Support NeoGAF

[CriterionDog]

I know Microsoft has a ginormous fanbase, but for some reason, I see them going out first. I see Nintendo always going strong, just because of how well they managed with the Wii, and 3DS, along with their charming and iconic brands. Sony may have struggled greatly with the PS3 (rough start), and PSP (at least in the end?) and possibly the Vita (sales), they seem to still go on. As for Microsoft, I'm not to sure.

 

[Previous]

Sony as a whole is not doing well money wise recently, but at the same time it is such a large company they would need to be in some very serious shit before they decided to yank one of their biggest brand names (PlayStation).
Even in the worst case scenario they'd probably just spin it off from the mother ship into some independent company.

Nintendo.. is well Nintendo.. video games are all they do and they've been doing it longer then anyone else. Even if the Wii U bombed they'd keep trying until they find another honeycomb of a consumer market because god knows they have the money to do that now.

Microsoft isnt going anywhere, while this generation was certainly a reminder that sometimes being great at software doesn't translate well into reliable hardware. They have tons of cash.

Even if one of the big three fell who would fill the void? r&d investment costs alone for a new console alone would scare away any company that doesn't have gaming industry experience..
Well maybe Apple.. but their making so much money on selling people new phones/ipods/ipads every year I just can't see them adapting to the current 5-8 year console cycle. The rumored Apple TV defiantly has the potential to be able to play games (like that thing isn't going to have at least the power of the current iPhone/iPad generation of whenever it comes out) but I don't see that making dent into standalone home consoles more then the iPhone or iPad currently make into the ds/3ds/psp/vita

 

[StuBurns]

What do you mean maybe?

Maybe it was Kennedy's bad reporting, or maybe it was Perry's statement. That maybe.

 

[Metalmurphy]

We just got done with a two page discussion on how much Sony has lost on gaming this generation.

The division that is profitable for them is insurance.

So you're saying that SCE lost money on all quarters since the PS3 released?

Just because they lost before doesn't mean they are loosing now. Like I said Gaming division was the only profitable division a few quarters ago. Don't know what's the status in this quarter but I'm sure they're not losing money.-

 

[GeoramA]

So judging from this thread, there's a chance only Microsoft and Nintendo will be making our consoles.

I feel...nauseous.

 

[Angry Fork]

Nintendo tries new things all the time, the problem is, they're not the new things YOU want...

I don't think think anyone except casuals and fanboys cared about Wii Sports/Music. When I say try new things I mean new IPs with the same budget/time as a Mario or Zelda game. As well as changing up Mario/Zelda a bit and maybe trying some spin-off stuff with new types of gameplay. Nintendo only takes risks on hardware but their software is always predictable.

 

[Eusis]

Nintendo is as much software as hardware. Iwata said so.

Not sure what the point of that was, but I did recall some statements before about how the day they stop producing hardware is the day they exit the game industry. It helps those two ARE intertwined though, software designed around hardware and hardware to make the software they want.

Surprised at everyone saying Sony, I mean... it was (is?) the only devision making money. They'll stop selling TVs before they get rid of SCE.

Yeah, it's why I think Sony exiting would be a desperation move. I get the impression from Microsoft though it's SORT OF like a "flavor of the week", they keep changing people around, have basically given up on non-Halo/Gears/Fable/Kinect first party stuff unless you count XBLA (and that's more XBLA publishing policies). They'll stay in as long as it's profitable and suits what they want, but if it turns out something else (like, say, focusing on Windows Tablets) serves their purpose more than pursuing gaming consoles I can see them going and dropping the whole thing at the drop of a hat. In fact, maybe I should go an extra step there: if Microsoft DOES abandon gaming it's going to be through slowly distancing themselves rather than outright "we're going third party" like SEGA did, they'll make a more Roku-like device instead of a proper console, and they'll maybe make Xbox branded tablets. Follow Apple's model rather than Nintendo's as it were.

 

[Zimbardo]

i could do without Microsoft being in the console game. i'd rather them stick with PC and let Sony and Nintendo have their consoles. i also can't stand how Microsoft nickle and dime ya to death with Xbox Live, and having to pay a monthly subscription to play the multiplayer component of your games is just wrong ...i don't care how good the service is.

also, i'm pretty sure the xbox is the least popular of the 3 consoles worldwide ...so that doesn't help. so with those negatives on the Xbox side ...i'll say Microsoft are the more likely of the 3 to bow out at some point.

