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

Forums - Gaming - Which Company Will Be The Next To Leave The Gaming Industry...

 

Which Console Developing Company Will Be The Next To Leave The Gaming Industry.

Nintendo 63 11.80%
 
Microsoft Studios 129 24.16%
 
Sony Computer Entertainment 341 63.86%
 
Total:533
Play4Fun on 06 January 2012
Rpruett said:
Play4Fun said:
 

 

They are a  very smart business.  However, if they did release a terd or two of a console and a terd of a handheld and sold a paltry amount, they don't have the sustainability to survive much of that.  It's the same situation as Sega, except they are far better at managing their business.

So you think if Nintendo fails in three console and handheld generations back-to-back they will bow out? Wouldn't it be pretty much the same thing for Sony? If they failed in that manner as well they would cut out their gaming sector instead of letting it continue to drag the rest down. You seem to have this idea that even if Sony's gaming sector was losing too much generation afer generation, it would be 'completely unfeasible' for them to cut it out unless the whole company was going down as well, which isn't true at all. If the gaming sector wasn't gaining them anything for so long they would drop it. It would be just as vulnerable  as Nintendo's company would be in that situation. It isn't 'too big to fail' just because Sony has other business sectors.


 

Microsoft isn't immune simply because Microsoft hasn't dipped their feet all the way into the gaming community.  I could see another Xbox type generation really sinking, discouraging them.  MS doesn't have the first party studios like the other two.  They don't need to sustain losses, they could easily drop the gaming division from a business standpoint.

I just think they've provided enough competition in the market to remain viable and they have the money to take some hits and they're a large enough Corporation that can eat these hits to some extent.

  This isn't the same MS from the 6th gen and this isn't the same Sony. MS has risen in the gaming industry and Sony have gone from being dominant to losing alot to the Xbox brand. To say MS hasn't provided enough competition in this market is completely absurd. They have dipped their feet all the way into the  gaming community.

 

Nintendo is the most likely to leave the 'Hardware' industry in my opinion because they are the least insulated from poor sales, poor performance, etc.  I don't believe they would abandon creating games and even if they did skip creating Hardware, I believe they would strongly consider publishing games (Like Sega) forging enough profits to build another console.

I don't disagree with the idea that  Nintendo would leave the hardware industry if they experienced  poor sales and poor performance gen after gen but I completely disagree with the notion that Sony's gaming sector isn't as vulnerable in that regard just because Sony has other business sectors.



Around the Network
Rpruett on 07 January 2012
Play4Fun said:
Rpruett said:
 

So you think if Nintendo fails in three console and handheld generations back-to-back they will bow out? Wouldn't it be pretty much the same thing for Sony? If they failed in that manner as well they would cut out their gaming sector instead of letting it continue to drag the rest down. You seem to have this idea that even if Sony's gaming sector was losing too much generation afer generation, it would be 'completely unfeasible' for them to cut it out unless the whole company was going down as well, which isn't true at all. If the gaming sector wasn't gaining them anything for so long they would drop it. It would be just as vulnerable  as Nintendo's company would be in that situation. It isn't 'too big to fail' just because Sony has other business sectors.

Again,  Sony is profitable overall with their gaming division and has really had wild success since entering the gaming realm.  They would change how their business operates around the gaming division, they wouldn't leave the gaming division.   Because it's been a successful venture for them and has shown plenty of promise and growth.   Stark contrast to other business avenues that are flops or dead ends and have never shown promise.

Sony has never had a console sell as miserable as some Nintendo consoles have and really has never been close to that.  If they went Nintendo and made a console that generated profit from day one, they probably would sell enough consoles to keep the profit chain going.   

Even the PS3 priced at $600 with marginal differences over the Xbox 360 (Incredibly absurd and arrogant of them by the way) in a recession has still managed to rebound and will be fighting for the next 5 years for second place, albeit with very little American support.

A lot of other factors come into play as well,  Sony obviously has more clout in terms of ease to get the world out about their consoles.  They have more opportunities to get the public to jump in, whether that is it's media friendly nature,  packaged deals with their tv counter parts, advertising , etc. 

This isn't the same MS from the 6th gen and this isn't the same Sony. MS has risen in the gaming industry and Sony have gone from being dominant to losing alot to the Xbox brand. To say MS hasn't provided enough competition in this market is completely absurd. They have dipped their feet all the way into the  gaming community.

Microsoft released a console $200 cheaper than the PS3 (At the PS3 launch) and a year prior.  Let's not kid ourselves.  They did very well, but they were the only option for a vast majority of people within the prized 13-24 crowd. 

Microsoft and Sony with equally priced consoles?  I would guarantee Sony wins that battle.  Americans care primarily about price/value ratio.  The PS3 has never been worth $200 more than the Xbox 360 for the primary purpose of it.  Sony will hurt from the after shock of Microsoft forged loyalty from fans now though.  Just not nearly as much as you might think.

Microsoft has already nabbed all of the third parties that Sony held in high regard.  They need to form a strong first party, or they won't provide nearly as much competition.



I don't disagree with the idea that  Nintendo would leave the hardware industry if they experienced  poor sales and poor performance gen after gen but I completely disagree with the notion that Sony's gaming sector isn't as vulnerable in that regard just because Sony has other business sectors.

It's not as vulnerable because Sony will do what is necessary to prop their best division within the company up.  Nintendo can't do anything other than watch.  Again, great news for them is they dominate the handheld market.  However, with everyone owning smart phones with increasingly more power, better, bigger screens and more game playing occurring on them?  Handhelds are a dying breed.

Nintendo doesn't play the large scale wars as well as Microsoft or Sony.  When they fall, they fall hard.



archbrix on 07 January 2012
Rpruett said:

It's not as vulnerable because Sony will do what is necessary to prop their best division within the company up.  Nintendo can't do anything other than watch.  Again, great news for them is they dominate the handheld market.  However, with everyone owning smart phones with increasingly more power, better, bigger screens and more game playing occurring on them?  Handhelds are a dying breed.

You speak as though Sony is able to persevere through any difficulty and Nintendo has no choice other than to take a hit and wish for the best, which is untrue, proven this very generation when they completey changed strategies with the Wii.  Whether or not Nintendo can devise a winning strategy in the next gen as they venture into HD remains to be seen, but saying "they can't do anything but watch" is absurd.

 

Nintendo doesn't play the large scale wars as well as Microsoft or Sony.  When they fall, they fall hard.

@Underlined:  Actually, no they don't, or at least haven't yet.  The Gamecube only sold about 1/3 as many units in its entire life as the PS3 has so far, and also had laughable 3rd party support in comparison as well.  However, Nintendo still profited as a company in the Gamecube generation whereas Sony has used up all of their previous profits this gen.  So which of the two has fallen harder?  Remember, protecting your company's bottom line is still part of a greater strategy in a "large scale war".


Play4Fun on 07 January 2012
Rpruett said:
Play4Fun said:
Rpruett said:
 

 

 

Sony has never had a console sell as miserable as some Nintendo consoles have and really has never been close to that.  If they went Nintendo and made a console that generated profit from day one, they probably would sell enough consoles to keep the profit chain going.   

PS3 was more of a  failure than GC and N64 combined. It's funny to see you claim that GC and N64 were such big failures for Nintendo but act like PS3 wasn't all that bad a failure for Sony. 

 

 

 

It's not as vulnerable because Sony will do what is necessary to prop their best division within the company up.  Nintendo can't do anything other than watch.  Again, great news for them is they dominate the handheld market.  However, with everyone owning smart phones with increasingly more power, better, bigger screens and more game playing occurring on them?  Handhelds are a dying breed.

Nintendo doesn't play the large scale wars as well as Microsoft or Sony.  When they fall, they fall hard.

Did they just watch as 3DS failed? Or did they turn it around? Didn't they quickly discontinue the Virtual Boy when they saw what a failure it was? I'm pretty sure Nintendo isn't helpless to control their company.  Handhelds are such a dying breed that Nintendo have turned the 3DS into a massive success that is breaking sales records.

 I don'tsee why you continue to act like Nintendo would drop out in the face of massive failure after failure but Sony's gaming division is invincible, but whatever.



BlkPaladin on 07 January 2012

I have to say currently Sony. They are looking like Sega which they bumped out of the market. For the past four years they have been bleeding billions of dollars, this last year alone they lost about $6 billion as a whole company. Plus they are going into a period that gave Nintendo it first loss in decades, with the R&D of not only the Vita but the PS4 sapping away at it's only profitable division it will just get worse this next year. Weather or not they fold is up entirely to the new management but I don't see Sony's profits improving anytime soon. (This may be one of the reason why the advertising for the Vita is next to non-existent.)

I see Nintendo as the only who may stay in the console business because it will more than likely go back to niche, market it was once before and Nintendo has shown it can stay profitable. (The GameCube was profitable itself right out of the gate, I think they made like $10 each machine sold, though they wouldn't of been as profitable without their handhelds.)



Around the Network
Rpruett on 07 January 2012
archbrix said:
Rpruett said:

You speak as though Sony is able to persevere through any difficulty and Nintendo has no choice other than to take a hit and wish for the best, which is untrue, proven this very generation when they completey changed strategies with the Wii.  Whether or not Nintendo can devise a winning strategy in the next gen as they venture into HD remains to be seen, but saying "they can't do anything but watch" is absurd.

Sony the company is more equipped to perservere through difficulty than Nintendo is, simply put.  I've been hearing Sony is 'doomed' since 2006 or before.  Nintendo didn't change their strategies with the Wii,  they resorted to desperation strategy.  I'm not saying Sony is infalliable.  They just have more resources to give up than Nintendo if things hit the fan and you don't give up your best division within the company when the rest of your company is struggling.


 Actually, no they don't, or at least haven't yet.  The Gamecube only sold about 1/3 as many units in its entire life as the PS3 has so far, and also had laughable 3rd party support in comparison as well.  However, Nintendo still profited as a company in the Gamecube generation whereas Sony has used up all of their previous profits this gen.  So which of the two has fallen harder?  Remember, protecting your company's bottom line is still part of a greater strategy in a "large scale war".

I'm not talking profit numbers, I am talking wide scale success.  The greatest danger for Nintendo is getting pushed aside as a niche product.  The handheld market is probably on its way out the door in the near future,  and increasingly the industry itself is getting more complicated.  Nintendo has never dealt as well in these avenues as Sony or MS.





Rpruett on 07 January 2012
Play4Fun said:

 

 I don'tsee why you continue to act like Nintendo would drop out in the face of massive failure after failure but Sony's gaming division is invincible, but whatever.

It's very simple and very straight forward.  Sony is JUST as invested if not more as Nintendo is into their gaming division. (In terms of First Party presence, R&D, etc). It's also one of, if not the most successful business sector for Sony.  Additionally, it fits with their business model perfectly.  Sony also has it's hands in literally thousands of other business ventures at any given time.  For Sony to abandon their gaming division,  would be comparable to Nintendo dropping a very important component of their structure.  (Like abolishing Mario from it's software lineup, or Zelda).

Nintendo has only one avenue, gaming.  Now, you're saying "Well that's why they will continue to survive!!!".  If things go south overall for the economies across the globe or continue to depress further,  Or hell Nintendo has a few bad generations with slipping handheld sales to boot?  They have no other options or business outlets for that matter.

I don't believe any of these 3 companies will go out of business and file for bankruptcy.  Sony is in the Music, Movie, Gaming industry and across the board is the most well known entertainment company in the World.  Microsoft dominates the World-wide Computer market by a crazy margin and makes boat loads of profit because of this.  Nintendo stays within their means and doesn't make poor business decisions and is also a landmark for the industry.

