The Response

So, I posted a while back on what I think about the current generation of consoles. Earlier today Justin decided that he was going to post some comments. Some were in refutation of what I was saying. So this is a refutation of a refutation.

You neglected to mention that no one buys consoles unless they have the games they want to buy for them. No good games, no systems sold.

Yes, in the long run I suppose this is true. However in the short run there really haven't been any block busters. The 360 sold just fine and its #1 game is CoD2. You can get that for Mac even. People still play Halo 2 which is works perfectly fine on the original Xbox. Not until Gears came out was there finally a game that ousted the last gen shooter. A whole year of next gen and there was no must have next gen title. But the 360 still sold, for a whole year. Yeah the PS2 had a lot of block buster games, but that was very much in the long run. With or without great games all of the systems sold out. Even the Wii which had the most to sell and the least exciting games all sold out. And these aren't casual gamers who stand in line or bid on ebay. Bottom line: yeah great games sell in the long run, but just having the console sells it out.

but the future for gaming is always going online these days.

Good point. While it is not essential for games to go online for success. Half life. (Though most of its mods are online play) It will be essential for a console to support online games. Interestingly enough the Xbox had that great Xbox live, but still didn't win last generation.

Will Nintendo pick up non-gamers and make them gamers?

Who cares, they sold out with the gamers alone. Whether or not they get the gamers or not they have made money and don't have to make anything up on the games. I'm not really a gamer and it looked like something fun. But thats what Sony did already with the Play Station. Its a DVD player too, its not like a NES its like a VCR.

So here is that link that says Xbox 360 makes $76 per unit and PS3 loses $306 per unit. http://www.videogamesblogger.com/2006/11/16/ps3-loses-up-to-306-per-unit-xbox-360-profits-76-per-sale.htm

Yes, indeed you are correct. However, this was not always true. Way back last year they were loosing over $100 per system. And even now they are down over a Billion capital B. I don't have evidence, but I seriously doubt they broke even on the last Xbox. Flat out anyone who thinks that Microsoft's Xbox division has anything to do with making games is a fool. Yeah, I mean they make games, but in the end MS has only on game: OS. Their past dealings with Netscape, current dealings with Google are all about one thing, protecting Windows. Whatever they loose in producing a free web browser, a high tech web search or a next gen system all has to do with keeping their cash cow. MS's business is plain and simple Windows. Xbox division all about Windows. It doesn't matter how much they gain or loose as long as they keep Sony in check.

On consoles selling out... PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii all sold out initially. The people who buy those systems are the fans of those systems, customer loyalty. Those totals were 400,000 for PS3 in the US and like 500,000 for the Wii and Xbox 360 shippe dlike 1/2 a million at launch last year and sold out too.

If consoles survive on customer loyalty then Atari would still be around (original). There are some posts floating around digg.com that PS3 sales are slumping in Japan while the Wii stays strong. In the first week alone 600,000 Wii's in the US were sold. And thats not the Wii's primary market. Where as the 360 sold about that many in its primary market. Nintendo is promising 4 million Wii's by years end. And they keep selling. Many of the PS3's markets such as Australia have yet to see the console in any great number.

What the crap, now you need a wireless router to use the Wii on the internet, why not an ethernet cable?

Wii + Router = $300
360 + Ethernet cable = $400+
Next.

Ok I'll hit this one more. What about dial up people? Where is the modem? No one has them anymore. Its not a rare thing anymore. The Lee household has been a wireless hotspot for a while. So has the Schwartz. Additionally the Baldwin household. For goodness sake a router is the cost of one months DSL payment nearly.

Okok, just once more. 360 + Ethernet + Xbox live = $499+ (depending on the package. Eventually it will hit atleast $499)

Ok I promise last one. The Wii is really little, rather cute. Ethernet cables are lame. Really lame. And annoying. Not to mention that if you want to use a computer and your console at the same time you already need a router. Why not just upgrade to wireless? Its really very clever. DS already has it and no one complained. Meh. Oh btw if anyone wants I can make custom length patch cables if you like. You know so that you can run that 170 foot line from the office upstairs to the den in the basement. Did I mention that patch cables are lame? Remember all the fun we had running cables over (and out of) Lang? I would just miss that so much.

At least Nintendo is just a gaming machine, like old school. Now the others are multimedia machines:

True, but thats not all bad for the other systems. Many people are making what are called Home Theater PC's. They are basically a way to take all of your movies and music that are on your computer and bring them into the living room. This is a very good alternative to be honest.

Blue-Ray is not a Sony format, they are just in the malgomation of companies supporting it.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Section-14009/Index.html

True Sony is part of a mix. (amalgamation) On the other hand, Sony is clearly the spearhead of bluray. They started it, everyone else joined in. Sony is not a dumb company. Every one mocked them for creating a system that was so expensive. One digg story stated (I don't necessarily hold to this) that Sony would have to sell half a million of every game to break even. Sony like Microsoft isn't in the business of charity to gamers. Blu ray if anything will be the death of Sony's gaming division. It costs too much, it hindered production, its a ship with holes in it from a gaming only stand point. Yet, Sony has a bigger picture in mind. What could it be? Obviously Blu Ray. They aren't going to basically give away systems just to be nice to gamers. There is profit to be made. If they are to loose hundreds of millions they expect to make it up somewhere. Clearly they won't make it back in games. Where else will they make their money from? If there is nothing for Sony to gain from Blu Ray they are utterly senseless in adding it to the PS3. You could argue about all the extra space and so on and so forth. Yet last I checked Oblivion fit on one DVD. I don't want to play a game longer than that.

For Sony the console war is about winning the format war.

For Microsoft the console war is about keeping the Play Station from hurting PC sales.

For Nintendo the console war is about making games.

For far too long now, people all over Digg and Dot and Blogs and whatnot have been calling Sony dumb for insisting on putting Blu Ray in the PS3. This is both nearsighted and ignorant. Whatever decision Sony makes is deliberate and with a reason. Even if it takes sacrificing the Play Station line, Sony is determined to win the Blu Ray war. Why else would MS hold so strongly to HD DVD? Why else would they deem DVD good enough for the 360? Even the HD DVD add on doesn't play game disks. Why? Bc Blu Ray isn't about games. The games are just a clever way for Sony to get the ball rolling for their format. Don't you think beta max still looms in their memory? It was only a few decades ago. They lost out, big. They won't do it again. Blu Ray wins. Windows lives on. Nintendo survives another generation.

The bottom line is the bottom line.