They'll close the gap considerably next generation, if the competition doesn't make another damaging leap forward. But the game has been changed. In the short term, a chip-set arms race will not resolve anything
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
| Stefan.De.Machtige said: It seems clear that graphics have reached a certain point where megaleaps of hardware increases shows less and less difference than before. The differences between this generation and the last were smaller than the one between PS1 to PS2 and those were smaller than the ones between snes to PS1. Isn't that the reason that Nintendo came with the focus on fun and not graphics? That wouldn't have worked well before the wii. There was a staleness creeping in the gaming bussiness. Nintendo saw it, acted after its feeling and struck gold. |
Exactly, and that's why Nintendo is winning this generation. We will have a point that the hardware will not fill our eyes, and we will need of innovations, the numbers shows what you are saying and what I am strengthening now.
RolStoppable said:
The DS and PSP launched within weeks of each other. I am not an expert myself, but I have heard that the PSP is much more powerful than the DS. Nintendo wasn't doing as bad as you think, they made always profit. They also could have afforded a loss leading strategy that costs billions of dollars. The question is: why should they if they were convinced (and they really were) that such powerful hardware isn't needed because the majority of the market doesn't care about it? That's really flawed thinking which I see quite often: "Nintendo didn't make a powerful console because they couldn't afford it and because they can't compete with Sony and Microsoft on that level". It's like saying that a man is stupid because he doesn't jump from a bridge like the other two men to impress a woman who doesn't care for men who jump from bridges. Everytime the power discussion comes up, it's put in a light where Nintendo is the stupid company and the loser. In reality, the opposite is the case, because Nintendo has read the market better than the other two companies who were more focused on impressing each other. I may have to work on my analogies... |
You seem to have misunderstood me. I never said that they lost money on the 'Cube--I know for a fact that they made a few billion. However, they were outsold by both of their biggest rivals, and the GameCube didn't really have the mass appeal that the PS2 did. They would likely have been forced into becoming a third party if they kept going on the same route, as before the Wii they'd never had a console that outsold its predecessor. Selling 15 million when their rivals are both likely to pass 40 million at least would not have been a strategy they'd have liked to follow, so they tried something different and it's been a roaring success that's changed the industry, like Nintendo has done many times before.
I did say that they probably WOULD have lost money on the new console if they followed the same route as Microsoft and Sony this generation, and that's why they decided to take a gamble with this new path. I don't think Nintendo is stupid at all--the Wii has been a fantastic success, and they are by far my favourite console manufacturer.
About the DS comment, I simply meant that the DS is quite a powerful handheld (the first of its kind to even think about a polygon). Unlike the Wii, the DS was a generational leap from its predecessor.
| Stefan.De.Machtige said: That's the wrong question. This is the real one: What will the two others players do with graphics or hardware? Will they follow Nintendo? The answer is probably yes. Nintendo's new strategy works without a shadow of a doubt, so the others are forced to act in a similar way. It seems clear that graphics have reached a certain point where megaleaps of hardware increases shows less and less difference than before. The differences between this generation and the last were smaller than the one between PS1 to PS2 and those were smaller than the ones between snes to PS1. Isn't that the reason that Nintendo came with the focus on fun and not graphics? That wouldn't have worked well before the wii. There was a staleness creeping in the gaming bussiness. Nintendo saw it, acted after its feeling and struck gold. Neither company's will not throw much money down a hole when it's not needed. None of the three. The funny thing is that Nintendo doesn't depends on graphics but on color and style. So it possesses a clear advantage over its rivals. The next generation could be very interesting. |
They can't lower their graphical power. When they do, the core uses will see them going "casual" and demand they change back. The new market probably wont take to well as Nintendo is dominate in the new market. So, they will be forced to retreat upstream. This is why Sony is doomed becuase their system is too powerful. Some have suggested that Sony could make the PS4 only slightly better, but core users will want Sony to make it even stronger. Sony will have to make the system stronger and stronger to keep up with users demand for powerful consoles. The Playstation line wont last much longer afterwards.
Ugh...this is an embarrassing thread for 360 supporters.
OT: Maybe Microsoft and Sony should rethink their business strategies, not Nintendo. While I am sure next gen graphics for all systems will improve, I hope Microsoft focuses more on adding features/functionality and hardware reliability. I hope this gen is the last of the whole macho graphical powerhouse era...it's really obnoxious, resource intensive...and honestly, I've been kind of underwhelmed.
I'm not a fanboy, I just try to tip the balance in favor of logic and common sense.
The real question is, will Microsoft or Sony catch up with Nintendo's interface and mass-market appeal innovations?
Sky Render - Sanity is for the weak.
| CatFangs806 said: Here is the list of the processing speeds of the sixth generation gaming consoles. Surprisingly, the Gamecube is faster than the PS2. Xbox: 733 Mhz Gamecube: 485 Mhz PS2: 294 Mhz Dreamcast: 200 Mhz As one poster as already said, though, Nintendo did lose a lot of money on the gamecube because everybody else was playing PS2 or Xbox. So instead of spending billions on a powerful console, they made a cheap console with almost the same graphics as gamecube and named it the Wii, and targeted it towards the casual. And what do you know? 50 million units sold in 2 1/2 years versus 32 million lifetime for the 64 and 24 million lifetime for the gamecube. |
They didn't lose money on cube. Nintendo has always had the strategy to make money on Hardware as well as software.
They did this by not including certain features like DVD playback but still used a DVD rom but with mini discs and back then DVD was very expensive.
Raw numbers show Xbox as being the most powerful but it was a PC in a console shell,Gamecube had more efficient chipset design so while the numbers were lower it could do anything Xbox could and better at some points,only thing that Xbox had better that pushed it past cube was the memory and a HDD and 8.5 GB discs over Cubes 1.5GB.
Also Xbox only outsold cube by 3 million units and MS lost 1 billion on Xbox 1 ..it never made money.
Wii has surpassed the original Xbox in every way now and matched what both Xbox and 360 use in disc capacity with 8.5GB discs.
Smashchu2 said:
|
Who's talking about lowering graphics? it's about not upgrading so fast to push the price down. Nintendo upgraded but not so much as their competitors.
The problem for Sony is that they are a hardware pusher. They make hardware platforms in the first place. That's their nature like you said. If they want to live within the new market, they will be forced to have a real gaming division. Not a mere pusher of formats or anything else. Pushing Blu-Ray pretty much sunk the PS3. And that's something they also could do with the PS4. It will be intersting to see how Sony will act. Perhaps they might seperate the gamedivision from the rest, unlike they are doing now. But i doubt it. They couldn't understand the market this generation. It looks unlikely, that they will do so with the next one.
In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.
Nintendo's DS system rules this gen without all the HD bells and whistles. In my house There is a Beautiful Naked Popular Movie Star. In your house Same Star But she makes wearing Bikinies look "HD" great. Which do you want? Nuff Said!!!
| Sky Render said: The real question is, will Microsoft or Sony catch up with Nintendo's interface and mass-market appeal innovations? |
that's it exactly
Nintendo wants : making money with games ===> they stick to weak hardware and innovation / peripherals and see huge profits again, they became a synonym for gaming long ago and now after the Wii, it makes them tons of money
Sony wants : take over the living room as a all Sony'fied solution, TV, gaming, computer, music ; playstation brand is meant to help them to become 'the' brand to own. If they acchieve being strongly associated with media in general, all their gambles with PS3 pay of 1000000000 %. let me explain : in germany, hazelnut cream isn't called hazelnut cram, but NUTELLA, which is a brand. so i say : i like nutella on my bread. If sony achieves that people say :' im going to buy a new sony ' instead of : i buy new media devices, they get unimaginably rich and outrival they toughest rivals in both the music and TV media device market ======> they won't focus on hardware taht strong again, but they will be the peak of technology again. I expect ps4 to consolide devices, it will be an all-in-one solution for music, movies, TV receiver and gaming. that what they always aimed for. ALWAYS
Microsoft wants : avoid sony from threatening their PC and, if possible, create a direct link between windows and the living room. they don't want the same living room dominance as sony is aiming at in the short term, they aim to delay the process to strengthen their operating system, create a strong XBOX brand and consequently be able to become the-all-in one solution in the long run. they can do it now, they have the most money and cant afford to wait until playstation and therefore sony becomes monopolist in the living room. ====> they will do the same as now, outplay sony with costy buying off games and studios, offering similar hardware to a lower price point. but they will do it a bit more the nintendo way, they will pay much attention to the casual, less than nintendo but more than sony
I used the term living room too often i think ...
How can 720p be considered HD when it looks like ugly snow grains on my 22'' screen?
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
