Sony: We have a wider audience and take more risks than Nintendo

NintendoDpad:
"Speaking in a video interview with Forbes, Jack Tretton of SCEA makes a bold statement about the Sony brand, in which they claim they cater to a wider audience than Nintendo while taking more risks."

[Product]

shock and awe

[BulletToothtony]

but they stucked to it and now we the gamers get the benefits..

I agree.. they do risk a lot more.. that's why they have so much variety when it comes to games..

[JL]

I guess the wider audience comment could be debated upon semantics. But as far as risk-taking, hands down Sony always has and always will be the leader in that. With every generation they are taking risks to push this industry further/forward.

[Goomba12]

By copying and pasting what PC's have done for years?

How has Sony pushed this generation further outside of trying to become a computer?

[rucky]

Oh yeah let's see you if you can play Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, MGS4 or ANY exclusive PS3 game on you PC. Sony pushes what matters most to me and any gamer for that matter... GAMES. Everything else are just extras as far as I'm concern.

[droid and bot]

@1.3
why the hell everyone got to talk about PC in a consoles discussion ???

PC is a gaming platform
yes
but its different than CONSOLES
when we use the term " industry "
we mean consoles industry

PC is just another story and another level

[mikeslemonade]

The PS3 and the other sony game systems do have a wider demographic and they have the most diverse lineup of games from rated E to M and the diverse genres. The last risk Nintendo took for in 2006 when the Wii launched, and they haven't done anything else that successfully attracted the hardcore audience. The hardcore audience will not buy the next Nintendo system cause they screwed us over this generation and doing nothing to bring us back.

[saint_john_paul_ii]

oh great, PC fanboys...Have fun stealing games... its the main reason why your favorite PC devs are quickly jumping ship to consoles.

[Goomba12]

@ pope
Glad to know you don't understand why pc gaming died. I'll give you a hint, niche.

[JL]

@Goomba
Really? I hate PC-elitist. Here let me clarify for you. No, not by "copying and pasting what PCs have done for years". This generation alone: was it PC that introduced the Cell ushering in a completely different processor architecture? Was it PC that created and sent blu-ray mainstream, once again, being the leaders in the advancement of physical medium? Hell, you need look no further than the R&D costs that Sony entered this generation with and the massive loss they were taking at the beginning to see proof of the risks they take.

And truly, PCs and consoles cannot be compared.

[Sarcasm]

"By copying and pasting what PC's have done for years? "

Really?

If you look at the history of PC gaming, there really isn't anything that offers the same level of Cinematic experiences like Uncharted, Uncharted 2, MGS4, etc.

Trust me, I was a big PC gamer in the entire PS2 generation.

There isn't anything the PC is doing now that hasn't been done before is a more accurate statement.

With consoles, they are limited. But when you're limited, you become creative.

[hay]

Actually Sony's consoles were pushing the industry from the very beginning. First PSX. I remember first games on PSX and they were more advanced than on PC.
Also PC gamers were envious of PSX capabilities hence the one of the first divisions happen between PC and console gamers.

I even remember one joke on April Fools claiming that PC gets graphic accelerator which enables PCs to show graphics comparable to PSX. People went crazy about it.

Same have been with PS2. TTT have shown details not known that time on PC. FFX've blown us away. Sony implemented DVD which was also a risk and a brick that build DVD's position today.

And even right now Sony's pushing industry again with online services, hardware, variety of software and quality. I highly doubt if there will be games on PC like Killzone 2, Uncharted, MGS4 or Gran Turismo. Not cause they're exclusives. Cause the quality they show.

Sure, you can counter Killzone with Crysis but keep in mind some things. The former is twice as long with one of the greatest multiplayers in shooters while the latter needed monstrous machines in the beginning to play it as it should be. There's hardly any comparison.

[saint_john_paul_ii]

niche? LOL right, every PC fanboy blames it on Niche. Is that why companies like Crytek are slowly abandoning the PC platform, just to develop on consoles when the Next-Generation arrives? more specifically when the PS4 arrives

http://playstation.joystiq....

I mean your game(with the best graphics available right now) cant even sell millions despite being a game that was expected to be a system seller, then there's a problem...its called piracy...that's why PC gaming is DYING. that why PC devs like EPIC for example would rather just make games on the PS3/360 and Beyond. there are standards and they are able to protect their games as much as possible from piracy...

This is why the Devs gives praise to the PS3 because of its anti-piracy features and BD. They need that console to sell because they would be able to sell and profit from their games due to the lack of piracy on that console....

The only games that will possibly sell well cause its backed by a hardcore community is COD/VALVE GAMES/WoW, other than that, its GG PC gaming...

[Bathyj]

I dont mean to sound like a prick--ly pear, but PC gaming would have died long ago if not for all the console ports it gets. Even my console hating diehard PC buddies admit that. CoD4 even stole the FPS crowd.

Sims and Warcraft, anything else get a console.

[coolfool]

It isn't true that the casual and female gamer is an audience Sony didn't want to know. Sony have been targeting casual and female demographics fairly strongly since the PS2 days. The difference between Sony and Nintendo is that Sony haven't *focused* on that market. Where casual and female are more of a sub-market for Sony, for Nintendo the casual has been the strategic focus.

To say casual is an "audience not even Sony wanted or knew about" is complete rubbish.

[gaffyh]

@1.14 - You may be cool, but you are not a fool. I agree with everything you said.

Sony always takes more risks than MS and Nintendo. You ever seen anything like Flower, Linger In Shadows, LBP etc. on any other platform?

[heroicjanitor]

Even if it failed it cost nothing to develop and they were selling it at a profit.

If the ps3 didn't get out of it's mess(which it looks like now) all of the ps2s profits were gone and extra billions in losses were there to be taken. But, bravely, they stuck at it and I think they deserve, more than any other console manufacturer, to reap the rewards now.

[boodybandit]

I was too during the PS1 and most of the PS2/Xbox era.
I couldn't agree with you more.

Without question Sony takes more chances and has a wider variety of gaming then Nintendo.

[kunit22c]

Sony takes more risks? Sorry um I don't quite agree, I mean I do like sony and the PS3, I plan on buying one soon, but this year Nintendo came out with a console that doesn't even have HD and its main gameplay was motion controls, cmon now, thats a way bigger risk than blue ray, Nintendo with the power glove, the d-pad, the DS, the gamecube, the Wii, the joystick, and the virtual boy, sorry but im pretty sure Nintendo takes more risks than sony, Sony takes risks, its just that they are always predictable and go in the same direction as all their other risks, and I think we're pretty close to the point where we wont even call them risks anymore. Also the Sony pushing the Industry forward, the way they took it forward was not even a risk at all, if you improve graphics and disk format thats not a big risk at all. sorry but I have to say Nintendo also has a wider audience, I mean cmon they have casual and some of the hardcore, where as sony has only hardcore, please do not reply to this with ignorance please explain to me how sony has taken more and bigger risks, I really don't see how you can possibly think that, I also cant see how someone would think they have a wider audience, unless im missing something im pretty sure Nintendo beats them in both of these. Please someone tell me how they could possibly think this.

[heroicjanitor]

Those weren't risks, they were all sold at a profit. Nintendo made more profit per year in the gamecube days than sony did in the ps2 days because nintendo refused to sell the gamecube at a loss and try to make profit on games. They never took risks they were just trying something different all the time and hoping it caught on and it did with the wii(which was sold at a profit and hence made them billions) Sony sold ps3 at a massive loss and lost twice the total profits they made with the ps2.

Definition of risk: The possibility of suffering harm or loss; danger.

There was never a possibility of danger to nintendo since they make profit from everything they sell and the wii cost nothing to develop.

[kunit22c]

Thank You heroicjanitor for actaully giving real reasons instead of being like these other fanboys and saying new disk formats and blueray. but yes I now see what you mean, and I agree Sony does take more risks than Nintendo, because your right I forgot that everytime sony sells a PS3 they make no money and actually lose money. but could you now explain the logic of how they think sony has a wider audience?

[droid and bot]

lunching a console with 600$ and harder to work with
new IP after the other ( that may fail )

thats a lot of risk Sony
but
they are doing a good job

[jwatt]

Don't forget Blu Ray!

[droid and bot]

yah blu-ray too

but they actually should do that to push the industry forward

i mean look at the PS1 era
sony took a risk to go with CD-ROM format
while Nintendo used cartridges with the N46

i mean if that didn't work
we would be probably still using cartridges

[Product]

Man how odd would this generation be had HDDVD won?

[Godmars290]

Embarrassing. Considering that at the time Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey would still have been multi-disc games.

HD-DVD = 15GB

Blu-ray = 25GB

The real argument between them was menu and security codecs that a certain company owned.

(Hint: Bill Gates use to own it.)

[mfwahwah]

@2.4

Don't forget that SONY has their foot pretty far in the door with movie companies.

[Bumpmapping]

He speaks the truth.

[Graffin]

Oh, Sony. Always so delightfully deluded...

[Goomba12]

Sony isnt doing anything this generation outside of what my comp does better. Sony used to be the bees knees, but this generation instead of focusing on software, they are too focused on features outside of what video gamign is all about.

Uncharted, Killzone, GT, etc. are great games, but damn if i remember the PS2 having way more.

[droid and bot]

"Sony isnt doing anything this generation outside of what my comp does better."

so what are you trying to say is
the PS1 and the PS2 did more than what PC did ??

[ReviewsArePolitics]

My Ps3 can actually play PS2 and PS1 games, but that aside, there's no console with both great first party line-up and with AAA 3rd party games. Most of Xbox 360 "exclusives" have been ported to PS3: Oblivion, Bioshock, Ninja Gaiden, nearly all JRPGs; the ones that haven't aren't really system sellers. There isn't one game on 360 that PS3 owners could say "gosh, I really wish we had that!", because the PS3 has got its bases covered. Add all the multimedia features and reliability and PS3 seems like the only viable choice. That and it's easier to set-up (and cheaper) than a PC.

Call me when the PC pushes the boundaries of gaming in something other than graphics (such as gameplay and genre innovations). Until then, STFU.

[N4XBOXG]

"but this generation instead of focusing on software, they are too focused on features outside of what video gamign is all about."

like twitter and facebook???

The ps3 has a huge line up or exclusives and their is a good variety of genres, hell it prolly has more exclsives than the xbox and it came out a year later.

[artgamer]

lol @ Goomba. the name says it all, you're a sad Nintendo fanboy what a dumb statement when Sony are the ones with the most and best software line-up this generation like the PS1 and 2 were.

Its not a matter of taste, just a fact. Sony has better games than Wii and 360 combined, period. Even better than PC when it comes to the plug 'n play aspect and games like Uncharted 2 giving Crysis a serious run for its money.

[robotnik]

In the same time, the PS3 have more games than the PS2, so I don't get your logic

[Etseix]

Sony takes a lot of risks,
perfect example blu ray instead DVD, BUT, Sony is giving games that actually need the blu ray, and theyr awsome on every single way.

thats why i dont blame them, if one of theyr ideas is not good, they do another one, been always like that, and thats why i keep supporting Sony by buying all Sony related ;)

[cmrbe]

Cell,Blu-ray, Double the PS2 launch price, 1 year MS head start, holding back on releasing most of their heavy hitters has been quite risky for Sony.

However. Sony knew all of this from the beginning. They knew that in order to make the PS3 last and push HD gaming forward they needed the PS3 as is. Sony has a 10 year plan (road map) for the PS3. Everything else is secondary to this plan which is why they generally or never respond to what the competition does. Sony so far this gen has only responded to their fans.

Now we are seeing Ken's vision come to fruitation which is bitter sweet in a sense. We are seeing PS3 games push the boundraries of gaming and will continue to do so in coming years.

To be a leader in gaming you got to be bold and innovate which means taking huge risk in order to achieve their vision of gaming. Sony did this and to some extent Nin with the wii.

However Sony got the short end of the stick from commentators unlike Nin. This is something i still don't understand to this day. Sony were bold and aimed for the stars for the PS3 and they got bashed by the media for doing so. MS basically went backwards with the x360 and yet the media accept it with open arms. I think its just that most game journalist are not visionaries and don't like change so that when MS came out with the x360 which is basically the same formula from last gen they accepted it. The PS3 is ahead of its time i guess because Ken is why ahead of his time.

However, in coming years when PS3 exclusives keep pushing HD gaming to new heights and blu-ray is a must and the full potential of the cell is unlocked. People will look back at the PS3 haters in it's infancy and think back at how stupid they were.

Long live King Ken.

[Aclay]

I have to admit, Nintendo did take a pretty big risk with the Motion Controls, because it was a pretty big departure from their other consoles that were more "hardcore" oriented, and many people (including me) thought that Motion Controls were going to be a fad on the Wii.

But when it comes to games, and constantly pushing the industry forward, I agree that Sony have been more risk-taking over the years with Playstation... there's all the new IP's they introduced, a new disc format each generation, and were one of the first to position their game consoles as Multimedia Entertainment devices. (PS2 as a DVD player, etc...)

I can't even imagine how the gaming industry would look right now if Sony had never came out with the PS1, and making gaming big with the adult audience, because up until then, console gaming was mainly still considered "kiddy"... games like Metal Gear Solid and Gran Turismo on the PS1 totally changed all that.

[Godmars290]

Nintendo might have taken a risk with motion control, but now they don't know what to do with it. And just like rumble before it, the competition are taking their idea and improving on it.

Not that they'll do better, but at least someone wont sue them all over it. I hope.

[cmrbe]

Nin knew they had no chance competing with Sony and MS for the hardcore like they did with GC last gen and N64 before then. Both were more powerful that the PS1 and PS2 but they still lost to Sony.

I am sure Nin wouldn't try a 3rd time with another hardcore console. My point is they really had no other option .

Nin was very smart. They knew from the DS and gameboy before that there is a huge extreme casual gamer market out there. Nin used their experience from the handheld market to position the wii. They learned that price, accessiability will win over better specs as they found out with the DS VS PSP for extreme casuals. Nin did the exact opposite of what Sony did with the PSP. Sony tried to use their expereince with PS2 to dominate the handheld market with the PSP which didn't work as much as people expected.

The way i see it. The wii is just a home console version of the DS which is why its selling like mad to the extreme casuals. Nin banked on this and it worked wonders for them.

[droid and bot]

lol
the wii is a slim Gamecube
and the wii mote is just a new version of the power glove

nintendo just looked at what they already got
and gave it a new name
left the hardcore to Sony and Microsoft to fight over
and head right to casuals

good business move if you ask me
because
a) dirt cheap hardware to make
b) an open market with no competition at all

[Goomba12]

You guys act as though Nintendo was not making profit on the n64 and gamecube generations.

Nintendo made the Wii to get rid of the label that video games are for males age 18-30.

Expanding the video game market was the first priority.

Also funny how ou guys state that Bluray is one of the best features in the PS3. Sony did this NOT FOR GAMERS, but because of the movie industry. You don't think it is odd how movie studios are the ones who determined who would win the format war?

[god_o_war]

@Goomba12

uhhhhhh i think guitar hero wouldve gotten rid of that label.

even if sony used blu-ray for movie purposes us gamers still benefit so its win win and very smart ;)

[droid and bot]

@Goomba12
LOL
you are really stupid

"Bluray is one of the best features in the PS3. Sony did this NOT FOR GAMERS, but because of the movie industry."

so you think that sony did the same thing with DVD in the PS2 right ??

[Godmars290]

Yeah, you're right, Sony didn't put out BR just for games, but movies as well. Same as with the PS2. Even in the PS1 days they were concerned with making a media system and not just a console. The PS2's main strength is that its a DVD player out the box. That was a mistake MS with the first Xbox and haven't really gotten right with the 360. They've made it too dependent on XBL.

And as far as the Wii is concerned, Nintendo may have opened the market to soccer moms with it, but they aren't buying games. Thye're just getting Wiifit and Wiiresort and don't give a damn about anything else.

[Goomba12]

Droid and bot

you do understand that dvd was out before the PS2, how is this relevant to the PS3 as it came out at the exact same time as bluray?

Wow you got me.

As for Godsmar
"Thye're just getting Wiifit and Wiiresort and don't give a damn about anything else."

How has Sony or Microsoft tried expanding the market with success before the Wii?

[droid and bot]

and blu-ray was out before the PS3 not by a long time
but still out

the PS3 is the first blu-ray gaming console

same with the PS2 DVD was out before it but not by along time

and the PS2 was the first DVD console game

and by the way look at your name
you are nothing but a butt-hurt nintendo fanboy
that cant handel the truth that Sony is far more better and powerful than Microsoft and nintendo

and i don't need to remember you that Sony floored both MS and nintendo for 2 generations

"How has Sony or Microsoft tried expanding the market with success before the Wii? "

the eyetoy says hi
and it have been out far before the wii

[Infernostew]

The ps2 was a huge push for DVD format in Japan. Before the ps2, the dvd market was horrible in the country. We can look at sony's affects on other countries and not just our own.

[Goomba12]

Haha you judge me by my name? Let me guess you also think I'm what? 12, by looking at my name?

"same with the PS2 DVD was out before it but not by along time"
May want to look that up if i were you.

"the eyetoy says hi
and it have been out far before the wii"
Wow one product huh? and how much of a success at expanding the gaming population did that do?

Now go read a book.

[aslucher]

Well I don't care what he thinks now, I am judging you're 12 or maybe 13 not by your name but how you act!

You tell us to go and read a book? I think you need to do that before any of us even think of being forced to do so.

You say, "How has Sony or Microsoft tried expanding the market with success before the Wii"

Well I'm sorry to tell you this but the EYE TOY was out way before the Wii and IS the answer to your question. The recent publicity it has gotten is only because of how the Wii has changed the market for casual games.

Sony has released numerous games for the Eye Toy on PS2 and PS3, they have NEVER stopped and started FOR THEMSELVES! The new motion peripheral is actually an old prototype that the Eye Toy team has been working on since the PS2 days.

This is your answer and it only takes one thing buddy

"Wow one product huh? and how much of a success at expanding the gaming population did that do?"

You asked the question and it was answered, why dont you read on how to have a logical conversation with someone, or better yet wait a couple years and take freshman english. That should get you started and bring you up to speed with SOME people in the real world. Just don't stop there like the rest of the education level here on N4G though.

[Godmars290]

Wonder how many in the Xbox camp is going to disagree?

Nintendo people can't disagree either. Sony opened the market, made it mainstream and more mature, than the Big N was willing to. That's why the N64 and GC faired so poorly by comparison.

[SKUD]

Sony > Nintendo

[djfullshred]

The wider audience claim sounds like marketing hype.

But as far as taking risks, Sony has been the frontrunner on that...Putting Blu Ray in it before most people had even heard of that format, using a cell processor which was a challenge for programmers at first. Then on top of all that, selling them for more than they cost to make for quite a while, and even at that price they were more expensive than the other consoles. Pretty risky, and a lot of people were placing their bets on when Sony was going to fold in the next gen gaming biz.

[ChickeyCantor]

yes promoting your PS3 in 2 parts of the world where one has to wait 6 months before launch. Where you set the price of 600 dollars/euro's.
Ofcourse.

But Nintendo selling a non HD product that was "doomed" from the beginning...
I'm wondering...

You are still doing what you always have Sony, you just expected PS2 sales. That is where your "risk" was.

[na-no-nai]

how did sony first gaming console with a cd a risk?? there was sega with sega genesis who first introduce cd into the console realm
sony being leader in risk, so tell who introduce analog, virtual boy, dual screen on a handheld, i see these as risks, tho not all of them are successful. btw power gloves was not made by nintendo; its a third party who made them not nintendo
and saying that nintendo dont make new ips, that a load of bs; i can name a few new ips they made that is original tho i bet its not to your preferences

[supremacy]

that was sega cd, which was more of a peripheral than an actual unit, meaning each playstation was sold as a cd player inside out, that's more risky than just tossing a peripheral which you can get rid off with ease as oppose to a whole console?

also no one here is saying Nintendo isn't creative, sure they have had some new ips here and there but thus far this gen they really haven't done much outside of the casual.

and while the wii was a new thing all entirely, it wasn't so much of a risk as it was a gamble, i mean the wii is the only platform to launch profitable.

but.. i guess you do have a point, both Sony and ms do have other avenues of revenues to compensate for their gaming losses so there you got a point though.

but i will say this, many seem to forget that Sony has always been around, heck they were once alongside Nintendo during the snes era, yes they were involve.

and one last thing sony has helped expand the gaming community, bluray has actually attracted non-gamers into the consoe realm, i mean those movie people who just wanted a ps3 for movie watching eventually got themselves a ps3 not to mention a portion of them converted into gamers.

the clear differences between Nintendo and Sony in this lil war, has always been affordability(price) had the ps3 been at the price of the wii from the start, the wii wouldn't have succeeded they way it has done so thus far.

[na-no-nai]

remember this those 2 sony n microsoft can afford to take risk as their investment is in other area too and not only in gaming industry unlike nintendo who basically life investment is in the gaming industry.

[PandemicPrawn0]

I can agree that Sony probably has a wider audience than Nintendo.

But taking more risks? I'm sorry but thats just a lie. Sony have taken some big risks with the eyetoy and bluray, but as na-no-nai has already said Sega took on the risk for CD.

Nintendo have always been taking risks. The D-pad was a risk, the analog controller, rumble, staying with a cartridge based console when every other console on the market used CDs, motion controls, and going after the casual market. all risks taken by Nintendo.

I'm not bashing Sony, both they and Microsoft have taken plenty of risks over the years. But nobody can top Nintendo in this area.

[WickedLester]

I don't think Nintendo really took a risk just because they made the wii controller standard in every box. Why? Because it's bundled with a last generation system. If Nintendo had actually taken the time to develop a real high def next gen system that could compete with 360 and PS3 on a technical level then yes, I would've said that was taking a risk. However the Wii hardware was profitable from day one!! That is NOT taking a risk. That's doing the safe thing (and the smart thing). They have never had to worry about selling software or add ons to make up for any kind of loss on hardware sales.

[memots]

check this out lol ( funny )

http://www.actiontrip.com/c...

or even better Rofl

http://www.actiontrip.com/c...

[Saaking]

Yep, Sony is the best.

[keysy420]

nintendo didnt really take that big of a risk with motion controls. they built on the 10 million eyetoy users. so their was already a market.

[phantomexe]

Love my ps3 but there just no way.Most of the time it's nintendo takeing the risk and if it pays off then the other two copy and inprove what nintendo had done.It's been this way since the frist ps and xbox even sega use to do it.It's all good they do make those ideas better tho.

[na-no-nai]

i dont think blue-ray is much of a bigger risk too cuz if sony didnt push it and put it on ps3 then yes it prob wont make it. beside sony had to show the world what the blu-ray was capable of doing and what other what is to bundle it with the ps3
look blu-ray has higher capacity than hd dvd. beside if blu-ray fail; it wont kill sony; while motion control would of kill nintendo in the console war.

[na-no-nai]

also nintendo lost an important start with introducing cd drive (instead of cartridges) to a console with Panasonic and sony. however the with that loss come sony into the gamin realm

also micrsoft took a big risk knowing that their console rodd lol
could of been better if werent for defect

[Wolf873]

they certainly have taken more risks this gen, with the blu-ray and all.

[Godmars290]

Goomba12: how is your reading comprehension?

Don't mean to offend, but I already said Sony opened the market by making multi-purpose consoles. A CD music player player with the PS1 which wasn't really all that valuable. And a DVD movie player with PS2 which was. MS hasn't expanded jack, just done its best to exploit an existing market, while the Wii and Wiimote have yet to prove their worth past being a gimmick. Not when games like MadWorld fail to be bought up by the new market Nintendo has opened.

Again, Sony expanded the market and exceeded Nintendo, and MS went after that market.

[Xander-RKoS]

Madworld wouldn't have sold on the pre-existing market and you, I, and everyone knows that. It was a 6 hour long beat-em up with no replay value.

[Shnazzyone]

They do take more risks... as for wider audience.. when I see a chick at a bar eager to play anything on PS3 as opposed to wii. Then i might be convinced on that one. Otherwise, nintendo has tons for kids grownups men and women. What is the list of 5 games women want to play on ps3 again?

If you want the proof of the more risks however... look at their 300 million dollars in losses. As a company they certainly live on the edge. Not to mention the risks of the awfully concieved PSPgo

[kewlkat007]

Sony's devices have been used for "just" other uses. But the biggest innovative RISK taken this gen has got to be Nintendo and the Wii.

Sony wouldn't have dared be the first to go that route "Totally". Nintendo went full steam ahead.

When it comes to cutting Edge Hardware, Sony is it.

[Gr81]

If they have a wider audience than Nintendo why are they trailing them by 30m units?

[yippiechicken]

Sony built a machine that was pretty much guaranteed to sell a lot of systems to the "hardcore" gamer, which it is doing. I personally don't see much of a big risk there. Some may think it was a big risk trying to sell a console at launch for $600 but I think there is a difference between taking a risk and just making a bad decision.

Nintendo built a machine hoping to keep the "hardcore" gamer satisfied while at the same time bringing in the "Casual" gamer and even the non-gamer into the mix, which could have failed miserably on all accounts. That seems like a bigger risk, IMO.

If Nintendo hadn't come out with the Wii, I probably wouldn't have gotten back into gaming after all those years. I finally saw an opportunity to be able to play games without having to relearn the complicated controllers. Because of the Wii, I remembered how much I loved gaming and even bought a PS3 (and love it too) and will be picking up a 360 very soon.

[Product]

The Wii got me back into gaming. I lost interest last generation for some reason and didnt play a single game in over 2 years outside of a couple pc games. Gaming when I was younger in my memory was so much better than it is now. For me that is. It is hard to overshadow you and a friend dying 100 times in Contra, or getting the feather and hiding in the lake in Super Mario Kart in battle mode. And lets not forget the arcades which was a gamers dream.
These are my favorite gaming memories, and playing Wii with friends gets a little bit of that feeling back.
I couldnt' get into games last generation because for the most part, none of them were really multiplayer backed. This generation has changed a little but you still have many great games that seem cool to play with friends but has no co-op online.

Local multiplayer, has always been my favorite part of gaming. Starting last generation and even in the ps1/n64 days, single player and online started becoming all the rave. Something i support when its importance is behind that of local multiplayer.

[Gr81]

I was also getting sick of the same games of the N64/PS1 era but with a new coat of paint. The only game to truly impress me last gen was Metroid Prime and that may be because it was a fresh interpretation on a classic franchise. I really was going to sit this gen out because all I saw was the same old controllers same old games etc. But the games while looking fantastic didn't offer much else. IMO.

The Wii was really a breath of fresh air for me because I loved "learning how to play" again. The first time I played Wii Tennis I was pressing A to hit the ball, lol. Old habits die hard, but they do eventually die.

And while its easy now to take Wii's success for granted the whole concept was a risk. We aren't even looking at the DS which held Nintendo's future in its hands.

I agree that risk and bone head decisions are not the same thing. Trying to sell a 600$ Blu Ray trojan horse player at launch isn't a risk, its a bone headed decision. Sony has released a console with the same controller for 3 gens in a row. Everything about their controller was taken from previous Nintendo console controller design, they even took RUMBLE! lol.

Nintendo releases a Wii-mote and through years of being called a gimmick, Sony and MS are shoehorning Motion Controls into their consoles, but Sony has the audacity and arrogance to claim they take more risk?

When gaming isn't your ONLY revenue pool, I guess you can afford to make bone head decisions.

[na-no-nai]

cd wasnt a risk. it was cheaper to produced and manufacture. that why FFVII was for ps1 instead of the N64. yeah it could been a failure. also saying that wii-mote was bundled with every wii is like saying blu-ray was bundled with every ps3; basically the same thing but clearly nintendo try to get people into gaming wit a gaming console for games only while the ps3 try to get people to buy it for movies, games etc not only for games. see the differences sony ps3 is multi-purpose while nintendo wii is not

[sikbeta]

This is my first comment in this site, and you have too bookmark this, SONY is in the best position this gen, next year you will see the "wand" and as always SONY will make that gimmick piece of plastic in "standard" like rumble and the sticks, wii don't have the 10 year life cycle as the PS3, maybe 5/6 total years, the next Nin console can't be the same as the wii cuz you can count with casuals forever, M$ only have Gears-Halo-Natal and nothing else, if they jump to the next xbox, it'll be more expensive and what format will use, DVD AGAIN? no way! will M$ pay royalties to SONY? no way! so what are they going to do?... sony in the other hand is focusing in the 10 years plan, next gen is already done for sony, they don't have to worry about a new format because Blu-ray will become a standard like DVD, come on 10 layer Blu-ray=320GB and is only the begining, Sony, Toshiba and IBM don't made the CELL just for the PS3, now you know the truth: SONY ALREADY WON