Kasz216 said:
totalwar23 said:
What, that's not what he told me. According to him, the PS3 will win because it's on a ten year plan and by the time the next generation consoles will come out, the PS3 will hold an advantage over those more powerful consoles due to being cheaper to develop for (due to its lower specs) and having a higher install base but the PS3 won't be harmed by the Wii because people want more powerful consoles to play more technically impressive games. Go ahead and read his posts, that's what I got from him.
|
The question is... why would they? Why would Nintendo release another console if Sony hasn't? It kinda seems like the Wii is going to end up being the NES all over again. They aren't going to bother replacing it until it needs to be replaced.
Which would be either when Sony releases a new console or the new Xbox becomes successful. Which would defeat Sony's point either way. I mean, it's all explained up their mostly. The Mega Drive wasn't a big hit in America because it was higher specced. It was a big hit because their advertising campaign convinced America it was the "Cool" system. That's not going to work of a system that's been out 5+ years. Had Sega not done so and the Master System failed... Nintendo probably would of rode the NES even longer then it did. A strategy like that... where their is no PS4 in 5-6 years just gives microsoft a big advantage. Eventually PS3 will be forced to move. |
Thats all true as well. The idea the the PS3 will have a PS2-like tail (or even close) doesn't make sense from any angle. The console just won't have the flexibility in price, games and support required to survive at anything more than game-cube like tail levels once all three (or any two) manufacturors have their next consoles out.
