#1 Edited by zkilla (139 posts) -

With the Wii U out, the PS4 about to be announced in a week and the next Xbox not far away the next generation of home consoles is upon us and I would just look back at what were the mistakes and accomplishes of each first party. Starting with Sony obviously launch was a big mess with a ridiculous price point, shortages and missing features but then stuff straightened out(price drops and better games) some stumbles here and there (dropping backwards compatibility the PSN hacking) but maintaining a consistent lineup of exclusives and innovation kept them in the competition even though marketing was not up to the task of promoting these games.

Microsoft in a very smart move launched first even though it had the red ring problem around it but with a redesign they changed that, another accomplishment was the transformation of Xbox live into a legit entertainment hub something Sony couldn't really compete with the PSN. A big mistake(IMO) was abandoning interest in releasing exclusives and just depending on the pillars of GoW, Halo, Fable and Forza but an accomplishment was investing more in innovative XBLA titles.

Nintendo really didn't have many mistakes outside of the gimmick getting old, they played their cards right betting on a casual market that the other 2 couldn't have anticipated but it also alienated some third parties.

Mistakes on both Sony and Microsoft would be trying to get in the casual market with Move and Kinect and not including HDMI cables.

What did you think were the mistakes and accomplishments by the big 3?

#2 Posted by believer258 (11684 posts) -

Nintendo really didn't have many mistakes outside of the gimmick getting old, they played their cards right betting on a casual market that the other 2 couldn't have anticipated

I disagree. Nintendo got an unexpected surprise with the casual market but they're not going to get that market again because it's on the cellphones and Facebook games. As a consequence, these days you hear "PS3, 360, and PC" instead of "PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube". I would hardly call the exclusion of a large number of the best-selling games of this generation, plus a hard-headed approach to online interactivity, "playing your cards right".

I'm not saying that Nintendo shouldn't continue being Nintendo, but for some crazy as hell reason, they seem to be excluding pretty much everyone else from doing much on their system if it doesn't line up with their idea of "innovation", which isn't so much innovation as it is gimmicks.

Online
#3 Posted by Pr1mus (3825 posts) -

Sony

The good, the best offering of first party games. Better and more varied than Nintendo. The bad almost no marketing for half of those games. The ugly, PSN hacking and initial price tag of the console.

Microsoft

The good, simple console easy to work with for developers. The bad, the exclusives. Not enough of them and not enough variety. The ugly, making the console less functional with every dashboard update and the first 2-3 years of the cycle where there was a very real risk of setting yourself on fire just turning the damn thing on.

Nintendo

The good, trying something different and innovative. The bad, almost everyone but Nintendo failed at making decent games on the Wii. The ugly, everyone, Nintendo included abandoned the Wii 3 years ago.

#4 Posted by boj4ngles (287 posts) -

My own two cents:

Nintendo:

I think the big mistake is obvious, they needed a more technically hefty platform. Towards the end of its life, the Wii just couldn't handle the HD graphics that gamers were expecting. But overall, the Wii was the most successful of the three platforms in my opinion. In terms of giving audiences a new gaming experience, it was by far the most innovative and successful. The pathetic attempts by Sony to launch it's own remote, and Microsoft's attempt to launch Kinect were really a testament to success of their competitor. On second look, maybe another problem was that Nintendo didn't promote independent developers as well as it could. The unique capabilities of the Wii were really begging for inventive developers to create special things. On the other hand, they did a good job of making the classics of older platforms available for download. In general, they succeeded in introducing their storied characters and franchises to a new generation. I honestly haven't had a chance to play the WiiU yetand don't know a whole lot about it. However I worry that if their deluxe version comes with only 32 gigs of memory, then they might be making the same shortsighted mistakes of hardware limitation that hampered previous generations.

Sony:

I think that from a technical standpoint, the PS3 was the superior to the 360 in every regard and this choice to go with heftier hardware was a wise decision. PS3 games almost always looked better than their 360 counterparts and PS3 exclusives looked fabulous. This meant that the breakout platformer of the generation (Uncharted) was a PS3 exclusive. A huge bonus. The choice to go with free online service was also a wise and generous nod to consumers and it will surely earn them loyalty in the next generation. With regard to mistakes, their notorious launch is well known, and while I can't back this up with evidence, I suspect that this slow start meant that Microsoft was always a step ahead in terms of getting audiences and attracting developers. This could be why the PS3 failed to make a Halo killer, a lost battle that will probably resume in the next generation.

Microsoft:

The great success of the 360 was to capitalize on it's existing champion (Halo), and ensure that it's launch was backed up with cutting edge titles like Gears of War and the newest generation of EA Sports titles. A cheaper launch price than the PS3 was also big boost, but the corresponding deficiency in hardware meant that the 360 aged faster and today it is somewhat disappointing how games require multi-gig installations to play at their full potential. Nonetheless, the promise of bigger markets meant that they had an edge in attracting developers over Sony. To this day, multi platform developers often design their games first and foremost for the 360 over the PS3. The biggest coup however were the Xbox Dashboard and Xbox Live Marketplace which was easy to use, shamelessly imitative of Nintendo, and offered loads of consumer options very early on. I really don't know why it ended up being more successful than the Playstation Network (the two seemed fairly equal to me), but it certainly was. Their overall marketing of their platform was superior and the slow death of Blue Ray is evidence of this. Of course their biggest mistake was the legendary hardware problems that accompanied their launch. If their next console has red rings of death than it will be very bad news for them indeed. In general, I think that they suffered gaining a reputation for inferior hardware compared to Sony.

But that's just the way I see it. I might be full of crap.

#5 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

"Starting with Sony obviously launch was a big mess with a ridiculousprice point, shortages and missing features but then stuff straightenedout"

yea because RROD was not a big mess

not at all

#6 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

Sony made the wrong choice to invest heavily in new IPs that largely went nowhere, even if the games that resulted were quite good ( killzone, resistance, Infamous) and price their console too high and too different than the mainstream development environment. They also made the mistake of centering their OS around the single console experience rather than the window into a marketplace of content experience that became the trend.

Nintendo made the mistake of not being prepared to jump into their next thing when the Wii started to become stale a few years after its explosive debut.

Microsoft largely did things right, but in the last few years they have made the mistakes of believing that in-house development is not worth the expense and focusing on "entertainment" and selling non-game content. I believe that without strong first party development third party development stagnates into the same old shit over and over.