No that isnt proving anything...except what we've already known $600 systems wont sell, making sony's decision a poor business decision instead of a risk.

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.

All three companies took risk

Wiifit, wiimote was a major risk, damn the name " Wii" was ridiculed at first, that was a huge risk.


Sony tried to bring the most  powerful console, adding blu-ray which as quite expensive and released a $600 console.

MS took major risk by releasing an unfinished console to the market so they can come out first, it payed off well, but that was very risky.

So please ladies and Gents, give it a rest on the redundant argument which happen on a daily basis around here.

Isn't that if one doesn't take into account the staggered launches?

And, I think the PS3 would have to maintain 200k a week for the next 7-8 years to reach the PS1.

I must resist and stay on topic.

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.

Ridiculous? Please, kindly take your preconcieved notions and throw them out before bashing someone else's thoughts.

Which goes back to a previous post , we knew the outcome of a $600 system would only be hurting the company.....its not a risk if we already know the outcome already.

Is it?  I don't know.  The J man thought it was on topic, apparently, so I just answered for him.

But, you have to admit, surely, that to attain PS1 numbers is practically impossible at this point, right?

This whole "who takes more risks" contest is kind of ridiculous. How is taking financial risks a good thing? We're not talking about innovation here (which is often good, and something Nintendo does more than anyone).

Looking at noname2200's post, it looks to me like comparing 2 people that want to cross the street - one person looks both ways before crossing (Nintendo), while the other doesn't (Sony). This is probably a bit harsh on Sony, I'm sure both companies have their own ways of predicting what the market wants, Sony just ended up with the wrong assumptions this round (as did Nintendo for 2008's holiday lineup).

As for the people claiming that "arrogant comments like these are what bring them down," it really isn't. Yamauchi or Kutaragi's crazy comments aren't what brought them down, it was their business decisions - bad 3rd party relations, or building an $800 console.

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.