History is slowly repeating itself...

AdultLink

AdultLink

CAGiversary!
Feedback
2 (100%)
The N64 was the most powerful, the most hyped, the one where Nintendo didn't care about anything.

Before it launched, tons of magazines were behind it...

Afterwards, however, they disappeared, bashing the magazine. When the Playstation took off, sales of the N64 began to vanish.

It seem to tables have turned, and the same thing is beginning to happen in the new console wars...

But instead of one console being 'Playstation', two are, sort of.
 
Thanks for the shitty comparison. Surprised you didn't just say "N64 was black, PS3 is black, holy crap." I think I would have taken it more seriously.
 
[quote name='TimPV3']Thanks for the shitty comparison. Surprised you didn't just say "N64 was black, PS3 is black, holy crap." I think I would have taken it more seriously.[/quote]
uh oh... Dreamcast was white and Wii is white... Wii is gonna fail :(
 
What I don't understand is why people seem to think 360 sales are going to stay high. The Halo 3 crowd all went out and bought their 360 for Gow, hence the good past 2 months.

Before GOW 360 was practically dead in the water. Now I can only wonder what is going to sell systems for the next year when PS3 starts getting games people want to play and stores are able to stock Wiis.

Unless Microsoft is able to pull in some major titles that arent shooters it isn't going very far.

/sticking with my PS2 in the meantime
 
[quote name='happy']What I don't understand is why people seem to think 360 sales are going to stay high. The Halo 3 crowd all went out and bought their 360 for Gow, hence the good past 2 months.[/QUOTE]

This will be a good quote to look back on when Halo 3 comes out. :roll:
 
[quote name='SMMM']the explosion in your sig is quite appropriate after your post...[/quote]Because of heads exploding, or a flamefest?
 
[quote name='Diiz']In fierce competition I trust.[/QUOTE]

Agreed; but let's be entirely fair here. The reason competition is good is because it drives costs down and quality of product up. Sony is so certain of their market superiority that they aren't going to any real lengths to do either. Since the unveiling of the console, they've shown that Sony has no real concern for providing real gaming content, and they are providing no real pressure or incentives for developers to make great content, seeing as how they still have the mentality of having the largest installed user base. As a latecomer to the game, they cannot just let things happen; they have to actively give developers a reason to be exclusive to PS3; enough for developers to forget the huge market lead of Microsoft and take a risk with a smaller installed user base. This requires not solid, but killer apps; which aren't coming down the pipe for some time. Meanwhile, Sony is content to focus their efforts on providing the "easy content"; blu-ray, downloads... things that don't require any real additional work on their part, and yield good profits. Only problem is; if you are a gamer; and not a gadgeteer, this does not bode well. It's essentially the same strategy they took with the PSP. The PSP is not getting stomped by the DS because it's an inferior product; far from it. It's being stomped because it gives every impression of being less a gaming machine and more a funnel to get easily produced content through in an additional format to squeeze out that extra buck. Getting to the point of how this relates to competition; from the perspective of a gamer playing the PS3; I'd be very worried about its value; as it's legitimately not competitive at this point. It's hard to deny Sony desperately wants to have ownership of a solidified format; they tried it with Betamax, tried to introduced A-Trac, Minidisc, UMD... the PS3 seems to be just their next effort in this vein; getting blu-ray players into homes and hoping, not to provide a gaming system, but to get a piece of the distribution of next gen movie releases. When Sony stops running every single press conference and business plan bullet point on downloadable content and additional, non-game related software and starts to put an emphasis on games, at that point they will be serious competitors and drive up both the quantity and quality of game development. As it stands now, it's poised to become, with a few notable exceptions, and forgive the harshness of my words, a fringe dumping ground for higher resolution ports of 360 games.
 
Yeah; I figured it was best to get the whole argument covered at once.

And just for the record, I meant that as a general statement; I'm not defending the OP. Sorry, OP; but that's a pretty meaningless, silly, and fanboy-smelling comparison.
 
Well this is true to a certain extent seeing as the Wii is running on less powerful software and has a more widely available/cheaper format for its games (DVDs vs Blu Rays=CDs vs cartridges) but it's still pretty hard to predict how the console wars'll turn out. The DS wasn't doing too well at launch in terms of games available and sales but look at it now.
 
