Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Other Weblogs Inc. Network blogs you might be interested in:
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Subscribe with My AOL, MyYahoo or Bloglines
|
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-27-2007 @ 2:23PM
stephen said...
well, if it is simple technology, that means it's probably easy to make games for it, which means that there will be more games made for it, which means that there's a better chance of there being games worth playing on it.
which is exactly what happened/is happening.
Reply
9-27-2007 @ 2:50PM
xenon said...
"a system is only so good as its games"
This is true from an abstract, perhaps historical point of view. But changing perspective, the price, the looks, the (perceived) innovation factor of a system attract buyers, and buyers attract more and better games. Also, technical features (lack of a second analog stick on the PSP, touch screen on the DS, media support type, graphical horsepower) determine what games you can successfully develop on a certain system.
You see, it's way more complex and bidirectional than that.
Reply
9-27-2007 @ 3:14PM
Hirsbrunner said...
I think Microsot's Neil Thomspon makes a good point.
^_^
Reply
9-27-2007 @ 4:06PM
Obiter said...
I have no idea why anyone ever listens to any thing Microsoft has to say. They've never invented anything or innovated in any markets. Their entire business model is to sit around on their giant monopolistic piles of MS Office and XP money, wait for people with more heart and smarts to invent something (be it Apple, Nintendo, Google, nameless start-ups, etc.), and then either buy the company, the technology, or copy it (Windows, Zune, internet searching, Internet Explorer, Xbox, etc. etc. etc.). Hell, it is literally an industry out there to try and come up with something clever purely so that MS will buy it from you.
Anything that they do say about a successful product is almost always completely wrong.
Reply
9-27-2007 @ 4:56PM
Szu said...
For the fanboy translation:
We, at Microsoft, didn't feel like getting our asses handed to us on the portable market. Getting beaten in the console market is fine by us.
Reply
10-01-2007 @ 10:47AM
Neo Senku said...
Simple is fine. I personally think that the making of consles into do everthing machines is a bad idea. I've never been a fan of convergence. I'd rather a bunch of devices that i can get cheaply and will do what they do well, as apposed to giving you a bunch of extra stuff you dont want. Nintendo still has the idea that its a gaming machine and that should always be the main focus
Reply