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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - why companies arent considering nintendo direct competition?

Vague_Fenix on 19 June 2008
oliist said:
Because the quality of the best Nintendo games is not an achievable goal for any other existing company.

I rather have company's have those goals and fail, which results i still very decent games(no more heroes), then company's who just just bring out games for the money and not even try to match Nintendo's quality and effort.

Given that nintendo's quality is a almost impossible goal.

 



#Live Life, Die Laughing#  *the laughter revolution*

Around the Network
WEWdeadeye on 19 June 2008
Kasz216 said:
MontanaHatchet said:

Because this is the first time in history where the two losing consoles are getting tons of games that the leading console isn't, especially when these games were on the leading console's predecessor, even if multiplatform (Beyond Good and Evil 2 seems to be a good example of this).

 

Except... Sony is claiming the same thing for the DS. Which doesn't meet any of your qualifications.

So... no.... your wrong. That's now why they're saying it.

If you ask me it's because Sony and Microsoft care less about videogames and more about entertainment.

The design philospy of Nintendo is to make a system that plays games... period. They follow the company motto. Do one thing exceptionally. They don't even like to own other buisnesses selling them off whenever they aquire something related to the VG buisness.

While the other two companies are more interested in taking over your living room. Either one would do anything for that... as it's a much larger piece of the pie as far as money goes.

Well also Microsoft more wants Sony to not get a hub, as a thing like the Playstation 3 controlling your living room is basically "like" a PC... and that could be a mega inroad into the PC market hurting their profitability.

The Wii isn't going to take over anyones movie collection or sound system or anything else... so it doesn't challenge their ulitamte goal it just delays it.

It's the same with the PSP.  The PSP isn't really a game system... it's really more a multimedia device... that primarily was trying to push UMDs.  Though that failed, it stil has other non game uses.

 

I totally agree with what you said.  Sony and Microsoft are using video games as a trojan horse to invade and control all aspects of digital entertainment in our living rooms.



Currently Playing:

PS4 - Killzone:SF and Assasins Creed 4

 

XBox One: BF4, CoD:Ghosts, Dead Rising 3, Forza 5

 

Changing channels with my voice: priceless!!!

WEWdeadeye on 19 June 2008
Vague_Fenix said:
oliist said:
Because the quality of the best Nintendo games is not an achievable goal for any other existing company.

I rather have company's have those goals and fail, which results i still very decent games(no more heroes), then company's who just just bring out games for the money and not even try to match Nintendo's quality and effort.

Given that nintendo's quality is a almost impossible goal.

 

You might prefer that (as I would, and many others I am sure), but a company that doesn't worry about making money won't be around long enough to make anymore of those games.

Oh, and Nintendo is VERY concerned about making money, make no mistake.  They are a business, that is their number one goal.



Currently Playing:

PS4 - Killzone:SF and Assasins Creed 4

 

XBox One: BF4, CoD:Ghosts, Dead Rising 3, Forza 5

 

Changing channels with my voice: priceless!!!

weezy on 19 June 2008
lolita said:
Yeah I think they are sore losers. They can't accept that a console that's less powerful, less costly gets more attention. The best solution they found to counter all of it is to say that they don't target the same audience which is a quite weird argument.

We have a winner.

 



I am WEEzY. You can suck my Nintendo loving BALLS!

 

MynameisGARY

Rock_on_2008 on 19 June 2008

Sony and MS no longer consider Nintendo direct competition because of:

A. They have both given up on achieving First Place in console generation wars.
or
B. The HD console market argument its PS3 V's X360

A or B?

Around the Network
Rock_on_2008 on 19 June 2008

Nintendo focuses on providing the best game play. second is graphics.
Sony and MS focus mainly on best realistic graphics in games. Game play is second



MontanaHatchet on 19 June 2008
Kasz216 said:
MontanaHatchet said:

Because this is the first time in history where the two losing consoles are getting tons of games that the leading console isn't, especially when these games were on the leading console's predecessor, even if multiplatform (Beyond Good and Evil 2 seems to be a good example of this).

 

Except... Sony is claiming the same thing for the DS. Which doesn't meet any of your qualifications.

So... no.... your wrong. That's now why they're saying it.

If you ask me it's because Sony and Microsoft care less about videogames and more about entertainment.

The design philospy of Nintendo is to make a system that plays games... period. They follow the company motto. Do one thing exceptionally. They don't even like to own other buisnesses selling them off whenever they aquire something related to the VG buisness.

While the other two companies are more interested in taking over your living room. Either one would do anything for that... as it's a much larger piece of the pie as far as money goes.

Well also Microsoft more wants Sony to not get a hub, as a thing like the Playstation 3 controlling your living room is basically "like" a PC... and that could be a mega inroad into the PC market hurting their profitability.

The Wii isn't going to take over anyones movie collection or sound system or anything else... so it doesn't challenge their ulitamte goal it just delays it.timedia device... that primarily was trying to push UMDs.  Though that failed, it stil has other non game uses. It's the same with the PSP.  The PSP isn't really a game system... it's really more a mul

Well, he asked about "companies." As if he would be implying both Microsoft and Sony. Since Microsoft doesn't have a handheld, my first thought turned to the home console race. And the PSP is still getting a lot of games that the DS isn't, even if many of them are first party. The problem is that there isn't a third leg in the handheld race for comparision. I'm sure that if Microsoft had a handheld in the race, similar to the PSP, that the PSP and Microsoft's handheld would both get a lot of games that the DS wouldn't get, despite the DS being the market leader. A lot of it comes down to demographics.

So no, I'm not wrong. You're (notice the spelling?) wrong about that.

 



 

 

NJ5 on 19 June 2008
SpartanFX said:

I honestly think it's due to different audiences these companies are targeting,,,,,nintendo is exploring audiences that Sony/Microsoft had no intention of (or didn't think about) exploring it.

for example ,Honda is exploring different market audience than say jeep ,despite both being cars.( jeep does not consider Honda as a direct competition ,,,, one is considered bt people who have fuel effiecieny on their mind and the other one is considered by poeple who want an off-road/large car)

 

That would be fine, except for this little detail which means Nintendo is indeed stealing userbase from PS360 (or that the games market is crashing, make your choice).

Saying the Wii isn't competing with the other consoles is corporate spin, pure and simple.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

greenmedic88 on 19 June 2008

A and B.

I don't buy the best game play argument seeing as how very few games really make good use of the motion controls. Bad motion controls are just as bad, if not worse than bad standard game pad controls. But I'll say the same thing I said after I played Wii Sports for the first time a year and half ago in regards to the control capabilities: "I see lots of potential."

No point in trying to compete graphically, attempts by High Voltage notwithstanding. It falls outside the Blue Ocean strategy even if a new game engine is miraculously supposed to produce comparable visuals on the Wii.

Then again, Conduit's not a Nintendo property. Maybe they didn't get the memo.



greenmedic88 on 19 June 2008

MontanaHatchet said:
Kasz216 said:
MontanaHatchet said:

Because this is the first time in history where the two losing consoles are getting tons of games that the leading console isn't, especially when these games were on the leading console's predecessor, even if multiplatform (Beyond Good and Evil 2 seems to be a good example of this).

 

Except... Sony is claiming the same thing for the DS. Which doesn't meet any of your qualifications.

So... no.... your wrong. That's now why they're saying it.

If you ask me it's because Sony and Microsoft care less about videogames and more about entertainment.

The design philospy of Nintendo is to make a system that plays games... period. They follow the company motto. Do one thing exceptionally. They don't even like to own other buisnesses selling them off whenever they aquire something related to the VG buisness.

While the other two companies are more interested in taking over your living room. Either one would do anything for that... as it's a much larger piece of the pie as far as money goes.

Well also Microsoft more wants Sony to not get a hub, as a thing like the Playstation 3 controlling your living room is basically "like" a PC... and that could be a mega inroad into the PC market hurting their profitability.

The Wii isn't going to take over anyones movie collection or sound system or anything else... so it doesn't challenge their ulitamte goal it just delays it.timedia device... that primarily was trying to push UMDs. Though that failed, it stil has other non game uses. It's the same with the PSP. The PSP isn't really a game system... it's really more a mul

Well, he asked about "companies." As if he would be implying both Microsoft and Sony. Since Microsoft doesn't have a handheld, my first thought turned to the home console race. And the PSP is still getting a lot of games that the DS isn't, even if many of them are first party. The problem is that there isn't a third leg in the handheld race for comparision. I'm sure that if Microsoft had a handheld in the race, similar to the PSP, that the PSP and Microsoft's handheld would both get a lot of games that the DS wouldn't get, despite the DS being the market leader. A lot of it comes down to demographics.

So no, I'm not wrong. You're (notice the spelling?) wrong about that.

 

Maybe he meant "your wrong" as in your bad. lol

You can split the argument either way depending on your point of view. Yes, every Wii sold is potentially a PS3 or 360 that was not sold, but I really don't see the same types of games (or the same high profile titles) being developed for the Wii, barring a few multi-port titles with perfunctory motion controls (Force Unleashed may actually be the first decent port if they nail the controls). They simply don't exist on the platform.

By far most of my best gaming experiences this generation have been on the HD consoles. I have exactly three titles between the two of them that had a port for the Wii; none of which were better due to the merits of the Wii. I have one FPS title for the Wii that was also available for the 360 and despite the IR aiming, the port was horrible. And MP3 didn't give me the seamless FPS controls I was expecting even though they were much improved over the previous standard GC controls.

Just about all the Nintendo franchises that are the key selling point for any Nintendo console haven't won me back over for the first time since the SNES as far as the hardware and games go. I've long since transitioned from being a fan of Nintendo, to a minor investor in the company. No room for cheerleading there; the financials are my only concern. Lot of fun, great little console, but hardly the be all end all revolution in gaming.