13th March 2006, 9:34 PM
Quote:How is it that the console with the biggest selection isn't the most desirable?
How is it that the console with the least amount of options should be the console of choice?
Because of the games available... any one of the three platforms has plenty for anyone... but you choose one based on which exclusive titles you like best, obviously.
Quote:In your opinion. Laying on the floor is much more valuable to me than whatever the PC can offer. That's my preference. Dislike or disagree, my preference doesn't change.
You can say that, but it doesn't make it actually make one bit of sense. :)
Quote:This is their problem, imo. It's too narrow a course, imo. Why try to only redefine gaming? Why not include the option to play big and grandiose games as we're used to (and still like) AND give us new innovative titles to play in a unique way?
Or for a question from their side, why follow a path that is broken? Wouldn't it be muddying ones message and betraying your goal of change if you both say how things are so broken and need to change ... and make games that follow that exact broken formula? Yeah, it wouldn't make sense... and there IS a problem in gaming. Will Nintendo fix it? Um... not all at once, and I do hope that the Revolution's changed focus won't mean that we don't have as many great, classic Nintendo-style games... but it has the potential to do a lot of good. And Nintendo has been building relationships too; look at n-Space (Geist) and Kuju (Battalion Wars), for instance. And, of course, the GC's new focus on increased third-party relationships -- Capcom and Zelda, Sega and F-Zero, Namco and Star Fox...