 

[Medalion]

I don't think think anyone except casuals and fanboys cared about Wii Sports/Music. When I say try new things I mean new IPs with the same budget/time as a Mario or Zelda game. As well as changing up Mario/Zelda a bit and maybe trying some spin-off stuff with new types of gameplay. Nintendo only takes risks on hardware but their software is always predictable.

Nintendo is built on tradition, to violate that would be a detrement.

Nintendo takes risks on their hardware and pushing forward gameplay ideas with different uses of technology and not follow the herd that everybody is doing, or if they do they put their own spin on it. That is where Nintendo takes risks.

If they take their core franchises and change them too much, people will complain, and you know it.

 

[surly]

So you're saying that SCE lost money on all quarters since the PS3 released?

Just because they lost before doesn't mean they are loosing now. Like I said Gaming division was the only profitable division a few quarters ago. Don't know what's the status in this quarter but I'm sure they're not losing money.-

The Consumer Products & Services division (which contains their gaming stuff now) lost $34.6 million in the last reported quarter,

 

[Grayman]

We just had this thread. What happened to it?

Anyway, Sony is the most likely to bow out while at the same time have the most potential to succeed next gen. Assuming things go as planned, Wii U is released with modest specs and the other two fight it out with powerful machines, than I can see Sony bouncing back nicely after this rough generation.

They would have to play their cards right but its all there for the taking. Release the PS4 right around the next Xbox launch and at the same price (or cheaper). That is crucial and can make or break Sony.

If you break down the three markets, than Sony has a decent shot at 2 of them. Obviously Xbox is dead in Japan so if Sony was smart they would not let MS secure exclusives there, instead sign their own. Studios have much more incentive to sign with Sony as they could actually sell games on that platform. If the tech gap is great enough between the Wii U, than secure the next FF (as we heard Square likes to push the envelope with that franchise). That will not only help in Japan but worldwide.

Next, get GT6 out within the first 2 years for Europe. UK aside, Sony has done a good job in Europe with a very high console price. Capitalize on that loyalty/brand power.

I cant see them outselling the next Xbox in NA but I can see them split it. Free online, a much healthier Japanese support and equal parity between multiplats without the 1 year headstart will make all the difference.

So maybe its not "easy" per se but the potential is there. Continue with the strong first party support and new IPs as well. I didn't talk about Wii U that much because honestly, its a huge wildcard and impossible to predict. Same with any unannounced next gen innovation that can throw a wrench in my predicitions (controllers, massive third party exclusive, online features, etc).

I think Microsoft may be in the momentum position for next generation. To split NA Sony needs to have a flawless strategy and MS needs to screw up a bit.

 

[Araxen]

Microsoft, they stand in a not too great position next gen with very very few 1st party exclusives.

 

[Eusis]

Sony still seems to be trailing them worldwide, but quickly looking at Wikipedia it's only by a few million, and they ARE more consistent globally in regards to popularity. Nothing like Microsoft's irrelevance in Japan anyway.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

I think this thread proves that armchair analysts trying to discuss the figures of huge corporations is one of the most painful things to read on the entire internet.

I'm glad I don't go into the NPD threads. My brain would melt.

 

[Metalmurphy]

The Consumer Products & Services division (which contains their gaming stuff now) lost $34.6 million in the last reported quarter,

That says nothing since it contains pretty much everything else as well.

 

[StuBurns]

Microsoft, they stand in a not too great position next gen with very very few 1st party exclusives.

Does that matter? They're the go to multiplatform console, Live is the go to online infrastructure, Xbox 3 doesn't really need exclusives does it?

 

[RedSwirl]

Obviously Sony. If that does happen though it will be very odd to see them reincarnate themselves as third party publisher. I think we might see merger of some sorts though before one of "the big three" disappears.

Sony WAS a 3rd party developer before the PlayStation.

But yes, they are in the most precarious position. I think their future is pretty much all on the PS4 at this point.

 

[Mama Robotnik]

Nintendo only takes risks on hardware but their software is always predictable.

They made a platformer using gravitational and multidirectional mechanics the likes of which the industry has never seen on such a scale (Mario Galaxies); They created the first action-adventure game centered around considered motional-control sword play (Skyward Sword). They released a new IP that combined Japanese historical real-time-strategy with pinball with voice controls (Odama), a bongo-controlled platform game (Donkey Kong Jungle Beat), a platformer made up out of yarn (Kirby's Epic Yarn); rocked the world with Cel-Shading (Wind Waker), gave a prestigious legacy franchise to an unproven developer resulting in the best game of the last generation (Metroid Prime), and released a game in which you control driving robots who can throw custard pies at disembodied clown heads, collect butterflies, evade dinosaurs, grow legs and destroy forests and kick footballs into nets under while also racing round a track (Excitebots).

That's just scratching the surface. To say that Nintendo software takes no "risks" and is "always predictable" is vintage bollocks of the highest order.

 

[Ignis Fatuus]

That says nothing since it contains pretty much everything else as well.

We just showed reports demonstrating massive losses before they rolled gaming into the larger division, and now that larger division is posting losses as well. I'm not sure where your assumption of profit is coming from. They recently said that Vita would not be profitable for 3 years even according to their own pre-launch projections. There's literally nothing to suggest that Sony is making money from gaming, and even if they were, it would be beyond belief to suggest that they're making anything more than a drop in the bucket they've lost this generation.

Sony made a huge investment in gaming this gen and they lost, yet you seem confident that they'll be eager to make a repeat investment even if the Vita fails.

 

[Eusis]

Does that matter? They're the go to multiplatform console, Live is the go to online infrastructure, Xbox 3 doesn't really need exclusives does it?

I think it MAY indicate Microsoft's position on gaming to an extent, but I suspect it could mean that if they slip up at the start of the next generation they're going to have a hard time convincing people why they shouldn't just stick with PS4/Wii U. Especially if it turns out the power jump DOESN'T make Wii U as irrelevant as one might think.

 

[Acheron]

I think this thread proves that armchair analysts trying to discuss the figures of huge corporations is one of the most painful things to read on the entire internet.

I'm glad I don't go into the NPD threads. My brain would melt.

Mostly because they view these as game machines, not media devices in an age where content providers appropriate nearly all the value in consumer electronics.

 

[Pureauthor]

I don't think think anyone except casuals and fanboys cared about Wii Sports/Music. When I say try new things I mean new IPs with the same budget/time as a Mario or Zelda game. As well as changing up Mario/Zelda a bit and maybe trying some spin-off stuff with new types of gameplay. Nintendo only takes risks on hardware but their software is always predictable.

A) 'Anyone except casuals' is such a hilarious statement. You do realize that the casual gamers far, far outstrip the number of people who would ever describe themselves as 'core'?

B) How in the world is stuff like Mario Galaxy and 3D Land not 'changing Mario up'? (I don't play Zelda so I won't comment on those.)

C) Spin-off stuff? What, you mean like Mario (Insert Sport Here)? No shortage of those.

D) If you honestly believe stuff like Wii Sports and Wii Fit don't have massive budgets, I don't think this conversation can go any further. Also, you claim stuff like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, et al, were no risks when they were made?

 

[StuBurns]

I think it MAY indicate Microsoft's position on gaming to an extent, but I suspect it could mean that if they slip up at the start of the next generation they're going to have a hard time convincing people why they shouldn't just stick with PS4/Wii U. Especially if it turns out the power jump DOESN'T make Wii U as irrelevant as one might think.

If the PS4 had parity with the XB3 in terms of online, and the standard of multiplatform games, maybe the exclusives might be able to push them ahead, but otherwise I think people will just go for comfort, what they know more or less. I think they just have to not fuck up to beat Sony basically.

 

[Metalmurphy]

We just showed reports demonstrating massive losses before they rolled gaming into the larger division, and now that larger division is posting losses as well. I'm not sure where your assumption of profit is coming from. They recently said that Vita would not be profitable for 3 years even according to their own pre-launch projections. There's literally nothing to suggest that Sony is making money from gaming, and even if they were, it would be beyond belief to suggest that they're making anything more than a drop in the bucket they've lost this generation.

Sony made a huge investment in gaming this gen and they lost, yet you seem confident that they'll be eager to make a repeat investment even if the Vita fails.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=431420

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=434368

And lets not forget the PSN Hack and Earthquake, which aren't likely to happen again. Point is, they were making money after losing alot of it, they're not gonna bow out any time soon. Like I said, they'll stop selling TVs before getting rid of SCE.

I mean, they already knew how much they lost when starting R&D for the Vita, yet they still did it.

 

[Deleted member 22576]

Sony just can't offer the type of software/infrastructure experience that Microsoft will be able to in the coming years. So that counts them out of the "focal point of the living room" race that is heating up. They might not disappear soon but Microsoft is on to something much bigger. Whether or not they'll succeed is up in the air, obviously, but Sony isn't really in the position to even attempt to compete.

 

[Corto]

I didn't find the graph I was thinking of but this article shows what i was trying to say:

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/TimT...ox_and_Playstation_are_potentially_doomed.php

                Sony            Nintendo        Microsoft                 Total

Y/E 1998     $902,811,090   $1,023,333,867                          $1,926,144,957

Y/E 1999   $1,102,563,557   $1,301,350,000                          $2,403,913,557

Y/E 2000     $722,738,949   $1,368,207,547                          $2,090,946,497

Y/E 2001    -$449,776,290     $677,576,000                          $227,799,710

Y/E 2002     $629,101,056     $895,872,180   -$1,135,000,000      $389,973,237

Y/E 2003     $935,569,253     $834,333,333   -$1,191,000,000      $578,902,586

Y/E 2004     $627,195,212     $993,161,303   -$1,337,000,000      $283,356,515

Y/E 2005     $419,888,799   $1,056,056,202     -$539,000,000      $936,945,001

Y/E 2006      $69,129,058     $774,478,055   -$1,339,000,000     -$495,392,887

Y/E 2007  -$1,970,923,859   $1,914,666,388   -$1,969,000,000   -$2,025,257,471

Y/E 2008  -$1,079,994,103   $4,322,637,887      $426,000,000    $3,668,643,783

Y/E 2009    -$664,313,787   $5,691,428,301      $169,000,000    $5,196,114,515

 

Y/E 10Q1    -$413,541,667     $420,843,750      $312,000,000      $319,302,083

Y/E 10Q2    -$653,333,333     $710,655,556      $375,000,000      $432,011,111

Y/E 10Q3     $210,629,750   $2,087,904,452               N/A               N/A

Total         $387,078,407  $24,072,504,822   -$6,157,000,000   $16,004,049,028

 

[alphaNoid]

Microsoft, they stand in a not too great position next gen with very very few 1st party exclusives.

Because all those first party Sony titles are killing it for Sony

 

[surly]

Microsoft, they stand in a not too great position next gen with very very few 1st party exclusives.

If you just look at disc-based games, there have been more exclusives released for the 360 this gen than there has been for the PS3. That's excluding console exclusives where the game may also be available on PC. If you include console exclusives as well, plus download only games, the 360 has lots more exclusive games than the PS3.

The PS3 got a price cut recently. It has a built in Blu-Ray player and free online play. It's certainly had more "hardcore" exclusives released for it in the last year or two. And yet, it's not like it's outselling the competition by huge amounts worldwide. Sony will be the only company who end this generation in the red because of selling the hardware at the greatest loss for the longest time, and because they have run PSN at a loss since day 1. That's not a sustainable business model going forward and while I don't think they will bow out, their business strategy has to change. They cannot do with the PS4 what they have done with the PS3, as that really does put them in a precarious position where I could see bowing out as a real possibility.

MS have shown that they're willing to throw in the towel with consumer electronics more than once already, but the 360 has been their one success in that area and I think they'll build on that, but if they have a bad generation next time round, I could see bowing out as a real option for them too. Office and Windows is where they make almost all of their money. They don't need to dabble in consumer electronics at all.

The only one I couldn't see bowing out any time soon is Nintendo.

 

[Corto]

Because all those first party Sony titles are killing it for Sony

If it weren't for those Sony would be in an even worse situation.

 

[Metalmurphy]

If you just look at disc-based games, there have been more exclusives released for the 360 this gen than there has been for the PS3. That's excluding console exclusives where the game may also be available on PC. If you include console exclusives as well, plus download only games, the 360 has lots more exclusive games than the PS3.

How many of those were released before the PS3 even came out? Also, he said 1st party.

Because all those first party Sony titles are killing it for Sony

Pretty sure Sony made more money out of first party titles then Microsoft did.

