Support NeoGAF

Deguello · Feb 18, 2012

I don't think there's much chance that Sony will bow out of the console race. However, the likelihood of that is far greater than the likelihood of Nintendo bowing out.

Sony has essentially squandered an entire decade's worth of market leadership in a few years. They've pissed away the proceeds of both the PS1 and the PS2, and are in the red as far the history of their video game department is concerned, not just their whole company.

I do not foresee anybody bowing out next generation, but if we are talking about likelihoods, Sony far outpaces the other two. It's just facts and math.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
I disagree.

Here's my theory: Business-wise, what's better for Sony in the long term? Doing well for another game console generation for 6 years, or establishing dominance of the entire home video industry for far longer? They decide the latter, they say "fine, we'll put a cutting edge technology on the PS3". You stick a high-end (for its time) Blu-ray player that boosts its price to very high prices, now they have to sell it using the "posh, high-end premium hardware" angle. So that's how they play it. They stick in an exchangeable hard drive, 6 USB ports, 2 HDMI ports, SD slot cards, touch buttons, an entire PS2 inside it, etc. to really make this obvious and justify the cost. In other words, they build the rest of the PS3 around the Blu-ray play because business-wise that's where the money is. Of course, they try to sell it as a gaming-related medium, playing the whole "good storage" angle, etc. They additionally take a hit (IIRC they sold the PS3 at a $400 loss initially) and bring Blu-Ray drives into as many homes as possible.

If you believe this, a lot of their other behaviors become all the more obvious. After Blu-ray "wins" the format wars, then they focus on the PS3 as a gaming console. They strip down the console little by little, trim back on everything from the HDMI ports, USB ports, touch controls, PS2 hardware, etc., and start aggressively dropping the price as much as they can. After all, if they were trying to sell the PS3 as a high-end device in the long haul they wouldn't have made the PS3 visibly cheaper later.

Now look where they are. PS3 is in "last place", but it's hardly Dreamcast'd. The console played a big role in making Blu-Ray the established next-gen video format, and now they can use the brand to focus on other things. Using it to drive 3D, for instance, is another one of their ventures although it's not as "invasive" to the console as Blu-Ray was.

So there's my theory. I know a lot of people like to think Sony went stupid, but honestly on a business sense Sony isn't stupid. They didn't get to this point in the industry if they made stupid decisions and they most definitely didn't put Blu-Ray in the PS3 for gaming purposes. I find my theory far more plausible than "Sony derped, now they're in last place".

You do understand that Sony doesn't own Blu-ray, right? My argument is that even if what you're saying is true, I don't think Sony anticipated slipping from market dominance as much as they have. Blu-ray is an important brand, but so is Playstation. Sony gains royalties from blu-ray sales, but only a fraction.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
I disagree.

Here's my theory: Business-wise, what's better for Sony in the long term? Doing well for another game console generation for 6 years, or establishing dominance of the entire home video industry for far longer? They decide the latter, they say "fine, we'll put a cutting edge technology on the PS3". You stick a high-end (for its time) Blu-ray player that boosts its price to very high prices, now they have to sell it using the "posh, high-end premium hardware" angle. So that's how they play it. They stick in an exchangeable hard drive, 6 USB ports, 2 HDMI ports, SD slot cards, touch buttons, an entire PS2 inside it, etc. to really make this obvious and justify the cost. In other words, they build the rest of the PS3 around the Blu-ray play because business-wise that's where the money is. Of course, they try to sell it as a gaming-related medium, playing the whole "good storage" angle, etc. They additionally take a hit (IIRC they sold the PS3 at a $400 loss initially) and bring Blu-Ray drives into as many homes as possible.

If you believe this, a lot of their other behaviors become all the more obvious. After Blu-ray "wins" the format wars, then they focus on the PS3 as a gaming console. They strip down the console little by little, trim back on everything from the HDMI ports, USB ports, touch controls, PS2 hardware, etc., and start aggressively dropping the price as much as they can. After all, if they were trying to sell the PS3 as a high-end device in the long haul they wouldn't have made the PS3 visibly cheaper later.

Now look where they are. PS3 is in "last place", but it's hardly Dreamcast'd. The console played a big role in making Blu-Ray the established next-gen video format, and now they can use the brand to focus on other things. Using it to drive 3D, for instance, is another one of their ventures although it's not as "invasive" to the console as Blu-Ray was.

So there's my theory. I know a lot of people like to think Sony went stupid, but honestly on a business sense Sony isn't stupid. They didn't get to this point in the industry if they made stupid decisions and they most definitely didn't put Blu-Ray in the PS3 for gaming purposes. I find my theory far more plausible than "Sony derped, now they're in last place".

Sony definitely went stupid.
Their marketing for most of the PS3's life and all of the PSP's life was horrendous.
It appealed to NO ONE.
Their software support on the PSP was basically non-existant as far as big titles go. The PS3 was far too hard to program for, and with no good reason.

They won in the fact that they pushed their BluRay agenda, but is that really winning?
They're still losing millions (billions?) and streaming movies is becoming larger each month.

EatinOlives · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
You do understand that Sony doesn't own Blu-ray, right? My argument is that even if what you're saying is true, I don't think Sony anticipated slipping from market dominance as much as they have. Blu-ray is an important brand, but so is Playstation. Sony gains royalties from blu-ray sales, but only a fraction.

Like you said, they still get royalties. Again, what do you think brings them more money in the long run: a good console generation, or Blu-ray royalties from the entire home video industry?

Remember that Sony's a very, very large corporation. Their strategic actions of one division aren't always done solely to benefit that division, and if we look at the PS3 from a tunnel-vision perspective of only gaming, it makes simply no sense. And it makes no sense to accept that perspective and insist that Sony just "derped". Building the PS3 around Blu-Ray to secure dominance of that format in the home video industry, once more, sounds more plausible than Sony just seemingly fucking up because they wanted a nice-looking console. That just makes no sense.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
Like you said, they still get royalties. Again, what do you think brings them more money in the long run: a good console generation, or Blu-ray royalties from the entire home video industry?

A healthy playstation brand, without question. They don't own Blu-ray! It was a joint venture with something like a dozen companies iirc.

Also, while I think there's merit to the claim that sony isn't completely idiotic on the basis that they're a massive corporation, they've obviously been doing something wrong for the better part of the last decade. The company is currently in the toilet.

EatinOlives said:
Building the PS3 around Blu-Ray to secure dominance of that format in the home video industry, once more, sounds more plausible than Sony just seemingly fucking up because they wanted a nice-looking console. That just makes no sense.

It makes sense if you think back to the tenor of the industry back in 2006. Everyone thought the playstation brand was invincible. Even with $599 US DOLLARS on the table, people thought PS3 would eventually dominate its competitors, including Sony. Practically NO ONE predicted the decline the playstation brand.

EatinOlives · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
A healthy playstation brand, without question. They don't own Blu-ray! It was a joint venture with something like a dozen companies iirc.

Also, while I think there's merit to the claim that sony isn't completely idiotic on the basis that they're a massive corporation, they've obviously been doing something wrong for the better part of the last decade. The company is currently in the toilet.

Methinks you don't know how much money an established storage format brings in. It's just a leetle more than "winning" a console generation. Not owning Blu-Ray doesn't nullify that. The royalties are still a better return in the long term.

guek said:
It makes sense if you think back to the tenor of the industry back in 2006. Everyone thought the playstation brand was invincible. Even with $599 US DOLLARS on the table, people thought PS3 would eventually dominate its competitors, including Sony. Practically NO ONE predicted the decline the playstation brand.

You don't see how that momentum could've very well been used to further the Blu-Ray format in its stead? Really?

At any rate, that's my theory. You guys can believe your "Sony's stupid, let's all point and laugh" theory, I'll believe mine.

Hiltz · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
I wonder when the Wii is finally going to hit $99. I'm surprised it's still at $150, though it does come packaged with NSMBWii. I wonder if they'd be making a loss at $99...

Wii sales are not so hot these days but the platform did slightly outsell the PS3 for 5 months in 2011 (Jan,Feb,May,July, and December) and apparently tied sales in one month and another month PS3 won by just 3K more units. January 2012 sales were pretty bad. 360 sold more than the Wii and PS3 combined.With a significant lack of Wii software in 2011 and again this year (based on what we know so far), Nintendo may end up doing another price cut before the holiday season.

snesfreak · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
It makes sense if you think back to the tenor of the industry back in 2006. Everyone thought the playstation brand was invincible. Even with $599 US DOLLARS on the table, people thought PS3 would eventually dominate its competitors, including Sony. Practically NO ONE predicted the decline the playstation brand.

I did, but I wasn't on GAF at the time.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
Methinks you don't know how much money an established storage format brings in. It's just a leetle more than "winning" a console generation. Not owning Blu-Ray doesn't nullify that. The royalties are still a better return in the long term.

At any rate, that's my theory. You guys can believe your "Sony's stupid, let's all point and laugh" theory, I'll believe mine.

Obviously not enough...

Hiltz said:
Wii sales are not so hot these days but the platform did slightly outsell the PS3 for 5 months in 2011 (Jan,Feb,May,July, and December) and apparently tied sales in one month and another month PS3 won by just 3K more units. January 2012 sales were pretty bad. 360 sold more than the Wii and PS3 combined.With a significant lack of Wii software in 2011 and again this year (based on what we know so far), Nintendo may end up doing another price cut before the holiday season.

It'll be $99 by the end of the summer. No question.

Shin Johnpv · Feb 18, 2012

-Pyromaniac- said:
No, the vita is showing the only option to stay in the handheld game. What else can they do? Release a device similar to the 3DS at a lower cost (than the vita currently is)? And what? Get fucking devoured by the 3DS. Release a lower cost device, maybe something not so traditional, and then what? Get devoured by smartphones/3DS again. The Vita, contrary to what people realize, is pretty much their only option. It's their only differentiator. It's the best option. The fact that it happens to be the best option isn't a testament to Sony making poor decisions, it's a testament to the state of handheld gaming.

And price drop being a moderate help? What planet have you been on lately. The price drop + the revamped marketing campaign that came with it propelled the console into its rebound. They've outsold the 360 every year since then haven't they? Save the latest year I believe.

But back to the Vita. Sony had 2 options, release a device like that and RISK failing in the handheld market, but also a chance to appeal to the west. Or, release a device along the lines of other handhelds like the 3DS and ipod touch and then what? Get devoured by those because there'd be no reason to get the Sony one. Or the final option, not release a handheld system at all....not easy.

Or they could have made a moderate priced handheld that stood out because of the software it offered. Games are still king. The DS didn't beat the PSP because it was cheaper, it won because of games. Set yourself apart through what people can play on your system.

Instro · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
Methinks you don't know how much money an established storage format brings in. It's just a leetle more than "winning" a console generation. Not owning Blu-Ray doesn't nullify that. The royalties are still a better return in the long term.

Sony makes next to nothing from Blu-ray royalties.

Rösti · Feb 18, 2012

-Pyromaniac- said:
I'm utterly blown away that people are doubting a next playstation lol. Jeebus christ.

Considering the current status of Sony's economy, it's kinda difficult to discuss any potential next generation plans of Mr. Ridge Racer & Co in a somewhat sensible way. Either you have a normal profit model as base, where gross operating rates will however be a common denominator; or we could see Sony go the same route as with PS3 and detail a model with high R & D expenditures. The latter I doubt however, as Sony probably is seeking to improve its creditworthiness and there could be problems for it to withstand major market movements during development and close after launch of a system of the same caliber as PS3. I don't doubt they will create a new system though, but I understand why some people have doubt. Personally I think it could be wise for Sony Computer Entertainment to overlook its current strategy regarding path dependency; they ran a great course between between 1994-2005 (excluding Cell Broadband Engine development).

As for the Wii U there's not much to say at the moment. I'm expecting a firm reply from Jerald Nagae next week regarding the Wii U trademark issues. He will be back in office on Monday. I'm also contemplating digging some in Panasonic's potential involvement in the making of the Wii U discs. I theorized previously in this thread that the discs for Wii could be based on the ADA discs from Panasonic, as the format (120mm) correlates to what Nintendo mentioned at E3 2011, and max data transfer speed (144 Mbps) is appropriate for next generation: http://panasonic.net/avc/media/ada/lineup.html

Panasonic has been Nintendo's closest partner regarding media discs for Gamecube and Wii, for those that didn't know.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
Methinks you don't know how much money an established storage format brings in. It's just a leetle more than "winning" a console generation. Not owning Blu-Ray doesn't nullify that. The royalties are still a better return in the long term.

Well obviously either I'm underestimating or you're overestimating. Until someone brings up actual numbers, I think you can put your overconfidence aside. I will say though that my stance is based on the fact that sony is continually hemorrhaging money, so clearly a partial stake in Blu-ray isn't miraculously saving them at the moment.

EatinOlives said:
You don't see how that momentum could've very well been used to further the Blu-Ray format in its stead? Really?

Read my comments. I said I think it's possible, just not to the extent that Sony anticipated. I find the idea that this is exactly how sony planned things to happen quite implausible.

EatinOlives said:
At any rate, that's my theory. You guys can believe your "Sony's stupid, let's all point and laugh" theory, I'll believe mine.

Misrepresenting and belittling another person's argument is going to do you any favors. It just makes you come across as childish. There's a huge difference between saying "durr, sony is stoopid," and claiming that a large tech company that's been losing billions of dollars annually may have made some missteps.

TunaLover · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
The company is currently in the toilet.

Panasonic and Sharp are in worst position than Sony, and I think they have chances of turning things around. It's really mindblowing than companies with that huge holes still can survive, but it seems they can.

Heck, I think that Sony can afford a Vita bomb too *sigh* =/

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

TunaLover said:
Panasonic and Sharp are in worst position than Sony, and I think they have chances of turning things around. It's really mindblowing than companies with that huge holes still can survive, but it seems they can.

Too big to fail, basically.
Despite getting a new, lower, credit rating, they can still borrow a lot of money, and have a ton of investors.
But they also have an insane amount of debt. Something Nintendo will never have (as long as people like Yamauchi and Iwata run it).

Sadist · Feb 18, 2012

Is it known which company will make the Wii U discs?

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

Sadist said:
Is it known which company will make the Wii U discs?

As Rosti said, it's likely Panasonic, as they've been doing it for Nintendo for a while now.

AzaK · Feb 18, 2012

Billychu said:
If they did that then developers can't actually use the subscreen. Playing on the controller is cool, but this would seriously limit design.

I'm not so sure though. I understand this is a dangerous area to get into; controlling what devs can and can't do and I wouldn't expect Nintendo to enter into that lightly.

I guess what I was trying to communicate is that if the majority of games end up requiring dual screen play, that will severely limit the advantage of being able to play while someone uses the telly; something Nintendo is promoting in their videos. The "telly off play" feature can be made more practical if devs are encouraged (Rather strongly) to allow players to play with both.

If Nintendo says "do what you want", I'm sure devs will be throwing HUDS only on that Subscreen and not bothering to implement a "put hud and game on subscreen" mode. That would be something I would find disappointing.

Shin Johnpv · Feb 18, 2012

EatinOlives said:
Methinks you don't know how much money an established storage format brings in. It's just a leetle more than "winning" a console generation. Not owning Blu-Ray doesn't nullify that. The royalties are still a better return in the long term.

Sony shares what little is made off licencing of bluray with 17 companies. Besides the fact that of the 17 companies Sony doesn't even own the most patents or largest "share" of it, that would go to Panasonic.

The best info I can find about what is paid per disc, shows about 20 cents of each disc sold going to patents. With the majority of that going to Panasonic, on a HIGH estimate, Sony is only making a couple cents per bluray sold. The other per disc cost, that again goes to all of the BR group is 4 cents per disc. From what I remember of an older Forbes article they make about 7 - 10 DOLLARS per PS3 game sold.

So even if they made HALF of the patents fee on Bluray, 100x as many blurays as PS3 games would need to be sold, just for them to MATCH what they make off game sales.

Having a first place console that sold a ton of software would make them more money, than what bluray will make in that time period. Maybe if Bluray lasts 30 years it might be different, but I don't know if it will.

*edit*

If some one can find better sources or better amounts go right ahead. Those where the best values I could find.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

Shin Johnpv said:
Sony shares what little is made off licencing of bluray with 17 companies. Besides the fact that of the 17 companies Sony doesn't even own the most patents or largest "share" of it, that would go to Panasonic.

The best info I can find about what is paid per disc, shows about 20 cents of each disc sold going to patents. With the majority of that going to Panasonic, on a HIGH estimate, Sony is only making a couple cents per bluray sold. The other per disc cost, that again goes to all of the BR group is 4 cents per disc. From what I remember of an older Forbes article they make about 7 - 10 DOLLARS per PS3 game sold.

So even if they made HALF of the patents fee on Bluray, 100x as many blurays as PS3 games would need to be sold, just for them to MATCH what they make off game sales.

Having a first place console that sold a ton of software would make them more money, than what bluray will make in that time period. Maybe if Bluray lasts 30 years it might be different, but I don't know if it will.

*edit*

If some one can find better sources or better amounts go right ahead. Those where the best values I could find.

Thanks for chiming in with actual numbers. It always annoys me when actual data exists that could prove or disprove an argument that isn't brought up. I was too lazy to search for it myself though >_<

antonz · Feb 18, 2012

Shin Johnpv said:
Sony shares what little is made off licencing of bluray with 17 companies. Besides the fact that of the 17 companies Sony doesn't even own the most patents or largest "share" of it, that would go to Panasonic.

The best info I can find about what is paid per disc, shows about 20 cents of each disc sold going to patents. With the majority of that going to Panasonic, on a HIGH estimate, Sony is only making a couple cents per bluray sold. The other per disc cost, that again goes to all of the BR group is 4 cents per disc. From what I remember of an older Forbes article they make about 7 - 10 DOLLARS per PS3 game sold.

So even if they made HALF of the patents fee on Bluray, 100x as many blurays as PS3 games would need to be sold, just for them to MATCH what they make off game sales.

Having a first place console that sold a ton of software would make them more money, than what bluray will make in that time period. Maybe if Bluray lasts 30 years it might be different, but I don't know if it will.

*edit*

If some one can find better sources or better amounts go right ahead. Those where the best values I could find.

Your numbers seem pretty accurate to what I recall. Would take something like 75 billion Blu Ray discs sold just to make back close to the amount of money the PS3 lost the company. Of course players and stuff net them more money but the general idea is as you say Blu Ray will never make up for what it cost sony.

HylianTom · Feb 18, 2012

Conor 419 said:
You'd think come next gen, Sony will sit back a bit. You would imagine that they'll produce a moderately powerful system which is competitive but does nothing special technically. It'd have similar control schemes to the other two, and on top of this it'll have a a nice innovative feature which is central to the system. This would all be backed by a good, solid and modern service. This console would act as an intermediate while they get back on their feet and it'd be open to lots of room for upgrade with subsequent redesigns.

Instead, what will we see? They're probably going to (again) build the most ridiculously powerful system that they possibly can, charge about four and a half grand for it, it'll launch with a new Killzone game which scores 58 on Metacritic and PSN will go down on launch day.

Get it together Sony.

I'll say it aloud: I'd rather Sony not get it together and Nintendo end-up having Japan essentially to themselves.

After all the shit they and their fans have flung over the past decade-and-a-half.. yes.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

HylianTom said:
I'll say it aloud: I'd rather Sony not get it together and Nintendo have Japan essentially to themselves.

Well, that looks to be the case, either way.
The 3DS will become the dominate system in Japan unless Sony does something drastic.
And I don't mean a price cut.
They need games. Big games. Lots of them. Now.

snesfreak · Feb 18, 2012

HylianTom said:
I'll say it aloud: I'd rather Sony not get it together and Nintendo end-up having Japan essentially to themselves.

After all the shit they and their fans have flung over the past decade-and-a-half.. yes.

Yep, I liked Sony better when the only game hardware they made was the SPC700.

blu · Feb 18, 2012

HylianTom said:
I'll say it aloud: I'd rather Sony not get it together and Nintendo end-up having Japan essentially to themselves.

