Titusfied said:
|
Actually, Nintendo was simply the next step in video game evolution, just as SNES was next, then N64, PS1, PS2 and XBox, etc. Of course, I'm not saying that is the order of console evolution, just a broad course over the years. Nintendo might have been more successful in selling than Atari, but that is only because the quality was greater. The same can be said about PS2 right now. It is selling 100 times better than Nintendo, but that doesn't mean it resurrected the industry and brought it to the next level, does it?
|
It's not the same thing, Titus. The videogames industry was in a state of steep decline as a result of Atari's buffonery. Developers were making nothing back on their games, hardware sales were slumping and the general public concensus was that console videogames would be dead in a few short years if the industry continued to progress in that manner.
Along came Nintendo, they started making
creative games that were worth the buyer's 80 bucks, and they revived an industry that was on the brink of collapse. Sony isn't in the same boat. They joined the race as the entire industry was picking up steam. Granted, Sony one-upped Nintendo by turning the videogames industry from a nerdy hobby into a genuine multimedia threat, however the industry was in no danger of
dying when Sony did so. It's not the same thing.
Titus said:
|
Just to nit-pick and be a severe anal itch, you didn't mention Zelda in the same paragraph.
|
Raziel said:
|
I'm not knocking Halo anymore than I am knocking Zelda and it's tried and true "save the Princess" rountine in every single game. Halo did not create the "alien menace attacks the world" device, therefore Halo is not a pioneering bastion of innovative story. That's not a bad thing, but for SYG to try and claim that all Nintendo does is rehash old crap while Microsoft and Sony do nothing but excrete pure, creative gold is a load of absolute malarkey.
|
Yes I did. You and I are referring to two completely different posts. I've said
nothing about Microsoft or Sony's games that can't be applied to Nintendo as well. The fact is, I merely levelled the playing field. The complaint from S2 AM was that Nintendo just rehashes old crap. The comment from SYG was that Nintendo simply rehashes old crap while Microsoft births nothing but sheer art at every turn.
Both companies do their share of re-hashing and innovating. That was my whole point, which was so woefully taken out of context by S2.
Quote:
|
So technically, it is original in its own sense.
|
I never said it wasn't. I merely said that the basic premise, that being "evil aliens attack the world" is no more innovative than Zelda's tried-and-true "save the Princess" routine. If you go into specifics,
neither game is as cliched or rehashed as the basic premises would lead you to believe. That was my entire point, once again, completely manhandled by S2.
Quote:
|
I hardly see what SYG wrote as "crusading against a company". You seem to be on more of a crusade to suck off the inventors of "the Big N", as you put it. He simply said Nintendo has gay characters.
|
I'm simply correcting ridiculous blanket statements. If someone was making the same generalized comments about hair gel or black people, I'd be saying the exact same things I'm saying now.
Plus, it's an opportunity to debate. You know me enough to know that I'm gonna jump at the chance when it's provided.