By the way, there will come a point where graphics are so realistic that that games will look like today's movies... think about it... :/
It actually might be possible next gen. Square Enix has already developed a photo-realistic engine that could have some use in the near future If Wii U can do this though....that's another thing entirely.
This years E3 sucked. Current rumor is that Mircosoft is going to show off the new Xbox at ces (consumer electronic show) next month. Major nelson has been randomly tweeting about ces since last month.
Also at CES mircosoft is fully unveiling Windows 8 and the Nokia Windows phone 7's. Its thought that the nextbox will be running windows 8 and this would be the place to show the three screened approach.
Xbox running Windows? Might as well just call it a PC then.
That's the way Microsoft's strategy has been for the past few years. To have all of its divisions and technologies working together in unified platforms and with interconnected technologies.
That's what Microsoft has been doing with its corporate strategy, and that's what its doing with its far less significant consumer electronics strategy.
Graphically, I suppose. But only because graphics are an unneeded luxury. I would much rather them continue with the innovative games and peripherals than start making sure their games look as nice as possible and sacrifice the innovation. Take a game like Crysis, for example. It obviously looks amazing, no doubt about it. The campaign is pretty cool, albeit short. But after that, you have a cool enough map creator and a multiplayer that doesn't really do anything special. If the game looked half as good as it does, I bet it would have a lot more content and replay value.
You could point out that Nintendo used to be equal or even on top graphically compared to other companies. Well, then, there was a standard that needed to be met. That standard happened to be really high for them. Now, not so much. At the beginning of the generation, HD was growing but not the biggest thing out there. Now, almost everyone has it, so the standard has been raised. I'm sure that by the end of this generation there will be some other mind-blowing technology that they will need to implement later on, but right now, it's not that important.
Nintendo - Where even first person shooters ooze creativity.
This years E3 sucked. Current rumor is that Mircosoft is going to show off the new Xbox at ces (consumer electronic show) next month. Major nelson has been randomly tweeting about ces since last month.
Also at CES mircosoft is fully unveiling Windows 8 and the Nokia Windows phone 7's. Its thought that the nextbox will be running windows 8 and this would be the place to show the three screened approach.
Xbox running Windows? Might as well just call it a PC then.
That's the way Microsoft's strategy has been for the past few years. To have all of its divisions and technologies working together in unified platforms and with interconnected technologies.
That's what Microsoft has been doing with its corporate strategy, and that's what its doing with its far less significant consumer electronics strategy.
Well I'm just glad Sony isn't trying to turn the PlayStation brand into a mini-PC. It's fine adding media-player functionality as a compliment to games (it is an "entertainment system" after all), but turning it into an actual PC defeats the purpose of game systems.
This years E3 sucked. Current rumor is that Mircosoft is going to show off the new Xbox at ces (consumer electronic show) next month. Major nelson has been randomly tweeting about ces since last month.
Also at CES mircosoft is fully unveiling Windows 8 and the Nokia Windows phone 7's. Its thought that the nextbox will be running windows 8 and this would be the place to show the three screened approach.
Xbox running Windows? Might as well just call it a PC then.
That's the way Microsoft's strategy has been for the past few years. To have all of its divisions and technologies working together in unified platforms and with interconnected technologies.
That's what Microsoft has been doing with its corporate strategy, and that's what its doing with its far less significant consumer electronics strategy.
Well I'm just glad Sony isn't trying to turn the PlayStation brand into a mini-PC. It's fine adding media-player functionality as a compliment to games (it is an "entertainment system" after all), but turning it into an actual PC defeats the purpose of game systems.
So I just imagined that Sony was putting its PlayStation brand into its phones and tablet devices ("mini-PCs"), then.
This years E3 sucked. Current rumor is that Mircosoft is going to show off the new Xbox at ces (consumer electronic show) next month. Major nelson has been randomly tweeting about ces since last month.
Also at CES mircosoft is fully unveiling Windows 8 and the Nokia Windows phone 7's. Its thought that the nextbox will be running windows 8 and this would be the place to show the three screened approach.
Xbox running Windows? Might as well just call it a PC then.
That's the way Microsoft's strategy has been for the past few years. To have all of its divisions and technologies working together in unified platforms and with interconnected technologies.
That's what Microsoft has been doing with its corporate strategy, and that's what its doing with its far less significant consumer electronics strategy.
