How are Nintendo still around?

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] Don't waste your time. Shinobishyguy would be easily impressed by toast. "OH MY GOD TOAST!" Not the kind of guy who would dine in a four star restaurant. Bread_or_Decide

When talking about Sega's track record, what about Sonic?

psymon100

[QUOTE="Renegade_Fury"]

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"] SMG1 and 2 are two of the highest ranked games of all time. Zelda:TP won many GOTY awards from non-nintendo websites. I sorry in what way can people say sega is better than Nintendo?

HarlockJC

It isn't all that hard to believe when you don't hide only behind others' opinions. In the long scheme of things, I like their games and the games offered on their platforms more than Nintendo's. Even when only looking at this gen, I think Sonic Generations has far more replayablitly because of it's arcade like design than any of the Galaxy games, and I love those too.

See I disagree. I give SMG all the credit in the world when it comes to polish and the length of a one time playthrough. Once you collect all 251 stars though (and for me this took 4 or 5 days), there is no reason to come back. It's an easy game, and the only time I felt challenged was when playing the Perfect Run, but that by itself isn't enough to make me want to come back and play the game over again. Sonic Generations I can beat in a day, in fact, I did just that, but I would be doing myself a deservice if I put it on the shelf after only that. The game is completely about speed running, and if you don't take the time to master the controls and memorize the level layouts and shortcuts, you will never get a respectable time. I find this type of gameplay far more addicting and rewarding because, like arcade games, it forces me to get better. Mastering Planet Wisp or Rooftop Run like that and ranking within the top 30 was a much grander experience than anything I did in Mario Galaxy, and it's one reason why I'm still playing Sonic Generations over a year later unlike the Galaxy games.

The way I see it, SEGA games are more challenging and arcade like, and reviews tend to give more praise to games that offer a grand one time experience over replayability. When it comes to reviews, I don't put very much stock in them when defending a game I like. So saying whatever game won GOTY really doesn't phase me, because to me, it's about gameplay and replayability, which is something SEGA games tend to emphasize. That all said, I think not playing either Nintendo or SEGA games is missing out, but I don't believe there's anything wrong in believing SEGA is better than Nintendo.

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]I don't get how ANYONE can buy a brand new system, put in Super Mario Bros. U, and be satisfied that this is a "next gen" experience.Bread_or_Decide

Sega has a better track record...SMG 1 and SMG 2 are two of the highest rated games they won many GOTY awards. Zelda:TP won many GOTY and Gametrailers named it as one of the best games during the gen. Please tell me what Sega has done that compares to that record? HarlockJC

WTF are you smoking? There is no fvcking way Sega has a better track record.

It's one of the best games of the year. The funny thing about talking about next gen, looking back I'd say Mario Galaxy is one of the top games that defined the current gen--and it's on wii.Heirren

Here's some advice: Do not try to argue with Bread_or_decide. He's one of those guys who will always think, act and react like an average teenager and teenagers, as we all know, are dumb.

Because Nintendo does this incredible thing called "making money."

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Sega has a better track record...SMG 1 and SMG 2 are two of the highest rated games they won many GOTY awards. Zelda:TP won many GOTY and Gametrailers named it as one of the best games during the gen. Please tell me what Sega has done that compares to that record? lightleggy

Well nobody can deny that Sega > nintendo. Still, nintendo consoles right now are not to be taken seriously. Hell the wii was never considered next gen. and it was only a good secondary console with game cube graphics.

By far right now nintendo is the worst company and nobody can deny that, sure microsoft and Sony hardly makes any mistakes here, and there nobody is perfect, but nintendo does everything wrong.

ratchet_usa

I don't think anybody on SW is as delusional as you.

First of all, people who think Sega>Nintendo are in the minority, so yes, it is easily denied that Sega>Nintendo. Sega dropped out of the hardware business. Nintendo didn't.

If Nintendo does everything wrong, why do they sell the most consoles? Your post is contradicting reality. Sony is easily the company that has made the most mistakes this gen. That is not debatable.

