Aaaaaaaaaand the award for the most ignorant post of 2011 goes to sales2099! CONGRATULATIONS!

SEGA killed SEGA. The Saturn was a bitch to program for (and had a botched launch WITH a $400 pricetag) and released after two R&D and sales tragedies, SegaCD and 32x, Nintendo released very late, used expensive carts, and because of the storage limitations along with the company's constant intrusions in game development (see Duke Nukem 3D N64 vs PC for a great example), the N64 wasn't as big as it could've been. The PS1 was easy to program for, cheap to release games for, and Sony didn't intrude in your business. As a result, the Dreamcast came with a very weak and crippled SEGA backing it up, and Nintendo had their brand name annihilated. The PS1 was so varied, cheap, and appealing, that Sony went into the 6th gen with enormous hype. And much like Nintendo this gen. the PS1 opened up a whole new demographic. Market killers I tell you! KILLERS!

This gen, Sony killed their own lead with an expensive PS3 with very few games. If you think that it was MS, then... well... that's pretty funny. The 360 being the second HD console effectively saved the PS3 by giving it a constant porting effort with popular games like COD and GTAIV. Sony lacking meaningful sales in their IP's? See the sales of God of War III or GT5 then get back to me. Microsoft rules the core market? This isn't 2007-8 anymore.

If ignorance were a bannable offence, you'd be permanently banned in a second.

Competition is good for everyone, all three should stay.

You explained how PS1 dominated but you didnt touch on at all the monopoly that was the PS2 and how it effectively choked the life out of the competition.

Gamecube and xbox were both quality machines and did not deserve to sell less then 25 million a piece where PS2 sold over 120 million. There is no excuse for that gen. Sony killed competition, which did lead Nintendo to go the motion gaming route to get market share back. Microsoft had to launch early. This was all because of Sony.

GT5 comes out every 5 years (not exactly flagship worthy if it takes THAT long) and isnt a mascot type of game. GOW sells pitiful compared to Mario and Halo, nice try.

Competition is amazing, no argument there, but its only attainable with Sony in either last place or out all together

Way to ignore everything but the unmentioned and still be arrogant as hell. Nice.

The PS2 does not need to be touched upon. The general concensus in the gaming community is that it's one of the most amazing consoles  ever - its success is no small part because its competition sucked, hard. The Xbox lacked any Japanese support and had to build a whole new brand name for itself while lacking PS1's perfect storm of 3rd parties only looking for an excuse to break off of Nintendo and cheap development. The Gamecube had a terrible kiddy, less powerful than PS2, and uncool image. Mostly thanks to its own design and game selection (the problem still persists today).

It just hit me: I can't believe that a Microsoft fanboy is trying to school anyone about monopolies and uncompetetive practices. Whatever means Sony used to attain their market control, they were nothing like how Microsoft behaved in their prime. My reply, even to me, comes off kinda lazy. But I don't really care, there's zero reasoning here when you're not even willing to admit your mistakes.

Iwata did not say that online will go away (as you claimed in your previous post), because that would have been in direct contradiction with saying that Nintendo doesn't rule it out to use online features in the future (refering to their next generation systems). Here is the link again. This is from July 2004 and if you care to read it this time you'll notice that the article states that this particular quote of Iwata is an often repeated one, meaning that he was saying the same thing at least since another few months. It always was about the Gamecube's lack of online games (aside from Sega's Phantasy Star Online).

The Gamecube wasn't on its way out in 2004. Nintendo's fall lineup consisted of Metroid Prime 2, Paper Mario 2, Pikmin 2 and Tales of Symphonia which they localized and published. They also officially announced a new Zelda game that year, planned to release in 2005. Not to mention that the Wii launched in November 2006. So much for that.

It really seems like you have no clear idea of what Iwata was talking about. He spoke of online enabled games and not games you buy online (which is what the Virtual Console and WiiWare service is). Lastly, investments in online gaming cooled down in the sixth generation quite quickly. Remember the time we are talking about here. In 2002/03 online gaming was supposed to become a really big thing, that's why Nintendo was constantly asked where their online games are. Microsoft had launched the Xbox Live service, Sony was bringing games like Socom and Everquest to the PS2, Square-Enix released Final Fantasy XI and Capcom tried with Resident Evil: Outbreak. None of that took off despite there being an actual push which is why you didn't see more focus on online gaming on the PS2 from early 2005 onwards, because the vast majority of hit games did well without any sort of online functionality.

Wel honestly, Sony didnt really choke competition until PS2 and I do agree about PS1s competition actually sucking.

But Gamecube was actually more powerful then PS2 and easier to develop for, do your homework. Xbox had a hard drive, more reliable (ironic right), pioneered a decent console online network, and had superior graphics then PS2. Never mind Japan....PS2 choked the potential out of xbox to grow in Europe and especially North America. People remember the PS2 as an amazing console and rightly so....yet theres also people who remember just how much Nintendo and Microsoft struggled that gen when their consoles were actually worthy competitors.

All I know is that with Sony in a well overdue last place position......Nintendo and Microsoft are thriving. Nintendo capitalized on the Nintendo core and especially the casuals, yet didnt pull a PS2 and choke out Microsoft, which is enjoying much improved success over last gen. PS3 offcourse is a massive failure compared to PS1 and PS2 but at least its getting by and improving year over year.

This gen, everybodies more or less equal, unlike when Sony was #1.

I wasn't gonna reply, but since this is just twisting my words into a bowtie, I can't refrain.

First of all, reading comprehension please:  The Gamecube had a terrible kiddy, less powerful than PS2, and uncool image. Bolded and italicised so it's easier to comprehend. In Europe, the Xbox launched to a very high price (quickly dropped later since it was barely selling anything), without a brand name (conversely, the PS brand name is enormous in europe, even today - to lots it was their first console), without proper advertising, essentially, against everything that the PS2 was. Naturally, it failed. Also, Japan doesn't matter? There are 20+ million PS2's sold there, and like 6 mil Gamecubes. It matters, and it matters lots. Neither was a worthy competitor, since they lacked in lots of areas, and a worthy adversary doesn't fail so hard. Also, the reliability of the Xbox with the Thomson made drive is shit. The xbox was generally more reliable, but not without faults. Online wasn't also nearly as big as it is now, but kudos on the addition. Wouldn't have been the same w/o them.

Nintendo would pull a PS2 if they could, get real. The just got ignored by all the third parties that developed on the PS2, and ignored hard.