The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Thereís no point in doing anything at all unless thereís other people/things involved, is there? There would be no point in having the Premier League if there were only one team in it. There would be no point in marriage if there were only one person. There would be no point in practically anything, actually.
The same goes for the console market.
If there were only Nintendo then they couldnít fail because there would be no one to beat them. The same goes for Sony and Microtosh... Soft. Without anyone to compete against they have no one to beat and no one to lose to.
They have no drive to keep bringing out better and better games, better and better pieces of hardware and better and better consoles.
People say that games, controllers, media hype... Whatever, is what makes the gaming world what it is. And there they could not be further from the truth.
If Mario had never been invented, Sony would never have needed to create Solid Snake or Crash. They would not need to create a mascot for themselves if their main rivals had no mascot.
Equally, if the PlayStation had never been made, do you think the N64 would have been? Yes but not quite so soon. Nintendo would have had nothing to beat and so would not have needed to bring out a new console while they were doing just fine with the SNES.
Without a motive, no one ever advances, because, without a motive, there is no NEED to advance. If Liverpool and Everton werenít such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derbyís be as important to either team? No. If the N64 had no competition, would we ever have progressed to a GameCube? Again, yes, but it would have taken a good deal longer than 4 years to come about.
Think about that for a second, itís only been 4 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only last month. Why did they feel the need to bring out a new console so (relatively) soon after the N64 was out? Because they would have fallen behind in the consoles market. Thatís why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they donít have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rivalís do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) Itís a great piece of machinery and 2) Because it has no competition.
There is nothing handheld that even comes within a light year of the GBA.
Human nature forces us to want to beat someone else at something (Or is it the testosterone? ;-D ) Either way, we always want to be the best, which is why competition and rivalries exist. And it is also why the gaming world is what it is today and why it has such awesome prospects for the future.
RBS
The same goes for the console market.
If there were only Nintendo then they couldnít fail because there would be no one to beat them. The same goes for Sony and Microtosh... Soft. Without anyone to compete against they have no one to beat and no one to lose to.
They have no drive to keep bringing out better and better games, better and better pieces of hardware and better and better consoles.
People say that games, controllers, media hype... Whatever, is what makes the gaming world what it is. And there they could not be further from the truth.
If Mario had never been invented, Sony would never have needed to create Solid Snake or Crash. They would not need to create a mascot for themselves if their main rivals had no mascot.
Equally, if the PlayStation had never been made, do you think the N64 would have been? Yes but not quite so soon. Nintendo would have had nothing to beat and so would not have needed to bring out a new console while they were doing just fine with the SNES.
Without a motive, no one ever advances, because, without a motive, there is no NEED to advance. If Liverpool and Everton werenít such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derbyís be as important to either team? No. If the N64 had no competition, would we ever have progressed to a GameCube? Again, yes, but it would have taken a good deal longer than 4 years to come about.
Think about that for a second, itís only been 4 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only last month. Why did they feel the need to bring out a new console so (relatively) soon after the N64 was out? Because they would have fallen behind in the consoles market. Thatís why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they donít have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rivalís do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) Itís a great piece of machinery and 2) Because it has no competition.
There is nothing handheld that even comes within a light year of the GBA.
Human nature forces us to want to beat someone else at something (Or is it the testosterone? ;-D ) Either way, we always want to be the best, which is why competition and rivalries exist. And it is also why the gaming world is what it is today and why it has such awesome prospects for the future.
RBS
Page:
I would say the only downside of intense competition is that it can limit originality, in that many games developers and publishers tend to "play safe" with the games they make and release through fear of failure.
I heard a loooooong time ago that song were releasing a handheld. Heh I think they canned that idea, nintendo would whoop them :o)
Great Saiyanman wrote:
> Good post there Rasta, and you make some good points.
Nintendo practically
> own the handheld market because there is no competition.
Well then, let me
> ask this. If there was competition, would the GBA games be a lot better then the
> are now and what they will be?
They'd probably be a darn sight cheaper though.
If they had a PS2 style rival to compete with then Nintendo wouldn't be selling Snes re-releases for 35 quid a time.
> Good post there Rasta, and you make some good points.
Nintendo practically
> own the handheld market because there is no competition.
Well then, let me
> ask this. If there was competition, would the GBA games be a lot better then the
> are now and what they will be?
They'd probably be a darn sight cheaper though.
If they had a PS2 style rival to compete with then Nintendo wouldn't be selling Snes re-releases for 35 quid a time.
GasMask wrote:
> Thats where Nintendo cash in on the Gb and GBA. No competetion.
Yup, the only competition they've ever had in that area was the Gamegear, and that died out in under 4 years!
> Thats where Nintendo cash in on the Gb and GBA. No competetion.
Yup, the only competition they've ever had in that area was the Gamegear, and that died out in under 4 years!
Thats where Nintendo cash in on the Gb and GBA. No competetion.
Great post, Rasta. I like the way you pounce on the opportunity to post a classy, winning post whenever you feel is best :D
What did I say? You win when you want to! :D
(You won't win now)
:-D
What did I say? You win when you want to! :D
(You won't win now)
:-D
AliBoy wrote:
> Competition is what we all need to improve. If better games or consoles come
> along then those who are in "second place" have to try harder and make
> a product which is better than the others.
It is the only was forward. That is
> why if only one console was available to buy or consoles became more like PC's
> then the industry may lose out in a big big way.
Indeed my dear Alan.
PS Rasta, what a pants
> topic : )
*Lip trembles* :-D
> Competition is what we all need to improve. If better games or consoles come
> along then those who are in "second place" have to try harder and make
> a product which is better than the others.
It is the only was forward. That is
> why if only one console was available to buy or consoles became more like PC's
> then the industry may lose out in a big big way.
Indeed my dear Alan.
PS Rasta, what a pants
> topic : )
*Lip trembles* :-D
Great Saiyanman wrote:
> Good post there Rasta, and you make some good points.
Why thankyou my dear Boggy :-D
Nintendo practically
> own the handheld market because there is no competition.
Uh huh.
Well then, let me
> ask this. If there was competition, would the GBA games be a lot better then the
> are now and what they will be?
Yes, I think they would. Nintendo would be striving to beat their competitors and so would work even harder on new technology and better, faster games. I beleive we all here should design, make and market a handheld to force Nintendo into getting there rear ends in gear and then we'll see what the GBA is *really* capable of.
> Good post there Rasta, and you make some good points.
Why thankyou my dear Boggy :-D
Nintendo practically
> own the handheld market because there is no competition.
Uh huh.
Well then, let me
> ask this. If there was competition, would the GBA games be a lot better then the
> are now and what they will be?
Yes, I think they would. Nintendo would be striving to beat their competitors and so would work even harder on new technology and better, faster games. I beleive we all here should design, make and market a handheld to force Nintendo into getting there rear ends in gear and then we'll see what the GBA is *really* capable of.
Competition is what we all need to improve. If better games or consoles come along then those who are in "second place" have to try harder and make a product which is better than the others.
It is the only was forward. That is why if only one console was available to buy or consoles became more like PC's then the industry may lose out in a big big way.
PS Rasta, what a pants topic : )
Only joking. Nice one.
It is the only was forward. That is why if only one console was available to buy or consoles became more like PC's then the industry may lose out in a big big way.
PS Rasta, what a pants topic : )
Only joking. Nice one.
Page: