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

Forums - Gaming - My Supreme Viewpoint on the Big Three

liquidninja on 09 October 2009
Heavenly Sigma said:
Well in gaming Nintendo is as big as they come. So, Liquid what would Sony or Microsoft have to do besides make some of the best selling game consoles ever. Some of the most recognizable game franchises ever. Invest billions into making these consoles. And in the case of Sony for a long time make the bulk of your money from games and consoles to be condidered a serious gaming company?

Their core business would have to be video games and video games accessories.  



Around the Network
Kenryoku_Maxis on 09 October 2009
Heavenly Sigma said:
Nintendo the Game company gives us hardware that can barely keep up with last gens best machine and inaccurrate controls and is praised for being the only game company. They are doing what they always do and give us Mario in everthing. While Sony is trying to create new ips and publishing more first party games and are in the wrong.
Yeah, teh PS3 came out to expensive and for the wrong reasons for the most part but to say gaming is not important to Sony after being the market leader for as long as they where is wrong. The best part of the PS brand has been the 3rd support. Which isn't a bad thing and I prefer over the way Nintendo makes things seem to be about 3 franchises.

Sure feels like 2006 in here.



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

ctalkeb on 10 October 2009
liquidninja said:

Their core business would have to be video games and video games accessories.  

1: When reality doesn't correspond to your definition, it's your definition that has to be changed - not reality.

2: Sony is a music/film/video game/electronics company. No serious investor would disregard any part of the business.

3: Microsoft is a video game/software company. No serious investor would disregard any part of the business.

4: If the PS3 had been made as a PC, it would have been markedet as one and been able to perform regular PC duties. If Microsoft had made the  Xbox360 to "protect their core Windows business" (or whatever it was you said), they would deserve to be bankrupt by now. Console sales don't even make a dent in the number of Windows copies in use. They're in the business to make money and they can only make money by delivering good products.

I find it sad that you're unable to enjoy newer videogames, but slightly pathetic that you feel the desire to redifine reality in order to make your opinions into fact.

If you had simply stated that having several identical electronic devices with only a few first-party titles to divide between them was bad for consumers I would be inclined to agree, but Trip Hawkins thought the same and look how that turned out.

 



liquidninja on 10 October 2009
ctalkeb said:

1: When reality doesn't correspond to your definition, it's your definition that has to be changed - not reality.

2: Sony is a music/film/video game/electronics company. No serious investor would disregard any part of the business.

3: Microsoft is a video game/software company. No serious investor would disregard any part of the business.

4: If the PS3 had been made as a PC, it would have been markedet as one and been able to perform regular PC duties. If Microsoft had made the  Xbox360 to "protect their core Windows business" (or whatever it was you said), they would deserve to be bankrupt by now. Console sales don't even make a dent in the number of Windows copies in use. They're in the business to make money and they can only make money by delivering good products.

I find it sad that you're unable to enjoy newer videogames, but slightly pathetic that you feel the desire to redifine reality in order to make your opinions into fact.

If you had simply stated that having several identical electronic devices with only a few first-party titles to divide between them was bad for consumers I would be inclined to agree, but Trip Hawkins thought the same and look how that turned out.

 

No serious investor would call Sony and Microsoft video game companies. I'm not the one who's trying to redefine reality here.

Microsoft is a paranoid company they are constantly blocking threats to their core business Sony's PlayStation entering into the PC-space was one of them.



liquidninja on 10 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:

You're beating a dead horse bro. He's been given just about EVERY piece of logic that's humanly possible. He's ignored everything, you're wasting your time at this point...

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.



Around the Network
ctalkeb on 10 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:

You're beating a dead horse bro. He's been given just about EVERY piece of logic that's humanly possible. He's ignored everything, you're wasting your time at this point...

I guess I am. He seems to be arguing that the Monkey Island series are less worth as games because Lucasarts also does other things. Which is kind of an entertaining opinion.



liquidninja on 10 October 2009
ctalkeb said:

I guess I am. He seems to be arguing that the Monkey Island series are less worth as games because Lucasarts also does other things. Which is kind of an entertaining opinion.

I made no such claim. All I said was that Sony's and Microsoft's core business weren't videogames, ergo they aren't video game companies.



ShadowSoldier on 10 October 2009

Please Lock this thread



Black Women Are The Most Beautiful Women On The Planet.

"In video game terms, RPGs are games that involve a form of separate battles taking place with a specialized battle system and the use of a system that increases your power through a form of points.

Sure, what you say is the definition, but the connotation of RPGs is what they are in video games." - dtewi

liquidninja on 10 October 2009

I don't know why everyones so upset over the fact that Sony and Microsoft aren't video game companies. Just except it. It's not the end of the world.

If Sun Microsystems or IBM came out with video games they'd still not be video game companies. Because in no way would they just suddenly change their core business over to video games.

If Burger King or McDonald's came out with movies they wouldn't be movie companies either unless their core business was changed over to movies.

Just having products in a industry sector does not change the core business of a company.

And I've heard no one try to argue the other way on this. Everyone keeps trying to change the argument to something else.

Anyway, this wasn't even the point of the thread it was just a tiny part of my original post.



liquidninja on 10 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:

Do as the rest of us, refrain from continuing a debate with him. This is my last post in here because this thread is receiving more attention than it needs...

I think the thread was fine until people started to getting mad at me saying that Nintendo was the only game company left making consoles now.

It really sucks that few people cared to talk about the rest of the post. I wanted to talk more about what if Sony and Microsoft really were game companies or if consoles were commoditized like DVD and CD players, but nooo everyone was sooo hung up on Sony and Microsoft not being video game companies.