The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Who's getting one? Who's worried about it's impact on a market? and who wants it to die on it's ass?
Page:
Hedfix wrote:
> Which we now see Microsoft doing very aptly illustrated by a GTA
> doublepack appearing on the X-Box.
What a scoop! Launched a year after it sold thousands of PS2. Launched months after it was available on the PC. This is a case of a developer squeezing a title dry, not MS courting developers with Sony-esque ability.
> Harsh. I think they made a better job of it with the GC. I think they
> are re-evaluating their appraoch even more for the next console. The
> GC should hopefully be the 'transition console' for Nintendo to
> experiment with and come back stronger with the next one.
Ahhh... no. Nintendo never learn anything. Ever. A large part of it also comes down to the huge grudge the old boy's network holds against Ninty for making life so hard for them in the 8/16-bit days. Sony were the Knight's on white horses ending the days of stupidly high liscencing fees and obtuse checks and controls from the console manufacturer. Sony come along with low prices and a nice, fat, useful suit of middleware. Ninty did exactly the same with the N64 and got screwed. And a half hearted attempt to drag back developers has got them nowhere.
Same goes for your replying post below - it makes no difference how many competitors there are as all it takes is one to make you look like a lumbering giant who bleeds their customers for all they're worth. The GBA is over-priced and under spec-ed for no reason other than Ninty know they can do it without hurting their fat profits. You think it was just one of those wierd quirks that the day Sony announced the PSP, Ninty's market value took a hit?
> Which we now see Microsoft doing very aptly illustrated by a GTA
> doublepack appearing on the X-Box.
What a scoop! Launched a year after it sold thousands of PS2. Launched months after it was available on the PC. This is a case of a developer squeezing a title dry, not MS courting developers with Sony-esque ability.
> Harsh. I think they made a better job of it with the GC. I think they
> are re-evaluating their appraoch even more for the next console. The
> GC should hopefully be the 'transition console' for Nintendo to
> experiment with and come back stronger with the next one.
Ahhh... no. Nintendo never learn anything. Ever. A large part of it also comes down to the huge grudge the old boy's network holds against Ninty for making life so hard for them in the 8/16-bit days. Sony were the Knight's on white horses ending the days of stupidly high liscencing fees and obtuse checks and controls from the console manufacturer. Sony come along with low prices and a nice, fat, useful suit of middleware. Ninty did exactly the same with the N64 and got screwed. And a half hearted attempt to drag back developers has got them nowhere.
Same goes for your replying post below - it makes no difference how many competitors there are as all it takes is one to make you look like a lumbering giant who bleeds their customers for all they're worth. The GBA is over-priced and under spec-ed for no reason other than Ninty know they can do it without hurting their fat profits. You think it was just one of those wierd quirks that the day Sony announced the PSP, Ninty's market value took a hit?
Dr Gonzo wrote:
> Basically it comes down to this - Sony will rule all. Not saying
> they'll make the best games or even the best consoles, but they'll
> sell more than everyone else.
I think Microsoft might have something to say about that.
>
> One thing the computer games industry never had until Sony was a
> "real" business. Sony understand how to play the game.
> They know they need the developers on they're side as they'll make
> the titles that sell their consoles.
Once again the X-Box comparasins are plentiful.
That's why they smashed
> Nintendo's extortionate licensing fees in the home console market -
> attracted the big name games (again, not necessarily the best games),
> sold the consoles.
Which we now see Microsoft doing very aptly illustrated by a GTA doublepack appearing on the X-Box.
They also know how to sell a console - something
> Ninty don't have a clue about, and don't seem bothered about learning
> as the N64 mistakes have been repeated with the GC.
Harsh. I think they made a better job of it with the GC. I think they are re-evaluating their appraoch even more for the next console. The GC should hopefully be the 'transition console' for Nintendo to experiment with and come back stronger with the next one.
>
> End of the day - I don't care. I've always played Nintendo games,
> and they'll never stop making games, so it doesn't make a jot of
> difference to me how many other people do and who made the console
> I'm playing the games on.
Yep same here. However when Nintendo games go online I'd like there to be someone for me to play against. ;)
> Basically it comes down to this - Sony will rule all. Not saying
> they'll make the best games or even the best consoles, but they'll
> sell more than everyone else.
I think Microsoft might have something to say about that.
>
> One thing the computer games industry never had until Sony was a
> "real" business. Sony understand how to play the game.
> They know they need the developers on they're side as they'll make
> the titles that sell their consoles.
Once again the X-Box comparasins are plentiful.
That's why they smashed
> Nintendo's extortionate licensing fees in the home console market -
> attracted the big name games (again, not necessarily the best games),
> sold the consoles.
Which we now see Microsoft doing very aptly illustrated by a GTA doublepack appearing on the X-Box.
They also know how to sell a console - something
> Ninty don't have a clue about, and don't seem bothered about learning
> as the N64 mistakes have been repeated with the GC.
Harsh. I think they made a better job of it with the GC. I think they are re-evaluating their appraoch even more for the next console. The GC should hopefully be the 'transition console' for Nintendo to experiment with and come back stronger with the next one.
>
> End of the day - I don't care. I've always played Nintendo games,
> and they'll never stop making games, so it doesn't make a jot of
> difference to me how many other people do and who made the console
> I'm playing the games on.
Yep same here. However when Nintendo games go online I'd like there to be someone for me to play against. ;)
Memorandum! wrote:
>
> But my point is Sony were able to storm straight into a market where
> they had NO reputation, no brand, with two hugely established
> companies, and take complete control...now they're entering the
> handheld market with the strenght of the Playstation brand behind
> them.
And my point is that Nintendo must have learnt from the last time this happened in a market they dominated and that this time around they will be better prepared.
Gameboy is a pretty strong brand in itself.
>
> But my point is Sony were able to storm straight into a market where
> they had NO reputation, no brand, with two hugely established
> companies, and take complete control...now they're entering the
> handheld market with the strenght of the Playstation brand behind
> them.
And my point is that Nintendo must have learnt from the last time this happened in a market they dominated and that this time around they will be better prepared.
Gameboy is a pretty strong brand in itself.
Dr Gonzo wrote:
>
> Lol! Yeah - look how that helped Atari! And Sega! And Nintendo in
> the home console market!
But there were four then. (Six if you count the 3D0 and Cdi)
Here we have two: Nintendo and Sony.
It's likely Nintendo have learnt from their NES monopoly days.
Sony will definately carve up a piece of the market regardless, how big a piece and how easy it is for them to do is up to how Nintendo react/pre-empt.
Nintendo have been shown to do well when it's a two horse race.
>
> Lol! Yeah - look how that helped Atari! And Sega! And Nintendo in
> the home console market!
But there were four then. (Six if you count the 3D0 and Cdi)
Here we have two: Nintendo and Sony.
It's likely Nintendo have learnt from their NES monopoly days.
Sony will definately carve up a piece of the market regardless, how big a piece and how easy it is for them to do is up to how Nintendo react/pre-empt.
Nintendo have been shown to do well when it's a two horse race.
Basically it comes down to this - Sony will rule all. Not saying they'll make the best games or even the best consoles, but they'll sell more than everyone else.
One thing the computer games industry never had until Sony was a "real" business. Sony understand how to play the game. They know they need the developers on they're side as they'll make the titles that sell their consoles. That's why they smashed Nintendo's extortionate licensing fees in the home console market - attracted the big name games (again, not necessarily the best games), sold the consoles. They also know how to sell a console - something Ninty don't have a clue about, and don't seem bothered about learning as the N64 mistakes have been repeated with the GC.
End of the day - I don't care. I've always played Nintendo games, and they'll never stop making games, so it doesn't make a jot of difference to me how many other people do and who made the console I'm playing the games on.
One thing the computer games industry never had until Sony was a "real" business. Sony understand how to play the game. They know they need the developers on they're side as they'll make the titles that sell their consoles. That's why they smashed Nintendo's extortionate licensing fees in the home console market - attracted the big name games (again, not necessarily the best games), sold the consoles. They also know how to sell a console - something Ninty don't have a clue about, and don't seem bothered about learning as the N64 mistakes have been repeated with the GC.
End of the day - I don't care. I've always played Nintendo games, and they'll never stop making games, so it doesn't make a jot of difference to me how many other people do and who made the console I'm playing the games on.
Hedfix wrote:
> Memorandum! wrote:
>
> SEGA Saturn
> Nintendo 64
> Sony Playstation
>
>
> Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
>
> Soory I should have explained it better:
>
> GB
> GB Colour
> GB Advance
> GB SP
>
> Remember I was mainly talking about the handheld market.
But my point is Sony were able to storm straight into a market where they had NO reputation, no brand, with two hugely established companies, and take complete control...now they're entering the handheld market with the strenght of the Playstation brand behind them.
> Memorandum! wrote:
>
> SEGA Saturn
> Nintendo 64
> Sony Playstation
>
>
> Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
>
> Soory I should have explained it better:
>
> GB
> GB Colour
> GB Advance
> GB SP
>
> Remember I was mainly talking about the handheld market.
But my point is Sony were able to storm straight into a market where they had NO reputation, no brand, with two hugely established companies, and take complete control...now they're entering the handheld market with the strenght of the Playstation brand behind them.
Hedfix wrote:
> PSP may have the marketing but you forget that Nintendo have the
> established user-base.
Lol! Yeah - look how that helped Atari! And Sega! And Nintendo in the home console market!
> PSP may have the marketing but you forget that Nintendo have the
> established user-base.
Lol! Yeah - look how that helped Atari! And Sega! And Nintendo in the home console market!
PSP will give it a run for its money, but i think Nintendo are plotting a handheld so magnificent in retaliation, that the sony chiefs will be jumping from their office windows in dispair.
Or something.
Or something.
Memorandum! wrote:
>
> SEGA Saturn
> Nintendo 64
> Sony Playstation
>
>
> Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
Soory I should have explained it better:
GB
GB Colour
GB Advance
GB SP
Remember I was mainly talking about the handheld market.
>
> SEGA Saturn
> Nintendo 64
> Sony Playstation
>
>
> Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
Soory I should have explained it better:
GB
GB Colour
GB Advance
GB SP
Remember I was mainly talking about the handheld market.
Hedfix wrote:
> PSP may have the marketing but you forget that Nintendo have the
> established user-base.
I got this far, because:
SEGA Saturn
Nintendo 64
Sony Playstation
Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
> PSP may have the marketing but you forget that Nintendo have the
> established user-base.
I got this far, because:
SEGA Saturn
Nintendo 64
Sony Playstation
Who had the established user-base then, hmm?
Page: