Would you sacrifice one of the big 3 for Sega?

[binary solo]

KungKras said:

binary solo said:

 

Yes, but it's emotionally overwrought, and inaccurate, to say Sony killed Sega. Seriously, are you going to begrudge Sony for all time for trying to make sure its console was a success? Is it such an outrage that Sony should think it can make a go of being a gaming console maker and give it a go, especially as they had gone a fair way down the road with Nintendo?

None of what you say can be made into Sony being at fault. If you can point to any instances where Sony used unethical business practices and those unethical practices directly contributed to Sega's poor console sales, then yes I'll accept Sony bears the stain of guilt for causing Sega's downfall. But so far all I've read is Sony engaging in business practice that is acceptable, and no, you can't say moneyhatting is unethical, because it's accepted practice in the business. Buying exclusivity happens in a lot more industries than gaming.

Sega fans, and Nintendo fans, need to get that gigantic Sony chip off their shoulders. You don't have to like Sony or Playstation, but you should stop with the unjustified blaming of them for the failings of your preferred console makers; unless you can provide an actual smoking gun.

If there's one thing Sony fans didn't do this generation it was try to blame someone else for PS3's difficult start. Quite the opposite really, they maintained faith that PS3 would do well enough in the end; and they were right. Sony fans can be criticised for a lot of things, but scapegoating isn't one of them; at least not in anything I've read.

I don't see how it's inaccurate. Sony entering the market was what became the final nail in Sega's coffin as a hardware maker. And I hate the direction that console gaming went while Sony was the market leader, so of course I am going to begrudge them for entering the market.

You just don't get it. Up until the PS3 failure, Nintendo was the only company left with the old-school philosophy of making consoles (and even the Gamecube was clearly influenced by the PS1 in design) and they were believed to also be going extinct as a hardware maker. And as long as there is two giant corporations like Microsoft and Sony in the market, Nintendo will always be vurnurable to war-of-attrition tactics. I don't want the kind of gaming I like to die out, so you can be damn sure I am going to be bitter about it.

Oh, and a lot of Sony fans complained about Microsoft's moneyhatting, I remember it clearly.

Just get over it already. There's no denying we've seen brilliant games the last couple of generations without a Sega console, and at least up to now console gaming has done very well. For some people it's sad that Sega left the hardware business, but it's blind fanboyism to hold a grudge against Sony for something that Sega largely did to itself.

I never said Sony fans didn't complain about MS moneyhatting. I said Sony fans haven't bitched about MS or Nintendo being to blame for PS3's bad start. PS3 faltered, and MS and Nintendo capitalised on that stumble, well done them. Wii would have been very popular even if PS3 had got off to a much better start, Xbox 360 probably not so much.

I like how you characterise PS3 as a failure when it's outsold every Nintendo and Sega home console other than the Wii, and will probably outsell Xbox360 when all's said and done, making only Wii and PS1/2 as home consoles that have sold better than PS3; and outselling Wii isn't entirely out of the question. PS3 had it's failings, especially early on, but it's far from being a failure. If PS3 was a true failure we wouldn't be getting a PS4.