Well I'm just glad Sony isn't trying to turn the PlayStation brand into a mini-PC. It's fine adding media-player functionality as a compliment to games (it is an "entertainment system" after all), but turning it into an actual PC defeats the purpose of game systems.
So I just imagined that Sony was putting its PlayStation brand into its phones and tablet devices ("mini-PCs"), then.
Phones are not PC's. They're communication devices.
And what Sony is doing on that front is trying to make the brand more noticable to a wider audience. The core of the PlayStation brand will always be game systems. It's the same thing that Microsoft is doing by putting Xbox Live on Windows Phone 7.
Phones are not PC's. They're communication devices.
And what Sony is doing on that front is trying to make the brand more noticeable to a wider audience. The core of the PlayStation brand will always be game systems. It's the same thing that Microsoft is doing by putting Xbox Live on Windows Phone 7.
No. What Sony is trying to do is tie its PlayStation brand in more closely with its PC and mobile division.
These days where you need a thousand different devices to do one thing each are numbered. Thankfully so. Cross-purpose devices that make use of entertainment services (PlayStation is being transitioned to be a service, not tied in with hardware, XBLA and Amazon Kindle being two other examples) are infinitely more useful for the consumer than having "one box there to play games, one box there for music, one box there for computing, one box there for computing on the go, one box there for archives, one box there for making phone calls, another box over there for email."
Phones are not PC's. They're communication devices.
And what Sony is doing on that front is trying to make the brand more noticeable to a wider audience. The core of the PlayStation brand will always be game systems. It's the same thing that Microsoft is doing by putting Xbox Live on Windows Phone 7.
No. What Sony is trying to do is tie its PlayStation brand in more closely with its PC and mobile division.
These days where you need a thousand different devices to do one thing each are numbered. Thankfully so. Cross-purpose devices that make use of entertainment services (PlayStation is being transitioned to be a service, not tied in with hardware, XBLA and Amazon Kindle being two other examples) are infinitely more useful for the consumer than having "one box there to play games, one box there for music, one box there for computing, one box there for computing on the go, one box there for archives, one box there for making phone calls, another box over there for email."
PlayStation Suite is a software platform for Android devices that shares the brand "PlayStation", but it is not going to replace PlayStation hardware. Otherwise Sony would have no reason to make the PS Vita.
Xbox Live is nothing more than a software-distribution platform and online network that's tied to Xbox brand of game systems. If Microsoft or Sony were going to quit making hardware and only focus on software distribution, we would have heard about it already. But we have the PS Vita coming out, which goes against what you're trying to say. And the next Xbox is coming out in a few years.
Also, Xbox 360 and PS3 are already multi-purpose devices capable of playing music, movies, etc., but their core purpose is for playing games.
Phones are not PC's. They're communication devices.
And what Sony is doing on that front is trying to make the brand more noticeable to a wider audience. The core of the PlayStation brand will always be game systems. It's the same thing that Microsoft is doing by putting Xbox Live on Windows Phone 7.
No. What Sony is trying to do is tie its PlayStation brand in more closely with its PC and mobile division.
These days where you need a thousand different devices to do one thing each are numbered. Thankfully so. Cross-purpose devices that make use of entertainment services (PlayStation is being transitioned to be a service, not tied in with hardware, XBLA and Amazon Kindle being two other examples) are infinitely more useful for the consumer than having "one box there to play games, one box there for music, one box there for computing, one box there for computing on the go, one box there for archives, one box there for making phone calls, another box over there for email."
PlayStation Suite is a software platform for Android devices that shares the brand "PlayStation", but it is not going to replace PlayStation hardware. Otherwise Sony would have no reason to make the PS Vita.
Xbox Live is nothing more than a software-distribution platform and online network that's tied to Xbox brand of game systems. If Microsoft or Sony were going to quit making hardware and only focus on software distribution, we would have heard about it already. But we have the PS Vita coming out, which goes against what you're trying to say. And the next Xbox is coming out in a few years.
Also, Xbox 360 and PS3 are already multi-purpose devices capable of playing music, movies, etc., but their core purpose is for playing games.
It's cute that you assume these things happen overnight. Or in one generation of hardware. I know these companies well, and I know exactly what they're doing. Device convergeance is high on the priority list.
Those "analysts" are just blowing smoke. Each company has their own strategy and no one is playing "catch up" to the others. Nintendo sure as heck wasn't catching up to anyone this past gen when they made the most hardware sales.
