Why do some people dislike Nintendo?

I just got annoyed at replaying pretty much the same games every year and paying a premium price for a "lesser" console in regards to hardware specs. I don't hate Nintendo, but I definitely wont purchase another one of their consoles.

They are stuck in their ways and have struggled with home consoles since leaving the cartridge era. Okay, the Wii sold 100 million units, but the software lineup was abysmal. Nintendo always has a gimmick, and I wish they would stop making consoles and just make games. I wouldnt buy a Ubisoft console to play Ubisoft games. Why do I buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games? Sucks. I like my 3ds and WiiU a lot, but Nintendo should leave the home console market.

I don't dislike Nintendo, I dislike Nintendo games cause I found severely overrated the few games I played of them. SMG is probably my personal most overrated game of last gen. Didn't played the 2nd but I take its more of the same

You still sound like you are trying to spin this as a bad thing. More recent Pixar movies are some of the most well-made, and honestly adult-themed stories to come out of Hollywood these days. Hell, even back in the 1990's they made movies kids just wouldn't get.

"Family friendly" implies they make games for adults and children, that can be enjoyed equally by both, even if it's for different reasons.

When you have Nostalgia for Nintendo you can't see two sides of an opinion so i can see why you can't see why people don't like Nintendo because you're blocking actual reasons from the other side.

Video game consoles, excluding the Wii, since the Xbox original pretty much stopped being toys. If anything they are equal to an Computer or multimedia device, just made more for games and graphical applications. Console before then actual, a few of them, were not "toys" either, but at that point at least the mainstream consoles were, or were closer to toys.

It's odd to see people still at times trying to demote game consoles as toys. Nintendo is pretty much the only developer/publisher that still has that mindset and it's why they are were they are today. Catching up, slowly.

From what I frequently read, Nintendo tends to live in the past with a lot of their games -- showing an unwillingness, at times, to break the mold and start something ground-breaking game wise. Their consoles also typically do not receive the important third party games that many people enjoy, so that leaves a sour note with them. Lastly, and perhaps laughably, one of the major complaints I read is that Nintendo lacks a "mature" demographic to cater to since their games are more "everyone friendly."

I don't hate them, I hate loving them though. They are my favorite of the 3 when it comes down to it, but I can be critical. The New 3DS should've been the 3DS to begin with. Their games don't go down in price nearly as fast as MS and Sony games if they go down in price at all. They do limited runs on things and make them hard to find like some of the Amiibos and their Majoras Mask and Monster Hunter 4 bundles. Why not just make more so people don't have to pay more from 3rd parties? That could be money in Nintendos pocket instead of some ebay guy who bought it just to price gouge the fans. I also wish they'd put voice chat in MK8.

I love Nintendo games however, and I love how they go in different directions than MS and Sony.

I think people hate them because of the "kiddie" perception. Not enough CoD shooter games for them and the graphics aren't OMG TEH REVOLUTIONARIEZ.

Any platformer fan should love them though.

Lack of 3rd party and tired of playing their 1st party.

I said trying to be, but trying to be the Pixar of video games just won't work. We know what kind of games sell well, yet Nintendo doesn't want to touch certain genres because it doesn't fit with the kind of image they want to portray as a company. They might finance games like Bayo 2, but you won't ever see them develop a game like that in house.

They just don't seem that interested in attracting the COD/GTA players out there. You know those franchises that sell over 20 million units per game.

Sony on the other hand doesn't limit themselves. They make both uber violent video games (God of War) while also making family friendly titles (Little Big Planet). Nintendo just wants to hold on to their old franchises even though they continue to lose relevancy with each new generation of consoles. Only a handful of die hard Nintendo fans still cares about Mario and Zelda. A Nintendo console can't survive on Nintendo games alone. Those games just don't have the same kind of mass market appeal as they once had.

What Mirko said.

I liked the NES/SNES/N64(despite game droughts). Gamecube was meh. Wii was horrible. And I have no desire to get a wii U. I liked their handhelds, I own a 3DS but I only play pokemon and I am tired of the series. Probably wont be buying the next handheld.

