In most cases yes, but this IMO is not one of those cases.

Microsoft really hasn't even made any money from the video game business (not that needed it to begin with). They were chasing a phantom ghost in the Playstation-is-a-threat-to-Windows (it never was).

If anything the XBox adventure distracted Microsoft from real threats that would burn them badly later on (Apple and Google).

Yeah, but PSN is only anywhere near as good as it is because they had to try and be competitive with Live. It was a hot mess when it launched and would never have improved nearly as much or as quickly as it has if it didn't have to keep up with XBL.

Nintendo has experimented with a lot of stuff over the years that never panned out. If it's true that Microsoft's entry forced them into an anti-online mode out of sheer obstinance their refusal to do the right and obvious things is because they don't want to be a "follower", I still wouldn't want to depend on such an incredibly stubborn and insular company as Nintendo to make a consumer friendly experience in the online space.

Please explain to me why Nintendo having money to burn releases a console like the Wii U...

I agree things would've evolved more slowly with online networking, but they would've gotten there eventually. Really online networking isn't some incredibly magic formula that only MS knew how to do.

It's a matchmaking service and throw in the ability to download demos/DLC and you have basically the foundations of an online network right there. If Nintendo opted to be insular about it, Sony would've figured it out in time on their own.

I think it is good MS entered console scene.. or else we would still have had that arrogant sony from 2006 and the games which we got now as first party exclusives would not have been the same if they were the leaders.. So competition jolted sony from their dream run and pushed them in creating quality software...

And i admit I m PS fanboy.. i want MS to be neck n neck with Sony in next gen too, so none of them gets delusional. As for nintendo they shot themselves in the foot... Wii U should be the console in 2006 with Wii mote.

Of course not, but only Microsoft had the vision to make it happen. Maybe it's just that I'm so horrified by the fact that Nintendo still ties your purchases to your hardware, but on balance I am glad MS was there when they were.

Yeah man, what the hell's up with that?...have any of those gaming 'journalists' asked Iwata & Co why the heck they haven't implemented an account system?

Like you said, it is 2013.

I should clarify too, I'm not knocking Microsoft once again. They have put forth tremendous effort in the game business and earned their spot at the top of the North American market by whupping Sony.

Just from perhaps a selfish POV though, I still see XBox as basically just another Playstation-type brand. I can't help but think I'd prefer an industry where you had Sony basically doing the same things MS would do anyway, and then having in the other corner a Nintendo much more like the Nintendo of the 1990s (good spec-ed hardware, more focus on core gaming, plus the general uniqueness that Nintendo brings).

And Rare too. It'd be nice if they had never gone down the path they did, where today they are basically irrelevant.

Once MS arrived it really put more pressure on the GameCube I think than Nintendo was ready for, and that was a good system that fizzled as a result, leading them down the path of casual gaming. Which honestly I could've done without. I'd rather they have continued to try and make a great successor to the Super NES than making a console for soccer moms because there was no core gaming market left for them to grab other than a niche.

Yeah I complete agree Sony inflicted more damage to themselves than MS did.. and PS as a brand was too strong and withstood those mistake and recovered remarkably well.. but it allowed MS to gain a foot hold in the market.. Only If sony had played all the cards right from launch, market would have been a lot different.

I like POV