News Article

Pachter Thinks Nintendo has Superior First-Party Software

Posted by Trevor Chan

Despite what Xbox CFO thinks

In response to what Xbox chief financial officer Dennis Durkin said about Microsoft's first-party software line-up being "superior" to that of Sony and Nintendo's (as reported by Industry Gamers), Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter has shared his two cents.

Speaking to Industry Gamers, Durkin was asked whether Microsoft needed to increase the number of its studios in order to build up its development capabilities, and his reponse was:

I would ask you to go and look at some of your data, just to compare first party performance over the course of this lifecycle, because I think our first party performance in terms of quality bars and units per title this shift has been superior to our competition’s.

While praising Durkin as an individual, Pachter suggested Durkin the Microsoft representative might not necessarily be telling the whole truth, at least from his point of view:

Dennis [Durkin] is a great guy, and is paid to be loyal to his Microsoft family. I think Nintendo's first-party content is vastly superior to either other console manufacturer's, and don't think that either Sony or Microsoft would really dispute that.

Although admitting that it's futile to argue whether Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft develop the better first-party software, Pachter ― the owner of all three home consoles ― summed it all up rather concisely by saying, "... people have different tastes."

[via industrygamers.com]

More Stories

User Comments (87)

Ryno

#1

Ryno said:

I would agree that Nintendo has superior first party software followed by Sony. Doesn't everyone and their mother already know this though?

Lan

#2

Lan said:

Wow. I'm shocked.
Also, he reminds me of a certain NL user. Not namin' names though.

Crunchy_in_milk

#5

Crunchy_in_milk said:

How refreshing to see somebody not from Nintendo sticking up for Nintendo...

I'd have to agree with him too, to be honest, Microsoft has the overall worst 1st party titles but I understand that Durkin has to talk up his company.

ASDFGHJKL

#6

ASDFGHJKL said:

Definitely. Nintendo consoles are slowly turning into investments you would make if you focus almost entirely on the excellent First-Party titles. Now if they could get all the 3rd parties on-board as well, then I might as well reach some sort of Nirvana :D

Ryno

#7

Ryno said:

Hey GabeGreens, what do you mean by Nintendo Consoles "slowly turning into investments?" Just curious your thoughts? I would say I am Nintnedo collector but dont think they are good investments.

bboy2970

#8

bboy2970 said:

Really? This is an argument? Of course Nintendo has the strongest first-party line up of the big three! I didn't know this was a topic even up for debate. That's like trying to argue that Nintendo has the most powerful console out of the three. They simply don't. It can't be argued.

DestinyMan

#11

DestinyMan said:

People bought the Wii not just for the new motion controls but mainly for the new first-party games that would come out for it. People will still buy the Wii U not only for its controller and HD graphics but also for its soon-to-be first-party titles. The Mario and Zelda games have such loyal fanbases that they are willing to shell out the cash if it means more great Mario and Zelda games. Also take into account that Mario games are proven million-sellers just like Pokemon. I'm not saying that Microsoft's games are bad but Nintendo has plenty of first-party support to float its boat. So I agree with Pachter.

SMEXIZELDAMAN

#12

SMEXIZELDAMAN said:

Lol, sometimes I love this guy and sometimes I hate him. That's when you know you got a pro troll on your hands.

gamepopper

#13

gamepopper said:

Thinking about it, other than Halo, what first party series does Microsoft have? It's not that I think that Halo is the only one they have, it's the only one I can recall.

Chris720

#16

Chris720 said:

Nintendo has always had the BEST first party software, it's a downright fact! And, I may be wrong here, but do Sony and Microsoft actually have first party software? I know they have exclusives like Little Big Planet and Halo, but aren't they from other companies, not from the actual heart of Sony/Microsoft compared to Nintendo?

Sure they may get other companies to make their games (Retro Studios), but atleast most of Nintendo's games are actually from the company itself and not getting other devs to make their games.

