Forums

Topic: Come to other ports

Posts 81 to 99 of 99

CanisWolfred

Sorry, Sailor, I'm spoken for- oh, you mean Nintendo...let me fix that...

"Sorry, Sailor, I'm spoken for. But here's some more posters and iPhone Wallpapers so you can waggle your remote the next time you get bored of your 'box. " - Love, Ninty

p.s. xox

Edited on by CanisWolfred

I am the Wolf...Red
Backloggery | DeviantArt
Wolfrun?

3DS Friend Code: 1418-6849-7569 | Nintendo Network ID: CanisWolfred

LuckyLand

@spizzamarozzi I don't think so. First of all, I have to say PS2 was the last non-Nintendo console that I really liked as much as a Nintendo one, so right now this is not a problem for me, I have very little interest in later Sony consoles and absolutely no interest at all in Microsoft ones. Other than that, if I think of all the games I love, all the games I have played since I started gaming in 1990 and I still remember and love now I can clearly see that most of them, at least 80% but probably more than that, were console exclusives, and I don't think that this is a coincidence. I'm convinced that the bigger involvment developers are subjected to when they are tied to a specific hardware push their limits and create the conditions for games to be taken to a whole other level of quality. In the PS2 era I had both PS2 and Gamecube and loved them both, but I was also bothered because it was hard for me to handle my interest in both systems. Not because I did not have enough money to buy the games I wanted, but because it is hard for me to have interest in more than one thing. I probably felt like a guy who love two different persons and feel guilty lol. Exactly like right now I am bothered because I cannot watch my favourite photos using Switch. I can do it with my computer but I don't care, I love my Switch I want to have all the things I love inside it! I hope you get the idea. It was hard for me to accept the fact that I loved two different systems at the same time, but I think that most of the games I remember so fondly and love so much were made possible because of the exclusivity of those two different systems. Most of them were exclusives, and I'm sure that it was because of this that they were so polished, so awesome and so great. So in the end I think it was for the best and I don't think this thing will ever change. As long as great games are made, it is a lot more likely that they are created as exclusives than as generic multi systems games

Edited on by LuckyLand

I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee

Octane

@LuckyLand The difference is that a third party publisher sells games to make money. Whilst this is also true for platform holders, not all of their games have to be profitable. Their games also exist to sell their console, and in turn sell more games. Take a game like The Last Guardian, yes it sold more than a million copies, but was it really profitable after 10 years of development? If Sony was a just another publisher without their own console to support, that game would've been canned years ago.

Octane

spizzamarozzi

Well, if you think that first party games are always better than third party games, there's not much I can do or say. To me it's just a bad attitude and a clear sign of somebody who is infatuated with a company rather than with the videogames. PC games are basically all third party, and I never see PC gamers complaining for the quality of their games.

If you're happy with a single Nintendo console per generation, well, you're missing out on some good games. On the other hand, if you are buying multiple consoles to experience multiple exclusive games and you still don't agree that a unified system would allow you to save money on hardware, money which you would later pour into the pockets of the developers, resulting in better games (not to mention all the time and money developers/publishers would save on porting, publishing and manufacturing)...well, there's not much I can say.

@shaneoh well, most DVD players are unlocked anyway. That's the beauty of a unified system/format. A company locks their players for whatever reason?! You get another brand. If we had unified systems, you wouldn't have had to wait 34 years for Nintendo to unlock theirs.

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

Octane

Hold on a minute, since when does giving publishers more money equate to better games?

Octane

NaviAndMii

@spizzamarozzi Competition drives innovation...without competing hardware - we wouldn't have had the PlayStation, we wouldn't have had the Wii, we wouldn't have had the 3DS, we wouldn't have had the Vita, we wouldn't have had the Switch - we'd just have 'Generic Game Machine VIII'...and the gaming industry would be far poorer for it - maybe even non-existent. Silly idea.

ūüéģ Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

StuTwo

spizzamarozzi wrote:

I know it sounds too good to be true so the Nintendo Puritans will hate it because videogames and pain should never be separate , but this is actually something we should strive for. It would make the industry and games so much better.

It's not necessarily the case though. Like @Octane has pointed out - first parties don't always produce games to make money directly. They can afford to make games to promote and position the format. Like The Last Guardian or Bayonetta 2. If those games make a good profit great but that's not why they were bankrolled.

Ontop of this there are many B or C tier games that are made by 1st parties to bulk up or diversify the library for the format. Again Nintendo doesn't commission Mario Golf games because they make millions - they make them because you need a golf game on your console. Those games disappear if you go third party. Just look at the breadth of what Sega used to put out when they were a first party publisher versus what they put out today. A call for Nintendo to go third party is basically a call for them to cut back to 4 or 5 mega franchises and cull the rest.