Why didn't this thread just end here?
This^.
Just for you. "I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury
To answer the topic question: Will Nintendo Always Be Playing Catch-Up to Other Companies?
In terms of innovation... No, Nintendo is in fact a leader in gaming.
In terms of technology/console horsepower... Yes, because it's more profitable for them to not compete with others when it comes to technology/console horsepower. Case in point, Nintendo has and likely will continue to make a profit from their consoles when first released.
It is my opinion that their focus should remain on innovation and pushing the software envelope as that has proved to be their most profitable business model in their last 2-3 decades in the gaming industry.
While reading the exchange between tendoboy1984 and YellowChocobo, I am reminded of this quote I saw the other day.
YellowChocobo wrote:
I love watching then blind leading the blind...
There really is no sense in arguing with someone who cannot see a POV besides their own.
Edit: Sorry for the constant edits, this was horribly formatted and hard for me to read.
I love how you act like you know more than practically everyone else here. Sure MS and Sony might be heading in that direction eventually, but it won't happen for a long time. And just because the platforms go digital, you still need hardware to play it on.
Look at iTunes/the App Store: you still need an iPod, iPad, iPhone to play the content you downloaded.
Or maybe you're thinking of a future where everything streams directly to your TV... It is happening on a case-by-case basis (Netflix, Hulu, Youtube). But for EVERYTHING to go completely digital (whether streaming or download), you still need high bandwidth, fast broadband speed, a global network infrastructure, no data caps, etc.
No sense in arguing with someone who cannot see a POV besides their own.
You talking about me, or YellowChocobo? He's talking about things that may or may not happen, based on his perceived ideas for the future. I'm talking about the present. It's pointless to speculate about the future, for you never know what could happen.
A couple decades ago, I never would have imagined that Sony or Microsoft would be huge players in the console industry, or that Sega would give up on hardware.
I love how you act like you know more than practically everyone else here. Sure MS and Sony might be heading in that direction eventually, but it won't happen for a long time. And just because the platforms go digital, you still need hardware to play it on.
Look at iTunes/the App Store: you still need an iPod, iPad, iPhone to play the content you downloaded.
Or maybe you're thinking of a future where everything streams directly to your TV... It is happening on a case-by-case basis (Netflix, Hulu, Youtube). But for EVERYTHING to go completely digital (whether streaming or download), you still need high bandwidth, fast broadband speed, a global network infrastructure, no data caps, etc.
What makes you think it's an act? I do this stuff day in day out and I talk to the heads of these companies. I've been to Microsoft's global conferences where it lays out its plans for the future. This is my job, so I would hope I knew more about it than anyone else here.
The problem is that someone always has to argue with me.
The point I was making, and the point which you didn't want to understand, is that both the Xbox and PlayStation brands are not going to be tied to hardware in the future. They're going to be cloud software products, much like the App Store or Amazon Kindle is now, where you buy into a service, and then access it from whatever device suits you at the time.
The days where you'll have a box sitting there in front of a TV called a PlayStation or Xbox, and the only thing it does is play games, and you can't access those games from any other device anywhere else, are numbered. Both Sony and Microsoft have come right out and said this is what happens.
I never said that's the case now. But then if you look back I was responding to your silly comment that "may as well call the Xbox a PC." That's exactly what is going to happen, and it's not a bad thing.
This doesn't have anything to do with points of view or my own personal opinion. I am repeating to you what Microsoft, Sony and Apple have all made clear as their strategies going forward.
I love how you act like you know more than practically everyone else here. Sure MS and Sony might be heading in that direction eventually, but it won't happen for a long time. And just because the platforms go digital, you still need hardware to play it on.
Look at iTunes/the App Store: you still need an iPod, iPad, iPhone to play the content you downloaded.
Or maybe you're thinking of a future where everything streams directly to your TV... It is happening on a case-by-case basis (Netflix, Hulu, Youtube). But for EVERYTHING to go completely digital (whether streaming or download), you still need high bandwidth, fast broadband speed, a global network infrastructure, no data caps, etc.
What makes you think it's an act? I do this stuff day in day out and I talk to the heads of these companies. I've been to Microsoft's global conferences where it lays out its plans for the future. This is my job, so I would hope I knew more about it than anyone else here.
The problem is that someone always has to argue with me.
The point I was making, and the point which you didn't want to understand, is that both the Xbox and PlayStation brands are not going to be tied to hardware in the future. They're going to be cloud software products, much like the App Store or Amazon Kindle is now, where you buy into a service, and then access it from whatever device suits you at the time.
The days where you'll have a box sitting there in front of a TV called a PlayStation or Xbox, and the only thing it does is play games, and you can't access those games from any other device anywhere else, are numbered. Both Sony and Microsoft have come right out and said this is what happens.
I never said that's the case now. But then if you look back I was responding to your silly comment that "may as well call the Xbox a PC." That's exactly what is going to happen, and it's not a bad thing.
This doesn't have anything to do with points of view or my own personal opinion. I am repeating to you what Microsoft, Sony and Apple have all made clear as their strategies going forward.
If Microsoft and Sony want digital distribution/cloud streaming to be the future, then why don't they just join forces and make it happen? True cross-platform play is something people have been wanting since the beginning of the gaming industry. Can't Sony and Microsoft just buddy up and do that? For decades we've had competing hardware companies making consoles that won't play each others games, meaning we'd have to buy the same game for different consoles.
And iCloud is still tied with Apple's mobile devices. Apple is very restrictive on that sort of thing.
I love how you act like you know more than practically everyone else here. Sure MS and Sony might be heading in that direction eventually, but it won't happen for a long time. And just because the platforms go digital, you still need hardware to play it on.
Look at iTunes/the App Store: you still need an iPod, iPad, iPhone to play the content you downloaded.
Or maybe you're thinking of a future where everything streams directly to your TV... It is happening on a case-by-case basis (Netflix, Hulu, Youtube). But for EVERYTHING to go completely digital (whether streaming or download), you still need high bandwidth, fast broadband speed, a global network infrastructure, no data caps, etc.
What makes you think it's an act? I do this stuff day in day out and I talk to the heads of these companies. I've been to Microsoft's global conferences where it lays out its plans for the future. This is my job, so I would hope I knew more about it than anyone else here.
The problem is that someone always has to argue with me.
The point I was making, and the point which you didn't want to understand, is that both the Xbox and PlayStation brands are not going to be tied to hardware in the future. They're going to be cloud software products, much like the App Store or Amazon Kindle is now, where you buy into a service, and then access it from whatever device suits you at the time.
The days where you'll have a box sitting there in front of a TV called a PlayStation or Xbox, and the only thing it does is play games, and you can't access those games from any other device anywhere else, are numbered. Both Sony and Microsoft have come right out and said this is what happens.
I never said that's the case now. But then if you look back I was responding to your silly comment that "may as well call the Xbox a PC." That's exactly what is going to happen, and it's not a bad thing.
This doesn't have anything to do with points of view or my own personal opinion. I am repeating to you what Microsoft, Sony and Apple have all made clear as their strategies going forward.
If Microsoft and Sony want digital distribution/cloud streaming to be the future, then why don't they just join forces and make it happen? True cross-platform play is something people have been wanting since the beginning of the gaming industry. Can't Sony and Microsoft just buddy up and do that? For decades we've had competing hardware companies making consoles that won't play each others games, meaning we'd have to buy the same game for different consoles.
And iCloud is still tied with Apple's mobile devices. Apple is very restrictive on that sort of thing.
Because bringing two billion dollar companies together doesn't "just happen"? Sony and Microsoft have very different ideas in terms of they want these things to work, too. Lions and Tigers both want to eat meat too, that doesn't mean you can stick them together and expect them to just start working together.
As for iCloud, it didn't even exist until six months ago. Once again these things take time to happen. The Mac App store game later to the party too. With the Apple TV looking certain and with future developments to the iCloud network, it will become more encompasing.
Because bringing two billion dollar companies together doesn't "just happen"? Sony and Microsoft have very different ideas in terms of they want these things to work, too. Lions and Tigers both want to eat meat too, that doesn't mean you can stick them together and expect them to just start working together.
Ok so explain Microsoft and Sony's ideas for their future of cloud gaming/digital distribution. Or is that confidential?
If you know so much about what Sony and Microsoft's motives are, then why are other gaming media sites posting nothing more than speculation and guesswork? No one knows what will happen in the next 10 years, it's all speculation at this point.
Forums
Topic: Will Nintendo Always Be Playing Catch-Up to Other Companies?
Posts 121 to 140 of 142
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.