After all the shit they and their fans have flung over the past decade-and-a-half.. yes.

Petty fanwars cannot be a good reason for anybody to wish Sony's exit from the console market. For a healthy market you need variety. Nintendo might be the strongest consoles company with the best track record in the industry but they alone cannot make sure the market stays healthy - nobody is immune to mistakes. For everybody's sake, I hope Sony pulls it together.

Roo · Feb 18, 2012

^ It's a shame Panasonic, Sanyo and LG quitted the videogame industry
after the Real 3DO fiasco

and the same goes to Sega

Lord Ghirahim · Feb 18, 2012

blu said:
Petty fanwars cannot be a good reason for anybody to wish Sony's exit from the console market. For a healthy market you need variety. Nintendo might be the strongest consoles company with the best track record in the industry but they alone cannot make sure the market stays healthy - nobody is immune to mistakes. For everybody's sake, I hope Sony pulls it together.

But I want Sega back.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

If I could make a single fanboy wish right now, I wish Nintendo and Apple would strike up a major partnership. The Wii U would be the exclusive console outlet for the app store, itunes, the whole shebang. Apple would get their own dedicated channel with which they could do whatever they want. All app and itunes store based content management would be handled solely by Apple. Nintendo would just skim a small fraction off the top and benefit greatly from the apple brand.

And I say this as someone who actively dislike's Apple and avoids their products.

snesfreak · Feb 18, 2012

Lord Ghirahim said:
But I want Sega back.

I'd take Sega over Sony any day.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
If I could make a single fanboy wish right now, I wish Nintendo and Apple would strike up a major partnership. The Wii U would be the exclusive console outlet for the app store, itunes, the whole shebang. Apple would get their own dedicated channel with which they could do whatever they want. All app and itunes store based content management would be handled solely by Apple. Nintendo would just skim a small fraction off the top and benefit greatly from the apple brand.

And I say this as someone who actively dislike's Apple and avoids their products.

Bleh, no thanks.
And that's as someone that likes both.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

AceBandage said:
Bleh, no thanks.
And that's as someone that likes both.

Why not? I think it could definitely benefit both companies. Apple of course would never agree to it unless the Wii U was fully integrated into their product line. I mean cross interactivity between multiple apple products.

herzogzwei1989 · Feb 18, 2012

One game I absolutely want on Wii U is Tokyo Wars

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

guek said:
Why not? I think it could definitely benefit both companies. Apple of course would never agree to it unless the Wii U was fully integrated into their product line. I mean cross interactivity between multiple apple products.

Because Apple's philosophy completely clashes with Nintendo's.
Apple basically allows for anything and everything on their system which leads to a bombardment of crap from all directions.

Cookychan · Feb 18, 2012

Whenever someone brings up the topic of Apple re-entering the gaming industry, I like to bring up the Pippin.

guek · Feb 18, 2012

AceBandage said:
Because Apple's philosophy completely clashes with Nintendo's.
Apple basically allows for anything and everything on their system which leads to a bombardment of crap from all directions.

But all that would be relegated solely to the apple channel. It wouldn't permeate into any of the other content.

Of course it might bring up conflicts regarding whether Wii U eShop games can be cross published on the app store.

Doc Holliday · Feb 18, 2012

Cookychan said:
Whenever someone brings up the topic of Apple re-entering the gaming industry, I like to bring up the Pippin.

Hey apple also released the newton before releasing the ipad. Just saying

Cookychan · Feb 18, 2012

Doc Holliday said:
Hey apple also released the newton before releasing the ipad. Just saying

The iPad and the Newton were two (arguably) different things.
But the Newton did set foundations.

I still don't see how they could make a good Pippin though.

Alrix · Feb 18, 2012

HylianTom said:
I'll say it aloud: I'd rather Sony not get it together and Nintendo end-up having Japan essentially to themselves.

After all the shit they and their fans have flung over the past decade-and-a-half.. yes.

I just hope that the Wii U lives up to its potential as a valid hardcore gamer console. If that means that next gen will be a Wii U/Xbox720 gen whereas this was a 360/PS3 gen, then so be it.