Sgt_Ludby

#17

Sgt_Ludby said:

#1, you said it perfectly lol isn't it pretty obvious that Nintendo has the best first-party software? Sure, Uncharted is great, and I cannot WAIT for it to come out, but how can you possibly compete with Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros, Kid Icarus, Star Fox, Luigi's Mansion, and more? Nintendo wins first-party, hands down, every time.

C-195

#19

C-195 said:

Of course Nintendo has the best first-party software, the Wii was kept afloat by the Big-N alone (mostly).

ASDFGHJKL

#21

ASDFGHJKL said:

@Ryno What I mean by "Investment" is that I put money towards a console in hopes of something in return. In this case, in return I would get awesome first party titles :)

Gamer83

#23

Gamer83 said:

Well, this kind of goes without saying. I like Sony's first party overall but they are hit and miss and for as much crap as Sony fanboys give Nintendo and MS for milking certain franchises, Sony is very good at the same thing. Outside of Halo, MS' first party is laughable. Mario is probably still the biggest name in gaming and his 2D and 3D platformers consistently impress and Nintendo does do a good job of making the games feel familiar yet different from each iteration. Zelda is still going strong, aside from Other M, Metroid is still good as are Mario Kart, Smash, and Donkey Kong, they even brought back Punch-Out!! this gen, which was great. As far as first party, it's no contest. The only company that was ever close was Sega in its prime.

The problem with Nintendo systems has been third parties not taking any seriously since the SNES. Fortunately that didn't stop the N64 and Wii from having great overall libraries.

Squid

#24

Squid said:

Tell it like it is, Pachter! I mean, how can mister Durkin (any one else think of Dunkin Donuts when you see his name?) think that they've got better first-party software than Nintendo (And ANYONE has better first-party software than Sony)? Sure, he has to say that to get paid, but I would NEVER pay someone to say such a dirty lie. Nintendo's been at this for years, and have (almost) never failed, and they think they're better? Fat chance. I guess I never realized how much of bags Sony and Microsoft are. That's why I like Nintendo, because they aren't. Rant over.

Monkeh

#26

Monkeh said:

Come on, it's the reason a lot of people love Nintendo and will always buy their consoles. I also own a PS3 and mostly play on my PC anyway, but I will always buy Nintendo consoles the day they're released, just because I know there'll at least be one great Mario/Zelda/Donkey Kong/Metroid/etc. on it. ;)

Hell, it'd probably be worth the money to me to just buy their console for the one Zelda game it gets. :P

FonistofCruxis

#27

FonistofCruxis said:

As others have said, this is obvious, Microsoft and Sony just can't compete with nintendo's first-party line-up.

triforceofcourage

#28

triforceofcourage said:

I agree. First party titles are why I own a Wii. (Exept Monster Hunter)
Nintendo needs to bring 3rd party quality to the table.

komicturtle

#30

komicturtle said:

Let me break this down:

If Nintendo had no third-party support, they'd have: Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Pokemon, Pikmin, Fire Emblem, Advance Wars, Animal Crossing, Custom Robo, Golden Sun.. etc. etc.

If Microsoft had no third party support: Halo, Gears of War, Viva Piñata, Banjo, Perfect Dark, Kameo, Conker, Fable, Jet Force Gemini, Age of Empires, Mech Assault and Forza...

OH, and don't forget- they haven't used about 7 of those franchises in awhile or at all.

Yeah, Nintendo wins this.

Vinsanity

#31

Vinsanity said:

After years and years, I have to say; Nintendo's in second place here. After Sony went on a studio-partnering spree in the PS2 days, they have the best first party games now.

I mean, you want the marketable games for the shooter-fiends out there? Hard to find more solid games than Resistance or Killzone. Third person? SOCOM is solid. But Uncharted blows Gears of War out of the water.

