LogFAQs > #949725441

As a concept, "exclusive" generally only looks at a single generation. It's silly to say "the NES didn't have any decent exclusives" because virtually all of its noteworthy games have been rereleased in some capacity or another. When the NES was contemporary, you had to buy it in order to access those games. That's all "exclusive" has ever meant, especially as we move into an era where digital distribution makes it easy to port older games to every new system. Again, surely you're not going to suggest that rereleasing any game shafts the early adopters.

Nintendo games were almost always exclusive for at least two generations. Wii U is the sole exception.

They really don't. For one thing, "there's new content the original version doesn't have that means the original is unfinished" is just a silly attitude to have. Unfinished games feel unfinished when you play them, and that wasn't the case for any WiiU exclusives I can think of (not the decent ones that are seeing ports, anyway). Retroactively deciding after you've already been satisfied by them that they were actually unfinished just because some new content later is roughly akin to a spoiled toddler throwing a tantrum when he realizes one of his peers is playing with a toy he doesn't have.
For another, the new content is rarely that significant. It's enough to make choosing the remake over the original easy (presuming such a choice is actually available and there isn't a massive price difference confounding the issue, which may not be a reasonable assumption), but by and large, I wouldn't even bother spending $10 on a hypothetical upgrade option if it existed (and the cases where I would, that option's already been made available in the form of DLC for the original game, like the MK8 track packs, NSLU, or the Hyrule Warriors expansion pass, and I already have purchased it).

If I buy a $60 game I shouldn't be locked out of any content forever because greedy publishers demand to purchase the game again just to get $10 DLC. I want all DLC without having to waste money on content that I already own and have already played. Not being able to play DLC that I want because developers want you to buy the same game again ruins videogames for me, because it means that I will always get games with missing content that I will never get to play, because locking $10 DLC behind a $60 port is the same as them refusing to sell that DLC to me.
And new levels in a Mario game or new characters in Pokken or a battle mode that's not completely broken in Mario Kart is pretty significant content.

Is it unfortunate that these remakes are coming out so relatively soon after their originals? Kind of, though even then it's not actually that soon in many cases (Mario 3D World came out in November 2013, over 7 years before this port is being released). Some of them were really close (Pokken Tournament DX came out a year and a half after the original's NA launch), particularly the ones that were used to flesh out the Switch's launch window lineup, but most of them did wait at least 3-4 years. That's actually a pretty reasonable gap. But even with some of them being relatively close, feeling "shafted" and bitter over having jumped on the bandwagon earlier isn't particularly reasonable. I'd much rather see the studios that created these excellent games get the revenue and recognition they deserve for doing so than see them take a loss for the sake of making me feel like my "loyalty" has been rewarded.

Most Nintendo remakes come 10-15 years after the original. If I buy a Nintendo console I expect a console that will remembered until the end of time because of great exclusives, not shit like Amiibo Festival or Devil's Third.