think about sega..

anyway...i think that Nintendo maybe will have a harder time next generation than they had this... you know all the "wii fit, my fitness coach" gamers will probably not come back, for them wii is just another half-hearted try to get slim...- 10 000 000 sold consoles just there....then we have the children's who wanted wii as a toy to play wii sport and then bought games like "Big Beach Party" and "Game party" and they will probably not come back to Nintendo... and i think they are like 10 miljons to...

i dont say nintendo cant win without these...but i think the race will be much closer and be more based on who has the "good games" next generation. I think Next generation will have less crap games, less sold consoles and less casual things.

The gamers who bought wii for first time with games like Mario Kart, Guitar Hero and Lego Star Wars will probably come back to gaming because they have had a good experience off it. So Nintendo will probably stay biggest...but it will be a much closer run...

LOL, depends on how you define "win". Is selling the most consoles winning???

MS are over 9 billion $ in the hole. The made a tiny profit last year, but again they're taking losses because they dropped the price to $199 to save themselves the embarasement of being outsold weekly by PS3 which was $120 MORE EXPENSIVE.

It's pretty common to sell a console at a loss at launch, but to be selling at a loss 3.5 years later is not good at all.

The problem MS has is that they either have to lose the console war or lose a shitload of money. They simply cannot fight fair with Sony and Nintendo and expect to win. There's simply more talent in those companies.

Actually considering that the average price of Xbox 360s sold in the U.S.A. is $290 you're full of it.

ALL I'm going to say is, that this generation isn't over yet not for about 3-4 years, so to say that microsoft hasn't lost half way through a generation is stupid

if you consider losing as last place, nintendo has never lost... last gen the DC lost.

oh yeah they lost the GBA era... they were alone ^^

anyways this game is about earning money so you win when you do and you lose when you don't...

Yeah, because every PS2 game released to a user base of over 100 million.

Seriously, when a console sells as much as the PS1 or PS2, it's quite hard to make a game that appeals to every gamer(or even close to it) because those gamers are of so many different demographics. Even with the DS and the Wii, their best selling, non-bundled titles will have only sold to 10-20% of their respective user bases.

Microsoft is better? Please. What game on a Microsoft console, first or third party, has ever sold more than ten million? Granted, games like Halo and Gears Of War had high attach rates, but that's because the Xbox and Xbox 360 install bases consist almost entirely of core and hardcore gamers and don't have the mass appeal of the PS1/PS2/Wii/DS, so if you make a core or hardcore game, it's obviously going to sell to a large chunk of the install base.

I doubt it unless there is an underlying change in global purchasing or MS changes tack for their next console. So far as I see MS is locked into having a console that has high specs, required to deliver ever better graphical versions of Halo, Gears, Fable, etc.

Every generation seems to be won by a console that is not at the edge graphically/specs but captures the middle ground and general purchasers (something both Sony and Nintendo have done, and I believe could do again).

For two generations MS has shown growth, but has shown no real ability to capture the general consumer. I see no evidence to believe they stand a better chance than Nintendo or Sony of doing so next gen.

If MS really wants to win the next gen I think its going to really have to consider the specification/cost of the console vs the level Nintendo (and I suspect Sony) too are likely to aim for after seeing how this gen is playing out.

How is Sony and Microsoft any different from one another? Microsoft and Sony are no better than one another. Sony brought heavy corporate bidding and exclusivity contracts into the console gaming realm, and Microsoft is finishing it. This is no different than the actions which any strong corproration could achieve. Microsoft has weakened Sony already, so again I ask, how are they any different? The high sales of the PS and PS2 were more favorable to its days of having a lower installed base and still having the larges variety of games. As their installed base grew, only few games numbers rose. The PS2 has an installed base of over 100 M, and yet I see no change in their highest selling games as opposed to 6-8 years ago. The installed base isn't everything if you don't know who your core demographic are and Sony didn't have to even worry about that, because they moneyhatted every third party that would dare lift their skirt and bat and eye.

Microsoft has the same power to do the same evil, but they are far more powerful than Sony, gaming division or no gaming division. Mass appeal is knowing your demographic, and out of Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo....I'd say Microsoft was in second place. They never arrogantly attacked Nintendo's "gimmicks". They made it clear who their system was for, which was mainly teen to adult males. Microsoft leveled the playingfield when third parties saw peoples reaction to Microsoft over Sony during the economic downfall. I've never heard of Microsoft outright buying games unless they were DLC, timed exclusivity or acquiring a company. For instance, Microsoft just agreed to buy Big Park. They are playing a game which if Sony strikes back, they will surely lose; you see, they'll drain Sony of every last SCE dollar forcing them to fight back.

Any powerful corporation can moneyhat, but I guess Microsoft gets all the hate when they do it. Sony has been doing it for nearly a decade without as much as a sneer from anyone, save for a minority of Nintendo fanboys who could tell the difference. The conclusion to this grande story, is that Microsoft must purchase more studios to pump out more first party games, just like Sony. I mean come on, do you actually think either Sony or Microsoft have the creativity of Nintendo to be involved in developer affairs? Please....they just make the technology, conspire and throw money at devs. Microsoft has already found enough of a following in America and Europe to be able to have a great start next gen. As I said, the only fault for Microsoft this gen was rushing the hardware.

Look at Nintendos games as they approach 100M. They have more great selling games its just that. But most of the really top selling software on the PS2 was third party, this coming from a company which has 'a bigger 1st party than Microsoft/Nintendo combined'.

I only said marginally better for Microsoft. They seem to know how to win key demographics such as shooter fans with Gears, Halo, Bioshock timed exclusivity and the free exclusive Left 4 Dead which is on track to selling 4M units. Microsoft got for free what a massive development effort on the PS3 couldn't deliver if you compare either RFOM 2 or KZ2 to Left 4 Dead. Also wasn't Oblivion timed exclusivity a kick in the pants for Sony at a time when they desperately needed games?