"9 have tried, 9 have failed"

[fuchikoma]

I heard this comment was made by a NoA representative when talking about the ds vs. the psp and nintendo's track record. What 9 handhelds is he referring to or 9 companies?

[Nik Jam]

Game Gear
Game.com
Neo Geo Pocket Color
NOMAD
Not sure if N-Gage was included at the time
Wonderswan?
Some others..

[Artimus Gigan]

Yeah the Gameboy has outlasted the 9 systems, however the DS is not like the Gameboy in anyway design-wise. Also the other handhelds had pretty much a weak line-up for games. PSP has a rather strong line-up where as compared to the current DS games.

Also to add to that list of fallen handhelds, there's the Atari Lynx...

[Beat]

Almost all the mentioned systems, with the sole exception of Game Gear (and that was later phased out by the Nomad) were driven by first party software. Nintendo had a more attractive plate with both first and third party software, making their console far more attractive in the long run.

[Noukon]

Also the other handhelds had pretty much a weak line-up for games. PSP has a rather strong line-up where as compared to the current DS games.
The Game Gear had a decent library, and started out fairly well; if I remember correctly (since I had one, and enjoyed it), it lasted a couple of years against the Game Boy. Its major sticking point was its battery life, a downside which could be compared to the PSP, but at least the PSP can be recharged, and does not require its owner to buy six AAs for every seven hours of gameplay.

[Andy Mancini]

Nine systems eh? Let's see...

Game Gear
Nomad
Lynx
Game.com
Neo Geo Pocket
Turbo Express
Watara SuperVision
Wonderswan
N-Gage

[fuchikoma]

The list of 9 I posted on another board might be:
game.com
turbo express
game gear
nomad
ngpc
lynx
watara supervision
ngage
r-zone

I assumed he wasn't including handhelds like the wonderswan and gp32 since he is an American. I am not confident in the r-zone being the ninth.

[guinaevere]

What I think is an underlying misaprehension is that there can't be multiple consoles (tabletop or handheld) which are good products and sucessful in their own right. Where the idea came along that one will come along and blast the others out of the water, I don't know nor do I understand.

[fuchikoma]

The "can't we all just get along" sentiment is not macho enough for a field of male interest. Also the Japanese aren't against but are in support of monopolies and cartels. It is the western mind that sees them as evil. Personally I would like to see one non-proprietary handheld and console. Therefore anyone could manufacture the units causing them to be sold cheaper. There would be no licensing fee so the games would either be cheaper or the portion that was once the fee would go back to the producer/developer. The console wars would not exist although there would be brand battles but gamers could still play the same games as each other.

[guinaevere]

Personally I would like to see one non-proprietary handheld and console.:sighing: (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1141849&postcount=26)

Don't schools teach about coorporate competition benefiting the consumer (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1140873&postcount=12) any more?

[Artimus Gigan]

:sighing: (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1141849&postcount=26)

Don't schools teach about coorporate competition benefiting the consumer (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1140873&postcount=12) any more?Those are the rules I like

I know them by heart because they specificly benefit ME!

[SSJPabs]

:sighing: (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1141849&postcount=26)

Don't schools teach about coorporate competition benefiting the consumer (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1140873&postcount=12) any more?Now if only that were actually true :p

[guinaevere]

I resist rising to the liberal flamebait. :p

[CtrlAltDel]

I hope this isn't getting off topic, but...who won the past presidential election, I could have sworn in was Kerry, but last night I saw George Bush on Television claiming he was the president

..???

[PSPiscool]

i will travel from maine to calafornia with him for all the money bill gate's has!

[Jon Hanson]

:sighing: (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1141849&postcount=26)

Don't schools teach about coorporate competition benefiting the consumer (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=1140873&postcount=12) any more? Competition between consoles means I have to spend more money. I don't see how buying two systems benefits me. I read the post you linked to and the problem with Mynd's logic is that the Game boy had loads of great and innovative games and was reasonably priced despite lack of competition.

[Artimus Gigan]

I hope this isn't getting off topic, but...who won the past presidential election, I could have sworn in was Kerry, but last night I saw George Bush on Television claiming he was the president

..???POLITICAL AGENDA IS FORBIDDEN:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[guinaevere]

Competition between consoles means I have to spend more money.No it doesn't. It means you chose to spend more money if you decide to purchase all available consoles/games.

You don't *have* to buy any of them. None of us do. We need to get clear the difference between our wants and needs.
POLITICAL AGENDA IS FORBIDDEN:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:I do believe he was kidding.

[Mynd Hed]

Competition between consoles means I have to spend more money. I don't see how buying two systems benefits me.

Then don't buy two systems. As I pointed out in the post Gwen linked to and as Gwen just kindly reiterated in this very thread, you don't NEED to spend more money. You WANT to, because you WANT to play the games that two different systems offer. That's not a bad choice if you've got the means-- counting my Dreamcast and Gameboy Player, I currently own four major video game systems, and I love them all. But it's still your choice. Millions of people only buy one system per generation (if that often), resign themselves to the fact that there are going to be games they won't be able to play, and are perfectly happy. It's not like you'd ever have the means (let alone the time) to play EVERY game on the market, anyway.

I read the post you linked to and the problem with Mynd's logic is that the Game boy had loads of great and innovative games and was reasonably priced despite lack of competition.

Depends on what you mean by "competition." While comparable multi-game, cartridge-based handheld systems have been sporadic-- Game Gear was debatably the most successful-- there has always been some sort of competition for the Game Boy, from console systems (for those whose biggest concern was the games themselves rather than portability) to a Walkman to one-game Tiger Electronics esque devices to a port of Tetris on graphing calculators to a good book.
Even if you don't count any of the above as suitably major competition for the Gameboy, a single fluke doesn't disprove the rule. Just because one company, for a certain span of years, cared enough to make a quality product when they might have gotten away with less doesn't mean that the general rule that monopoly breeds stagnation is any less true in the vast majority of cases.
Besides, who's to say that if a more serious competitor had come along, Gameboy might not have kicked even MORE ass in order to keep up?

[fuchikoma]

A proprietary gaming unit is a monopoly that hinders the consumer's ability to freely choose software and therefore hinders software competition. This monopoly doesn't allow the introduction of compatible hardware substitutes therefore limiting hardware competition to those with their own proprietary format. If a new proprietary gaming unit enters the market then it must rally 3rd party support, already supporting other proprietary hardware, behind it otherwise it will cease to be, but to establish a new monopoly where monopolies are already present a prohibitively large amount of capital is needed to push and wiggle one's way into the market. This excludes anyone from entering the hardware gaming market except large corporations. The 3rd parties can support only a limited number of proprietary formats, or they will become spread too thinly and each software company will be competing too much against itself for people in the same region but using different hardware. Therefore an unofficial consenus must be formed to determine which hardware shall be the chosen one and receive gamer/developer support or the bulk of it so software publishers remain profitable and gamers remain out of debt. When a proprietary format has significantly less support than the competition it either dies which reduces gaming hardware competition or it stays until it can usurp the userbase and 3rd party support from the other hardware developer(s). This oscillation from one to many and back to one proprietary piece of hardware should be replaced by one non-proprietary format anyone can develop for, anyone can manufacture, and anyone can buy games for. Competition isn't needed to motivate the revision of this one non-proprietary format since software/hardware sales will begin to slump due to boredom and the investors in the hardware companies, the gamers, and the software developers will all scream in unison for change as they do now. This will always be the driving force behind hardware improvements especially the software developers who try to create games for consoles that have yet to exist and their pc's can barely handle.

[Mynd Hed]

This oscillation from one to many and back to one proprietary piece of hardware should be replaced by one non-proprietary format anyone can develop for, anyone can manufacture, and anyone can buy games for.

I have one of those. It's called a PC.

[fuchikoma]

Anyone cannot buy games for a PC unless they have the correct hardware components which is no different than having the correct console. When one buys a game for a console they are guaranteed that piece of software is compatible with that console. Gaming hardware developers agreeing on a single non-proprietary format for a console or handheld takes this one step further by ensuring all console/handheld games in a generation are compatible with any console/handheld in the market for that generation.