But what if you're a nintendo fan and crave more endearing, charming, unique fare? Sony supports games like that too! ModNation Racers, Littlebigplanet, and the 1-2-3 punch of Jak, Ratchet and Sly is a brutal one to overcome. Fan of Zelda? Team Ico has been making better games for awhile now, and titles like Shadow of the Colossus and Last Guardian are easily going to bring more inventive, unique experiences to the table than Link's latest (non-handheld) adventures. You can't discount action-adventures like God of War either.

They have world class racing games, sports titles, motion controlled stuff, party games, both western and eastern RPGs — literally every genre is supported, and supported WELL. Games like Littlebigplanet get the same advertising push and prominence on store shelves as Uncharted.

Which is totally NOT how Microsoft handles games like Banjo or Kameo, or even Alan Wake or Crackdown - and action games are supposed to "their thing". And Nintendo both hates advertising games AND making games "outside their comfort zone", thus leading to a huge lack of quality software in key genres on Nintendo's console.

And let's not forget all the unique, wonderful indie games on the PSN. Sony's the company that backs titles like Pixeljunk Shooter, Flower, Journey, Papo Y Yo.

Sony destroys. Nintendo may have been on top of the world in the '90's, but they've really slipped since. AND Sony's been getting better and better.

47drift

#32

47drift said:

I don't care what Pachter has to say, good or bad. I just want him to shut up.

Vinsanity

#33

Vinsanity said:

Also, Microsoft has failed to successfully launch any franchises besides their big 4. Halo, Gears of War, Forza and Fable.

Versus that, they have well over two dozen franchises they didn't support, and didn't light up retail charts. They've let down Kameo, Banjo, Perfect Dark, Alan Wake, Shadowrun, Crackdown, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Blinx the Time Sweeper, Project Gotham Racing, Rallisport Challenge, Crimson Skies, MechAssault, Sudeki, Tao Feng, Kakuto Chojin, Halo Wars, Voodoo Vince, Nightcaster, Azurik, New Legends, Bruce Lee, Age of Empires, Mech Warrior, Conker, Brute Force, Malice, Jade Empire, Kung Fu Chaos, Whacked, Mad Dash Racing, True Fantasy Live Online, Marvel Universe Online, Halo Online, Orchid, Amped, NBA Inside Drive, NFL Fever, etc. etc. etc. But at least back in the Xbox 1 days they were hungry and ambitious enough to throw some money around and MAKE these games and try to establish some world class, dependable franchises and stuff. With the 360, they literally just say, "Let the third parties define our console", which is lazy and despicable. They really don't deserve any success; especially since the 360 hardware was failure-prone sh*t.

Really, they're an awful first party in the exact opposite way Nintendo is.

AVahne

#34

AVahne said:

Everyone has different tastes, but isn't it already established that Nintendo's first party software has always been superior?

LordTendoboy

#36

LordTendoboy said:

@Vinsanity 31 &33

This this this! You hit the nail on the head. Though I would argue that Halo is more popular than most of Sony's 1st-party games (aside from Uncharted). Halo is Microsoft's bread-and-butter franchise. They won't ever let it die. :-P Quality-wise, Sony's 1st-party studios wipe the floor with Microsoft's any day.

And between Sony and Nintendo, I'd say it's about a tie. Though Sony does take more risks and tries to branch out into new genres (ModNation Racers, LittleBigPlanet, the PixelJunk games, Flower, etc.). This is something Nintendo really needs to work on.

The_Fox

#37

The_Fox said:

@Vinsanity
Just a bit of FYI but fanboyism is tiring and annoying no matter which way it swings. Why do you think so many forums are terrible to visit?

Pryce

#39

Pryce said:

I like Pach, if only because he constantly insults his followers at Game Trailers.

TheGreenSpiny

#40

TheGreenSpiny said:

@31: You're joking right? Team Ico games are better than Zelda? Not by a long shot. Colossus was just Zelda stripped of everything except the overworld and the boss fights. Add in ugly graphics, clumsy controls and lots of slowdown and get one of gamings most overated games.

pepsilover2008

#41

pepsilover2008 said:

id have to agree look over at the ps360 games they all have something to do with shoot, and not only do we have the best ones, we also have the most diverse, there is something for everyone on the wii its just a matter of finding the games

TheBaconator

#42

TheBaconator said:

@40
The graphics in Shadow of the Colossus were outstanding, in fact the entire game is supposed to be artsy and was praised greatly for its visuals. The controls were not clunky, they captured the struggle of trying to climb up a giant colossus perfectly. Lastly, I never experienced any slowdown in the game, so I have no idea what game you were playing. It may not be as good as Zelda gameplay wise in your opinion, (even though the game isn't even close to relating to Zelda gameplay wise except for the fact that you have a bow, a sword, and a horse) but it is definitely one of the most memorable games of the past decade, if not all time, for all the reasons you said you didn't like the game. (Which actually don't exist.)

PSICOffee

#43

PSICOffee said:

@Vinsanity Sony has some good games, but God of War is too easy on the hardest difficulty (just learn boss patterns and smash buttons), Rachet and Clank series is really fun until you realize what a simplistic joke it is (again very easy compared to the difficult platformers of the 80s and 90s like Metal Storm and Little Nemo I'm used to), I've never played the Sly series so no comment, and I've only played Daxter on PSP and that was okay. Modnation racers has terrible drift controls (Mario Kart isn't perfect but it's certainly better) and Little Big Planet is cool but really bores me (I'm not really big into customization and the platforming elements aren't as complex as something like Do Re Mi Fantasy for instance). I haven't played Team Ico games, but I've seen them, so I'm sure they're on par with Zelda.

I know this makes me seem like the obvious Nintendo fanboy, but shooters just aren't my style (except Half-Life, Goldeneye, and Metroid Prime Trilogy). Sony's got a lot of good games (like the Uncharted series) and Nintendo may suck lately, but as the PSP Vs. DS libraries show, Nintendo still has it where it counts.

Where is Sony's Kirby equivalent? Locco Rocco and Patapon (both very awesome)?

BulbasaurusRex

#44

BulbasaurusRex said:

Something I really like about Nintendo's first party software is how they keep things appropriate for most ages. Out of Sony's and Microsoft's first-party lineups, a big chunk are rated M. With Nintendo, I can't think of any first party M rated titles, while you still get plenty of action with T rated series like Smash Bros, Metroid, Star Fox, and Fire Emblem.

It's usually not that hard to design an action game to get a T rating instead of an M rating while keeping the gameplay and story intact. Although these aren't first-party games, even in the FPS genre, the Wii has Conduit, Conduit 2, Metroid Prime 3/Trilogy, Goldeneye, Onslaught, and Water Warfare without an M rating, yet I don't know of any FPS games on the other consoles to manage it. The Halo games could easily be rated T just by cutting out most of the blood (and perhaps some language, I don't know where Halo stands in that area) and putting some restrictions on their online communications, but Microsoft and Sony pander too much to their core mature fan base instead of trying to expand their audience (and I'm talking about a lot more than just the Wii Sports/Fit casual gamers).

zeeroid

#45

zeeroid said:

I would personally place Sony and Nintendo at about the same level in this regard, but clearly Microsoft's first-party development is inferior. Halo, Gears and Fable. That's basically all Microsoft offers and frankly, I know those games have their fans, but Halo has gotten stale, and Fable is continually disappointing. Gears, in my opinion, is still good. That's it.

Edit: Oops, I forgot about Forza. Well, for racing sim fans that's definitely a winner. That's not me, though, unfortunately.

Gamesake

#46

Gamesake said:

"I think Nintendo's first-party content is vastly superior"--In his dreams maybe. Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper, and Ape Escape are the greatest games of all time! ALL TIME!

luminalace

#47

luminalace said:

I own all three consoles and love my X-box 360 but I buy far more games published by Nintendo than of any other company and even my PS3 is home to more Sony published titles than my 360 has MS titles.

StarDust4Ever

#48

StarDust4Ever said:

Unless you're a huge FPS fan (which I'm not), Xbox 360 exclusives [Halo] offer very little entertainment value. Sony PS3's Little Big Planet is on par with Nintendo's Mario titles, and perhaps exceeds them. But that's just 2 games. How many Mario titles are there on Wii? A lot. And they are all great. Truth be told, LBP and Blu-Ray are the prinary reasons I bought a PS3. In LBP, you can create your own levels. In a perfect world, Nintendo would release NSMB3 on Wii-U with a level editor and an online database of user-generated levels, all ripe for exploration.

MasterGraveheart

#50

MasterGraveheart said:

In other news, Mario wears red. Tell us something we don't know, lol.

Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, F-Zero, Eternal Darkness, Sin & Punishment, Kirby, Fire Emblem, Advance Wars, Punch-Out, Wario, Smash Bros., the recent run of Dragon Quest, Pokémon, Pilotwings, Starfy, Golden Sun, Pikmin, Kid Icarus, Animal Crossing, Wave Race, Excitewhatever, EarthBound, StarTropics, Lolo, and others. Is it a wonder why the haggard Sony/Microsoft die-hards, when asking you what good games are available for a Nintendo console, DEMAND you not include them? We call it the green-eyed monster where I'm from. =P

Daisaku36

#51

Daisaku36 said:

In other news, the sky is blue. One could back their reasoning for why Nintendo has better first party software for the simple reason that they've been in the business longer than their competitors. Like Pachter said though, its just his opinion.

SuperSonic

#52

SuperSonic said:

@Vinsanity #31
Nintendo hasn't slipped, and Sony is only doing better because they're leeching off Nintendo.

LOL!!! An image about the leeching just came to mind! I imagined Satoru lwata and Jack Tretton standing in a meeting. Tretton is uncomfortably close behind Iwata. He slowly bends over a bit and silently begins to suck on Iwata's shoulder. Iwata takes notice, slowly looks diagonally down at Tretton, and with a slightly annoyed and confused expression, he slowly says "What the hell are you doing?" ...lol..

@51 The sky is black - the atmosphere is blue because of reflected light. ...please don't hate me...

ImDiggerDan

#54

ImDiggerDan said:

In my mind, Microsoft don't actually have any 1st party software. 2nd party at best. Yes, they buy up studios and brand them as their own, something Sony is doing a lot more of too. In fact, do Sony actually have any studios that weren't originally other companies they bought up?

Not that I have a problem with Sony buying studios. If they buy the one I'm working for (they just signed us up for exclusivity), I'll be quids in.

ImDiggerDan

#55

ImDiggerDan said:

@46 - I agree with you about the quality of those PlayStation games. Funnily enough though, I've always referred to them as "Nintendo" games as they have a lot in common with all the great Nintendo franchises that I love.

LeasTwanteD

#56

LeasTwanteD said:

I won't pretend knowing much about games that are not on a Nintendo platform. I didn't inform do much reasearch on these since years. That aside i kinda miss Gran Turismo scale racing games and games like Shadow of the Colossus, Alan Wake and Fable.


Often when i play a new entry of a Nintendo franchise it feels like a celebration. The controls and camera feel slick as hell. And it adds / changes just enough to keep the experience fresh and often even breathtaking. :)

JimLad

#57

JimLad said:

It's true. It's superior because they market to all ages (as most developers did back in the day) and always put gameplay at the forefront, way before storyline, graphics or character development.
Long live Nintendo games! Still flying the flag for traditional gaming values.

Wildfire

#59

Wildfire said:

Well...I don't want to argue with anyone, but...comparing Zelda with Shadow of Colossus and comparing Mario with LBP!? Seriously? o_O
Nintendo is superior! Enough said!

Teh-Ray

#63

Teh-Ray said:

Well, yeah. Of course. It's the reason I stick with Nintendo, because I can rely on a majority of their first party games to be really good.

