So you've read the title [I hope] The mighty Nintendo or super Microsoft? There's only one way to find out.........FIIIGGHHTTTT!!! Sorry, just had to put that..
If Call Nintendo = fun for the whole family & Microsoft = fun for spawn campers then Call PlayerMsg(index, " Nintendo rules!", GREEN) Else Call PlayerMsg(index, " you spawn camper!!!!", RED) End if End Sub Nintendo spanks Microsoft with moon rocks
Nintendo and Microsoft (methinks) are targeting different audiences. Nintendo releases family and kid friendly games and draws in the casual crowd. Microsoft has more violent games and appeals to the hardcore. Unfortunately, I don't own any type of Xbox, and thus I am biased. I prefer Nintendo for my games, and Microsoft for my computers.
My Wii's system menu doesn't have transparent window edges; so, Micro$oft FTW. As three_strangers touched upon; they are very different companies. On the surface, they appear to have quite a lot in common though. Fundamentally, Micro$oft is a software manufacturer (with a very strong foothold in the console business. It also does well selling - mostly low-end - P.C peripherals). When people think Micro$oft, their first though is probably Windows and/or its office suite. That's changing quickly though, XBox Live has become so triumphantly successful that it has its own recognition as the de facto online service for consoles, a map that Nintendo isn't even featured on. To me, it seems like Micro$oft has great brand recognition for most of its important assets; but they aren't necessarily linked to each other in a consumer's mind, Micro$oft has its fingers in so many pies that its services are often scattered over different areas of its business. If a consumer thinks of one of Halo (likely Micro$oft's biggest name for the XBox 360), the fact that previous versions are available for Windows as well as XBox limits the impact that the XBox (a piece of technology bought by the majority to be used for gaming) at the expense of keeping those that use their Windows O.S for mainstream big-name gaming (a small number compared to those that use it for general tasks and the Web) happy. This isn't true of all games; but very few of Micro$oft's first-party games have the immediate connection to their console/s that Nintendo's have. A person could be forgiven for thinking that Gears of War will be coming to PS3; it's a far harder mistake to make to think that Mario is coming to 360. The XBox may currently be the golden boy of "mainstream" gaming, but its position as such is far more precarious than than Nintendo's position in the "casual" market currently; they came out of nowhere, they could be sent back there if Nintendo matches them in graphical capabilities and online services with its next home console. Nintendo is absolutely a gaming company. It makes games consoles and software. When people think Nintendo, they typically think of one of their consoles (their brand name is synonymic with gaming) or one of their main I.Ps (such as Mario). The positive brand recognition of Nintendo's many successful I.Ps inevitably leads to a favourable reception and/or interest (at least; at first) when a new console or service of theirs is released. Their I.Ps seem to act as funnels for anticipation leading directly into their consoles; people whom enjoy Nintendo's I.Ps could be convinced to buy a console just to play them, and because Nintendo has expanded its I.Ps, in recent years, to grasp the "casual" market (a market hat had not traditional been in the sights of Nintendo); this has been enough to make the Wii and the such DS widespread successes. Nintendo can use its mascots as insulation to soften the blows that come in the forms of features currently missing from its own consoles that are now standard for its competitors (such as decent online services, impressive graphical capabilities et cetera). Nintendo has now built a new reputation amongst demographics that may not even known it existed previously (the old, the middle-aged) by offering hardware with software that has been marketed directly at them. Nintendo's I.Ps and consoles go hand-in-hand. A consumer may not even know that Starfox is an exclusive Nintendo property, but they aren't going to be thinking of any other console that isn't branded "Nintendo" when they think about playing it. If Nintendo could rise again to take back the majority of the mainstream audience that it hasn't truly had since the SNES days, and take its new casual audience with it (without neglecting either); I think that it could kick Micro$oft to the curb in the next console war. Developers will support whichever console sells games, people can go without GoW if there is a decent enough alternative. Micro$oft has the money to back it through multiple failures, but Miro$softs well-funded failing aren't going to harm Nintendo. Micro$softs rise to fame in the console business feels so unwarranted to me; Halo was popular and live is great. Those are the records that Micro$softs been playing continuously for the last few years. They're riding high on the wave that started with Halo on the original XBox still. The 360 has done so well because its only mainstream competitor arrived too late and too expensive with problems getting developers to make exclusive games. If Nintendo bring out the rumoured high-definition Wii with decent online capabilities and decent developer support (plus make it relatively inexpensive and ensure it is available before competitors) they could take back the crown, I think. Just my opinion/s anyways... I'm not a Nintendo fanboy (although I love some of their games), I just think these things based on my observations over the years.
Why post twice? To be honest, I play my 360 over my Wii. I can say that I bought my Wii for only the Nintendo made games and very few others, although on the 360 and PS3 I can say I bought them for a multitude of games. Unless Nintendo can match both the 360 and PS3, they need to have more good games come out in less time than it does now (there's a couple each year on the Wii). I agree with Markswan on all his points, but I have to add one thing. If Nintendo does not gain the support of the third parties like MS and Sony have, then it'll be similar to where it is now. Where the Wii is looked down upon the gamer crowd. The Wii may have Nintendo's amazing offerings, they have to deal with long wait times for the games. And to be honest, the wait isn't that worth it. Meanwhile the 360 and PS3 have great games more often, unless Nintendo can do the same or do similar, than the next Nintendo console will be viewed the same way it is now. I like all three major competitors equally ftw, I just play on my 360 more. :\
i doubt Nintendo will change much.. they've always considered themselves more family oriented than hardcore gaming..they've picked up quite a few titles that i never saw coming to a nintendo console like the resident evil or call of duty. the handheld series is a different story though i'm pretty sure they're two different companies within nintendo. they've got the DS for more hardcore gamers and then the console they seem to try to target everyone young and old, where microsoft really only targets hardcore gamers and the games that dont are usually movie title games, but i think its for the best that nintendo stays out of the hardcore scene since Sony, Microsoft, and pc gaming provides more than enough for the hardcore gamers
I've seen and heard that they censored a lot of games for the NES and SNES, but they have still had as many "hardcore" games as any other given console. The DS has also been targetted at the young and old. Nintendo has released plenty of "hardcore" titles for the Wii. As Natewlie said; they don't have third-party developers support, they don't have them making the effort to make "hardcore" games for the Wii ("hardcore", in this case, meaning either aimed at adult gamers or games with more ambition and scope that fit into traditional gaming genres). Developers that have tried games aimed at adults on Wii haven't done well with them (Madworld, for example). Developers that have made Wii-exclusive games that aspire to be far and above the usual shovelware and for Wii have also been relatively unsuccessful with sales (The Sky Crawlers: Innocent Aces <3 and No More Heroes <3 for example). It's partly the fact that the Wii costs more to develop for and than the DS and isn't really seen by people as "hardcore" in the same sense as the PS3 and 360. Shovelware, typically. And Nintendo could provide a (possibly better) platform for even more; a console should be a medium that any genre of game, and aimed at any age bracket, may be successful on so long as it's good. If Nintendo didn't bother even attempting to market their next home console to "hardcore" (read/type it often enough and it really pisses you off) gamers (and, again, as Natewlie said; ensuring the support of third party developers to enable it to have more great "mainstream" games made by someone other than Nintendo - not that there aren't good games from other developers on the Wii).
i know haha i need more/better adjectives.... i still like nintendo more just because they "adventure" more into changing the ways games are played like the "Lightgun" , "Track & Field" mat."Power Glove"...etc and now they have the "wii mote"... what do the others have? clones and DDR mats haha oh and Rock Band accessories (im not saying they aren't great inventions either)
I prefer the other two simply because they offer a more traditional sense of gaming and offer a quite extensive library of games, both exclusive and multiplatform, all the while offering a good amount of atmosphere to insight immersion and still being fun to play. Nintendo would dominate if they can appease both parties ('hardcore' and casuals), but as of now, they really haven't (I know it's not all on Nintendo). But the Wii simply doesn't have the third party track record like the 360 and PS3, while there are good third party games, they either don't compare to the stronger consoles or they are met with disappointing sales. The SNES and NES was not aimed towards gamers, it was aimed towards everyone, that just happened to be at the time, gamers. The Wii is also aimed towards everyone, with limited success with the gamers from the SNES and NES era, why? Because the Wii doesn't have the great library of games like the SNES, NES, N64, PSX, 360, PS2, and PS3. The DS on the other hand does and appeases all audiences (I rarely hear DS hate). If Nintendo does in fact have a WiiHD or Hi-Fi planned, then I kind of expect MS and Sony to start planning for the next gen. In terms of specs, Nintendo's a gen behind, if they play catch up, Sony and MS will have the advantage of releasing a more powerful console in the mean time. While the Wii is a success sales wise, we really don't know about next gen and it feels as if Nintendo painted themselves in a corner with the Wii.
