- it's hard to speculate how things would have turned out otherwise, but "lesson learned?" The DS and Wii have shown Nintendo anything but them needing Sony. They made plenty of mistakes of course, but staying away from Sony was not one of them.
Your right it is hard to speculate but sharing a console for a generation rather than getting dominated for 2 generations seems better to me.
Sure Ninty has success now but I am sure they would be happier laways having it. The Wii is no indication that staying away from sony was a good move. Whats a indication that it was abad move is being beat by the PS and PS2 and now having to share handheld market which they never really had to do prior.
Through your comment you did imply somthing just like that by saying Nintendo was better off not with Sony. We dont know how it would of turned out otherwise but telling them no certainly didnt turn out good.
Am with PDF on this one.
And just for the record, I read the thing that guy's sig said to read.... sounds pretty dumb..... Nintendo dropped SONY's prototypes and SONY decided to make their own CD based system... and it turned out to be a success. I don't see how SONY copied.... especially when the article says that Nintendo went to Panasonic after they dropped SONY, and yet there next console wasn't CD based at all..... And the N64 was released more than 1 year and a half after the PS1 right???? I don't see what SONY did wrong... unless entering a new market and doing well in it is a bad thing????
And also I don't see MS doing anything new to the CONSOLE VG industry... I just see them making a few adjustments to ideas that were already there. Even with online, didn't the DreamCast have it first??? And now look??? Although it's arguable as to which service is better, PSN is fully functional now, and Free. Not to mention how well SONY has been pushing digitall distribution, working for MMO's, and bringing new things like Qore and Home.
Pretty dumb? if you say so , there was a dispute over naming rights , now nintendo hired sony , purely based on nintendo already been gaming software and hardware pioneers surely they should have had naming rights, sony knew what they were doing all along, they disputed the naming rights so that KEN "THIEF" KUTUGARI could run back to sony like a scalded dog with the hardware and software ideas that he stole from nintendo and hence the "PHONEY" playstation brand was born....... try to sugar coat over it all you want , SONY have always got by in this world by mainly copying other brands and its never really been thier talent that has made them successful , its always been the size of their damn wallet........ the gaming world was doing fine before sony came along , nintendo were (and still are) LEGENDS..... sega were fierce but fair competition to nintendo , sega started the console CD revolution with the mega CD and then the sega saturn.... nintendo were always revolutionary and sega were stepping up their game too by making 3d fighters as popular as they are today (virtua fighter, you know , the game that namco copied with tekken) sony aint given this gaming business nothing that wasn't already done or was already in production , Sega and nintendo were already taking gaming to the next level, virtua fighter , kirby , virtua cop , super mario world, sony saw an oppertunity and they took it like the RATS they are........... The corporation (sony) beat the LEGENDS (sega) because of the size of sonys wallets and NOTHINGELSE