What's the deal?

[corn619]

Sony and Microsoft were a few of the final large nails in Sega's coffin. We are still bitter.

Maybe so, but Sony only entered the game because of Nintendo dicking them over, while Sega was happy to put in a few of their own nails into that coffin while trying to beat Nintendo.

Face it(and I don't mean just Breetai, I mean all of us): they all suck, and they've all done things we're quick to denounce them for unless they happen to be that one company that we consider "sacred." Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, and Atari have all done nasty things in their day to try to win. Ultimately fanboyism is stupid, pointless, and merely helps to continue the vicious cycle while also continuing to foster the pathetic arguments that plague video game forums everyone over whose console sucks more because a corporate name is stuck to it.

They all have their pros and cons. Let's suck it up, get over it, and go play some games.

Well said Ack.

[Opa Opa]

Let's suck it up, get over it, and go play some games.

You just ended 75% of all topics in every video game forum.

[alienjesus]

Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, and Atari have all done nasty things in their day to try to win.

Did atari ever stop doing nasty things?

Anyhow, I agree totally with the sentiment of your post.

[EvilRyu2099]

Sony and Microsoft were a few of the final large nails in Sega's coffin. We are still bitter.

I agree with sony, but I don't think MS had anything to do with the demise of Sega..

[EvilRyu2099]

Maybe so, but Sony only entered the game because of Nintendo dicking them over, while Sega was happy to put in a few of their own nails into that coffin while trying to beat Nintendo.

Face it(and I don't mean just Breetai, I mean all of us): they all suck, and they've all done things we're quick to denounce them for unless they happen to be that one company that we consider "sacred." Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, and Atari have all done nasty things in their day to try to win. Ultimately fanboyism is stupid, pointless, and merely helps to continue the vicious cycle while also continuing to foster the pathetic arguments that plague video game forums everyone over whose console sucks more because a corporate name is stuck to it.

They all have their pros and cons. Let's suck it up, get over it, and go play some games.

I totally agree... Not one point you made is false IMO..

[flamepanther]

I'll bite. I have a feeling this topic is partially aimed at me anyway.

First of all, I don't personally have any major animosity toward Microsoft. I can take or leave them, either way. Sony can more or less burn, for all I care. The few negative things that I think apply to both Microsoft and Sony equally are high product defect rates, catering especially to Joe Sixpack, and a general lack of vision and originality relative to Nintendo and console makers of the past.

I also think I have an uneasiness about both of them because at heart, they are gaming outsiders, and now they are in control. From the beginning, all of the most successful game consoles (and even a lot of unsuccessful ones!) were made by people that made games. From Atari's Pong console, to the 2600, to the Master System, to the NES, to the Neo Geo, and so on. Even NEC's PC Engine had Hudson's involvement. The equipment was built by or with input from game developers. Being game development companies, they should have a pretty good idea what equipment would give developers (especially their own) a good environment. Sony and Microsoft?

[insert cricket chirping sound]

I will at least give Microsoft credit for actively listening to the complaints and suggestions of gamers and developers. I hope the need to poll these groups and cater to them so attentively is a sign of (partially) good intentions, but it also shows they do not inherently understand what a game console really ought to be. At least they seem to know this.

Sony on the other hand has up to now had madman Ken Kutaragi in charge of console design. Kutaragi was known for being conceited about his work, bitterly unreceptive to criticism, and an all-around antagonistic ego-maniacal wacko. After two generations of mediocre hardware, I will admit that the PS3 is finally a very nice machine. However, the PS3 was designed for the glorification of Kutaragi's self-styled design genius, not for the needs of consumers (his version cost $600!) or developers (let's make it REALLY hard to develop for!). It cost Kutaragi his position. It's not a very promising history, but I'd love to see them humble themselves enough to change course now that Kutaragi is out of the picture. In the meantime, having this group in charge of the last two console generations has been sad and frightening.

Above all, I don't like that both of these companies view their consoles as merely appliances and lifestyle items. Their corporate interest is more about having a strategy to control what technology goes in your living room entertainment center than than about really making a good game console. We know this because both companies have said so at some point or another.

I've got more to say about just Sony, but I'll leave that for later, since I'm already at risk of TLDR.

Maybe so, but Sony only entered the game because of Nintendo dicking them over[...]

...which Nintendo did because Sony tried to dick Nintendo over first. There was a clause hidden in their contract that stipulated Sony would have all the publishing rights for games on the Nintendo/Sony CD add-on. When Nintendo found out, they freaked over it and voided the contract like anyone should have expected them to. Nintendo has made some dick moves, and they've paid for most of them, but that one really seems justified, IMO. What they did to Phillips was just bad though. I won't attempt to sugar-coat that.

[EvilRyu2099]

which Nintendo did because Sony tried to dick Nintendo over first. There was a clause hidden in their contract that stipulated Sony would have all the publishing rights for games on the Nintendo/Sony CD add-on. When Nintendo found out, they freaked over it and voided the contract like anyone should have expected them to. Nintendo has made some dick moves, and they've paid for most of them, but that one really seems justified, IMO. What they did to Phillips was just bad though. I won't attempt to sugar-coat that.

They voided the contract without Sony's knowledge.. In fact Sony didn't even notice that they weren't working with Nintendo until, Nintendo announced at E3 that they were working with phillips.. That was an extremely dick move..

[flamepanther]

They voided the contract without Sony's knowledge.. In fact Sony didn't even notice that they weren't working with Nintendo until, Nintendo announced at E3 that they were working with phillips.. That was an extremely dick move..

"You tried to slip one past us, so we slipped one past you" basically. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play. Nintendo even tried to offer Sony a role in the Nintendo-Phillips partnership, but Sony refused. It suggests at least some degree of remorse or magnanimity on Nintendo's part, if only very little. Ultimately, it was just business.

On the other hand, per this article, the senior members of Sony's board were against Kutaragi's non-Nintendo Playstation until "Eventually, Sony President Ohga decided to retain the project after being reminded by Kutaragi of the humiliation he suffered from Nintendo." That's a pure Darth Sidious style "dark side" moment right there, and this is coming from an extremely pro-Sony article. It's a product born admittedly and explicitly out of hatred and revenge. I can't think of any other game console with an origin quite that... I'll say it: evil.

[EvilRyu2099]

That's a pure Darth Sidious style "dark side" moment right there, and this is coming from an extremely pro-Sony article. It's a product born admittedly and explicitly out of hatred and revenge. I can't think of any other game console with an origin quite that... I'll say it: evil.

So it's evil that they wanted to start in the business and compete with Nintendo because they were screwed by them?

[flamepanther]

So it's evil that they wanted to start in the business and compete with Nintendo because they were screwed by them?

Sony had some options here as far as motivation, not all of which were evil. For example:

NOT EVIL: Wanting to compete with Nintendo in order to prove they could stand on their own in the gaming business.

NOT EVIL: Wanting to compete with Nintendo in order to justify and recoup their losses from research and development on the original project.

EVIL: Wanting to compete with Nintendo due to personal feelings of rage, to act out revenge for bruised egos.


Sony considered options 1 & 2, but rejected them. They liked option 3. What Would Vader Do?