canadamus_prime said:
Hence the qualifier, "seems to be." Besides, what's Nintendo done that's so terrible? It's true that they've made a number of boneheaded decisions lately and have not been the company I once believed in, but surly they're nowhere near on the same level as EA. Capcom, on the other hand, well I'll give you that one.
Well Nintendo aren't that bad i guess. I just think that some of the things that they do halts the progression of the gaming industry more than EA or even Capcom. For example, they continue to remake old games time and time again to the point where the only 'New' thing about New new super mario land is that it's on a new console. Also, with Bayonetta, while I have never played the game, it is bullshit that the sequel is going to be Wii U exclusive when the original game was multi platform. Then there's the DS. Initially, it was great, then they improoved it by making the DS lite, but then they decided to make the DS XL and take away the gameboy slot, but adding a memory card which cannot be used for games that people would like to have multiple saves for like Pokemon. THEN, they hooked onto the 3D gimmick, and because it's sales have been doing sooo poorly, they come out and make another generation of Pokemon games, barely a year after Black and White 2, just so that people will buy the 3DS.
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate Nintendo, I love their games! but when they continue to do these things above and people just seem to brush it past and accept it while tearing EA another asshole, I kinda get a little ticked off. Especially when people say EA ruins franchises by turning them into conveyor belt games. Yeah, that argument makes me wanna ram the entire mario series down their throats.
I also feel EA gets a lot of unjust blame for some games as well. For example, Mass Effect 3 has made a lot of fans blame EA for what happened in the game. While I personally loved the game, I am perfectly fine with accepting people not liking the game, but when they start blaming the publisher for ruining a game that was given an extension on release date, my mid just gets boggled. How can you blame a publisher for the games story, when all they do is give the devs money? Sure they can say "Make the game faster" or "We wanna broaden the game to a bigger market", but that doesn't mean they came out and said, "Make the ending like this". Too many people blame EA for things that are actually the developers fault, and while I agree EA is to be blamed for what happened to Dragon Age 2 (even though I liked the game), it doesn't mean they are the anti-christ of the gaming industry. They are a business, and businesses need to make a profit, and decisions like on disc DLC is a good business decision. I don't agree with on disc DLC, but I can see from the business angle that if you have a team of developers sitting on their asses for a few months and they have literally finished the game intended to be released, damn right I'm gonna get them to keep working.
So yeah...I don't want this to sound like I'm jumping down your throat (Though it totally does re-reading it), my main argument in the end is that boycotting a publisher for doing something that other publishers do is stupid, especially if you actually want to experience the product they are releasing.
