Greetings! I am Chris Furniss from The Weekly Geek podcast, here to bring you a brand new feature aptly named: "Ask The Weekly Geek". Why should you ask me anything, let alone believe anything I say? Because I am known to have an encyclopedic knowledge of things Geek, and it is clogging up my brain tubes. I must eject some of this knowledge or else my head will explode. Help my head not explode!
I like to rant. I am passionate about things, either rabidly for or rabidly against said things. I take video games way too seriously, just like you, dear reader. And with that, let us begin!
QUESTION: "Why does Nintendo insist on ignoring the hardcore gamer base and marketing to my grandma?"
Ah, yes. You are obviously referring to Nintendo's new marketing strategy where they release a metric ass-ton of games that make you waggle your arms in order to have fun. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not a Wii hater, nor am I a Wii fanboy. For the record, I love Nintendo, and always have; I even sport a Triforce tattoo on my wrist. That said, the Triforce on my wrist burned like hellfire when I was forced to swing my Wii remote around to make Link's sword slash in Twilight Princess, but I digress. First, let's get a little context.
First rule of business: Make money.
This is why businesses exist. They aren't around for the betterment of mankind, for the elevation of society, or for the protection of the Earth - that's the realm of charities and private organizations full of crazy people (see: Greenpeace,). No, businesses are in the business of business, and the video game business is quite the lucrative one indeed. Nintendo knows this firsthand: back in the 80's they dominated during a time when all that was being released were clones of other successful games. Everyone had their Centipede, their Pong, their Missile Command, until a sparkling young artist named Miyamoto came to town and was set to task at making use of a bunch of old arcade cabinets for a game that didn't sell called Radar Scope. Because seriously. Would you play a game called Radar Scope? He came up with Donkey Kong, which was so innovative and crazy addictive that arcades began to take issue with the cabinet's coin case filling up all the time. You couldn't play it when you wandered in to your favorite arcade because everyone had already played it to death. Nintendo saved the games industry then, and ushered in an age of home console gaming a few years later with the NES. This is where we come in.
By "we", I mean the hardcore gamer demographic. The guys who used to stay up all night playing through Milon's Secret Castle because it was there. The guys who would wake up three hours before the school bus came to conquer Contra without the code. We are between the ages of 18-35, typically male, and ridiculously white. We know every bit of minutiae regarding the games industry, and can tell you things like the Japanese name for Goomba (kuribo!). And perhaps most importantly, we have a lot of disposable income, and take our video games very seriously.
The trouble is that we're a static group. Hardcore gamers are an exclusive clique with an entire industry built around their specific needs. We buy a ton of games and are going to continue to buy a ton of games into our old age, but as we approach that elderly threshold, the average age of gamers keeps going up. We aren't attracting anyone older or younger to our demographic. If this keeps up, we're likely to start seeing strange titles in the future surrounding the adventures of 70 year old men all of a sudden realizing they have superpowers along side Madden 2050: The Maddening.
Simply put, there's no growth in the hardcore gamer demographic.
What happens when the hardcore gamers start dying off? Nintendo is used to thinking long term; they've been around for over a hundred years, and got their start making playing cards called Hanafuda. They've only recently got into video games. How lucrative can a market be when in 40 years your target demographic is worm food? Enter the blue ocean strategy, which has Nintendo throwing a Wii remote-shaped life preserver out to non-gamers. Brain Age, Nintendogs and the Wii have all proven that you can get people who had no intention or desire to play video games in the past to spend their money on Nintendo's products.
The question is: will this new demographic that Nintendo is trying to win over transition into the hardcore? Will you see soccer moms playing Metroid Prime? Not likely. Rather than simply ushering non-gamers into the gamer fold, Nintendo is creating an all-new market. They are turning their focus on to this brand new group which, by sheer virtue of its numbers, has much more money than we hardcore gamers ever had. This is horrible for us! This is not a good thing at all! As their focus moves more and more towards constructing hats made out of money, the hardcore games are going to be left in the dust. Funds are no longer going to be spent making some brilliant new 40+ hour RPG where you fight monsters made out of poop (see: Blue Dragon), it's going to go to the development house who is making the next compilation of Super Partysaurus Fun Time Land, because it sells. You and I may think that waggling your arm and pretending it's a sword doesn't feel like the real deal, but people with no experience using a d-pad are going to think it's immersive and amazing.
Sure, this may be a jaded point of view, but look at Nintendo's E3 conference this year. There was a magical moment there when Bill Trinen announced that Miyamoto was coming out to present a brand new IP no one had ever seen before. Nick Brutal was sitting next to me, and I was so excited I think I peed his pants. Was it going to be a brand new and exciting series like Pikmin was? Was it going to be a new Zelda? We started clapping excitedly like a couple of little girls at a Hannah Montana show. Miyamoto walked on to the stage, and my chest swelled a bit -- this was the man who brought so much happiness to my life through his creative vision. What sort of new magic would he wow us with today?
Oh. It was a standing simulator. WiiFit.
My heart sunk. Miyamoto no longer cared about me. He was marketing to someone else now, someone with completely different gaming tastes. Someone who likes to stand and get said standing evaluated on their TV screen. I felt forsaken by the man who helped hone my gaming tastes to begin with.
What does the future hold for Nintendo? What can you do as a gamer to cope with this horrible waggle-based brave new world? Pretty much nothing. You can learn to enjoy Nintendo's new "casual" gaming attitude, or you can look elsewhere for your gaming fun. Nintendo has changed, and they've left you in the dust. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go weep for a couple hundred hours. Thanks for depressing me with your question, jerk.
Have a question for The Weekly Geek? Post it in the comments for next week's column!
Contest:
5:19 PM on 08.17.2007
| 
I have a question: How are you so amazing?
Answer: You are Chris Furniss.
Sorry, I just ruined the fun of the column.
Next, I don't think Nintendo is ignoring the hardcore gamers - tons of hardcore titles are being released by Nintendo and third party developers. As a matter of fact, when was the last time we got a new Mario, Smash Bros. and Metroid within a 5 month period? Or a Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros., Metroid and Wario Ware within a 13 month period? Nintendo has always spread out its flagship franchises over long periods of time. I think this is a clear message that we are not forgotten.
Seriously, though, this was a good read...I wonder what’s in store next week!
I see your point, though I don't think that the hardcore gamers should be thankful that they are only being served nintendo's tried and true franchises. No new franchises are really being created, and when there are ones being pushed to the hardcore (project HAMMER) they get canceled. Nintendo is content with releasing minigame compilations, and that's it. We just aren't seeing new, creative, awesome titles. Look at the 360. Bioshock, The Darkness, Dead Rising, Gears of War, EVERYTHING on XBLA... it's for the most part original content, and made for the "hardcore". So yeah. Nintendo doesn't care about the hardcore. They care about franchises and making hats made of money.
Nintendo has never released so many strong first and second party titles with in the first year of a systems launch. They have never supported the life long gamer more than they are now.
But, they are also making games for the new gamer. Some gaming lifers may resent that, because they are completely nuts and have some sort of weird need to always be catered to. Well, good luck with that fellas. Not every tv show is going to be tailored made to your tastes. Not every movie, comic book, or pop song either.
And now, you also can't count on every video game being made specificly for you. Games have finally become something potentially for everyone. Get over it.
Also I heard Project HAMMER isn't cancelled, only on hold.
"Look at the 360. Bioshock, The Darkness, Dead Rising, Gears of War,..."
Okay, now how many of those titles you mentioned are first party Microsoft titles? None. So the examples you gave are all 3rd party titles. Why direct all your anger at Nintendo then and not on these 3rd party developers who seem to be slacking on the Wii? As others have said while Nintendo may be catering a large amount of time to the casual market, they do still cater to the hard core with quite a number of titles. Could they be doing more? Sure. But, to make it sound like Nintendo is squarely responsible for the lack of hardcore centric games is pretty short sited.
The argument that Nintendo wants to make loads of money is so cringe worthy it's not woerth responding too. Please tell me which company gives their products away for free, tell me which company doesn't want to make money.
The irony of this article is that it comes straight after another article about the yearning for arcades, throw away, simple fun games, basically pick up and play. So on the one hand people look through rose tinted glasses at the arcade scene but can't see the similarities with Wii's gaming philosophy - pick up and play.
Then there is the mini game argument, "Nintendo just want to make a load of mini games" Where's the evidence to support this, I'm talking about first party Nintendo games, I beleive the awful Mario Party is the only collection of mini gams Nintendo have released (Wii sports doesn't count because it is a totally unique piece of software that doesn't fall into any category( Mario Party is on it's 8th edition, so that means there were 7 other mini game fests way before the Wii came along. Not only that, but ALL games are essentially mini games plastered over with narrative, in all games you are basically doing a variation of the same thing over and over again from start to finish. A game doesn't suddenly evolve new gameplay in the middle of your playing session, it's a repeated game mechanic stretched over different locations - mini games with a different setting. What people are really saying is that they don't want games without narrative or detailed worlds, but they are quite happy to play the same game mechanics again and again. So yet again this is not something the Wii has brought about.
And I have to agree with Tron Knotts, it's a dumb question to begin with, which menas that we can't properly answer it because we have to base some of our ideas on the questions premise which is flawed to begin with.
The real question should be "Has any console other than the Wii, been given such a hard time in it's first year?" or "How is it that so called hardcore gamers don't understand the simple concept of making a games console with mainstream appeal?" or "Didn't the PS2 & Gameboy do this ages ago?"
Also I resent the assertion that "nintendo doesn't care about the hardcore" is just like "nintendo is kiddy". It's not. It's an informed observation, not a kneejerk reaction.
Sure, it's a bit alarmist to say that Nintendo is abandoning the hardcore. But it's still an issue. I used to be a huge Nintendo fanboy, and now I play my Xbox 360 more than anything else. Why? Because Nintendo (and the requisite third parties) just doesn't make games that I like anymore. And that INCLUDES Twilight Princess.
Now ask a question for next week!
they wont get good third party support this gen either. third party games will be mini games, and they will not be fun for people like me who hate minigames and games that are disguised to be some adventure game but are really minigames.
nintendo fanboys go away.
also, gears of war was published by microsoft. so it is first party.
I am insanely disappointed by Nintendo this gen, more so than Sony.
I used to play Nintendo like a motherfucker back in the day, then the ps1 came out and all Nintendo had was Starfox, Ocarina, goldeneye, and perfect dark.
I don't buy systems for just good first party support. I wouldn't have a 360 if halo was just the norm, its had a ton of new IP's that for the most part have been really awesome and fun. and I wouldn't have a ps3 if it wasn't for the fact that mgs4 and ffxiii weren't coming out for it.
I buy a system for one developer.
Judgeing by his name: He's someone who likes to set fire to things.
Answer: He's the guy who wants to be Jim Sterling but he's NOOOOOOOOOOT.
Ok ok, seriously though. This was a pretty good write up dude. Hope to see moar of this.
Also: I fit in the hardcore gamer age. Wewt!
How soon do you think the world of gaming will go all digital download?
soon i think that everybody will have access to some form of internet connection, and then i wont have to deal with gamestop!
i think that everyone needs to stop talkin about "the big three" and start thinking about how many more great titles are coming to PS3 and 360. I'm a huge nintendo fanboy, but 3 games arent going to do it, and people need to realizew that the other consoles have a lot more than 3 big ones coming
We can all go on about our opinions, but the one universal leveller is evidence. You say Nintendo are influencing third parties, the evidence suggests otherwise. Third parties have treated the Wii as a half assed, easy cash generator for second hand watered down ideas. If third parties were making games that had the same visual imagination as Mario Galaxy or the same "out of the box" concepts as Wii sports then I would see where you are coming from. But as always, third parties are taking far too long to understand the direction Nintendo are going in.
Here's what actually happens, based on the evidence of the past decade - Nintendo make a console with certain software in mind, they know what their hardware is best suited to and why it was designed in a specific way. Third parties don't. Which is why third parties prefer the neutral hardware approach by Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo then release software to show third parties what the kind of games they are hoping they would make, an example is Phantom Hourglass on DS. An RPG/adventure game that only uses the stylus and yet works perfectly, an example of software that can only be done on the DS. No developer attempted to do this before, but I can assure you that they will now, so that is an example of Nintendo influencing third parties, and since the DS follows the exact same gaming philosophy as the Wii - pick up and play games which focus on human interface rather than historical knowledge of how videogames play, why have you singled out the Wii? If we use your logic then surely the DS is also to blame for the up take of Granny gamers to then.
So having established the cycle of Nintendo software leading game development trends for their systems, in what way have third parties followed Nintendo into mini game hell? How has Nintendo lead this genre of game design?
Nintendo doesn't make games that you like anymore? But that's personal taste not evidence, I don't like 90% of games regardless of who makes them, it doesn't mean games have gotten any worse, it could just mean that I'm changing. And here's another overlooked point, the arrogance of the hardcore gamer, they themselves were once newcomers, perhaps it was the Famicom or the Playstation that hooked them in, and at that moment of conversion they were completely oblivious to the fact that a whole generation of gamers before them had left the scene after the 80's due to games not being made for them anymore, it's the same thing happening again, every era thibks it's unique and new, it's not. Every era somthing gets lazily blamed for changes which were going to happen anyway, this era it's the Wii.
Twilight Princess was dissapointing, it lacked a soul and was obviuosly a rushed effort, but this is one game, a launch game at that, there is nothing else to really use an example because Nintendo haven't released anything, but I honestly beleive that Mario galaxy will be the Wii's unofficial launch, I believe that Nintendo under the leadership of Yamauchi would have delayed Wii's launch until Mario galaxy was finished, much in the same way that the N64 was delayed to accomodate Mario 64. Under Iwata though, Nintendo realise that getting the hradware out quickly is very important, the games will follow.
My prediction is that in 2008 these type of questions and arguments will look very old and tired, it's a simple case of third party's inability being blamed on Nintendo. The question should be "Why don't third parties understand the Wii?" that would reveal much more genuine problems within the industry.
People forget that the first year the DS was out was filled with crap and half-assed GBA ports. Now it's a smash.
I agree that a new property from Nintendo aimed at the hardcore would be nice, as the ones they have are becoming terribly inbred and sequelized. However, it's early in this generation. We've already got Smash Bros., Metroid, and Mario coming this year.
Aa for third parties, I think they aren't going to abandon the hardcore by a longshot. We may be a smaller market, but we still have money. What's the likelyhood of your minigame collection selling well if it's the 39th one to come out this month? How much brain training are people willing to pay for? With the large install base for the Wii publishers/developers are flocking to it, and in order to compete and survive many are going to have to carve a niche. Come on, we've got Guilty Gear on the way; I doubt the Gamecube was ever under consideration to receive that game.
The new marketing may not be for me, but I'm not the one who needs to be convinced. I'm not worried.
"also, gears of war was published by microsoft. so it is first party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-party_developer
From Wikipedia:
"The defining characteristic is that a second-party developer is a company completely separate from the manufacturer, while first-party developers are considered to be a "division" of the console maker itself."
Gears was developed by Epic, which is not in any way owned by Microsoft (hence, not a division of MS). Microsoft published Gears and has released it exclusively for their platforms (360, Windows). Epic doing work under contract for Microsoft makes said game 2nd party. Hence Gears of War is a 2nd party title.
"Also I resent the assertion that "nintendo doesn't care about the hardcore" is just like "nintendo is kiddy". It's not. It's an informed observation, not a kneejerk reaction.
Sure, it's a bit alarmist to say that Nintendo is abandoning the hardcore. But it's still an issue. I used to be a huge Nintendo fanboy, and now I play my Xbox 360 more than anything else. Why? Because Nintendo (and the requisite third parties) just doesn't make games that I like anymore. And that INCLUDES Twilight Princess."
It's limited to Twilight Princess you mean. You're playing your Xbox 360 NOW, over a year after its release. Nintendo's problem right now isn't a lack of hardcore games, it's a lack of games in general. Which is exactly what people said about the 360 for about a year after its release, and what people say about the PS3 right now as well. The "Nintendo just doesn't make games that I like anymore" statement holds no water when I know you are excited about both Super Mario Galaxy and Phantom Hourglass.
It's a kneejerk reaction.
I know you're saying "What about SSBB, Metroid, Zelda, etc..." and to that I say: How many of those are new IPs? None. Nintendo isn't catering to the hardcore with those games, they are catering to the Nintendo fan base who demands them.
"Well Project Hammer and Disaster are new IPs." Well Project Hammer is on hold indefinitely. You can be in denial all you want but that basically means cancelled and besides, everyone who did get a chance to play it reacted with a collective "meh". What do we really know about Disaster? Very little. The last time they showed any media from it was early LAST year. That does bode well either when it's not even mentioned at the latest E3. You can say that neither MS nor Sony is doing any better 1st party wise, but neither of them really need to (well, Sony kind of does) since they have plenty of 3rd party support.
Nintendo is out there to make money. This does not make them evil, this just makes them a business. They're going to go where the money is and right now the money is with your Grandma. Wii Fit being the big reveal at E3 proves this. Face it. To Nintendo the casual market is the new born baby and the hardcore gamer has effectively become the older child who doesn't get as much attention. They still love you, just not as much.
The way I see it, "Nintendo doesn't care about the hardcore" is kinda like the the claim "The 360 is only good if you like FPSes" or "The PS3 is only good as a Blu-ray player". There's some truth there but it's not the entire picture. Nintendo has struck gold with the non-traditional gamer, so it's no surprise they're currently focusing on that market. We'll still get hardcore games from them, but the Wii Fit announcement at e3 made it very clear that they won't be the number one priority for the near future. And I'm fine with that. I've continued to buy Nintendo systems over the years because I continue to love the characters and franchises I grew up on. But I know each system has it's strengths and weaknesses, and Nintendo isn't an exception. No single company is going to be everything for everyone. There'll be titles released over the next few years that will definitely make the Wii worthwhile. But traditional gamers are going to be missing out on a lot if they don't also own or have access to a 360 and PS3.
My list of upcoming hardcore games that are exclusive to the Wii:
Super Mario Galaxies
Metroid Prime Corruption
Super Smash Bros.
Guilty Gear Accent Core (2D fighters instantly qualify)
Nights
Blast Works: Fuse, Build, Destroy (shmups instantly qualify)
Fire Emblem: Goddess of Dawn
If this is what happens when Nintendo ignores the hardcore gamers, I hope they never pay attention to me again.
And no Guilty Gear on PS3 or 360, which means they equal fail.
Galaxies is Mario......jumping on things......in 3d.....again. Not that I want my Mario doing much more(save for some kart and football , but I have seen this before, on each console.
Metroid Prime: Curroption looks like Prime and Echos. Not bad, but I have those games, give me more.
Same with Smash. If it aint broke don't fix it i guess.
I am a HUGE guilty gear fan and while AC looks cool, I am happy with it on my PSP and PS2.
Nights, one of the few games I am actually looking forward too. Its fucking Nights for crying out loud.
Blast and Fire Emblem look alright, but hardly strike me as must haves.
Then we hit No More Heros, quite possibly the hardcore gamers reason to buy a Wii. This is the real system seller if you don't like the above games.
But looking at this list, I see games Ive played before. Games Nintendo knows we will buy on name alone. Save for No More Heros, Nights and Smash, I don't want anything for my Wii, cause I have them on my Gamecube and 64 still.
...
So now we're blaming Nintendo for catering to their own fan base, the people who got them where they are today? Next thing we'll be blaming them for accepting money for their products.
Now it's cool to play games. Games aren't games anymore. They're a fucking fad that will be skull-fucked by the same emo kids who recently ditched their music. My advice is to play nothing but pre 1997 games and the dreamcast. Send a message or something like that. Then in 2-3 years when grandma has carpal tunnel, it's safe to buy a recent game.
Q: What will it take for the AO rating to be legitimate and not just a death sentence?
Q: Why do the PAL territories get screwed over 99% of the time?
Q: Will Contra 4 rock your face off and then make sweet love to your immediate family?
I can't think of anything terribly interesting right now, but there're some starters.
"Nintendo is teh kiddy" then boom Wii brings in seniors to the limelight; "These people only bought Wii because of Wii Sports, the won't buy anything else" then boom Nintendo's bringing things out like Wii Fit; and now it's "Nintendo is abandoning the hardcore gamer." People raise the argument of games like Mario, Metroid, SSBB, Zelda, Fire Emblem, etc. and of course "they don't count because they're old franchises." I mean c'mon, Nintendo have done their part, on both ends of the spectrum, the question should be what are third-parties doing. It's not like they've made that great an effort in general when it was the Gamecube (not saying there wasn't more than enough games I fancied on that console, but there was obviously more emphasis on the Xbox and PS2, and now the 360 ans PS3).
The focus has changed, and it's probably not going to give us as satisfying an experience as we'd hope. Smash Brothers will be great. Metroid will be great. Mario Galaxy will be great. I am not saying don't go out and buy a Wii. Every system has great games, and you'd be missing out on a lot of awesome stuff if you "took sides". My theory is just that we are going to get more of the same. A great game every 3 months or so, while the rest of the time is filled with new ways to train your brain, or fantastically clever peripherals that tell your body mass index. ooh! maybe Wii Fit has some online functionality! Imagine your mom trying to comprehend friend codes. Yes, that will go well.
Now Disaster on the other hand looks far more promising. Why people think Disaster looked bad but bemoan the possible cancelation of H.A.M.M.E.R. is beyond me.
I happen to agree with your opinion on the "New" Super Mario Bros. for the DS. Could you please tell us in detail why you were so disappointed and what Nintendo would need to do better to make a new side-scrolling Mario game the right way? I scoured your website to see if you'd written about this earlier, but if you already have, please point me in the right direction. I'm totally sipping on the same haterade you are. Let's commiserate!
One can't hate on Nintendo for many of its current strategies -- it's printing cash right now and that is the goal of all corporations. Nintendo is succeeding. It could, however, be making even more and it isn't.
But as far as the "Nintendo doesn't care about us" thing, as with everything, it's the people lapping up lame-ass PS2 ports, uninspired waggle games and roms on the VC that you could download for free who are at fault here. Nintendo and the developers on the Wii are only doing what the consumer justifies them to do. The market wants mediocrity, mediocrity it shall have.
Not that I don't have problems with a lot of what Nintendo's doing, but really, fuck the customers who allow it.
What exactly Jim, would you say, is wrong with people legally obtaining older games (yeah, I'm talking about the VC)?
For reals yo. I'd love to hear this explanation. I think it would be tremendously entertaining.
Name me one company that if they had such hits as Mario, Metroid, or Pokemon wouldn't milk it to death. Sega, Capcom, EA, you name it. They find something that is guaranteed to print money and they'll run it into the ground. You don't think Microsoft wished that they had more than just Halo waiting in the wings to take advantage of? How they wished that Viva Pinata would turn out to be their Pokemon? Please, you'd be naive to think otherwise. Nintendo just happens to have some of the most recognizable franchises.
What it comes down to is really the 3rd Party software. But herein lies the problem of judging a system within its first year. Most people completely underestimated the Wii. Most developers that got on-board did so with ports. It wasn't until much later that developers started to take notice of the Wii. Problem is, yeah, the crowd that flocked to it are non-traditional gamers and that's where a lot of attention is going. Will this keep going? Who really knows?
One thing I do know is that the next few years will be very interesting for video games. With the rising costs of developing new properties, I see more and more companies falling back on tried and true franchises. Exclusive games will become rarer as turning a profit on a smaller userbase becomes more difficult. I think that Nintendo will have poised themselves in a very good position. Games built from the ground up for the Wii simply will never be the same experience on another system. Plus, as was pointed out, the larger disposable income of the Wii's audience will allow companies to recoup developing costs.
The downside to this, of course, will be more of a rise of ports and mini-game compilations. But I think that that will be the nature of the beast, regardless of the Wii's success.
I just wrote up my first 'toid blog post about some gripes I have with the Virtual Console, as much as I've enjoyed it. It may come off as making some issues bigger than they are, but they are genuine concerns of mine that piss me off when I think of them too long.
you're retarded for not buying a ps2
it CLEARLY owned last gen
like
owned with an iron grip of doom.
there are some five thousand games for it.
you sir are a nintendo fanboy.
Attack the market that has the lowest standards. Hardcore gamers know what they want, and that's expensive. Your grandma will play a game that costs $50 so she can wave a stick. Clueless parents will buy a glorified scale for $70 if the sales pitch includes getting kids to exercise (because balancing on one foot makes you lose lots of weight). Gamecube hardware for $250 is just fine if you're used to crappy VCR recordings of soap operas. Why is there no original content on VC? New games would interfere with Nintendo's ability to resell 10 to 20 year-old games (aka Classics). Why so little online play? Servers cost money, and it's better to make multiplayer games that encourage you to buy multiple controllers at $60 each. Who needs AI and CPU players, anyway? That might require programmers to have to work, think, and actually earn their profit.
But, hey, don't blame Nintendo. Ultimately, the fault lies with the consumer...
...and Sony, for fucking up so badly and making the Wii look appealing.
It's not that I don't love you all, it's just that I man-love Chris even more.