Sony believed that they had so much market share that they could make a console that was leaps and bounds more complicated to code for, which would lock devs in and prevent them from going elsewhere, and they’d just have to suck it up because of said market share. Sony was wrong, and they lost out big time that generation (although they did manage to win the Blu-ray vs hd-dvd format wars).
Microsoft seems to believe they have so much market share that they can force people to upgrade to a privacy invading, ai infested piece of crap, and that everyone needs to suck it up because market share.
I’ve already started hearing wind that people, in statistically significant numbers, are finding alternatives… so is this the same situation as the ps3?
Just a passing musing without much to back up the gut feelings.
Well unless Sony was aiming for mums and dad’s who had never played games before yeah no… They were not competing.
The Wii wasn’t Nintendo’s first console. The fuck do you think Nintendo is?
No shit… But the Wii was aimed at a different audience. They used to make playing cards but the PS3 wasn’t competing against that either. It’s about what market they are targeting. Lamborghini makes super cars acts competes with Ferrari, but they also make tractors and that’s not up against the latest Ferrari HyperCar.
lol playing cards… Just admit you have no fucking clue about Nintendo. This obstinant shit is just pathetic.
(yes, Nintendo did make playing cards, but pretending the NES, SNES, N64, GameBoy, and all related consoles and handhelds didn’t exist before is just pathetic of you. Seriously, get a clue. Nintendo have been competitors in consoles and handhelds longer than Sony)