-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Of Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft; which would the industry miss the least?
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
Forget genres. They have most of the best selling games out there. End of story.
GANGSTERKILLER
Member
The industry will miss Nintendo the least. Just look at the poor 3rd party support, and most of the available 3rd party content are ports of games you could play a year ago on PS3 and 360 (which are also less expensive).
And I can't believe that after almost a half year they still don't have one real system seller. No 3D Mario, no Zelda, no F-Zero. It is just sad.
Sony and Microsoft are getting massive support with their next-gen consoles day one. Nintendo can only dream about this.
Personally? I don't want any of them leaving the industry.
And I can't believe that after almost a half year they still don't have one real system seller. No 3D Mario, no Zelda, no F-Zero. It is just sad.
Sony and Microsoft are getting massive support with their next-gen consoles day one. Nintendo can only dream about this.
Personally? I don't want any of them leaving the industry.
SniperHunter
Banned
I agree
H_Prestige
Banned
They were making losses even at $599.
It wouldn't matter if the 360 weren't there. Nobody is buying a $600+ console.
Splash Wave
Member
Truthfully, I'd miss them all. I wouldn't miss Microsoft for their games, of course, but they've definitely elevated Nintendo and Sony.
Beer Monkey
Member
If Nintendo exits the console business (which would never happen for several years if ever) I'm sure we'll get Mario platformers, Mario Kart games, and Zelda games on Sony and Microsoft platforms. They'd do a better job of it than Sega, I suspect.
Beer Monkey
Member
They wouldn't have made losses when they started rolling out the newer revisions and kept the price at $599. Consoles get rapidly cheaper to manufacture due to improvements in fabrication, and in a monopoly there would be no pressure to reduce the price. The bottom line is most console gamers have no interest in switching to PC gaming, and that would literally be the only other choice.
Do you understand how monopolies work? Trust me, you NEVER want one. Every Microsoft fanboy should be grateful as fuck for Playstation and every Sony fanboy should love that Microsoft is in this market.
AppleSmack
Banned
I know I wouldn't miss Microsoft at all if they left.
FieryBalrog
Member
What, 25 years ago? I doubt that's really occupying the minds of third parties right now.
Developers, Publishers, Third Party. The guys who only makes games, not hardware.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
LOL he doesn't know that the more they cut the price the LESS they lost on the system, he doesn't know that the vast majority of the losses came at the 600 dollar price tag when the console cost nearly 900 to make. Do you think we should tell him?
AppleSmack
Banned
I would say we should also include consumers here.
Actually, this is probably the better answer for me personally. As long as we're talking post-Gamecube days.
BrokenEchelon
Banned
Microsoft.
Halo is past its prime, Forza is the new racing kid on the block, and Gears was never anything more than a B-Rate action movie in game form.
Halo is past its prime, Forza is the new racing kid on the block, and Gears was never anything more than a B-Rate action movie in game form.
Beer Monkey
Member
It wasn't the price cut that reduced losses, it was the more integrated design and improved fabrication.
In a monopoly the improved designs wouldn't have had reduced losses, they would have made PROFITS, as they would not have had pressure to reduce price.
Have you ever had an economics class? I've had two years of Econ and I have a business degree, but anybody with at least a basic liberal arts degree should understand this. Don't they still require Econ for most bachelor's degrees?
We are the consumers. We're important to the industry, a part of it, but it's not what the OP wanted to say, clearly.
That's why he asks our oppinion too.
That's why they are putting so many games on Wii U and 3DS, right?
Didn't know you were the whole industry
FairXchange
Member
I would have said Nintendo if you asked me 2 years ago, but in that time Nintendo have turned me into a believer to the extent that I have Platinum status in Club Nintendo and was there day 1 for 3DS, 3DS XL, and the Wii U. So I clearly am in support of Nintendo's strategy, and love their IPs.
Xbox still remains my online competitive console of choice for the obvious infrastructure reasons such as party chat, and Xbox live service bonuses. The thing is, at this point I no longer derive much of my satisfaction from online shooters like Halo or COD. I'm playing Bioshock Infinite, Luigi's Mansion, Dark Souls, etc.
I seem to be actively choosing to play games on my PS3, where I get games like The Cave, or Spec Ops, or Vanquish all from my PS Plus subscription. So in regards to a dominant platform, I must say Sony have captured my interest in the past while and given me a lot of value for my money where as I no longer really know why I spend money on Live.
