Mandalore76 said:
I never said that. Nintendo's success in the mid-late 80's proves that there was still a market available after Atari collapsed the industry. Nintendo thought that to be the case and that's why they brought the Famicom over to the US as the NES. They were 100% correct. If they hadn't done so, all it would have taken is another company to try and fill that void. Would the games have been the same/better/worse? There's no way to say that. Different people have different ideas and concepts. Sony's PlayStation is not remembered as a success because of ideas and concepts that they as a corporation were responsible for. They had a console that Nintendo themselves spurred them to create. They used that console as a platform for brilliant 3rd party support. No PlayStation = some other platform receives that support and gets Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, etc. That opens the door for some other platform to enjoy that success in Sony's absence. You can't say as a definitive fact that no other company would have enjoyed the PlayStation's success in the absence of Sony's entrance to the market if they had that level of 3rd party support. |
There is no way to tell what would happen if Nintendo hadn't entered the fray in the 80's but what we can be sure is that it would have taken longer, if there would be a bigger crash or if things would be better in the end we can't be sure... but in the case of Sony, seeing how many failed and that no one else tried before MS entered and also didn't really suceed at first I don't think anyone else would make the same success.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."