I was kidding. I do not buy crappy products! Needless to say, I do not have a sega genesis. :P

Low blow, but in the same spirit, that is exactly the reason I never bothered with the N64 ;)

Too far man!!!

1: zynga makes "billions" from advertisements. that is a fact. if they only sold games, they would make considerably less. as for why retail sales are down, i can only assume that is because of the recession we are in and that neither of your two choices are correct. digital distribution sales "tripling" doesn't mean squat and you know it. how much did those games cost? were advertisement based "sales" factored in? what would happen if we compared the Nintendo DS to the iPhone directly? how much total profit did game software for either make? if you're going to use data, at least use it in the right context.

The recession was in 2008-2009, not 2009-2010. I never said digital sales tripled, I said triple-digit, meaning 100% growth. How does that not matter? If iOS went from $400 million to $800 million in gaming sales in a year, how does that not mean anything?

the recession is now. type "recession" in google news. in fact, type DEPRESSION in google news. and "doubled" sales is nothing if it is said out of context. in this case, context is the nintendo ds (or psp, but that isn't selling). 400 million seems like a lot, but how much does the DS make in software figures? and did it lose 400 million dollars' worth of sales? doubling figures is not impressive unless the figures impressive to begin with.

Sales didn't include advertisments. I was talking only actual game sales. If you took iOS revenue in a head-to-head comparison to the DS, you'd find that the DS probably led it about as much as it did the PSP last year. Of course, the big issue with it is that iOS had major growth, where as the DS has crested. Take it for what you will, but my arguement has been that the iOS has a lot more blue ocean ahead of it.

lol, if you think the iPhone is still part of the blue ocean, you do not know what the blue ocean strategy is.

2: smartphones are not foremost made for video games. you just proved it yourself by saying 30-40% of software sales are game sales. that number is not 100%.  it doesn't matter how PC software sales compare (though that argument is flawed as well, since it's hard to track paypal based games, advertisement based games, item mall MMORPG games, etc. and smartphones can't stream flash games) to smartphone software sales.

If gaming products only mattered, then why did Nintendo announced a partnership with Netflix on the 3DS? Why are most console manufacturers securing deals with digital content providers and turning their products into set-top boxes instead of games alone?

i already mentioned 3DS is a stupid road for Nintendo to take. while we're on the subject, Nintendo's other addons like face raiders and AR are equally useless since they do nothing for gaming. in fact, i can't even see what 3D effects do for gaming. however, it still has more gaming in its blood than the iPhone has. far, far more.

3: arcade games saw a decline because video game consoles meant arcade games at home. computer games were not arcade games at home. smartphone games are not arcade games. arcade machines were designed with one game in mind. video game consoles were designed with first party games in mind. smartphones were designed with no games in mind, letting third parties fend for themselves. i will repeat this as many times as it takes.

Does it matter if games weren't the original intention?

yes. it limits gaming experience if it wasn't. off the top of my head, from a tech standpoint, game storage would utilize faster flash memory (NAND, NTSF) vs fat32 used in iPhone and most PMPs. CPU design would be vastly different (hyperthreading for smartphones for multitasking, extra physical CPU for game systems for AI commands). as for design, speakers (if any) will face the user, at all times, it would feel comfortable being held with both hands at any given time, there is a dedicated pause button, the operating system is simple and very "plug and play" (actually, there shouldn't be an operating system at all, in my opinion), load times are minimal (achieved by faster flash memory), local multiplayer is easily achieved, and of course, dedicated gaming controller/ buttons exist. the controller itself would be mapped around a select few games that are sure to be successes (for example, super mario bros). all this just to maximize the gamer's experience.  sure, the iPhone can emulate some of this, but not all, as it would interfere with its primary functions.

in other words, yes. it matters.

4: i don't have a clue how you decided that anyone who has a different opinion as you is a Nintendo fan. that's just ignorant.

I wasn't trying to argue that anyone that disagreed was a Nintendo fan, but there is an awful lot of correlation between ones' ownership of Nintendo products and their reaction to my post. I'm just trying to state what I believe will be in the future for the market, and since I believe its a future that has Nintendo playing a different role in the market, you and other Nintendo fans are up in arms at my statement.

i own sega products and i believe the future is NOT as you described, not even close. i must be a sega fanboy. whatever. it's not important.

You asked for it when bashing on my dear Genesis, which, coincidentally, I own.

The Wii had proper controls in various forms, so if anything the Wii proved that buttons are an absolute necessity to control more than just a limited range of genres.