of what happened back then (geez... almost 10 years now).
It would be interesting to try and pinpoint exactly where in history the alleged shift in priorities took place, when graphics and visuals arguably superseded gameplay in terms of importance to the "average gamer". Was it just an evolutionary thing, as we were so mesmerized by polygons and 3D that we couldn't accept the standard 2D anymore? Did the demographic shift?
For me, buying a PlayStation was largely in part due to Ridge Racer and how sweet it looked. I had played an import version at a local independent game store and was hooked from there. It wasn't the advertising, that's for sure. Polygon Man and Sofia really did nothing for me.
This may sound strange, but thanks for the perspective.
I'm asserting the shift was inevitable thanks to a maturing base and Sega's prodding. It would've happened without Sony anyway. I may be wrong too.Ignatz Mouse said:
Erm... wan't NES failry loaded with "twitch" shooters/platformers/puzzlers and offered a variety of pack-in options? If anything, these subjects have seen a steep decline starting with the 32bit generation.Ignatz Mouse said:
You're the only one I'm seeing push that line of thought though. Who's calling you "nuts"? I'm just proposing you're mistaken... that's all.Ignatz Mouse said:
jarrod said:
http://www.ga-forum.com/search.php?searchid=173395
missAran said:
missAran said:
THAT's what he's referring to.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
jarrod said:
Twitch games + gamepad = teh suck. Also, platform shooters (decidedly NOT twitch games) dominated over the kind of games I'm thinking of. There were, of course basic platformers and endless side-scrolling beat-em-ups. None of them my favortie kind of gaming.
NES Shooters tended to more pattern shooters than pure adreniline games. Nothing in the Defender or Robotron mold, save for lame ports. On the home computers, you got natural evolutions of those kinds of games with games like Oids, Datastorm, Psygnosis' catalog-- and superior ports of the originals (if you got them at all).
Any game that really relied on fast back-and-forth directional control either died off or was compromised in the NES era.
And I belive the NES was the first system to come *without* a pack-in. Yes, more options-- but at a price.
[In hindsight, you can find some NES games to fill these niches-- but they're the minority, the selection is more scant, and at the time I often overlooked them or never saw them.]
As far as being called nuts-- that was missAran, and I think a couple of others.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Thanks.
(And I never called ay of those games bad, although I am underwhelmed by them)
(And I never called ay of those games bad, although I am underwhelmed by them)
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Oh, regarding Sony and the Playstaion--
They certaily did change the market in some ways. I think they actively targetted older gamers with things like Gran Turismo. A "serious" style game was a rarer thing on consoles before the PSX.
Also, I think their publishing philosophy allowed more games that previously had been only on computers-- like old arcade compilations and the like. There was a while (96-97) when the oddball games flowed fast and free on the PSX.
Whether or not that would have happened on the other consoles if Sony weren't around, I don't know. But I recall interviews to the effect that they were trying to encourage such diversifying of the market. SCEA picked up a lot of odd stuff and pulished it in the US, for instance (like Carnage Heart, Tail of the Sun).
They certaily did change the market in some ways. I think they actively targetted older gamers with things like Gran Turismo. A "serious" style game was a rarer thing on consoles before the PSX.
Also, I think their publishing philosophy allowed more games that previously had been only on computers-- like old arcade compilations and the like. There was a while (96-97) when the oddball games flowed fast and free on the PSX.
Whether or not that would have happened on the other consoles if Sony weren't around, I don't know. But I recall interviews to the effect that they were trying to encourage such diversifying of the market. SCEA picked up a lot of odd stuff and pulished it in the US, for instance (like Carnage Heart, Tail of the Sun).