The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Well, everybodys thinking about momopolisation these days in the computer industry, espically as Microsoft, who many people regard as the kings of monopolisers as Bill Gates likes to do so most of the time, as they are releasing the X-Box to compete with Sony and Nintendo. I would have to say that we have seen this all before, and I think its good for the industry.
If you look at it, there has always been a dominant force in the computer games industry- in the mid 1980's it was Nintendo. What happened there? Well they crushed any hope of an Atari revival, and all but made Sega bankrupt, which would have happened if it wasnt for the Megadrive, which to be honest delayed the inevitable for Sega, as after the Megadrive's success, they really had dilusions of grandeur and thought that they could take on Nintendo. Due to the monopoly that Nintendo had then, it certainly wasnt the case, and they were delt a massive blow when the 32X arrived. Guess what- everybody switched to Nintendo.
Now lets move to the second scenario- Sony. When Nintendo released the super difficult to program for and expensive N64, they almost went the same way as Sega had it not been for they previous success and reputation(sounds like Atari in the late 70s there). Sony, being themselves huge electronics giants and possibly innovators of technology, thought that a joint with Nintendo was a profitable idea and they held the momopoly in the industry. Low and behold Sony would end up breaking from Nintendo not on the best of terms and then go on to release their own system, which preyed on the weak bad-reputation dogged Sega and gained a massive consumer base across the world, something that even Nintendo couldnt compete with, so the confidence in Nintendo took a battering, forcing them to effectively abandon the N64 very quickly.
Now Microsoft. Look at the situation- Sega now a software house, Nintendo really looking at the last throw of the dice to save their own skin and Sony doing exactly what Nintendo and Sega have both done in the past, that is screwed up their launches of a new system. The situation plays right into the hand of Microsoft- they can come in very quietly, like Sony did with the Playstation and sell the system like hot cakes to wrestle the advantage from Sony and realistically make Nintendo go the same way as Sega. It looks like Microsoft can do exactly the same as Sony and Nintendo have done in the past, the only reason people are moaning about it is because they did it with the PC market, thats all. Nintendo and Sony did it discretely, espically in Sony's case with home electronics. I believe that monopolisation is a good thing- because it forces people to come up with new ideas that consumers would like- and that isnt bad for the likes of us is it? We all want plenty of choice, don't we?
If you look at it, there has always been a dominant force in the computer games industry- in the mid 1980's it was Nintendo. What happened there? Well they crushed any hope of an Atari revival, and all but made Sega bankrupt, which would have happened if it wasnt for the Megadrive, which to be honest delayed the inevitable for Sega, as after the Megadrive's success, they really had dilusions of grandeur and thought that they could take on Nintendo. Due to the monopoly that Nintendo had then, it certainly wasnt the case, and they were delt a massive blow when the 32X arrived. Guess what- everybody switched to Nintendo.
Now lets move to the second scenario- Sony. When Nintendo released the super difficult to program for and expensive N64, they almost went the same way as Sega had it not been for they previous success and reputation(sounds like Atari in the late 70s there). Sony, being themselves huge electronics giants and possibly innovators of technology, thought that a joint with Nintendo was a profitable idea and they held the momopoly in the industry. Low and behold Sony would end up breaking from Nintendo not on the best of terms and then go on to release their own system, which preyed on the weak bad-reputation dogged Sega and gained a massive consumer base across the world, something that even Nintendo couldnt compete with, so the confidence in Nintendo took a battering, forcing them to effectively abandon the N64 very quickly.
Now Microsoft. Look at the situation- Sega now a software house, Nintendo really looking at the last throw of the dice to save their own skin and Sony doing exactly what Nintendo and Sega have both done in the past, that is screwed up their launches of a new system. The situation plays right into the hand of Microsoft- they can come in very quietly, like Sony did with the Playstation and sell the system like hot cakes to wrestle the advantage from Sony and realistically make Nintendo go the same way as Sega. It looks like Microsoft can do exactly the same as Sony and Nintendo have done in the past, the only reason people are moaning about it is because they did it with the PC market, thats all. Nintendo and Sony did it discretely, espically in Sony's case with home electronics. I believe that monopolisation is a good thing- because it forces people to come up with new ideas that consumers would like- and that isnt bad for the likes of us is it? We all want plenty of choice, don't we?
So therefore monopolisation is bad. Just my point.
damospud wrote:
The
> point I was trying to make was that if there is one dominant force,
> a monopoliser if you will, in the industry, it forces the ones
> trying to compete to work hard to produce better quality hardware
> and software, and thats how the computer industry evolves, plain and
> simple.
Either that or it allows the one company with the monopoly to get all lazy and rip-off their customers!
The
> point I was trying to make was that if there is one dominant force,
> a monopoliser if you will, in the industry, it forces the ones
> trying to compete to work hard to produce better quality hardware
> and software, and thats how the computer industry evolves, plain and
> simple.
Either that or it allows the one company with the monopoly to get all lazy and rip-off their customers!
I dont think either will fold- Nintendo will happily carry on with the successful Gameboy now the GBA is coming out in a couple of months and the epic Pokemon licence, and Sony have a huge base(well nearly a bottomless pit) of funds due to their sales of home electronics, so the possiblity of both folding is unlikely. The point I was trying to make was that if there is one dominant force, a monopoliser if you will, in the industry, it forces the ones trying to compete to work hard to produce better quality hardware and software, and thats how the computer industry evolves, plain and simple.
Well, id hardly call microsofts entry quiet!
I dont generally agree with monopolisation.
Lets play "what if". What if micrsofts dominence mean that both Sony and the Big N fold, or atleast become mere software developers like Sega (highly unlikely, but still...) Now what? Microsoft are the only console hardware manufacturer left, now they can do what they want. Make any old crap machine and sell it for a sky high price. Why? because there will be no other console for people to buy, they'll have to buy from microsoft if they want to play games, which most people do.
I dont generally agree with monopolisation.
Lets play "what if". What if micrsofts dominence mean that both Sony and the Big N fold, or atleast become mere software developers like Sega (highly unlikely, but still...) Now what? Microsoft are the only console hardware manufacturer left, now they can do what they want. Make any old crap machine and sell it for a sky high price. Why? because there will be no other console for people to buy, they'll have to buy from microsoft if they want to play games, which most people do.
Come on then, which three?
(Well done... by the way.)
(Well done... by the way.)
3 points there I agree with.
16 I don't agree with.
1 I can't make up my mind on.
16 I don't agree with.
1 I can't make up my mind on.
Well, everybodys thinking about momopolisation these days in the computer industry, espically as Microsoft, who many people regard as the kings of monopolisers as Bill Gates likes to do so most of the time, as they are releasing the X-Box to compete with Sony and Nintendo. I would have to say that we have seen this all before, and I think its good for the industry.
If you look at it, there has always been a dominant force in the computer games industry- in the mid 1980's it was Nintendo. What happened there? Well they crushed any hope of an Atari revival, and all but made Sega bankrupt, which would have happened if it wasnt for the Megadrive, which to be honest delayed the inevitable for Sega, as after the Megadrive's success, they really had dilusions of grandeur and thought that they could take on Nintendo. Due to the monopoly that Nintendo had then, it certainly wasnt the case, and they were delt a massive blow when the 32X arrived. Guess what- everybody switched to Nintendo.
Now lets move to the second scenario- Sony. When Nintendo released the super difficult to program for and expensive N64, they almost went the same way as Sega had it not been for they previous success and reputation(sounds like Atari in the late 70s there). Sony, being themselves huge electronics giants and possibly innovators of technology, thought that a joint with Nintendo was a profitable idea and they held the momopoly in the industry. Low and behold Sony would end up breaking from Nintendo not on the best of terms and then go on to release their own system, which preyed on the weak bad-reputation dogged Sega and gained a massive consumer base across the world, something that even Nintendo couldnt compete with, so the confidence in Nintendo took a battering, forcing them to effectively abandon the N64 very quickly.
Now Microsoft. Look at the situation- Sega now a software house, Nintendo really looking at the last throw of the dice to save their own skin and Sony doing exactly what Nintendo and Sega have both done in the past, that is screwed up their launches of a new system. The situation plays right into the hand of Microsoft- they can come in very quietly, like Sony did with the Playstation and sell the system like hot cakes to wrestle the advantage from Sony and realistically make Nintendo go the same way as Sega. It looks like Microsoft can do exactly the same as Sony and Nintendo have done in the past, the only reason people are moaning about it is because they did it with the PC market, thats all. Nintendo and Sony did it discretely, espically in Sony's case with home electronics. I believe that monopolisation is a good thing- because it forces people to come up with new ideas that consumers would like- and that isnt bad for the likes of us is it? We all want plenty of choice, don't we?
If you look at it, there has always been a dominant force in the computer games industry- in the mid 1980's it was Nintendo. What happened there? Well they crushed any hope of an Atari revival, and all but made Sega bankrupt, which would have happened if it wasnt for the Megadrive, which to be honest delayed the inevitable for Sega, as after the Megadrive's success, they really had dilusions of grandeur and thought that they could take on Nintendo. Due to the monopoly that Nintendo had then, it certainly wasnt the case, and they were delt a massive blow when the 32X arrived. Guess what- everybody switched to Nintendo.
Now lets move to the second scenario- Sony. When Nintendo released the super difficult to program for and expensive N64, they almost went the same way as Sega had it not been for they previous success and reputation(sounds like Atari in the late 70s there). Sony, being themselves huge electronics giants and possibly innovators of technology, thought that a joint with Nintendo was a profitable idea and they held the momopoly in the industry. Low and behold Sony would end up breaking from Nintendo not on the best of terms and then go on to release their own system, which preyed on the weak bad-reputation dogged Sega and gained a massive consumer base across the world, something that even Nintendo couldnt compete with, so the confidence in Nintendo took a battering, forcing them to effectively abandon the N64 very quickly.
Now Microsoft. Look at the situation- Sega now a software house, Nintendo really looking at the last throw of the dice to save their own skin and Sony doing exactly what Nintendo and Sega have both done in the past, that is screwed up their launches of a new system. The situation plays right into the hand of Microsoft- they can come in very quietly, like Sony did with the Playstation and sell the system like hot cakes to wrestle the advantage from Sony and realistically make Nintendo go the same way as Sega. It looks like Microsoft can do exactly the same as Sony and Nintendo have done in the past, the only reason people are moaning about it is because they did it with the PC market, thats all. Nintendo and Sony did it discretely, espically in Sony's case with home electronics. I believe that monopolisation is a good thing- because it forces people to come up with new ideas that consumers would like- and that isnt bad for the likes of us is it? We all want plenty of choice, don't we?