UNITY - Nintendo & Wii U Finish The REVOLUTION

[Zod95]

Mummelmann said:

 

[too many paragraphs]

My post had a single idea, built from few and short sentences, and you just took them seperately as several independent ideas (which was not the message I was passing) and gave them extensive replies. Your comments have juice and are well constructed, I'm not criticizing them, I'm just saying that's not what I asked and the issue I've raised became a bit lost in that ocean of text you've wrote.

However, there are some parts I would like to comment on:

Mummelmann said:

 

Look what happened when MS gained such massive market control with Windows, look at what happened when Apple gained massive control with the iPod and iPhone, look and Nintendo with the NES; there comes a point where the control and ambition supersedes market and industry interest.

...

And for that reason, it is equally silly to want Nintendo to go away from the market, just as it is silly to want MS and Sony to go away, the more players the more potential for variation and lack of consumer shackles.

Apple is as bad as Nintendo. Microsoft is definitely better, although they become dangerous as monopolists. Sony is even better than Microsoft. Valve is even better than Sony.

Apple and Nintendo present a shameful behaviour even when they aren't the leaders. It's very easy to fill an extensive infamous list about their practices.

Microsoft is far more difficult not only because they behave better than Apple/Nintendo but also because they never got the monopoly of the videogaming business. The DRM policies and the online checks they were about to implement on XOne show us already what we could expect from such disaster but that's far from being as bad as what Apple/Nintendo have done in past and are still doing.

Sony had the monopoly in the 5th and 6th generations and we can barely say bad things about such golden times. I think the Sony's infamous list of bad practices is very short and I have no fear about them dominating again.

Valve is just the immaculate example. They have no such infamous list and the way they've approached so far the market, the industry and even the work relations is brilliant like you said.

Having that said, why would it be a bad thing if Nintendo went away from the console market? Is the Sony vs Microsoft vs Valve a bad/poor scenario? Would you like a videogaming industry in which the exclusive games were splitted into 10 different consoles? That's what I understand from that last sentence of yours. I even think that a Sony vs Valve would be enough to avoid major greedy moves.

Mummelmann said:

 

With Sony and MS striving ever more for sameness in philosophy and market approach and Nintendo wasting their time refusing to wear the right shoes for the track; the whole console line-up is a lost opportunity.

Sameness how? Sony has created and developed new IPs and concepts on every generation they were in (being leaders or not) and this time around seems to be no exception. Microsoft is also attempting to bring many new games although I understand they're rather a Sony copy-cat in most of cases and that brilliant series like Project Gotham were ended and not replaced at all by similar concepts.

Mummelmann said:

 

This is also a problem for me; on the one hand I believe that gimmicks and short lived fireflies are not the way to go for sustained growth but I also resent the idea of the placid becoming the norm.

You seem to forget about software. That's the real field for improvements and innovation. The hardware doesn't need mandatory gimmicks that otherwise wouldn't be bought by the majority. The hardware needs to be simple and powerful, the rest is software's onus. Sony is playing it right with the PS4.

"Placid" doesn't need to be the norm. If a gimmick is really appealing it will be successful even if it's sold separately from the console. If it doesn't sell well is because it wasn't that appealing. Sony has been collecting the gamer's feedback on a daily basis (since they failed hard with Blu-ray and Cell) and they understood the camera shouldn't be included in the PS4's package. For now, the only thing consumers massively want with the console seems to be the conventional controller.

Mummelmann said:

 

Sony have always had an artificial price point on much of their hi-fi produce, for instance, which starting biting them in the ass when Samsung started one-up’ing them with equal or better hardware at a lower price point.

...

For some examples though, some MS blemishes to feast your eyes on

...

Sony have had immense influence and power in formats for a long time, not only due to being pioneers and co-engineering the formats themselves but also because they have stakes and ownership in sizeable music and movie industry venues, they provide the formats and the market segments to push them through consoles, audio releases and film.

I don't care about what they do outside of the videogaming business. That's not my focus. With all honesty, I can even say that I would be glad to see them profiting from the other industries as much as possible in order to spend it all in videogaming. I know I'm being selfish but that's my view.

Don't I want fairness in all businesses of the world? Sure, but then my focus would be on the oil companies, banks and major retailers that fill most of the fortune 500 with no real merit. Compared to them, even Apple and Nintendo are trully saints.

 

So, again, my question remains: are the "infamous lists" of Sony/Microsoft game divisions as large and devastating as Nintendo's?