You're not being completely honest there. I thought Witcher books came out before the games? If so than it isn't comparable to other games that later get books like Halo and the like.Charcharo said:I suggest you do RELEARN certain types of expression. As is right now... you are comically missing the point.
Nintendo's fanbase is actually smaller then World of Tanks's fanbase. By a VERY big margin. Considering WG's ability to lie like a pro with their money and the fact that they have their own bank, skyscraper and fleet of military vehicles AND a space program (a video game developer...) I dare say they might even make more money.
Some of these games are 15 years old and still have competition. Still have their own festivals. Their community content STILL sets records (250 000 unique downloads in a day for a simple mod for a 7 year old game). The books on the games get actual awards and the books the games were based on are classics of their genres
In your strange world probably the Strugatsky's and Andrzej are also unknown...
The entire argument, was that Nintendo is SLOWLY damaging their (earlier) near spotless reputation. That they have no idea what they are doing and that this will bite them years from now.
As I said, there is a reason why companies that can buy Nintendo's collective organs and their family's organs still do advertise. Still try to engage community work. Cause they are smarter in this case.
As for the Weabos, well I try not to enter such .... circles at all.
Once I saw this:
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Anime_vs_Cartoon
And had the bad luck to see some terrible stuff in YT comments... and people like Movie Bob that slobber all over Nintendo... so that shaped my world view.
Did you know there is some unfounded elitism from Western Tank fans AGAINST Russian armor? Now you do... I just hope to God they never get to see how wrong they are...
Did I say Nintendo shouldn't advertise? Its good business to do so yes, however they are not so irrelevant like some companies to simply disappear if they were to actually stop be it through no longer advertising or shutting down.
I'm sorry but are you referring to the article itself which I didn't read fully but seems to be trying to be a factual comparison of the two which is perfectly fine... or the facebook comments? If its the comments than you open one hell of a can of worms. I could fetch with little issue youtube comments that'd make "you look bad" by association... the point is pointing at comments is evidence of nothing as you'll have to do better than that to highlight a problem.
I am aware of the whole tank thing actually.