By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - If you want one of the big 3 to go the way of Sega, or want your preferred company to monopolize...

RolStoppable said:
oniyide said:

enthusiam did not cool, online funtioning games kept coming out on Xbox, as well as PS2 even though on a much smaller scale. What year did they cool off?? 2005??? Please, did you ever consider that maybe they were gearing up for the release of their next gen consoles that did go full force with onling gaming? Iwata said, that enthusiam for online gaming will wear off, it did not it has only gotten bigger, he was wrong, now Ninty has to play catch up

Once again, this was about the sixth generation.

 

For years one of the major complaints about the GameCube has been its lack of online-enabled games. Judging by comments made last week by Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, that won't be changing anytime soon.

In an interview with the Japan Economic Foundation's magazine, Japan Spotlight, the famously outspoken Iwata repeated his oft-quoted assertion that "customers do not want online games." He told the Spotlight, "At the moment, most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet, and for some customers, connection procedures to the Internet are still not easy."

But while Iwata's disdain for online play was clear, he would not abandon the concept altogether. "Online technology has its own interesting features, so I don’t rule out the possibility of making use of it for games," he said. Iwata also said that the industry would soon come around to his point of view. "Game companies now find it difficult to make online game businesses successful, and their enthusiasm for them is cooling," he predicted.

 

So what was the outcome in the sixth generation? The Gamecube obviously didn't get any online games aside from Sega's PSO. Online games didn't make a difference for the Xbox's demise, not even Halo 2 changed much. Sony removed the HDD port when they redesigned the PS2, known as the PS2 Slim.

So Nintendo did nothing, Microsoft pulled the plug on the Xbox to start over and Sony "screwed over" the people who wanted to play the online focused games like Final Fantasy XI (not really, because hardly anyone cared anyway). Sony was the dominant marketleader last generation and they cut back on online play. If that isn't a game company whose enthusiasm has cooled down, then I don't know what is. Nintendo not making any online games for the Gamecube didn't hurt them at all and that is what all these quotes are about.

Also, let's not forget that the Wii crushed the Xbox 360 and PS3 despite a severe disadvantage when it comes to online functionalities and the Wii slowed down due to the lack of new games in general and not because of inferior online.


these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. Sony, I would imagine did the same thing, and when the PS2 was still around in force they kept having online games. Just go on Wikipedia and their is a massive list on online enabled games for PS2, the last being smackdownvsraw 07, a year after PS3 debuted, so your wrong enthusiam did not drop.  Ninty did nothing, of course not, GC was getting crushed as soon as it hit the market, what i find interesting was that it was in 2nd for a while but then Xbox over took it, why was that? It was not the price, it was not the games, they had alot of the same games, having online must have played a role. Ninty didnt add online because they knew it would make no difference, the competition already had it and could do it better, so why try.

Saying they were only talking about 6 gen at the end of six gen makes no sense, that would mean IWATA was playing captain hindsight. He said people would lose interest, for what the next year until 7th gen started?? That makes no sense, he was wrong. Yes Wii did it without the crappy online, but the best selling HD games have some online component and most of the games being made have online component, so did enthusiam die?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_network_games thats a link for the PS2 games for the hell of it



Around the Network

@fordy

You didnt read my first post properly. I said its pure fantasy. The reason I said it was to make clear that I know this will never happen. Also I did mean not like the license model of the 3do were everyone was able to buy a licence and produce its own 3DO same as CDi i think.



sales2099 said:
Xen said:
sales2099 said:
Xen said:
sales2099 said:
Xen said:
sales2099 said:
Well I am a supporter of Nintendo handhelds and Microsoft consoles so naturally I would pick Sony but there is a reason.

With the PS1, it choked the life and potential out of the Sega Saturn and N64. The PS2 did this even worse, creating a monopoly that made it near impossible for competition to thrive. Sega quit. Nintendo was forced to take a drastic route and go the Wii route. Microsoft was convinced that the only way to avoid a repeat was to launch before the PS3, even if the hardware wasn't ready.

I am a firm believer in Sony killing competition. Only with Nintendo and Microsoft taking drastic actions this gen has caused Sony to drop to last place and actually create balance and equal potential/room to grow in the industry.

On top of that, Sony has no flagship franchises on the level of Mario and Halo. Come to think of it Sony has no mascot, just a bunch of diverse (yet lacking in any meaningful sales) exclusive IPs.

Nintendo rules the casual console market and the handheld one. Microsoft rules the core console market. PC gamers still get their PCs.

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.


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.


If your saying the Xbox 1 and Gamecube were on the same level as the N64 and even the Sega Saturn in terms of competition then you are deluded.

Running out of arguments are we? I never said that, read my post. I just said that they were weak competition.



oniyide said:


these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. 

One of the reasons MS dropped support for the Xbox 1 was that it was a loss leader, the original Xbox never once gave Microsoft an annual profit.  The hardware components and previous contracts with manufacturers were costing them too much money.   If the margins were a little better they would've squeezed a little more life out of the old xbox, like Sony did with the PS2.

oniyide said:


these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. 

If you want to look at that Iwata quote you also have to look at where and when it comes from. (circa 2004 in a Japanese publication)

Iwata said in the interview that Sony's online golf game (referring to Minna no Golf Online in Japan) did not sell as well as the offline versions of the games in the series (and that was true).  Although this version of Minna no Golf can be played offline you have to connect online once in order to start the game for the first time, and so you have to have actual Online access and the hard drive.  The game also had a fee but it's unclear (unlikley?) you needed it to setup the game.