With that being said, if the shit hit the fan, who would be the first to die?  Nintendo.  They can't support themselves beyond this all.



thetonestarr on 07 January 2012

I would have picked Microsoft a few years ago, but more recently, things are looking a lot worse for Sony. I'm going to wager Sony now.



 SW-5120-1900-6153

Claymore on 07 January 2012
Rpruett said:
Play4Fun said:
 

 

 I don'tsee why you continue to act like Nintendo would drop out in the face of massive failure after failure but Sony's gaming division is invincible, but whatever.

It's very simple and very straight forward.  Sony is JUST as invested if not more as Nintendo is into their gaming division. (In terms of First Party presence, R&D, etc). It's also one of, if not the most successful business sector for Sony.  Additionally, it fits with their business model perfectly.  Sony also has it's hands in literally thousands of other business ventures at any given time.  For Sony to abandon their gaming division,  would be comparable to Nintendo dropping a very important component of their structure.  (Like abolishing Mario from it's software lineup, or Zelda).

Nintendo has only one avenue, gaming.  Now, you're saying "Well that's why they will continue to survive!!!".  If things go south overall for the economies across the globe or continue to depress further,  Or hell Nintendo has a few bad generations with slipping handheld sales to boot?  They have no other options or business outlets for that matter.

I don't believe any of these 3 companies will go out of business and file for bankruptcy.  Sony is in the Music, Movie, Gaming industry and across the board is the most well known entertainment company in the World.  Microsoft dominates the World-wide Computer market by a crazy margin and makes boat loads of profit because of this.  Nintendo stays within their means and doesn't make poor business decisions and is also a landmark for the industry.

With that being said, if the shit hit the fan, who would be the first to die?  Nintendo.  They can't support themselves beyond this all.

The shit is close to hitting the fan for Sony, they're 13 billion in debt the companys value has fallen 75% from 100 billion in 2000 to 18 billion now and hasn't listed any profit in the last 4 years. A few more years like those last few and it could seriously be bye bye Sony.



archbrix on 07 January 2012
Rpruett said:

Sony the company is more equipped to perservere through difficulty than Nintendo is, simply put.  I've been hearing Sony is 'doomed' since 2006 or before.  Nintendo didn't change their strategies with the Wii,  they resorted to desperation strategy.  I'm not saying Sony is infalliable.  They just have more resources to give up than Nintendo if things hit the fan and you don't give up your best division within the company when the rest of your company is struggling.

I never said  Sony is doomed.  I'm saying they are just as susceptible to failure as any other company, including Nintendo.  The fact that Sony is a bigger company is irrelevant; they are currently doing poorly in other divisions as well, not just gaming. And no, the Wii was absolutely not a "desperation strategy" lol.  That would insinuate that they lost money in order to gain marketshare, something that Sony tried this gen, and failed at.


I'm not talking profit numbers, I am talking wide scale success.  The greatest danger for Nintendo is getting pushed aside as a niche product.  The handheld market is probably on its way out the door in the near future,  and increasingly the industry itself is getting more complicated.  Nintendo has never dealt as well in these avenues as Sony or MS.

The fact that you separate profit numbers from wide scale success is the very reason your argument fails.  Sony could drop the price of the PS3 tomorrow to $49.99 and the Vita to $19.99 and experience unheard of success in systems sold, but they'd go broke.  You fail to realize that there is a balance between the two in order to remain successful, somethng that Nintendo has proven to be better at than Sony.  "Niche product" or not, Nintendo made a veritable fortune this generation while Sony lost billions (yes, billions) with the PS3.  Check out D21Lewis' thread about the PS3's success.  Many (including myself) would agree that to us (the gamers) the PS3 was a great console.  But to Sony it was a catastrophy because it lost a lot of money, lost a lot of marketshare, and allowed the "Xbox" name to replace the "Playstation" brand here in the states for this generation.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=138541

Nobody is saying that Sony can't turn things around next gen; of course they could, particularly with blu-ray and the cell widely established now.  Just don't pretend that Nintendo has a worse track record than Sony at sustaining their business.