Stop the constant Nintendo shilling,close your mouth,get off of your knees and leave. Dont forget to wipe your chin.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Stop the constant Nintendo shilling,close your mouth,get off of your knees and leave. Dont forget to wipe your chin.
@jcrame10:
In your opinion. ;)
Then you remember Braid cost $180,000.
It depends on what you mean by low budget. The majority of independent games are low budget compared to AAA titles from major publishers. Personally, I'd take Shovel Knight over a large number of AAA titles I've played recently. That's just my tastes. This year there are a large quantity of appealing indie games for me.
There is a trend of discounting indie games or mid-range titles when scaling the quantity and quality of a system's software yearly but in truth, I just as excited if not more by these titles over a number of AAA games which have adopted pop mechanics and design choices that I don't find appealing (Take FarCry, Assassin's Creed, BattleField, Call of Duty, MGSV, Batman Arkham Knight, GTAV for instance).
It's all personal preference, I know but I think all games of varying types deserve to be credited and discussed when talking about yearly line-ups. Otherwise we bottle ourselves into regarding only one style of game - what ever is popular.
ive played a few...however most of the GwG and PS+ ones are bad.
@jcrame10:
I don't know what indie games you have played, to be fair. :P
Most of the ones I play, I have enjoyed. I have Axiom Verge waiting for me too. I heard it's wonderful.
Steamworld Heist is also an incredibly engaging strategy RPG. It blends turn-based strategy with skill-based shooting. Think X-Com on a 2D plane.
It depends what kind of games you like. It could just be that you value the immersive experience AAA games can offer over the simplicity of a solid game-loop.
Did it even live at all? Most people didn't even bother with Wii U as there was very little incentive to get one.
- Weak hardware (a generation behind).
- Overpriced for what it was.
- Gimmick that people didn't care about.
- Watered down first party titles.
- Abysmal third party support.
- Lack of games in general.
Because most people assumed that when the PS4 and XBO released, and the Wii U was "last gen" by their simple standards, that it had died along with the PS3 and 360.
It never got a Metroid game. It's finally getting a new Zelda game, but it needed it way sooner. It never got a 3D Mario game like Galaxy, Sunshine, or 64, but rather an improved upon sequel to 3D Land.
Yes it was around all those years, but it never got the games we wanted.
Because the Wii U is barely 4 years old, not 5. It released in November.
However if you compare the Switch launch with the 3DS launch, it lines up to a near perfect 6 years. (3DS launched in March 2011)
After the good year they had in 2014, after the pat on the head they got for turning things around, they pretty much gave it no extra effort and decided to coast the rest of the way. Yeah, its time was short lived.
It was short lived because they killed it for what appears to be nothing more than a slightly better system of the same exact ilk with the ability to take it on the go.
They made the Switch which is a home console/portable hybrid Wii U, and carried absolutely nothing over.
This isn't an Xbox to Xbox 360 kind of situation...
because it got no support what so ever and wasnt seen anywhere
how much did it even sale? like 8 million?
OP is such a bandwagoner
Previous Sheep, jumped to COW status, then ditched them and tried being a lem for awhile, got butthurt and jumped back to PS4, and now jumps back to Nintendo.
#noloyalty
I see it as short lived because really, what games did it get?
It didn't get a proper Zelda game, only remasters and one it will share with the Switch.
It had maybe two good Mario games, and a Mario Kart game.
There really wasn't much given to it.
New Pikmin, Multiple Marios, Mario Kart, Splatoon, Mario Maker, New Yoshi game, Captain Toad game. There was a solid amount.
No its not. It bloody awful. Its like 2 games a year with minimal 3rd party.
I see it as short lived because really, what games did it get?
It didn't get a proper Zelda game, only remasters and one it will share with the Switch.
It had maybe two good Mario games, and a Mario Kart game.
There really wasn't much given to it.
New Pikmin, Multiple Marios, Mario Kart, Splatoon, Mario Maker, New Yoshi game, Captain Toad game. There was a solid amount.
I'll give you Pikmin, Yoshi, and Splatoon, I forgot about those. I'll give you Captain Toad too, even though really it was a great spin off from Mario 3D world. I forgot about the Xenoblade game that came out as well.
It's still not very much, considering how much have come out on other generations.
It's enough for me though. I don't play games all day everyday. Don't have that kind of time anymore.
Yeah but well, you see. Not everyone is you. The answer is obvious it had low support.
Because it's compared to an anomaly. They gave it a typical lifespan- rather Iwata would have if he were alive, as Kimishima came in, and basically killed it, because it went from 3+ million a year sales to 800,000 in its one year under him. He didn't really like Iwata continuing it for a full generation, and phased it out as fast as he could, because he wanted Switch only to be in the limelight. Sure, Wii U could have lasted through 2017, but Kimishima didn't want anything more (at least it turned profitable in 2014 so Iwata was able to tout that in his final financial report in 2015).
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment