This is going to be quite a controversial post but I feel this needs saying. Every single chance a certain analyst gets he slams Nintendo saying "I don't like their consoles but I like their games". Who is he? Well you probably know but many incorrectly pronounce his surname as Patcher. Is there truly any justification in his belief? Or should he look at it from the other side for once? Has he considered what could happen to the quality of Nintendo's software? Has he considered what Nintendo brought to this industry and continue to do so? This is my response. Yes a company should go, but you (and every other blind Nintendo hater) have the wrong company. The one who should go should be Microsoft. These are my key points in saying why Microsoft should close shop and Nintendo should stay as a hardware manufacturer. I shall present the argument made by these haters and then present another way to look at it.
1. Nintendo make bad systems. I hate their gimmicks.
What can truly justify a bad system here? I would argue a bad system is one where I have witnessed a family member go through 5 different versions all with varying hardware failure problems. Not a system which uses a control method you don't like. It especially becomes contradictory when the system these haters claim to be good has followed in the footsteps of Nintendo's said "gimmicks". A bad system is a terribly manufactured one which was rushed to market. My counter argument to this is simple. Microsoft is a software maker. Not a hardware one. Already we have had rumors that Xbox One has hardware issues. Would it really surprise you?
2. I want Mario on my system. It would be so much better.
Look at all the people who have sent their content to be published on other systems and you know this will never come to pass like this. Every single company that made for alien hardware had the software quality plummet as they lost the passion they once had to make the games. It happened to Sega. It happened to Rare. It happened to Atari. It happened to Insomniac. Name me a company that migrated from home that didn't have their software decline in quality. In my eyes its simple. Developing for hardware they don't shine on contributes to them not putting the effort in their games that they would usually do on their home turf. And what kinds of releases would we see from Nintendo on an Xbox or Playstation? Definitely not Wonderful 101 or Pikmin 3. The need for those to exist is gone. They don't have their own platform to differentiate any more. Do you really think they would waste money on their lower sellers? They would milk poor Mario and Zelda sequels into oblivion. They wouldn't spend all the time making something on the scale of Zelda games they normally make. That would be gone.
I'm not getting into more points because the others are the obvious ones. That is why Nintendo should stay. So why do I think Microsoft should go? Well there are three key reasons. The first being what they have brought. Nintendo and Sony have paved the way forward in this industry in many ways. What have Microsoft made "the norm"? In my mind the online fees. Everything about online comes from them. Now you can argue "they did online gaming right" but as I already pointed out, they gave greedy publishers the key they needed to start very bad business practices. They introduced DLC as part of their pitch for 360 at E3 2005. They claimed it was to "expand" the game. Instead what has come of it? Things have actually gone backwards. Companies are dictating what we can have and what we can't. Content is being held back instead of added later. And when there is a good chance to add DLC in (UMVC3) most of the time it gets re-released anyway and we are forced to buy the whole game again. Then online charges are becoming the norm. Sony is understandable in which it needs money so paid online is a good way round it. But its only a matter of time before Nintendo follow suit now.
The second point is there doesn't really seem to be a purpose for Xbox. It does things so similar to Playstation. We already have a console which meets our core gaming needs. Why do we need two? You can say "so Sony should go" but Sony aren't the ones who rushed bad hardware to market. They aren't the ones who attempted (and will probably try again later) to restrict how we play our games and charge used fees. Microsoft did that. Sony have shown they only have our best interests. When they already forced paid online on us, Microsoft have shown anything but that. They use Xbox as a scapegoat to get in living room entertainment. But while it was obvious to a lot of us, many on forums seemed strangely surprised by their heavy focus on entertainment and less on games.
Lastly, they already have a system to put their games on. Even if they leave they don't have to go third party. They can just release their games on PC. You may not have to see Halo on Playstation.
A lot of haters out there exist to bash Nintendo and everything they've done but when you compare their mistakes to that of Microsoft, there simply isn't a comparison. Nintendo definitely serve to have your best interests more than Microsoft do. You can say Mario Galaxy 2 would have been great on other systems but the truth is it wouldn't. They would never have put in the amount of time and effort into it. The phrase "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind with Nintendo going third party. A lot would be begging Nintendo to make their own consoles again after the first release when they see the game simply isn't up to scratch with the quality the company puts out now. With Microsoft, they have done nothing that Sony hasn't already done. They aren't doing anything that Sony isn't doing now.
