One of the games you mentioned is out.Zink said:
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
The New Console Debates
- Thread starter DreamCaster
- Start date
- Status
Zink
Smash Champion
?? Plz explain.
Holy **** man, you took that seriously? I assumed people would think that a moderator (or really anyone who's not a moron) would know better than what I put.mouseboy20 said:
But to clarify, it was sarcasm.
Zero Beat
Cognitive Scientist
Sarcasm over the internet : Serious'R Business.
Lack of emoticons in posts makes it difficult mate.
Just playing.
Does anyone have any information regarding any possiblities on new SSB characters? Rumors?
Lack of emoticons in posts makes it difficult mate.
Sounds like Fanboy talk. You win the internet for 'teh hidden sarcasm'.Osco316 said:
Just playing.Does anyone have any information regarding any possiblities on new SSB characters? Rumors?
If you want to talk about that, you can head over to Melee Discussion to the stickied topic.XZero BeatX said:
Zero Beat
Cognitive Scientist
Since we can talk about games and stuff here, why not answer it anyway? Whatever i guess, thanks for the advice.
You missing my point. Forget what I said about your friends. What I was asking was, how do you know that the sales of those games are coming from "non-gamers" and not from people already buying games?kaid said:
If its working for Nintendo then good for them, that means their work is paying off. But where's the evidence of this?
Doggalina
Smash Lord
kaid, have you ever TRIED Nintendogs? It's actually fun. I just don't feel like playing it everyday. It is fun once in a while. Brain Age is fun to math nerds like me. It helps people to think on their feet.
Heh, think that all you want. If Nintendo is ignoring us, why are they still making games like Zelda and Mario? If they ignored us, they'd spawn sequel after sequel year after year after year (sometimes twice in a year). You know, like sports games or Dynasty Warriors (which is rehashed every release).
I don't like Nintendogs.
prolly because I'm all for kitties!
If they release Nintencats I will be the first person on earth to get it. count on it. (heck you think that'd be a no-brainer after the unbelievable amount of sales Nintendogs got...) The only thing is that a cat simulation game might not be as "fun" because cats are less active than dogs. to make up for that they could do like "Nintencats and other furry friends" or something, to include cats but other animals too you could pick.
prolly because I'm all for kitties!
If they release Nintencats I will be the first person on earth to get it. count on it. (heck you think that'd be a no-brainer after the unbelievable amount of sales Nintendogs got...) The only thing is that a cat simulation game might not be as "fun" because cats are less active than dogs. to make up for that they could do like "Nintencats and other furry friends" or something, to include cats but other animals too you could pick.
commonyoshi
Smash Hero
Would only be fun if you could feed them live Nintenrats.Giygas said:
I'm worried about the "non-gaming" people running out. What if say 70% of all people(excluding the ones who can afford games) become gamers? Will they start going to PS3 while Nintendo is still going after the remaining 30%?
The makers of some multiplatform game on 360 and PS3 said it'll be near imposible to tell the diference between 360 and PS3 graphics.
There, happy now Cashed?
Dammit, that's Chill. Cuuuuuurse you Toomin!
There, happy now Cashed?
Dammit, that's Chill. Cuuuuuurse you Toomin!
I know Mics trying to tell us something. I just can't quite see it.
Zero Beat
Cognitive Scientist
The 360 has better processors but the PS3 has MORE.Mic_128 said:
Quality>Quantity? Or will this be an exception?
lol, Your like the third person to get us mixed up.Mic_128 said:
The keyword is multiplatform. Those games typically look similar across consoles. No suprise there.
Zink
Smash Champion
OK, so we all know that the consoles will have amazing graphics. But only the huge junkies and the computer-power analysts will be able to tell the difference. 9 processors might beat 3 but we won't be able to tell if the next Madden has 5.6% better sweat stains on one platform or the other.
Pogiforce-14
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38
I must admit I have not read much of this topic at all, but if I may interject here, although I cannot recall where I saw the info , of all the producers, consumers, and designers polled at last year's E3, about 40 50 % percent of each were looking forward to the PS3 and the Revolution, and less than a measely 20 to 10% were looking forward to working with the Xbox 360. You can take that info as you wish. If I could remember where I had found it, I could prove it. Maybe someone else can find it, I think it was somewhere on wikipedia.
Zink
Smash Champion
You can't trust wikipedia. It's always possible a few fanboys edited it.
Pogiforce-14
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38
But Wikipedia also has a high percentage of reliable info since they're constantly double checking the info provided to be sure they aren't being purposely mislead. And if the info is doubtful, they let you know as such. It's in their mission statement. I'm pretty sure that data was reliable. I only wish I could remember where I saw it.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
I just finished watching E3 footage on G4 and determined the winner of this console war HAS to be Microsoft. Why? Let me create a list one why the other two can't, or don't need to win:
Sony has won the past two generations of gaming consoles. PS2 was a total blowout year and that isn't a good thing. They need to suffer one loss to make them innovate themselves again. Also, they can most afford a loss with being on their third console.
No matter how you cut it, Nintendo is a house hold name. They can release the worst games ever and people will still throw their dollars at them. Since they are so cheap next gen and they possess a controller that taps into virtual reality, they really don't need the win to stay around because people will buy it regardless. Also with their handheld edge, they have enough steam to keep them afloat. Nintendo also needs to do what ALL gamers want not just what a select few want. The controller is cool, but I like multiplayer, like many other people do. Yes, they will have a multiplayer system but they needed to show it in a much better way.
They must win for a few reasons. Microsoft is still the newest to the console race, last gen they managed to overtake one of the giants by beating Nintendo. If they can score a win this gen, then they can possibily open the market to newer console creators, which is a great thing. I was so excited when I heard about the Phantom because it meant that gamers would be divided over 4 consoles so they would all have to prove why they are worth the money, and we the gamers win. However, Phantom failed and was scrapped. A win could make developers less scared to try a console. Also, a win for MS would be a win for gamers. Microsoft has given gamers what we wanted for a LONG time, online multiplayer. And they did it the best last generation with Live, so much so, they have redone it and repackaged it. Live was the easiest online program I have ever experienced. It allows compelling downloads and massive content for a pretty low fee PER YEAR.
So in summary, Sony needs to lose to shock them back to reality that other consoles are good too and they need to step up with their ideas. Nintendo needs the loss, again, to show they are not focusing on all gamers and they will get money anyway. MS has money, infinite funds at least, but a win here would be a win for gamers as it could see more competition (competition is good for gamers) and we could see developers focusing on gamers more and less on themselves. Sony followed suit with the online program this gen which could be what I really wanted all along.
I'll probably be getting a Wii and a 360 by Christmas and then a PS3 the following year. That is if Oblivion lets me.
Sony (Playstation 3)
Sony has won the past two generations of gaming consoles. PS2 was a total blowout year and that isn't a good thing. They need to suffer one loss to make them innovate themselves again. Also, they can most afford a loss with being on their third console.
Nintendo (Nintendo Wii)
No matter how you cut it, Nintendo is a house hold name. They can release the worst games ever and people will still throw their dollars at them. Since they are so cheap next gen and they possess a controller that taps into virtual reality, they really don't need the win to stay around because people will buy it regardless. Also with their handheld edge, they have enough steam to keep them afloat. Nintendo also needs to do what ALL gamers want not just what a select few want. The controller is cool, but I like multiplayer, like many other people do. Yes, they will have a multiplayer system but they needed to show it in a much better way.
Microsoft (XBox 360)
They must win for a few reasons. Microsoft is still the newest to the console race, last gen they managed to overtake one of the giants by beating Nintendo. If they can score a win this gen, then they can possibily open the market to newer console creators, which is a great thing. I was so excited when I heard about the Phantom because it meant that gamers would be divided over 4 consoles so they would all have to prove why they are worth the money, and we the gamers win. However, Phantom failed and was scrapped. A win could make developers less scared to try a console. Also, a win for MS would be a win for gamers. Microsoft has given gamers what we wanted for a LONG time, online multiplayer. And they did it the best last generation with Live, so much so, they have redone it and repackaged it. Live was the easiest online program I have ever experienced. It allows compelling downloads and massive content for a pretty low fee PER YEAR.
So in summary, Sony needs to lose to shock them back to reality that other consoles are good too and they need to step up with their ideas. Nintendo needs the loss, again, to show they are not focusing on all gamers and they will get money anyway. MS has money, infinite funds at least, but a win here would be a win for gamers as it could see more competition (competition is good for gamers) and we could see developers focusing on gamers more and less on themselves. Sony followed suit with the online program this gen which could be what I really wanted all along.
I'll probably be getting a Wii and a 360 by Christmas and then a PS3 the following year. That is if Oblivion lets me.
Zook
Perpetual Lazy Bum
Seems logical.
However, let us think about what the 360 has been like. So far, nothing really making it worth buying. Also, they aren't the only ones with online play anymore. But if Microsoft combinds it promises with its literal infinate funs, they may win.
Still, I'll get the Wii. Why? Nintendo consoles are fun. Not violent gorefests (like all of Microsofts and Sonys 'good' games), but fun.
Plus, I wouldn't want to pass up Smash and Wario Ware.
However, let us think about what the 360 has been like. So far, nothing really making it worth buying. Also, they aren't the only ones with online play anymore. But if Microsoft combinds it promises with its literal infinate funs, they may win.
Still, I'll get the Wii. Why? Nintendo consoles are fun. Not violent gorefests (like all of Microsofts and Sonys 'good' games), but fun.
Plus, I wouldn't want to pass up Smash and Wario Ware.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
Gears of War will definately be the one to move it off the shelves.
Oblivion, if anything like Morrowind, will keep me going on for 4 more years.
Oblivion, if anything like Morrowind, will keep me going on for 4 more years.
Zink
Smash Champion
hmmm... it's gonna come down to Nintendo and MS, I think. And it'll be close. 360 already has the 1 year edge, but do they have to originality and third parties to pull it off? Probably. But in the face of the Wii's price, gameplay, total backwards library, and name power? Maybe.
Sony is in deep deep trouble. They have too much money for too little right now, and I'm betting Wiis will sell like hotcakes. That and MS's head start will put them in the dust. They're gonna need something big to draw people in.
If Nintendo had an online system like Live I would say they would win hands down. As it is, we'll have to hope the WiFi Connection will be upgraded a bit.
Can Sony even survive, with the whole Wii+360=PS3 price thing going on? They really need to slate the market their way or they will be crowded out by MS and Nintendo. And I don't have high hopes that MS can keep going with consoles in the after360 era- another gen of merely incremental changes and they will be gone.
It's going to be an exciting 5 years.
Sony is in deep deep trouble. They have too much money for too little right now, and I'm betting Wiis will sell like hotcakes. That and MS's head start will put them in the dust. They're gonna need something big to draw people in.
If Nintendo had an online system like Live I would say they would win hands down. As it is, we'll have to hope the WiFi Connection will be upgraded a bit.
Can Sony even survive, with the whole Wii+360=PS3 price thing going on? They really need to slate the market their way or they will be crowded out by MS and Nintendo. And I don't have high hopes that MS can keep going with consoles in the after360 era- another gen of merely incremental changes and they will be gone.
It's going to be an exciting 5 years.
I agree with the Nintendo vs MS as the main header for this next generation. Just from talking to the locals, it seems everyone and their grandmother wants or at least has a healthy interest in the Wii (I'm being quite literal with this too; I've met 3 grandmothers that have expressed interest). 360 already has the online multiplayer community going for it, but they're going to have trouble in the future if they don't improve their library.
The big part to Sony's downfall is going to be their desire for tech choices. Not only did the Blu-Ray increase their system's price to fatal heights, but it will also up the cost of software should they require the discs to be in Blu-Ray format. Their Cell, although powerful, has not yet delivered anything that is above and beyond other current hardware such as that of the 360. And because of its complexity, developers have to work that much harder to program their games, alienating the smaller companies as well as driving up total development costs. It's a very rough position to be in, right now.
The big part to Sony's downfall is going to be their desire for tech choices. Not only did the Blu-Ray increase their system's price to fatal heights, but it will also up the cost of software should they require the discs to be in Blu-Ray format. Their Cell, although powerful, has not yet delivered anything that is above and beyond other current hardware such as that of the 360. And because of its complexity, developers have to work that much harder to program their games, alienating the smaller companies as well as driving up total development costs. It's a very rough position to be in, right now.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
Sony will not be blown out completely. First off the $600 is for the higher end PS3 and that's just launch price. On top of that they have 100 million people who did buy a PS2 without hesitation. They will still be a viable contender. Also, never knock anyone for going with the higher end technology. Why? In 5 years when PS3 is hitting it's power potiential, 360 and Wii will be scrambling for advancements. The Nintendo 64 is a great example. They built a console that was behind in technology, and Sony built one that was advanced, for it's time. Well a few years later, Nintendo needed an expansion pack just to keep up. So though expensive now, they will drop the price soon enough.
The 360 has a chance to dominant with it's year advantage. But everyone is also misinterpretting Peter Moore's comment. Most people will not buy more than one console when it comes out. In fact very few will. He was trying to get the MS name mentioned on Nintendo websites where Nintendo fanboys will feel a potiential agreement is reached between MS and Nintendo. Also it puts MS in a great position if Nintendo is forced to close on consoles, as they will become the top runner for a buyout. Never assume anything is exactly as it appears. In business EVERYTHING said publically has multiple meanings.
Sony showed some great games too and was really overlooked by alot because 360 did a great job. Sony has a bad habit of putting out weak titles for their launch. (Ps2 had like Summoner, Kessen, and Oni as huge titles when it came out) But they are also doing something that Nintendo fans are missing. They are innovating GAMES. Instead of tossing a Mario or Zelda into a launch title to give them credibilty, they take the risk in hopes of creating the next big franchise, and Sony is really good with that. Last gen saw GTA 3, totally obsecure at E3 that year, blow up and destroy the world of gaming. Can they do it again this yea?
Nintendo has a great chance to come back to the light it lost since the SNES. The 64 was a failure in many people's eyes and the GCN died due to lack of fan support, despite a very strong E3. Right now, Nintendo has a promising run, but they are also isolating many gamers like they have for a while. Some gamers want new series, not just repeats, some want harder games all around. Red Steel could be their shot at a harder, edgier appeal. Backwards compatibility via downloads COULD rope in gamers to playing what they liked. MS recently got the license to Genesis titles as well so now Nintendo really has to push their own system's games. I'd love to see Nintendo release a risky new game, ala GTA 3, and take the world by storm. Hey, we could see Grand Theft Auto: Mushroom Kingdom. Imagine the possibilities.
I will still keep my stance in waiting until next summer (6 months after all are released) before buying any next gen console. Right now they are just launch titles, save for the 360, so it's impossible to compare the two. Hype can do a lot for a system, especially with the Wii on a Nintendo website. We need to wait and see on what they will actually put out.
The 360 has a chance to dominant with it's year advantage. But everyone is also misinterpretting Peter Moore's comment. Most people will not buy more than one console when it comes out. In fact very few will. He was trying to get the MS name mentioned on Nintendo websites where Nintendo fanboys will feel a potiential agreement is reached between MS and Nintendo. Also it puts MS in a great position if Nintendo is forced to close on consoles, as they will become the top runner for a buyout. Never assume anything is exactly as it appears. In business EVERYTHING said publically has multiple meanings.
Sony showed some great games too and was really overlooked by alot because 360 did a great job. Sony has a bad habit of putting out weak titles for their launch. (Ps2 had like Summoner, Kessen, and Oni as huge titles when it came out) But they are also doing something that Nintendo fans are missing. They are innovating GAMES. Instead of tossing a Mario or Zelda into a launch title to give them credibilty, they take the risk in hopes of creating the next big franchise, and Sony is really good with that. Last gen saw GTA 3, totally obsecure at E3 that year, blow up and destroy the world of gaming. Can they do it again this yea?
Nintendo has a great chance to come back to the light it lost since the SNES. The 64 was a failure in many people's eyes and the GCN died due to lack of fan support, despite a very strong E3. Right now, Nintendo has a promising run, but they are also isolating many gamers like they have for a while. Some gamers want new series, not just repeats, some want harder games all around. Red Steel could be their shot at a harder, edgier appeal. Backwards compatibility via downloads COULD rope in gamers to playing what they liked. MS recently got the license to Genesis titles as well so now Nintendo really has to push their own system's games. I'd love to see Nintendo release a risky new game, ala GTA 3, and take the world by storm. Hey, we could see Grand Theft Auto: Mushroom Kingdom. Imagine the possibilities.
I will still keep my stance in waiting until next summer (6 months after all are released) before buying any next gen console. Right now they are just launch titles, save for the 360, so it's impossible to compare the two. Hype can do a lot for a system, especially with the Wii on a Nintendo website. We need to wait and see on what they will actually put out.
Zink
Smash Champion
Along with the new Red Steel franchise there was also Excite Truck and Day of Disaster.
ANyway, I think I see what you mean- they have all these new features and then they use Mario or Zelda or DK to show them off instead of a new franchise. Well, I think they did that because they want to ensure people bought the game- i.e., it's not just a tilt game, it's a KIRBY tilt game. To draw more people in. But I think they will branch out more now. Although I do anticipate a second Wii Zelda arriving around Year 3 or Year 4, taking more advantage of the controller.
ANyway, I think I see what you mean- they have all these new features and then they use Mario or Zelda or DK to show them off instead of a new franchise. Well, I think they did that because they want to ensure people bought the game- i.e., it's not just a tilt game, it's a KIRBY tilt game. To draw more people in. But I think they will branch out more now. Although I do anticipate a second Wii Zelda arriving around Year 3 or Year 4, taking more advantage of the controller.
RaptorHawk
Smash Ace
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 787
This will only affect 360 at the end of this war since they are the ones relying on technology. Wii is already behind in technology, but thats not why its being bought so this will have little affect on it.Crimson King said:
Nintendo is doing both. Which is the smarter decision. They are releasing new franchises, but if those fail they have the old ones to hold them up. If sonys new franchises fail. Then basically so do they.Crimson King said:
Uh.....the gamcubes worldwide sales are only a few million short of xbox so I wouldn't exactly say it died.Crimson King said:
zarbityugi
Smash Cadet
This makes me happy in ways I can't understand.Zook said:
SMASH MOVIE
MS vs. Nin. It seems all the points have been covered, so there isn't much to say except CLICK THAT LINK. Great movie, doesn't show much gameplay but what you do get to see makes up for it. Quality > quantity.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
4 million is substantial. That's how big my state's population.
GCN didn't do nearly as well as it would have if they would have targetted a wider audience.
GCN didn't do nearly as well as it would have if they would have targetted a wider audience.
kaid
Smash Master
Crimson king, take it to the OLD console debates. This is for Wii, 360 and PS3, not GCN.
RaptorHawk
Smash Ace
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 787
Yea I know, but it's not enough to say the system died. Nintendo still made more money than Microsoft in the end. And 4 million is nothing compared to the 80 some million Sony had over both.
Pogiforce-14
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38
That comment about Genesis titles forthe 360? I saw some E3 videos of someone playing Wii, and they were able to play Genesis titles on that. In fact they popped into Mario 64 for about oh, 5 seconds, then changed their mind and started playing Sonic the Hedgehog. The Original Sonic the HEdgehog.
I also agree with raptor hawk about them doing both. sure, the Wii is starting with established franchises, but they're already innovating the system. The idea is to tread the water, not jump right in. Too much innovation at once scares people off. At any rate they still hve Red Steel as a start, and I doubt it will finish with Red Steel. And on a tangent involving this, there are a LOT of retro gamers out there. Nintendo realizes this. Which is why Nintendo released old NES games for the GBA, and why they're making their entire game library from 64 back downloadable, as well as why they are revamping classic titles, and why they hold onto well established franchises. Sure, they have new, they have fresh, but they make sure they have what's needed to appease that retro gamer. Heck, Nintendo could probably make a living from the retro gamer fanbase alone. The reverse downloadability certainly has caught everyone's attention.
I also feel that PS3 is going to fizzle out. Blu-ray is the gimmick here, not the Wii-mote. It's designed to appeal to the tech heads who think stronger hardware means better software, even though reality says that better hardware doesn't necessarily make the software is better, and better video and sound doesn't mean a better game. Audio and Video aren't the all powerful factors people act lke it is. I repeat a comment I made elsewhere how to me, DK in SSB looked like a sack of potatoes and yet i still found much enjoyment in the game.A similar comment, how realistic the fur, grass and waterlooked in Star Fox Adventures and looking through all the complaining people do about Star Fox, even I must admit that game was pretty bad. Blue -Ray won't take a pity poor game and suddenly turn it into God on Earth. It's not a miracle worker. It's competition for HD DVD. In fact that may be why PS3 has it: Sony still wants to try to turn a video game system into a multimedia system. They sold TVs and VCRs long before they sold Video Games. So while Sony is busy investing in movies on the Playstation (as if not every family in the U.S. doesn't have two or three DVD players by now) their system get's jacked up in price and the game library is boring enough to make people yawn. Blue-ray is not Sony trying to make the games better. It's them taking a really unnecessary risk that doesn't promise much to anyone who isn't swamped in techno lingo.
I also agree with raptor hawk about them doing both. sure, the Wii is starting with established franchises, but they're already innovating the system. The idea is to tread the water, not jump right in. Too much innovation at once scares people off. At any rate they still hve Red Steel as a start, and I doubt it will finish with Red Steel. And on a tangent involving this, there are a LOT of retro gamers out there. Nintendo realizes this. Which is why Nintendo released old NES games for the GBA, and why they're making their entire game library from 64 back downloadable, as well as why they are revamping classic titles, and why they hold onto well established franchises. Sure, they have new, they have fresh, but they make sure they have what's needed to appease that retro gamer. Heck, Nintendo could probably make a living from the retro gamer fanbase alone. The reverse downloadability certainly has caught everyone's attention.
I also feel that PS3 is going to fizzle out. Blu-ray is the gimmick here, not the Wii-mote. It's designed to appeal to the tech heads who think stronger hardware means better software, even though reality says that better hardware doesn't necessarily make the software is better, and better video and sound doesn't mean a better game. Audio and Video aren't the all powerful factors people act lke it is. I repeat a comment I made elsewhere how to me, DK in SSB looked like a sack of potatoes and yet i still found much enjoyment in the game.A similar comment, how realistic the fur, grass and waterlooked in Star Fox Adventures and looking through all the complaining people do about Star Fox, even I must admit that game was pretty bad. Blue -Ray won't take a pity poor game and suddenly turn it into God on Earth. It's not a miracle worker. It's competition for HD DVD. In fact that may be why PS3 has it: Sony still wants to try to turn a video game system into a multimedia system. They sold TVs and VCRs long before they sold Video Games. So while Sony is busy investing in movies on the Playstation (as if not every family in the U.S. doesn't have two or three DVD players by now) their system get's jacked up in price and the game library is boring enough to make people yawn. Blue-ray is not Sony trying to make the games better. It's them taking a really unnecessary risk that doesn't promise much to anyone who isn't swamped in techno lingo.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
That's where you are incorrect. Blu-Ray and HD DVDs are the future of formats. This started when HD TV started becoming so popular that whole channels were made just for them. Hi-Def is going to help bring video games to that real life attribute to games that blurs the space. Yes it is graphical, but play a 360 on a HD TV then play it on a regular TV and you'll notice the difference. It enhances the gaming experience, it doesn't change the games. Today most people will not be entertained for hours on end with a game that looks like it was on the Atari. Graphics are becoming apart of the total experience, however sad, it is the truth.
The GCN substancial loss is alot. They did not make more than Microsoft by any stretch of the imagination, so I don't know where you got that number from. Microsoft outsold them by 4 million units (around Christmas at least) which translates to roughly $6 million that Nintendo didn't make. Add to the fact that the GCN was less than the XBox by $50, that's $50 Nintendo didn't make. On top of that, that 4 million less gamers to sell their games to. Plus it's simple mathematics that if you sell more of product A which plays dependent A at a higher price than Product B then it will logically make more sense that you will make more money off Product A overall.
The GCN substancial loss is alot. They did not make more than Microsoft by any stretch of the imagination, so I don't know where you got that number from. Microsoft outsold them by 4 million units (around Christmas at least) which translates to roughly $6 million that Nintendo didn't make. Add to the fact that the GCN was less than the XBox by $50, that's $50 Nintendo didn't make. On top of that, that 4 million less gamers to sell their games to. Plus it's simple mathematics that if you sell more of product A which plays dependent A at a higher price than Product B then it will logically make more sense that you will make more money off Product A overall.
Pogiforce-14
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38
I never said graphics aren't important, but they aren't the biggest factor. how good the game was to start with is more important than how pretty Blue Ray will make it. And Playstation's Library of favorable games isn't quite as expansive as Nintendo. And besides, as I have already said, there are a large number of retro gamers. they LIKE the old 8 bit, 16 bit style. All that aside, Prototype and new does not mean the future. The saying "8 tracks are the way of the future!" and the "Virtual Boy" come to mind. Also no matter how you slice it, BlueRay is just a way to make things prettier. It doesn't promise realistic graphics, that's still up to the game designers. all it promises is cleaner and crisper Audio and Video.
And Nintendo actually did make more money than Microsoft from video games. and I happen to have an article to prove it. this guy poses a very powerful arguement. it's a couple years old, but it just goes to show how much more money sense Nintendo has than Microsoft.
http://nintendo.about.com/od/editorials/a/gamestatistics.htm
And Nintendo actually did make more money than Microsoft from video games. and I happen to have an article to prove it. this guy poses a very powerful arguement. it's a couple years old, but it just goes to show how much more money sense Nintendo has than Microsoft.
http://nintendo.about.com/od/editorials/a/gamestatistics.htm
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
That's quite incorrect. BlueRay provides more STOREAGE than a typical DVD (and more than HD DVD), more storage equals bigger games, whether that space is for graphics are not.
Also, manufacturers make money off the games. You can only buy one (maybe 2) consoles during the span so they bank on people buying more games. Remember, Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation, their money sense is legendary.
Also, manufacturers make money off the games. You can only buy one (maybe 2) consoles during the span so they bank on people buying more games. Remember, Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation, their money sense is legendary.
Pogiforce-14
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38
sure, that's why they lost a billion dollars in a year on Xbox while Nintendo essentially earned what Microsoft lost. you apparently didn't read the article. I don't think microsoft is in business to give their money to Nintendo.
More storage or not, blue-rays primary purpose is to improve video and audio output. Naturally you'd need more data space for it, since data compression reduces the quality. Did you ever think of that? Besides, Playstation usually doesn't make the best of their hardware except for only a handful of games. Doesn't seem fair to charge a couple hundred extra dollars for hardware that for one, is pretty much just movie enhancement, and two, they probably will almost never make use of.
And you're right, it is about the games. so again I have to assume you didn't read the article, since the article clearly stated that Nintendo pulls more as a company than either Sony or the game division of Microsoft because they target the casual gamer. Essentially, their games are better on a grander scale because they have more than just what the Hardcore peeps like.
More storage or not, blue-rays primary purpose is to improve video and audio output. Naturally you'd need more data space for it, since data compression reduces the quality. Did you ever think of that? Besides, Playstation usually doesn't make the best of their hardware except for only a handful of games. Doesn't seem fair to charge a couple hundred extra dollars for hardware that for one, is pretty much just movie enhancement, and two, they probably will almost never make use of.
And you're right, it is about the games. so again I have to assume you didn't read the article, since the article clearly stated that Nintendo pulls more as a company than either Sony or the game division of Microsoft because they target the casual gamer. Essentially, their games are better on a grander scale because they have more than just what the Hardcore peeps like.
RaptorHawk
Smash Ace
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 787
As of Sept. 2005 microsoft has lost 4 billion dollars since the launch of xbox. So yea when it comes to profits Nintendo kicked Microsofts *** because Nintendo at least made money. All microsoft did was lose money.
xbox $ loss article
xbox $ loss article
zarbityugi
Smash Cadet
But maybe MS isn't currently playing a money game. Maybe they're trying to make a name for themselves and get a really solid fanbase, then they can charge a bit more for games/consoles because people will say "Hey, that's Microsoft. It must be good." Like people did for Nintendo. It got a really good rep after the SNES, and still has a substantial bit of pull with the name. My guess is that Microsoft realizes that they need to really get BIG in the market (not just have one really popular and well-done 'franchise') and then they can start playing the money game. Nintendo already has a 20+ -year name, so they are getting money before MS possibly takes them over.
- Status