11-18-2004, 06:14 AM
Before anyone else jumps on the "beat on Sony" bandwagon I'd like to point out that it is Nintendo's fault that Sony got into the game business at all. Nintendo and Sony had been working on a joint venture to make a CD based game system but Nintendo backed out and decided to work on a cartridge based system instead (N64) which left Sony hanging in the breeze. Considering they had already made large investements in research, Sony finished the development and launched the PS1.
That was a mistake for Nintendo and a smart move by Sony. From there, Sony continued with smart moves by negotiating with top developers and making sure there are lots of great games available for their platform. When they researched the PS2, they used the profits from the PS1 and when they sell a new PS2 unit, they make a profit from it... this is good business practice.
As for Sega, they are still in the video game business. They just got out of the consoles and have been focusing on the software. This was a smart move for them because they have a larger audience to sell to and we benefit from this because Sega develops some great games.
My only complaint with a company is M$ and the way they have been doing business. They decided to get into the game industry and are determined to take it over. They courted a number of developers away from other platforms with lucarative contracts, deprived other systems from some solid games. The biggest offense in my eyes is the fact that they continue to sell every unit at a loss trying to gain market shares rather than running a business plan that requires them to make a profit. Undercutting is one thing but to run a negative profit line just to stay in the game doesn't make sense to me. At least we can buy them as cheap computers and enjoy a few great games as a result of their agressiveness.
Lastly... if I have to admire any game company, it's Neo Geo. The fact that they held on for so long catering to hard core gamers is worth my admiration. Anyone who has actually played a Neo Geo knows what a quality game machine is. Too bad they couldn't keep it up.
That was a mistake for Nintendo and a smart move by Sony. From there, Sony continued with smart moves by negotiating with top developers and making sure there are lots of great games available for their platform. When they researched the PS2, they used the profits from the PS1 and when they sell a new PS2 unit, they make a profit from it... this is good business practice.
As for Sega, they are still in the video game business. They just got out of the consoles and have been focusing on the software. This was a smart move for them because they have a larger audience to sell to and we benefit from this because Sega develops some great games.
My only complaint with a company is M$ and the way they have been doing business. They decided to get into the game industry and are determined to take it over. They courted a number of developers away from other platforms with lucarative contracts, deprived other systems from some solid games. The biggest offense in my eyes is the fact that they continue to sell every unit at a loss trying to gain market shares rather than running a business plan that requires them to make a profit. Undercutting is one thing but to run a negative profit line just to stay in the game doesn't make sense to me. At least we can buy them as cheap computers and enjoy a few great games as a result of their agressiveness.
Lastly... if I have to admire any game company, it's Neo Geo. The fact that they held on for so long catering to hard core gamers is worth my admiration. Anyone who has actually played a Neo Geo knows what a quality game machine is. Too bad they couldn't keep it up.
Gullible isn't in the dictionary.