Squilliam said:
Million said:
Squilliam said:
The games industry could lose any one of the big three and it will still survive. Or to put it simply any one of the three are expendible.
Nintendo - Expendable, proven in the PS1/PS2 generation. Had they not existed then? It wouldn't have mattered.
Sony - Expendible, this generation and the ones before the N64 are proof of this.
Microsoft - Again, expendible.
The point is, the three players in the market have to constantly justify their existance to you the consumer. If they don't they will drop out, its as simple as that.
This is an industry where one or two players can expand and cover the whole market, much like the semiconductor industry. So the one who would drop out of the market would hurt it the least because at that time it would probably be the least relevant and influential in the market anyway. If you want proof, look at the exit of Sega! It hardly caused any ripples at all when they left. |
Your ignoring the question most probably because the answer hurts you too much , the question wasn't "what company would kill the gaming industry dead with it's depature" was it ?. Of course any gaming company would be expendable but that's beside the point. Sony and Nintendo offer alot to this industry and have both invested heavily in the growth of the gaming industry , Microsoft tried to elbow their way in buying exclusivity , aggresivley dropping the prices of the consoles to the point where they're unlikely to be even profiting of it , released shoddy , poor quality hardware and so on.
|
Except that the most important company never leaves the industry, only the LEAST important company.
Compare this, Microsoft drops everything game related, so that means:
- Tools
- The Direct X standard
- The Xbox360
All gone, and the result?
- PC gaming dies and with it GPU development grinds to a halt. (The biggest game platform btw) and all three consoles use PC derived GPUs
- No bridging ports to get the industry up to speed quickly in a new generation
- Linux/OSX would take YEARS to bridge the gap between where Windows is now and where they are currently in relation to games.
Microsoft is THE monopoly in the PC gaming market. Its the only platform and there aren't any other players to quickly step in and fill the breach.
You're forgetting the important PC aspect, remember Microsoft has both the 2nd best selling console in this generation AND the biggest single game market wrapped up in its little finger.
If Sony drops dead tomorrow the industry will blink and move on. Their studios? Bought by third parties, Microsoft and Nintendo. What can you do on a PS3 that you can't do on an Xbox360? The PSP? Its Apples next target anyway, they'd just accelerate their plans at moving into the industry.
|
Nuh uh , the void that microsoft would leave would be quickly filled with already existing ( and superior ) alternatives , it would hinder the proggresion of development short-term but be much better for long term as competition = Quality with good value , Monopoloy = Microsoft = Bloatware , with a crazy price tag.
I don't understand all the technical stuff all that well but isn't OpenGL the less popular but superior alternative to Direct X , Isn't Firefox the less popular but superior alternative to Internet explorer ? I know that VLC media player is the less popular but superior alternative to Windows Media Player , Open Office may not be superior but it is a free alternative to Microsoft Office (which in my eyes makes it superior).
