| asqarkabab said: No remasters |
Everyones doing remasters.
| asqarkabab said: No remasters |
Everyones doing remasters.
Thunderbird77 said:
Totally wrong fallacy. Competition should come from software only. |
As long as there are not different manufacturers for compatible hardware?
Nope, competition is important, always. That's for console hardware and features as well.
The topic is similar to that of what if Nintendo went third party or drop out of gaming all together. It's good to have variety and competition from consoles.
I'm not sure what to think if Sony have dropped out. I'm mostly a Nintendo fan and care a lot more about their games and systems even though i have more than just Nintendo consoles. I have a PS2, but it's not like I bought and played all of the big time games it had, I only heard of games like Shadow of the Colosseus, GTA3, and a few others years after I no longer played on my PS2, which I used to primarily play sports game because that's what I was passionate about.
In the end, I still would've supported Wii U and 3DS because right now these consoles have given me great experiences despite what others have said about their specs (which really doesn't make much difference for me since power doesn't do much for me unless I'm interested in the gameplay).
Could the industry have declined without PS4? I don't know, too many elements. I mean, Vita is not setting the world on fire right now despite being superior hardware wise compared to the 3DS. Same thing if Nintendo were to bow down. I can't be sure. In the end, I'm glad Xbox, Wii U, and PS4 exist because they provide something different.
| Miyamotoo said: I am pretty sure Sony had similar plans with DRM and always on line with PS4, but after reactions of consumers on MS plans they abandon them and they appear like savers of console market. If situations were opposite and consumers actually were delightful buy DRM and always on line, you can bet PS4 would have something similar too. |
Unless you are ignoring that Sony when reveling the console on 2013 already said they didn't had always online and DRM would depend on the publisher on individual basis as were the case with PS3, so unless you have real proof drop the lie.
You don't like a company having a big chunk of the market, was your position the same when Wii was close to 50% of the market? Because PS4 is ahead of 50% for a small time, and mostly due to the other 2 companies not doing their best, WiiU is totally flumbing while X1 is keeping pace with X360 slower period, but will drop behind when it align with X360 hottest period.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
Thunderbird77 said:
?????????? Who would have a system one gen ahead of what and for what price? |
Ergh... whatever.
Thunderbird77 said:
Try with someone else because I'm well aware of the truth. |
What truth do you think you are aware of?
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
Let's drop the hostility everyone. Discuss the ideas, never turn the argument into something personal. Debate is encouraged as long as you respect the opinions of others. PMs will be recieved by some of you.
Thunderbird77 said:
Totally wrong fallacy. Competition should come from software only. |
Imagine a hypothetical scenario where only one gaming hardware platform was available. The company could do whatever they would want, always online DRM, keep raising online prices, and other customer unfriendly practices. They would implement features that might turn many people away, but they would find the right balance where they can maximize profits, a balance between screwing people over so they can exploit them the most, but so they still keep playing games. They would not need to win customers over anymore, as the only alternative would be not gaming, so they could get away with a lot more exploiting of its users.
The fact that companies have to fight to get the consumers to their platform, means they will be doing things that benefit consumers.
Profrektius said:
Imagine a hypothetical scenario where only one gaming hardware platform was available. The company could do whatever they would want, always online DRM, keep raising online prices, and other customer unfriendly practices. They would implement features that might turn many people away, but they would find the right balance where they can maximize profits, a balance between screwing people over so they can exploit them the most, but so they still keep playing games. They would not need to win customers over anymore, as the only alternative would be not gaming, so they could get away with a lot more exploiting of its users. The fact that companies have to fight to get the consumers to their platform, means they will be doing things that benefit consumers. |
Sure, If we're talking about sony and MS, as they already tried it even while having competition.