prayformojo said:
Ssenkahdavic said:
prayformojo said:
Machiavellian said:
prayformojo said:
What happened with Xbox is a result, a DIRECT result, of putting a product on shelves and viewing it as a product instead of having a love and passion for it. Nintendo IS gaming. That's all they freakin' do. Criticize all you want, but the men and women who make games like Animal Crossing, along with the president himself, truly have a passion and love for games and their ability to bring joy to the world. This is why they have stayed afloat for so long. It's not enough to make something that you think will make money. You have to BELIEVE in it, and love it as well.
Xbox has been nothing but a cold, sterile "product" for many years now and this is why it's crumbling. No vision, no passion and absolutely NO soul behind the brand what so ever. Video games aren't mops or paper plates. They're as much art as they are a product. When you have a bunch of ceo, suit wearing egg heads dipping into the world of "art", it's always going to end poorly.
|
Having a vision that conincide with consumers is way more important then passion.
|
Consumers is such a generic term and can mean lots of things. I think what Nintendo does on the business side of things, is look at long term goals. Sony and MS chase trends. Nintendo tries to look past them or flat out make them all by themselves. That's why they have been turning a profit for damn near their entire run as a game maker.
But at the heart of this, is the fact that, like I said, they ARE games. This is all they do. They don't make OS for mobile and PC machines, tv's, portable music players, cell phones or try to make "entertainment machines." They make GAME CONSOLES and GAMES...period. I think that level of dedication and passion, that leads to knowledge and that knowledge allows them to succeed where other fall.
|
I would agree with you on MS and Nintendo. Gaming for MS is a possible extra market to make some money out of. Nintendo IS gaming (regardless of how much many people do not like their games). I do not really agree with you on Sony though. Sony wants gaming to save their company and/or other Sony products (Think about it. PS1 = CD, PS2 = DVD, PS3 = BlueRay, PS4 = Saving Sony). It started out as a good way to upsale their other technologies, but now its morphed into a possible savior for the Company.
|
But if PS1, PS2 and PS3 were basically trojan horses for their other products, then by default, doesn't that kind of prove my point? I'm not saying they view gaming as just another product like MS. After all, a vew of the lead players in that company were developers. But in no way do I think they have the same love of the craft as Nintendo or as dedicated to gaming.
Sony is an enterprise that sells many products much in the same way MS does. The only difference imo, is that some of the people in CHARGE, know what they're doing or at least have some common sense when it comes to gaming.
|
It does not. Sony is much more like Nintendo than they are like MS. If anything, would you agree Sony is an Entertainment Company? TVs, Movies, Music then going into Gaming (PS1 = CDs when they were popular and massively being adopted = Music. PS2 = DVDs when they were popular and in the initial stages of being massively adopted = Movies. PS3 = 3D/BlueRay when it was first released and they were trying to make it the primary HD dvd replacement = TVs/Movies
MS is much more of a Business Software Company (Going more towards Business as a Service IE The Cloud) While you say MS chases trends (and maybe they do) Sony looks to be more of trying to create a trend, sort of like Nintendo does. The difference is Nintendo for now IS a Gaming company and tries to make trends in gaming, where Sony is also looking out for the other parts of the company besides Gaming.
I think its pretty awesome that the three players in the game are so different. Makes things interesting.
