Why “no” rather than “not” in “Life is no Nintendo game”?

Question

I've just seen this sentence on the internet...

You don't get another chance. Life is no Nintendo game.

If I had to say something like that, I would say "Life is not a Nintendo game."

Why did he say "no"? What is more correct? and what is the difference?

Answer 1

This is a common idiom that is subtly different from the regular use of no and not. It’s used to make a comparison against an ideal or standard thing, and is often used to compare skills:

He’s no “king of comedy”, but Dane Cook can make people laugh.

Michael Bublé is a pretty good singer, but he’s no Frank Sinatra.

Your example sentence is saying you don’t get another chance because life is not a Nintendo game—though ideally it would be, because everybody wants a second chance at life.

This is also used with negative descriptions to cast someone in a positive light. “She’s no fool” means “she’s actually very wise/savvy”. Occasionally you also see it used in a rhetorical way, to give the reader a negative expectation but “surprise” them with a positive description:

He’s no Nikola Tesla—he’s even smarter than that!

Answer 2

Neither is more correct. They both mean the same thing, however using "no" gives it more intriguing feel, and "not a" gives a cold definite statement.

Answer 3

When a noun has an non-gradable meaning (it is either something or it is not) we cannot use "no" + noun.

A potato is not a fruit.
A potato is no fruit.

When a noun has a gradable meaning, "no" + noun means the same as "not a/an" + noun:

It's no secret that we are interested. (=It's not a secret. A secret is gradable. Something can be more of a secret than something else.)

In the context you have provided I suppose that one can give only an opinion on how a Nintendo game, metaphorically speaking, is, so:

You don't get another chance. Life is not a Nintendo game.

and

You don't get another chance. Life is no Nintendo game.

are both correct.

_{Reference: English Grammar Today (Cambridge)}