is anything they do more innovative, interesting, or good
Is it not? Do the ‘indies’ sell devices with novel gaming mechanics that are bought by the millions, at a small fraction of cost to the users as you say? Do the ‘indies’ sell games for the whole family to enjoy, by the millions?
I’ve never owned a Nintendo device, and I’m still jealous of what they’ve done. If you aren’t, you’re severely lacking the appreciation of what gaming devices could do and how Nintendo strayed out of the trodden path time and again.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Yes, they do, except usually not selling by the millions, which has nothing to do with quality but marketing. There are indies that do some crazy, amazing, and interesting things. You have to find them though. Nintendo gets shoved in your face.
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 3 days ago
It definitely has to do with quality. Firstly, Nintendo distinguished themselves from the competition starting with the NES through quality control for the software titles, resurrecting the entire US market after tons of shovelware saturated it in 1983-85. By the time of the 16-bit consoles, Sega specifically profited off of allowing stuff that Nintendo wouldn’t, like more violent games. Nintendo’s legacy of quality family-friendly titles is pretty damn obvious, and when one is buying their console, they’re also buying into this ecosystem, knowing that they’ll have a new Mario Kart game to play with friends.
Secondly, you’d do better by citing any examples of indie devs providing hardware and software of equal quality and innovation to Nintendo’s, instead of empty statements. For example, Playdate is an interesting handheld console that definitely looks well-made, and is designed by Teenage Engineering known for music gear like synths. It has a crank on the side, and aside from that, a d-pad and four buttons, a black-and-white screen (not grayscale) with 400×240 pixels, a 168 MHz CPU and 16 MB of RAM. It costs 230$ (originally 180$) with twenty-four games, and 40$ for twenty-four more. I bet most of the games are retro stuff like platformers. Do I admire Teenage Engineering’s output? Oh yeah. Would I buy this if I had 270 spare bucks for a handheld console? Fuck no.
I also had an R35S gifted to me by someone more than a bit into emulation handhelds. It has way better specs than Playdate and okayish quality of the inputs. Only, the battery went fully and irreparably dead after a year of it lying around, and moreover, the battery may be pierced by the screws holding the case in place when the battery expands with age, which may lead to a fire.
Guess what my primary handheld emulation device is? A PlayStation Vita gifted to me earlier by the same person. Reportedly it can lie about for months with a game paused, draining barely any battery charge.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
I know the history. I owned a SNES and enjoyed it. I don’t care about what they did in the past. I’m talking about now.
I don’t care to spend a ton of time proving that indies innovate far more than Nintendo. If you don’t believe that then you never will. What innovation do they do with their new consoles? The majority are just played with traditional controls, and their games are maybe polished, but they are copying things other games have done in the past. For example, LoZ TotK building is pretty much the same thing Banjo Kazooie Nuts and Bolts did in 2008. Indies have done it significantly better (an example; Space Engineers). Just look up vehicle building games. If you want to find a game innovating on a mechanic, you can search for it and probably find one. I’m not spending my time proving this for every example.
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Thanks for telling me to go find evidence for your own position. That definitely supports your argument a whole lot.
However, excuse me if I choose to ignore your request as patently ridiculous.