Could someone please explain to me what the hell is wrong with Nintendo?

[CritialGaming]

1) They release a underpowered overpriced console with the worst launch line up ever only one single games worth playing.
2) They discontinue the insanely popular NES classic for no reason.
3) Charge ?35 for ultra street fighter which was ?9 on xbox 360 several years ago.
4) Deliberately under stock their product the Switch.

1. Most launch line-ups are mediocre at best. They released the Switch early to get the first sales within the fiscal year which resets in April I believe. The Switch's game line-up wont be an issue unless all that 3rd party support that Nintendo bragged about doesn't show up, which I don't believe it will.

2. Because a business lives and breaths off scalpers making more money than the company does. Obviously.

3. Nintendo over prices everything always. Nintendo branded things never have price drops, Zelda will be 60 bucks forever (new).

4. Understocking items is what Nintendo does. Amiibo's, NES classics, probably the SNES classic, they thrive on a market of "false" scarcity to ensure everything they make gets sold out. The Switch makes at least a little sense, because the Wii U didn't sell well, and they didn't want to over produce a product without seeing just how much it would sell. Once the Switch starts returning to store shelves, you probably will stop having problems finding them and they will be everywhere.

Ultimately Nintendo is one of the weirdest companies in the gaming industry. Nothing they do makes business sense, and yet it works for them. I've read and spoken with other big name developers and publishers and they don't even pay attention to what Nintendo does anymore. Everyone used to follow suit with them when the SNES, N64 were the BIG consoles. Then they just started going completely off the rails. Companies tried to follow them after the Wii became huge, but realized the the Wii might have been a very high selling console, but nobody actually played their Wii.

The attachment rate of the Wii was shit because motion controls are stupid. I forgot where I read it, but I read somewhere that 90% of Wii owners never bought any game outside of what came with the system. So while a lot of people had Wii's, not many people actually played games on them.

Which continued into the Wii U's lifespan. Developers didn't make games for the Wii U, because their games didn't sell on the Wii and developing for the Wii U was a pain in the ass. So that's why the Wii U struggled and really only lived on 1st party games which also didn't work for the system.

Now we have the Switch and it seems that development is easier for the console because it's a standardized system, but time will tell.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

juvenile hype train.

Juvenile Hype Train: Proper Noun. Definition: anything short of total evisceration regardless of severity, context, or reality.

We don't know if Switch will keep this momentum because the truth is that the lineup isn't all that great and it may be that those who bought one already are most of the people who ever will. How many new people will buy it for Mario or do those people already have one? Third party support has been teased so often on Nintendo consoles that we can't be sure until the games actually release. You know you'll get your promised first party games though, right? Even if they are pushed to the next console as well.

1) You are stating the obvious. 2) That's not the point. Here's the thing that you don't get: you are not helping. Period. You are not solving any issues, you are not giving any meaningful insight, you're just complaining on a message board about stuff that has next to no impact on you.Because that's the entire crux that this decade-long obsession against Nintendo has hinged on. It's a behavior that was tiresome years ago and is not somehow magically going to become meaningful now.

 

[WeepingAngels]

juvenile hype train.

Juvenile Hype Train: Proper Noun. Definition: anything short of total evisceration regardless of severity, context, or reality.

We don't know if Switch will keep this momentum because the truth is that the lineup isn't all that great and it may be that those who bought one already are most of the people who ever will. How many new people will buy it for Mario or do those people already have one? Third party support has been teased so often on Nintendo consoles that we can't be sure until the games actually release. You know you'll get your promised first party games though, right? Even if they are pushed to the next console as well.

1) You are stating the obvious. 2) That's not the point. Here's the thing that you don't get: you are not helping. Period. You are not solving any issues, you are not giving any meaningful insight, you're just complaining on a message board about stuff that has next to no impact on you.Because that's the entire crux that this decade-long obsession against Nintendo has hinged on. It's a behavior that was tiresome years ago and is not somehow magically going to become meaningful now.

