square-enix games on the 360

[Crani]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

Why can't fans just be happy that the games they love so much are getting a bit more diversity. If Zelda went on the PS3 I wouldn't give a damn because it means it's accessible to more people. For me to want it all for Nintendo would be selfish, and I'd want others to have a chance to play the franchise I love so much. So I really don't know why people are whining about it.

Zelda on the PS3 or the Xbox, for the time being is impossible, since Nintendo owns it, along with the Wii system, it's like having GOW or Forza on any other system then PS3/ Xbox 360.

[UrikosRandomStalker]

Originally Posted by Crani

Zelda on the PS3 or the Xbox, for the time being is impossible, since Nintendo owns it, along with the Wii system, it's like having GOW or Forza on any other system then PS3/ Xbox 360.

yeah we knew that already. we're just saying how funny and akward it would be if it came true. lol

[DagothUr]

Originally Posted by UrikosRandomStalker

yeah we knew that already. we're just saying how funny and akward it would be if it came true. lol

It is so weird. I played Halo with a PS3 style controller a few times.. Changes EVERYTHING!

[Crani]

Originally Posted by UrikosRandomStalker

yeah we knew that already. we're just saying how funny and akward it would be if it came true. lol

Until the Dreamcast, did you think you would be playing sonic with a PS controller? Well, if nintendo goes the same way Sega did, it can happen and they'll just have to make it work... And it can happen, it happened to Sega and Nintendo are is in the same situation, because they don't have anything else to grab to if they fail in the gaming section, unlike Sony and Microsoft.

[UrikosRandomStalker]

Originally Posted by Crani

Until the Dreamcast did you think you would be playing sonic with a PS controller? Well, if nintendo goes the same way Sega did, it can happen and they'll just have to make it work... And it can happen, it happened to Sega and Nintendo are is in the same situation, because they don't have anything else to grab to if they fail in the gaming section, unlike Sony and Microsoft.

this is very true. i never imagined a sonic game on a system not owned by sega

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Crani

Until the Dreamcast, did you think you would be playing sonic with a PS controller? Well, if nintendo goes the same way Sega did, it can happen and they'll just have to make it work... And it can happen, it happened to Sega and Nintendo are is in the same situation, because they don't have anything else to grab to if they fail in the gaming section, unlike Sony and Microsoft.

I really doubt Nintendo will have to let go of the Zelda franchise yet, or even at all. The reason why Sega had to sell out is because they were in trouble. As far as I'm concerned the Nintendo Wii was more successful than the 360 or the PS3 despite what other fans may think. I know Microsoft and Sony make things other than game consoles, but Nintendo has been running way longer than they have in the gaming industry and I believe they know what they're doing! They'll probably be riding on the success of the Wii and DS for a good while yet.

[Yogehi]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

I really doubt Nintendo will have to let go of the Zelda franchise yet, or even at all. The reason why Sega had to sell out is because they were in trouble. As far as I'm concerned the Nintendo Wii was more successful than the 360 or the PS3 despite what other fans may think. I know Microsoft and Sony make things other than game consoles, but Nintendo has been running way longer than they have in the gaming industry and I believe they know what they're doing! They'll probably be riding on the success of the Wii and DS for a good while yet.

1) this is UrikosRandomStalker. i made a new account (mods please delete my old account)

2) before i say this, i don't mean to disagree with you. but there is something that was bothering me for a long time.

if i remember correctly, the GBA had the shortest life span of a hand held console. and what i mean by that is that it had the shortest life span as the only system for handheld from nintendo. back when the DS was announced, nintendo said both the GBA and the DS would be sold along side with eachother. now that's fine and dandy. but i noticed that the DS was announced like soon after the psp was announced. and the fact that the GBA was being sold for a good 6-8 months along side with the DS was rather suspicious. that's when i noticed how long the GBA was on the shelf before the DS was announced.

idk. it might be just me, but it just sounds like the DS was announced as a counter part to the psp. don't get me wrong, it's a good system. but sony kinda like.....pushed nintendo into releasing something new for the handheld.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Yogehi

1) this is UrikosRandomStalker. i made a new account (mods please delete my old account)

2) before i say this, i don't mean to disagree with you. but there is something that was bothering me for a long time.

if i remember correctly, the GBA had the shortest life span of a hand held console. and what i mean by that is that it had the shortest life span as the only system for handheld from nintendo. back when the DS was announced, nintendo said both the GBA and the DS would be sold along side with eachother. now that's fine and dandy. but i noticed that the DS was announced like soon after the psp was announced. and the fact that the GBA was being sold for a good 6-8 months along side with the DS was rather suspicious. that's when i noticed how long the GBA was on the shelf before the DS was announced.

idk. it might be just me, but it just sounds like the DS was announced as a counter part to the psp. don't get me wrong, it's a good system. but sony kinda like.....pushed nintendo into releasing something new for the handheld.

I don't think Sony forced Nintendo into doing anything. At that time, Nintendo owned the handheld market, because there was nothing else and because people really trusted their systems. I really don't think Nintendo would have been influenced by Sony in terms of release dates, if that's the case it'd have been more likely to be the other way round. I don't really know what you mean is suspicious. The likely reason they were still selling GBA's alongside DS's is because games were still being made for the GBA and it was selling well still, despite new handhelds on the horizon.

[Crani]

What Yogehi says makes sense, because Sony was about to release a highly sofisticated Handheld that would kick GBA ass and they needed to act quick so they could continue to own the Handeld market, and there was when the NDS was born.

[Tyrien]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

I really doubt Nintendo will have to let go of the Zelda franchise yet, or even at all. The reason why Sega had to sell out is because they were in trouble. As far as I'm concerned the Nintendo Wii was more successful than the 360 or the PS3 despite what other fans may think. I know Microsoft and Sony make things other than game consoles, but Nintendo has been running way longer than they have in the gaming industry and I believe they know what they're doing! They'll probably be riding on the success of the Wii and DS for a good while yet.

As far as you're concerned? Misa I can understand trying to word an opinon right but it's a fact that the Wii prints money.

• Only console that's turned a profit off hardware alone this generation from day one.
• Sells so much Nintendo has only recently been able to make up production demand
• Virtual console is pure profit. I alone spent $50 for the first time I bought things on mine. All nintendo or sega games, old games too that cost next to nothing to host and emulate. Pure profit.

Nintendo is absolutely FLUSH with money.