digibutter.nerr

[Lord Bowser]

A long time ago, video games were born in the late 70's/early 80's. They became so popular that they all died off in 1983. Then, in 1985, a man named Shigeru Miyamoto reinvented video games as we know them with Super Mario Bros. for the Famicom, otherwise known as the NES, and gaming was born.

Other companies like Atari tried to make a foothold in this new, reinvented industry, but they couldn't. Nintendo was king. In the early 90s, Sega tried their hand with a console that actually rivaled Nintendo's. The first console war was born.

But Nintendo still ruled supreme. Terrible add-ons and poor marketing led to Sega's drawn-out death all through the 90s. But then, in the mid 90s, something happened that would shake up gaming forever: Sony invented a console called the PlayStation. The PlayStation was for "mature" gamers, people tired of Mario and Zelda and Metroid. These people wanted realism and games they could relate to. Magazines and review companies (the Internet as we know it wasn't big yet) had never had a choice as to who they had to support-it was either Nintendo, the clear winner, or Sega, the second man.

But this PlayStation gave them a bigger choice, and this choice became even more obvious when Nintendo fumbled with the N64. For the first time, Nintendo lost, and those reviewers and magazines who had hated Nintendo's rule for so long, but could never do anything about it, finally could.

The PlayStation won that war, and its successor, the PS2, was even more popular. Nintendo stuck with their old franchises on the GameCube, even as Microsoft entered and appealed to the same demographic as Sony with their new console, the Xbox. It was two versus one, essentially. Microsoft and Sony ganged up on Nintendo, and when the GameCube died, they fought each other. Sony came out on top once again, and everyone-magazines, websites, reviewers, even news agencies, had picked their winner-Sony, or, to a lesser extent, Microsoft. To their eyes, there was no Nintendo. The king was dead.

Then Nintendo played their trump card: the Wii, a console with a "kiddy" name, non-HD graphics, and a strange controller. Everyone laughed. This was Nintendo's suicide. Magazines, websites, reviewers, and news agencies laughed their final laugh. They placed their bets on the Xbox 360 and PS3. This "Wii" would crash and burn and Nintendo would die forever.

BUT IT DIDN'T. The Wii broke records left and right and left those naysayers peeing themselves. Desperate for answers, those millions of professional gamers and reviewers looked for a way to save themselves from embarrassment. Wrist strap problems? Overheating? Poor online? There had to be a reason. But there wasn't. Nintendo was back, and these companies didn't like it.

Somewhere, these companies-Electronic Gaming Monthly, Gamespot, Gamestop, even the news-made an alliance. An unspoken alliance, but an alliance nonetheless. The alliance was simple-we aren't losing now. Not after we put down the Wii and Nintendo for months, years even. We're embarrassed and ashamed, and we're not going down without a fight. So they started off slow-poor coverage of Wii games (Gamespot and Gamestop), biased reviews (EGM, Gamespot). Nothing too big. But people caught on. Something was fishy. The answer was clear: no self-respecting professional gamer was allowed to admit that Nintendo was back. If you admit the Wii's winning, if you admit Nintendo's back, if you admit Nintendo has fixed your mistakes, the terrorists win. This is the environment gamers live in now. Nintendo is on top, and a revolution (no pun intended) is starting.

[Crappy Blue Luigi]

Lord Bowser, that was awesome. The only thing I see wrong is that you forgot about Donkey Kong and Mario Bros., which came before Super Mario Bros..

[Lord Vaati]

I'd say this is worth having this quote in it.

[Zelnor]

This is the greatest thing since the Wii and it's games.

[INeedScissors61]

>.> I find it insulting, actually. Every "gamer" left their eyes on Nintendo, and developers took ideas from them often. The only thing that made PS2 and Xbox wins was-... Any takers? The Gamecube did one thing: play video games. The other systems could play DVDs and more, making them more wanted to whom? Casual gamers. I rest my case. It should have been predicted Wii would win looking at the past generation. And Nintendo just naturally pwns all anyways.

[Francis]

Yeah, nice write up (assuming its not copykoopasta)

[Super ShadowArticuno]

...

Wow. If that isn't just a vat of copypasta, then that was awesome, and so true.

[Manjew]

It IS true that the Wii is underrated... well, a little underrated.

The social era is just starting. A new wave of gamers arrive, and the cinématographic games are less poppular. Arcade-style games are slowy diing, and make theirself rarer.

Oh, and some people really takes Wii's success like a gaming apocalypse. Go figure...

[Super Maiq the Liar]

[Crappy Blue Luigi]

[Yellow Magikoopa]

I couldn't agree with you more. I hate what Sony did with the gaming industry. They enforced a new generation of violence-addicted morons who act like they're "gangstaz". It's DISGUSTING.

[Legendary Mashine]

And if they're for "casual gamers" then why do they cost so much freakin' money.

... phail.

I like Xbox though.

But Sony is made of phail.

Really, go play a PS1 game and compare it to a N64 game, and you will see that even then... Sony sucked. :D

[Super Slim]

NINTENDO=WIN


MICROSOFT=OK



SONY=U SUCK

[Super Maiq the Liar]

Nintendo = Super mega awesome sauce

Microsoft = Super awesome sauce

Sony(before PS3) = Awesome sauce

Sony(after PS3) = Sauce

[Paper Luigi]