By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Jereel Hunter on 26 February 2010
Edit Thread
WilliamWatts said:
Jereel Hunter said:
WilliamWatts said:

Thats cool. 45% market share vs 48% or 52% is still pretty great. Remember the once great Playstation brand with its mighty mega powerful hardware is squelshed under the heel of some cheap $100 last generation hardware. Ditto for the Xbox 360, so why not be happy and smile every week that the two arrogant console makers get their ass handed to them?

Smile!

How is that a good thing? while MS and Sony have repeatedly dropped prices, and MS in particular, has worked very hard to get the most high quality support from 3rd party devs, Nintendo charges more for their console can is necessary, and doesn't care that 90% of software not created with their licenses is shovelware.

Yes, smile if you like platformers and last-gen graphics. And while it's nice to see Sony get knocked down a peg after telling us to get second jobs to pay for their system, Nintendo's hardly doing this for our benefit.

 

(Also, I'd hardly classify MS as an 'arrogant console maker' considering they entered the market last and were the scrappy underdogs a very short time ago)

How did Nintendo charge too much? The market paid for what the console was worth not for what the cost of the individual components were. They probably charged too little given the endemic shortages for the first couple of years.

I didn't say Nintendo charged too much, I said they charge more than is necessary. While MS and Sony sold their consoles at a loss, Nintendo opted to sell a much less advanced peice of hardware to make a profit - which became a huge profit as costs dropped. Which is great from a business point of view - just that from a consumer point of view, they didn't do us any favors, hence no reason to smile.

Nintendo are not responsible for the software released on the platform, the people who released it are. Go complain to them or something because I haven't seen Microsoft or Sony declining software for being 'too bad' either.

The makers of the system can put in quality checks. For instance, MS makes sure games have acheivements and proper live support. You'll note Sony mentioned being more "egalitarian" recently. That it was easier to make something for PSN, less hoops to jump through. Nintendo doesn'thave the same standards they did in past generations, resulting in more shovelware... something they COULD at least mitigate, if they wanted to.

Microsoft worked hard? Well bully to them. Nintendo worked smart and gave an under-represented userbase an option for a console which suited their needs better and they responded in kind.

If it makes you feel better, Microsoft are slightly less arrogant than Sony. Their PR is still pretty bad even if its better than the worst offenders by a good margin.

 

In short, my point is that there's no reason for people to smile at Nintendo's success, other than being Nintendo fanboys. They're not a scrappy underdog, they've been making consoles longer than anyone else. And while the 360 and PS3 have both evolved since their release - they do more and cost a lot less, Nintendo is making money hand-over-fist on a no-frills system. Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike Nintendo, and I almost got a Wii myself - but i'm saying don't kid yourself in thinking that the triumph of the Wii is a win for consumers. Now we get to look forward to a future where motion controls are incorporated into more games than are necessary, and the graphical boost for the next generation is likely to be smaller than if the HD consoles had been the market leaders.