| KungKras said: You really do like to write walls of text do you? Please remember that sometimes the best arguments are the simplest. Well, I can write walls of text too. If you have read the "finding Ninintendo's sword" and the "Finding Nintendo's shield" articles that Malstrom has written, you should know that Nintendo is turning Sony's and Microsoft's advantages into their wekanesses. You can argue that Microsofts first-party studios and Sony's first party studios is on par with Nintendo's studios (Which would be silly, but still open to discussion) But, because Sony and Microsoft are no true game compainies like Nintendo, their first party studios isn't as integrated as Nintendo's are. Nintendo's first party is very integrated with the hardware divisions, and thus have a much easier time making software following the goal of the company. Nintendo has turned the expanded market into a batlleground of first party titles, (as evident by how much Nintendo games sell on Wii) and therefore this great "scope" that you say microsoft has is irrelevant. Microsoft will never win in the expanded market unless they can integrate their goal with the hardware and software as good as Nintendo does. You said thousands of dev kits for Natal were allready handed out, but that's irrelevant too since this is not a battle about third party. Third parties will make their downmarket (casual) games for Wii, because it will not be worth it to make for an HD system. You said that Microsoft is doing well as a first entrant into the market, but no they are not. With the 360 they are worse off than the N64 in terms of marketshare, the PS1 had a virtual monopoly, and the PS2 sold even more, 360 isn't even close to those numbres. Nintendo with the NES and the SNES were also much more sucessful that Microsoft has been. M$ expected the 360 to give them the leading position this gen, it did not and this great "scope" that Microsoft thought would be their strenght is now their weakness. You say that Microsoft is a stronger and richer company than Nintendo, and that Microsoft can outlast Nintendo (whatever that's supposed to mean since Nintendo will never lose money on their hardware). Even if they are a bigger comapny, Nintendo has certain things that Microsoft doesn't have. They have their Nintendo franchises, which is probably the reason they survived the Playstation dominance (that and their handhelds). Nintendo having their core franchises means that demand for Nintendo systems will never ever reach zero, thus Microsoft will never ever be able to gain a monopoly over the game industry. If you think Microsoft can buy Nintendo, that is also incorrect, Nintendo is a japanese companyy and can only be taken over if both countries governments agree (which they never will). You also said this: "Microsoft and Sony are better built to compete and exist in the direction the industry is headed in." It makes me wonder where you have been the ast few years. Nintendo has changed the direction that this industry is moving at, and Sony and Microsoft didn't have time to change. But... maybe the reason as to why I find that quote way off is becuse I might have forgotten that "Nintendo is always doomed".
Also, why are you talking about Bill Gates? I thought that he didn't work at MS anymore.
(Edit: I would also like to add that Microsoft has Sony to worry about as well.) |
Bill Gates was one of the forces that propelled Microsoft to go into gaming.
The direction the video game industry is headed is a very different version than you might be thinking. Do you think the evolution of the revolution Nintendo themselves started will cease at wiimotes and limited motion controls? The controls will need to get more innovative and groundbreaking. The technology required to accomplish these new controls and interfaces might outgrow what Nintendo is capable of. Nintendo is a gaming company and they have started a movement that might not lead to pure gaming anymore. The question isn't so much what has Nintendo started and where are they taking the industry. The question is where will Nintendos' competition take what Nintendo started?
I never said Microsoft will monopolize the game industry. I simply stated this is always their goal. I don't believe Microsoft can dominate Video Games like they dominate the OS market. However, they can certainly become the unquestioned leader. I do expect them to accomplish this sometime in the future. Microsoft unlike Nintendo and even more so sony, knows how to maket their products and strategize to gain the lead. Once they attain the lead, they hold it with a cyborg like grip.
Nintendo prior to Microsoft was my prefered console maker. I simply liked them better because I grew up with the company and had grown very fond of their first party titles. Once the N64 era came around, although I was happy with my console I always felt like Nintendo wasn't aggressive enough. Sony always seemed to one up Nintendo. Ever since then, Nintendo hasn't changed. Their just too nice. Nintendo showed some previously absent intiative this generation. From this point forward the other companies are going to push to even the playing field and even dislevel the field in their favor. Nintendo will have to answer back. How many failures can Nintendo sustain? How many failures can Sony and Microsoft sustain before their pushed beyond the brink? That is what I meant about Nintendo being outlasted.
Why do you have such a profound love for Nintendo? They turned their backs on us! They might have started the beginning of the end for this industry. They are no longer a gaming company for gamers, their a gaming company for non gamers. Am I suppose to be happy because Nintendo finally releases some first party titles for gamers? I feel sorry for Nintendo fans. Nintendo fans have been starved this generation of their quality games of old. Nintendo made a conscious decision to try to appeal to non gamers before they take care of us. We the gamers who have granted them everything they have. Nintendo has no third party support because hardcore games don't sell on the Wii. They don't sell on the Wii because there aren't that many hardcore Wii owners. Their first party? I'm sorry but what you perceive as a strength is really a weakness. Their true first party, the Marios and Zeldas and Metroids are few and far between. The shovel ware first party titles are just that, shovelware. Wii Fit, Golf and all the other terribly shallow, superficial titles they make are easily duplicated elsewhere. You're making a huge mistake by assuming that the casual mass market bases their game decisions on the same factors as the traditional loyalist gamers. Casuals will just flock to the newest kid on the block. Nintendo isn't building a fanbase with casuals. Their building a fanbase for motion controls. What will seperate Nintendo from the other consoles then?
There was a factor I haven't previously mentioned but that influenced my previous posts. Apple. I have a strong convinction that Apple is looking to join the Home console market. If Apple indeed does join the Home Console market, I don't believe Sony or Nintendo can withstand the heat. Apple and Microsoft have a strong rabid dislike for each other and the other companies might get caught in the crossfires. These companies are no joke. Apple and Microsoft know how to win.
