Phantasy Star Cave Message Board

Don't you think it's kinda retarded to hate on a company which knows how to make a success of itself with their products?

Sega weren't some underdog hero trying to fight for tr00 gamers; they were simply a devious company, like Sony & Nintendo, that were shit at monopolising the console gaming market, thanks to their business tactics.

Am I wrong in thinking this? Discuss.

im just annoyed how nearly EVERYONE my age loves microsoft for the xbox please fix me console.

No companies are saints, and they're all in it to make a profit. However, some companies are more 'evil' than others.

Sony and Microsoft are particularly arrogant about their console products, and both are not gaming companies, but an electronics company and software company respectively. Sony entered the market because they smelled a business opportunity, and Microsoft entered it because the PS2 was looking to be a sort of media setop box, which was the next market they were going to invade.

Sony, at least until some years ago, made low-quality hardware that would break quickly enough, so consumers would buy it again. This led to higher sales and more profit. Early PlayStations and PlayStation 2s were likely to break only a couple years in. I also dislike Sony for their arrogance and lies that were partly responsible for the demise of the Dreamcast.

Microsoft is a company that destroys almost every market it enters through shady business practices, buy-outs and leverage of their Windows monopoly. Their products are often inferior to other companies', as the XBox 360 clearly demonstrated with its repeated breakages.

Sega did very well in Europe with the Master System, and excellently with the Mega Drive in America and Europe. It's just that they made some very bad decisions when planning their 32-bits system, the Saturn, and they didn't get out of that rut until it was too late.

Being shit at monopolising a market doesn't matter. You don't need a monopoly to be a successful video game company.

BenoitRen wrote:Being shit at monopolising a market doesn't matter. You don't need a monopoly to be a successful video game company.

True. At 16-bit era Nintendo and Sega owned the gaming industry pretty much. There was no monopoly. Both were succesful.

It's just that they made some very bad decisions when planning their 32-bits system, the Saturn, and they didn't get out of that rut until it was too late.

They probably lost trust in their 32-bit console due to the underachieving add-on for the Genesis as well.

im just annoyed how nearly EVERYONE my age loves microsoft for the xbox please fix me console.

You know, where I live I can buy two 360's for the price of one PS3. If this is the case in most areas then the blow of a faulty console isn't that bad.

Overall, I agree with Peegai. How many slaps on the wrist has Nintendo handed out to all of the horrible developers of Wii software? Aside from Reggie mentioning that 3rd parties "still don't get it" there has been nothing. Any of you can say what you want about your PS3's and your 360's being superior but I can guarantee that Sony and Microsoft would love to be in the money making position of Nintendo right now.

What is interesting is that Nintendo has known since 2001 (when Wii planning began) what the secret to making profit in the video game industry is. Surprise! Its not good games. The mass market wants simplicity and practicality. The Wii offers both.

Now at the same time, in the case of long time gamers such as most everyone here, just having a Wii wont suit your needs. Nintendo's hardware and software choices have sealed that deal.

BenoitRen wrote:Their products are often inferior to other companies', as the XBox 360 clearly demonstrated with its repeated breakages.

Red ring of death, but ive heard roumors that its stopped now. However a friend got it a few weeks ago, also the elite is meant to be more likley to break.Apparently 33% of xbox 360's are defected when bought, while PS3 = 2% My PS3 dosn't break, but regulary freezes, and recently playstation network is having a lot of troubles. Repedidly signing me and my friends out, but im sure my poor connection is no help (well its was poor a while ago, but my laptop in the same room as PS3 says connection is exellent. I must say sony are evil to the customers in Europe but love the americans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ps3

the chart shows how the americans have chrome lining, 2 extra usb ports, flash card memory, and PS2 compatability. But apparenly they earn more profit from Europe, so its very much unfair, from my current point of view.

Neo48 wrote:They probably lost trust in their 32-bit console due to the underachieving add-on for the Genesis as well.

I'm wondering what you're trying to say here. When the Saturn was released, support for the Master System, Game Gear and Mega Drive was stopped. They were going forward full force with the Saturn.

The problem was that they licensed the wrong 3D technology, got lazy with their hardware design (they just popped in one more CPU when they saw what the PSX was capable of), and their console was a bit too pricy.

What is interesting is that Nintendo has known since 2001 (when Wii planning began) what the secret to making profit in the video game industry is. Surprise! Its not good games. The mass market wants simplicity and practicality. The Wii offers both.

This may be part of their strategy, but what really makes their strategy profiting is that, unlike the other players, they actually make money on their hardware! Even though the GameCube didn't fare too well, they made money with it because every sold console meant profit for them. Unlike Sony and Microsoft, they never had to recoup losses on their hardware sales.

Now at the same time, in the case of long time gamers such as most everyone here, just having a Wii wont suit your needs. Nintendo's hardware and software choices have sealed that deal.

I disagree. I'm happy with my Wii, and have enough to play on it.

Semix wrote:the chart shows how the americans have chrome lining, 2 extra usb ports, flash card memory, and PS2 compatability.

The first models had PS2 compatibility, but that is now long gone in the USA as well.

BenoitRen wrote:

Semix wrote:the chart shows how the americans have chrome lining, 2 extra usb ports, flash card memory, and PS2 compatability.

The first models had PS2 compatibility, but that is now long gone in the USA as well.

So... You're able to play PS2 games on PS3 only if you have older PS3 or by running those games on emulator (that requires installing Linux on it)? I wonder what's the idea behind this lack of support?

Oh and when Sony hasn't released any specs (or Linux drivers) for the GPU, can you even play PS2 games propely on PS3?

I'm wondering what you're trying to say here. When the Saturn was released, support for the Master System, Game Gear and Mega Drive was stopped. They were going forward full force with the Saturn.

I was referring to the 32x and CD attachment. Also didn't specify that by "they" I meant consumers.

I disagree. I'm happy with my Wii, and have enough to play on it.

Wait one minute. Haven't you played PSU? (PS2/Xbox 360/PC software).

Zucca wrote:I wonder what's the idea behind this lack of support?

Saving costs, most likely.

Neo48 wrote:I was referring to the 32x and CD attachment. Also didn't specify that by "they" I meant consumers.

I knew you meant the Mega CD and the 32X with "add-ons". I don't agree that consumers would lose trust just because some add-ons didn't work. Their main console, the Mega Drive, still did well.

Wait one minute. Haven't you played PSU? (PS2/Xbox 360/PC software).

Yeah, on PC. So? I'd still have plenty to do with just the Wii.

And that's just with Wii games. The Wii can also play GameCube games, and there's the Virtual Console.

BenoitRen wrote:

Zucca wrote:I wonder what's the idea behind this lack of support?

Saving costs, most likely.

Neo48 wrote:I was referring to the 32x and CD attachment. Also didn't specify that by "they" I meant consumers.

I knew you meant the Mega CD and the 32X with "add-ons". I don't agree that consumers would lose trust just because some add-ons didn't work. Their main console, the Mega Drive, still did well.

Wait one minute. Haven't you played PSU? (PS2/Xbox 360/PC software).

Yeah, on PC. So? I'd still have plenty to do with just the Wii.

And that's just with Wii games. The Wii can also play GameCube games, and there's the Virtual Console.

I have a wii, had it for a while, but in my opinion it gets boring 1/2 months down the line. With mostly party games that are offline multiplayer (online ones arnt that good anyway) it gets old. While PS3 (and 360) have less for offline multiplayer, more for solo and online. I wouldnt know with PS2 DC whatever, never hooked it up online then. And i never got a gamecube, shame but i dont want one now. My CoD:WaW 6 day online play times shows im happy with it.

Semix wrote:I have a wii, had it for a while, but in my opinion it gets boring 1/2 months down the line. With mostly party games that are offline multiplayer (online ones arnt that good anyway) it gets old.

There is more than party games. I haven't bought any. Either your tastes are wildly different than mine, or you're not looking.

And i never got a gamecube, shame but i dont want one now.

The Wii can play GameCube games.

I don't agree that consumers would lose trust just because some add-ons didn't work.

What we need here is large scale surveying! It truly is the only way to determine the answer. But I've heard things and I'm sure you've heard things...

Yeah, on PC. So? I'd still have plenty to do with just the Wii.

Plenty? Sure. I have plenty on my Wii as well. In fact I have enjoyed all the games that I've purchased. But Phantasy Star Universe is a good example of my point. Even if the Wii was prepped in time I doubt that the game would have been released on it. Nintendo's online network is such an bureaucratic institution that such a game may never been seen on it.

Phantasy Star Online was released for the GameCube years ago when Nintendo didn't even want to go online, and that worked out well enough.

BenoitRen wrote:Phantasy Star Online was released for the GameCube years ago when Nintendo didn't even want to go online, and that worked out well enough.

I agree and as you mention, Phantasy Star Online became an instant hit due to the OnLine aspects.