| bdbdbd said: @WoW: Ehh... Were you just trying to validate my points or argue against? I think you just wanted to argue for the sake of argument, as usual. I didn's say Segas ads weren't effective, after all, they were very much targeted at the core audience that time and with the "headstart" Sega had with Megadrive, it really was able to gain ground by being aggressive right from the start. But the biggest reason for Segas success that gen was Sonic. They do respond to ads like that. But the issue is, that the segment of the market that responds, is already dominated by the instances that are in question in the OP. Basically Nintendo would benefit the most within the segment, if it would start making ads that calls PS360 as systems from history for crippled fat nerds, for example. Well, Sega exited the hardware market and Nintendo didn't. And i'm not that interested in explaining all my jokes. |
You cannot simply just say that Sonic is the reason for their success without understand what Sonic is/was. Sonic was nothing more than a video game character (albeit a very fun game). It was aggressive marketing and advertising that transformed him into a mascot to be remembered decades later and even rival Mario for a number of years. The hype, the attitude, and the games all contributed to Sega's and Sonic's image.
Also, your 3rd paragraph is worthless. Nintendo would not and cannot benefit from attacking its competitors at this point as its target demographics would not be strongly affected. Older people would not be impressed at all by it nor would the teenage/young adult demographic be phased by it while it's being played along side Gears/Resistance 2 ads. Sega also played the power and attitude cards, neither of which Nintendo is really in a position to play with its competitors. Honestly, your only real point would be that Nintendo has the most ground to gain in the teenage/young adult demographic, but it also has very few ways to gain it.
