@Chrono_Cross
That race comment doesn't even make sense. This is so literal, and it probably sounds pathetic, but catching up in a race doesn't mean the race is over.
If Nintendo caught up to it's competitors, that means it's just as possible to still 'win', considering all parties are on equal ground. We have to see how Nintendo will do from this point forward. If we look back as far back as say, the 80's, Nintendo would still have advantages over their competitors. That is why they are still relevant to this day.
Nintendo has yet to catch up to its competition's online offerings.
Not IMO. Nintendo had freaking radio and internet on its first 2 consoles.
Where the heck was Sony? They were making Walkman, VHS, and starting CD players. Those devices didn't have a computer in them at all, and weren't even close to having internet. That put Sony being even further behind than Nintendo, IMO, at least when it comes to game consoles and AI.
In a sense, Sony has caught up to how Nintendo was way back in '85, while Nintendo didn't create the physical memory formats. That is where Sony wins.
@Chrono_Cross
That race comment doesn't even make sense. This is so literal, and it probably sounds pathetic, but catching up in a race doesn't mean the race is over.
If Nintendo caught up to it's competitors, that means it's just as possible to still 'win', considering all parties are on equal ground. We have to see how Nintendo will do from this point forward. If we look back as far back as say, the 80's, Nintendo would still have advantages over their competitors. That is why they are still relevant to this day.
Nintendo has yet to catch up to its competition's online offerings.
Not IMO. Nintendo had freaking radio and internet on its first 2 consoles.
Where the heck was Sony? They were making Walkman, VHS, and starting CD players. Those devices didn't have a computer in them at all, and weren't even close to having internet. That put Sony being even further behind than Nintendo, IMO, at least when it comes to game consoles and AI.
In a sense, Sony has caught up to how Nintendo was way back in '85, while Nintendo didn't create the physical memory formats. That is where Sony wins.
How are the NES and SNES relevant in the race today? That's kind of like saying we need to catch up to Greece's Olympics because try did those thing such a long time before we did.
Not IMO. Nintendo had freaking radio and internet on its first 2 consoles.
Where the heck was Sony? They were making Walkman, VHS, and starting CD players. Those devices didn't have a computer in them at all, and weren't even close to having internet. That put Sony being even further behind than Nintendo, IMO, at least when it comes to game consoles and AI.
In a sense, Sony has caught up to how Nintendo was way back in '85, while Nintendo didn't create the physical memory formats. That is where Sony wins.
So it turns out that Atari, despite completely failing as a company multiple times, turns out to be the winner of the console race. The GameLine modem was introduced in 1983 by Control Video Corporation. It featured downloadable games (it was more of a rental service though). That puts them ahead of Nintendo by at least five years. Oh, and who could forget that Atari had Atari 2600 BASIC running on their system in 1979. Another five years ahead of Nintendo's Family BASIC.
I can't wait to inform all of Atari SA's shareholders all the financial difficulties they've been having is complete garbage, In My Opinion, because they were actually ahead any and all video game competitors, In My Opinion.
Seriously. That claim has got to be the worst case of intellectual diarrhea I've ever witnessed. In My Opinion.
Not IMO. Nintendo had freaking radio and internet on its first 2 consoles.
Where the heck was Sony? They were making Walkman, VHS, and starting CD players. Those devices didn't have a computer in them at all, and weren't even close to having internet. That put Sony being even further behind than Nintendo, IMO, at least when it comes to game consoles and AI.
In a sense, Sony has caught up to how Nintendo was way back in '85, while Nintendo didn't create the physical memory formats. That is where Sony wins.
So it turns out that Atari, despite completely failing as a company multiple times, turns out to be the winner of the console race. The GameLine modem was introduced in 1983 by Control Video Corporation. It featured downloadable games (it was more of a rental service though). That puts them ahead of Nintendo by at least five years. Oh, and who could forget that Atari had Atari 2600 BASIC running on their system in 1979. Another five years ahead of Nintendo's Family BASIC.
I can't wait to inform all of Atari SA's shareholders all the financial difficulties they've been having is complete garbage, In My Opinion, because they were actually ahead any and all video game competitors, In My Opinion.
Seriously. That claim has got to be the worst case of intellectual diarrhea I've ever witnessed. In My Opinion.
See, that's the spirit. BTW, you were probably 12 when I was born, so way to show maturity.
There's a such thing as explaining situations w/o being a total jerk.
Besides, there's a difference between being better when it comes to consoles and practical uses for consoles. Sega had the internet thing for games, too, and look where they are.
Those features are cool, but it doesn't matter if no one gives a crap about Sega or Atari.
I'm defending a console still in the market, so lets try and make this discussion the best we can by actually contributing to the discussion please.
EDIT: Also, based on your information, Atari didn't even have to release an Atari 2600. If they were able to run a 'next gen' operating system on their last gen console, that is a big reason why it failed.
That's the same reason why I don't like Apple. Same device, different year. Hardly anyone harnesses any iPad build past the first iPad, because the market is greater and no one wants to buy a $200-900 device once a year to take full advantage of a $1 app.
Do you seriously want me to decipher why Atari died? I can go look at wikipedia and report back if you want.
There's a console timeline chart, and it's obvious that there is a pattern in the industry.
Not IMO. Nintendo had freaking radio and internet on its first 2 consoles.
Where the heck was Sony? They were making Walkman, VHS, and starting CD players. Those devices didn't have a computer in them at all, and weren't even close to having internet. That put Sony being even further behind than Nintendo, IMO, at least when it comes to game consoles and AI.
In a sense, Sony has caught up to how Nintendo was way back in '85, while Nintendo didn't create the physical memory formats. That is where Sony wins.
So it turns out that Atari, despite completely failing as a company multiple times, turns out to be the winner of the console race. The GameLine modem was introduced in 1983 by Control Video Corporation. It featured downloadable games (it was more of a rental service though). That puts them ahead of Nintendo by at least five years. Oh, and who could forget that Atari had Atari 2600 BASIC running on their system in 1979. Another five years ahead of Nintendo's Family BASIC.
I can't wait to inform all of Atari SA's shareholders all the financial difficulties they've been having is complete garbage, In My Opinion, because they were actually ahead any and all video game competitors, In My Opinion.
Seriously. That claim has got to be the worst case of intellectual diarrhea I've ever witnessed. In My Opinion.
See, that's the spirit. BTW, you were probably 12 when I was born, so way to show maturity.
There's a such thing as explaining situations w/o being a total jerk.
Besides, there's a difference between being better when it comes to consoles and practical uses for consoles. Sega had the internet thing for games, too, and look where they are.
Those features are cool, but it doesn't matter if no one gives a crap about Sega or Atari.
I'm defending a console still in the market, so lets try and make this discussion the best we can by actually contributing to the discussion please.
EDIT: Also, based on your information, Atari didn't even have to release an Atari 2600. If they were able to run a 'next gen' operating system on their last gen console, that is a big reason why it failed.
That's the same reason why I don't like Apple. Same device, different year. Hardly anyone harnesses any iPad build past the first iPad, because the market is greater and no one wants to buy a $200-900 device once a year to take full advantage of a $1 app.
Do you seriously want me to decipher why Atari died? I can go look at wikipedia and report back if you want.
There's a console timeline chart, and it's obvious that there is a pattern in the industry.
April 9th, 2013: The day nintendolife.com became thuglife.com
ATTICA!! ATTICA!! ATTICA!! I AM THE ROSA PARKS OF NINTENDOLIFE
"You don't need a link to a website as proof all the time. It's called research. If no one ever did research, you wouldn't even have l...
This isn't about being biased or being emotionally attached to a stance. If Sony were in the same position as Nintendo in a parallel world or whatever, I would defend that stance just as much, but that is not the case.
Hate to break this to you, but if you support a company, then you're biased. The term simply means you support one thing over another, and it does not mean anything negative like the internet wants you to believe.
As for me, I'm a Nintendo fan, and I just stopped caring what others had to say about them. Why? Because Nintendo will still make games regardless, and defending them on some internet forum isn't going to accomplish anything but stress for you and delight from others. I support arguments, but there comes a time when either side can go too far (and I admit I went too far in some situations).
If you want to truly support Nintendo, then buy their products and speak positively for them. If you feel insulted in an argument, just leave. Not many really care for your opinion if they just want to poke you.
@Abe_Vigoda
Why even post anything? You didn't even know 4k upconverted 1080p to 4k, or that 4K was 3D enabled, and you hardly even believed me when I told you. You should use Google proactively instead of posting useless pictures.
@LzQuacker
Ya, I'm starting to realize that, too. I just never call out people being biased because that doesn't really add anything to the discussion. I don't even get pissed when I get hit by a blue shell in Mario Kart anymore.
@Abe_Vigoda
Why even post anything? You didn't even know 4k upconverted 1080p to 4k, or that 4K was 3D enabled, and you hardly even believed me when I told you.
I really wish you could dig that post up and show me, because I vaguely remember it, but I also know that everything you "accused" me of there had nothing to do at all with what I was talking about hahahaha! It's impossible to take you seriously because you warp every statement into something completely different and derail the whole conversation. Whenever someone gives you an answer you can't refute, you change the question! I do enjoy reading your posts though, as they are HIGHLY entertaining.
Thinking back, I believe I said something along the lines of 4K TVs not being useful/selling well until there is 4K resolution programming being broadcast in the next several years, as an analogy for needing games to help sell a console. Then you flipped the script and talked about the TV upconverting 1080p to 4K (not the same thing at all, nor what I was talking about) and mentioning 3D capability, which I never brought up either, as it had nothing to do with my point.
April 9th, 2013: The day nintendolife.com became thuglife.com
ATTICA!! ATTICA!! ATTICA!! I AM THE ROSA PARKS OF NINTENDOLIFE
"You don't need a link to a website as proof all the time. It's called research. If no one ever did research, you wouldn't even have l...
If Sony or/and MS launch at 450 or below Nintendo is in trouble.
If they launch at 500 Nintendo will have a challenge but I think be fine with great games out by then
If they launch at 550 Nintendo would be in a great position especially with great games out by then
If they launch at 600 then Nintendo is going to kill it.
You people are laughable. A bunch of forum-goers trying to masquerade as professional analysts.
And you feel you weren't in that segment of laughable people how? You just spilled out the same ole stuff acting like you know every detail as well.
Sorry, buffalo dude. I don't see the "same ole stuff" that I "spilled out" anywhere else in this thread. And a bit further down in the thread... somebody calling attention to "butthurt"? What in the world? Is there honestly any better way for somebody to completely disregard your opinion than to type out a word like that? You make fun of the people posting in this forum, yet here you are posting in the very same forum.
I feel I'm not in the segment of laughable people because all I did was type out the FACTS. You can't refute them. The laughable people, as I'm still going to refer to them as because I'm still laughing at them, offer no real facts but only hunches, guesstimates, and emotionally charged personal opinions. Does that answer your statement/question?
I suppose I'll say it again: I hope all three of the major console makers stay in business. We all squabble and bicker now, but many analysts already believe this is going to be the last wave of consoles. Having a major console maker drop out of the race would only bring us one step closer to losing the hobby we all love, so I really don't see how anyone in their right mind would want to campaign against ANY of the big three if they want to see console games continue to grow.
Where my friends and I usually get stupid:
https://www.twitch.tv/MUDWALLHOLLER - Come by hang and visit our Discord. The link for Discord is on the Twitch page.
Well whatever. Everyone already knows Nintendo isn't doing that bad, especially in comparison to Sony, so I don't see why people keep bringing up these threads.
It just causes problems and no one cares.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
If Sony or/and MS launch at 450 or below Nintendo is in trouble.
If they launch at 500 Nintendo will have a challenge but I think be fine with great games out by then
If they launch at 550 Nintendo would be in a great position especially with great games out by then
If they launch at 600 then Nintendo is going to kill it.
I highly doubt Sony can afford to sell the PS4 at a price lower than $500.
Current games: Everything on Switch
Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky | Nintendo Network ID: LzWinky
If Sony or/and MS launch at 450 or below Nintendo is in trouble.
If they launch at 500 Nintendo will have a challenge but I think be fine with great games out by then
If they launch at 550 Nintendo would be in a great position especially with great games out by then
If they launch at 600 then Nintendo is going to kill it.
I highly doubt Sony can afford to sell the PS4 at a price lower than $500.
Most definitely. Yet we all must remember that a lot of people are still going to shell out the large amount of cash necessary due to, but not solely on, Call of Duty.
Snagrio
3DS Friend Code: 4081-5821-0404 | Nintendo Network ID: WingedFish64
Forums
Topic: Nintendo down but not out
Posts 61 to 80 of 127
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.