Jordahn said:
|
superchunk said:
I don't want to read 4 pages of stuff, so my comment is this.
If Sony's 1st and 2nd party base is so much bigger, by be extension better, than MS and Nintendo combined, then why is it Nintendo is the only company that can carry their entire company solely of their software?
1. Who's to say that both SONY and Microsoft cannot do this? If the PSOne and PSTwo had switched position with the N64 and GC respectfully, could SONY be as successful? Hard to say, and we'll never know. But the PS3 is in third this gen, and it's 1st/2nd offering have been for the most part good to SONY and the PS3.
Why is it Nintendo made more profits from gaming than MS and/or Sony for every single year any of them has ever made video games?
2. I would suspect from the reports of 3rd parties, developing for the "HD" consoles are more expensive. So I can see it applied to SONY and Microsoft as well.
Why is it Nintendo, who makes games on at most 2 platforms, is only 2nd to EA in publishing when EA makes games on every single possible platform there is to be found?
3. Just narrowing this to just "publishing" will not paint a more accurate big picture scenario.
Why is it Nintendo never has to wonder if their game will be a million seller? Its usually will their game break 3m. 1m is almost a certainty.
4. Most of the time, larger userbase help larger software sales.
More does not equate to better. PS1 and PS2 did not become the best selling home consoles of their times (and all time) because Sony makes great games. They sold so well because Sony worked very well with 3rd parties and retained a TON of great exclusives.
5. No one legit ever said that more always meant quality.
On the other hand, Wii is a massive success and will easily claim the crown from PS2 almost solely on Nintendo's software as most 3rd parties have only just begun to actually put forth solid efforts.
There is no better software maker than Nintendo. Its multiple decades of massive hits and record breaking titles prove this beyond a doubt.
6. Nintendo is an awesome software maker. Nuff said. |
|
I added numbers to your comments.
1. Sony and MS would not be profitable or successful without a lot of 3rd party support. This I believe is proven in both PS3 and Xbox respectively. Whereas Nintendo made money on N64 as well as GC without any real support and Wii, which has arguably far less than PS360, is also a far more stable platform.
2. I don't know what the dev costs for HD consoles has to do with my question. I was referring to primarily the last gen as well as before that in the case of Sony. This gen its obvious, but last gen all three consoles were similarly spec'd but, Nintendo made far more profit in gaming than either Sony or MS.
3. I didn't narrow it to anything. The point of developing software is to publish it and all three companies have 1st/2nd party devs because they publish software. Thus, being that Nintendo is 2nd only a company that publishes on every platform imaginable is really saying something about the number of titles Nintendo puts out and how many of those they sell. Which really is the whole point to making them in the first place, right?
4. ok, true, however, I again was not solely concerning myself to the Wii. Even with previous gens, Nintendo's games generally sell very, very well.
5. As I said in another reply, the whole point of making that comment by Sony is to prove that they are better.
6. Fully agree.