Mandoble

#64

Mandoble said:

No idea about MS games for XBoX, no idea about Sony games for PS3, but for me MS games for PC are far better than whatever Nintendo has or has had for any console. It is also true that types of games are quite different, Nintendo never had any strategy game, MS never had a platform one, Nintendo never had RPG games, MS never had party ones (that I know of).

ImDiggerDan

#65

ImDiggerDan said:

@64 - Advance Wars and Pikmin not strategy? (Never played Pikmin, so I may be wrong on that one!). Pokemon not an RPG?

Edit: Mario RPG & Paper Mario not RPGs?

yoyo1212

#66

yoyo1212 said:

@64 nintendo never had rpg? what is u smoking? paper mario fire emblem there rpg's from nintendo and pokemon

treeofmana

#69

treeofmana said:

I agree and disagree with Vinsanity.  I would agree that Sony is building up a really strong collection of IP's though I'm not sure how it all works because I think that technically a number of the franchises he mentioned may be second party.  I think a couple are third party, too.  I may be wrong.  I don't follow Sony business that closely.  Either way, it's clear to me that Nintendo has made more IP's in their history and in my opinion they have treated them better.  Granted, they weren't technically first party but I feel really bad for Spyro and Crash Bandicoot as an example.

But boy!--Vinsanity listed some great games.  And he's right that Nintendo lacks many shooters.  However, I don't see many 2D platformers showing up on Sony's first party radar.  They barely exist on Sony and Microsoft's consoles period.  Nintendo has been focussing a lot of their energies on this genre during the current generation and I couldn't be happier because I was sad when it all but disappeared.

My biggest disagreement however is that I wouldn't dare argue Nintendo hasn't created new first party games or innovated genres this generation.  The big N has been spending time on non-traditional genres and games that break down barriers.  You may have already forgotten about Wii Sports but with it Nintendo once again defined a new genre of game that is now being imitated by the other two major companies.  Games like Wii Fit and Fling Smash are unique and new examples of first party games coming to Nintendo's Wii.  Nintendo has been on a roll but I think many gamers turn a blind eye because they aren't seeing on the Wii the type of genre they are most attracted to (which is increasingly becoming the shooting genre in the west) whether it be first or third party.  And really, this is a case where lack of third party support really stings because people perceive Nintendo as lacking.  A strong third party showing makes a company--like Microsoft or Sony now--look good.  A poor third party showing--like for Nintendo now--makes a company look bad.

Bacon_Gal_Blaze

#71

Bacon_Gal_Blaze said:

I'm not just saying this as a Nintendo fan, but........ THAT'S SO OBVIOUS!!! When did Microsoft have superior first party software??? Honestly I thought that was a joke. Away from the point made though, they do lack 3rd party support whereas Sony & Microsoft have this.

Widdowson91

#72

Widdowson91 said:

Nintendo managed to sell the Wii, a far technically weaker console than the other two, on first-party offerings alone. Personally I can't ever see Microsoft and Sony been able to do the same. I like all the consoles this gen, but as far as first party games go, the Wii has the best set. Games such as Uncharted and Gears of War aren't even first party games anyway. First party is if the console company themselves make a game. Uncharted mught be published by Sony, and exclusive to their consoles, but it's only a second party title. This is becuase Naughty Dog existed before Sony bought them out. Sony only ever buy out companies. If they themselves founded a company and that company made a game then it would be first party. But if you buy an existing company then their games are only ever second party. Same thing goes for Microsoft. In theory Gears of War is only a third party title, because Epic aren't restricted to only making games for the Xbox.

Widdowson91

#73

Widdowson91 said:

@Mandoble: Pikmin is a strategy game as is Advance Wars, and games such as Paper Mario and the Mario and Luigi series are RPG's. So yeah, Nintendo do make those types of games.

Widdowson91

#74

Widdowson91 said:

@Vinsanity: ModNation Racers, LittleBigPlanet, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper, Jak & Daxter, God of War, Uncharted...