StuTwo

Switch Friend Code: SW-6338-4534-2507

Octane

Another point is that it's sustainable, and therefore it happens. If Blu-ray manufacturers started to buy out films and make them exclusive, would anybody even care? If anything, they would lose money. I certainly wouldn't buy a second device to watch a couple of films (films I could've seen in the cinema already). Films are in a way dispensable, and you wouldn't find anywhere near as many people who are heavily invested in films than there are gamers.

Anyway, the irony is that now streaming is starting to replace physical media as a cheaper alternative, we do start seeing exclusive content on different streaming devices. Sure, you can watch it all on a single device, but you still need different subscriptions for Netflix, HBO, Amazon, and whatever Disney is going to do. It's essentially the same thing (except you don't own any of the content, making it worse by default).

Plus, we're also ignoring Apple and Microsoft in the phone business, and Apple and Linux in the PC industry, even though Microsoft and Linux have an incredibly small market share in the phone and PC business respectively, it still counts.

Octane

spizzamarozzi

@Octane it is sustainable because people keep going bananas each time somebody mentions an alternative way to things established 40 years ago. People keep bragging about competition/innovation without realising that after online gaming in the late 90s, there hasn't been one single universally welcome innovation that affected the way we play games, and the two main consoles in the "console war" nowadays are basically 1997 consoles with a modem and more horsepower.

Of course it doesn't help that we are on a gaming forum - even worse, a Nintendo forum, probably the most conservative place on the internet right after the official KKK website. If we were on a forum for film enthusiasts, people would go berserk at the idea of films being exclusive to certain DVD players.

I love music way more than I love games and the idea of having to buy multiple devices to listen to exclusive music sounds like the stupidest thing ever. As I said, people don't realise that things could be different simply because this is the reality they have always been living in. But having "Generic CD Player VIII" doesn't mean that music stopped evolving. Games won't stop evolving if we didn't have platform exclusivity simply because the content is more important than the hardware it runs on. If you take any list on the most innovative games, you'll realise that most of those games could have run on any hardware that was available at the time.

And just to answer @StuTwo, yeah, I do realise Nintendo makes certain games to fill gaps in their library. But why would they stop making them?! If these games are so mega, they would still sell. However, if they didn't sell even on a unified console (=to a much bigger audience), it means they only sold in the first place because people didn't have much else to buy.

And please note that I'm not talking about "Nintendo going third party". I'm talking about every a unified system. Sega is not a fitting example because Sega had become unable to produce enough good content on their own consoles too. They managed to keep the Dreamcast alive using ports of games they built for arcade, but once that well run dry, they couldn't do much. I'd say, they made/published good and bad games before and after going third party.

Edited on by spizzamarozzi

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

StuTwo

@spizzamarozzi the dreamcast had arguably the best first party support of any console ever. Completely original game after completely original game - and actually surprisingly few of the games it's really remembered for were arcade ports.

The point about 'second string' games like Mario Golf or Yoshi's Woolly world is that they'd be instantly less profitable as third party games with licensing fees to pay to the platform holder (be that Sony or a hypothetical analogue to the DVD consortium).

That might be offset by a larger reach but it might not - it could be that everyone who would buy Yoshi already owns a Nintendo platform. It might also be that some of those games (cough Mario Party) can only sell well when there is less competition for attention and a somewhat captive audience.

StuTwo

Switch Friend Code: SW-6338-4534-2507

LuckyLand

In my opinion quality is a lot more important than innovation. I don't care that much about innovation, after all, I don't know if I will like it unless I try it. For example, I really hate almost all the innovations that came with the DS (as a result I don't like the DS), but for sure I will always appreciate good quality. And having the need to make your own hardware stand out is an extremely strong motivation in my opinion (and also something that I can see very clearly demonstrated by facts) to improve the quality of the games developers make.
Also "generic" consoles already exists, but all of them were pretty much doomed since the beginning, because one can create a console where anybody can publish their games, but if people who make the best games are either people who make exclusive games for a specific hardware or people who make great "generic" games but are not interested in those system anyway those consoles are just useless pieces of plastic garbage.
You cannot change this situations and nobody would gain anything from changing it. You could buy more games maybe but I'm sure many of those games would end up being far worse than what we are used now. I don't think it would be a good thing, quantity over quality? No thanks. If you really cannot understand this and don't think that console exclusives have anything special compared to other games you can always just stick to your PC for gaming. If you really are convinced of what you say you should feel like you are not missing much that way.

I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee

NaviAndMii

@spizzamarozzi ..take a look at the cars developed in communist countries and you'll see what I mean by 'Generic Game Machine VIII' - it's not just Nintendo that 'innovates', the PS4 and X1 are innovative too - sometimes its more subtle, but competition always drives innovation - without any form of competition whatsoever, we wouldn't have a PS4 or X1 - and we certainly wouldn't have a Switch...we'd just end up with the gaming equivalent of the Lada Riva.

