Would Sony be a better company being just 3rd party? (gaming wise)

[Bamboleo]

NYANKS said:

Bamboleo said:

PSwii60 said:

Bamboleo said:

PSwii60 said:

honestly, if anything nintendo would be the better third party..
i was actually hoping after GC they'd become one;
imagine zelda on the PS3 today and Metroid on Xbox360

'nuff said

Nintendo doesn't sell their hardware for a loss, being a very profitable company, while others are quite the opposite.

Dropping on profitable hardware sales to focus just on software? I don't think that would generate more money than their current strategy,

if i were a stockholder, of course i'd prefer to see the company gain instead of huge losses but i really doubt sony would ever let it happen

i'm just saying...
while nintendo, even during GC period they'd even seen so many gains and has never seen a loss even for a year, i still see nintendo as a better third party than sony..
nintendo has a lot of ip's and their games can appeal to either HD consoles not to mention a lot of fans

Agree. But that would make Nintendo a less profitable company, skipping hardware income, and therefore a worse company by this thread logic!

It would make them less profitable, but it would make the other consoles much better than Nintendo's last couple efforts because the system in question would have great 3rd and 1st parties, as opposed to Nintendo's consoles, which only have one.

"Better" doesn't mean more profitable. Also, few, doesn't mean zero. Wii as great 1st party and third party support. But in fewer quantities than the HD consoles.