Posted January 24, 2013
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7ef4e/7ef4eabdef58568ea960960fe024218995137bcf" alt="avatar"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/34d41/34d41c0fd502ac38fe1e2dea6df812c6506abe79" alt="avatar"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10272/102724c57b7e85bf4462278944f209936e9862da" alt="avatar"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=p_RbU6C-tno#t=186s
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/34d41/34d41c0fd502ac38fe1e2dea6df812c6506abe79" alt="avatar"
They tried to tack on a Golden Eye style multiplayer and ignored the fact that everyone had already said "we're fucking bored of that" when they tried to push the exact same thing for Perfect Dark years before.
Metroid Prime 2 wasn't a copy of Halo, it was a bloody copy of Golden Eye/Perfect Dark, once again Nintendo trying to stick stubbornly to crap because "someone used to like it". Well, back in 1998 Golden Eye was pretty fun. But that was then, the gameplay hadn't aged all that well, and MS, Valve, and several other American companies had shown over and over again that not only was there a vast market for shooters, but the market existed on consoles as well, and offered multiple, successful examples of how to make one.
Nintendo did their own thing with online multiplayer, offered pretty much nothing interesting in the single player, and there's any question at all why Prime 2 didn't do well?
Yeah, I'm gonna have to go with the most likely option here, Prime 2 did poorly because it wasn't very good or interesting, not because there's some saturation point for "shooters" or something.
Prime 1/Godfather 1= Perfect
Prime 2/ Godfather 2= Very Good
Prime 3/ Godfather 3= OK but will never be as awesome as the older ones.