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

Forums - Sales - The Console Wars! - cheering for one product over another

BasilZero said:

7. Nope, would want them to equally be successful due to the fact that its better for the market to have a competition that is strong and not much of a monoply.

Thanks for participating Basil.

For point 7, don't you think more dominance has been condusive to more gaming enthusiasm in the past though?



Around the Network

1. Y
2. depends on the game, mostly no
3. Y
4. -
5. -
6. Y
7. N



happydolphin said:

For me it's different. Since I believe that Nintendo in the past made the best games, I want to see them dominate the market again.

Why? Reason is simple. I believe 3rd parties thrived best with Nintendo in terms of creativity especially. For that reason, I'm happy when Nintendo dominates more, as it gives hope for more support on their platform, and seeing 3rd parties working more closely with Nintendo.

 

There's a difference between what you said and what Sales2099 does. You want your 'team' to do really well in comparison to the others. That's understandable I guess. But Sales 2099 not only wants his 'team' to dominate, he wants the other team to do horribly, as evidenced by his constant efforts to downgrade the competitors. He doesn't just go around saying "oh yeah, Xbox is racking in millions, YEAH!". That would be okay. He goes around saying "Playstation is WEAK, Yeah". That's totally different.



happydolphin said:
Jay520 said:

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make. 

Me being a Playstation fan, I was not happy to see the Gamecube or the Dreamcast fail. I did not look at the Gamecube low sales and think, "Yes! This makes the PS2 look really good!". Also, if the Gamecube did sell really well, I would not have thought, "No! Now, the PS2 victory is nonexistent!". If the Gamecube did sell really well, I would have thought, "Wow, that's really great for the Gamecube". There does not need to be a loser in order for there to be a winner. Not in terms of sales or quality.

For me it's different. Since I believe that Nintendo in the past made the best games, I want to see them dominate the market again.

Why? Reason is simple. I believe 3rd parties thrived best with Nintendo in terms of creativity especially. For that reason, I'm happy when Nintendo dominates more, as it gives hope for more support on their platform, and seeing 3rd parties working more closely with Nintendo.

So you must have skipped the Wii generation completely then?



happydolphin said:

Hey guys, happyD here.

Well, we are all here because we love sales numbers and want to see some titles and products sell better than others. For example, being a Nintendo fan, I personally like seeing Nintendo games selling well.

So, here are some questions I had for you:

1) When you see exclusive games for your favorite console sell well, do you like that? Only if it is a game I like and the sales are enough to guarantee a sequel.

2) When you see exclusive games go multiplat for your favorite console, do you like that? I couldn't care less as long as the game is a good game and I can play it on my current console(s) of choice.

3) When you see multiplat games for your favorite console sell better, do you like that? Why should I? This is one of the things I never understood.

4) When you see games that are competing on two consoles that are not your favorite console, which do you prefer do well? If I can't play it then I don't care about it.

5) This one is for 360 fans. Do you like it when one portable does well against another?

6) For all fans, does it make you happy when your favorite console sells better than the others? Only if it results in me getting the games I want. PS3 can sell as well as it wants, but if I get no JRPGs then those sales mean shit. COME ON NINO KUNI!

7) (*New) Lastly, when two consoles are competing that are not your favorite console, are you happy when one does better than another? I couldn't care less.





iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

Around the Network
Jay520 said:

There's a difference between what you said and what Sales2099 does. You want your 'team' to do really well in comparison to the others. That's understandable I guess. But Sales 2099 not only wants his 'team' to dominate, he wants the other team to do horribly, as evidenced by his constant efforts to downgrade the competitors. He doesn't just go around saying "oh yeah, Xbox is racking in millions, YEAH!". That would be okay. He goes around saying "Playstation is WEAK, Yeah". That's totally different.

I understand what you mean, so Sales is taking it to the extreme. But what about this.

