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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Do people realize it's almost impossible to kill a douopoly console? (SONY/MS/XBox One)

Chris Hu on 19 March 2014

Anyway no matter how big you think the PS2 was it was nowhere near as dominant as the NES was during the 3rd generation in North America not only did they have over 90% of the market share they also pretty much controlled all third party publishers when it came to console games. Not only could they dictate what games to make for its console since they where in control of all the cartridge manufacturing they could also control how many copies a game could sell now that is pure dominance.



Around the Network
zorg1000 on 19 March 2014
fatslob-:O said:
Chris Hu said:

It did but your too young to realize it since you where still in elementary school when it got released and you live on the wrong side of the pond, probably in some small village where most things seem irrelavant.

WHAT IN THE HELL DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL POINT ?


Kinda off topic but this is exactly how u were when u first started posting here, constantly coming up with irrelevent arguments lol it seems u have matured since then



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 19 March 2014
fatslob-:O said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

4 years is paltry when the competitors are have already doubled that in lifetime.

Still doesn't give you the right to claim that the WII was a fad ...

In the red because of what exactly? Mind showing me some links to back up your claims. Cause I could easily attribute a lot of Xbox's losses to the RROD fiasco.

http://www.neowin.net/news/report-microsofts-xbox-division-has-lost-nearly-3-billion-in-10-years

http://www.1up.com/news/epic-games-cost-microsoft-billion

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

Alot of the losses are due to microsoft selling consoles at a LOSS. Microsoft also hides a part of the losses by claiming android patent fees.

The N64 was also a clear decline from the SNES. Please elaborate how making profit is a failure. Clearly it isn't a failure if the goal was to make money. The Wii is for all intents and purposes a repurposed gamecube. It actually has the OS on the and the hardware of the system hence its easy yet cheap backwards compatability. But you know what, despite that fact, it doesn't resemble the GameCube in the slightest, especially not its controller ports.

Making profit in itself isn't a failure but a DECLINE is also a failure in many ways itself. Making money is ONE THING but making customers are revenues are another. Hence, why the GC and xbox HAD NO INFLUENCE on the FUTURE and therefore are failures. 

Gamecube came after PS2, so my point still stands, online and hdd were made standard by Xbox. They where just peripherals that the mainstream wouldn't understand with regards to the PS2. If anything, the Xbox Arcade edition resembles the PS2, barring the marketplace, but since its just a strip down stock model its clear as day to see the simalarities between the 360 and the OG. 

It goes either WAY. It doesn't matter if it were peripherals on the PS2. You can't say that the original xbox was the one who set the standards when it is in fact supported by consoles before it. Much like how you can't claim that it was eyetoy who set standards for motion gaming when it clearly flopped in comparison to the competitors solution. Standards are set when it is ADOPTED by mainstream and the original xbox didn't get support from the mainstream so it was very much likely that the xbox 360 set that standard. 

Just because the PS2 Dominated, doesn't mean the competiton was irrelevant. Sega was made irrelevant by the PS1, and they don't make consoles anymore, that right there is total failure.

It pretty much did mean that the competition was irrelevant. 

Here we go again:

Out of the three links you posted, only one of them was relevant to the OG, and it showed that 360 lost more money than the OG did, it just made more profits as well, but that doesn;t help your argument when your trying to put the blame of the xbox divsion being in the red on the OG Xbox.

NIntendo's consoles have been declining since the NES, with the exception of the Wii which is a verifiyable fad, every single Nitendo console has sold less than its predecessors. To claim that the decline started with the GC is completely ignoring the previous generations.

Backwards compatiblity isn't an influence? It should be obvious how this is a blantant fallacy. You can't prove your point, while I have been providing real evidence that cleary contradicts your claims.

If it doesn't matter that they where peripherals on the PS2, then the Dreamcast would be responsible for the features. The fact is the PS2 slim did not have these options avaliable. It doesn't matter that the PS2 and Dreamcast supported it, the Xbox mandated it. Every single model of the xbox has hdd and online capability. That is indisputable. Furthermore, every console afterwards has released with online and hdd. Everything else you mentioned is not standard. 



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Troll_Whisperer on 19 March 2014
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share.


It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.

Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.

The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.


Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer.  In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.

The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.

Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.

Irrelevant. For all I know, perhaps in Sweden the DC steamrolled over the competition. Doesn't make it a PS-DC duopoly.

"The place where you live" has nothing to do with the overall picture, otherwise you'll always be able to find some market where some console did better than average.

Anyway, if I wanted, I could nitpick your argument and say that PS2 outsold XB over 3.5:1 in NA and that the XB still got nowhere near the amount of 3rd party titles the PS2 did. But again, I don't even need to do that, because this discussion is not about your particular market.

There was no PS2-XB duopoly.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Chris Hu on 19 March 2014
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share.


It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.

Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.

The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.


Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer.  In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.

The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.

Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.

Irrelevant. For all I know, perhaps in Sweden the DC steamrolled over the competition. Doesn't make it a PS-DC duopoly.

"The place where you live" has nothing to do with the overall picture, otherwise you'll always be able to find some market where some console did better than average.

