I don't either, That Guy, & this is what I think might be subconsciously fueling the anger of people who think everybody's slamming Sony. They see Sony as the last stop to keep Microsoft from raiding another industry bringing their half-'arsed' (love the British version of that word ) standards and routines to industries they dominate. They got money virtually forever and don't really have to be as good to survive. They just outlast you until you're spent. It reminds me of a classic DBZ fight where one of the protagonists suddenly loses power in the midst of a great battle to become easy fodder for the other. They know Nintendo is a solid company but worry if they can stand up to that Goliath if it ever got stronger. (I believe it will but that's besides the point). Microsoft at its current status is OK but if Microsoft ever became the leader here the game industry is on a timeclock counting down and that's the truth. Just like it's operating systems the industry would eventually crash if they ever took true power. I believe this wholeheartedly. Wanting to reduce generations to 4 years & actually putting PRICIER systems out in the middle of the generation and their lack of true concern for the breadth that the game industry supplies. Their heart is not in this business even more than Sony's isn't. They more than anybody is using their gamesystem as a strategy piece and a money object for ulterior motives. All the other old school game-centric companies except one have folded from the difficult hardware making/software selling business. The giants have raised the bar of entry into this business & the costs to be the boss in gameworld are steep. Developer companies consolidating and merging. Making money off of this business is difficult. Very dificult. MS lost $4 billion on a doggone game system??? Nobody else could survive that. Sony a monolith itself is not as big and doesn't have as long money as MS has. Plus they are at a critical period in their company right now in all their endeavors gaming included. People fear MS will shut Sony out of the gamesbusiness reducing competition to Eastern monopoly (which is already about finished forming) and Western monopoly (which may be gaining ground). And after that no one without a really big bank can break into this industry. 8-bit gamemaking was so comparatively easy and took less people and time. Not so in our high-end graphics centric world. PC Gaming has limits and every one will not become a PC Gamer. The games business primarily survives due to consoles. If this comes under attack, it may be a subconscious fear that videogame playing may be coming to an end. John Lucas

My thoughts are that a "360 class" console from nintendo for $400 WOULD kill Nintendo right out of the home console market. It wouldn't be able to get the install base because of it's price, which would also kill it's publicity, then it wouldn't get the 3rd party support because of the lack of install base, and in the end it'd probably end up worse than gamecube. IMHO Nintendo made the best possible decision they could overall.

Nintendo has been fighting to get back 3rd party support they lost ever since the N64 days. That was back when us nintendo people were quite the elitists and said things to the effect of "eh, screw Square. we don't need final fantasy anyways." However, by comparison, the PS1 was the developer's friend. Though it had "outdated graphics" compared to the N64, it was cheaper to develop for and made more money due to higher user base and less royalty fees. Its kind of funny seeing how the pendulum is starting the swing the other way, with the Wii being cheaper and more developer friendly and with the PS-TRIPLE having high development costs.

couldn't agree more, Nintendo at a higher price would kill them.

The irony of course is that the *closer* MS/Sony are to each other (and the more they fight it out), the more this benefits Nintendo (in various ways). If Sony died (not going to happen), Nintendo I think would be more nervous about competing solely with MS than just with Sony. Nintendo don't care *that* much about being #1 - in terms of hardware units sold anyway. They will almost certainly be #1 in terms of profit. What they do care about is a flourishing, growing games industry - with solid business models, innovation, lots of profit and successful companies. If you asked Nintendo as to whether they would rather have the industry all to themselves - or have Sony/MS as competitors - Im sure they would say the latter.

There was initially a perception that the N64 rocked the PS1, from a developers viewpoint. This was in part because of the masterpiece that was Super Mario 64. But the more developers used it, the more they realised this just wasn't true - the PSX was actually a superior machine. I believe this is what REALLY killed Nintendo in that generation (small, expensive carts didn't help either). Nintendo also refused to release the full "microcode" specs to the N64, that would have released the full power of the machine (basically programming the GPU directly from what I understand). It was only at the end (when failure was assured) that they did - for games like RE on the N64.

johnlucas, I do not remember posting the trm fanboy but if I did it wasn't meant as an insult. To me fanboys rank up there with otaku. Excessive and hard to understand...... unless you see their point of view. Here is why I find your comments on thesmackdown funny http://ps3.ign.com/articles/777/777264p1.html I am going to say that therwill by alot of ports.... until next year. Sooner or later developers "are" going to want to take atvantage of the cell processor and space on the blu ray. There will be a divergance of fanbases. Story driven, single player video game lovers will return to their mecca that is the PS3 (after they save enough to buy one) and western developed PC style games, especially multiplayer will flock to the 360. Sony and nintendo seem to push third party decisions because of the quality and the amount of their first party titles. (MS isn't there yet) To combat them I am pretty sure that most companies (who normally don't make ports as a norm) Are making ports know while the spend R&D making custom engines for every system. Whether it is first party or not. Great games set the bar. Reviewers will question why isn't there more games that looks like Gears for the 360. It seems as if tools of destruction, the getaway, Lair, and heavenly sword might set some bars for the PS3. Dewey's adventure, mario galaxy and metroid are bound to set standards on the Wii. So I personally beleive the amount of multiplatform games are going to go down the more each archetecture is utilized. I still think there are going to be many multiplatform ports than last generation because of similar architecture and the sheer fact that the games look good enough. But I do not think that some companies (especially japanese) like to be outdone by rivals. I firmly believe that you are wrong about MGS4 because the already started work and cystomization...It would make very little sense for them not to release it on the PS3.

I fully agree and as crazy as it sounds I think this is why Sony priced the PS3 so high. All the systems are not in direct competition and are avoiding a pricing war. Microsoft has Proved they can win that. Sony has to win customers based on merit and it is obvious they are working on something. MS has only to keep the titles flowing and make improvements on live. Nintendo has to remain easily accessable and continue to host entry games on their console. This isn't a battly of consoles more like a battle of fanbases (not for.. of).

No no, don't get me wrong, staticneuron. I was referring to the people at the forum that banned me. That was a just a reference in general to people who take my stance as less than credulous on sight alone. But luckily there were some good folks over there who I enjoyed talking with. Oh & uh I highlighted WWE Smackdown Vs. Raw 2007 not 2008. Notice the 2008 version launching everywhere and the 2007 version launching mostly everywhere except PS3 when it would have made a great launch title. Also notice WWE S Vs. R also launches on Wii this time around showcasing for sure that the franchise is no longer wedded to the Sony platform. They're trying to make sure they make the most money. 3rd party's law. John Lucas