IMO, this thread has got completely out of hand. I am locking it. Feel free to PM me and complain.

Legend11 said: Bodhesatva said: Legend11 said: Rath said: Is anybody going to try and refute the 'wave theory' that has been proposed? The one that says that this wave of crap games and shovelware only indicates a change in developer focus that will cause good games to come to the Wii - but not yet as for a good game development takes time. It's about as valid as PS3 fans who say their system will take off next year (as in nobody knows for sure and anyone who claims otherwise is just guessing and hoping). No, these are quite different Legend. They do share one similarity: they both predict the future. It's just that one prediction relies both on historical and empirical data, and another relies on wishful thinking. Saying the PS3 will pick up next year is just.. a hunch. Hey, this is what I believe will happen! It goes against the facts (no system has ever seen a major turnaround 1.5+ years in to its lifespan) and the developmental focus, but that's what I believe! By contrast, we have very solid reason to believe that developmental focus is shifting to the Wii. First, because every leading platform in the history of gaming has seen the most development, compared to its generational competitors; and more importantly, because most if not all major publishers (EA, THQ, Take 2, Capcom, Sega, Namco-Bandai, Activision,  and Ubisoft, among others) have specifically stated that they are moving their focus towards the Wii. Now, we see the first wave of third party games becoming available on the system -- not surprisingly, the ones produced the most quickly are the least polished.  A better analogy would be this: let's say you and I are both standing outside one day. The sky becomes very dark, the humidity raises to 99 percent, and we hear thunder in the distance. I claim it's going to rain. You claim that it won't. Sure, both are predictions of the future, but one is based on logic and evidence, and another is not. Similarly, the notion that the Wii will continue to see increased developmental support is based on both empirical evidence and unanimous historical data. The suggestion that the PS3 will pick up speed later is not.  They are both guessing and hoping dispite one relying on historical and empirical data which may or may not play out the same way again.  Take the N64 for example, based on the historical and empirical data at the time it should have dominated like the SNES and NES did which wasn't the case.  In the end nobody knows how it's going to play out and it all comes down to guessing, educated guesses sometimes, but that doesn't change the fact.

Legend, give up.

 

How was the N64 supposed to dominate based on historical and empirical data?  Because it was a Nintendo branded console?  Bodhesatva stated, which is the topic of this thread, the relationship between 3rd party development and the success of consoles.

 

Even if you want to bring the N64 into discussion, we see a console made by the company who dominated the market for 2 years whose mistakes, including a greedy choice of media format, caused a great deal of problems. (By greedy, I mean 64's cartridges = no licensing fees for CD's to Nintendo, harder to pirate (until emulation).  Sony trying to trojan horse into the home movie market through videogames.)  See?  I looked at the past and I based my prediction upon the previously proven data rather than saying, "well I like the PS3, and I want it to win the console war."

I'm just as the guilty as the rest of us.  I'm a big Buffalo Sabres fan (a hockey team if you don't know) and they were in the semi finals and ended up 0-3 to Ottawa.  I thought they could turn it around even though only 2 teams in sports history (of any sport [it might be 3, i forgot]) have come back from 0-3 series.  I went against all previous data - and it was merely wishful thinking because I was a big fan.  Well it turned out they won the 4th game but the 5th game they lost in the 2nd overtime.

I was a Buffalo Sabres fanboy just as these people are Sony fanboys, and we all want the best for our favorite entities that we cheer for, but sometimes you just have to come to terms with reality.  I mean its fun and all cheering for your favorite team (company), but the arguments on here just get out of hand.

Legend11 said: They are both guessing and hoping dispite one relying on historical and empirical data which may or may not play out the same way again. Take the N64 for example, based on the historical and empirical data at the time it should have dominated like the SNES and NES did which wasn't the case. In the end nobody knows how it's going to play out and it all comes down to guessing, educated guesses sometimes, but that doesn't change the fact.

There was actually little historical data to support the N64. Nintendo didn't outright dominate Sega and we'd already seen one company rise to the top only to fall. There had yet to be any long lasting company continue in that way. It also came out over a year after the PS. I personally don't know much about the lineup of these systems because I missed out on this generation overall for what empirical data you may be suggesting. I do know that the cheaper costs of the compact discs over cartridges caused a lot of developers to jump ship (along with a poor atitude by Nintendo). The gamecube was similar by coming out a year after the PS2.