I don't want to see any company leave the industry, especially Xbox. MS have done wonders for the online console space. I will say however, that I share all the same concern as many of you. The monetization of the home console space has become cumbersome, and services like Xbox live seem to be examples of how pay-walls can be to the detriment of a platform rather than adding value. Always-on is a joke to me, I live in Canada and have Bell high speed internet, and it does not stay stable and can go down when other people have to download.
Kinect only is also a major point of disconnect for me, because I never bought into the original Kinect and have noticed a sharp decline in all interest for it, seemingly validating my disinterest in the product. Yet Microsoft are willing to spend billions of dollars trying to get it to catch on, which is somewhat irritating when that money could be spent directly on the depth and breadth of games development. Sony may shows a clear commitment to games development in this regard, having released games late into the generation for a number of audiences despite commercial failings amid weakness of console game sales.
So what I'll say is I do not want or wish any player in the console space to bow out, I just think for the first time in a long time, I'm considering not buying every home console offering this generation. Or at least, not on day 1. I already have the Wii U, and am looking strongly at the PS4 as my primary gaming platform. I expect the Next Xbox to have megaton announcements, partnerships with publishers, things that make people excited in the platform. I'll give them their fair shot, but if some of these rumours make it into the final console, I may just be sitting their launch out.
Xbox still remains my online competitive console of choice for the obvious infrastructure reasons such as party chat, and Xbox live service bonuses. The thing is, at this point I no longer derive much of my satisfaction from online shooters like Halo or COD. I'm playing Bioshock Infinite, Luigi's Mansion, Dark Souls, etc.
I seem to be actively choosing to play games on my PS3, where I get games like The Cave, or Spec Ops, or Vanquish all from my PS Plus subscription. So in regards to a dominant platform, I must say Sony have captured my interest in the past while and given me a lot of value for my money where as I no longer really know why I spend money on Live.
I don't want to see any company leave the industry, especially Xbox. MS have done wonders for the online console space. I will say however, that I share all the same concern as many of you. The monetization of the home console space has become cumbersome, and services like Xbox live seem to be examples of how pay-walls can be to the detriment of a platform rather than adding value. Always-on is a joke to me, I live in Canada and have Bell high speed internet, and it does not stay stable and can go down when other people have to download.
Kinect only is also a major point of disconnect for me, because I never bought into the original Kinect and have noticed a sharp decline in all interest for it, seemingly validating my disinterest in the product. Yet Microsoft are willing to spend billions of dollars trying to get it to catch on, which is somewhat irritating when that money could be spent directly on the depth and breadth of games development. Sony may shows a clear commitment to games development in this regard, having released games late into the generation for a number of audiences despite commercial failings amid weakness of console game sales.
So what I'll say is I do not want or wish any player in the console space to bow out, I just think for the first time in a long time, I'm considering not buying every home console offering this generation. Or at least, not on day 1. I already have the Wii U, and am looking strongly at the PS4 as my primary gaming platform. I expect the Next Xbox to have megaton announcements, partnerships with publishers, things that make people excited in the platform. I'll give them their fair shot, but if some of these rumours make it into the final console, I may just be sitting their launch out.
It would be a shame if MS or Nintendo left. With Kinect and the Wii, they've brought gaming to the masses. I'm assuming once given time they will do so again.
My decision is Sony. one incompentent decision after another, and I'm still not convinced they've learnt thier lesson. Where thier exclusives are concerned, all I ever hear is narrative and story. They think cross game voice chat, and an easy to develop for console are next gen features as well.
Edit. It would be a disaster if any of the 3 leave tbh. Competition is how the industry grows, how the companies learn from thier mistakes etc.
My decision is Sony. one incompentent decision after another, and I'm still not convinced they've learnt thier lesson. Where thier exclusives are concerned, all I ever hear is narrative and story. They think cross game voice chat, and an easy to develop for console are next gen features as well.
Edit. It would be a disaster if any of the 3 leave tbh. Competition is how the industry grows, how the companies learn from thier mistakes etc.