I have simply outgrown their style of games. I don't enjoy them and I have moved on to better games. Nintendo is not some end all/be all of video games like the hardcore fans make them out to be. I simply don't like mario, zelda or whatever else they make. Why is that so hard to believe?

You are talking out of your ass throughout that entire post. This sentence just seals the deal.

The N64, Gamecube, Wii DID, and now the Wii U IS surviving on "Nintendo games alone". Plus, all four consoles were/have been profitable for Nintendo.

Maybe they don't feel the need to be a big sales player in the market and have just decided to continue pleasing their loyal fanbase that continues to buy their products because they believe in the quality?

Sony has sold almost 20 million console units with barely a quality exclusive game to speak of. And are hemorrhaging money from almost every other division in their company. You think that's a future proof business strategy?

You really think Nintendo's goal is to continue on a path that just pleases the 15 or so million hardcore Nintendo fans out there? That is a pretty pathetic goal to have, especially considering there are way more gamers now then there were in the 80's/90's, yet the Wii U has zero chance selling as well as either the NES, or SNES. The console isn't even going to surpass the Gamecube in sales. If you think the Wii U's successor is going to fair any better while I've got some bad news for you. It will most likely sell even worse than the Wii U. Unless somehow Nintendo creates another gimmick on the level of the original Wii, you won't see another Nintendo home console pass 20 million units LTD.

It is sad that your standards for Nintendo is so freaking low. Yeah, that is what a company should strive for, just to survive. People like you are the reason why Nintendo blows these days. You don't hold Nintendo to higher standards and that is why you will continue to get weak hardware that is overpriced with no third party support in sight.

I find it really hilarious when armchair economists think that high sales at a financial loss is some how smarter business strategy than low sales at huge profit.

IDK, but who above the age of 20 is complaining about limited supplies of amiibos? I collect figurines. But I don't piss and moan about it. Come on.

As someone who loves Nintendo, their 3DS and Wii U, I have to say Nintendo infuriates me just the same with some of the choices they make (or don't make). But, it's better I have those feelings than to totally disregard them as many others do. I too was at a point I thought the Wii U was hopeless but then I came around, decided to give it a shot, don't regret it at all. The 3DS too has given me lots of meaningful games to play as well. Sure on that end the 3DS probably won't live up to the overall appeal and sales of the DS, but I find the library every bit as good, if not better for what I want out of it.

I hope you realize that the PS4 was selling at a profit from day one. You know that console that came out a year later than the Wii U and has managed to outsell it around 2x the amount of units worldwide. The PS4 has been a way more profitable console than the Wii U, especially when you add in PS+ memberships.

Personally, I believe age can be a factor for liking Nintendo products. Mario, DK, MK, MP, SSB, etc. were a ton of fun when I was younger, but Nintendo keeps pumping out the same kind of titles over and over. Obviously I'm older now and those titles aren't as appealing anymore. They(Nintendo) need more variety, or 3rd party support. If they received more multi plats I wouldn't mind owning a Nintendo system.

It's also a great system to let kids play on. Mario isn't exactly running around cursing and gushing blood.

Rno hate no love for kidy nintendo for me

And? Sony still hasn't delivered on the software yet. They're still busy remastering last generation.

Plus, we have to remember that Nintendo is selling the Wii U at a much higher profit level than the PS4. They are probably generating a good $100+ per unit sold of pure profit. What is the cost of the PS4 to manufacture these days?

Exactly, everything went downhill for Nintendo in regards to their home consoles when the PS1 came out. People wanted Nintendo to grow up with them, but instead Nintendo just continued to try and cater to 8 yr olds. So all the teenagers and adults said screw you and jumped on the Playstation.

Wrong. Sony only expected to recoup losses in games/PS+ subscriptions. In terms of solely the hardware (which is what your post implies) Sony was losing a small amount of money.

That's exactly what I was trying to get across. I never owned another Nintendo console after I got my hands on a PS1. First game I played on PS was Resident Evil...there was no going back from there.

The Wii U was breaking even during its initial launch at $349.99. Reggie said you had to buy one or two games for the Wii U to be profitable. When you take into consideration they had to drop the price pretty early I highly doubt they have been making $100 profit on each unit sold in a substantial amount of time. Perhaps in the last few months, or so, but definitely not in 2013, or early 2014. The PS4 cost Sony about $350 per unit during its initial launch. I believe it's fair to say they have since managed to shave off at least $30 - $50 from the original costs. This is great news for Sony since the PS4 is still selling at $399.99 and won't likely see a price cut until Q4 of 2015.

The PS4 cost around $350-$370 to manufacture in 2013. They were in fact making a small profit on each unit sold. Manufacturing costs have dropped since then and Sony is making an even larger profit now.

Care to link that? Sony out-and-out said they weren't profiting off the PS4 hardware initially. Read the link.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/sony-says-ps4-unlike-their-previous-consoles-is-already-contributing-profit/1100-6419822/

I read it, now read mine.

At the end of the day the PS4 has been a more profitable product than the Wii U.

That link is from May 2014. The PS4 was released in November of 2013...

iSuppli also noted in their teardown, that overall the PS4 was coming in at a loss:

When other expenses are tallied, Sony initially will still take a loss on each console sold. But the relatively low BOM of the PlayStation 4 will allow the company to break even or attain profitability in the future as the hardware costs undergo normal declines.

----

Both my links are from very close and just after launch. Which is the timeframe you stated, as you said it was profitable immediately. Incorrect.

Undoubtedly.

Fine, I stand corrected but it obviously didn't take long for the PS4 to become profitable. Also, PS+ subscriptions helped a ton. I think I read somewhere that more than 50% of the PS4's install base has PS+. That is fantastic.

It's been stupidly profitable for Sony, thank God. It's my go-to platform this gen.

Wind Waker, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Star Fox 64. Nintendo is just as guilty of remasters, in fact they are the originators of remastering games. Ninja Gaiden Trilogy and of course Super Mario Bros. All Stars for the SNES is where it all started.

Well, look at it from this perspective, when you purchase a Nintendo console and game they work perfectly well immediately, if you purchased a Ubisoft console ( if they existed ) you can bet your right testicle it´s going to be broken right out of the box.

Pretty much this. I've been almost exclusively a Nintendo gamer for most of my life but these past couple generations, especially with the advent of online integration, I've found their decisions to be absolutely maddening. I was a little late to their current gen offerings, saying I'd wait until they addressed some of their more prominent issues (to which they alluded they were working on) before eventually caving under the impression I'd get over it and that I was blowing things out of proportion. That was a mistake. Even the little progress they've made with cross-buy is largely negated by limited support, games are still tied to your device, games that could run on both systems are randomly allocated between the two and it's integrated in a way that completely avoids a proper central account system and may even make it harder to implement in the future. I'll consider buying the next Metroid but otherwise I think I'm about done funneling money into Nintendo.

On drugs.

N64 had tons of TP support from Western Devs and only decent TP support for Western Devs, other issues with the N64 is why it was placed as it was and why support "later" shrunk down (and even then it still had ok TP support) switing to a U.S. sales focus is what kept the system floating as well

Gamecube had more TP support than the N64, and doing the same thing as the N64, they later, after awhile, went for an american games market sales approach (didn't work to well with Xbox being there) with good Western TS support, just got more and more limited over time, earlier than the N64. Both of them don't have massive third-party libraries, but they were there before they vanished in the last part of their both life cycles. It did limit what they got however, and Gamecube would have been completely dead if it wasn't for them, also, Gamecube was not profitable (GBA profits were used to cover Gamecube losses. Considering how Nintendo was still 5+ years behind on portable hardware it's not surprising seeing it get that much profit, but even then GB brand was continuing to shrink in revenue and getting the GC out did not help hence DS cutting GBA, though they still sold GBA's and games just decreased.)

The Wii has tons of Third-party support, just different TP support than 360 and PS3 and PC. The Wii had tons of shovelware, "beta-test" games for the other consoles, Ports, got cheap companies to make games due to available templates and lack of effort required and contained some companies that could not transition to HD or were still suing PS2 tools, and did not want to go to portable, or also ported on portables. (which is why i shrug when people "find a hidden gem on the wii" which are mostly (not all) still bad games just better in comparison.) And those games SOLD. Then crashed, but they played a huge part at the Wii's peak. Then it got so bad that they stopped selling and only certain FP and TP titles ended up continuing to sell, but that doesn't remove those TP games from existing as bad or lazy, or behind the time as they were.

Wii U is not surviving. Let alone on Nintendo games that aren't even expanding the system install base. Heck, some of the best selling Wii games are third-party, there's barely a library there on either category really. The machine will be the worst selling Nintendo home console, all cards have already been played, the console is not in good shape.

PS4 sold 20 million by not only being partly lucky but also doing the right things at the right time. Especially when the Xbox one floundered at first (outside the UK and U.S. apparently) with some angry and confused mindshare. Even then, Xbox One and PS4 beat the Wii U in less time at an accelerated rate, both due to third-party, keeping their machines up with the times, online, accessible prices, Exclusives, support, better advertising, better features, papajohns.

I mean Wii U made almost all mistakes possible out the gate, so most of it's sales are pretty much front loaded. There's a reason that 10 million sold through is at least an LTD goal for the Wii U and not the others.

I like Nintendo franchises and their systems. I can get why some don't. And if you call them "Kidtendo" (just like calling a system Xbone or PSbore), I lost all respect and credibity for your posts.

@intotheminx: I liked Resident Evil a lot too, but who says people need gore for fun. Not a matter if one is better or not. Why can't they coexist? I feel like Wii U is a perfect second complimentary console that offers an experience you can't find elsewhere. Are chess and Monopoly less fun as board games because they lack cinematic flare and excessive gore?

The Wii and WiiU suck ass. Their other consoles were pretty good.

##34 years old here and my #1 game last year is Captain Toad. PC/Nintendo gamer for life!

I have a ps4 and an xbone. They are practically the same console.

So for me it's good that Nintendo offers something different.

I like having online at no extra cost. I like platformers, Nintendo makes the best platformers.

I like playing local multiplayer. Mario Kart is probably the best local multiplayer game for casual gamers.

People like to complain that Mario/Link (Zelda)/pokemon has been around for 30 years....Firstly the games sell so well. Secondly Call of Duty comes out every year.... Assassins Creed is heading that way, Need for Speed was a yearly release. Higher selling games usually do have sequels and sequels of sequels.

Regarding the 3rd party criticism... If a console doesn't sell well it doesn't get 3rd party games. It's happened to a lot of consoles with terrible sales.

@foxhound_fox: PSP did remote play. Atari 2600 had wireless controllers. Analog sticks were around before N64.

@SpiderLuke: That was a example of how I changed and Nintendo did not. I was at the age when gore was cool to the kids lol. I don't need every game to be bloody and violent, but Nintendo lacks a wide range of variety imo. They really need to get the big multiplats back on their side.

@Capitan_Kid: yes but Nintendo had their first in most of the current features of any modern controller. Mics (Famicom), Triggers (N64), Shoulder buttons (SNES), gamepad shape (NES), d-pad (game & watch) and rumble (N64). And all of those where gimmicks in some form

But Analog sticks weren't popular before the N64.

"They're miserable because their mothers take it up the f**in' a$$"---Joey Lamotta

That happened with the N64. And during the life of the GC the wannabe gamers, gaming journalists and publishers were busy 'ignoring' Nintendo. The Wii was just a continuation of that but I know what you mean, it didn't help. I'm convinced nothing would have helped that situation anyway.

Did the PSP make remote play an important must-have feature? Nope. They didn't even standardize it across all PS3 hardware (IIRC), nor was it's functionality as seamless as Nintendo's. How many consoles adopted the wireless controller after the Atari 2600? None. How many after the Gamecube? ALL OF THEM. Same with analogue sticks.

Hell, we know joysticks were around for ages already, but after the N64 came out and proved the viability of that form factor, then everyone else got on board.

Because when you buy Nintendo you are pretty limited in the games you can play on that console. Its silly.

This applies to every console. When people bring up this complaint i want to ask...wait...when was the last time you played a Nintendo game? My friend says this all the time and he hasn't touched a Nintendo since the N64.