Between the Big three (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo), who is the worst when at the top?

[ZyroXZ2]

hinch said:

ZyroXZ2 said:

I'm not ashamed to admit I didn't read all the pages, but I'm going to submit my answer for the ages:

ANY AND ALL OF THEM.

These are companies, and a company's sole (and SOUL!) purpose is to part people and their money.  There is NO company that is immune to greed when they're at the top, none of them.

Heck, I've even seen greed infect non-profit organizations if enough money flows.  I don't want ANY of the companies "at the top", there should always be a healthy competition and round robin on who's in that top spot to keep things favorable for the end user/consumer.

The thing is companies do act differently depending on how they are situated on the market. Which is the main topic.

When a company has the most market share they have the advantage to shape and dictate the market more-so they unfavorable positions. We've seen this a lot in the PC tech market with CPU's and GPU's where the top dog dictates the market and when they have a near majority of the pie its usually bad for us consumers. Some act way worse than others.

Take Intel.. who had the hold of market for such a long time. Absolutely refused to release multicore core CPU's over quad for ages (for mainstream) before AMD had a competitive product like their Zen line. On the GPU market Nvidia shows how awful they could be and their prices during the pandemic, re-releasing priceier SKU's and taking advantage of the already messed up situation, instead fulfilling existing products on the same dies (chips) and selling GPU's directly to miners. On top of that not adding MSRP on their newer graphics cards etc to milk even more money.. is way worse than anything AMD has done when they are/were on top.

Granted all companies are out for consumers money, there are ways in which they act that can be seen as shrewd, anti competitive or downright anti-consumer when all cards swing their way.

Also whoever mentioned Dreamcast. The 'Dreamarena' online play was free using its built in 56K modem. It was not locked behind a paid service. SegaNet was an ISP provided by Sega of America who offered an internet service and broadband that could be used with the console. They released a broadband adapter for the Dreamcast shortly before exiting the console market.

I didn't say they acted they same, I said greed infects any company at the top and thus I don't want any company at the "top".  Power corrupts, and they'll find a way to keep that power at the cost of consumers.  Every company who ever hits the top should feel like the rug could be pulled out from them at any moment in time by a competitor: that is THE healthiest business model that accounts for us, the consumers of products/services.  It literally does not matter who's there at the top.