Wah, wah, you bashed my favorite console, wah wah.

When a company gets conceited, thinks people will buy anything just because it has their name on it (basically what Nintendo did), then yes, they are destined to fail. It's the same damn thing that happened during the video game crash.

And yes, journalists are quite important. You don't need every journalist to survive, but when all journalists turn from your console, every console that this has happened to has failed.
 
[quote name='AdultLink']Wah, wah, you bashed my favorite console, wah wah.

When a company gets conceited, thinks people will buy anything just because it has their name on it (basically what Nintendo did), then yes, they are destined to fail. It's the same damn thing that happened during the video game crash.

And yes, journalists are quite important. You don't need every journalist to survive, but when all journalists turn from your console, every console that this has happened to has failed.[/QUOTE]


Sorry, I need to correct your point here. The video game crash of '83 had nothing to do with brand name. In fact, it was partly due to lack of brand name recognition. Allow me to explain:

Atari's console policy was that anyone could develop and distribute games for it; without restriction (recall wonderful titles like Custer's Revenge, etc.) This seems on the surface like it provides a benefit; because of the ease of development and distribution, but in practice, it turned out horribly. Everyone and their mother opened a development studio (including Chuck Wagon dog food), and the market was flooded with product. The problem was, with no quality controls, the overwhelming majority of what was hitting the shelves was terrible. Prices plummeted on garbage, and despite the fact that good software was still being developed, people who entered the store could buy one piece of quality software at normal price, or grab 15 piece of garbage from the discount bin for the same price. Granted, there was a factor of Atari arrogance (producing more cartridges than there were systems in home), but the overall crash was due to total inability to control the product.

Also, even if it were the case that brand name had anything to do with it, it's not particularly relevant to your argument.
 
[quote name='crazytalkx']Well this is true to a certain extent seeing as the Wii is running on less powerful software and has a more widely available/cheaper format for its games (DVDs vs Blu Rays=CDs vs cartridges) but it's still pretty hard to predict how the console wars'll turn out. The DS wasn't doing too well at launch in terms of games available and sales but look at it now.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree you can't predict a winner early on based on software; good call. But in the case of Sony this generation, the issue isn't that there isn't good software, but that there seems that Sony hasn't committed itself to doing anything to ensure that the good software ever comes. Certainly, there's still plenty of opportunity for them to turn that around, but they seem to be focussing more on additional content when they haven't really given any developers an incentive to work on their core. Also, production costs of the media is certainly a factor, but I don't think it's quite as big a gap this generation as it was in CDs vs. cartridges. If blu-ray was produced in volume, I'm sure the production gap would close.
 
Actually it was that brand name had a bit of something to do with it.

Companies made games that were crappy, and thought people would buy them just because they were video games.

And even though it's similiar, it really doesn't have much to do with what I'm saying, except that when you think that people will buy something because it has your name on it, instead of putting effort into it, you fail.

Their is effort put into the PS3, but it's more of an N64-ish effort. They make a nice, powerful machine, but don't try to please the fans. They just expect you to buy it.

And journalists are important. Only the hardcore read gamer mags. Alot of people get their info from the paper, or time magazine, etc.

And when these papers/magazines bash ps3, alot of people will be pursuaded.
 
I see history repeating itself in the form of a shitty topic with a poor argument that will incite 20 pages of maladjusted name-calling.

The only thing different from history is that I won't be a part of it.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I see history repeating itself in the form of a shitty topic with a poor argument that will incite 20 pages of maladjusted name-calling.

The only thing different from history is that I won't be a part of it.[/QUOTE]
Lawlz too lates!
 
[quote name='AdultLink']Actually it was that brand name had a bit of something to do with it.

Companies made games that were crappy, and thought people would buy them just because they were video games.

And even though it's similiar, it really doesn't have much to do with what I'm saying, except that when you think that people will buy something because it has your name on it, instead of putting effort into it, you fail.

And journalists are important. Only the hardcore read gamer mags. Alot of people get their info from the paper, or time magazine, etc.

