The Wonderswan Color actually had a lot of potential in the Japanese market; Square Enix had initially said it would remake Final Fantasy 1-6 exclusively for the platform.

Unfortunately Bandai couldn't get any other killer exclusives, and the initial sales (pre Final Fantasy) were slow. Eventually Square Enix decided to go after the numbers with the GBA, and that ended that for the Wonderswan Color.

But by all accounts it is a really nice little console.

The Digimon games for it were kinda good...

You guys are the most entertaining people on the internet. I applaud you and your wonderful debates. And no, I'm not being sarcastic. This is probably the most entertaining thread I've ever read on NL.

By default, if Nintendo bowed out of the console/handheld business, I'd throw my support to Sony. After all, the PlayStation was originally going to be part of the Super Nintendo, so it would be the next closest thing in my warped mind. Already, while I favor Nintendo by far, I've owned PS, PS2, PS3, PSP, and will one day get a Vita. So, while I'd be in mourning and likely wear all-black for at least a year, I'd back Sony.

That said, my future support would depend on Nintendo. In the end, despite the unimaginable event of them leaving the video game system business, I'd still primarily be a Nintendo supporter. Thus, I would mostly support whichever console/handheld maker that Nintendo ultimately made the most games for. If they divided their support between Sony and Microsoft, I'd go Sony.

Unless their support goes to Apple, and they haven't learned by then that touch screen-only controls make games completely unplayable and miserable. In which case Nintendo and I would part ways. If everything is touch screen and social gaming by then, I'll hang up my joystick and find a new hobby, or become a retro-only gamer.

Mentioning the parallels with Sega and Dreamcast does worry me. Not only was Dreamcast their last console, about a decade later, Sega is barely staying afloat even as a third party developer. Last I heard, they were in so much trouble that they are now only making things like Sonic, which are sure-fire hits.

Truest words I've seen you say on this forum

You know, when a company focuses on many different departments, it doesn't mean one of those departments won't go bankrupt. They do have demacations, albeit low ones, I admit. The only thing that saves their a**es is the fact that they have other departments to bring in excess funds from - but with the way things are going in the economy nowadays, I wouldn't slap on the "impossible" tag on Sony and Microsoft just yet on the sole basis of the fact that they don't just focus on games.

But hey, two cents. Two cents.

You do realize that Microsoft just put 5 million down for grabbing exculuwive games for next gen. As well W's they did a 8.5 million buyoit of skype last year, a as well as there being a rumored billion dollar buyout of yammer and the looming inevitable buyout of nokia.

How do you think thexbox Dickson survived the giant losses it took on.

Microsoft has a lot of bussiness that's make alot of money. If its said nintendo could take nintendo about 3 generations worth or flops to die imagine how much it would take the other guys.

If nintendo left the gaming industry, I wouldn't probably play video games anymore

@Sony_70 your right, unfortunately those "gaming" companies like Microsoft and Sony have enough money to gamble on, at least WAY more than Nintendo, Nintendo is big for a video game company, but compared to the likes of Sony and Microsoft, there very tiny

If Microsoft bowed out, I wouldn't bat an eyelash.

If Sony bowed out, I would be excited because all of those IPs would have to go somewhere. There has been some discussion that Sony's been future-proofing themselves by picking up strong IPs for if and when they drop out of the console business, especially considering how badly their business is on fire right now. I would love to be able to play a lot of Sony-centric games on a Nintendo console. I would be slightly worried too, since less competition isn't a good thing.

If Nintendo bowed out, I'd be pretty crushed. It's one of those things where Nintendo consoles have been with me since I was a little kid. I know they're a corporation, consoles are just dumb boxes and that they're trying to take as much of my money as possible, but Nintendo consoles and playing their IPs on them are lifelong memories and familiarity.

I wasn't. I simply asked a "What If?" question similar to the one that this entire thread is based around and he basically replied with "Not possible, move on." The other companies being more financially stable doesn't have anything to do with the question I asked. The other companies not being solely based around videogames ISN'T what I asked. I asked WHAT IF they dropped out.

WHAT IF.

A "What If?" question doesn't have to be in the realm of possiblity. "I don't know" IS an acceptable answer if you don't see the certain situation ever happening, but not "This isn't possible, so I won't worry about it." In a "What If" scenario, you PRETEND the scenario COULD happen and then explain WHAT you WOULD do IF it WAS REAL.

So once again @Knux, WHAT IF Microsoft or Sony stopped making GAMING SYSTEMS and became a third party developer?

How could Microsoft and Sony become third party? They don't even make their own games, they just publish them all. All the developers owned by them would have their games on other systems yeah, but they've already been going back and forth between game systems. But in your context, I definitely think for Sony that would be more of a big deal. If Microsoft went "third party" we just would have Halo on a non-Microsoft game system, woo.

Would suck if any if the big three fell.

[/div]

... what?

Once a publisher acquires a developer, the publisher owns the developer. The developer is a part of the publisher's business.

Rare is no longer Rare. It is Rare, a subsidiary of Microsoft. The games that Rare makes are games that Microsoft has made. Same goes for Lionhead, same went for Ensemble. Same goes for Naughty Dog, Media Molecule, and the range of developers that Sony owns that has Sony in the name (Sony Online, SCE Japan, SCE London).

By your logic games by Intelligent Systems, Retro, HAL and Monolith Software don't belong to Nintendo. Nintendo just publishes them, amirite?

In a hypothetical, were Microsoft to go third party, what happens to Rare and the IPs it has created since being a part of Microsoft would be the decision of Microsoft management.

Well, Microsoft did license a few of their games on DS (Age of Empires, Mech Assault and even Viva Pinata Pocket Paradise). Just interesting how they allowed their properties on DS.. Then again, during the time, MS didn't have anything in the portable space to compete with DS. It's also interesting how they refused to license their games on PSP, blatantly stating that.

Oh, and those games were published by Majesco except VP which was by THQ. Doubt they'll bring games to 3DS now that they have Windows Phones going.

I'd like to see this happen.

I could buy a PS4/5/6/whatever and still be able to play Nintendo games. A sony console was the first console I remember owning , so the "Playstation" franchise has a special place in my heart, but I can generally only afford 1 home console per generation and Nintendo usually gets it.

They still wouldn't be competitors in the same fields, dedicated portable gaming and phone gaming are two different consumer marketplaces. It'd smart for Microsoft to allow their IPs to be released on Sony and Nintendo portables.

I wouldn't care if any of them dropped out. I don't have any 'loyalty' to any of those companies.

I would simply stick with the highest quality product available at the time, like I do any other time.