So my point to these people saying Nintendo should go is this. You hate Nintendo so much but ask yourself how many would you be upsetting in your selfish desire to play Mario on your "hardcore" system? When you compare how many would be upset if Nintendo or Sony dropped out to the amount that would be upset if Microsoft dropped out (especially after the anti-consumer tactics they've displayed) people would quickly get over it. Nintendo leaving would leave a black mark on the industry that won't ever go away. They differentiate their platforms. Xbox gets pretty much every release Playstation gets but Sony output more (and arguably better) quality exclusives. Why not cut the man who has no real role to play rather than the man who you seem to think betrayed you when he is just trying to stand out from the crowd.
The friendly folks over at Razer recently sent us their full size Kishi Ultra mobile gaming controller, and this thing didn't disappoint.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Upon finally finishing Devil May Cry 5 recently - after it spent several years on my “I’ll play that soon” list - I considered giving it a fittingly-named Late Look article. However, considering that this was indeed the final piece I was missing in the DMC puzzle, I decided to instead take this opportunity to take a look back at the entirety of this genre-defining series and rank the entries. What also made this a particularly tempting notion was that while most high-profile series have developed fairly evenly over time, with a few bumps on the road, the history of Devil May Cry has, at least in my eyes, been an absolute roller coaster, with everything from total disasters to action game gold."
Me leaving it out should be telling of my thoughts on it. Better than 2 as a DMC game.
Still a good game though.
3,1,4,5 to me, never played 2. 5 gameplay is amazing but level design was really disappointing to me, just a bunch of plain arenas, the story felt like a worse written rehash of the 3rd and the charater models looked weird ( specially the ladies ). Another problem with 5 was that there was not enough content for 3 charaters so I could never really familiarize with any of them
2.
Dmc.
4.
5.
1.
3.
God DMC2 was an awful game.
And in case this isn't obvious it goes worst to best
Order changes depending on your focus. I tend to focus on gameplay/fun factor, so...
5, 3, 1, 4, 2.
I really didn't like 4 but commend Dante's weapon diversity. The retreading of old ground was pretty unacceptable to me.
But even then... Still more enjoyable than 2 for me
TSA go hands on with the beta for Inazuma Eleven: Victory Road, but how is the game transitioning to the post-stylus era?
Considering that all Microsoft does is try to out-Sony Sony, I really don't see why we NEED Microsoft's console endeavors anyway. Sony's products can handle what the Xbox is meant for and then some. You have Nintendo for the family oriented easy-to-play console, and then you have Sony for the more singular hardcore experience.
At that point I fail to see why we NEED Sony's doppelganger in the mix. They have had very few exclusives this past generation, and even in this generation Sony and Nintendo still trample Microsoft with the sheer quantity, quality and appeal of their own exclusives.
If there's a third option, they should be doing something unique. Not mimicking Sony and forcing Kinect/TV down our throats.
While I largely agree with you, the thing is that Nintendo have technically been been out of making consoles for some time. Have fallen so far behind Sony and MS that they're not operating on the same level. They are literally one console generation behind them in fact.
How about all 3 brands continue to exist and give people the option of picking which console offers exclusives/features that fits their needs.
Meh, there are reasons why Xbox is here. Debate all you want till you're blue in the face but Playstation is the one that tries to mimic the others.
Xbox live, Wii mote, HD graphics, First person shooters, platformers, western rpgs, ...PlayStation has second rate software that try to compete with Nintendo and Xbox. It's been that way since ps1. Sony always has the "that's good enough" mentality. People buy PlayStation because it's the generic console that does what the others do...good enough.
Here come the fan boy disagrees...lol
This is an AMAZING blog. This is exactly what I mean. We don't need M$ here. We really don't. Just wondering, did you see my blog on the whole 'competition is good for the industry' statement?