For example, there's a game you really don't respect, or you disagree with what it stands for, and consider that the level of sales it obtains is not what you would judge worthy.

Let's say you consider the NSMB series as a milking of the Mario genre, and you don't really like that, and especially don't think it should be bought by so many when there are maybe other things to buy, and it really throws you off when people are not getting to play the experiences that truly are innovative, like let's say Little Big Planet.

Wouldn't you want the game that is doing "too" well to do less well? And in such a case, cheer for its downfall if/when it happens?



BasilZero said:

Yes it has, there's nothing wrong with that, but when I mean successful, I dont mean in total domination or obliteration of the competition, as long as both sides are profitable and consists of media which is appealing for all audiences and sells well, everyone wins.

 

Now how success is measured depends on the developers, obviously games like Mario and Pokemon will be multi million sellers while other small games such as Disgaea or a niche RPG will barely sell as much as mario and pokemon, but can easily be called a success depending on how the developer markets it, reactions/critiscisms are caught, and the overall production value/profit they make.

True enough. But wouldn't you want some of the smaller games to do better, for example? And some of the big games maybe get too much of the spotlight?



happydolphin said:

I understand what you mean, so Sales is taking it to the extreme. But what about this.

For example, there's a game you really don't respect, or you disagree with what it stands for, and consider that the level of sales it obtains is not what you would judge worthy.

Let's say you consider the NSMB series as a milking of the Mario genre, and you don't really like that, and especially don't think it should be bought by so many when there are maybe other things to buy, and it really throws you off when people are not getting to play the experiences that truly are innovative, like let's say Little Big Planet.

Wouldn't you want the game that is doing "too" well to do less well? And in such a case, cheer for its downfall if/when it happens?


No, I wouldn't cheer for a game's failure. I feel sorry for those who do.



happydolphin said:
Jay520 said:

There's a difference between what you said and what Sales2099 does. You want your 'team' to do really well in comparison to the others. That's understandable I guess. But Sales 2099 not only wants his 'team' to dominate, he wants the other team to do horribly, as evidenced by his constant efforts to downgrade the competitors. He doesn't just go around saying "oh yeah, Xbox is racking in millions, YEAH!". That would be okay. He goes around saying "Playstation is WEAK, Yeah". That's totally different.

I understand what you mean, so Sales is taking it to the extreme. But what about this.

For example, there's a game you really don't respect, or you disagree with what it stands for, and consider that the level of sales it obtains is not what you would judge worthy.

Let's say you consider the NSMB series as a milking of the Mario genre, and you don't really like that, and especially don't think it should be bought by so many when there are maybe other things to buy, and it really throws you off when people are not getting to play the experiences that truly are innovative, like let's say Little Big Planet.

Wouldn't you want the game that is doing "too" well to do less well? And in such a case, cheer for its downfall if/when it happens?

Why would you want that game to fail, even if its just a little bit?  Success bring in competition as companies try to come in and partipate in a space that is growing or each new entrant will take share naturally, there is no need to personally root aganist.



Train wreck said:
happydolphin said:

For me it's different. Since I believe that Nintendo in the past made the best games, I want to see them dominate the market again.

Why? Reason is simple. I believe 3rd parties thrived best with Nintendo in terms of creativity especially. For that reason, I'm happy when Nintendo dominates more, as it gives hope for more support on their platform, and seeing 3rd parties working more closely with Nintendo.

So you must have skipped the Wii generation completely then?

With the Wii, Nintendo may have dominated, but not for the same reasons as expected. They dominated thanks to sales in the non-gamer arena, and with more mainstream games. But they didn't get the partnerships with 3rd party devs like they did in the NES days, where they dominated as well.

The reason is because Nintendo conquered a new market, and left the traditional market in its wake. The problem is in doing so Nintendo never fostered a "New" traditional market for itself. Mind you they're doing that now with the WiiU.

So as far as Wii is concerned, I'm still not satisfied ;)