The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
If they both gave up making consoles then it would be rather bad news!
Just think of it, with no other competition on the market, Sony would have a monopoly in the games market.
No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only choice that people had.
We need Nintendo and Microsoft to stay in the market for our sakes, we don't want to pay these massive prices...
So for once, there is a use for Microsoft being in the games industry!
Just think of it, with no other competition on the market, Sony would have a monopoly in the games market.
No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only choice that people had.
We need Nintendo and Microsoft to stay in the market for our sakes, we don't want to pay these massive prices...
So for once, there is a use for Microsoft being in the games industry!
Page:
If they both gave up making consoles then it would be rather bad news!
Just think of it, with no other competition on the market, Sony would have a monopoly in the games market.
No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only choice that people had.
We need Nintendo and Microsoft to stay in the market for our sakes, we don't want to pay these massive prices...
So for once, there is a use for Microsoft being in the games industry!
Just think of it, with no other competition on the market, Sony would have a monopoly in the games market.
No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only choice that people had.
We need Nintendo and Microsoft to stay in the market for our sakes, we don't want to pay these massive prices...
So for once, there is a use for Microsoft being in the games industry!
If Sony hadn't entered gaming a few years ago, then the gaming world would already be in chaos. Of in fact, it might not even exist anymore.
How weird of you to say that.
Lookie...
http://www.gamesradar.com/news/default.asp
subsectionid=160&articleid=63630&pagetype=2
(space after asp)
Lookie...
http://www.gamesradar.com/news/default.asp
subsectionid=160&articleid=63630&pagetype=2
(space after asp)
Can you imagine how poor it would be if Nintendo never existed?
Does not bear(sp) thinknig about....
Does not bear(sp) thinknig about....
The link doesn't work for me, what did it say?
You need a ? after the .asp, the crazy fool forgot that :o).
Phi11ip wrote:
> No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony
> wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only
> choice that people had.
I believe people will always have a choice. The choice not to buy such things at higher prices. If Sony did do this when Nintendo and Microsoft leave (not saying that they are, OK) then we could eaither be muppets an pay the extra, or tell them where they can stick their console. Also, can you imaging the amouun of piracy????
Phi11ip wrote:
> No competition against them would result in prices being higher, Sony
> wanting to charge as high a price as they could as they were the only
> choice that people had.
I believe people will always have a choice. The choice not to buy such things at higher prices. If Sony did do this when Nintendo and Microsoft leave (not saying that they are, OK) then we could eaither be muppets an pay the extra, or tell them where they can stick their console. Also, can you imaging the amouun of piracy????
The crazy fool!
If Nintendo did leave, it would almost certainly result in higher prices, you would still get the mugs who would buy the consoles...
Thus keeping prices high!
If Nintendo did leave, it would almost certainly result in higher prices, you would still get the mugs who would buy the consoles...
Thus keeping prices high!
A tad simplistic I fear.
The "I hate monopolies" view has died down since less children were forced to play the godawful game at Christmas with their parents who invariably relied on their offsprings' limited mathematical ability to win by miles.
But seriously, a monopoly is no bad thing, in fact the whole idea of different market structures has become increasingly outmoded with economists prefering the theory of Contestability instead.
Basically this means that if there's a threat of competition then everything's hunky-dory. If rival firms want to enter a market but can't then that's a bad thing. Sony, assuming they were the only firm in the console market, could not afford to hike prices up massively because another firm would see the fantastic levels of profit Sony was making and jump into the market with an uber-cheap console, taking away some of Sony's excess profits. In order to avoid this Sony would have to maintain prices at a level where competitors would not want to produce a rival console. This means only making normal profits, nothing big and nothing exploitative to consumers.
Then again let's suppose Sony were the only firm. Think about it. The only console would mean that you could only buy games on one console format. This would mean that Sony's investment in the console would be more secure, as most consoles have a lower than cost-of-manufacturing price with the assumption that losses will be recuperated when you buy games. If you could only by ony-endorsed games then Sony would be able to lower the price of the console further, because they would pretty much inevitably make back the money.
Also think of how big Sony would become as a console maker. More consoles would be demanded, which means larger production lines, lower risk, lower cost of borrowing, and all sorts of other wonderful things that result in a lower cost as output rises. Economies of scale - the bigger your company is, the bigger the savings it can make and so it can pass them on to consumers.
Finally if Sony were to make large profits then these could then be invested in research and development. Sony could research cheaper methods of production, or even invest the lot in the design of a stonking new console that could do 1000 times as much as the PS2.
So monopolies are not a bad thing and it's a wee bit simplistic to say so.
Also I doubt very much that a company that could afford to buy both Nintendo and Sony, Microsoft, will be pulling out of the console market any time soon.
The "I hate monopolies" view has died down since less children were forced to play the godawful game at Christmas with their parents who invariably relied on their offsprings' limited mathematical ability to win by miles.
But seriously, a monopoly is no bad thing, in fact the whole idea of different market structures has become increasingly outmoded with economists prefering the theory of Contestability instead.
Basically this means that if there's a threat of competition then everything's hunky-dory. If rival firms want to enter a market but can't then that's a bad thing. Sony, assuming they were the only firm in the console market, could not afford to hike prices up massively because another firm would see the fantastic levels of profit Sony was making and jump into the market with an uber-cheap console, taking away some of Sony's excess profits. In order to avoid this Sony would have to maintain prices at a level where competitors would not want to produce a rival console. This means only making normal profits, nothing big and nothing exploitative to consumers.
Then again let's suppose Sony were the only firm. Think about it. The only console would mean that you could only buy games on one console format. This would mean that Sony's investment in the console would be more secure, as most consoles have a lower than cost-of-manufacturing price with the assumption that losses will be recuperated when you buy games. If you could only by ony-endorsed games then Sony would be able to lower the price of the console further, because they would pretty much inevitably make back the money.
Also think of how big Sony would become as a console maker. More consoles would be demanded, which means larger production lines, lower risk, lower cost of borrowing, and all sorts of other wonderful things that result in a lower cost as output rises. Economies of scale - the bigger your company is, the bigger the savings it can make and so it can pass them on to consumers.
Finally if Sony were to make large profits then these could then be invested in research and development. Sony could research cheaper methods of production, or even invest the lot in the design of a stonking new console that could do 1000 times as much as the PS2.
So monopolies are not a bad thing and it's a wee bit simplistic to say so.
Also I doubt very much that a company that could afford to buy both Nintendo and Sony, Microsoft, will be pulling out of the console market any time soon.
Phi11ip wrote:
> The link doesn't work for me, what did it say?
Gamecube may be Nintendo's last console.
Just go on the gamesradar front page, it's a headline. Don't know if it's true though.
> The link doesn't work for me, what did it say?
Gamecube may be Nintendo's last console.
Just go on the gamesradar front page, it's a headline. Don't know if it's true though.
Bad news.........................?!
Page: