This topic is locked from further discussion.
Yes, MS never got into this to win a system war anyway they got into it to steal away some market share and because there was no way they were going to just hand Sony trillions of dollars of future potential income from the livingroom download marketplace.
Btw, good luck on that whole 360 is dead thing.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"]Microsoft is going to release a PC/Console hybrid, and all the lemmings will start loving PCs like hypocrites. Bookmark/Quote/Tattoo it on your arm for reference.thrones
They're going to make a Wii console, mark me on this :|
It'll be called The Xbox Wii60
What I mentioned is practical. What you are suggesting is absurd. Microsoft has the capabilites to release a gaming model, in that the same APIs found on a PC can be put into a set top box, ie: console. However, considering the ignorant comment you made in regards to my opinion, I would likely waste my time explaining it to you.
[QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.dhjohns
Under what claim?
Monopoly law in Canada and the USA, not sure how European laws go for that. Same reason M$ saved Apple instead of destroying it.
[QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.Andrew_Xavier
Under what claim?
Monopoly law in Canada and the USA, not sure how European laws go for that.
Yea, I'm not sure if that applies to Japan and Europe though.
[QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.dhjohns
For what claim? Pursuant to what?
likely attempted monopoly...[QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.dhjohns
For what claim? Pursuant to what?
Actually, I know what you mean, I should have said if they DID buy them, my bad.
[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.Nagidar
Under what claim?
Monopoly law in Canada and the USA, not sure how European laws go for that.
Yea, I'm not sure if that applies to Japan and Europe though.
Yeah, but, it's based in the USA, so, American law is applicable to it.
Basically, you can be the only company in a certain industry, that's acceptable (Bell Telephone for a long time for example), but, you cannot prevent/purchase all other companies in order to become the only company, you have to be the only company because no one else wants to be in it.
[QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.penguino726
For what claim? Pursuant to what?
likely attempted monopoly...:lol: You don't get sued for that. The governmental agency in charge would just not allow the merger to go through. And what monopoly would MS and Sony have?
[QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.ssj_ken
more like the other way round. Sony has more money that m$
[QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.Andrew_Xavier
Under what claim?
Monopoly law in Canada and the USA, not sure how European laws go for that. Same reason M$ saved Apple instead of destroying it.
Is that like monopoly money? :lol: Seriously though, what would happen is the US govt (for MS) would look at the deal and see if it violates any existing regulations or laws. If it did and MS couldn't find a way around it, the deal would be nixxed. Not sure how Japan would handle this though. Only know US law. :(
[QUOTE="penguino726"][QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.dhjohns
For what claim? Pursuant to what?
likely attempted monopoly...:lol: You don't get sued for that. The governmental agency in charge would just not allow the merger to go through. And what monopoly would MS and Sony have?
Console gaming monopoly I'd assume, since there are 3 major players in it currently, and if you force them to become a whole, you are left with one.
[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="dhjohns"][QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.Andrew_Xavier
Under what claim?
Monopoly law in Canada and the USA, not sure how European laws go for that.
Yea, I'm not sure if that applies to Japan and Europe though.
Yeah, but, it's based in the USA, so, American law is applicable to it.
Basically, you can be the only company in a certain industry, that's acceptable (Bell Telephone for a long time for example), but, you cannot prevent/purchase all other companies in order to become the only company, you have to be the only company because no one else wants to be in it.
That's fairly accurate; however, the US govt has been easing restrictions concerning monopolies for some time now. This is in order to better compete globally. MS and Sony though wouldn't really have a monopoly though by any standards.
A little while ago there was something on the news that has just supported my dislike of M$. They stated that if Yahoo doesn't sell to them by the end of the month they would impose a hostile take-over. With this I will never by another product that has the M$ name on it at any price.jimm895
So I guess your thoughts are the same with how EA is dealing with Take Two? So by that logic I don't think you will be playing many games considering EA is a huge percentage of the market in gaming software.
Edit: Also what they mean by a hostile take over is taking the deal to the shareholders which are the owners of the company. By the way if you look in the interest of the owners who are the shareholders it would be in better interest forthem for MS to purchase Yahoo anyways.
Console gaming monopoly I'd assume, since there are 3 major players in it currently, and if you force them to become a whole, you are left with one.
Andrew_Xavier
Nintendo would still be around. Also, I am not sure if the govt would be too concerned about a "console monopoly". The regs behind anti-trust law are fairly hyper technical and I think MS could find a way to make it happen. But we are all just spinning our wheels because we know this will never happen. :P
[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Console gaming monopoly I'd assume, since there are 3 major players in it currently, and if you force them to become a whole, you are left with one.
dhjohns
Nintendo would still be around. Also, I am not sure if the govt would be too concerned about a "console monopoly". The regs behind anti-trust law are fairly hyper technical and I think MS could find a way to make it happen. But we are all just spinning our wheels because we know this will never happen. :P
Well, the previous post did say "M$ would buy nintendo and sony", not just Sony, see, I'm assuming the sale of Sony to Microsoft would be just fine, or vice versa, it's when all 3 major players are involved in one massive sale that you end up with problems.
I only know about Canada, and the gov't here even blocks bank mergers these days due to monopoly laws.
A little while ago there was something on the news that has just supported my dislike of M$. They stated that if Yahoo doesn't sell to them by the end of the month they would impose a hostile take-over. With this I will never by another product that has the M$ name on it at any price.jimm895
Let's grow up now. Hostile takeovers are a fact of business. And yahoo is smoking something if they don't take the $15 billion offer. Also, I guess you plan on only using apple products from here on out? If you use a computer, you can't escape MS (especially for business).
I always loved to support the underdog in any fight but supporting the MS consoles has been even better than I ever could have suspected.
All these threads about the console that holds SECOND place in sales and the company who makes that console, MS planning a early exit from the VG business just leaves me with a ear to ear smile. :)
The MS plan has gone better then what privately they could have ever thought ( minus RROD ) and it isn't earth shattering news to KNOW they are working aggressively on their next " Set To Box " that should cement their place as a manufacturer of hardware/software that continues to please those looking for the best living-room entertainment.
I'm going to suggest that by 2020 they will pretty much own the business with others fighting for Second.
Carry on. ;)
[QUOTE="Nagidar"]If MS really wanted to win this war, they would buy Nintendo and SONY, but, even if they tried that, they'd probably get sued.ssj_ken
more like the other way round. Sony has more money that m$
:lol::lol::lol:
this made my day...and made my new signature quote :lol:
[QUOTE="jimm895"]A little while ago there was something on the news that has just supported my dislike of M$. They stated that if Yahoo doesn't sell to them by the end of the month they would impose a hostile take-over. With this I will never by another product that has the M$ name on it at any price.xscrapzx
So I guess your thoughts are the same with how EA is dealing with Take Two? So by that logic I don't think you will be playing many games considering EA is a huge percentage of the market in gaming software.
Yes it does, if a company has to use this type of things to gain market shares I would rather support there main competitors. If you notice my list of games there are reasons that there isn't a lot of PS3 games in that list yet, and there never will be any M$ games in the list.
[QUOTE="xscrapzx"][QUOTE="jimm895"]A little while ago there was something on the news that has just supported my dislike of M$. They stated that if Yahoo doesn't sell to them by the end of the month they would impose a hostile take-over. With this I will never by another product that has the M$ name on it at any price.jimm895
So I guess your thoughts are the same with how EA is dealing with Take Two? So by that logic I don't think you will be playing many games considering EA is a huge percentage of the market in gaming software.
Yes it does, if a company has to use this type of things to gain market shares I would rather support there main competitors. If you notice my list of games there are reasons that there isn't a lot of PS3 games in that list yet, and there never will be any M$ games in the list.
Are you alright? The reason they made the offer is one Yahoo is doing awful right now, and two they made a huge bid for Yahoo which the board of directors denied because they wanted a better offer which they are not going to get. So MS is doing something right for the owners which are the shareholders and are going to present them with the offer(which is what is called a hostile takeover when presenting the offer to shareholders instead of the board of directors) considering they are the ones who invested their money into Yahoo in the first place. Secondly EA is doing the same thing to Take Two so if you aren't going to buy anything from MS because what they are doing, then you aren't going to do much gaming considering EA is the most dominant gaming software developer out there. So pretty much you are making a flawed statement. But I guess if you don't like how business works in reality I guess you will be playing games here and there.
Xbox 360 is doing well. Yes the PS3 got a boost with the downfall of HD-DVD, but that should be short lived. They make most of their money on game sales and not hardware sales as most of us know (Sony sells at a loss, and MS has in the past), and MS leads all consoles in the game sales department. That even includes a lower than average 2008.
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/15956/February-2008-NPD-Xbox-360-Leads-Software-Sales-but/
If you guys really want a single monopoly on the gaming market... Go ahead and cheer for a company who has complete control over the price of everything on the market, and the soledeterminantof the success of the gaming industry. To wish the death of successful console is a very ignorant statement. And honestly, You should rather have a desire for a more competitive monopolistic market, over a single monopoly (3 major players vs one). With the current scenario, we get exclusives for each console, with witch each developer trying to out do its competition to sell more game and more consoles(this means great games). Competition is also the reason as to why we get those things called "price drops." Without this, Sony could dictate whatever inane price they want consoles. Sony probably would also jack the price per game up to 80-90 dollars as well (they already do this in the japanese market on consoles and games because of national loyalties to sony(I.e. MGS4 pricing, and most likely GT5). So yea, go ahead and wish for microsoft to fall apart when we are in the middle of a recession. A major company like that falling apart would kill the economy as a whole.
On another note, Sony probably wouldn't have even desired to make online play a major feature on the PS3 if Xbox was not on the market. So more consoles on the market brings about this thing called innovation. A basic Microeconomics class would have taught you that. Look up the term "monopoly" or get a microecon book and read up on it. Monopolies are the not the best thing for a consumer to deal with, mostly because of prices and the lack of innovation(could also factor in patents, and other barriers against entry into the market, but I am not trying to overcomplicate my argument.)
A simple answer to your question "Is Microsoft going to make one more console?": Yes, They are most likely going to make more than one more console. Their goal is not only focused towards games, but also innovating gaming consoles to the point where they are an all in one media center featuring Live TV, Movies, and Games. They hope to in the future fully eliminate the use of hard disks, but rather rely on big hard drives to bring High Definition games to the consumer. Down the road, I can see hard disks getting much cheaper. So i wouldn't doubt that this will only take 2 more consoles to achieve the ability to put a several terrabytes of hard disk, in a rather small space, at a very inexpensive cost.
If you guys really want a single monopoly on the gaming market... Go ahead and cheer for a company who has complete control over the price of everything on the market, and the soledeterminantof the success of the gaming industry. To wish the death of successful console is a very ignorant statement. And honestly, You should rather have a desire for a more competitive monopolistic market, over a single monopoly (3 major players vs one). With the current scenario, we get exclusives for each console, with witch each developer trying to out do its competition to sell more game and more consoles(this means great games). Competition is also the reason as to why we get those things called "price drops." Without this, Sony could dictate whatever inane price they want consoles. Sony probably would also jack the price per game up to 80-90 dollars as well (they already do this in the japanese market on consoles and games because of national loyalties to sony(I.e. MGS4 pricing, and most likely GT5). So yea, go ahead and wish for microsoft to fall apart when we are in the middle of a recession. A major company like that falling apart would kill the economy as a whole.
On another note, Sony probably wouldn't have even desired to make online play a major feature on the PS3 if Xbox was not on the market. So more consoles on the market brings about this thing called innovation. A basic Microeconomics class would have taught you that. Look up the term "monopoly" or get a microecon book and read up on it. Monopolies are the not the best thing for a consumer to deal with, mostly because of prices and the lack of innovation(could also factor in patents, and other barriers against entry into the market, but I am not trying to overcomplicate my argument.)
A simple answer to your question "Is Microsoft going to make one more console?": Yes, They are most likely going to make more than one more console. Their goal is not only focused towards games, but also innovating gaming consoles to the point where they are an all in one media center featuring Live TV, Movies, and Games. They hope to in the future fully eliminate the use of hard disks, but rather rely on big hard drives to bring High Definition games to the consumer. Down the road, I can see hard disks getting much cheaper. So i wouldn't doubt that this will only take 2 more consoles to achieve the ability to put a several terrabytes of hard disk, in a rather small space, at a very inexpensive cost.
theonlyGAMESTER
Please, MS is in it for business, just the same as Sony. The only company of the 3 with a heart is Nintendo, other then that, MS will probably be the last one standing on the high power consoles. MS nor Sony have an "innovative" bone in their body.
Now that the 360 is being declared dead outside the US, retailers dropping it from their product line and on its way to 3rd place in the console race due to an upsurge in PS3 sales(teh Blu-Ray!) and the domination of the grandma-&-soccermilf-friendly Wii, do you honestly think Microsoft will hemmorage another few billions $ to put out Xbox 3?dz8t2t
They lost 4 billion last gen and they broke even last summer (I think. I was reading an article about it, but I don't remember when that was exactly). So the net improvement in their numbers so far between this gen and the last gen is greater than 4 billion...I'm not saying they definetely will, but...when you put it the way I do I think it makes it seem more than likely.
Please, MS is in it for business, just the same as Sony. The only company of the 3 with a heart is Nintendo, other then that, MS will probably be the last one standing on the high power consoles. MS nor Sony have an "innovative" bone in their body.
You do know that Innovation can mean many things... Xbox live innovated online gaming for consoles, plus it's download content, personalization, tv show, xbox live aracade, and its movie rental addition to the market place, which is verysuccessful, is revolutionizing media content on consoles. Just because nintendo has a console in which you can wave your hands around, does not mean its the only innovative console on the market. Innovation in games is in the hands of the developers of games. For example, (Rockstar)GTA is innovative in Free Roam Games. (Turn 10)Forza is innovative when it comes its physics and customization, setting the bar high for other Racing Simulators. The list goes on and on. Nintendo not in it for business? LMAO,of-coursethey are... They just have a different target audience.
Yes, the Xbox 3 is already in development along with the PS4 and the......Puu? I don't think Microsoft lose as much money as they used to with the first Xbox.Floppy_Jim:lol: good one
Well they're going to wait until Sony announces their next console, so then they'll have a couple year headstart LOL.... Yeah it' gonna be the same thing as last time, all the other Dev's will have a massive headstart because of Sony's unreliability.
BTW has anyone noticed the massive amounts of Sony fanboy threads in System Wars? There may be X360 fanboys, but at least they dont post so many HATE and FANBOY threads as either Wii or X360, to bomb everyone else into submission.
FANBOYS
#1 MS makes more profit than Sony. The guy saying otherwise has no business knowledge and couldn't decipher an income statement if he tried
#2 Sony and MS could merge. Sony makes a hell of alot more than just the PS3. The same goes with MS and the 360. For the vast majority (over 60%) of the products that they make, there is very little overlap. MS is primarily a computer software company. The only sony software I can think of is Vegas and Soundforge, which are audio/video programs... and MS makes none. MS also doesn't make any home electronic devices except for the 360. Sony makes TVs, stereos, computer systems, etc. The only time where they would line up is portable music devices, but there are DOZENS of companies doing that.
#3 MS likely cannot afford to purchase Sony though. The market value of Sony is in the billions. But to buy them out, they'd have to offer more money per share than the shares are worth, which could take the price to a place where no MS shareholder would approve such a mammoth loss in one year. Not only that, Sony isn't doing bad right now and with Blu-Ray winning, they will likely continue to do well. You have to consider if Sony shareholders would even be interested in MS buying them.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment