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

Forums - Gaming - The Industry Is Stronger When Nintendo Is Strong, Says Sony's Jim Ryan

DonFerrari on 19 June 2017

Some people need to review the VGC tables...

PS3 were always ahead of X360 launch aligned and even when considering the year in question it was never something like PS4 over X1.



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari on 19 June 2017
Soundwave said:
DonFerrari said:
He is right, the industry itself is stronger when all its players are strong

Depends sort of IMO. When you have too much competetion it leads to a situation where Sega is gone for example. And that wasn't good for gamers, we lost a really valuable part of gaming when Sega dissolved away. 

Too many gaming options can be bad because a legitimately good one can end up getting less marketshare than they should.

And that meant Sega wasn't strong and that was bad for the industry



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."

Soundwave on 19 June 2017
DonFerrari said:
Soundwave said:

Depends sort of IMO. When you have too much competetion it leads to a situation where Sega is gone for example. And that wasn't good for gamers, we lost a really valuable part of gaming when Sega dissolved away. 

Too many gaming options can be bad because a legitimately good one can end up getting less marketshare than they should.

And that meant Sega wasn't strong and that was bad for the industry

People can only buy so much game hardware. Sega did everything they could with the Dreamcast, but someone was going to be pushed out. 



DonFerrari on 19 June 2017
Soundwave said:
DonFerrari said:

And that meant Sega wasn't strong and that was bad for the industry

People can only buy so much game hardware. Sega did everything they could with the Dreamcast, but someone was going to be pushed out. 

Yet the generations only got bigger and with more HW and SW sold. Sega not knowing how to compete and making their own mistakes with the Mega Drive add-ons, Saturn surprise and all else was the problem, they weren't strong on Saturn and Dreamcast and made several bad decisions.



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."

Soundwave on 19 June 2017

I think the industry would be better if Microsoft had never gotten involved as a console maker. Nintendo GameCube likely would've by default sold 40 million instead of 22 million IMO and then likely Nintendo would've taken advantage of Sony's $600 Blu-Ray blunder and sold a lot that following generation no matter what. 

We'd have a Sony-Nintendo market but Nintendo would be making both main line console and portables instead of basically being pushed out to make portable focused hardware alone.

And really MS doesn't bring anything to the marketplace other than PC games that are all on PS4 anyway. When they came in they unneccessarily crowded the market for Nintendo for no good reason (and have destroyed Rare in the process too). They don't need the game industry at all, instead they came into a market to basically screw up things for Nintendo that does need the game industry because they are an actual video game company, not some billion-dollar software company looking to blow some money on a side hobby. 



Around the Network
KLAMarine on 19 June 2017

That's very nice of him to say! Thanks Jim! Thank goodness it wasn't Phil Spencer saying this otherwise I'd have to question his motives.



DonFerrari on 19 June 2017
Soundwave said:

I think the industry would be better if Microsoft had never gotten involved as a console maker. Nintendo GameCube likely would've by default sold 40 million instead of 22 million IMO and then likely Nintendo would've taken advantage of Sony's $600 Blu-Ray blunder and sold a lot that following generation no matter what. 

We'd have a Sony-Nintendo market but Nintendo would be making both main line console and portables instead of basically being pushed out to make portable focused hardware alone.

And really MS doesn't bring anything to the marketplace other than PC games that are all on PS4 anyway. When they came in they unneccessarily crowded the market for Nintendo for no good reason (and have destroyed Rare in the process too). They don't need the game industry at all, instead they came into a market to basically screw up things for Nintendo that does need the game industry because they are an actual video game company, not some billion-dollar software company looking to blow some money on a side hobby. 

Considering Wii were out of stock for most of it's relevant life how X360 not existing would help it? And how X360 and X1 not existing would make Nintendo not make the errors on WiiU?

Companies usually live and die by their own mistakes.



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."

Goddbless on 19 June 2017

Thank God this wasn't Phil Spencer saying this because everyone would've been going at him. I'm a fan of Nintendo so I can agree with this statement but I'm not sure a Sony rep should be saying this.



Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

-TheRealMafoo

VGPolyglot on 19 June 2017

They want stability, because they're benefiting from the stability. If Nintendo went under, there'd be a good chance that their gaming division would be greatly affected, too.



Pionner on 19 June 2017

Not really. Playstation is a better world wide brand and the industry, developers, and gamers benefit more when Playstation is successful.

This article sums it up-

http://gamingbolt.com/why-playstation-being-dominant-may-be-the-best-thing-for-the-gaming-industry



Formerly ilovegirls69  :(