Cookychan · Feb 18, 2012

I love how with the PS2 some Sony fans spouted "POWER DOESN'T MATTER!!1!!2" but as soon as the PS3 was shown, they changed their tune.

Pick one, bitch.

But, if anything, I too would like to see the PS brand crumble.

fabricated backlash · Feb 18, 2012

AceBandage said:
Because Apple's philosophy completely clashes with Nintendo's.
Apple basically allows for anything and everything on their system which leads to a bombardment of crap from all directions.

WiiWare, DSiWare, and loads of shovelware on both DS and Wii say hello.

The Nintendo quality control has always been an illusion. Getting the crap is simply a sign of popularity.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

boris feinbrand said:
WiiWare, DSiWare, and loads of shovelware on both DS and Wii say hello.

The Nintendo quality control has always been an illusion. Getting the crap is simply a sign of popularity.

Not even close to the same thing, though.
With Nintendo's services, they have to go through a process and approval.
With the App Store you can just make anything and throw it up instantly.

Cookychan · Feb 18, 2012

AceBandage said:
Not even close to the same thing, though.
With Nintendo's services, they have to go through a process and approval.
With the App Store you can just make anything and throw it up instantly.

Like the Baby Shaker fiasco in 2008? Or 09 was it?

TheExplodingHead · Feb 18, 2012

Alrix said:
I just hope that the Wii U lives up to its potential as a valid hardcore gamer console. If that means that next gen will be a Wii U/Xbox720 gen whereas this was a 360/PS3 gen, then so be it.

But the Wii was every bit a "hardcore gamer console". Only thing it really lacked was aggressive hardware and dedicated online, which I hardly associate with being "hardcore", more like "trendy" or "hip".

Deguello · Feb 18, 2012

AceBandage said:
Not even close to the same thing, though.
With Nintendo's services, they have to go through a process and approval.
With the App Store you can just make anything and throw it up instantly.

Even if it's not yours to begin with apparently.

AceBandage · Feb 18, 2012

Cookychan said:
Like the Baby Shaker fiasco in 2008? Or 09 was it?

2009

Deguello said:
Even if it's not yours to begin with apparently.

Exactly.

Ikael · Feb 18, 2012

Apple and Nintendo are some of the most similar companies that I have ever seen. And I am not even jocking. Their strategy and corporative philosophy regarding business strategy is eerily similar, believe it or not.

blu · Feb 18, 2012

herzogzwei1989 said:
One game I absolutely want on Wii U is Tokyo Wars

Do you happen to have authentic screenshots?

HylianTom · Feb 18, 2012

blu said:
Petty fanwars cannot be a good reason for anybody to wish Sony's exit from the console market. For a healthy market you need variety. Nintendo might be the strongest consoles company with the best track record in the industry but they alone cannot make sure the market stays healthy - nobody is immune to mistakes. For everybody's sake, I hope Sony pulls it together.

To be clear, my reasons for wishing Sony away aren't just "petty fanwar" reasons, although I do admit I can hold one hell of a grudge.

With Sony gone, Nintendo's chances of long-term survival increase. That's as simply as I can state it.

And a "healthy" market or industry doesn't strike any of my emotional chords. Lately, I find it really really difficult to find any pity for those poor, poor third parties.
That, and there will always be Microsoft providing competition - at least in the West. That is, unless they no longer find their dabbling in the gaming industry to be useful for moving towards their long-term (non-gaming) goals.

Coolwhip · Feb 18, 2012

Do we have a countdown to Nintendo's press conference at E3 yet?

Gamer @ Heart · Feb 18, 2012

Ikael said:
Apple and Nintendo are some of the most similar companies that I have ever seen. And I am not even jocking. Their strategy and corporative philosophy regarding business strategy is eerily similar, believe it or not.

Expanding the traditional audience for their products and being innovative yet accessible is a pretty broad corporate philosophy. That said, they are both much more successful at it than their competitors so they really do seem more similar.

Support NeoGAF

Wii U Speculation Thread 2: Can't take anymore of this!!!

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Rösti

Unconfirmed Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

SPOILER: Columbus finds America

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.

Banned

Banned

Member

Similar threads