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Sega has a better track record...SMG 1 and SMG 2 are two of the highest rated games they won many GOTY awards. Zelda:TP won many GOTY and Gametrailers named it as one of the best games during the gen. Please tell me what Sega has done that compares to that record? DarkLink77

I love a good Nintendo game as much as the next man, heck my 2 favorite games of all time are mario 64 and Zelda OOT but it just seems that Nintendo games are not moving forward at all, sure they stil make some decent titles but for the most part they're completely unchanged from the games that they made 20 years ago.

Sega had a much better track record and they ended up going the software way and yet Nintendo are still around?

I don't get it.... :(

mrfrosty151986

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Sega has a better track record...SMG 1 and SMG 2 are two of the highest rated games they won many GOTY awards. Zelda:TP won many GOTY and Gametrailers named it as one of the best games during the gen. Please tell me what Sega has done that compares to that record? lightleggy

Hatting on Zelda :TP is the popular thing to do it seems. Zelda:TP was amazing game, lighting, sound, and gameplay were all there.

"Twilight Princess received Game of the Year awards from GameTrailers,1UP.com, Electronic Gaming Monthly, Game Informer, Games Radar, GameSpy, Spacey Awards, X-Play and Nintendo Power. It was also given awards for Best Adventure Game from the Game Critics Awards, X-Play, IGN, GameTrailers, 1UP.com, and Nintendo Power. The game was considered the Best Console Game by the Game Critics Awards and GameSpy. The game placed 16th in Official Nintendo Magazine's list of the 100 Greatest Nintendo Games of All Time. At the event "GameStar/GamePro Leserpreis 2006" on February 1, 2007, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii version) received the trophies "Best Console Game in 2006" and "Best Console Action-Adventure in 2006" after the reader's voting of German gaming magazine GamePro."

See I disagree. I give SMG all the credit in the world when it comes to polish and the length of a one time playthrough. Once you collect all 251 stars though (and for me this took 4 or 5 days), there is no reason to come back. It's an easy game, and the only time I felt challenged was when playing the Perfect Run, but that by itself isn't enough to make me want to come back and play the game over again. Sonic Generations I can beat in a day, in fact, I did just that, but I would be doing myself a deservice if I put it on the shelf after only that. The game is completely about speed running, and if you don't take the time to master the controls and memorize the level layouts and shortcuts, you will never get a respectable time. I find this type of gameplay far more addicting and rewarding because, like arcade games, it forces me to get better. Mastering Planet Wisp or Rooftop Run like that and ranking within the top 30 was a much grander experience than anything I did in Mario Galaxy, and it's one reason why I'm still playing Sonic Generations over a year later unlike the Galaxy games.

The way I see it, SEGA games are more challenging and arcade like, and reviews tend to give more praise to games that offer a grand one time experience over replayability. When it comes to reviews, I don't put very much stock in them when defending a game I like. So saying whatever game won GOTY really doesn't phase me, because to me, it's about gameplay and replayability, which is something SEGA games tend to emphasize. That all said, I think not playing either Nintendo or SEGA games is missing out, but I don't believe there's anything wrong in believing SEGA is better than Nintendo.

.

Ninty makes that dow.

Its huge with children. Children is big money.

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Sega has a better track record...SMG 1 and SMG 2 are two of the highest rated games they won many GOTY awards. Zelda:TP won many GOTY and Gametrailers named it as one of the best games during the gen. Please tell me what Sega has done that compares to that record? HarlockJC

Hatting on Zelda :TP is the popular thing to do it seems. Zelda:TP was amazing game, lighting, sound, and gameplay were all there.

"Twilight Princess received Game of the Year awards from GameTrailers,1UP.com, Electronic Gaming Monthly, Game Informer, Games Radar, GameSpy, Spacey Awards, X-Play and Nintendo Power. It was also given awards for Best Adventure Game from the Game Critics Awards, X-Play, IGN, GameTrailers, 1UP.com, and Nintendo Power. The game was considered the Best Console Game by the Game Critics Awards and GameSpy. The game placed 16th in Official Nintendo Magazine's list of the 100 Greatest Nintendo Games of All Time. At the event "GameStar/GamePro Leserpreis 2006" on February 1, 2007, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii version) received the trophies "Best Console Game in 2006" and "Best Console Action-Adventure in 2006" after the reader's voting of German gaming magazine GamePro."

[QUOTE="1PMrFister"] ]

See I disagree. I give SMG all the credit in the world when it comes to polish and the length of a one time playthrough. Once you collect all 251 stars though (and for me this took 4 or 5 days), there is no reason to come back. It's an easy game, and the only time I felt challenged was when playing the Perfect Run, but that by itself isn't enough to make me want to come back and play the game over again. Sonic Generations I can beat in a day, in fact, I did just that, but I would be doing myself a deservice if I put it on the shelf after only that. The game is completely about speed running, and if you don't take the time to master the controls and memorize the level layouts and shortcuts, you will never get a respectable time. I find this type of gameplay far more addicting and rewarding because, like arcade games, it forces me to get better. Mastering Planet Wisp or Rooftop Run like that and ranking within the top 30 was a much grander experience than anything I did in Mario Galaxy, and it's one reason why I'm still playing Sonic Generations over a year later unlike the Galaxy games.

The way I see it, SEGA games are more challenging and arcade like, and reviews tend to give more praise to games that offer a grand one time experience over replayability. When it comes to reviews, I don't put very much stock in them when defending a game I like. So saying whatever game won GOTY really doesn't phase me, because to me, it's about gameplay and replayability, which is something SEGA games tend to emphasize. That all said, I think not playing either Nintendo or SEGA games is missing out, but I don't believe there's anything wrong in believing SEGA is better than Nintendo.

HarlockJC

Well my intent wasn't to compare Sonic to Mario as a whole, but if you want to go there I'm not going to defend crappy games from either series. From 2002-2010, Sonic may as well have been dead. Mario, though not as bad, I didn't enjoy anything from that series aside from Mario Tennis in the space between Mario 64 and Galaxy 1. The NSMB games, I find to be boring and soulless, so I would never bring them up in the series defense either. Just looking at Sonic Generations and the Galaxy games only, I find Generations to be better for the reasons I already wrote.

Well nobody can deny that Sega > nintendo. Still, nintendo consoles right now are not to be taken seriously. Hell the wii was never considered next gen. and it was only a good secondary console with game cube graphics.

By far right now nintendo is the worst company and nobody can deny that, sure microsoft and Sony hardly makes any mistakes here, and there nobody is perfect, but nintendo does everything wrong.

ratchet_usa

Nintendo's always been better than Sega. And don't come at me with Shenmue. Shenmue sucked.

[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

I love a good Nintendo game as much as the next man, heck my 2 favorite games of all time are mario 64 and Zelda OOT but it just seems that Nintendo games are not moving forward at all, sure they stil make some decent titles but for the most part they're completely unchanged from the games that they made 20 years ago.

Sega had a much better track record and they ended up going the software way and yet Nintendo are still around?

I don't get it.... :(

soldyoursold

...by sticking to an extremely outdated and expensive cartridge format?

The same reason Valve's Steam is still around, and the same reason the PS VITA will still be around 5 years from now : sheer and unbridled and Stubborn PERSISTANCE. I love it when a company wont admit defeat for so long it actualy ends being true.Lulekani

So Valve is defeated? You sir fail in life.

Gee, people are a little negative around here. What's up?

I don't get how ANYONE can buy a brand new system, put in Super Mario Bros. U, and be satisfied that this is a "next gen" experience.Bread_or_Decide

youll see how when you buy uncharted 5 put in your ps4 and use your dualshock4..

i think nintendo are still around because of the Gameboy advance.... they should have died that gen but they didn't and now look at them....

Nintendo wasn't sh1tty on the business side of things. They marketed their systems better, they marketed their different brands better, and when they knew they had a hit they made sure it would go on to be a major franchise(See mario kart, mario party, Super Smash Bros, pokemon). Their handheld business has been a significant advantage for them in terms of generating them money.

Plus in general lets say Nintendo hasn't done a lot of "new", their franchises tend to be some genre defining stuff. Mario has been the reigning king of the platformer for how long? Even if you could argue a few platformers being better than his best outings(an argument I would disagree with, but lets ignore that for a sec) his franchise as a whole has consistently pumped out great additions for the genre. Be it in 2D or 3D(see the Mario Galaxy games, and the impact of mario 64)

In terms of impact Ocarina of Time is a pretty special game. Majora's Mask is the least zelda of the 3D Zelda games, and Wind Waker and Twilight Princess had their own advantages. Wind Waker had personality in spades because of its presentation, and Twilight Princess hit just the right note of OoT homage territory while bringing in some of the best dungeons the franchise has ever had. On top of that you have something like Metroid Prime, an excellent game even a decade after release. You have something like Smash BRos, a game essentially created to celebrate the lore of Nintendo and is a perfect way to abuse the fanbases admiration for all things nintendo(while being a pretty fun fighter in its own right).

Tl: DR

1: Handhelds
2: They don't suck at selling things like Sega did, and knew how to make profits
3: Their franchises, still pretty f*cking good.

[QUOTE="1PMrFister"] ]

See I disagree. I give SMG all the credit in the world when it comes to polish and the length of a one time playthrough. Once you collect all 251 stars though (and for me this took 4 or 5 days), there is no reason to come back. It's an easy game, and the only time I felt challenged was when playing the Perfect Run, but that by itself isn't enough to make me want to come back and play the game over again. Sonic Generations I can beat in a day, in fact, I did just that, but I would be doing myself a deservice if I put it on the shelf after only that. The game is completely about speed running, and if you don't take the time to master the controls and memorize the level layouts and shortcuts, you will never get a respectable time. I find this type of gameplay far more addicting and rewarding because, like arcade games, it forces me to get better. Mastering Planet Wisp or Rooftop Run like that and ranking within the top 30 was a much grander experience than anything I did in Mario Galaxy, and it's one reason why I'm still playing Sonic Generations over a year later unlike the Galaxy games.

The way I see it, SEGA games are more challenging and arcade like, and reviews tend to give more praise to games that offer a grand one time experience over replayability. When it comes to reviews, I don't put very much stock in them when defending a game I like. So saying whatever game won GOTY really doesn't phase me, because to me, it's about gameplay and replayability, which is something SEGA games tend to emphasize. That all said, I think not playing either Nintendo or SEGA games is missing out, but I don't believe there's anything wrong in believing SEGA is better than Nintendo.

HarlockJC

I hated the controls in secret rings to, but the more I leveled up in the game the funner it became.

because they can sell.....what sony wish it could do and what MS cant do outside NA

....but it just seems that Nintendo games are not moving forward at all, sure they stil make some decent titles but for the most part they're completely unchanged from the games that they made 20 years ago.

Well this is your issue then. You have no idea what you're talking about. It would be better if you actually played their games instead of making baseless assumptions, then believing those assumptions and then making a topic about how you're confused.

I don't get it.... :(

That is very obvious.

mrfrosty151986

<

Well my intent wasn't to compare Sonic to Mario as a whole, but if you want to go there I'm not going to defend crappy games from either series. From 2002-2010, Sonic may as well have been dead. Mario, though not as bad, I didn't enjoy anything from that series aside from Mario Tennis in the space between Mario 64 and Galaxy 1. The NSMB games, I find to be boring and soulless, so I would never bring them up in the series defense either. Just looking at Sonic Generations and the Galaxy games only, I find Generations to be better for the reasons I already wrote.

Renegade_Fury

I hated the controls in secret rings to, but the more I leveled up in the game the funner it became.

super600

The ignorance on Gamespot is mindblowing. What an absolute moronic question to ask. Just do some research and stop pandering to those you think will tell you what you want to hear. WOW.