Anyway, if I wanted, I could nitpick your argument and say that PS2 outsold XB over 3.5:1 and that the XB still got nowhere near the amount of 3rd party titles the PS2 did. But again, I don't even need to do that, because this discussion is not about your particular market.

There was no PS2-XB duopoly.

Your acting like the PS2 was the most dominant home system ever.  No one else will ever come as close a being completely dominant like the NES was during the third gen especially in North America where it had over 90% of the home console marketshare and completly controlled all third party studios. And again the X-Box did pretty good in North America even with a lot less third party support then the PS2.  Halo 2 was pretty much the most significant home console exclusive released during the sixth gereation in the US both in sales and popularity and critical acclaim.



Around the Network
zorg1000 on 19 March 2014
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share.


It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.

Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.

The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.


Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer.  In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.

The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.

Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.


North America hardware totals

PS2-53.65

Xbox-15.77

Gamecube-12.55

Even in America Xbox didnt do much better than Gamecube despite Halo being so huge, having the best online, most powerful, better 3rd party support and a build in HDD. It surely wasnt a duopoly as PS2 sold over 3x as many Xbox in America.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Troll_Whisperer on 19 March 2014
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share.


It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.

Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.

The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.


Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer.  In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.

The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.

Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.

Irrelevant. For all I know, perhaps in Sweden the DC steamrolled over the competition. Doesn't make it a PS-DC duopoly.

"The place where you live" has nothing to do with the overall picture, otherwise you'll always be able to find some market where some console did better than average.

Anyway, if I wanted, I could nitpick your argument and say that PS2 outsold XB over 3.5:1 and that the XB still got nowhere near the amount of 3rd party titles the PS2 did. But again, I don't even need to do that, because this discussion is not about your particular market.

There was no PS2-XB duopoly.

Your acting like the PS2 was the most dominant home system ever.  No one else will ever come as close a being completely dominant like the NES was during the third gen especially in North America where it had over 90% of the home console marketshare and completly controlled all third party studios. And again the X-Box did pretty good in North America even with a lot less third party support then the PS2.  Halo 2 was pretty much the most significant home console exclusive released during the sixth gereation in the US both in sales and popularity and critical acclaim.

Halo, GC, NA... I don't care!

Gen 6 was no duopoly.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Chris Hu on 19 March 2014
zorg1000 said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share.


It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.

Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.

The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.


Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer.  In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.

The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.

Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.


North America hardware totals

PS2-53.65

Xbox-15.77

Gamecube-12.55

Even in America Xbox didnt do much better than Gamecube despite Halo being so huge, having the best online, most powerful, better 3rd party support and a build in HDD. It surely wasnt a duopoly as PS2 sold over 3x as many Xbox in America.

You do realize that it was on the market two years less then the Gamecube due to a bad business deal between NVIDIA  and MS.  If both consoles would have been on the market for the same amount of time the gap would have been a lot bigger.  Also the X-Box was always a lot more expensive and never had a $99US fire sale like the Gamecube had towards its end of it life cycle in the US.



fatslob-:O on 19 March 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

Here we go again:

Out of the three links you posted, only one of them was relevant to the OG, and it showed that 360 lost more money than the OG did, it just made more profits as well, but that doesn;t help your argument when your trying to put the blame of the xbox divsion being in the red on the OG Xbox.

It still ties in to your point about how gaining market share is supposed about sacrifice but guess what ? The PS1 was Sony's first attempt and they didn't lose money! It makes no difference whether the the xbox or xbox 360 lost more money. All that matters is that there still in the red after all those YEARS. 

NIntendo's consoles have been declining since the NES, with the exception of the Wii which is a verifiyable fad, every single Nitendo console has sold less than its predecessors. To claim that the decline started with the GC is completely ignoring the previous generations.

@Bold This is nothing but worthless hack and drivel of an analysis on your part. What's the point in catering to a declining market such as the PS360 when it limits the potential of gaming ? You can't say that the WII was a fad when nintendo's output of quality software has diminished signifcantly. 

Backwards compatiblity isn't an influence? It should be obvious how this is a blantant fallacy. You can't prove your point, while I have been providing real evidence that cleary contradicts your claims.

You have yet to prove shit. Being backwards compatible has nothing to do with the consoles philosphical representation. 

If it doesn't matter that they where peripherals on the PS2, then the Dreamcast would be responsible for the features. The fact is the PS2 slim did not have these options avaliable. It doesn't matter that the PS2 and Dreamcast supported it, the Xbox mandated it. Every single model of the xbox has hdd and online capability. That is indisputable. Furthermore, every console afterwards has released with online and hdd. Everything else you mentioned is not standard. 

Once again it doesn't matter if the PS2 slim didn't support it or not. The fact is YOU CAN'T CLAIM that it was the original xbox who set these standards when it's failure that wasn't adopted by the main stream. 

@Bold You just proved that you can't read. Did the WII  and the WII U have an HDD ? 





Chris Hu on 19 March 2014

Whatever the original X-Box still was a lot closer to being in a douopoly with the PS2 then the GameCube especially in the US.