Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
I don't know about the industry, but personally, I'd miss Microsoft the least.
Competitive shooter lovers would miss microsoft the most.
Nintendo is the only company so far to actively lose out on third party games. That's already the industry not caring.Microsoft, easily. EASILY. There is no argument here, lol.
I will say it not because of their shitty always online thought process, but because of their weak ass first party output and horrible XBL justifications.Everyone is going to say Xbox, especially with the rumors of the nextbox.
This isn't true. These consoles wouldn't have anywhere near the level of online features and connectivity if not for Microsoft pushing Xbox Live so hard, basically bringing lots of PC online features to consoles. That was a huge contribution to the console market. Losing Nintendo would hurt Nintendo. Third parties are almost non-existent on their platform, so the overall industry impact, which is what the OP asks, would be minimal.
Yeah, that's the only thing I really value about Microsoft at this point. Their online infrastructure is clearly superior to Sony's and Nintendo's. I'm hoping that gap will narrow with the PS4, though.Hard to answer this question without coming across as a fanboy/hater, but it has to be Microsoft...
The strides they took in network infrastructure and such are certainly worth lauding, however. In truth, all three companies have found their niches, so they'd all be missed a great deal. But overall Sony and Microsoft cross over the most, and Sony is doing far more for software development than Microsoft.
They're out there, but even they have their limits. That's why I couldn't believe The Crusty Juggler earlier when they said they weren't phased by all the Durango rumors, lol.There is no such thing as microsoft faithful. I dont believe it at all. The always online thread is pretty much proof of that.
The only thing my 360 provided me this gen that I don't feel I could have gotten elsewhere is a proper version of Bayonetta, so definitely MS for me. For the industry, I would say Nintendo since they have the least impact from a third party perspective, but I feel like they usher in new generations of gamers with IPs like Pokemon, Mario, etc.
but the MS faithful is like you and one other guy on here
Yup that's all Sony does. Pack it up fellas.
The strongest case that can be made for Nintendo is that diversity is good. Removing them for the equation and keeping two companies that offer experiences so similar that they were referred to as "twins" for the generation wouldn't really offer much.
This is funny. Any time I say something positive or side with Microsoft in a discussion, I'm labeled a MS fan. Any time something positive about Sony, I'm a Playstation fanboy. This unheard of behavior, praising two competing companies, might cause a rift in the space-time continuum.
There is no such thing as microsoft faithful. I dont believe it at all. The always online thread is pretty much proof of that.
Nintendo is the only company so far to actively lose out on third party games. That's already the industry not caring.
I don't hate MS. The 360 has my favorite library this generation.If all you play is Nintendo, or strictly retail games then I can see how you'd hold that opinion, but truth be told xbla is unbelievably diverse.
Anyway isn't this thread who the 'Industry' would miss, and not 'what console maker do you hate'?
The OP uses examples such as God of War and Uncharted as "classic franchises." While Halo, Fable and Forza are just merely IP despite being as old or older and more successful then some of the examples the OP gave. Lets not pretend this list war was being honest from the beginning.
Just because they remain, doesn't take away from the fact the industry ignores them.This only strengthens my argument. The third party ship sailed a loooong time ago circa '96. And, still, they've remained (and thrived). Which of the other two could do this?
If all you play is Nintendo, or strictly retail games then I can see how you'd hold that opinion, but truth be told xbla is unbelievably diverse.
Anyway isn't this thread who the 'Industry' would miss, and not 'what console maker do you hate'?
I don't hate MS. The 360 has my favorite library this generation.
MS could disappear from the console industry and nobody would really care, though.
I don't hate MS. The 360 has my favorite library this generation.
MS could disappear from the console industry and nobody would really care, though.
Yes, because the customers that buy games on a Microsoft platform would be too struck with grief to move onto a Sony platform.I'm pretty sure dev and pubs would care, seeing how many copies of games are sold on that platform.
I assume the OP means in terms of a home console hardware manufacturer. If this is the case I believe that Nintendo would be the least missed from the console hardware space.
To me Nintendo has always been about their IPs and not about the innovation in the hardware console space. Nintendo could do great as a Third Party Software Dev/Publisher while dominating the Handheld market.
However, if the OP is referring which of the big 3 would be least missed entirely from the industry then I would have to say Microsoft. Although, they have brought a lot of innovation into the industry I don't believe they have a portfolio which has diverse as the other two.
The industry would miss Microsoft the most.
Gamers would miss Microsoft the least.
Similar experiences... a.k.a. third parties.The strongest case that can be made for Nintendo is that diversity is good. Removing them for the equation and keeping two companies that offer experiences so similar that they were referred to as "twins" for the generation wouldn't really offer much.