And when these papers/magazines bash ps3, alot of people will be pursuaded.[/QUOTE]

I disagree; I don't think it's the larger media impact that's causing Sony to have difficulties right now. It's more the actions of Sony itself. Arrogant statements like the infamous "We think we'd sell 5 million PS3s if it didn't have a single game." have really turned a lot of consumer opinion against Sony. A lot of hardcore gamers feel that Sony has betrayed their core audience in favor of nickel and diming the gaming public. However, this isn't due to the influence of the press. In fact, I'd say the press has simply picked up on the undertones that Sony has brought forth themselves. In short, I think you're quoting a symptom; not a cause.
 
This would make more sense as an analogy if the N64 didn't launch well after the Playstation. The Playstation was already doing quite well when the N64 appeared. N64 sales faltered because of limited software to drive interest while the Playstation library grew rapidly. Final Fantasy VII was just adding insult to injury. The trend was already set in the Playstation's favor because it ofered great advantages to developers, publishers, and retailers alike.

Another analogy breaker is that the N64 was less expensive than the Playstation by 33%. The reverse is true by a much greater span for today's competition in terms of who is perceived as failing.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I see history repeating itself in the form of a shitty topic with a poor argument that will incite 20 pages of maladjusted name-calling.

The only thing different from history is that I won't be a part of it.[/QUOTE]

I should probably not waste my time trying to turn it into a legimate discussion then?
 
[quote name='Cuzza40']In short, I think you're quoting a symptom; not a cause.[/QUOTE]

That's a good point, but if it Sony causing it, wouldn't it be like the N64 era, where Nintendo made Square go away?

Sony DEFINATELY is not being that stupid, but still, you hafta admit the similarities.
 
[quote name='Cuzza40']I should probably not waste my time trying to turn it into a legimate discussion then?[/QUOTE]

I appreciate the effort, but time has shown that your kind (let's just call you the "sense-makers") will always lose.

I'm of the opinion that damn near everybody on this site, with few exceptions, have decided that one or more consoles is or is not "worth it," and will debate until the ends of the earth their case. The problem, of course, is these people build their case after coming to a conclusion, so it's ultimately a fruitless effort trying to deal with people constantly readjusting their post-hoc justifications.

Like the reason for war in Iraq.

Fire away, however, as I do enjoy what you've said so far. Much respect to anyone who brings up "Chase the Chuck Wagon."
 
[quote name='AdultLink']That's a good point, but if it Sony causing it, wouldn't it be like the N64 era, where Nintendo made Square go away?

Sony DEFINATELY is not being that stupid, but still, you hafta admit the similarities.[/QUOTE]

The thing is, while you could look at the two generations and point out some type of similarities between the two situations, those similarities are really very superficial, to some extent coincidental, and it's not really a particularly compelling observation from a standpoint of prediction. I mean, you can use it as a filter to view current events through; but the greater question, knowing that the predictive power of the comparison is sketchy at best, is what does it get you?
 
Some may be coincidental, but once the problem happens, it happens.

People are influenced by what others say, if others tell them to buy Wii and PS3 sucks, they may do it.

All of these magazines bashing PS3 will start the wheels turning by the simple fact that people are pursuaded so easily.
 
[quote name='AdultLink']Some may be coincidental, but once the problem happens, it happens.

People are influenced by what others say, if others tell them to buy Wii and PS3 sucks, they may do it.

All of these magazines bashing PS3 will start the wheels turning by the simple fact that people are pursuaded so easily.[/QUOTE]

Like I said previously; the magazine comments are caused by a root issue, they aren't causing a root issue themselves. It's not very accurate to think of game magazines as a barometer for public opinion. However, what we're seeing occuring there isn't going to cause much, but is a reflection of what's already occuring. This market isn't as easily persuaded as one tends to think. Its history is full of beloved low profile titles and hyped ones that utterly failed. In many cases, it's not just opinion, but sales numbers themselves that go against critical and advertising pushes.
 
[quote name='Cuzza40']Sorry, I need to correct your point here. The video game crash of '83 had nothing to do with brand name. In fact, it was partly due to lack of brand name recognition. Allow me to explain:

Atari's console policy was that anyone could develop and distribute games for it; without restriction (recall wonderful titles like Custer's Revenge, etc.) This seems on the surface like it provides a benefit; because of the ease of development and distribution, but in practice, it turned out horribly. Everyone and their mother opened a development studio (including Chuck Wagon dog food), and the market was flooded with product. The problem was, with no quality controls, the overwhelming majority of what was hitting the shelves was terrible. Prices plummeted on garbage, and despite the fact that good software was still being developed, people who entered the store could buy one piece of quality software at normal price, or grab 15 piece of garbage from the discount bin for the same price. Granted, there was a factor of Atari arrogance (producing more cartridges than there were systems in home), but the overall crash was due to total inability to control the product.

Also, even if it were the case that brand name had anything to do with it, it's not particularly relevant to your argument.[/QUOTE]


Ironically, the same thing is pretty much happening now on PS2 :razz:

As for history repeating itself, the OP is right in one regard, Japan is once again the Nintendo nation.
 
[quote name='shipwreck']This will be a good quote to look back on when Halo 3 comes out. :roll:[/quote]

Yep, seeing as how 2 of my friends and I are still holding out on the 360...




until Halo 3 comes.
 
I don't know about that comparison but I basically agree with Cuzza40.

Anyway, does anyone here really think the PS3 will be number one when it costs more than the other two consoles and has no head start?
 
History only repeats itself for those looking at only the broadest description. Under examination, the details make every event differ greatly.

Ever since Nintendo resurrected the console industry there have been people predicting a repeat of the Great Crash but it isn't going to happen because it can't happen. The circumstances and business models are far too different. Individual companies will come and go but the industry is a composite that will simply continue.

A certain highly placed CAG was convinced the next Great Crash was nigh when I first started participating here. What he was really expressing is how much it sucks to run an independent video game store. But it has ALWAYS sucked to run an independent video game store, just as with many businesses that are outgrowths of hobbies, such as comic book stores. Retail ventures that compete with massive chains are always going to have it rough and the owners struggle to maintain a middle-class existence.

But that doesn't mean the industry as a whole is in any trouble.
 
The Wii is riding on hype still. It's a new console with a new way of playing. Don't be so quick to give Nintendo a hand job - the video game industry is very unpredictable.
 
N64 = 3 letters
PS2 = 3 letters

Holy shit, the N64 is really as powerful as the PS2 was!! Did any of you realize that???


And the PS3 is.....wait, the PS3 = 3 letters too!!!!

OH.
MY.
GOD.
 
[quote name='happy']What I don't understand is why people seem to think 360 sales are going to stay high. The Halo 3 crowd all went out and bought their 360 for Gow, hence the good past 2 months.

Before GOW 360 was practically dead in the water. Now I can only wonder what is going to sell systems for the next year when PS3 starts getting games people want to play and stores are able to stock Wiis.

Unless Microsoft is able to pull in some major titles that arent shooters it isn't going very far.

/sticking with my PS2 in the meantime[/QUOTE]

If your a Pro Halo player you play on a original xbox, the 360's emulation of Halo 2 is FAR from perfect. Many many hardcore players are holding out till Halo 3. As for Xbox 360 being dead in the water, all I can say is Wow!

Not saying this is true or anything but Gamecube and N64 came out with a Bang much like the Wii is now, but third party support died off and both consoles didn't do as good as originally expected. IT could happen again. Don't let Internet hype make you think a certain way. Just play the games you enjoy and buy whats fun to you.
 
[quote name='keithp']N64 = 3 letters
PS2 = 3 letters

Holy shit, the N64 is really as powerful as the PS2 was!! Did any of you realize that???


And the PS3 is.....wait, the PS3 = 3 letters too!!!!

OH.
MY.
GOD.[/QUOTE]

lol
 
[quote name='keithp']N64 = 3 letters
PS2 = 3 letters

Holy shit, the N64 is really as powerful as the PS2 was!! Did any of you realize that???


And the PS3 is.....wait, the PS3 = 3 letters too!!!!

OH.
MY.
GOD.[/QUOTE]

N64... PS2... 360... Wii... PS3... GaMiNG Iz d00meD!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top