"How the Console 'Failures' Finally Won"

[heavy-sixer]

Interesting article. Some of you may differ over some of the details but an overall thought-provoking read:

 

How the Console 'Failures' Finally Won

[sega saturn x]

I liked how they slipped game cube in their.

[NE146]

I liked how they slipped game cube in their.

 

Their what?... rectum?

[sega saturn x]

I liked how they slipped game cube in their.

 

Their what?... rectum?

Ohh man, that sounds painful.

[ZylonBane]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

[xenomorpher]

Interesting read....

Edited July 21, 2006 by xenomorpher

[sega saturn x]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Zylonbane you're such a joy to have here, I can't even remember the last time you posted about video games.

Edited July 21, 2006 by sega saturn x

[AtariJr]

Kinda interesting. would have been better if the guy wasnt using a dictionary to write half of those sentences, i mean common, its video games, not a science theory.

 

Anywho, it wasnt as informative as i hoped it to be, but what he said was kinda ironic in a sense.

 

One thing that baffled me is the inclusion of the GC in the "failure" list. While i see his point that it didnt "live up to expectations", you could argue that the Xbox 360 isnt living up to many expectations as well, esp for the Japanese audience.. but it doesnt make it a failure.

 

It was so-so. It would have been better if he made it a one or two page article instead of ranting about one idea for a bit too long ...

[Needles Kane]

Zylobane

 

[Atarifever]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Your constant attacks on the other posters here are no doubt due to your exciting social life making it difficult enough for you to post here in the first place, let alone when there is bad grammar or odd topic titles to distract you from sharing your, no doubt Earth shattering, ideas. The kind of guy who goes around nit-picking over a few spelling errors on the internet is almost certainly somone who women swoon over and who men enjoy the company of. Good for you.

[sega saturn x]

Zylobane

 

Yeah yeah I fixed it.

[Foxy Cleopatra]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Your constant attacks on the other posters here are no doubt due to your exciting social life making it difficult enough for you to post here in the first place, let alone when there is bad grammar or odd topic titles to distract you from sharing your, no doubt Earth shattering, ideas. The kind of guy who goes around nit-picking over a few spelling errors on the internet is almost certainly somone who women swoon over and who men enjoy the company of. Good for you.

 

 

I think I'll speak for the women and say, yes, we prefer men who can spell and use correct grammer. It implies thoughtfulness and intelligence. Using poor grammer as well as bad spelling, even on the internet, implies stupidity and/or laziness, neither of which is attractive to most females.

 

there- a noun, adverb, adjective, or pronoun all implying a point in space, a place

their - a pronoun implies possession

they're - a contraction of "they are"

 

your - a pronoun implies possession

you're - a contraction of "you are"

 

Example: THEY'RE going to shove Gameboys up THEIR asses. I hope THERE is enough room in THEIR asses. Do you want them to use YOUR Gameboy? Oh, YOU'RE going to shove YOUR Gameboy up YOUR own ass? What if it gets stuck up THERE? YOUR mom will probably get angry if you shove it up THERE. Perhaps you shouldn't be THEIR friend anymore. THEY'RE not the smartest people in the world. Girls don't like boys with Gameboys up THEIR asses.

[AtariJr]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Your constant attacks on the other posters here are no doubt due to your exciting social life making it difficult enough for you to post here in the first place, let alone when there is bad grammar or odd topic titles to distract you from sharing your, no doubt Earth shattering, ideas. The kind of guy who goes around nit-picking over a few spelling errors on the internet is almost certainly somone who women swoon over and who men enjoy the company of. Good for you.

 

 

I think I'll speak for the women and say, yes, we prefer men who can spell and use correct grammer. It implies thoughtfulness and intelligence. Using poor grammer as well as bad spelling, even on the internet, implies stupidity and/or laziness, neither of which is attractive to most females.

 

there- a noun, adverb, adjective, or pronoun all implying a point in space, a place

their - a pronoun implies possession

they're - a contraction of "they are"

 

your - a pronoun implies possession

you're - a contraction of "you are"

 

Example: THEY'RE going to shove Gameboys up THEIR asses. I hope THERE is enough room in THEIR asses. Do you want them to use YOUR Gameboy? Oh, YOU'RE going to shove YOUR Gameboy up YOUR own ass? What if it gets stuck up THERE? YOUR mom will probably get angry if you shove it up THERE. Perhaps you shouldn't be THEIR friend anymore. THEY'RE not the smartest people in the world. Girls don't like boys with Gameboys up THEIR asses.

 

I'm sorry, i know you were being serious, but that was just so damn funny lol. And sadly true. You forgot the difference between "its" and "it's" ...

 

On a side note however, even though i've poked fun at Sega Saturn X once for his spelling skills, saturn X still has a point in the fact that most of the comments that come out of that guy's mouth are very pointed and rude.

[Foxy Cleopatra]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Your constant attacks on the other posters here are no doubt due to your exciting social life making it difficult enough for you to post here in the first place, let alone when there is bad grammar or odd topic titles to distract you from sharing your, no doubt Earth shattering, ideas. The kind of guy who goes around nit-picking over a few spelling errors on the internet is almost certainly somone who women swoon over and who men enjoy the company of. Good for you.

 

 

I think I'll speak for the women and say, yes, we prefer men who can spell and use correct grammer. It implies thoughtfulness and intelligence. Using poor grammer as well as bad spelling, even on the internet, implies stupidity and/or laziness, neither of which is attractive to most females.

 

there- a noun, adverb, adjective, or pronoun all implying a point in space, a place

their - a pronoun implies possession

they're - a contraction of "they are"

 

your - a pronoun implies possession

you're - a contraction of "you are"

 

Example: THEY'RE going to shove Gameboys up THEIR asses. I hope THERE is enough room in THEIR asses. Do you want them to use YOUR Gameboy? Oh, YOU'RE going to shove YOUR Gameboy up YOUR own ass? What if it gets stuck up THERE? YOUR mom will probably get angry if you shove it up THERE. Perhaps you shouldn't be THEIR friend anymore. THEY'RE not the smartest people in the world. Girls don't like boys with Gameboys up THEIR asses.

 

I'm sorry, i know you were being serious, but that was just so damn funny lol. And sadly true. You forgot the difference between "its" and "it's" ...

 

On a side note however, even though i've poked fun at Sega Saturn X once for his spelling skills, saturn X still has a point in the fact that most of the comments that come out of that guy's mouth are very pointed and rude.

 

1. Your best bet is to most often not take me seriously, but bad grammer gets on my nerves, mostly because I'm (almost) a teacher. Oh and anal retentive, if you didn't notice.

2. There is sufficient arguement for the proper use of its and/or it's, sort of like whether alot is one word or two - alot or a lot?? Either is correct.

3. I think Zylonbane is funny and I happen to enjoy his drive-by, irrelevant posts. But I'm weird like that. I happen to prefer people who are to the point rude, rather than people who are condescendingly rude. If people were more honest with their insults the world would be a better place.

 

For example I'd have much preferred Atarifever to call Zylonbane a dickweed asshole, but people get so sensitive about that kind of stuff. So we have to revert to long witty posts, subtly insulting each other's prowess with the opposite sex, or the level of intelligence the other person has. That's one thing kids have over adults:

 

"You're a poophead! "

"No, YOU"RE the poophead! "

"Yeah well I have an invincibility mirror and anything you call me reflects back to you! "

"Oh, yeah?! Well I have the infinite penetrating ray of death that destroys your mirror, so there! "

"Oh, yeeaaahh?! Well I have the super sparker clash shield that all death rays in the whole UNIVERSE can't penetrate AANNNDD all reflect back to the shooter, so you are the enternal poophead of the universe, no take backs, infinity plus one!"

"I'm telling you on my mom! "

[AtariJr]

i know that people need to loosen up around here.. but when even you can admit his posts are "irrelevant", maybe he shouldnt ONLY post that type of stuff.. just sayin.

 

Anywho, please remember poor saturn x isn't a teacher, or old enough to be one, so give him a bit of a break.. poor fellow .

[ninjarabbit]

I really don't know how the Cube can be considered a failure when it was a more profitable system than the X Box (which has reported lost $4 billion for Microsoft and bombed in Japan) and the PS2 (which had high development costs and Sony has no first party games).

 

The article was meh in my humble opinion, it was too high brow for the target audience.

[Atarifever]

Not as painful as your consistently awful spelling and grammar.

Your constant attacks on the other posters here are no doubt due to your exciting social life making it difficult enough for you to post here in the first place, let alone when there is bad grammar or odd topic titles to distract you from sharing your, no doubt Earth shattering, ideas. The kind of guy who goes around nit-picking over a few spelling errors on the internet is almost certainly somone who women swoon over and who men enjoy the company of. Good for you.

 

 

I think I'll speak for the women and say, yes, we prefer men who can spell and use correct grammer. It implies thoughtfulness and intelligence. Using poor grammer as well as bad spelling, even on the internet, implies stupidity and/or laziness, neither of which is attractive to most females.

 

there- a noun, adverb, adjective, or pronoun all implying a point in space, a place

their - a pronoun implies possession

they're - a contraction of "they are"

 

your - a pronoun implies possession

you're - a contraction of "you are"

 

Example: THEY'RE going to shove Gameboys up THEIR asses. I hope THERE is enough room in THEIR asses. Do you want them to use YOUR Gameboy? Oh, YOU'RE going to shove YOUR Gameboy up YOUR own ass? What if it gets stuck up THERE? YOUR mom will probably get angry if you shove it up THERE. Perhaps you shouldn't be THEIR friend anymore. THEY'RE not the smartest people in the world. Girls don't like boys with Gameboys up THEIR asses.

My 9-5 is being the Graduate Writing Assistant in my university's writing centre. I tutor students on their writing, design and update pages on our website about writing, prepare handouts about writing, and give 2 hour lectures on grammar rules. Yet, I am not exactly fending the women off or anything (of course, maybe my fiancee has something to do with that )

 

This also explains why I care so little about writing on the internet. I don't even care about my own spelling by the time I get home (and I suppose a cook doesn't want to go home and prepare dinner for five).

[Starscream]

So how exactly did being so profitable make it a success? I like seeing profits used in discussions when it means something. In this case, it doesn't. MS and Sony are more profitable companies than Nintendo. Of course, if you want to slant it for your advantage, I suppose you could say Nintendo makes more money than MS and Sony do in their entertainment divisions. Of course, that's not very realistic comparing a part of a company to an entire company, but it may suit you better to say that for you own reasons.

 

Back on point, the GC was a failure if you look at it from an unbiased POV. It offered nothing that the other 2 didn't, it was limited in it's overall abilities, had the worst support, no online, no dvd playback, and was always cheap and still couldn't sell. There's a lot to be said if you have a good price point, good product and still can't get people interested. Like you guys always say, it's about the games. The GC did not have them. It had good games, but nothing that game stores would open at midnight to sell, or better yet, have an exclusive game that people waited in lines for hours to get, at midnight.

[sega saturn x]

I guess the idea is we need a loser, and this was a generation where all three did well or at least well enough. The cube wasn't a failure, but it didn't do great, dubbing it the loser. The cube doesn't really count as a failure in the same vein as the dreamcast or virtual boy. I think it says a lot about the size of the industry when even the "loser" does well.

[AtariJr]

I guess the idea is we need a loser, and this was a generation where all three did well or at least well enough. The cube wasn't a failure, but it didn't do great, dubbing it the loser. The cube doesn't really count as a failure in the same vein as the dreamcast or virtual boy. I think it says a lot about the size of the industry when even the "loser" does well.

 

thats what i was trying to say. And i dont care how much sony makes on vios, or miscrosoft makes on Windows... we are talking about video gaming here. If xbox makes 30 billion a year, and only 1 million of that is on 360 sales , then it would show that it was a failure in the gaming communities eyes. Just becuase they made 30 billion doesnt mean the 360 was a success. (these are all theoretical numbers, and situation is obviously fake, just using it as a "what if " example). Nintendo was in 3rd place in sales, but still made the most money becuase they dont lose money on consoles, and they make a lot of 1st party games that sell very well. Just becuase nintendo came in 3rd doesnt mean it was a failure at all. I would rate failure like the xbox 1 for instance in japan.. where there were months when only 200 or so units were sold, while ps2 and gc had hundreds of thousands a piece each month.

[Starscream]

I guess the idea is we need a loser, and this was a generation where all three did well or at least well enough. The cube wasn't a failure, but it didn't do great, dubbing it the loser. The cube doesn't really count as a failure in the same vein as the dreamcast or virtual boy. I think it says a lot about the size of the industry when even the "loser" does well.

 

thats what i was trying to say. And i dont care how much sony makes on vios, or miscrosoft makes on Windows... we are talking about video gaming here. If xbox makes 30 billion a year, and only 1 million of that is on 360 sales , then it would show that it was a failure in the gaming communities eyes. Just becuase they made 30 billion doesnt mean the 360 was a success. (these are all theoretical numbers, and situation is obviously fake, just using it as a "what if " example). Nintendo was in 3rd place in sales, but still made the most money becuase they dont lose money on consoles, and they make a lot of 1st party games that sell very well. Just becuase nintendo came in 3rd doesnt mean it was a failure at all. I would rate failure like the xbox 1 for instance in japan.. where there were months when only 200 or so units were sold, while ps2 and gc had hundreds of thousands a piece each month.

 

So...I am confused. In part of your post, profits determine success. Then, in another part, sales determine success. So which is it? Both have their place for different reasons. If you are a bean counter at Nintendo or MS or Sony, then I can understand the financial aspect. Or maybe you own stock in one of them?

 

I think it's real simple. Sony had over 100 million PS2 sales, MS had around 35 million Xbox sales, Nintendo had around 25 million GC sales. More people chose the PS2 or Xbox over the GC. Which means that the GC was not able to entice around 75 million gamers (that number is assuming that 25 million gamers have all 3 systems). Sony has the gamers. Which is the point of having a system no? And MS managed to attract an additional whateverthehell% more gamers than Nintendo did. So now tell me again how having less people wanting what you offered spells successful? All the money in the bank didn't improve sales did it? Having a gazillion yen didn't really bring in the 3rd party support did it? Nope.

 

Let's look at MS and Sony. They have a gazillion yen or more. They were able to attract 3rd party support with little effort. They sold a few more systems, had a couple million more online players than Nintendo. Could it be that the systems were more attractive? See, how important is this profit crap now? Even with both of those companies financially solid, the money didn't get them what they needed, the platforms did. Do you guys really, really really think that Bobby Joe walks into Gamestop and says to himself "Nintendo makes the most money, so that's the system I's gonna git me" or EA execs saying " Ya know, that Nintendo, gosh darn, they posted record profits and their GC sales continue to decline to almost nothing. THAT is the platform we should make all of our games for because they make money" I don't ever recall at any time, developers tripping over each other to make some games for the system that was least succesful in the market. Nintendo can have all the money in the world, but if those guys can't get a piece of the pie, they won't bother. And they didn't. Good thing Nintendo is rolling in the dough huh?

 

I do agree though, failure may not be the correct term. More like "less captivating". You guys can keep on grasping at straws to make the GC seem like it was right up there with the PS2 on some level, any level, but that won't change the fact Sony mopped up the competition.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Starscream

[AtariJr]

yea well sony will be wiped by the other two this time around lol. I know your an extreme sony fan, but even you cant deny theyve been making some really dumb mistakes lately.

[Starscream]

No, I'm really not an extreme Sony fan. They have provided me the chance to play some major kick ass games for years. I generally don't like Sony products like TV's, stereos, etc, but I do like many things that they have made possible. And no, I don't think they have made any bad mistakes lately. They have a major advantage over MS and Nintendo right now which gives them a nice opportunity to try what they are doing. They have brand recognition. They are video games for many people. In every brand loyalty/trust survey I have seen in the past 6 months, Sony ranks within the top 5. Nintendo and MS are somehwere around the 20's. They have support. Look at it like this. Nintendo made the DS. It was hit or miss who would know. But they had the ball rolling from the success of the GB line. They could take a chance at it failing and still be ok. Sony is in the same boat. They can include Blu Ray and see if it takes off. If not, they can try again next time. The PS3 is more expensive than the other 2, but you are getting more. To get more, you pay more. I like the controller idea too. I am most skeptical about the wii at this point. Until I see some games that aren't just Mario this or Mario that or just you usual run of the mill Nintendo games, controlled differently, then I am not even remotely sold on it. I saw many more original games on the PS2 and Xbox than I did on the GC and that's one of the things I liked about both of them, plus the big games like Halo or GoW, that I enjoy so much.

[Student Driver]

I don't ever recall at any time, developers tripping over each other to make some games for the system that was least succesful in the market. Nintendo can have all the money in the world, but if those guys can't get a piece of the pie, they won't bother. And they didn't. Good thing Nintendo is rolling in the dough huh?

 

During the N64's lifespan, I recall reading an interview with a developer in a trade magazine stating that, because of the lesser popularity of the N64 and concomitant smaller library, it was much easier to guarantee a profit on software developed for the system than for the PSX. The customer base for N64 software was still a respectable size, but relatively starved for software, so any decent effort (and probably many a lesser effort) was highly visible and tended to sell pretty well-- rarely a blockbuster hit, but a source of modest and dependable revenue-- more dependable than PSX profits, which promised huge profits for a hit, but a financial loss if the game got lost on the flood of releases.

 

So, to a developer, there's still a financial incentive to develop for less successful platforms (but perhaps less incentive to develop brand new franchises or groundbreaking titles, since the profits are modest).

[AtariJr]

Halo is original? Maybe its just me, but id rather play Unreal Tournament on the pc any day.. but thats just me. And last i checked , games like Geist and Chibi Robo were as far away from mainstream as i could think of. How many fps or racing games are there on the xbox... way too many (not saying i dont like the xbox, i just think its hard to pick out the good games in the heap of them all... i love racing games, but ive bought my fair share of crudy ones for the system)

Edited July 22, 2006 by AtariJr