Then I expect you not to complain if Microsoft, hemorrhaging money left and right, ever decides to leave the gaming industry. (At this point, though, they're here for the long-haul.)
If it's only 99 bucks, then I think I'll definitely buy it. I'm already considering it heavily due to how cool the controller seems and the ability to play all games. I think I'll wait a bit after it comes out and see how well people say the controllers work though.
They're turning out to be the Honda Civics of gaming: inexpensive, quality proven, a brand name that appeals to the masses. Which all equals to = a lot of systems being sold especially if this sucker clocks in at $99.
I still predict that, unless Nintendo does a complete redesign for a new console and develops a completely new markieting strategy, the Revolution will be the last console Nintendo makes.
Animal Crossing could have been easily adapted to the SNES. And there really isn't any "gameplay" to be had there - it's just a giant fetch quest. N can count me out of any future business. PS has had way more games over the past decade with good gameplay, more variety, and better prices than N, and it's not even close. GC was their chance to redeem themselves in my eyes as they had a system close to the others of this generation, with a cheaper price. All they had to do was deliver on the games and they haven't. The only exclusives I've enjoyed is Super Smash Brothers and Metroid. Wind Waker was probably the biggest dissapointment ever for me. Nothing else really springs to mind as being a killer app for the system. There's a few quality games here and there to be sure, but nothing that outshines PS library. I'd rather have my PS2 than the Revolution.
I love the bash that sony partisans use when they say 'yeah but xbox doesn't make any money'. Who cares? It's not like it affects you one iota unless you're a shareholder. And if you want to get into the realm of financial performance overall over the last 5 years - if you say you'd go with ailing Sony, which has been slowly spiraling down the crapper, rather than MS, which pretty much has more money than it knows what to do with, literally, hence hefty dividend payments, you're insane.
I usually bring it up as a response, such as something to use when some says "Nintendo is D00MED!!!" I didn't come into this thread saying, "The Revolution has 104MB of RAM, a CPU and GPU clocked twice as high as the CPU and GPU in the GC, and....MS lost more than 4 billion dollars on the Xbox." And since everyone was throwing around the "Who cares as long as they're still making it" comment...well, I imagine the profitability their console(s) may affect their decision to stay in the business or at least how they do things in the business. Last I heard, MS is still planning to make a next-next-gen machine, but I imagine there might be problems down the line if they continue to lose money. That's one reason why I might care about their profitability even though I'm not a shareholder. Yeah, because Sony Computer Entertainment = Sony and Microsoft Home and Entertainment = Microsoft. And FWIW, I believe most of Sony is profitable for the most part outside of their consumer electronics division, although they rely pretty heavily on that division, so any loss there usually affect their overall profitability. I admit they are having some rough times, but let's see what Howard Stringer has planned in order to fix that problem.
so if they don't make a next next gen machine, again who cares? If they don't make it, you can't buy it. What does this mean? Are you confused as to the nature of Sony's or MS's various subs and affiliates? Who cares? Finally, who cares what the other divisions are doing? They're all part of Sony Corp., which I believe is the parent entity. That's like saying McDonalds is doing well except it can't sell any hamburgers, considering that sony is the second largest consumer electronics maker in the world, and that their consumer electronics business being in the sh-tter is responsible for them losing money for the first time in 10 years, their credit and debt ratings reaching all time lows, etc.
Agreed. Very well put. Even though I probably will end up getting a PS3, just because Sony is the first company since Nintendo to not let me down on the following generation (NES to NES and PSX to PS2). I bet Nintendo is gonna surprise a lot of folks.
Since a lot of people seem to care about the future of Nintendo, apparently some people care about things like this. If you check out the other Revolution thread, it was basically 2-3 pages of several people discussing Nintendo and how their business decisions might affect their future. And this all in the Hangout at a Houston Rockets BBS; actually go to a board dedicated to video games and you'll find threads 40-50 pages long dedicated to subjects like this. But other than those people, no one really cares whether or not a big player in the console business may end up leaving the industry due to their poor profitability, and therefore, causing many things to change in the industry. Yep, no reason to care at all. That was directed at your comment about looking at the overall profitability of Sony and Microsoft, rather than just their console divisions. Just because MS is making billions every year, while Sony is kind of doing the opposite, that doesn't mean that their overall performances greatly impacts their console divisions. For example, given how much MS makes, they could easily win the console wars by just outspending Sony. They could lose like $300-$400 on each console, buy some big developers (heck, they could probably afford Nintendo if they were on sale, although it might be hard to do), and do a number of other things. They'd lose tons of money from their division (more so than they are now), but they might be close to turning a profit overall. Seeing as how they sold off some studios and are aggressively trying to find ways to make money off of the 360 hardware down the line, they obviously don't want to do that. And on the other end of the spectrum, Sony overall isn't doing so well, yet SCE has released and taken a (big?) loss on a brand new handheld, while also preparing to take a loss on the PS3 (possibly as much as ~$200 per console); they've made deals with Epic games and other popular middleware solutions (even buying some of them), and they recently also bought Guerilla Studios, IIRC. Again, they're overall business is suffering a bit, but they appear to be unaffected by this. So given the actions by MSH&E and SCE, it appears as though the success (or lack their of) of their divisions has a larger impact on what they'll do, not so much on how their overall companies are doing. Since you brought up the idea of looking at the overall business of Sony and MS, I thought I'd go ahead and throw in a comment about Sony's other divisions to give an idea on how the company overall is doing. Still isn't that great, but it is probably better than losing money in practically every division. I might be wrong, but I believe Sony is trying to restructure a bit to try and focus more on selling content as opposed to hardware and other consumer electronics (think this caused them to lose money recently when they could have been out of the red). IOW, they will focus more on divisions like SCE and Sony Pictures, which I believe are 2 of the most profitable divisions for Sony. I'm not sure if that will work that well, and even if it does, I'm sure MS will still make more in a month or two than Sony makes in a year (or something like that). Again though, this has little to do with the console business as I mentioned earlier. I don't even really care that much about Sony Corp overall or the other divisions, outside of maybe Sony Pictures, which I occasionally follow since I like some of their movies (some of which are based on video games).
