Zidart said:
i completely disagree with the statment mai just quoted, reason being that there is indeed many games on the wii that suit my need of hardcore gaming (and i already mentioned them thousands of times before) and not ALL nintendo games have a juvenile gameplay, in fact the only one that would fit in that category would be wii sports/fit
I agree with you. You and I both disagree with the article which states that Nintendo
should continue focusing on making games for inexperienced gamers as that is their role in the industry: a role that must and can only be filled by Nintendo. It seems apparent that you feel Nintendo has provided much to appeal to the hardcore gaming audience, and that this has in turn made you feel validated in your ownership of the Wii. And so it should, although the article tries to imply otherwise. Unless I have misinterpreted it, which is always possible; probable even. :lol
The article more or less says Nintendo needs to keep focusing on simple and fun games to bring in new audiences and expand the market, at which point Nintendo will leave
retaining these new gamers up to Sony and Microsoft whose roles are to provide more challenging and engrossing game experiences. Essentially the article proposes the idea that the industry is fractured, with each of the big players fulfilling one part of a bigger picture that sustains the industry, and therefore it is in everyone's best interests that Nintendo maintains this status quo. I'm saying this is not the case, that the industry is not fractured into the roles the article speaks of. I contend further that if it were segmented as the article proposes, Nintendo would not be irreplaceable in that role. Rather I am saying that the big three should all focus on both expanding the market
and retaining it, and that the best way to do that is with
good games; not simple ones, or dumbed down ones, or anything of that sort. And by what you just said, Zidart, Nintendo has recognized this with the games you have mentioned on numerous accounts. So if the article is painting an accurate picture of the industry, Nintendo is failing in it, and clearly this is not the case.
But the console still has a long way to go.
Zidart said:
HELLO disaster: day of crisis / advance wars days of ruins / any freaking fire emblem
I can't speak on day of crisis, and I haven't personally played any Fire Emblem since the GBA one, but in terms of Advance Wars I wouldn't call that game "dark." The style of the newest one was grittier, but the dialogue and plot of the campaign was aimed at a younger audience, ages 10-14 I would say. And there is still only cartoony violence. When a unit is destroyed they simply disappear. There is no blood, or gore, or anything visual that would make it appear as though people are dieing in these battles. The game still shy's away from mature themes, like the brutality of war, death, and so on. I would agree it is dark
er than its predecessors, but once again, it still has a long way to go from being compared alongside other war strategy games. But I do agree it is a game that could gain and retain gamers, by basing its strategy on principles everyone understands (infantry<tanks<bombers, and so on) and applying its own take on on the subject (turn based, economies, CO Powers). I got into the game because I'm a huge World War History buff and I wanted to see how real world strategies translated into the game. I keep playing the game, and buying new versions, because these strategies translate so well.