Your post is meaningless and unhelpful. It didn't have to be this way, you could have atleast expanded on the bolded. It's like when someone posts a thread and title says: 'In 15 US States it is illegal to eat and drive' and then in the body of their post they fail to mention the most important thing, the list of the 15 fuckin' states and someone has to ask for that list. Likewise, I must ask, what is the point in your opinion?

 

[CritialGaming]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

 

[Saelune]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

 

[CritialGaming]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

 

[Saelune]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

But Nintendo themselves made most of their famous IPs, like Mario and Zelda.

Microsoft and Sony rely far more on owning developers, not being developers.

And also...Bayonetta 2? Yeah, how dare Nintendo let them make a sequel that would not exist if not for Nintendo stepping in.

Anyone who is mad it is on Wii U only, it is SEGA they should be angry at, not Nintendo.

 

[CritialGaming]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

But Nintendo themselves made most of their famous IPs, like Mario and Zelda.

Microsoft and Sony rely far more on owning developers, not being developers.

And also...Bayonetta 2? Yeah, how dare Nintendo let them make a sequel that would not exist if not for Nintendo stepping in.

Anyone who is mad it is on Wii U only, it is SEGA they should be angry at, not Nintendo.

Wait a minute? So it's okay for Nintendo to pay to have Bayonetta, but not okay for Sony to pay to have Bloodborne made? Or Uncharted? Microsoft should pay to have Gears or Halo then right?

You're saying exclusivity is only okay for Nintendo because Nintendo develops. Except Nintendo doesn't directly develop, they own a bunch of studios that develop for them.

The following are developers owned by Nintendo:
Monolith Soft: (2 branches), this is the company making Xenoblade, and Super smash Bros.
ND Cube: They make the mario Party games
Retro Studios: Donkey kong, Metroid
1-Up Studios: Mother 3
Creature Inc: POKEMON!

So explain to me again why it is okay for Nintendo to do this, but not Microsoft and Sony?

 

[Saelune]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

But Nintendo themselves made most of their famous IPs, like Mario and Zelda.

Microsoft and Sony rely far more on owning developers, not being developers.

And also...Bayonetta 2? Yeah, how dare Nintendo let them make a sequel that would not exist if not for Nintendo stepping in.

Anyone who is mad it is on Wii U only, it is SEGA they should be angry at, not Nintendo.

Wait a minute? So it's okay for Nintendo to pay to have Bayonetta, but not okay for Sony to pay to have Bloodborne made? Or Uncharted? Microsoft should pay to have Gears or Halo then right?

You're saying exclusivity is only okay for Nintendo because Nintendo develops. Except Nintendo doesn't directly develop, they own a bunch of studios that develop for them.

The following are developers owned by Nintendo:
Monolith Soft: (2 branches), this is the company making Xenoblade, and Super smash Bros.
ND Cube: They make the mario Party games
Retro Studios: Donkey kong, Metroid
1-Up Studios: Mother 3
Creature Inc: POKEMON!

So explain to me again why it is okay for Nintendo to do this, but not Microsoft and Sony?

I really doubt FromSoft is in dire straits to make more Souls games.

Im sure plenty of other publishers would have put out for FromSoft. But only Nintendo was willing to give Platinum the needed money.

And I am not the one critical of exclusives, but if we are going to criticize exclusives for existing, Nintendo isnt my first target. Maybe you should be arguign with Strazdas?

 

[CritialGaming]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

But Nintendo themselves made most of their famous IPs, like Mario and Zelda.

Microsoft and Sony rely far more on owning developers, not being developers.

And also...Bayonetta 2? Yeah, how dare Nintendo let them make a sequel that would not exist if not for Nintendo stepping in.

Anyone who is mad it is on Wii U only, it is SEGA they should be angry at, not Nintendo.

Wait a minute? So it's okay for Nintendo to pay to have Bayonetta, but not okay for Sony to pay to have Bloodborne made? Or Uncharted? Microsoft should pay to have Gears or Halo then right?

You're saying exclusivity is only okay for Nintendo because Nintendo develops. Except Nintendo doesn't directly develop, they own a bunch of studios that develop for them.

The following are developers owned by Nintendo:
Monolith Soft: (2 branches), this is the company making Xenoblade, and Super smash Bros.
ND Cube: They make the mario Party games
Retro Studios: Donkey kong, Metroid
1-Up Studios: Mother 3
Creature Inc: POKEMON!

So explain to me again why it is okay for Nintendo to do this, but not Microsoft and Sony?

I really doubt FromSoft is in dire straits to make more Souls games.

Im sure plenty of other publishers would have put out for FromSoft. But only Nintendo was willing to give Platinum the needed money.

And I am not the one critical of exclusives, but if we are going to criticize exclusives for existing, Nintendo isnt my first target. Maybe you should be arguign with Strazdas?

So you are dodging my response. Okay that's fine. Platinum did need the bayonetta money....but only to make Bayonetta. They had plenty of budget and backing to make other games. Nintendo merely paid them specifically to make Bayonetta 2 for them, Platinum didn't need the money. So it had nothing to do with dire times, it was merely business.

 

[Saelune]

Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

This statement doesn't make sense, what are you talking about here?

What are we defining as "holding a game hostage"? If it is exclusivity instead of letting it be on other systems, atleast Nintendo is a developer. Microsoft and (though a lesser extent) Sony are not too into developing their own games. Dark Souls isnt Sony exclusive, but Bloodborne is? So is Nioh,even though Tecmo Koei doesnt belong to Sony.

And Microsoft should really let Fable go. I miss it.

But Microsoft and Sony own their own development studios. God of War for example was developed by Sony Santa Monica. Bungie was owned by Microsoft until Activision bought them five or six years ago.

While MS and Sony, may not develop their own games. They do finance other studios to make games for their systems exclusively. That's how it works. And Developers like this arrangement, because it yields a much better product more of the time. When they don't have to transmute code to work of other opperating systems it eases development.

Nintendo is guilty of this as well, they are have exclusive rights you Bayonetta 2 on their shitty Wii U system that nobody owns.

But Nintendo themselves made most of their famous IPs, like Mario and Zelda.

Microsoft and Sony rely far more on owning developers, not being developers.

And also...Bayonetta 2? Yeah, how dare Nintendo let them make a sequel that would not exist if not for Nintendo stepping in.

Anyone who is mad it is on Wii U only, it is SEGA they should be angry at, not Nintendo.

Wait a minute? So it's okay for Nintendo to pay to have Bayonetta, but not okay for Sony to pay to have Bloodborne made? Or Uncharted? Microsoft should pay to have Gears or Halo then right?

You're saying exclusivity is only okay for Nintendo because Nintendo develops. Except Nintendo doesn't directly develop, they own a bunch of studios that develop for them.

The following are developers owned by Nintendo:
Monolith Soft: (2 branches), this is the company making Xenoblade, and Super smash Bros.
ND Cube: They make the mario Party games
Retro Studios: Donkey kong, Metroid
1-Up Studios: Mother 3
Creature Inc: POKEMON!

So explain to me again why it is okay for Nintendo to do this, but not Microsoft and Sony?

I really doubt FromSoft is in dire straits to make more Souls games.

Im sure plenty of other publishers would have put out for FromSoft. But only Nintendo was willing to give Platinum the needed money.

And I am not the one critical of exclusives, but if we are going to criticize exclusives for existing, Nintendo isnt my first target. Maybe you should be arguign with Strazdas?

So you are dodging my response. Okay that's fine. Platinum did need the bayonetta money....but only to make Bayonetta. They had plenty of budget and backing to make other games. Nintendo merely paid them specifically to make Bayonetta 2 for them, Platinum didn't need the money. So it had nothing to do with dire times, it was merely business.

I am trying to not get into an argument I wasnt even trying to argue.

I am fine with exclusives, including Sony's and Microsoft's, but Nintendo's exclusives are essentially Nintendo's own children, while most of Sony and Microsoft's exclusives are at best surrogates. I find it silly when Nintendo is criticized for not having Mario and Zelda games on other things. But I mean, Tekken, Metal Gear, even The Elder Scrolls with Morrowind (console-wise) were exclusive, and now arent. I find it far more likely Halo, Gears, and Bloodborne itself, to be on other systems one day, than Mario besides shitty mobile games anyways.

 

[CritialGaming]

But you said this:

]Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

And I don't understand how you can say it's okay for Nintendo to hold hostage games when they pay studios to develop their games just like Microsoft and Sony.

That's a double standard...or triple standard? there's three so it's might be triple....nope still a double standard.

Also just for the record. Platinum was making Bayonetta 2 with Sega, and Sega pulled out of the deal when the game was 3/4's finished. Nintendo stepped it to pay for the rest of the project for exclusivity.

I will agree that Microsoft sucks though. They cancelled Scalebound which was literally the only Xbox game they had coming that would have been the slightest bit interesting.

Microsoft is the stupidest first party company on the planet.

 

[Saelune]

But you said this:

]Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

And I don't understand how you can say it's okay for Nintendo to hold hostage games when they pay studios to develop their games just like Microsoft and Sony.

That's a double standard...or triple standard? there's three so it's might be triple....nope still a double standard.

Also just for the record. Platinum was making Bayonetta 2 with Sega, and Sega pulled out of the deal when the game was 3/4's finished. Nintendo stepped it to pay for the rest of the project for exclusivity.

I will agree that Microsoft sucks though. They cancelled Scalebound which was literally the only Xbox game they had coming that would have been the slightest bit interesting.

Microsoft is the stupidest first party company on the planet.

Notice the qualifier "if".

If this, then that.

If any of the 3 are guilty of "holding games hostage", then Sony and Microsoft are more guilty than Nintendo.

But that also means "If no one is holding games hostage, then all three are in the clear".

 

[CritialGaming]

But you said this:

]Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

And I don't understand how you can say it's okay for Nintendo to hold hostage games when they pay studios to develop their games just like Microsoft and Sony.

That's a double standard...or triple standard? there's three so it's might be triple....nope still a double standard.

Also just for the record. Platinum was making Bayonetta 2 with Sega, and Sega pulled out of the deal when the game was 3/4's finished. Nintendo stepped it to pay for the rest of the project for exclusivity.

I will agree that Microsoft sucks though. They cancelled Scalebound which was literally the only Xbox game they had coming that would have been the slightest bit interesting.

Microsoft is the stupidest first party company on the planet.

Notice the qualifier "if".

If this, then that.

If any of the 3 are guilty of "holding games hostage", then Sony and Microsoft are more guilty than Nintendo.

But that also means "If no one is holding games hostage, then all three are in the clear".

But how can you say that microsoft and sony are more guilty?

Nintendo games NEVER come out on non-Nintendo platforms.

But Microsoft put's all exclusives on the PC. Additionally games they paid for like Rise of the Tomb Raider, came to PC and PS4 after X months as laid out by the deal.

So Microsoft can't be as guilty as Nintendo, because they aren't holding their games to one console network.

Sony....is guilty yeah. Their exclusives also almost never come out for other systems. So I suppose you can call them on par with Nintendo in terms of that.

Funny how the company I hate the most, is the most forgiving of exclusives....kinda made me throw up a little.

 

[Saelune]

But you said this:

]Microsoft and Sony suck.

And holding games hostage? They made the games themselves. If anyone is holding games hostage, it is Sony and Microsoft.

And I don't understand how you can say it's okay for Nintendo to hold hostage games when they pay studios to develop their games just like Microsoft and Sony.

That's a double standard...or triple standard? there's three so it's might be triple....nope still a double standard.

Also just for the record. Platinum was making Bayonetta 2 with Sega, and Sega pulled out of the deal when the game was 3/4's finished. Nintendo stepped it to pay for the rest of the project for exclusivity.

I will agree that Microsoft sucks though. They cancelled Scalebound which was literally the only Xbox game they had coming that would have been the slightest bit interesting.

Microsoft is the stupidest first party company on the planet.

Notice the qualifier "if".

If this, then that.

If any of the 3 are guilty of "holding games hostage", then Sony and Microsoft are more guilty than Nintendo.

But that also means "If no one is holding games hostage, then all three are in the clear".

But how can you say that microsoft and sony are more guilty?

Nintendo games NEVER come out on non-Nintendo platforms.

But Microsoft put's all exclusives on the PC. Additionally games they paid for like Rise of the Tomb Raider, came to PC and PS4 after X months as laid out by the deal.

So Microsoft can't be as guilty as Nintendo, because they aren't holding their games to one console network.

Sony....is guilty yeah. Their exclusives also almost never come out for other systems. So I suppose you can call them on par with Nintendo in terms of that.

Funny how the company I hate the most, is the most forgiving of exclusives....kinda made me throw up a little.

Cause Nintendo is a game developer. Microsoft is a computer company, and Sony makes movies.

 

[CritialGaming]

Cause Nintendo is a game developer. Microsoft is a computer company, and Sony makes movies.

..........

My brain just broke.....you broke my brain....congrats.

 

[Saelune]

Cause Nintendo is a game developer. Microsoft is a computer company, and Sony makes movies.

..........

My brain just broke.....you broke my brain....congrats.

*shrug* You wanted me to argue a point I wasnt even actually trying to make.

 

[Cold Shiny]

Nintendo is just doing what they are always doing - being shitheads that have no idea what the customers want.

They arent. You (and many others) just think that because Nintendo dont act like Sony and Microsoft, they must be failing...

Them not being Microsoft and Sony is a good thing.

Them not being Microsoft and Sony is a good thing. Them being WORSE than Microsoft and Sony is not a good thing.

But Nintendo games? Only on Nintendo...outside of these mobile games that just make you want to play the real versions.

Yep, nintendo holds games hostage to force you into buying inferior hardware, so fuck them.

Breath of the Wild's critical and commercial success invalidates every argument against the Switch's existence.

Too bad it doesnt invalidate the game being shit though?

Settle bro. Duke Nukem Forever is a crap game, let's keep things in perspective here.

 

[kilenem]

What's wrong with Nintendo? No one bought the Gamecube.

Lets look at the upsides of the Gamecube. A strong Console, with out gimicks. Animal crossing had free NES games because Nintendo didn't think it was feasible to sell NES games with out the price being super High. Ironically they would later release 20 dollar nes games on the GBA which everyone said cost to much. The Game Cube had the GBA player, even though it could compete with the GBA or Newly launched GBA SP. A lot of people assume the Wii U lacked portability so it didn't compete with the 3DS.

Its downside, it didn't play DVDs, Nintendo didn't think online gaming was the future and the controller that looks like it was near Chernobyl but works amazingly well for Smash Bros. Even then the Wave Bird is the first Wirseless controller. Xbox didn't really nail the Xbox controller with the Duke, the Black and white Buttons are odd. While the Dream Cast had the worst cord placement ever for a controller.

I feel like if the gamcube didn't do terrible, Nintendo wouldn't have had this weird fucking success with the Wii and DS. Which forced everything to be a Gimmick or have products to have artificial scarcity. Imagine if we got the next game boy and it was on par with the PSP because they didn't have to have a second screen making it cheaper. The 3DS probably would still happened because they really wanted to do 3d. Hell I think they still have a good chance of revisiting it as V.R, once that is commercially viable.

So if your parents bought a PS2 or Xbox because it had a DVD player you are the reason why Nintendo is shit and SEGA is a former shell of its self. Please read that sarcastically, I own a Switch and Can't wait for SEGA's Puyo Puyo V.S Tetris

 

[BrawlMan]

So if your parents bought a PS2 or Xbox because it had a DVD player you are the reason why Nintendo is shit and SEGA is a former shell of its self. Please read that sarcastically, I own a Switch and Can't wait for SEGA's Puyo Puyo V.S Tetris

I know you were joking on this part, but I tried supporting the PS2 and GameCube. I still have both consoles. Back during the 6th gen of console gaming, outside of a few titles, I hated the original XBOX. It was just a PC in console form with slight better visuals. You right about everything from Nintendo panicking and grabbing whatever gimmicks they can use in desperation to remain relevant. It's sad, because they are making the same mistakes that Sega made.