Sega hates Nintendo

Herr Shyguy said:
360's got a better lineup than the Wii.
I have to agree with this even though I'm a total Nintendo person. There has been allot of good games on the 360 but there's a lack of it on the wii. SOME 3rd party titles ultamitly fail, but on the 360 their doing just fine
 
Paper Bowser said:
Yeah apart from the Sonic games on them I've never really wanted an Xbox or PS3 because it dosen't have much good games on it.
Oh shut up; the XBox 360 and PlayStation 3 have plenty of good games on them. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean they're bad; I dislike most of the Wii's line-up, but I'm not about to say they're all bad games.
 
Having better games on the 360 is yet another example of Wii having weak hardware.
You can do a lot more on better hardware.

I know, Nintendo can do a lot of great stuff on their own consoles, but they know the architecture like no other.
 
Herr Shyguy said:
360's got a better lineup than the Wii.
WHAT. They just say that all the big games are for PS3 and XBox 360 but they are all to do with Blood and Killing.
 
Yeah but that was not as big as Call of Duty or any other game where you shoot.
 
XBOX 360 and PS3 are not only relying on shooters and blood.
These consoles have a lot of these kind of games, because the majority of the userbase of these consoles just relies on shooters and blood.
 
YamiHoshi.nl said:
XBOX 360 and PS3 are not only relying on shooters and blood.
These consoles have a lot of these kind of games, because the majority of the userbase of these consoles just relies on shooters and blood.
 
Dr. Eggman said:
Herr Shyguy said:
360's got a better lineup than the Wii.
WHAT. They just say that all the big games are for PS3 and XBox 360 but they are all to do with Blood and Killing.
Hahaha. I hate to admit it, but Shyguy's absolutely right (not that he isn't normally :P).

They're not all to do with blood and killing. And even if they are, that doesn't make them worse games.

And anyway, most of those "blood and killing" games are avaliable on Wii too.
 
Dr. Eggman said:
Herr Shyguy said:
360's got a better lineup than the Wii.
WHAT. They just say that all the big games are for PS3 and XBox 360 but they are all to do with Blood and Killing.
Yeah LittleBigPlanet is a total gore fest.
 
Little Big Planet is an exception. But in most other cases, we see violent gun shooters from the PS3 and XBOX360. Not to say that the Wii doesn't get them, but you get the idea.
 
Dr. Eggman said:
WHAT. They just say that all the big games are for PS3 and XBox 360 but they are all to do with Blood and Killing.
So having a wee bit of violence immediately makes them bad games? Would ye rather Red Dead Redemption have the characters bleed fruits and veggies instead of actual blood and therefore fuck up the entire 'realistic Old West' feel it was going for? I'm sorry, but you are a complete idiot; no matter how much I try to explain why Sony and Microsoft consoles are just as decent as Nintendo consoles, ye choose to completely ignore me. Most of the "bloody and violent" games you so hate are also available on Nintendo consoles as well, anyway, so you deliberately want to keep a bucket over your head to remain in ignorance and fanaticism.

The PlayStation 3 has LittleBigPlanet, Ratchet and Clank, the Ico series and I think Sly Cooper (was that brought to the PS3? I don't remember, but it's a Sony-owned series) as examples of non-violent (relatively in Ratchet and Clank's case) or bloody games on the PlayStation 3. I don't personally own an XBox 360, so I don't know many of the titles on it, but the XBox Live Arcade has a massive collection of non-violent independent games on it, I'm certain many cute and cuddly Bomberman and Katamari titles have been made exclusives to it, and I think Microsoft are making very family friendly titles for the Kinect as well.

I don't even understand why people decry any game with the slightest resemblance to realism, since a bit of realism in games is nice here and there, like if you want a video game representing the Prohibition-era of the 1920s or the Renaissance era of Italian history. We like movies that try to depict realistic scenarios accurately, why do we ignore realistic video games? And some games seem realistic when they're really not; they'd take one look at inFamous - one of the best games I've ever played - and immediately assume it's an ultra-violent and realistic gorefest. It's not. It's extremely unrealistic, not all that violent, and really, it resembles a comic book more than anything else. Same with Just Cause 2; at first glance, looks like a realistic sandbox, when it's really anything but. Having a bit of violence and blood is just there for aesthetic purposes, and it'd just feel sort of weird if these sorts of games didn't have them. These games, among others of their creed, are also extremely fun and interesting; not that you'll ever admit that.

And some games that are just insane violence - like Saints Row 2 and Prototype - are fun as all hell with just how much they know how crazy they are. And the Wii has its fair share of violent games; as I mentioned a while back, every Call of Duty game since 2004 has been released on a Nintendo console, and most Medal of Honor games since 2002 have done the same. MadWorld, House of the Dead: Overkill and The Conduit are all violent video games released on the Wii, and No More Heroes used to be a Wii-exclusive until they re-released it for the PS3 about four years after the original release (and it was way better for it, too).

Or to sum this up; do your bloody research, and when you do, realize that each console serves its own purpose in the industry even if it doesn't serve your purpose. I dislike the Wii, but I understand others love it, so I'm not going to tell them they're stupid for liking it or that the console is a complete waste of space. I understand this is a Mario forum and Nintendo will always be number one here, but I honestly expect people to be a little more intelligent and open-minded than this.
 
'3K said:
I wish Nintendo would just turn third-party and get it over with.

I..... think that's still a far away possibility from ever happening. There's no sign of Nintendo declining so far that they have to move to 3rd party. The sales the Wii, the DS, and the 3DS are proof of that. Just because the 3DS had a short period of time where sales were lackluster doesn't mean Nintendo is on it's way to a decline that far. You could argue that Sega was in a state where people thought they'd never turn 3rd Party even as the Dreamcast released but Sega had a rolling snowball of problems that began with the Saturn. I don't see any indication Nintendo is on the way there.
 
'3K said:
I wish Nintendo would just turn third-party and get it over with.
How about no.

Can't we all agree that all the systems are great/terrible and get this over with. Saying that the "Xbox or PS3 sucks" doesn't make you any better than the person saying "Wii sucks". All systems have their flaws and all systems have their own set of great games to play, such as the aforementioned Little Big Planet.
 
@ Northern Verve: You're right. I didn't take profit or anything like that into account and I wasn't even thinking about the 3DS sales numbers. From what I understand, the 3DS's figures have dramatically improved with the price cut.

@ Gamefreak: I'm just going off of what I'd personally like to see happen given my current lot in life. I'm not pulling enough income to buy multiple consoles. I really think it'd be great to be able to have both Marvel Vs. Capcom 4 and Super Mario Whatever on the same console.

And you know what, I really need to learn to keep my big mouth shut. :-X
 
Paper Bowser said:
Most of Sonic's main games have been on nintendo consoles.
You mean Later. The first few ones where only for Sega Consoles.
 
Re: I thought this thread was a news report.

'3K said:
I wish Nintendo would just turn third-party and get it over with.
I thought this during the Gamecube era but I changed my mind when the DS and Wii came out.
 
Back