"At the moment, most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet, and for some customers, connection procedures to the Internet are still not easy."- Iwata

Just to be clear when Iwata says "pay extra money for connection" he wasn't talking ISP fees but game subscription fees.  If you look at games that required a subscription fee to access a good portion of the game's content online (not just optional multiplayer), they usually didn't sell that well at the time.  Games like Final Fantasy XI Online, Nobunaga no Yabou Online and EverQuest Online Adventures weren't selling that great. Even Monster Hunter and Monster Hunter G weren't getting big sales on the PS2 at the time.  MH1 on the PS2 was the biggest of the bunch selling 265,828 copies in Japan but when the Gamecube version of Phantasy Star Online I & II even manages to sell 138,277 copies in Japan (and 189,082 copies on the GC in the US [327,359 total]) it doesn't seem like online peak was all that high then.  Sub Fee games just weren't selling that great on home consoles at the time of this interview.



foxtail said:
oniyide said:


these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. 

One of the reasons MS dropped support for the Xbox 1 was that it was a loss leader, the original Xbox never once gave Microsoft an annual profit.  The hardware components and previous contracts with manufacturers were costing them too much money.   If the margins were a little better they would've squeezed a little more life out of the old xbox, like Sony did with the PS2.

oniyide said:


these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. 

If you want to look at that Iwata quote you also have to look at where and when it comes from. (circa 2004 in a Japanese publication)

Iwata said in the interview that Sony's online golf game (referring to Minna no Golf Online in Japan) did not sell as well as the offline versions of the games in the series (and that was true).  Although this version of Minna no Golf can be played offline you have to connect online once in order to start the game for the first time, and so you have to have actual Online access and the hard drive.  The game also had a fee but it's unclear (unlikley?) you needed it to setup the game.

"At the moment, most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet, and for some customers, connection procedures to the Internet are still not easy."- Iwata

Just to be clear when Iwata says "pay extra money for connection" he wasn't talking ISP fees but game subscription fees.  If you look at games that required a subscription fee to access a good portion of the game's content online (not just optional multiplayer), they usually didn't sell that well at the time.  Games like Final Fantasy XI Online, Nobunaga no Yabou Online and EverQuest Online Adventures weren't selling that great. Even Monster Hunter and Monster Hunter G weren't getting big sales on the PS2 at the time.  MH1 on the PS2 was the biggest of the bunch selling 265,828 copies in Japan but when the Gamecube version of Phantasy Star Online I & II even manages to sell 138,277 copies in Japan (and 189,082 copies on the GC in the US [327,359 total]) it doesn't seem like online peak was all that high then.  Sub Fee games just weren't selling that great on home consoles at the time of this interview.

For 360, that is true i can see that, but if the console was hurting them that bad, why do a followup?? For the thrill of competition? Maybe. 

I understand what Iwata said, but what im focusing on is the comment about devs losing interest in making online games, which as we all know did not happen. Onlnine games were not selling that great of course they were not, we all knew that. What i have trouble is he assumed that they would continue to sell bad, which is not true and he was wrong. I dont know why people are trying to spin this part



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
oniyide said:

these comments were made in what 2004-05?? the sixth gen was pretty much over, MS pulled Xbox because they were gearing up for 360, lets not pretend its for any other reason. Sony, I would imagine did the same thing, and when the PS2 was still around in force they kept having online games. Just go on Wikipedia and their is a massive list on online enabled games for PS2, the last being smackdownvsraw 07, a year after PS3 debuted, so your wrong enthusiam did not drop.  Ninty did nothing, of course not, GC was getting crushed as soon as it hit the market, what i find interesting was that it was in 2nd for a while but then Xbox over took it, why was that? It was not the price, it was not the games, they had alot of the same games, having online must have played a role. Ninty didnt add online because they knew it would make no difference, the competition already had it and could do it better, so why try.

Saying they were only talking about 6 gen at the end of six gen makes no sense, that would mean IWATA was playing captain hindsight. He said people would lose interest, for what the next year until 7th gen started?? That makes no sense, he was wrong. Yes Wii did it without the crappy online, but the best selling HD games have some online component and most of the games being made have online component, so did enthusiam die?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_network_games thats a link for the PS2 games for the hell of it

Of course it doesn't make sense to you, because you continually ignore that the quote originated in spring 2004. That wasn't close to the end of the sixth gen, but in the middle of it. What Iwata was asked is why doesn't Nintendo make online games for the Gamecube and then he gave his answer and explained his reasoning. Online gaming was supposed to become a big thing in the latter half of the sixth generation, but Iwata disagreed because from his point of view the market wasn't ready yet.

Since you've posted the list of online enabled PS2 games, you might take a look at it. The big online offensive happened in 2003/04 with games like Everquest, Final Fantasy XI and Resident Evil: Outbreak being released. These are all games that were built around online gaming, mostly everything else had only negligible online multiplayer that had no significant influence on the games' sales. You didn't see any online centered titles from 2005 onwards. Even Sony's flagship game Gran Turismo 4 was originally planned to have online multiplayer, but Sony scrapped it, because it wasn't worth the additional development time. This combined with the design of the PS2 Slim (no HDD) should be pretty telling how enthusiased game companies were about online gaming towards the end of the sixth generation.

Im not ignoring that statement, i agree with it, you are ignoring the statement he made about devs losing interest in making online games, which looking from the launch of 360 and onward(2005-current) is simply not true.  Now your probably gonna say that he was only talking about GC and short term, but I think that is crap, considering how piss poor the effort of the Wii online was, Im sure that he never expected the online to get as big as it has on consoles. Actions speak louder than words. Oh sure Wii was successful regardless, but that doesnt take away the success of XBl and PSn too a lesser degree



I like how everyone loves to piss all over Sega... ¬_¬




ohh wait... Sega did it to themselves...


SEGA FTW!!!







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence