theprof00 said:
The fuck are you talking about?
I know MS is a great company, nay, Bill Gates is an extraordinary man, and all of Apple's success can be directly attributed to Bill Gates. And they charge because they want us to have a superior online system? Do you know how much money they make on their subscriptions? Many many millions more than they put into making it "an average" serverbase. What about proprietary drives and proprietary wifi adaptor? What were those for? To provide the best possible storage? The best possible wifi? No. These are all money making endeavors. I know you're thinking "that's business". And yes, you're right. But the difference is keeping customers happy. Does a charge keep customers happy for online? No. Does proprietary everything keep customers happy? No. They are obstacles that customers are willing to endure for the system they want. Big difference.
Nintendo, is probably the closest. They make great games, have fair pricing on their games, and have very reliable hardware. However, they discourage third party competition. Of course, Nintendo knew YEARS before the wii came out what they were going to do. Their strategy was all pre-planned. Third parties had to make it up on the spot.Third parties had no idea what would sell, and Nintendo didn't do anything to help them. Good for business? Yes. Does it keep the customer happy? No. And the fact that they have almost completely abandoned development is especially infuriating. They stopped making games because one game is capable of selling 20million, and they don't want new titles to compete. New super mario wii came out over 2 years ago, with no sequel in sight. Why? Because people keep buying NSMB Wii. Good for business? Yes. Does it keep the customer happy? No, because someone who bought it over 2 years ago, hasn't been kept happy. Only the people who haven't bought the game become satiated. After all, why spend money developing games when one game will keep selling as long as you don'tmake a sequel. Ie; why buy nsmb 1, when nsmb 2 is out?
And yes, I agree with you that Vita's strategy is stifling. I don't like their proprietary card prices, and I don't like them pushing the 3g even though wifi to 3g price for hardware is negligible. In terms of the Vita, Sony is fucking up. But you know what? MS proved that you could sell unnecessarily overpriced addons to the gamer and get away with it. I don't like what Sony is doing, but I want the system, because it has the games that I want. Are they keeping the handheld gamers happy? No. Are they doing right by business? Yes.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I call it like I see it.
Nintendo is shitty to gamers on the wii. They are better with gamers on the 3DS.
MS is shitty to gamers on the 360, but they do right by providing the games their core gamers want, but that will change as kinect keeps getting bigger.
Sony is Great with PS3 owners, but they are shitty to PSV owners.
When it comes to the consoles, Sony probably does the best as they fund indie games, picking up new developers all the time, and trynig to bring as many games to the console as possible without any charge to us.
When it comes to handhelds, Nintendo does the best as they have learned a valuable lesson and are working hard to bring in third parties, and new developers.
In the same way that Nintendo learned to be good to its handheld owners, so did Sony with its ps3. That is why both are at the height of each respective outlet.
|
