The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Lets face it, if Sony hadn't released the PlayStation we'd probably still have Sega as a hardware manufacturer. To use an often used expression: Sony came in and bought the video games market.
Now here comes Microsoft with enough money to try and do the same thing, or at least buy a big share of it. The way I see it the Xbox is either going to be really successful or fail miserably - I can't see there being much middle ground between the two.
Suppose it succeeds. Then both Sony and Microsoft will have used their massive bank accounts to their advantage in buying their share of one of the most profitable markets in the world. In doing so it may, as Sony did, crush a long-standing member of the opposition (Nintendo), forcing them to become a software only company (I wont go into the pros and cons of that, I'm sure someone already has at some point anyway). There is a danger that the Xbox's success may encourage any company with any sort of connection to this market (and enough money) to have a go and develop a console of their own. Some have already tried and decided it's not for them after all fairly early on in the development but how many companies out their are too stubborn to admit they were wrong and carry on anyway?
There are those that argue that a one-machine market would be a bad thing but what about the other end of the scale - how many different systems can it support at once? How many is too many? I'm not going to say why I think a one system market would be a good thing. Just read page 481 on C4 (Digitiser) before the end of the day and you'll find a very similar opinion to mine (written by a fat pig rather that a cooked fish).
On the other hand suppose the XBox fails. A lesson will be learned by any other companies with enough money to attempt the same thing and may convince them that the video games market isn't ready or willing to accept their contribution before they go all the way to releasing it before deciding it was a mistake.
Sega are out and unless the GameCube is a really big success it will probably be Nintendos last hardware contribution. This draws us to a one system market. However, this way, any competitors would make sure they know what they're doing before jumping in unprepared like Microsoft did and really give Sony something to worry about.
In short, if the Xbox is a success, it will encourage anyone with enough money to have a ago, resulting in an overcrowded market. If it fails it will show that the market is tougher to crack than people think, thereby upping the calibre of any future opposition.
No matter how much Sony does wrong people just wont stop buying PS2's. How many players will there be in the generation after the one just beginning? The next steps will be decided by Microsoft's success and their success will be decided by us.
The Xbox could be a great thing - but I think it would make the biggest contribution to the industry by having the smallest amount of success.
Now here comes Microsoft with enough money to try and do the same thing, or at least buy a big share of it. The way I see it the Xbox is either going to be really successful or fail miserably - I can't see there being much middle ground between the two.
Suppose it succeeds. Then both Sony and Microsoft will have used their massive bank accounts to their advantage in buying their share of one of the most profitable markets in the world. In doing so it may, as Sony did, crush a long-standing member of the opposition (Nintendo), forcing them to become a software only company (I wont go into the pros and cons of that, I'm sure someone already has at some point anyway). There is a danger that the Xbox's success may encourage any company with any sort of connection to this market (and enough money) to have a go and develop a console of their own. Some have already tried and decided it's not for them after all fairly early on in the development but how many companies out their are too stubborn to admit they were wrong and carry on anyway?
There are those that argue that a one-machine market would be a bad thing but what about the other end of the scale - how many different systems can it support at once? How many is too many? I'm not going to say why I think a one system market would be a good thing. Just read page 481 on C4 (Digitiser) before the end of the day and you'll find a very similar opinion to mine (written by a fat pig rather that a cooked fish).
On the other hand suppose the XBox fails. A lesson will be learned by any other companies with enough money to attempt the same thing and may convince them that the video games market isn't ready or willing to accept their contribution before they go all the way to releasing it before deciding it was a mistake.
Sega are out and unless the GameCube is a really big success it will probably be Nintendos last hardware contribution. This draws us to a one system market. However, this way, any competitors would make sure they know what they're doing before jumping in unprepared like Microsoft did and really give Sony something to worry about.
In short, if the Xbox is a success, it will encourage anyone with enough money to have a ago, resulting in an overcrowded market. If it fails it will show that the market is tougher to crack than people think, thereby upping the calibre of any future opposition.
No matter how much Sony does wrong people just wont stop buying PS2's. How many players will there be in the generation after the one just beginning? The next steps will be decided by Microsoft's success and their success will be decided by us.
The Xbox could be a great thing - but I think it would make the biggest contribution to the industry by having the smallest amount of success.
Page:
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> I'd like to see Command&Conquor Advance!!!! Now *that* would be
> awesome!
Yeah C&C Advance that WOULD be a sight to see or even a Banjo-kazzoie advance!
> I'd like to see Command&Conquor Advance!!!! Now *that* would be
> awesome!
Yeah C&C Advance that WOULD be a sight to see or even a Banjo-kazzoie advance!
Actually, Sony came in with a CD drive and blistering hardware that kicked the crap out of other consoles at the same price.
X-box have all 3rd party manufacturers doing it for them, like Geforce, Pentium, IBM etc. But because it is basically a PC, it will run slower than a console at the same clock speed. Just look at iMacs. If you need furthur explaination, just ask.
Also, MS have a reputation for crapness
X-box have all 3rd party manufacturers doing it for them, like Geforce, Pentium, IBM etc. But because it is basically a PC, it will run slower than a console at the same clock speed. Just look at iMacs. If you need furthur explaination, just ask.
Also, MS have a reputation for crapness
I'd like to see Command&Conquor Advance!!!! Now *that* would be awesome!
Bionic Commando. That's a NES game I'd like to see released on the GBA.
It was an excellent game, what with the swinging on your extendable arm and all.
I even read the book ;)
It was an excellent game, what with the swinging on your extendable arm and all.
I even read the book ;)
Actually, because the Gameboy has the market to itself, Nintendo are now releasing 12 year old games for £30 (Mario 2).
If there was competition, they'd put all the old Mario's onto one cart instead of trying to milk it's old Nes games!
If there was competition, they'd put all the old Mario's onto one cart instead of trying to milk it's old Nes games!
Yep I understood all of that did you???
:-D
:-D
Brief replies to multiple posters:
I agree the Digitiser opinion was nonsense when going on about CDs. I should have been more specific in saying that I agree totally with the part about the handheld market being a one-system machine (crushing any and all rivals) and is no worse off for it. Infact it's the reason it's such a success. The GameBoy is, and continues to be, a massive success because there are no worries about hardware competition so developers can concentrate on making the games as good as they can and not have to worry about producing different versions for different platforms. It's an undeniable fact that most of the games considered to be modern classics are available on only one system (excluding PC ports).
There are a significant number of companies with enough money to build and market a console, whether you'd expect them to or not. Microsoft's success in a relatively foreign market to them, would encourage others that where there's a wallet, there's a way.
As for the GameCube not being a succes, this doesn't depend totally on how good or bad it is. The Dreamcast it a top piece of kit with some truly great games behind it but that's not going to go the distance with the competition is it?
I agree the Digitiser opinion was nonsense when going on about CDs. I should have been more specific in saying that I agree totally with the part about the handheld market being a one-system machine (crushing any and all rivals) and is no worse off for it. Infact it's the reason it's such a success. The GameBoy is, and continues to be, a massive success because there are no worries about hardware competition so developers can concentrate on making the games as good as they can and not have to worry about producing different versions for different platforms. It's an undeniable fact that most of the games considered to be modern classics are available on only one system (excluding PC ports).
There are a significant number of companies with enough money to build and market a console, whether you'd expect them to or not. Microsoft's success in a relatively foreign market to them, would encourage others that where there's a wallet, there's a way.
As for the GameCube not being a succes, this doesn't depend totally on how good or bad it is. The Dreamcast it a top piece of kit with some truly great games behind it but that's not going to go the distance with the competition is it?
DanDaGr8 wrote:
> i think everyone should buy a gamecube or a ps2 just so bill gates
> can't use all his money the destroy the competion (eg. like he's
> doing to apple)
like hes DOING to Apple? ... Your about 10-15 years out of date man... ???
and lets face it a console running on windows is
> actually a very bad idea considering its past record of being cr@p
Didnt DC use a cut down version of Windows?
> i think everyone should buy a gamecube or a ps2 just so bill gates
> can't use all his money the destroy the competion (eg. like he's
> doing to apple)
like hes DOING to Apple? ... Your about 10-15 years out of date man... ???
and lets face it a console running on windows is
> actually a very bad idea considering its past record of being cr@p
Didnt DC use a cut down version of Windows?
i think everyone should buy a gamecube or a ps2 just so bill gates can't use all his money the destroy the competion (eg. like he's doing to apple) and lets face it a console running on windows is actually a very bad idea considering its past record of being cr@p
Page: