New Console Theory

[FreshChurros]

They already tried. Remember Pippin?

Neither does anyone else.

lol, Apple really has changed since then though. They've firmly established the iPod in all kids' hands, and if they marketed a video game system based around the iPod, I'm sure they would make tons of money.

As for SEGA, it's my ultimate wish that they make a new console, but I know that the chances are slim to none. They made some obviously irresponsible choices in the 90's that they can't erase, and their software really hasn't been up-to-par as of late.

[Original_Name]

Well, a major flaw with your theory of Sega working to the top of the 3rd parties is the assumption that they would "Buy out the competition" which is something that Sega simply doesn't do. Honestly, Sega is a very, very nice company in a world of capitalist monsters (EA, Sony, etc.) crapping all of over the industry. They very much respect their competition, and wouldn't stoop to the level of eliminating those around them for capital gain. Of course, the Sega I loved wouldn't... who knows what the Simon Jeffreys era will bring. I'd hate to see Sega end up looking like EA in a decade; unfortunately, I don't think anything would make Jeffreys happier.

And God, please let there never be an EA console. I hate EA so very, very much. Their name is so ironic because you know that they don't care one bit about electronic ART.

[Droid party]

If, ifs and buts were candy and nuts.

Sega needs to concentrate on getting thier games right first.I think the dream of another sega console is completely dead.

[RackGaki]

I want to see how well Capcom can make a console. They are my favorite developers for software and I think it would be pretty cool to see how well they would be able to do on a grander scale.

Capcom especially wouldn't want to restrict themselves to a single console, even if it is their own. They've seen sales jump through the roof since they have focused more on multiplatform gaming. See, for instance, the new Devil May Cry. 'nuff said there.

Entering the console business is tricky - and expensive. Sega could have even kept the Dreamcast trucking on, but knew better since they saw that the trend would not favor them. Sony and Microsoft both have multiple divisions to support their console habit, and Nintendo milks old cows and makes sensible consoles. See last generation, where the Gamecube sold the least amount of consoles, but made a profit, something Microsoft couldn't say with the Xbox.

[D.D.D.]

I'm sorry but for any company these days to compete with the triple-threat of Nintendo, Sony, and MS, that company will need an ass-load of money and SEGA sure does not have that. I really can only see EA doing something like that and even then, that still would be a game of Russian roulette...
Then again if that was the only system Madden was on, it might just do okay in the states.

[The Apprentice]

I'm sorry but for any company these days to compete with the triple-threat of Nintendo, Sony, and MS, that company will need an ass-load of money and SEGA sure does not have that. I really can only see EA doing something like that and even then, that still would be a game of Russian roulette...
Then again if that was the only system Madden was on, it might just do okay in the states.

That's the scary part. EA has exclusitivity on some college games too, if they're the single sports system available, they would sell like hot cakes. Emagine what would happen in europe if they landed an exlucsive Fifa deal.

[ZeroAX]

But them doing that is like Village Cinemas showing exclusively their movies. It would kill them. And this would also kill EA. Their games sell a lot because they come out for a big range of systems. Having FIFA only on 1 system instead of 12 will make people buy pro evo instead. The only way for them to make more money if they made a console would be if they dominated right off the bat with it but that's suck a HUUUUGE risk that they are better off only making original quality games based on new ip from now on and hoping it will sell

[marurun]

Nintendo is the only classic game company left. Sony is a veteran upstart and Microsoft a growing new entrant, but they didn't start in games. With this in mind...

I don't think there are any companies prepared to enter the market right now. Given that consoles have turned into cutting edge devices (even the Wii, if not in graphics) that often now trump even high-end PCs (at 25% the cost), who else has that much spare R&D money? Not only do you have to develop (or pay someone to develop) the hardware, you also have to be willing to fund internal development and give lots of expensive support trying to attract and assist 3rd parties.

Sega's parent company isn't flush enough with cash to compete. There's no American company dumb enough to want to try to sink anything even close to what Microsoft's invested, and they're only just now making enough to not be in the red. When you are an 800 lb gorilla and can barely fight it out, what will your 200 lb chimp competitors think? Apple has no interest whatsoever in games aside from the casual ones.

I suppose it's possible another Japanese company could see an opening and try to muscle in, but who is multinational enough in consumer circles to try? NEC once made video games, and while they could probably still put together the money and the technical expertise, they now largely supply to other companies rather than directly to consumers, at least anywhere that's not Japan. Let's face it. The rapid escalation of cutting edge hardware design has pushed out the small developers.

The only market that really has room for competition is handhelds. There's greater competition in low-power chips than in the high-power chips these days. Apple's PA Semi, or Freescale, or even VIA could probably manage to provide some power-sipping internals that could power a fancy handheld. But IBM rules the roost in high-power, specialized processing chips, and ATI and Nvidia have no competition on the graphics chipset front.