GameBanshee Forums

Microsoft already has a software-to-platform-to-merchandising monopoly; a lot of good competing products bit the dust because Microsoft forced 'em out of business. In 1989, there were more than 30 word processors for the PC; now, there's essentially one. And that one can't do a lot of the things, even with all its vaunted technology, that variety provided before.

I'd be concerned if X-Box takes over the console market, however good it is. We don't need "one size fits all" people determining what we should play. And make no mistake, that's part of the Microsoft gameplan.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Microsoft already has a software-to-platform-to-merchandising monopoly; a lot of good competing products bit the dust because Microsoft forced 'em out of business. In 1989, there were more than 30 word processors for the PC; now, there's essentially one. And that one can't do a lot of the things, even with all its vaunted technology, that variety provided before.

I'd be concerned if X-Box takes over the console market, however good it is. We don't need "one size fits all" people determining what we should play. And make no mistake, that's part of the Microsoft gameplan.</STRONG>

I've told you all, that's why I don't like Micros***......They have evil plans, mostly regarding monopolising every related software market

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>I'd be concerned if X-Box takes over the console market, however good it is. We don't need "one size fits all" people determining what we should play. And make no mistake, that's part of the Microsoft gameplan.</STRONG>

They did try to buy out SEGA, but I guess money can't buy everything.

by fable
I'd be concerned if X-Box takes over the console market, however good it is. We don't need "one size fits all" people determining what we should play. And make no mistake, that's part of the Microsoft gameplan.

I don't know if it will come down to a 'one size fits all' anytime soon. For one reason, the Xbox is more expensive than the other systems currently available. Second, there has to be some level of loyalty out there to companies with recurring console system. I'll use myself as an example on both fronts.

I've always purchased Nintendo systems, back to the first console system, the mighty 8 bit. I liked the sega system, maybe even more than the super nintendo, however I wound up buying a supernintendo. Then I was faced with buying a N64 or a Playstation. Now, the playstation seemed like an amazing thing with tomb raider and all. However, my loyalties held true and I bought the nintendo64 because I felt there products had been solid all along.

My theory goes to hell here with the introduction of the xbox. It was with great pain and debate that I purchased the xbox of the gamecube. I almost felt bad, which is scary. Anyway, I diverted from Nintendo because I didn't like the look of the new controller and was not at all pleased with there game selection. Nintendo system games have usually appealed to the child more than the adult. I know I'll regret my decision when the new Zelda game comes out. I'll probably wind up giving Nintendo a bunch of money also.

I agree with Ned on just about everything.
Halo is great! Sure, there is a learning curve adapting to the controller, but the game itself is very good.

It seems that everyone's anger is misdirected at Microsoft. If you are angry they have released X-box, and their dominance in the pc industry as a whole, blame the US government for failing to completely break up the company.

But, Gates is a very heady businessman. He sees a market opportunity, and he enters that opportunity with the goal of dominating it. That is capitalism at its finest. He is merely exploiting the system.

@Ned, I read that the new Zelda game would take on a more "cartoon" feel then the titles on N64. Also, Nintendo is declairing the N64 "obsolite", now that they've released Gamecube.

PS, N64 rules Playstation.

[ 01-15-2002: Message edited by: Gaxx_Firkraag ]

Originally posted by Gaxx_Firkraag:
<STRONG>

PS, N64 rules Playstation.

</STRONG>

I sit here with my Playstation I bought in 95, the selection of games I have and I know which machine rules.

Originally posted by Weasel:
<STRONG>I sit here with my Playstation I bought in 95, the selection of games I have and I know which machine rules. </STRONG>

Just as I sit here with my N64 and my games, and I know which console is better.

To each his own.

Originally posted by Gaxx_Firkraag:
<STRONG>Just as I sit here with my N64 and my games, and I know which console is better.

To each his own. </STRONG>

Shouldn't that be game instead of games. Or did they make something else besides Zelda.

(Nintedo should had paid Sony for the machine instead of deciding to start over on their own machine)

by weasel
Shouldn't that be game instead of games. Or did they make something else besides Zelda.

(Nintedo should had paid Sony for the machine instead of deciding to start over on their own machine)

which zelda game?

actually, if you want to refer to the 'one game' for N64, it would be wise to select mario kart or turok: dinosaur hunter.

The playstation did have tomb raider and oddworld, but please, it is an equal to the N64 at best. Don't even tell me you played that mechwarrior garbage they released for the Sony PS.

If we should further dissect the two systems, one must analyze the vidstick. Far superior in the case of the N64. Perhaps still the best design to date although the xbox has a nice vidstick.

Ah hell, I must confess, after admitting my sacrilege I committed to the nintendo community by purchasing an xbox, I went out and a bought a damn cube after work. Rogue squadron 2 is very good.