What is the appeal of Nintendo?

No I want to know why they have persisted as a company. Why are kids nowadays playing Nintendo's? Whydo kids know about these characters and care about this company? Why do their games get inflated review scores and why is it taught inherently that people should be thankful for Nintendo? I'm certainly not and I certainly never needed them. From the arcades to the genesis and beyond, I've never needed Nintendo. Games thrived on the zx spectrum, msx, and amiga without the help of the NES. The Master System was a mighty beast. Nintendo only came in and monopolized third parties.

>creating unique experiences and advancing the technology

You can probably see the problem there.

>normalfags

Stoped reading there. You memeing piece of shit.

Please don't try and tell me you're arguing that SA2's gravity "planets were in any way good. If you wanted to post a decent example you could have gone with Ratchet and Clank.

good gameplay
something Sonygges like you can't comprehend

EU detected
Disregard all further posts

I think it was only yesterday I was having to argue my case that people who grew up on Microsoft are the most insufferable cunts of today. Proof is in your sentiment that you think Sega isn't as loved as Nintendo. Sega is highly loved, even today, but they have been stringent with what titles they focus on.

I have a One, you buffoon.

Microsoft helped push online further than any other company. Party chat functionality was a godsend. I met so many people on Xbox Live.

Famicom had dragon quest. Where was segas society ruining rpg series that is still loved today?

Also, the mega drive did horrible in Japan because they loved the pc engine.

Online multiplayer ruined gaming.

>Where was segas society ruining rpg series that is still loved today?

Phantasm Star was phantastic, shut your whore mouth

But it existed as early as 1994 and was on PC for the longest time until pso came out on dreamcast.

Yeah, I know, we had the xband and saturn net link, no one used those for long.

The mighty Phantasy Star which is made by Sega not a damn third party. Dragon Quest is Enix and that proves why people were fond of Nintendo. They were fond of their monopoly, characters, and launch titles.

PC is Microsoft.

So they basically did what Sony is doing now? No wonder Sony swept the past 4 generations.

You're a fool if you believe that. I notice a trend with Nintendo fans. They don't seem to have any friends and mainly play singleplayer rpg titles or casual cutesy platformers. Nintendo gamers aren't very skilled as opposed to Microsoft and Sega gamers that have experience with simulators, shooters, and competitive multiplayer.

play Ocarina of Time and Perfect Dark and shut up.

Nintendo's hosted a shitload of multiplayer games over the years. Albeit mostly third-party, but nobody gave a shit about that back then.

Because many people grew up with Nintendo games and they're fun. Are you retarded?

I have nothing against Sony. I don't pay them much attention outside of Gran Turismo, but I've always hated Nintendo and how much love they get over Microsoft and Sega.

I've always felt both Microsoft and Sega had a vision and a goal, to truly extend one's body onto screen mechanically and artistically. There's a melodic craft to Microsoft and Sega's work with integration of competitive multiplayer, sports titles, shooters, fighting games, and ambitious roleplaying games centered around progression and self-improvement. Both Microsoft and Sega like to take inspiration from reality and reflect it onto screen in a unique way that focuses on technological body extension, a kinesthetic art.

Online multiplayer meant that companies could put less thought and effort into their games. Put two players into an arena and they can make their own retarded fun for hours. Don't have to worry about enemy AI, boss design, level design; all we have to do is allow people to point and click on each other!

>console fps
>z-targeting

>Don't have to worry about enemy AI, boss design, level design
And this is exactly what I was pointing towards in this post Nintendo gamers don't care for gameplay, they care for exploration and design rather than mechanical body extension, scoring, or competition. Nintendo gamers run away from reality, but both Microsoft and Sega embraced and learned from reality.

And how many multiplayer titles do you play?

Because NBA 2K17 and Black OPS 3 are great titles

I'm saying that they succeeded with marketing. Sega wasn't a slouch by any means, but Nintendo was already more established. Had Sega invested more in the popularity of their franchises, they'd probably have been bigger.

Aside from that, you can't hate old Nintendo and be OK with Sony at the same time because they're basically doing the same thing.

You're contradicting yourself here. Multiplayer games don't feature strong AI.

I don't get what you're getting at with Sega. Their games have always been fun first, competitive as an afterthought, much like Nintendo's game mantra.
Microsoft sure are heavy on the competitive edge but that is what ruined gaming really. That's my argument. You haven't really said much to disprove otherwise. The most flawed game design right now is MoBa's where companies can just design one (1) level and put minimum effort into gameplay and autists will eat that shit up.

I hate Nintendo for how much attention they are given when they have never been anything special. Fisher price toys shouldn't held as high art. Sega and Microsoft created art with NBA 2K, Shenmue, Virtua Fighter, Daytona, F355 Challenge, Forza, Gears of War, Fable, Killer Instinct, and Halo

Look, I get it. You hate Nintendo. After Reggie Filled-W/hate and Billy-Bob Bodine Trinen I can't say I blame you. But you're being an idiot about it.

Nintendo has publically stated that they are all about "Innovation". Don't confuse that with "Invention". They don't reinvent the wheel every time they need one, they just figure out how to make the wheel better for their usage - like adding treads and shocks.

If you want to hate on Nintendo, hate them for what they are.

Nintendo is crooked. Back in the 80's, and I HEAVILY suspect today, Nintendo participated(s) in Price Fixing, to the point that if any retailer sold their games on sale they wouldn't get more in stock. G.I. Joes (outdoorsy retailer pre-Cabela's that also sold Nintendo games) got bit HARD on this one.

Nintendo is idiotic. Even after Gunpei told the execs not to do it, the technology just isn't ready year and what he made was just a "proof of concept", they went ahead anyway and released the Virtual Boy...and blamed him when it flopped.

Nintendo...is either greedy or just stupid. They charge FAR more for royalties to 3rd party publishers than their competition. That was fine back when they had a market stranglehold and Nintendo was branded like Kleenex and Xerox, but to continue to do that today? It's little wonder companies don't want to work with them if they can help it.

Nintendo is a toy company. They are not an actual competition to Sony/Microsoft. Nintendo doesn't care about "pushing the envelope" or "Embracing common technology (internet, etc.). They exist to sell toys, bee they figures like Amiibos or Leapfrog-esque electronics like the Wii U.

Nintendo is out of touch. Given their game releases in the last 5 years, Nintendo is by-and-large willfully ignorant to what the market wants and focuses on what they want to the market to want...and expects the market to react to them 100% of the time.

THAT can by why to hate Nintendo.

>Their games have always been fun first
No, they focused on being unique and mechanically rich first

That's bullshit and you know it. You're just a child that never had an NES.

Killer Instinct was on the SNES

I play Black Ops 3, Guilty Gear and Dynasty Warriors online with a friend.
I do not judge those games (nor any game) by their online content and treat DW and GG multiplayer like I would local couch multiplayer. Multiplayer should always be an afterthought that is built around a good base game.

And N64...and the Game Boy.

Precisely stated. This is the sole reason why I never understand the love for Nintendo. They always created toys and never wanted to advance the medium as opposed to Sega or Microsoft which focused on video-body kinesthetic extension, expansive game modes, and competitive multiplayer via scoring or versus

rotten steak, perhaps.

Less an afterthought and more a companion thought. MMORPG's are designed on BOTH the multi-player AND the base game.

Otherwise the multi-player is tacked-on, which usually sucks.

>Hamburgers aren't good.
Someone never made a McGangBang.

And it's DEFINITELY not just Sega or Microsoft. Midway and Atari as well. They are the true forefathers and innovators of the medium. Not Nintendo.

For me it is the McChicken

MMORPG's are, for the most part, shit games that are just time-sinks more than anything else. Very bad example of good games design.

353746069

no (you) for you my friend
also not to make this post a waste of space
couch co-op has always been and always will be the biggest multiplayer feature that Nintendo has

online play? don't you have any real friends?

Spoken like a dullard that knows nothing about game design.

What Sega games are mechanically rich? Sonic? Yakuza? Hatsuni Miku?
They are all viscerally fun games but even kids can play them.

It doesn't matter how much you "innovate" or whether you invent something original, or are the first to try something bold.

What ultimately matters is whether or not your product appeals to people. It is really as simple as that.

Spoken like a true autist Microsoft fanboy who thinks everything can be broken down objectively by stating his opinions.

>Hamburgers aren't good. I prefer steak.
Fuck off Yuropoor scum. Of course you never grew up with Nintendo, because you are a fucking poorfag yuropoor cuck.

>Why do people who grew up with Nintendo love Nintendo?!

Makes you think.

He may be an autistic, cum-guzzling yuropoor cuck. But he is entitled to his opinion as much as anyone else.

McChicken is okay, but too heavily reliant on the mayo.

I'll probably try the Chicken brunch thing Jack in the Box is now selling.

Outrun, F355 Challenge, Virtua Fighter, Sonic, Shenmue, Sega GT, NBA 2K, MLB 2K, NFL 2K, Virtua Tennis, Virtua Striker, Choplifter and more.

But it's not just a matter of rich mechanics, it's a matter of how to extend and express oneself onto the screen via gameplay, what does it mean to play a game? HOW can one express themselves on screen?. From here, we have Space Channel 5, Ecco the Dolphin, Samba de Amigo, Jet Set, Cosmic Smash, Rez, Skies of Arcadia, and many others.

It's when you tout your opinion as objective fact is where I cross the line with people.

You're naming sports games. I hope you realize that.

These are all logical conclusions. They are not baseless accusations like yours.

Oh right, yeh, good list. When was the last time any of those games got a release?

As I said they have been incredibly stringent in recent years as to what they focus on.

>That image

Jesus christ
Next thing you're telling me that scientists based their research on other scientists research.

Skies of Arcadia sequel when?

He's using MMORPG's as an example of good game design. Logic is out the window here.

To be fair though, the sports games he mentioned are VERY good sports games.

>>>reddit

How anally frustrated at a fan base do you have to be to make something as petty as this?

They're still sports games. The only ways a sports game could be good are either going full arcade or full sim, and sports are inherently too complex to replicate.

to be fair, not many Sega fans are too vocal on this site and xbox owner are practically non-existant, so for one: this is a pretty refreshing topic for a change.

and notice that there is actual discusion and arguments in this thread.

Sega took massive influence and inspiration from reality in shaping their games as one should do as an artist because reality is what helps us as humans relate and reflect. This principle correlates artistially with games as mechanical and kinesthetic extension of body onto screen. With this in mind, Sega paved the way for true sports simulation.

t. polack

Still not the original poster. Go play some of the 2K games. For the technology available at the time, those games came the absolute closest I'd played. They actually deserve to be on the list...as odd as that is.

See here

So?

>Nintendo, one of the most gameplay driven developers emphasises exploration over gameplay
>implying exploration is not gameplay

Have you played a Nintendo game? Do you play any videogames at all?

What's with all the dudebro normies ITT defending FPS garbage and fucking SPORTS games? Holy fuck, go back to Xbox Live where you belong.

I play kine.

Take your meds, Australia-kun.

None of those things happened. There has never been a good sports sim because any attempt at a sports sim lacks so much.

Who do people like Star Wars?

Reality, my friend. To reflect reality seamlessly is a peak artistically. The arcade and the simulation work as two halves of this whole in the medium of kinesthetic video-expression.

Becuz nimtwmdo is comfy
Pokemon, zelda, kirby are't challenging but gameplay > graphics.

Also jrpgs mattered until 1996

As long as the exploration isn't just a glorified walking simulator like "gone home"...

Most sports games suck, this is a legit fact. Same with MMO's. There are a RARE few that are actually well-designed, good, fun games that just happen to be sports/MMO's. The 2K line SEGA had was such an example. On the MMO side, there's Final Fantasy XI and Dragon Quest X.

This

>australia-kun desperately trying to bait on Cred Forums since nobody on /vr/ falls for his bullshit anymore.

This is pathetic.

For those of you who aren't aeware, OP is a known shitposter from /vr/ who has a sort of personal vendetta against Nintendo for unknown reasons (child abuse is not out of the realm of possibilities).
He is not a Microsoft fan but he probably is trying to "fit in" with the younger generation, not knowing Cred Forums isn't really much into Xbox or Microsoft.

He is an old guy from either UK or Australia and is a big fan of the Amiga computer. He is legit autistic.

You might just be trolling, but simulating reality is not artistic. Actual art realized this at the end of the 19th century.

Wait, weren't you shitting on Nintendo earlier for featuring popular 3rd-parties? Not to mention that the GameCube also had Phantasy Star Online which is ifuckingronically a Sega game.

Speaking of not mentioning, Phantasy Star easily rivaled Final Fantasy and Dragon quest as the top JRPG series of the 3rd and 4th gen and you haven't acknowledged it once.

>What is the appeal of Nintendo?
Play more games faggot and maybe you'll find out. You sound like the kind of guy who only plays one genre of video games

>bedroom_in_arles
konbini.com/us/entertainment/airbnb-real-life-van-gogh-bedroom-arles/

No, the only shitting I did on Nintendo in relation to 3rd parties was that they charge way too fucking much in royalties back in

What is up with autists who dislike Nintendo? It's like a fucking meme now holy shit

Dunno about op, but I dislike Nintendo due to their habitual crooked business practices and general ineptitude lately.

>that image

99% of those systems are stuff people have never touched or never even heard of.

Nintendo itself admits it uses old tech and repackages it in a way that's successful. That's the whole point. They don't get all starry-eyed and hyped up with new shit and shit out the first half-assed idea that comes to their mind, they only care about whether they can actually market it.

That's why the DS came to be known for a touch screen and not the Tiger Game.com, whatever the flying fuck that is.

As someone who is more into games than brand loyalty (have roommates, have access to every system because everyone has their own taste, we share games and systems constantly), I'll be direct with you.

Nintendo's appeal is equal parts nostalgia, discovery and fun. Take those three words and add the obligatory ® to them though. There's always been a distinct marketing objective with video games, and if you're being serious you know that the three companies you've mentioned have all been equally guilty. It's the buzz-words that are the only REAL difference though. The words themselves attract their own tribes. The three words I mentioned though (nostalgia being only since the SNES era, mind you, before that it was branding/grooming) Sega FAILED by focusing on gimmicks, BLAST PROCESSING!!! Maracas! VMU with TERRIBLE BATTERY LIFE!! 4MEGAbit POWER! Meanwhile Microsoft's failing hard because the fratbro crowd is getting consistently neutered turning their primary fan-base away from their hobbyist gaming habits and redirecting them into being servants to their uterine mistresses.

It's unfortunate though, that this all leaves Sony to clean up on the console market (as the PS4/Vita aren't really the BEST because of technology, or superior games -it shares around 50% of its games with Xbone) and Nintendo's refusal to even ATTEMPT to play catch-up is slowly chipping away at the remainder of the industry.

So Nintendo is actually now doing what Sega did?

>Game.com
Remember now?

No. Nintendo are behind the times. Sega were ahead of the times.

>he posted it again!
>The absolute MADMAN!

Yet they're the only company that actually creates games worth playing
>They exist to sell toys
Fans have asked for that for decades and when they finally do it they ONLY Create toys, apparently Fucking retard.

> intellivision "d-pad"

that's very, very generous, OP.

Yes, I think what you say is true. Motion Control, Dual/Touch Screens, Force Feedback, Analog Sticks, Controller Speakers, these things are all gimmicks. The weird thing though, is that Nintendo instills a NEED with these by showing how they are effective if used properly, nobody would have analog sticks if the N64 hadn't first showed us that we NEEDED them for 3D movement. In the same way that touch-screens wouldn't have been nearly so viable if not for the DS's utilization. But gimmicks is all any of it is.

>Yet they're the only company that actually creates games worth playing
lol THAT's never been true. Fanboy much? As for the toy remark, "super-witty eyeroll-kun", you missed the point entirely of my post. Not a surprise, you being a super-witty eyeroll-kun fanboy and all.

Tech-wise, Nintendo makes toys when compared to others on the market. Business-wise, Nintendo thinks of themselves as a toy company first. Should I also mention how their toys are low quality for your reading pleasure, too?

The touch screen is God tier for navigating menus. Not a gimmick at all.

>Tech-wise, Nintendo makes toys when compared to others on the market
More bullshit. Do you have anything to say that's worth listening to at all? Any argument that's not shitposting? Try harder next time.

Pokémon

>stuff that was never released
So are we going to give Nintendo credit for making CD drive based consoles now?

no, because those existed before that

How did sony sweep the Wii/DS generation, again?

I love touch screens, I use them every day now. I love them in Monster Hunter, I'd have loved them in RE. They'd make pretty much any RPG instantly better (especially ones with retarded menu systems, yes, pretty much ALL of them.) if the Witcher 3 had released on the Wiiu (and somehow maintained at LEAST the XBone framerate impossible, I know) I would have played that over any other version because of how much I hate that menu system otherwise.

When the NXReality releases with Roy packed in people will bitch about the cerebral clamp but after you play it for a week, you'll wonder how you ever played games before that.

Sometimes I like games be fun to play, rather than just ride the coat tails of graphical fidelity or aesthetic. Nintendo often, but not always, delivers this.

Do you actually believe that ludicrous copy pasta?

So, the Wii is comparable techwise to the PS3? The Wii U comparable to the Xbox One? The DS to the PSP & 3DS to the Vita? Sure, each one sold well, but they're nothing more than TOYS compared to what else was/is on the market at the time.

The only times Nintendo was thinking like a tech company was when they released the SNES, N64, and GC. However, the SNES was pretty under-powered and relied on in-cart chips for additional processing power, the N64 suffered from giving their games over-aliasing and texture issues (just compare a native N64 game to an N64 emulator viewed on the same monitor/screen - you can see the screen shots in older EGMs comparing Ocarina of Time N64 vs Emulator before anyone made graphic packs for it - circa 1999) even though it was superior to the Playstation and Saturn, and the Gamecube? Tech-wise it was better than the PS2, worse than the X-Box, and was hindered by the use of mini-discs and physical design.

You cannot state with any form of seriousness that the Wii, Wii U, DS, and/or 3DS (and especially the NES) are/were any sort of tech marvels, actual competition to what others were making, and speaking tech-wise aren't just toys when compared to what else is available on the market.

Try harder next time, super-witty eyeroll-kun fanboy.

Nintendo is about fun, and fun is what games were made for. It isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together.

And yet their consoles featured the best games each time. Funny that.

If you're talking about the PC engine, Nintendo and Sony had started developing the Playstation for the CD drive was released.

Megami Tensei

Tired of playing neck beard pcmaster race games.

prove it.

The Playstation 3 or the Xbox aren't even impressive when you compare them to the PC, that doesn't make them toys, though. If we talk about games, then Nintendo has created better games than Sony and Microsoft. End of story. You can reply to this if you want but I'm gonna play some games. Ta-ta

All consoles are toys. If you're serious about tech then build a PC.

This 1 million times.

Nintendo knows that gameplay and creativity is what is most important, meaning their consoles are the only ones worth owning, especially when everything on the other consoles comes to PC.

What, that Nintendo is crooked? That's fact, they got sued for it and lost.

That Nintendo jumped the gun on the Virtual Boy? Also fact. Gunpey didn't want it released until he could give it color while keeping the battery life low.

That Nintendo charges more than everyone else for royalties? Also fact. This has been brought up by multiple 3rd party companies for years.

That Nintendo thinks of themselves and behaves as a toy company still, even after all these years? Up to this current generation yes, we'll have to see what the NX does. Various execs at the Big N have admitted to this in interviews.

Nintendo is out of touch? Gee, I dunno Wilbur. I mean, Reggie didn't totally hate on Xenoblade for the Wii until it practically sold out Day One in Europe and totally dump all over Fatal Frame fans, Nintendo doesn't lock their games to specific regions or use/have used silly codes to play others online, they totally embrace voice chat, TriForce Heroes was the single/multiplayer Zelda game the world wanted...same for Super Mario Run, Animal Crossing: Happy Home Designer, Dr. Mario: Miracle Cure, etc.

Oh yeah, Nintendo is fully in-touch with the market.

So the Master System, Genesis, PS1 and PS2 were all toys?

>That Nintendo jumped the gun on the Virtual Boy?
And who the fuck cares about VB? Autists like you do.

>And yet their consoles featured the best games each time. Funny that.
1. Debatable, which has been done to death.
2. Talking hardware, not software. Come back when you can argue that the Wii is comparative techwise to the PS3 or Xbox 360. I won't hold my breath.

And when we compare Nintendo consoles to PC's, the difference is even more vast! Wow! That's amazing!

PC's are also designed for more than gaming. Show me a PC that is specifically designed to play games, browse the internet, watch/stream movies/music..NOTHING that a console cannot/does not do (as in it can't run a word program, it can't run antivirus, can't be used as a CAD machine, can't ever do anything medical related, etc.).

Techwise, the Master System was superior to the NES, Genesis was comparative due to the CPU anr architecture, PS1 was far more flexible than the N64, and the PS2 had issues with it's rather idiotic "Emotion Engine" that took developers years to figure out...but once they did compared well with the competition.

They're dumb.

Is that a yes or a no? The hardware was no better than supposed toys, as you've just said. And when has hardware ever made a console good?

Nice deflection. However, the subject is how Nintendo makes toys compared to EVERYONE else on the same market, not how PC is superior to everything anyway.

If you can't argue that the Big N doesn't make tech toys/literal toys when compared to the competition, then why are you replying? I mean, besides fanboyism.

>PC's are also designed for more than gaming. Show me a PC that is specifically designed to play games, browse the internet, watch/stream movies/music..NOTHING that a console cannot/does not do (as in it can't run a word program, it can't run antivirus, can't be used as a CAD machine, can't ever do anything medical related, etc.).
Hence why they are toys.

I just did. The competition makes toys just as often. Only the Wii and Wii U were starkly inferior in terms of hardware. They were never the weakest console available before then.

OP, I get that you're harboring a hate boner for Nintendo, and I get that you're under the mistaken assumption that Sega systems were underappreciated gems, but, considering that Double Dragon on the NES, while not a direct port (same as MOST arcade adaptations) outsold the SMS version by a roughly 5/1 ratio I'm going to say that Sega was missing something important in there. I understand that the original "hueg" X-Box was for ALL intents and purposes the Dreamcast 2. The Sega Saturn was a terrible failure of a system with nothing saving it from drowning in its own mediocrity (PS1 and N64 were CLEARLY superior). The SMS had some of the same games that the NES had, and all of the exclusive titles were pretty bland. Alex Kidd sucked total ASS when compared to Mario, Sonic, who was often compared to Nintendo's platform line-up was a dull "fast" gimmick that grew inexplicable wings (3 buttons, ALL of them Jump), and the so-called "speed" was like 2 full seconds of build-up, then a wall, or an enemy, or spikes, or a cliff, Sonic wasn't the ONE thing they pushed him as. Outrun/Turbo Outrun were bland racing games that in no way improved upon existing racing games (not that Cruisin' was any better) yet F-Zero was insane, very fast, very flashy, very challenging. Comparing Enix (pre square) or Square (pre Enix) games to the Sega analogs is pretty sad too, what RPG was better than Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest? How about Strategy games? Nobunaga's Ambition (NES) was a game that you could (and often DID) play for DAYS, the first Strat I can remember on a Sega system was like... Herzog Zwei which, while pretty great, severely lacked in so many areas it's kind of unplayable anymore. Oh, you say, what about ninjas? NES Ninja Gaiden (later ported to Genesis) was the BEST. Shadow Dancer was dull, and Ninja Hostage Negotiator 1-3 wasn't anything special and often felt like a very lame Rolling Thunder knock-off (which was ALSO ported to the Genesis).

What's the appeal of Bacon?

Normalfags just absolutely adore the stuff. Myself, I've never cared. I never grew up eating eggs and bacy and never had the desire to touch anything bacon-related. I've always been a sausage and pancakes guy. How come neither sausage nor pancakes get the love and attention that bacon gets? Bacon didn't invent breakfast. Bacon didn't invent breakfast meats. Bacon meals have always been pretty casual, streamlined, and watered down compared to the competition. And bacon always emphasized flavor as opposed to nutrition. So what is it? Why do people like bacon so much?

>Normalfags just absolutely adore them

don't even have to read the rest to know you're fucking retarded

See? That's the problem! Who knows what Gunpei would've made if Nintendo hadn't been full of full-sperg retards. But because they are, no-one gives a fuck about the thing except that it was one of the biggest tech blunders in gaming history. Right up there with Warner Communications running Atari into the ground.

Hence why PCs and Consoles are separate-yet-related beasts, you mean. Like Homo Sapien to Homo Erectus. Unless you want to state that PCs are actually Consoles and therefore should be built, marketed, sold, and used the exact same way.

Otherwise leave PCs where they belong: At the top of the heap.

>controller with a screen
>dreamcast
JUST

The reason Nintendo consoles are always toys is because they aren't a hardware company. They can't make a console as powerful as Sony and Microsoft and price it competitively. All they have is gimmicks.

We know that Gunpei would have made though. A better Game Boy/Advance, He made it and called it the Wonderswan.

So Microsoft is a toy company?

>HOW can one express themselves on screen?
Fucking faggotry. You are what's wrong with video games.

>Debatable, which has been done to death.
Please, Nintendo games have tons of games that are some of the best games of all time. Autists like you only talk about blunders nobody cares about. Sony and Microsoft have fucked up tons of times too but what does it matter? The only thing I care about are games and Nintendo are the best in that regard. They also create games that focus on being played with other people when other consoles went multiplayer instead.

The technology for the Wii has been compared favorably against the competition by a great many people. Processing power, notwithstanding (of course, it's quite clear that the processor is much lower) there have been several software designers, and several economists who have all been quoted praising Nintendo and the Wii. It CLEARLY won last generation to the point where PS4 and XBone launched with some sort of waggle technology, graphics didn't win out over money, and people spoke with their wallets. It's alright to deny logic or reason, but you look like a creationist when you do.

They're the only company who consistently puts out gold.

The real normalfags are the Bethesdrones and anybody who touches the yearly Madden/FIFA games.

>The real normalfags are the Bethesdrones and anybody who touches the yearly Madden/FIFA games.

This. OP doesn't know what a normalfag is.