So, in a year where MS and Sony are bringing out new machines, MS releases one exclusive of note in Gears of War, while Sony is releasing 20+ exclusives. But you choose Sony as least likely to be missed because MS "brought gaming to the masses" with Kinect. I'm sorry, but you're going to have to try harder than that.
breakfuss
Member
"Exclusives" that few will buy, and that Sony will discontinue in 6 months. People throw around that distinction too often.
thesuperfunk
Member
Microsoft for sure.
So one game (that sold a quarter of Gears 3 at launch in the UK) will be missed more than a diverse range of 20+ titles appealing to a wider range of people?
Graphical dimishing returns are why Nintendo is biding its time.
Eventually their hardware will be strong enough.
Maybe 10 years MAX until it doesnt matter.
...any they have the money to keep going loooong after that.
Sony is in the most trouble currently, good thing PS4 looks hot!
This is a really bad comparison image. The extra polygons aren't even used to render a more detailed model. Look at the buttons, the coat, the tie and hair.
All that's done here is a very low-res model is being smoothed out with added polys, this has nothing to do with the actual diminishing returns we'll see.
As a gamer do you care what people will buy, or what you'll get to play? I'd be pretty pissed if I was an xbox fan this year.
FieryBalrog
Member
It's still largely true that Microsoft is responsible for bringing console gaming out of an archaic, offline ghetto. Imagine if it was left up to Sony, or, God forbid, Nintendo.
Well so far, you have one extra game you can play that I can't. The Last of Us. You have God of War, I've just finished the latest Gears. As for the rest of the year? Well MS always announce thier Winter line up at E3. So no I'm not really pissed. Not to mention the latest 3rd party games that Xbox owners can play aswell you know.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
MS' franchises always felt so 'seasonal' to me. Like they were all temp workers for the Microsoft corporation, awaiting their termination date before being replaced.
That's not necessarily true. Even if Sony isn't racing MS for units in homes, they're still racing their previous quarterly report and investor reaction if sales slump.
There are similar qualifiers for hardware design. The sheer amount of money flooding PC chip R&D means slightly customized mainstream parts from here on out; it's simply unfeasible for a platform-holder to design their own.
There's also the question of whether Nintendo would increase power in hopes of attracting devs who want to hedge their bets, whether Valve, Matsushita, or Samsung would seriously step in, or whether the majority of the MS-focused HD devs would simply push PC as their new lead platform.
As for the question, I'm going to have to go with MS because of responses like this. It's a well-focused corporate monoculture that places no value on anything it's not currently pushing; while I like a lot of the things they push, I also like other things and I don't think it's good either artistically or financially for the console market to become PC Lite.
Great response.
I think the question is, which one of the current console manufactures could be most easily replaced by another big electronics company (Let's say Apple or Samsung for sake of argument.)
While this is subjective I think that Nintendo, being the primary innovater of the industry, would be the hardest to replace in hardware AND especially software. Even Apple would be even close to producing a Mario-type phenomenon on a console. Sony less so, but still their first party output alone make them fairly indispensible.
While, again, it's subjective: Microsoft's contribution and expected contribution to the industry is certainly smaller than Nintendo's and most would say Sony's too at least when compared to what another party could bring to the plate.
While this is subjective I think that Nintendo, being the primary innovater of the industry, would be the hardest to replace in hardware AND especially software. Even Apple would be even close to producing a Mario-type phenomenon on a console. Sony less so, but still their first party output alone make them fairly indispensible.
While, again, it's subjective: Microsoft's contribution and expected contribution to the industry is certainly smaller than Nintendo's and most would say Sony's too at least when compared to what another party could bring to the plate.
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
At this very second, possibly not, but we really have zero insight into their Durango strategy for 3rd party relations and support. Even though it was ghettoized, XBLIG was a gigantic leap ahead of anything Sony or Nintendo were doing for indies and hobbysts in terms if access and ease of use on their platforms at the time. Microsoft's probably the most conservative right at this moment, but that might not hold true after their generational shift either.
And in terms of documentation, dev environment, tools, support, etc, they're still the gold standard afaik.
Xbudz
Member
It paints the picture. If you wanna go balls deep into some 3D rendering, by all means.
I certainly did not. (nor does Nintendo until the very last minute)
H_Prestige
Banned
Dude, nobody was buying a fucking console at $599. That would not have changed if the 360 or even the Wii were not around.
I don't need to be grateful "as fuck" for any of these companies to be around. They're the ones who have to earn my dollar.