Untitled

...no thanks.

Edited on by NaviAndMii

ūüéģ Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

LuckyLand

@NaviAndMii Exactly. I told that I don't care that much about innovation, only about quality, but competition and "protectionism" of your own products/systems drive quality as well as innovation. Those rules in the gaming industry were established 40 years ago but that does not mean are any less valid today. In fact it's the opposite, some non exclusive great games exists, yes, but for the most part you can clearly see evidences everywhere and anytime that keeping software and hardware competitons tied to each other greatly improves the commitment in making games and ultimately the quality of the final products.

I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee

spizzamarozzi

It's super-funny because Tetris, arguably the most popular, best selling, and most influential videogame ever in the history of the universe, came out of that country, under that regime, during those exact years, from a programmer who probably drove that car. Which totally makes your point worthless and wrong.

But I mean, I might as well give up, because when you are discussing videogame content being produced, distributed and manufactured in the same way as every other form of entertainment, and people produce........a picture of a car made in the USSR in the early 80s.......there's not much you can do.

ps: I don't have a PC - I mostly game on mobile phone.

Edited on by spizzamarozzi

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

LuckyLand

@spizzamarozzi some of my friends play videogames, some others don't, every one of them (myself included) think that Tetris is nothing but boring and tedious at best. I have NEVER found a single person who liked playing that game or that genre as a whole in my life. I can enjoy some Lumines every now and then but that's it. If you don't play on pc and spend more time playing on mobile phone than on consoles and think that Tetris can be "arguably the most influential videogame ever" then I really think we speak two completely different languages. I can see why you don't understand the importance of console exclusives but believe me, I mostly play games on console, I spend a lot of time playing games, I play them on PC too and I am sure that exclusive games are probably the single most important feature a console have. They are the founding pillar of console gaming and the founding pillar of quality in console gaming, if you play so much on mobile phones you probably never had the chance to really experience and understand what I mean, or maybe you simply don't care about the kind of games hardcore console fans like the most

Edited on by LuckyLand

I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee

NaviAndMii

@spizzamarozzi That's very much the 'exception that proves the rule', rather than the anomaly that renders my point invalid...I wasn't meaning to sound anti-Russian or anything - the 'Space Race' is another example of two entities pushing each other to reach an otherwise unimaginable goal...Lada, on the other hand, is just an example of a company that had no rival, so had no need to innovate - and the results were, well, mediocre.

Edited on by NaviAndMii

ūüéģ Adult Switch Gamers: Thread | Discord | Guilded

Switch Friend Code: SW-0427-7196-3801 | Twitter:

spizzamarozzi

NaviAndMii wrote:

Lada, on the other hand, is just an example of a company that had no rival, so had no need to innovate - and the results were, well, mediocre.

But why do you act like we would lose competition and innovation?! The companies would be competing on who produces the best software, the best content. Actually, the competition would be much fiercer, because with a unified audience, companies wouldn't get away with mediocrity. Everybody would be competing, therefore innovating, on what matters the most: content.

And we all know that what really matters is content, what really drive hardware sales is content, what really defines consoles is content. Nintendo has made a catchphrase out of this.

There hasn't really been any lasting hardware innovation in 17 years. The only thing that keeps changing is horsepower. Console manufactures are required to release basically the same consoles everybody elses release each generation. The irony of this, and the reason why there's really no competition/innovation on hardware, is that if you release a console that is deeply different and innovative from the rest of the pack, you basically cut yourself out of the market with your own hands.

Is there any technical difference between PS4 and X1 that makes the two experiences substantially different? No. They are two generic machines that can run exactly the same games. They are deliberately built this way. The only reason to buy one or the other, is that a very small number of games is locked to one or the other.

Each generation every console has to meet a certain standard of specs and functions. If one console doesn't meet a standard, people go crazy. We ALREADY live in the age of Generic Machines, hellooooo!! The only difference being the content that its locked and exclusive to each.

And I find it ironic that a unified console - a system that stresses the importance of content over hardware - is seen as something that would make the content paradoxically worse. If competition drives innovation, then a fierce and universal competition on content alone would create excellent content, far better than what we have now.

Guys, I don't know what to say - each time somebody questions the current state of affairs, you mathematically reject it, fearing that if anything in the current industry changes, the whole system would collapse. It's not really fun debating here anymore.

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

LuckyLand

The softwares that makes the best income/investment ratio are probably pachinko and slot machines. The best selling Mario games as far as I know are New SMB ones and not full 3D ones like Galaxy. That kind of competition improves only the income of companies, not quality of games.

I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic