Why Nintendo?

[Tigerblade]

yeah, it had one, but i never saw it, and the reaction in magazines at the time, was wtf? and how do i make it work? then the n64 thumbstick was more usable.

so i dont really know much about it.

Was a bit way out for the time but was the only way to play Nights. The Dreamcast controller was modelled off it as they are VERY similar in style, just adding VMU to the mix really. The n64 version was more usable only because it had the games to work well with it.....bar Nights and Burning Rangers I can't really remember any other games that complemented analogue very well on Saturn.

 

[Lord Nassirbannipal]

nintendo brought a new control scheme that may offer superior precision to that.
if it succeeds it will not be a gimick.

Motion-sensing controllers are nothing new.

The Wiimote is basically the same thing as those tennis and boxing games that you plug into your tv.

n64 had the first analog thumbstick

This is false.

Both the Atari 5200 and the Vectrex had analog sticks in 1982.

So your problem is that you have self-esteem issues with your maturity, and therefore must play games with sex, blood, and gore, in order to feel like an adult? Sorry, but that is just plain ludicrous to decide your console purchase off of something like that. Even if someone were watching you play your games constantly, who cares, they couldn't give a crud whether it is OOOH BLOODY SPLATTER SPLATTER SPLASH WOW BLOOD POOLS ON THE FLOOR or not. There are, of course, "mature" games that will be on the Wii... had you tried Zelda, you'd realize that after the first hour, it actually IS a mature game that younger players won't understand a scrap of the plot-line of. By mature, I don't mean that it has tons of blood and gore, I mean that it has a deep and meaningful story to it... ya'know, sort of like a good book .

It's not about blood and guts vs. sunshine and puppy dogs , it's about the gameplay.

Nintendo is best known for its flagship titles, and let's be honest, they've been some of the easiest and most simplistic games in history.

Super Mario World - The cape feather made you nigh unbeatable, and the Blue Yoshi made you God. There are so many opportunities to get 99 lives in this game, and I can't count the number of times I've gone through it(including the Star Road and Special World) without a death. At nine-years-old, I beat this game a few days after Christmas.

Super Mario World Two - There was an added challenge in trying to get 100% for all of the levels, but all in all, it was damn hard to die.

Kirby's Adventure - Do I even need to explain this? Not only could you just fly through all the levels, the powers that Kirby got by swallowing his enemies made him WAY to powerful. Even the bosses didn't stand a chance.

A lot of people think that Nintendo gets the "kiddie factor" from the cartoonish characters, but that's not true. Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, Crash Bandicoot are all just as cartoonish, but what it comes down to is the gameplay. Titles like the above and especially titles like God Of War, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear, etc have much more complex gameplay that involves more resource management, more puzzle solving, and more intense combat where the enemies can actually kill you if you don't have the precision and skill to take them out. They don't just walk back and forth on platforms waiting for you to jump on them.

Gamers simply consider it more challenging and fulfilling to defeat hordes of axe-wielding demons or heavily armed robots or a huge, fire-breathing beast than they do to run around jumping on turtles and(even though I've said it before) collecting fruit and coins.

 

[Tigerblade]

It's not about blood and guts vs. sunshine and puppy dogs , it's about the gameplay.

Nintendo is best known for its flagship titles, and let's be honest, they've been some of the easiest and most simplistic games in history.

Super Mario World - The cape feather made you nigh unbeatable, and the Blue Yoshi made you God. There are so many opportunities to get 99 lives in this game, and I can't count the number of times I've gone through it(including the Star Road and Special World) without a death. At nine-years-old, I beat this game a few days after Christmas.

Super Mario World Two - There was an added challenge in trying to get 100% for all of the levels, but all in all, it was damn hard to die.

Kirby's Adventure - Do I even need to explain this? Not only could you just fly through all the levels, the powers that Kirby got by swallowing his enemies made him WAY to powerful. Even the bosses didn't stand a chance.

A lot of people think that Nintendo gets the "kiddie factor" from the cartoonish characters, but that's not true. Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, Crash Bandicoot are all just as cartoonish, but what it comes down to is the gameplay. Titles like the above and especially titles like God Of War, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear, etc have much more complex gameplay that involves more resource management, more puzzle solving, and more intense combat where the enemies can actually kill you if you don't have the precision and skill to take them out. They don't just walk back and forth on platforms waiting for you to jump on them.

Gamers simply consider it more challenging and fulfilling to defeat hordes of axe-wielding demons or heavily armed robots or a huge, fire-breathing beast than they do to run around jumping on turtles and(even though I've said it before) collecting fruit and coins.

QFT and absolutely spot on.

This is what Nintendo !!!!!!s fail to grasp, they ALWAYS point to the fact that Nintendo games are superior because of gameplay. What they don't realise is gameplay is a subjective experience.....one mans steak is another's dog shit so to speak but this will mostly fall on deaf ears.

One thing this thread (and the wii=next gen? thread even more so) has taught me is that console !!!!!!ism is still as rabid as the SNES vs Megadrive days and that the Nintendo camp still have the same arguements. Games on the present Nintendo system haven't really changed, just the way you play them has and funnily enough that doesn't cut it with alot of us.

I still intend to check Wii out when I see one and may buy one for party use as it's cheap as chips, but as a main console system? Nah.....Just ain't for me and I dare say alot of ppl will be the same.

 

[sculelos]

Well, I will admit that I'm primarly gettting a wii for my favorite nintendo francises.

Super Smash Brothers, Zelda, Mario, Metroid.

Unanouced titles that I'm hoping for...

F-Zero, Starfox.

Also I'm buying rayman raving rabbids simply because it sounds like fun, will also be fun to play wii sports with friends and family.

In comparison the only game I want for eather 360/PS3 is gears of war, but I'm not buying a 360 for one game.

 

[drizzt81]

Games on the present Nintendo system haven't really changed, just the way you play them has and funnily enough that doesn't cut it with alot of us.

Games on the present Sony system haven't really changed, just the way they look has and funnily enough that doesn't cut it with alot of us.

[Edit: I have forgotten that sarcastic remarks require me to be politically correct, in order to appease the people that obviously did not understand my remark in the first place. Consequently, I have added the following]

Games on the present Microsoft system haven't really changed, just the way they look has and funnily enough that doesn't cut it with alot of us.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Ok, I have two comments:

1) I am still reading this thread, so be nice people

2) The point about the simplicity of Nintendo games is a good one. However, sometimes I like that. I actually enjoy sitting down and getting 100% on Kirby's Adventure in one sitting. Yes the game is easy as hell, but there's something charming and relaxing about it. When I get home from work, tired and irritated, I am not going to put in a game that's challenging and frustrating. It's not that I hate a challenge, and it's not that I don't enjoy such games. It's just that those games don't help me relax.

Different people have different ideas of fun, and want different things out of their entertainment. My gf, for example, likes dark, serious movies but only likes funny, upbeat music. I, on the other hand, prefer much more "serious" music, but when it comes to movies I want to laugh.

People need to accept that everybody wants something different out of gaming, and the titles that everybody likes are few and far between. To me, the penultimate FPS was the original Serious Sam. I'm sure not many people would agree with me, but it gives me what I want out of an FPS, so I love it.

 

[aphex187]

Just my humble 2 cents. I have a Wii and a 360. The Wii gets played when I just want to pick up a game and start playing with no BS. Generally most of my 360 games (not all) have a slightly higher learning curve so I generally save them for when I have a good amount of time to sit down and play.

Its somewhat the same with the DS and the PSP - virtually all my DS games are 'pick up and play' while the PSP games (again, not ALL) are games I'd rather play when I have time set aside to play.

Now - I also have a Gamecube and a PS2 - same generation consoles yet again and this is what I am hoping happens with the PS3. I have a ton of PS2 games that are pick up and play - and I've got other PS2 games that have a learning curve. This is why (in my opinion) the PS2 was so successful - it could appeal to everyone. I feel the PS3 and 360 both appeal VERY specifically to my demographic (young male) and they need to break this mold with both of these systems IMHO. I thing games like Sonic and Viva Pinata (awesome btw) help this happen. Only time will tell.

 

[GoldenTiger]

Ok, I have two comments:

1) I am still reading this thread, so be nice people

Perhaps I was a bit scathing in my reply to pandora's hehe .

Lord Nassirbannipal, I'm sure there are plenty of examples of easy games on other consoles, as well... things change over time, so yeah, while some of the really early flagships (some, not many) were easy (Kirby's was easy as heck, though it certainly was fun ), many were not. Unless a game is so easy to the point where it goes and basically hands you victory regardless of what you do, then when you lose says "Awwww, it's OK, go ahead, try again! There are no people who aren't winners here! WOW, YOU'RE THE WINNER!", it can be fun to someone .

 

[Rash]

Games on the present Sony system haven't really changed, just the way they look has and funnily enough that doesn't cut it with alot of us.

That Doesnt include Nintendo Games Then!!! I think what Tigerblade is saying is Nintendo is still rehashing games from 15 years ago. Wether Sony and M$ will do the same in 10 years time we dont know.

I also like how people always single out Sony and not M$!!

 

[GoldenTiger]

That Doesnt include Nintendo Games Then!!! I think what Tigerblade is saying is Nintendo is still rehashing games from 15 years ago. Wether Sony and M$ will do the same in 10 years time we dont know.

I also like how people always single out Sony and not M$!!

Nintendo uses the same CHARACTERS, yes, but not the same gameplay most of the time.

Sony deserves to be singled out further, if you don't know why, your head is buried in the sand .

 

[n1ce_hat]

I'm sure this was posted a zillion times in this thread's 10 pages, but I've always preferred Nintendo's games because of the 'fun' factor that they gear them towards, not focused on graphics as the #1 sell point. Also the first-party games they release are always so polished and perfect by the time you get them, they almost never disappoint (unless you hate them to begin)..

 

[Kevlarman]

yeah, it had one, but i never saw it, and the reaction in magazines at the time, was wtf? and how do i make it work? then the n64 thumbstick was more usable.

so i dont really know much about it.

I have Night and the analog controller, and it is a pretty nifty device. Works great, and fit my hands like a jelly donut.

In fact, before analog sticks came out, I prefered Saturn controllers to those of the PSX, but that's getting a bit OT.

 

[Furystrike]

Both the Atari 5200 and the Vectrex had analog sticks in 1982.

Atari had a digital joystick. digital joystick does not equal analog joystick.

Also, Sega released their analog stick about 1 month before nintendo. This by no means meant that they thought it up, they simply rushed it out the door. Anyone who used it for
'Nights: into dreams' knows that it was no where near as polished as the nintendo or later sony analog stick.

 

[LeviathanZERO]

Atari had a digital joystick. digital joystick does not equal analog joystick.

If I remember correctly, there was only 2 axes of movement.
(up-down and left-right.)

 

[LeviathanZERO]

Super Mario World - The cape feather made you nigh unbeatable, and the Blue Yoshi made you God. There are so many opportunities to get 99 lives in this game, and I can't count the number of times I've gone through it(including the Star Road and Special World) without a death. At nine-years-old, I beat this game a few days after Christmas.

Super Mario World Two - There was an added challenge in trying to get 100% for all of the levels, but all in all, it was damn hard to die.

Kirby's Adventure - Do I even need to explain this? Not only could you just fly through all the levels, the powers that Kirby got by swallowing his enemies made him WAY to powerful. Even the bosses didn't stand a chance.

A lot of people think that Nintendo gets the "kiddie factor" from the cartoonish characters, but that's not true. Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, Crash Bandicoot are all just as cartoonish, but what it comes down to is the gameplay. Titles like the above and especially titles like God Of War, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear, etc have much more complex gameplay that involves more resource management, more puzzle solving, and more intense combat where the enemies can actually kill you if you don't have the precision and skill to take them out. They don't just walk back and forth on platforms waiting for you to jump on them.

Gamers simply consider it more challenging and fulfilling to defeat hordes of axe-wielding demons or heavily armed robots or a huge, fire-breathing beast than they do to run around jumping on turtles and(even though I've said it before) collecting fruit and coins.

Btw, just wanted to tell you that was a horrible comparison.
I am refering to how you just compared a bunch of old 16-bit 2D games, with 128-bit 3D games.

 

[Least]

A lot of people think that Nintendo gets the "kiddie factor" from the cartoonish characters, but that's not true. Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, Crash Bandicoot are all just as cartoonish, but what it comes down to is the gameplay. Titles like the above and especially titles like God Of War, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear, etc have much more complex gameplay that involves more resource management, more puzzle solving, and more intense combat where the enemies can actually kill you if you don't have the precision and skill to take them out. They don't just walk back and forth on platforms waiting for you to jump on them.

Gamers simply consider it more challenging and fulfilling to defeat hordes of axe-wielding demons or heavily armed robots or a huge, fire-breathing beast than they do to run around jumping on turtles and(even though I've said it before) collecting fruit and coins.

Devil May Cry and God of War have complex gameplay? That's a new one. Not that these games aren't awesome (I love both of them) but Devil May Cry when it comes down to it is you beating the crap out of clowns using a sword and guns. God of War is an adventure title similar to Zelda. Metal Gear also came to the gamecube. Resident Evil 4 was originally supposed to be a gamecube only title.

Nintendo's consoles aren't inherently 'kid' oriented, it is dependent on who develops for it. Nintendo games will generally be more 'kid' oriented because those types of games will be able to appeal to a much broader audience.

What is it that makes someone incapable of enjoying a game with extremely similar gameplay, one looking gritty and gruesome and the other not? This is just pointing to other problems with that person other than the video games they're playing.

Cheers

 

[Tigerblade]

Btw, just wanted to tell you that was a horrible comparison.
I am refering to how you just compared a bunch of old 16-bit 2D games, with 128-bit 3D games.

Because Mario64 gameplay was SOOOOO different to SuperMario World on the SNES

Your being pedantic, the gameplay is pretty much the same. You can just run in all directions in the n64 title as opposed to just left to right.....

 

[Torn]

Both the Atari 5200 and the Vectrex had analog sticks in 1982.

I do believe your right about the Vectrex. I'll have to dig mine out and check. Fun little system that was...

 

[crackbone]

All I can say about the Wii is that everyone can enjoy it. While the graphics leave something to be desired, my Wii has seen more play in the last 3 days than my Xbox 360 has in a year. Everyone wants to get a hold of the controller, including parents, girlfriend, her family, everyone. The bottom line is that it's fun.

I think Nintendo will steal this generation based on what I have seen so far. Mind you, these are only launch titles... You give decent developers, who by looking @ the sales numbers will be developing for the Wii, time to create some great games... watch out.

I don't see Nintendo losing this round. They are profitable day one.. They are selling a system with an innovative control scheme (you can argue, been there, done that, but, not @ this level) that is accessable to the masses through their pricing and their inviting Wiimote.

I just don't see them losing this time.

 

[sculelos]

All I can say about the Wii is that everyone can enjoy it. While the graphics leave something to be desired, my Wii has seen more play in the last 3 days than my Xbox 360 has in a year. Everyone wants to get a hold of the controller, including parents, girlfriend, her family, everyone. The bottom line is that it's fun.

I think Nintendo will steal this generation based on what I have seen so far. Mind you, these are only launch titles... You give decent developers, who by looking @ the sales numbers will be developing for the Wii, time to create some great games... watch out.

I don't see Nintendo losing this round. They are profitable day one.. They are selling a system with an innovative control scheme (you can argue, been there, done that, but, not @ this level) that is accessable to the masses through their pricing and their inviting Wiimote.

I just don't see them losing this time.

QFT, I also was watching some gameplay footage of the wii and I really don't think it looks that bad, not as good as 360 or ps3, but still good, and I'm sure it will get better as well.

 

[krameriffic]

Serious question.

I've always wondered why the American gaming market loves Nintendo. Bar the N64 (which was poor bar KI Gold and yes I did own Mario64....boring) they have always been behind in tech and always looked at, how can I say......gimmicks, to sell a machine.

I mean who in their right mind would purchase a NES over a Megadrive/Genesis? That's the sort of thing I just plain don't get, but it all seems to be starting again over Wii. Please don't give me crap about 'innovation'......I've been able to pick up a tennis racket/boxing gloves for a number of years now and do these things.

Do Nintendo now expect they have to fill the niche market and heavily rely on on these gimmicks to get a decent market share?

Totally serious thread and I'd like to hear why ppl like the fallen giant so much. For what it's worth I know 0 amount of ppl that are buying the machine, yet the same ppl are lapping up 360/wanting PS3.

You do realize that between the Playstation and Playstation 2 Sony has shipped over two hundred million units... right? And that Nintendo has shipped roughly sixty million between the comparable N64 and Gamecube? How is it that Nintendo is "favored" by anybody again?

I would like to posit a new rule: conclusions made without hard facts or at least more than anecdotal hearsay should be a bannable offense.

 

[LeviathanZERO]

Because Mario64 gameplay was SOOOOO different to SuperMario World on the SNES

Your being pedantic, the gameplay is pretty much the same. You can just run in all directions in the n64 title as opposed to just left to right.....

That was not an arguement. I can click smilies too, see?
Next time you think of replying, how about some substance?

Pretty much the same?
Premise? Yes.
Gameplay? A 2D game the same as a 3D game? Get a clue, man. No. Not by along shot.

 

[Doward]

$600? its not just Nintendo and Sony in this war dont forget the 360 at $300 or whatever it costs over there. Your point is taken but you must admit theres a lot of people out there that love their Fifa/NHL/Basketball/Racing/RPG/RTS/flight sims. Games most of which the only way forward is to make the graphics/animation etc more realistic, take a look at Need For Speed Carbon on the pc, it bombed mainly because the graphics werent any better. Its great Nintendo is trying something different, they wilcreate their own seperate market hopefully and leave Sony and M$ to it unless they of course bring out a Wiimote equivalent which would make things very difficult for Nintendo. Gears of War has already sold over one million units already, why? Better Graphics, amazing sound and excellent Gameplay (the main factor being the graphics)

BS. If you've played GoW - you'd see it is all about the co-op gameplay. The game could push 1/2 the pixels, and still be just as much fun!

 

[Doward]

Have to agree - Mario64 was *much* different from SMW.

If you guys want to talk about how Nintendo releases 'easy' games - go play the original Starfox, hard difficulty track. It was certainly not easy.

 

[Tigerblade]

That was not an arguement. I can click smilies too, see?

Someones a little touchy

Mellow man, it's only about games! There are far more important things in life to get stressed over......

 

[swatbat]

Well, I will admit that I'm primarly gettting a wii for my favorite nintendo francises.

Super Smash Brothers, Zelda, Mario, Metroid.

Unanouced titles that I'm hoping for...

F-Zero, Starfox.

Also I'm buying rayman raving rabbids simply because it sounds like fun, will also be fun to play wii sports with friends and family.

In comparison the only game I want for eather 360/PS3 is gears of war, but I'm not buying a 360 for one game.

I'm kinda the same way. I want the wii for the party games. Bunch of drunk college students trying to play wii sports tennis is a blast. The ddr type game in rayman is nuts too. To me the wii is a secondary system. I got one for the party games(something nintendo has been the system for a while) and the first party nintendo games. I have a 360 for eveything elce. So far I must give nintendo credit. The wii is very fun to play. They have done a good job.

 

[Lord Nassirbannipal]

Atari had a digital joystick. digital joystick does not equal analog joystick.

It was not digital.

Btw, just wanted to tell you that was a horrible comparison.
I am refering to how you just compared a bunch of old 16-bit 2D games, with 128-bit 3D games.

Oh jesus christ.

I'm obviously not just comparing the games that I brought up, I'm talking about the near lack of difficulty in Nintendo flagship titles in general compared to other games.

Just replace Super Mario World and Kirby's Adventure with Super Mario 64 and Kirby 64: The Crystal Shards if you want, but the point is obviously there either way. How many bits they use is beside the point.

Devil May Cry and God of War have complex gameplay? That's a new one. Not that these games aren't awesome (I love both of them) but Devil May Cry when it comes down to it is you beating the crap out of clowns using a sword and guns.

They both involve more puzzle solving and have more challenging enemies. It's a hell of a lot harder to beat the crap out of those clowns than it is to jump on goombas all day. The game is overall more of a challenge, especially if you do all the special missions.

Even a game like Ratchet & Clank has more complex gameplay. It's cartoonish as hell, but again, the enemies can kill you if you aren't adept at taking them out, there's more puzzle solving, and then there's resource management. You have to decide which weapons will work best in each situation, what new weapons and upgrades you're going to spend your currency on, whether you're going to use that weapon now or save it for later, etc.

God of War is an adventure title similar to Zelda. Metal Gear also came to the gamecube. Resident Evil 4 was originally supposed to be a gamecube only title.

God Of War(especially on God Mode) is a hell of a lot more challenging than Zelda.

Metal Gear was nothing more than Konami milking the series. It was just a re-release of the original.

Resident Evil was the exception, not the rule.

Anyway, what I'm talking about is Nintendo's first-party titles, which are what it's mostly known for.

What is it that makes someone incapable of enjoying a game with extremely similar gameplay, one looking gritty and gruesome and the other not? This is just pointing to other problems with that person other than the video games they're playing.

Didn't I just say that it had nothing to do with the blood and gore?

That last sentence is so assinine that I'm not even going to reply to it.

 

[Least]

It was not digital.



Oh jesus christ.

I'm obviously not just comparing the games that I brought up, I'm talking about the near lack of difficulty in Nintendo flagship titles in general compared to other games.

Just replace Super Mario World and Kirby's Adventure with Super Mario 64 and Kirby 64: The Crystal Shards if you want, but the point is obviously there either way. How many bits they use is beside the point.



They both involve more puzzle solving and have more challenging enemies. It's a hell of a lot harder to beat the crap out of those clowns than it is to jump on goombas all day. The game is overall more of a challenge, especially if you do all the special missions.

Even a game like Ratchet & Clank has more complex gameplay. It's cartoonish as hell, but again, the enemies can kill you if you aren't adept at taking them out, there's more puzzle solving, and then there's resource management. You have to decide which weapons will work best in each situation, what new weapons and upgrades you're going to spend your currency on, whether you're going to use that weapon now or save it for later, etc.



God Of War(especially on God Mode) is a hell of a lot more challenging than Zelda.

Metal Gear was nothing more than Konami milking the series. It was just a re-release of the original.

Resident Evil was the exception, not the rule.

Anyway, what I'm talking about is Nintendo's first-party titles, which are what it's mostly known for.



Didn't I just say that it had nothing to do with the blood and gore?

That last sentence is so assinine that I'm not even going to reply to it.

Yet somehow you figure statements like "God Of War(especially on God Mode) is a hell of a lot more challenging than Zelda" isn't asinine, or comparing super mario brothers to devil may cry isn't equally stupid? You're acting the ignorant fool, not me. I am not the one making opinionated statements look like they're supposed to be facts. A lot of the things you mention are things about Ratchet & Clank also appear in Zelda and, if in fear of sounding !!!!!!ish (I'm really not), were innovated by the Zelda series.

You're trying to make a fair justification where there isn't one. Your attitude towards games like Zelda pushes me to believe that you no longer play any of them and have not for quite some time. This also makes me feel that any assertions you make are not backed by any specific facts but rather by generalizations you have come to accept as true.

 

[Rash]

BS. If you've played GoW - you'd see it is all about the co-op gameplay. The game could push 1/2 the pixels, and still be just as much fun!

But the attention to detail makes it even better, not the same..., if what your saying was the case, why did nintendo even putting a better gpu in the latest nintendo? Attention to detail is a huge factor on fps games. Adds to the atmosphere.

 

[Lord Nassirbannipal]

Yet somehow you figure statements like "God Of War(especially on God Mode) is a hell of a lot more challenging than Zelda" isn't asinine, or comparing super mario brothers to devil may cry isn't equally stupid?

It's not asinine. It's you who is acting as though what someone has said about video games gives you insight into their personal life. It is asinine to suggest that "someone has problems" based on what you've read here.

I'm comparing games for which one console is known to games for which another console is known, and you seem to be the only person who can't see this.

You're acting the ignorant fool, not me. I am not the one making opinionated statements look like they're supposed to be facts. A lot of the things you mention are things about Ratchet & Clank also appear in Zelda and, if in fear of sounding !!!!!!ish (I'm really not), were innovated by the Zelda series.

Again, an exception. What I've said still applies to nearly all of Nintendo's franchises.

As for the rest of this paragraph, see below.

You're trying to make a fair justification where there isn't one.

I think it's you who's completely missing the point of what I'm saying.

Your attitude towards games like Zelda pushes me to believe that you no longer play any of them and have not for quite some time.

And you'd be dead wrong, but that's what usually happens when you assume things.

This also makes me feel that any assertions you make are not backed by any specific facts but rather by generalizations you have come to accept as true.

I've already given plenty of facts, such as the fact that Nintendo is known for its first and second party franchises, the fact that most of these titles are geared towards kids, and the fact that the gameplay is indeed far more simplistic.

This is not stuff that I'm just pulling out of thin air. Many gamers and video game critics/analysts have brought up the exact same points about Nintendo's first and second party games compared to well-known titles on other consoles.