All these titles ARE NOT FIRST PARTY. A first party game is a game that is developed by the console manufacturer themselves. All those game you named weren't developed by Sony. They were all developed by other companies. If you said PS3 ahs better third party games I couldn't disagree, but they don't have better thrst party games because they don't have any.

hydeks

#75

hydeks said:

HAHAHAHAHA! Microsoft's first party is better than nintendo's, omg that's like the biggest joke in history! What does Microsoft have? Halo and Nintendo's old left overs, Rare. What games have they made? Not any worth mentioning since they went to microsoft. Ohh, and Nintendo can sell a system well with just there games and succeed in all regions, something microsoft DEFINITELY can't say, and they even receive the awesome third party games! Nintendo is something with or without 3rd party, Microsoft is NOTHING without the 3rd party.

Microsoft, you suck, just face it...ohh and @Widdowson91 and @Vinsanity, those games are first party, and there from SONY'S first party developers.

nasachi

#76

nasachi said:

right, Nintendo has the greatest quality in 1st-party-games, by far compared to Sony and Microsoft

without all those 3rd-party-titles, ps3 and 360 would be absolutely obsolete

Robo-goose

#78

Robo-goose said:

Of the "video game experts" to say this, did it have to be the guy who said "PC games are the genre that I probably play the most."?

Retrogamer88

#79

Retrogamer88 said:

i also agree that nintendo is number one when it comes to 1st party games, and i cant really say that ps3 is second when it comes to 1st party because all they have are first person and third person shooters and well. . . . thats it! but i guess they would be second when it comes to 1st party by default though,

Henmii

#80

Henmii said:

I guess you guys all love Pachter now (after all the hate)?

But seriously, Nintendo is best in the first-party area because that's their main focus. However, 99% of all the games found on Sony and Microsoft devices are from third-party's! No wonder they are lacking in the first-party area!

SwerdMurd

#81

SwerdMurd said:

@Gabe - agreed. You buy a 360 or a PS3 for all your games. You buy a Nintendo console for the first-party games. Been that way ever since N64, and honestly I think the Wii made the gap even wider.

I'm getting to the point where I think I might just revert back to PC gaming again... So much more affordable, better-connected, and usable. And Steam. Steam > restoftheworld.

Where the nuts does Durkin get that statement from though? Granted--Halo and Gears of War are phenomenal sellers and pretty solid games....but that's only two series. I guess Forza could be included too. Where are the rest of the amazing first-party titles though? And what does that even mean--MS doesn't develop games. Bungie did Halo and Epic does Gears....Nintendo's the only of the three that's actually pumping out games in-house. If he'd said exclusives, he'd still be wrong (Nintendo has around a dozen, and Sony has at least 8 that I can come up with off the top of my head), but at least it would seem like he knew what he was talking about.

MeloMan

#82

MeloMan said:

Must disagree with him... bah, I can't he's right (crud I agree with him for once...lol, you speak the truth Pachter)

Mandoble

#84

Mandoble said:

So Nintendo has the best first party games, fine, go and tell that to XBOX/PC users.
Best high fidelity flight sim: Pilot wings
Best RPG: Animal crossing
Best strategy game: Pikmin

Excuse me, ROFLOL!!!!

JustanotherGamer

#86

JustanotherGamer said:

Umm... The Pachter is now just learning Nintnedo has superior First party Software? That is what enabled Nintendo to survive during the Nintendo 64, Nintnedo Gamecube and Wii eras. When the third party support for there systems was not great.

In is 2011 and the Pachter has just discovered Nintendo's strength? The Wii U will be fine for First party support. Hopefully 3rd party support will be better than the Big "N"s last three home systems.

charly_rozen

#87

charly_rozen said:

Yeah and this is the reason of why Nintendo still exists. Without Marios, Zeldas, Metroids, ¡Nintendo hasn't nothing!

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...