@dlCHIEF58 @digitaltiger No one here is arguing that. But to see someone like him act like he knows what he's talking about when the one thing he helped create floundered in the 80s against the very company he's talking against... it's just a tiny bit silly, don't ya think?
It's just as credible as when Ultima creator Richard Garriott claimed back in 2011 that mobile tablet/smartphone gaming was going to eclipse consoles and PCs. For a guy who hasn't created anything successful since the 90s (don't forget the failed Tabula Rasa), no one could take him seriously.
And no one should be taking Bushnell seriously here either.
@TheSorrow66666 @jtthegame316 You can kindly blame the consumers for Nintendo's kiddy image.
Nintendo TRIED to shake that off with the GameCube. Remember Eternal Darkness and Nintendo's short-lived exclusivity with the Resident Evil franchise in the early 2000's?
The kiddy image started when they tried censoring Mortal Kombat in 1993, and it exploded with the N64. Later attempts like GoldenEye, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day tend to get ignored when the kiddy argument is brought up. :/
But many of the M-rated games didn't sell nearly as much as the E-rated family-friendly ones. Especially with multi-platform releases. Folks often bought the XBOX/PS2 version over the Cube one. Just ask anyone who bought Splinter Cell. How many have it for the GameCube? There was nothing wrong with the port... it was just the version few people purchased.
It's just not fair to blame Nintendo for the image. They tried to branch out. We just didn't listen.
@cursealoud @Serpentes420 Actually, the Seal kinda did. Sure, crappy games still got published, but remember the garbage that came out for the Intellivision, Colecovision and Atari 2600? Hell, remember all those different PONG consoles? :OAtari gets props for taking the bold risks, but they refused to learn from their mistakes.
I'm not saying Nintendo is this "almighty pioneer of gaming", but their focus was far more direct. The explosive success of the NES in the late 80s proved they were doing something right.
Gimmicks sell. Companies know this. Nintendo only capitalized on it with the Wii. And love it or hate it, the Wii did help change the playing field a bit. Did it make it better? That's open for debate. But the fact still remains that they were the first to be successful with it.
But to say MS "1UPed" them with the Kinect is rather ignorant. While the device is DEFINITELY full of ideas and untapped potential, people often forget how limited it still is. Without a controller, there's no freedom of exploration. Everything has to be on rails, unless they add some sort of hamster-wheel like attachment. :|
To be perfectly honest, motion gaming in itself is a gimmicky trend, and I feel Sony and MS are making a big mistake by trying to mimic the Wii's trendy success. It started with the Move and Kinect, but now we have Smart Glass and the PS Vita/PS3 connectivity.
It's one of the things I'll give the Wii U props for... going back to using a controller. Motion controls can be fun, but forcing me to play EVERY game with them is just asinine. Sometimes I just want to relax with a game, and not flail about like a ninny for an hour.
@cursealoud @Serpentes420 Wait a minute... what? Sega only one-upped Nintendo in short little spurts, like being first on the 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit markets.
In terms of GAMES? Sega was a very good competitor with Nintendo, and definitely helped make the 16-bit era one of the best by far. Sega was always a great game maker, so I'll give props for that.
But to go back on your argument on Atari, while you're right about other people ruining the industry in the early 80s, Atari did nothing to stop it. Mattel floundered right alongside with them because no one tried to take control of the mounds of shovelware being poured into our laps.
Atari CHOSE to allow that, which in turn puts the blame right back in their lap.
Nintendo, on the other hand, was one of the few companies who required software to be pre-approved before release. Remember that goofy "seal of quality" bit? Remember when game companies had to branch out into little sub-studios so they could release more games than Nintendo's QA was allowing?
It is a plain and simple fact that Nintendo had a HUGE hand in reviving the console market. You could say the Sega Master System had a part, but the number of units sold compared to the NES is pretty insignificant.
To resort to calling the guy a "kid" or "dumbass" when he raises solid points is childish on your part.
DragonRift's comments