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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Between the Big three (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo), who is the worst when at the top?

LurkerJ said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Semantics, lol. Not at all. Used games still would have been entirely possible. Like I said, the plan was trash, but it wasn’t “erasing used games”.

I believe SONY is the worst when they're unchallenged. This aside, why do you feel the need to rewrite the history of a multi-national tech giant that cares little for your overall wellbeing? bewildering. 

The only bewildering thing is how badly you just butchered the term “rewrite history”. Also it’s not like it was defending them, I said their plan was still shit.



Around the Network
Doctor_MG said:

Switch really reinvigorated the portable console space, and it doesn't get enough credit for that. 

Partially. Switch is partially used as home console and partially as portable, and of course as both as well. Being a different machine altogether also allow a new kind of consumer to emerge, people who wouldn't buy a handheld and wouldn't by a Nintendo home console (favoring Xbox and/or Playstation) but find a pretty good seal paying for a hybrid 

If Nintendo keep releasing only handhelds I'm not sure it they would be able to outsell 3DS, many of Switch system sellers seems better designed to be played on TV (Zelda), while others to be played as portables (Animal Crossing)

To better understand Switch sucess we must first realizing Switch haven't saved any market, but created a new one instead 



Fei-Hung said:

Microsoft. Regardless of how well or bad they have done, they have always given up quickly on supporting their system with games.

Original Xbox they tried and it didn't go anywhere so they killed it of early to release the next system early and get a head start.

The 360 they released faulty, lashed a bunch of next gen features that had to be bought as add ons, front loaded it with exclusive and after 3 years road it out with 3rd party and their triple halo, gears and Forza releases.

The One, stupidly priced at launch due to a gimmick, lacked behind in HW, gave up 2-3 years in and went back to relying on their usual 3 games.

Series gen, again has had 2 AAA games release in the span of 18 months and one of them being a bi-annual kinda game. In the same time Sony has released around 8 games that are AAA and then smaller games like Sackboy, Astrobot, Kena and Upgraded releases.

Nintendo has been horrendous this gen with only one Zelda, one mainline Mario. Most their games have been re-releases of sorts and they are 5 years into this gen. My fave Nintendo gen won't be beaten I think. The N64 was Nintendo at their best.

Not really true. There was Gears Tactics at launch and Flight Sim during the summer. Psychonauts 2 as well if you don't care about it being multiplatform. So 4-5 AAA depending on how you look at it. Then plenty of timed exclusives thrown in there. 2nd half of this year is still good, but Xbox needs to improve with 1st half releases which they have acknowledged. Sony continues to be way better at this. I can't see this being a continued issue going forward with the amount of studios Xbox has now and will have.

Last edited by smroadkill15 - on 25 April 2022

Fei-Hung said:

Microsoft. Regardless of how well or bad they have done, they have always given up quickly on supporting their system with games.

Original Xbox they tried and it didn't go anywhere so they killed it of early to release the next system early and get a head start.

The 360 they released faulty, lashed a bunch of next gen features that had to be bought as add ons, front loaded it with exclusive and after 3 years road it out with 3rd party and their triple halo, gears and Forza releases.

The One, stupidly priced at launch due to a gimmick, lacked behind in HW, gave up 2-3 years in and went back to relying on their usual 3 games.

Series gen, again has had 2 AAA games release in the span of 18 months and one of them being a bi-annual kinda game. In the same time Sony has released around 8 games that are AAA and then smaller games like Sackboy, Astrobot, Kena and Upgraded releases.

Nintendo has been horrendous this gen with only one Zelda, one mainline Mario. Most their games have been re-releases of sorts and they are 5 years into this gen. My fave Nintendo gen won't be beaten I think. The N64 was Nintendo at their best.

Kena is third party, not published by Sony.



IcaroRibeiro said:

Partially. Switch is partially used as home console and partially as portable, and of course as both as well. Being a different machine altogether also allow a new kind of consumer to emerge, people who wouldn't buy a handheld and wouldn't by a Nintendo home console (favoring Xbox and/or Playstation) but find a pretty good seal paying for a hybrid 

If Nintendo keep releasing only handhelds I'm not sure it they would be able to outsell 3DS, many of Switch system sellers seems better designed to be played on TV (Zelda), while others to be played as portables (Animal Crossing)

To better understand Switch sucess we must first realizing Switch haven't saved any market, but created a new one instead 

Switch reinvigorated the portable console space by offering home console players a portable console. They absolutely reinvigorated interest in portable consoles. Just look at the Steam Deck. I highly doubt Valve would have made that product if not for the success of the Switch. 



Around the Network
Doctor_MG said:
HoangNhatAnh said:

What about vita???

Not sure what you are inquiring about. Vita launched for 249.99 (as much as it's contemporary launched at for 2-3x the processing power) and offered backward compatibility (PSP digital games and PS1 classic games from PSP and PS3 carried forward) and offered crossbuy for many games. After a year on the market Sony slashed the price by $50 and reduced the price of the memory cards.

It was mostly the memory cards that cost the Vita, but, also, the mobile game market shrunk during that time. DS and PSP sold a combined 230M units. 3DS and Vita sold a paltry 90M combined. Switch really reinvigorated the portable console space, and it doesn't get enough credit for that. 

Bold: only selected of PSP and PS1 games, not even close to 50% of the full numbers of the games on both systems. Vita software also played a big part why it flopped. 3ds sold not too good, but at least it's software sales made up for that, can't say that for vita. Sony have their own fault, not just mobile phone.



smroadkill15 said:
Fei-Hung said:

Microsoft. Regardless of how well or bad they have done, they have always given up quickly on supporting their system with games.

Original Xbox they tried and it didn't go anywhere so they killed it of early to release the next system early and get a head start.

The 360 they released faulty, lashed a bunch of next gen features that had to be bought as add ons, front loaded it with exclusive and after 3 years road it out with 3rd party and their triple halo, gears and Forza releases.

The One, stupidly priced at launch due to a gimmick, lacked behind in HW, gave up 2-3 years in and went back to relying on their usual 3 games.

Series gen, again has had 2 AAA games release in the span of 18 months and one of them being a bi-annual kinda game. In the same time Sony has released around 8 games that are AAA and then smaller games like Sackboy, Astrobot, Kena and Upgraded releases.

Nintendo has been horrendous this gen with only one Zelda, one mainline Mario. Most their games have been re-releases of sorts and they are 5 years into this gen. My fave Nintendo gen won't be beaten I think. The N64 was Nintendo at their best.

Not really true. There was Gears Tactics at launch and Flight Sim during the summer. Psychonauts 2 as well if you don't care about it being multiplatform. So 4-5 AAA depending on how you look at it. Then plenty of timed exclusives thrown in there. 2nd half of this year is still good, but Xbox needs to improve with 1st half releases which they have acknowledged. Sony continues to be way better at this. I can't see this being a continued issue going forward with the amount of studios Xbix has now and will have.

Not to mention they list “upgraded releases” as if paying $70 for a refresh of a game represents something good. Meanwhile on Xbox you just get the upgrade free and it updates with Smart Delivery. 



HoangNhatAnh said:

Bold: only selected of PSP and PS1 games, not even close to 50% of the full numbers of the games on both systems. Vita software also played a big part why it flopped. 3ds sold not too good, but at least it's software sales made up for that, can't say that for vita. Sony have their own fault, not just mobile phone.

Well this is false. 

https://www.cheapassgamer.com/topic/281768-complete-list-of-pspminispsone-games-playable-on-vita/

Literally about 85-90% of the PSP library (including PSOne classics) that are available to download is compatible with the Vita. This goes up to 99% when you factor in workarounds like transferring from PS3 to PS Vita. I've no idea where you are getting your compatibility numbers from, but they aren't accurate 



LudicrousSpeed said:
smroadkill15 said:

Not really true. There was Gears Tactics at launch and Flight Sim during the summer. Psychonauts 2 as well if you don't care about it being multiplatform. So 4-5 AAA depending on how you look at it. Then plenty of timed exclusives thrown in there. 2nd half of this year is still good, but Xbox needs to improve with 1st half releases which they have acknowledged. Sony continues to be way better at this. I can't see this being a continued issue going forward with the amount of studios Xbix has now and will have.

Not to mention they list “upgraded releases” as if paying $70 for a refresh of a game represents something good. Meanwhile on Xbox you just get the upgrade free and it updates with Smart Delivery. 

Seems weird to mention this for Sony when MS is the most consumer friendly with free new content and free next-gen upgrades. Releasing a next-gen version with an upgrade fee while the competition is doing free upgrades is not exactly a positive. 



Doctor_MG said:
IcaroRibeiro said:

Partially. Switch is partially used as home console and partially as portable, and of course as both as well. Being a different machine altogether also allow a new kind of consumer to emerge, people who wouldn't buy a handheld and wouldn't by a Nintendo home console (favoring Xbox and/or Playstation) but find a pretty good seal paying for a hybrid 

If Nintendo keep releasing only handhelds I'm not sure it they would be able to outsell 3DS, many of Switch system sellers seems better designed to be played on TV (Zelda), while others to be played as portables (Animal Crossing)

To better understand Switch sucess we must first realizing Switch haven't saved any market, but created a new one instead 

Switch reinvigorated the portable console space by offering home console players a portable console. They absolutely reinvigorated interest in portable consoles. Just look at the Steam Deck. I highly doubt Valve would have made that product if not for the success of the Switch. 

As I said, I don't describe this as reinvigorated handheld space, rather as creating a new market space which is the hybrid-console market space. Valve's Steam Deck comes with a device to be plugged on TV or Monitors. Sure, it lacks a dock to increase its power, but I can see their concept is to state that you can play it like a standard PC (and even use it like a PC)

If anything I think Switch was the last nail in the conffin of handhelds. With Lite barely selling 20% of the standard model last quarter we can see handheld-only Nintendo devices are now confines to a very small audience