It's better to have 10+ selling around ~2M then 1 selling ~8M, and Sony also has that 1 selling ~8M

 

[StuBurns]

EDIT: NM

 

[hodgy100]

Honestly I think all of them will leave. and SEGA will return with the Dreamcast 2 and become the Overlords of all gaming!

 

[Tuck]

Microsoft really wants the living room, so I don't see them bowing out.

Sony on the other hand... I dunno. Aren't they like hemorrhaging money?

 

[AdventureRacing]

Right now i would say sony for sure. They are in the worst financial position of the 3 and their newest console is yet again struggling.

I don't expect any to drop out but they would be the most likely one IMO.

 

[Ignis Fatuus]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=431420

This link implies that they lost money. I hope you know the difference between income and profit.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=434368

http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6318239/e3-2011-vita-to-be-profitable-within-3-years-sony

Sony has said it plans on a 10-year cycle for its gaming systems. That's a good thing for the upcoming Vita, as the electronics giant doesn't expect the upcoming handheld to even turn a profit for the first one-third of that span.

 

[Lothars]

if any it will be MS.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

First off comparing the three hardwaremakers to SEGA isn't really a fair comparison.

First off SEGA was a much smaller company than either of the big 3 (yes including Nintendo) today. SEGA also failed because they were always stuck in the 1980's and thus made some of the most idiotic decisions. Mainly releasing way to many systems in a short period of time, being to liberal toward their developers, and most of all having democratic regional branches. None of the big 3 have these problems, or at least nowhere near to where SEGA had them.

Anyway thinking of it, I guess it means define what you mean by "bowing out". Would stop making consoles but moving on to make a service (ala Steam) fit the bill? I can imagine that in ten years from now set top boxes, tablets, and mobile devices will replace much of the console market.

With that factor I'd imagine either Sony or Microsoft. The former because they are a huge electronic maker and have tinkled with the idea while the latter due to them losing billions in the console space and trying to get their foot in the door with mobile OS's. I could definitely see PSN or Xbox Live move to Android and/or Windows as either one or both of them publish all of their games on their own service and collect royalties from third parties.

Nintendo however isn't going to budge. They are to console gaming as what Apple was and is to proprietary computers. There will always be a gaming specific hardware from Nintendo as long as the videogame market exists or when the company goes under.

Assuming the small likelihood (to me at least) that set top boxes and the like don't replace gaming consoles then I'd say Microsoft. They've lost billions in the console space and up until the Kinect I'd say it would be a full sure thing that they'd bow out from making hardware if the Xbox 3 flops financially. But if Kinect falls through their feet and the Xbox 3 is another financial burden I can see them backing out of gaming hardware. Though the Xbox as we know it will die the Xbox brand won't. You will always see games from Microsoft Gaming Studios, their existing IPs, Xbox Live will probably go third party online distributor (think EA online on PS2), XBLA is already expanding on Windows 7 and I'd imagine it would expand even further, etc.

 

[FateBreaker]

Microsoft answers are funny.

Anyway, the answer is Sony.

I didn't find the graph I was thinking of but this article shows what i was trying to say:

This is now very misleading. 2010 gained 1.5 billion profit for MS, and MS's Q1 2011 is roughly the same as their Q1 in 2010. Also, sales have only been increasing and profit expanding since then.

Isn't MS Xbox division still bleeding money?

No, they have been steadily gaining money since 2008, and since 2010, in a rather big way. They indeed are in the negative for the entire division, but at this rate, I don't think there will be any more blood in one to two years.

Do they really, though?

Yeah, they really do, I think. Everything about their attitude and direction screams living room. Kinect = living room. Alan Wake on 360 and not PC = comfy couch. 360 evolving from a games system to an full entertainment device = living room entertainment.

 

[Pureauthor]

Microsoft really wants the living room, so I don't see them bowing out.

Do they really, though? At this point it should be obvious that the living room is no longer the correct place for the 'convergence box' they wanted, but in smartphones and tablets now. I think they want the XBox division to be able to stand on its own two feet and be profitable, and they won't sink in cash otherwise.

 

[Metalmurphy]

This link implies that they lost money. I hope you know the difference between income and profit.

Ugh... SCE in Q2 and Q3 posted profits, in Q4 NGP whch includes SCE, post an income $429 million. But yeah... SCE is losing money...

Wait, not only that but they're losing more money then their other divisions

Spoiler

they're not

so they're gonna be the first to go. lol

http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6318239/e3-2011-vita-to-be-profitable-within-3-years-sony

Yoshidas comments were made AFTER that, to clarify that the business will be profitable day one, they still have to cover R&D costs, things don't get made for free you know...

 

[gabbo]

Sony because they have so many other divisions that could tank based on the economy. At the same time, that can help cushion the blow from a bad gaming/entertainment division for a period of time that the other two don't have as many of.

Microsoft still has Windows and Office, they can play in any market they want, if they really try (except tablets apparently), but even they can only lose so much before investors toss them out.

Nintendo is gaming. They aren't going out without literally going out of business. Harder landing, but stories about them have made their headquarters out to be Scrooge McDuck's money bin.

 

[StuBurns]

Do they really, though? At this point it should be obvious that the living room is no longer the correct place for the 'convergence box' they wanted, but in smartphones and tablets now. I think they want the XBox division to be able to stand on its own two feet and be profitable, and they won't sink in cash otherwise.

That was always part of the MS vision though. For years Gates would talk about everything in your house being connected and your TV being the central display for that, with a tablet being the ultimate interface.

 

[Sydle]

Do they really, though? At this point it should be obvious that the living room is no longer the correct place for the 'convergence box' they wanted, but in smartphones and tablets now. I think they want the XBox division to be able to stand on its own two feet and be profitable, and they won't sink in cash otherwise.

A convergence box is so small of an idea. It's all about three screens and a cloud for Microsoft. They want your PC, TV, and mobile device running Microsoft software and services, which are sold from and served by their own cloud service, which is also storing all your information tied to your Windows ID that enables access to all said services. It's an ecosystem -- the Xbox, Live, and Kinect are just part of a bigger strategy. MS has been public about this for several years now.

 

[cpp_is_king]

I think MS and Sony will team up, with Sony providing hardware and first party titles, Microsoft providing an operating system.

Nintendo is up in the air. Their past 3-4 pieces of hardware (including Wii U) have all been garbage, and in another generation if they dont get their crap together, more and more people will just start giving up on them.

The bottom line is that Japanese will never really adopt Microsoft hardware, while the West will easily adopt Sony hardware. So there's no way Sony will ever get pushed out of the hardware side, because the market is there.

 

[Medalion]

I think MS and Sony will team up, with Sony providing hardware and first party titles, Microsoft providing an operating system.

Nintendo is up in the air. Their past 3-4 pieces of hardware (including Wii U) have all been garbage, and in another generation if they dont get their crap together, more and more people will just start giving up on them.

The bottom line is that Japanese will never really adopt Microsoft hardware, while the West will easily adopt Sony hardware. So there's no way Sony will ever get pushed out of the hardware side, because the market is there.

Wii U isn't out yet, nor do we know what's happened to it since July and it's already a failure, aren't you a positive patrick?

 

[Acheron]

How many of those were released before the PS3 even came out? Also, he said 1st party.



Pretty sure Sony made more money out of first party titles then Microsoft did.

It's better to have 10+ selling around ~2M then 1 selling ~8M, and Sony also has that 1 selling ~8M

You'd rather few titles do really well, then a bunch doing sort of well. Lower dev costs and all.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

I could see Microsoft dropping consoles for PC gaming if they can sufficiently dumb it down by pushing Live on enough people. Hopefully that never happens.

 

[Pureauthor]

Nintendo is up in the air. Their past 3-4 pieces of hardware (including Wii U) have all been garbage, and in another generation if they dont get their crap together, more and more people will just start giving up on them.

Just fresh off the generation where Nintendo has achieved literally unprecedented success and people can type things like these with a straight face.

 

[Acheron]

I think MS and Sony will team up, with Sony providing hardware and first party titles, Microsoft providing an operating system.

Nintendo is up in the air. Their past 3-4 pieces of hardware (including Wii U) have all been garbage, and in another generation if they dont get their crap together, more and more people will just start giving up on them.

The bottom line is that Japanese will never really adopt Microsoft hardware, while the West will easily adopt Sony hardware. So there's no way Sony will ever get pushed out of the hardware side, because the market is there.

Why the hell would they do that? Japan is a dying market, MS would rather have a winning service to itself in EU, US and emerging markets than worry about Japan.

 

[Metalmurphy]

You'd rather few titles do really well, then a bunch doing sort of well. Lower dev costs and all.

That would only be true if they all added up to around the same.