I personally dislike the attitude Nintendo took a few years ago in telling gamers that they weren't their target audience anymore.
... That's a nice lie right there ._.
They totally didn't say that. They just picked a wider audience of gamers.
I noticed something. Nintendo introduce something then everyone copies. Wireless controllers started with the NGC, Wi-fi now everyone does it.
And that was proven wrong at E3 2009 and most certainly at E3 2010.No, at e3 2008 they totally did said they weren't focusing on 'core gamers' anymore.
Nintendo have certainly been pioneers of gaming technology in the past, but now it's gone into the realm of gimmicks, as I previously said.
natal is gonna fail completely as it is basically sony eyetoy 5 years later.
And now Xbox and PS3 are trying to break into the casual market with motion controllers while Nintendo uses the distraction to get core gamers back into their consoles. It was a pretty brilliant strategy actually since the Kinect and the PS3 motion controller aren't likely to be successful (most casual gamers own a wii!).
I noticed something. Nintendo introduce something then everyone copies. Wireless controllers started with the NGC, Wi-fi now everyone does it.
If anything Sony and Mircosoft should be looked down on.
Nintendo all the way.
When you know something is true, you just use the literal interpretation. You completely trounced Nintendo hater logic with that.
The jump from lucky to get one new installment in the Mario franchise a year to at least ten is awfully large.
Debatable.It's because Ninty doesn't deserve hating on. If it did, I doubt this site would be here~
That's offensive and untrue. What you're dong is perpetuating a stereotype.Becuase American like violence
Becuase American like violence, and Nintendo is, primarily, a maker of kids games. Which arent as violent.
So that's why EarthBound, Pokémon and Final Fantasy are hated so much (in my school).
Nintendo is usually looked down upon by ignorant "Hardcore" players. I don't have a Wii nor do I have a Gamecube so I don't know much about their Libraries, but anyone who looks down upon the 64, SNES or the NES is just... wrong. Plain and simple.
Not true at all. Goldeneye was a great game, but it was hardly revolutionary. Duke Nukem 3D and Quake both came out before Goldeneye 007, and AFAIK they both already had 3D movement in all directions. There wasn't really anything new in Goldeneye that I can think of.fps boys WOULD be quite wrong for lookin down upon the 64 since goldeneye revolutionized fps multiplayer for themXD completely true kid
Goldeneye was revolutionary because of it's multiplayer game mode, which iirc Quake and Duke Nukem both lacked. Goldeneye pretty much defined the standard for multiplayer gaming in the FPS department.Not true at all. Goldeneye was a great game, but it was hardly revolutionary. Duke Nukem 3D and Quake both came out before Goldeneye 007, and AFAIK they both already had 3D movement in all directions. There wasn't really anything new in Goldeneye that I can think of.
Also not true, and largely so. Quake multiplayer was what defined early FPS multiplayer. It was quite big at LAN parties, and even had some competitive play (tournaments and such; here's one example).Goldeneye was revolutionary because of it's multiplayer game mode, which iirc Quake and Duke Nukem both lacked. Goldeneye pretty much defined the standard for multiplayer gaming in the FPS department.