>>2
you don't see the collapse of a console giant funny? as much as i like the ps3 i am awaiting its collapse. just like the untouchable sega (with their once overpowering genesis)got knocked out of play with their dreamcast. its interesting to see an eagerly awaited (unbeatable) system get beaten by a kiddies console and a microsoft console that breaks every 10 seconds.
Sega failed because they always launched their console first, usually a year or two before the competition. However, that came with a price of always being the one with the most inferior hardware. Blast Processing was nothing but a bad marketing move as the SNES was ultimately more powerful. Also, performance-wise the Dreamcast was a frozen pile of shit on a drunken hobo's face compared to the PS2, let alone the Xbox or GameCube. Saturn was their only console that could do as much as their competitors, but it it was too expensive to produce.
At least the PS3's hardware is equal to that of the 360, if not even slightly better.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-23 13:24 ID:DFPBk64/
At least the PS3's hardware is equal to that of the 360, if not even slightly better.
It's not dead yet, but it's dying. The biggest thing they have against them is that they still don't have a big exclusive title *out* for ps3 yet. We have MGS4 and FFXIII "promised", but still nowhere near getting delivered.
Most other games have been launched on both xbox and ps3. So obviously, you'd buy the box that's $300 less and has more games on it. Unless you're a fanboy, or fir some reason need Blu-Ray.
And BTW I'm expecting a port of FF13 to the 360, it seems lately they've been having these "problems" with the engine. I suspect that it's because they need it to work on x360 and ps3. So now even nerds will want the 360.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-26 23:49 ID:fy0EdsBX
waaaaaa giiiiiiiiiii
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-27 0:17 ID:WPwdxDh0
SEGA: Was unnoticed with pinball games and working third party (can't recall game, but like nintendo, had a game on an ATARI or Oddisey clone). Continued unnoticed with Master System. Then went all "we are better" with Genesis. "Welcome to the Next Level" and the commercial with the kid becoming popular for getting a Genesis are prime examples of the "We are better" message. Then transition out of 16-bit with hit and miss stuff like the 32x and Saturn. Then Dreamcast came out, complete with overhype and alot of failed attempts to attract the mainstream (which includes changing Sonic's style into anime garbage). At the same time were the few successes that some may or may not remember, like Shenmue. Now SEGA constantly force itself into becoming everyones' bitch just to stay afloat.
Sony: Started with electronics. Went into games by trying to help Nintendo develop something similiar to the SegaCD. Nintendo broke it off (a bad idea that constantly repeats) and Sony went on to do it themselves, creating the Playstation. Then Sony went on to compete with the other companies. Things go fine, especially with the well planned out PS2 (which served more as a miniature entertainment system than a gaming unit). Then PS3 hit's the table, which started in design shortly after it's release. They play the hype card and I am sure we all know the rest of the story.
Now, the difference between SEGA and Sony is that SEGA has nothing to fall back on. Sony still have other electronics, so they have something to fallback on.
As for the others, Nintendo lasted for a little over a century and have plenty to fall back on no matter how little success the Wii may or may not generate. The DS can help, they still do cards, and they have mountains of other products. Microsoft has computers, so failure of anything on either Xbox's won't do too much damage to them. Microsoft can afford to overhype their products, and idiots follow hype, so Microsoft has a fairly successful formula.
Am I missing something here or disorganized in anyway? I doubt it, but there maybe something.