The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
There’s no point in doing anything at all unless there’s 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 couldn’t 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 weren’t such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derby’s 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, it’s only been 5 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only a few months back. 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. That’s why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they don’t have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rival’s do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) It’s 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 couldn’t 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 weren’t such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derby’s 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, it’s only been 5 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only a few months back. 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. That’s why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they don’t have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rival’s do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) It’s 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:
Bonus wrote:
don't get too
> carried away in the romance, money makes the world go round.
Huh? I know, that's what I was saying...
don't get too
> carried away in the romance, money makes the world go round.
Huh? I know, that's what I was saying...
You speak the truth there. But I think most of us know this already.
Oh and I am better than you!
Without competition things are pants. Take the operating systems side of the industry, Microsoft have no real competition so we are stuck with what they produce, the only other choices are Linux which isn't easy for beginners or buy a mac and use Mac OS.
Competition makes developers work that little harder to try make it the best they can, expect great games and consoles to appear as long as there is competition between the developers.
Oh and I am better than you!
Without competition things are pants. Take the operating systems side of the industry, Microsoft have no real competition so we are stuck with what they produce, the only other choices are Linux which isn't easy for beginners or buy a mac and use Mac OS.
Competition makes developers work that little harder to try make it the best they can, expect great games and consoles to appear as long as there is competition between the developers.
This is a nice rose tinted way of looking at the console market, but at the end of the day, there is only one incentive in a capitalist society, to make money. True, some individuals working for a company may be following ideals and dreams, but if that isn't making money, watch them be punted out the door, don't get too carried away in the romance, money makes the world go round.
There’s no point in doing anything at all unless there’s 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 couldn’t 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 weren’t such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derby’s 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, it’s only been 5 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only a few months back. 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. That’s why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they don’t have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rival’s do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) It’s 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 couldn’t 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 weren’t such huge rivals, would the Merseyside Derby’s 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, it’s only been 5 years since the N64 was first released. On March 7th 1997 it hit the public. The GameCube was launched in Japan only a few months back. 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. That’s why. Companies make games and consoles to make money. If they don’t have a new cutting edge piece of hardware, whereas, their nearest rival’s do, which one do you think will fall behind?
Why is the GameBoy Advance doing so well? For two reasons: 1) It’s 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: