I've been thinking about this for a while, and here are the questions... Who was the winner when Microsoft announced Grand Theft Auto IV for XBOX360? Here I think Microsoft debilitated Sony in America; most of us still think that GTA was one of the reasons that did so podular Sony's console. Yes sony definitively lost a big card. And what did Microsoft obtain of it? Well they're going to earn some sony's market, (and even I think the game isn't going to be the same without the exclusivity factor...), but that's all, they aren't going to see the succes that the game had before. The same goes to Devil May Cry, (maybe MGS4)... Nintendo won. Who was the winner when Microsoft got the support from japanese developers? Sony lost again a good card, and games who could be million sellers in Japan in a PS3 (Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, even Viva Piñata) were only a good try for XBOX in that country. Nintendo won. Microsoft even made a HD console, cheaper, with the best experience online, and more accessible than the PS3. Microsoft hit sony's weaknesses, and Nintendo took advantage of it. Why I think Nintendo can be the winner in this war? Because the Wii had a philosophy that did sony a winner once, the PS1 and PS2 philosophy. Make it easier for developers. Make it cheaper for the people. Make games for all kinds of people, not only for hardcores. What do you think?

Sorry, I now it's "Is microsoft helping nintendo to win this war?"

I still have problems with my english, sorry if there are more mistakes...

And yet people still believe Sony will win the war. *sigh*

The titles fine, headlines and titles in english often take out conditionals and conjunctions...

On topic. Yes. Heck MS basically told people to buy a Wii (Peter Moore any way). But this is more Nintendo's strategy of pitting the two against each other. Nintendo Execsdidn't know the Wii would be a success, but Nintendo Execs knew that the other two would lose money.

Nintendo does have a reputation for being ruthless for a reason.

Sorry, but there are some problems with all of this.

One, Nintendo doesn't win simply because MS steals customers from Sony. Nintendo has to win by creating their own customers, plain and simple. And they have, of course, so they're well on their way. Yet, I doubt I can stress enough that MS stealing a couple million of Sony's supporters is by no means enough to cripple them.

Two, some of the games you talk about Sony "losing" exclussiveness to MS either couldn't be on the system to begin with (Viva Pinata) or are too small to have mattered. Oh, and they are all brand new IPs. Sorry, but those games may have failed just as much on the PS3. Either way, it's ridiculous to even consider the possibility of brand new IPs selling a million copies in Japan alone without a shred of even theoretical evidence.

Three, if the 360 is more accessable, offers better features, and compete on level ground on the most basic matter then I've gotta ask: Why does the PS3 sell more units when priced $100 more than the 360 while not providing a superior product? That should damn well be a tip that MS isn't really putting the hurt on Sony at all.

Now you may be right. Nintendo may win. But it isn't MS's doing that will make it happen. Nintendo's good business decisions are far more influential. Sony's poor business decisions are also more influential. MS's "helping" Nintendo is a drop in the ocean.

Of course, the truth about MS is that they don't give a crap about winning the console wars as long as Sony loses.  So if it seems like MS is trying to help Nintendo, it might just be because they are.  With the Wii as successful as it has been, whatever little help they give is sure to be enough as long as Nintendo keeps doing their thing.

The PS3 did outsell the 360 while it cost $100 more, man.  Imagine how lopsided their little battle would be if the consoles cost the same amount.  And let's not forget, last generation essentially proved that MS would be forced out of the market if they charged more for their system than Sony does.

Nintendo is a tougher force to fight, but there are a numebr of strategies to beat them that most people here haven't considered or outright deny being possible.  Why is this?  Because we've seen all of 7 generations and think that's enough to make a pattern?  Well, that's what people think, at least, but the truth of the matter is that the business hasn't existed long enough to make such snap decisions to begin with and, don't choke now, the pattern doesn't actually exist.  PS1 came back against the Saturn and took a MASSIVE lead, eventually leading to Sega leaving the market.

Really, don't think soemthing is impossible just because you casually glanced at two sets of numbers and never put them into full context.

I respectfully disagree Chichiri Muyo, I think that the right stuff Nintendo has done is equally important to the bad decisions of the other companies, the lack of consumer HD awareness, the elitism of MS and Sony towards consumers, the high prices (compared to previous generation winners), etc., etc., etc.

MS cutting into the Playstation Brand popularity and starting this wreckless money war has divided hardcore gamers and left the casual and core gamers to Nitnendo.

Well, you are welcome to disagree, but I think you have the message just slightly off. I think Sony's mistakes are certainly as beneficial to Nintendo as their own good choices. I just don't think MS's choices, good or bad, are as influencial in who is going to win this generation as the first two factors. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

Let's be honest here, it's Sony's mistakes that really even allow MS the opportunity to damage them to begin with. It doesn't matter how much MS bites at Sony's ankles, it's still a two horse race and those two horses are the ones that decide how this ends. Until MS finds a way to not be outsold by a more expensive machine they just aren't a big enough force here.  Really, if you've got to undercut the competitor by 30%, spend millions on exclussives, and put out several AAA titles to the competiton's 0 and you still can't beat them by more than a small margin you've got troubles.

Really, MS's meddling could be what smacks Sony into shape thereby being a factor against Nintendo winning the genration. Gotta see how it plays out, but anyway I look at it I just can't see MS as being anything but a side factor in the grand scheme and a minor influence in the eventual winner.

I have to say that although I think the 360 is destined for third place I believe it to be way more than the bit player you seem to be calling it.