I did that in one thread and I admitted it, but if you insist on trolling me for eternity then knock yourself out.
Simply stating what you said before and comparing it to what you say now is not "trolling" you. Trolling is jumping up and saying the console of choice for the majority of the forum is for kids, soccer moms, and "grandpas" and the one you seem to like better is for "discerning adults." You just keep getting into threads where your words come back to bite.
I wasn't talking about load times. I was talking about the effect that cartridges had on third-party relations, causing developers to bail only AFTER people had already bought the console. Blu-Ray driving up the cost of the PS3 prevented people from buying it, but they didn't spend any money. The fact that the N64 used cartridges caused companies like EA to bail in the middle of the console's life cycle, essentially pulling the rug out from under gamers that assumed the console would have an acceptable amount of third-party support.
The cartridges had little to do with third party relations. Cart vs. CD was just a convenient reason that was palatable to the burgeoning internet at the time. It was actually the royalty fees AND the fact that the PS1 had a very hefty lead on the N64 by the time it released. Believe me, market leadership will start meaning a whole lot in the near future.
I don't think it applies because those DS cartridges likely cost a heck of a lot less to create in 2008 than the N64 cartridges did in 1996. I'm sure that Nintendo has revised their royalty structure due to the N64 debacle, as well. And I doubt that PS1 were much cheaper to develop than N64 games, either.
Here's where you actually contradict yourself. Cart vs. CD SHOULD be working here. But isn't. It is actually the simple fact that the DS is the market leader by a wide margin and this is coupled with the PSP's horrible game ratio, meaning people are buying PSP's and not buying games, which is probably not conducive to winning over third party support. And PS1 games were certainly cheaper to make because the graphical demands were very low. While the N64 was pushing boundaries, the PS1 stood behind it every step of the way looking like a fossil. Analysts expected that any day now the N64 would win because of graphical graphics. Didn't happen, and the PS1 zoomed ahead.
Yeah, as a matter of fact I do know what I'm saying. I'm saying not to put Nintendo a pedestal, because they got into the industry for the same reasons that Sony and Microsoft did, and can exit the same way you claim Sony and Microsoft can. If there's one thing that's permanent in the video game industry, it's impermanence. At one time Atari was just like Nintendo - on top of the world and insurmountable. Now they're all but gone.
Yes, Nintendo is in to make the money. So is MS and Sony. However the makeup of the companies is what sets them apart. The only thing Nintendo does is make games, it's mostly all they've ever done, ever. Their company as a whole is dwarfed by Sony and MS's (although they probably are bigger than their game divisions.) Nobody has been put up on a pedestal by simply stating the facts about the companies and the likelihood of them pulling out, of which Nintendo's is the least because of their continued profitability even in tough times and cash-flushed-ness, and Sony and MS's is greater, because of their current profit problems and missed goals, no matter what magazine reviewers say about the subjective quality of their games nor the passion of the people involved on the game side.
And each of the companies that left the hardware industry left doing SMART AND INNOVATIVE THINGS, not many were that "inept." No, not even Sega. The Dreamcast was the first console with a very robust online service (and DLC.) They attempted to take Madden head-on, which was a smart move because at the time Madden was weak. All of the "ineptitude" was attributed AFTER they left. And look how it will apply to this generation. Blu-Ray (while good for Sony until another Disc Format comes out) drove the price of the PS3 up greatly. They tried aping Nintendo with the Sixaxis, discontinued that, re-issuing the rumble controller. They keep screwing around with the basic model of the PS3, which greatly confuses the marketplace (MS for this too). These will all be considered "inept" should Sony continue to flail about and lose another billion.
OK, Nintendo is catering to 5-Year-Olds, Soccer Moms, and Grandmas. Sony is catering to adult gamers with discerning tastes, like myself.
I know this was a joke, but I'll bet ya that the Wii will end up with the most "discerning adults" by the end of it. For example, the PSP is obviously catering to the 18-29 male demographic, but they don't have the most males 18-29. DS does. The DS went through such a "identity crisis" of catering to "girls and grandpas" (with NWR piling on) and survived and is the darling of industry, the REAL Moneymaker, and will soon the best console ever released, just by the sheer number of new, different, and/or awesome titles (and MOUNDS and MOUNDS of shovelware timid third parties released because they were so sure the graphically superior PSP would win) that came out for it, no matter what demographic it's more-meaningful E3 shows were aimed at (hint: Nintendogs was the major theme for the DS in 2005. And Electroplankton. And everything else got a blurb)