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

Forums - Nintendo - Sony makes RIDICULOUS comment

Rpruett on 06 October 2009
Arius Dion said:
LoL. Let's see, the Wii was the biggest "change up" pitch since the original NES. It is almost taken for granted that Wii is a success now but look back at that gamespot parody article they never expected Nintendo to be where they're at now in the market.

As for risk, lets see, Sony releases the same controller 3 gens in a row, talk about playing it safe. And what prior controller did they base that design on?

If you are talking financial risk then he has a point; But why is this guy asking Nintendo to make boneheaded business decisions? Just the other day Nintendo was declared the best business in the world, spread sheets don't lie.

 

First of all,  Even the Wii 'risk' wasn't much of a risk for Nintendo.  Nintendo has a core audience that will buy their console (good, bad, or indifferent ,  Games, No Games, etc).  Releasing the Wii wasn't really a risk.   They still made profit for every system sold and even if motion controls were a gigantic failure,  they still would sell (At a profit) to their core audience.  Additionally, they incorporated the ability to use Gamecube controllers.   Why?   To mitigate the risk involved.

Secondly,  in this industry...What other type of risk are we speaking of?   Marketshare and Financial (Which are pretty much tied at the hip) are the only two bottom line risks that we are speaking of.  Neither of these companies is doing this for charity after all. 

Nintendo may run a good business but that doesn't always mean it's best for the consumers and it doesn't mean that they take tons of risks.  Generally the best 'operated' things take very few risks (Which is why Nintendo runs an air tight  business model).

Conversely,  if you don't take risks you won't make progress.  



Around the Network
angrypoolman on 06 October 2009
Onyxmeth said:
noname2200 said:
They took the risk that the market insisted on Blu-Ray now.

They took the risk that tilt controls would entice the populace.

They took the risk that the market is willing to support a purely DD handheld.

They took the risk that third-parties would continue to make exclusives for their system without extensive moneyhatting.

They took the risk that their first and second party studios could carry their systems single-handedly.

They took the risk of consumers getting a second job just to buy their system.

They took the risk that the rest of the corporation was willing to subsidize them even if they lost all the money they've assembled in the past decade.

They're about to take the risk that people will want to pay for and play with the Wand.

Nintendo, by contrast, does extensive research about almost every aspect of gaming and gamers before they commit to any move. This includes the DS and the Wii. They also take moves to minimize any harm that results if they read the market incorrectly.



No, I'd say he's being pretty accurate.

You're right. Not only is all of that ridiculously risky, it's also reckless. In that context he's right, but that just makes seem like a company that doesn't know what they're doing.

uh oh, onyxmeth entered the scene. this shit just got heavy.



Total Championships: Nintendo - 4, Sony - 2, Atari - 1, Microsoft - 0, Sega - 0

cdude1034 on 06 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:
cdude1034 said:
CGI-Quality said:
cdude1034 said:
CGI-Quality said:
cdude1034 said:
I'm confused, how is a console based completely on motion controls not riskier than anything Sony has ever done?

Don't feel like quoting, but putting big money into either novel or old IP's isn't a 'risk', it's a cost of doing business.

If Sony doesn't talk trash, how will anyone continue to respect them? Some companies can let the results do the talking. Others rely on their mouths.

From the looks and talk of Sony's games, I'd say their games do PLENTY of talking...

Now if only there were the sales to back that up...

You can say your games are the best all you want, but if nobody buys them (or another likely scenario, there aren't many people TO buy them), it doesn't matter.

Interesting, how'd you draw that ridiculous conclusion?

Also, I see you're one of those: "sales=quality" people. Not sure you're the right person to debate with....

No, not really, but you yourself said the games do the talking. What is their voice if not the people who buy them? One person can say they think X is the best game ever, and five others can say they hate it, and of course the reverse.

All talk does is get us nowhere. There has to be a way to qualitatively compare games, and reviews (see: opinions) are not a valid way of doing so.

So please, kindly take your preconcieved notions and throw them out before bashing someone else's thoughts.

Perceived quality does the talking, sales aren't everything you know. You'll learn one day that slaes =/= quality as judging from this post tells me you still believe it does. Why so defensive though? If you can't deal with a little subjectivity, you're on the wrong part of the site. You saying that "nobody buys Sony's games" IS ridiculous and inaccurate. Bashing this fallacy is rational there.

You think sales do the talikng, which if you want sequels, perhaps. But I stand by the assessment that quality does the talking, because plenty of quality games will never see Halo, Mario, or Gran Turismo-like sales.

I stand by my original assessment though, as of now, you aren't the right individual to discuss this with.

I gotta say, I can't find a single part where I said no one buys Sony's games. PS3 has what, 15+ million sellers? That's a lot of games. I'm not anti-PS3...

I will say this, you're right, sales aren't EVERYTHING. They're just the bottom line. Developers can go out of business if they pour too many resources into a failed game.

Why am I defensive? I can't exactly see that, but why are you so OFFensive? The beast fights its hardest just before the end of its life.

Quality is important, yes, but quality doesn't put food on the table unless people en masse can recognize the 'value' said quality can provide.



 

Currently playing: Civ 6

Dgc1808 on 06 October 2009
noname2200 said:
They took the risk that the market insisted on Blu-Ray now.

They took the risk that tilt controls would entice the populace.

They took the risk that the market is willing to support a purely DD handheld.

They took the risk that third-parties would continue to make exclusives for their system without extensive moneyhatting.

They took the risk that their first and second party studios could carry their systems single-handedly.

They took the risk of consumers getting a second job just to buy their system.

They took the risk that the rest of the corporation was willing to subsidize them even if they lost all the money they've assembled in the past decade.

They're about to take the risk that people will want to pay for and play with the Wand.

Nintendo, by contrast, does extensive research about almost every aspect of gaming and gamers before they commit to any move. This includes the DS and the Wii. They also take moves to minimize any harm that results if they read the market incorrectly.



No, I'd say he's being pretty accurate.

This should have ended the thread...

Also, the "Arrogant comments killed them" thing.... wtf??? Who listens to those comments??? Us on the internet... The average Joe doesn't give a fuck and probably never hears about this stuff.... 



4 ≈ One

supermario128 on 06 October 2009

Nintendo were the ones taking a huge risk with their new controller, while Sony took risks as well, (price of PS3, blu ray, etc) none were as big as Nintendo's.




Nintendo still doomed?
Feel free to add me on 3DS or Switch! (PM me if you do ^-^)
Nintendo ID: Mako91                  3DS code: 4167-4543-6089

Around the Network
psrock on 06 October 2009

CGI just killed the thread. I'm out.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
angrypoolman on 06 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:
angrypoolman said:
Onyxmeth said:
noname2200 said:
They took the risk that the market insisted on Blu-Ray now.

They took the risk that tilt controls would entice the populace.

They took the risk that the market is willing to support a purely DD handheld.

They took the risk that third-parties would continue to make exclusives for their system without extensive moneyhatting.

They took the risk that their first and second party studios could carry their systems single-handedly.

They took the risk of consumers getting a second job just to buy their system.

They took the risk that the rest of the corporation was willing to subsidize them even if they lost all the money they've assembled in the past decade.

They're about to take the risk that people will want to pay for and play with the Wand.

Nintendo, by contrast, does extensive research about almost every aspect of gaming and gamers before they commit to any move. This includes the DS and the Wii. They also take moves to minimize any harm that results if they read the market incorrectly.



No, I'd say he's being pretty accurate.

You're right. Not only is all of that ridiculously risky, it's also reckless. In that context he's right, but that just makes seem like a company that doesn't know what they're doing.

uh oh, onyxmeth entered the scene. this shit just got heavy.

Apparently it has.......

oh my god, is that onyxmeth?



Total Championships: Nintendo - 4, Sony - 2, Atari - 1, Microsoft - 0, Sega - 0

Smashed on 06 October 2009
psrock said:
CGI just killed the thread. I'm out.

BAM! Same here.



Dgc1808 on 06 October 2009
tedsteriscool said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
Call me when Sony has the balls to take some real risks, like releasing a purple lunchbox console that doesn't even use regular DVDs..

How about a console that supports a (then obscure) format called Blu-ray that was seen as too expensive, not enough of a leap over DVD, and a failure in comparison to HD-DVD?

How about a system that doesn't even play Discs or cartridges and can hardly even be used without the internet... AND it's expensive.



4 ≈ One

Yridian on 06 October 2009
Carl2291 said:
Sony launched the PS3 at $600.

PS3 at the time took ~$800 to make.

Losing $200 per console is a pretty big risk...

No, that was blatant arrogance. Mocking the competition, claiming the system would sell even if there weren't any games for it, and telling the consumer they should fall at Sony's feet for selling the system so 'cheap.'