[GagaMan]

You know, if there was only one format for video games (much like there's one "main" format for video (Currently DVD) and one "main" format for music (CDs at this current stage) ), I would probably enjoy gaming a lot more. But that's rather off-topic.

[Mynd Hed]

Anyone cannot buy games for a PC unless they have the correct hardware components which is no different than having the correct console.

That's just not true. While many PC games have recommended minimum system requirements, none of them say anything like, "You MUST have a Voodoo2 or this game will not run." Unless you consider the requirement of having a monitor, keyboard, and mouse to be no different than a video game console, in which case, can I have some of what you're smoking?

Gaming hardware developers agreeing on a single non-proprietary format for a console or handheld takes this one step further by ensuring all console/handheld games in a generation are compatible with any console/handheld in the market for that generation.

That will just plain never happen. What happens when Microsoft says, "Hey, guys, this generation's console should have a hard drive for custom soundtracks and downloadable upgrades! How cool would that be?" and Nintendo says, "No, that'll raise the price too much. What we need is a small, relatively cheap console that can be moved from place to place easily."
I'll tell you what happens-- Microsoft goes and makes the console they think people want, and Nintendo makes the one THEY think people want, and the free market decides who's right (or, in the current multi-system environment, more likely than not the market decides that both are right for different demographics).
Under your model, the consumer would have no choice-- they'd either have to play on the console that the industry decides is the best, or not play video games at all. In the real world, variety is the spice of life, and you and I are free to decide which of the consoles on the market we like best.

[Noukon]

You know, if there was only one format for video games (much like there's one "main" format for video (Currently DVD) and one "main" format for music (CDs at this current stage) ), I would probably enjoy gaming a lot more. But that's rather off-topic.
Games wouldn't be as good. Competition drives creativity and quality in the industry (though I've noticed that the less popular games and developers tend to be the most creative and quality/innovation-oriented).

[SSJPabs]

I dunno about that, AT&T did things better in some respects of land-line phone operation than the group of corporations with COM in their names do now. Not every monopoly is necessarily bad.

Also at the most basic level you don't even need clothes. Just shelter and food and water.

[SuperLuigiBros]

Someone on GameFAQs used to say it was 17. I'd go back and check the list but I was banned (losing a game of Russian Roulette = account suicide).

[Master Moron]

That will just plain never happen. What happens when Microsoft says, "Hey, guys, this generation's console should have a hard drive for custom soundtracks and downloadable upgrades! How cool would that be?" and Nintendo says, "No, that'll raise the price too much. What we need is a small, relatively cheap console that can be moved from place to place easily."
I'll tell you what happens-- Microsoft goes and makes the console they think people want, and Nintendo makes the one THEY think people want, and the free market decides who's right (or, in the current multi-system environment, more likely than not the market decides that both are right for different demographics).
Under your model, the consumer would have no choice-- they'd either have to play on the console that the industry decides is the best, or not play video games at all. In the real world, variety is the spice of life, and you and I are free to decide which of the consoles on the market we like best.

I think Fuchikoma is saying something entirely different. Under his(her?) system, Microsoft could have a system with a hard drive and custom soundtracks and Nintendo could make a cheaper, more portable system, but both systems would play the same game format. Just like many different companies make DVD players and many different companies make DVDs, but all DVD players play the same movie format.

[Mynd Hed]

I think Fuchikoma is saying something entirely different. Under his(her?) system, Microsoft could have a system with a hard drive and custom soundtracks and Nintendo could make a cheaper, more portable system, but both systems would play the same game format. Just like many different companies make DVD players and many different companies make DVDs, but all DVD players play the same movie format.

Except that then some enterprising company makes a game that REQUIRES Microsoft's hard drive, and you're right back where you started. If everything has to be compatible with everything else, then nobody can innovate.
It's hard enough to get home video companies to agree on a format-- witness VHS vs. Beta in the past or the upcoming (and potentially even bigger) battle between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD to see that. And a home video format is a relatively simple affair compared to video games-- just audio and video, no interactivity, and the format only has to upgrade every fifteen years or so as opposed to every five. A standard video game console format just plain cannot work.