None of the above all companies are out to make money. And each one has there own strategy to do it.

microsoft of course . Thinking about Bill gates and his crimes againest apple and netscape is enough , LOL .

I don't think that sony ALWAYS steals idea fro nintendo , they created the motion sensor before nintendo , in the playstation One .

nintendo is fully innocent *sniff*

Soooo this is it ..... MICROSOFT.

mike_intellivision said: In the past, Nintendo has committed many "sins." Its deals with third parties were one-sided. However, it planted the seeds of its own downfall when it broke an agreement with Sony to work with Phillips. The new competition (Sony) and the software makers gleefully worked with each other when the PS1 came out, leaving Nintendo to wither. Since then, Nintendo has finally realized it cannot always bully to get its own way and has pretty much allowed people a much freer hand with software on its platforms. This has led to greater quantity (and occasionally good quality) third-party releases. Microsoft came into the video gaming industry with the hubris it displayed in computer OS and productivity software. Its greatest "sins" deal though with its current entry -- the Xbox 360. It released it rushed and not full featured. While there are varying numbers on the frequency, most people believe that Microsoft's rushing out of its X360 to beat the competition to a certain extent led to the console having its infamous hardware problem (RRoD). Be it hurried engineering, inadequate testing, or bad karma, Microsoft has been paying the price and trying to do penance ever since. An even bigger problem though is the lack of a hard drive requirement for the Xbox 360. That was a move backward since the original Xbox had a hard drive. The move has restricted software install possibilities. And worst of all, it allowed Microsoft to sell overpriced proprietary hard drives (this "sin" of expensive hardware add-ons dates back to the original Xbox and also is seen in wireless adapters). Sony too has "sinned" this generation. It basically could do not much wrong and was a relatively benevolent market leader. The "sins" were indecision and synergy. Indecision because it could not decide what it wanted the PS3 to be. Synergy because it the incorporation of BR-DVD technology was useful to the corporate bottom-line, but had many drawbacks for developers and gamers (difficulty to program, high price, etc.). Mike from Morgantown

Huh? You do realize that Sony contract stated that Sony was to own all rights over all Nintendo products. That's why Nintendo didn't work with Sony. Sony were practically trying to buy Nintendo. Someone in Nintendo read the statement in the contract, which wasn't read earlier and they went to the president. Nintendo was furious, and they rejected the contract and didn't sign it. That was a smart move by Nintendo. A evil move by Sony as they told Nintendo that it was a partnership and they would split the $, but it was a ownership lol. Nintendo initially thought it was a partnership until they read that entire contract. Nintendo knew something that everyone should know. ALWAYS READ THE WHOLE CONTRACT!!

Nintendo

They always find new ways to take my money =(

Words Of Wisdom said: Soleron said: Case in point: You can't buy an OEM PC from any large vendor with a non-MS operating system that is cheaper than the same model with MS on it -even though e.g. Linux is free and Windows costs at least $50 to an OEM. Dell (the main provider of OEMs with Linux) includes support on all its products so if I were to guess at why the cost doesn't go down excluding the usual suspects (corporate greed/bribery), I'd have to say that it's likely due to needing to keep some people around who can support their linux product line (not that I'm really sure they do much of that anyway).

 

Actually, the reason is all that bundled crap that OEMs slap onto windows. Every stupid piece of trialware you get with your OEM computer is dollars off of the price. Until the day comes that a lot of companys who want this kind of exposure are making Linux versions Windows boxes will cost less.

 

well because you put (discuss) at the end of the title...


Microsoft. They knew full well about all the problems there console had upon release. They put it out anyways just to be first in the market. The PS3 delayed the release due to blu ray, but at least they put out a good console that rarely breaks.

astrosmash said: Words Of Wisdom said: Soleron said: Case in point: You can't buy an OEM PC from any large vendor with a non-MS operating system that is cheaper than the same model with MS on it -even though e.g. Linux is free and Windows costs at least $50 to an OEM. Dell (the main provider of OEMs with Linux) includes support on all its products so if I were to guess at why the cost doesn't go down excluding the usual suspects (corporate greed/bribery), I'd have to say that it's likely due to needing to keep some people around who can support their linux product line (not that I'm really sure they do much of that anyway).   Actually, the reason is all that bundled crap that OEMs slap onto windows. Every stupid piece of trialware you get with your OEM computer is dollars off of the price. Until the day comes that a lot of companys who want this kind of exposure are making Linux versions Windows boxes will cost less.

Good point, I forgot about that stuff.  I haven't bought an OEM in... years.

The people saying sony say it because they have been dominant the past two gens, completely took sega out of the map, and nearly took nintendo out of the map last gen (they had an amazing console, and earned there way to the top)

People saying Microsoft have a point, microsoft has been BUYING themelves to the top, and they declared they want to take the PLAYSTATION BRAND out of this gen, it was so cold what they said this e3, "We are aiming on taking out the playstation brand, and all of there games can be are on our console now."

Then they announced FF XIII, believe it or not the music had an evil betrayal tone to it.

As for nintendo, imo they are doing well, earning there way to the top just like sony did with the playstation. Just I hate the direction they are going, but hey they arent trying to take anyone out of the inustry and stealing that companies games now are they?

concity06 said: mike_intellivision said: In the past, Nintendo has committed many "sins." Its deals with third parties were one-sided. However, it planted the seeds of its own downfall when it broke an agreement with Sony to work with Phillips. The new competition (Sony) and the software makers gleefully worked with each other when the PS1 came out, leaving Nintendo to wither. Since then, Nintendo has finally realized it cannot always bully to get its own way and has pretty much allowed people a much freer hand with software on its platforms. This has led to greater quantity (and occasionally good quality) third-party releases. Microsoft came into the video gaming industry with the hubris it displayed in computer OS and productivity software. Its greatest "sins" deal though with its current entry -- the Xbox 360. It released it rushed and not full featured. While there are varying numbers on the frequency, most people believe that Microsoft's rushing out of its X360 to beat the competition to a certain extent led to the console having its infamous hardware problem (RRoD). Be it hurried engineering, inadequate testing, or bad karma, Microsoft has been paying the price and trying to do penance ever since. An even bigger problem though is the lack of a hard drive requirement for the Xbox 360. That was a move backward since the original Xbox had a hard drive. The move has restricted software install possibilities. And worst of all, it allowed Microsoft to sell overpriced proprietary hard drives (this "sin" of expensive hardware add-ons dates back to the original Xbox and also is seen in wireless adapters). Sony too has "sinned" this generation. It basically could do not much wrong and was a relatively benevolent market leader. The "sins" were indecision and synergy. Indecision because it could not decide what it wanted the PS3 to be. Synergy because it the incorporation of BR-DVD technology was useful to the corporate bottom-line, but had many drawbacks for developers and gamers (difficulty to program, high price, etc.). Mike from Morgantown   Huh? You do realize that Sony contract stated that Sony was to own all rights over all Nintendo products. That's why Nintendo didn't work with Sony. Sony were practically trying to buy Nintendo. Someone in Nintendo read the statement in the contract, which wasn't read earlier and they went to the president. Nintendo was furious, and they rejected the contract and didn't sign it. That was a smart move by Nintendo. A evil move by Sony as they told Nintendo that it was a partnership and they would split the $, but it was a ownership lol. Nintendo initially thought it was a partnership until they read that entire contract. Nintendo knew something that everyone should know. ALWAYS READ THE WHOLE CONTRACT!!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9TbVyNAWQI&feature=PlayList&p=7167CA33A18D17A9&index=0

 

880user088 said: microsoft of course . Thinking about Bill gates and his crimes againest apple and netscape is enough , LOL . I don't think that sony ALWAYS steals idea fro nintendo , they created the motion sensor before nintendo , in the playstation One . nintendo is fully innocent *sniff* Soooo this is it ..... MICROSOFT.

 

Source.