The Shrine

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://cube.ign.com/news/33194.html">Fo ... .morons</a>

Slammed, big time!</div>

<div style='font: 14pt Draconwick, Modern; text-align: left; '>Good artical. I am definitly offended by the ignorance repeatedly demonstrated by the words of the author.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Garamond, Modern; text-align: left; '>Trying to counter opinion with opinion? It's called spitting into the wind...the rebuttal is just as moronic and slanted as the original article..</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Modern; text-align: left; '>First I was gonna argue with you, then I re-read it. :P</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Times New Roman", Modern; text-align: left; '>Forbes had it coming to them.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Every real analysis I've read has been saying that Gamecube will be the 3rd system behind X-Box and PSX2. This analysis is perfectly consistent with what everyone's been saying. Nintendo holds a lot of top sellers but this doesn't mean the system is necessarily successful. We typically don't consider the success of the system based on how much the first party made. Sega games sold a huge amount of titles considering how small the installed base of Dreamcast is relative to its competitors. In fact I daresay that if Sega had the installed base of N64, they'd capture most of the best sellers... and the Dreamcast will still be dead.

Nintendo rattles off their huge market share statistics a lot, but I'd like to see just how much of that is Gameboy, and how of that is N64. No disrespect to the Gameboy, but the success in Gameboy is simply not relevant in the next generation console wars. It's hard for me to imagine that the Gameboy wouldn't hold 50%+ to much more of Nintendo's entire sales consider Gameboy is a runaway success on a monopoly market, while Nintendo is in a heavily contested market, and Sony is clearly the winner here.

The gaming sites are the ones that need to analysis the market more before they decide "Well XYZ makes good games, they must be the one to win." The market is anything but that. The analysis is not based on whether Joe Hardcore Gamer will want this system or not. The IGN analysis is shallow at best, though laughable is perhaps a better word as the guy who wrote this article obviously has no economic sense. I'll be the first to say that Sega has probably made the best games in the industry in the last year or so, but it doesn't change the fact that they're dead one bit. Microsoft has a powerful name brand recognition, and the money and 3rd party support to make an entrance. Nintendo will probably keep the younger audience share, but that's no surprise. Gameboy is making a huge amount of money at this market. Yeah Nintendo themselves will be fine. Pokemon is like a license to print money. The Gameboy will not be dethroned for a long, long time. They'll probably get a lot of best sellers since their core group of fans is very loyal, similar to that of the Dreamcast. But system wars aren't determined by the small group of loyal fans. Not by a longshot.</div>

<div style='font: bold 9pt Modern; text-align: left; '>I don't necesarily agree with the rebuttal, but whoever did write the Forbes article needs some better writing techniques.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>So far, nothing seams to be consistant in the Videogame world,

First gen NES takes all, SMS appears

16 bit- Sega and Nintendo in a relative split

32/64 bit - PSX sells the most consoles, N64 which was extremely succesful at first (sold 10M faster than any console in History) is not very succesful again until the release of Zelda. Saturn sold 7 Million total

Next Generation - Who knows. Forbes is pretty stupid assuming Nintendo only has what they had on the N64, they also have half the PSX developers or more primarilly supporting their console.

As far as systems go, I stopped really caring all that much a while ago, Dreamcast's line-up won't be recieving many more titles, but would I give up Dreamcast for any other console at the moment F*** no!</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>You learn not to contradict your own statements to argue different points in Elementary School</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion, Modern; text-align: left; '>It's just wrong on soo many levels</div>

<div style='font: 9pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Microsoft is going after the same market as Sony with only half of the developers. Their 1st party games aren't that great and they won't have any of the major games from 3rd parties. Plus sony already has an installed user base of 10 million. Microsoft will be crushed by Sony and Nintendo will swoop in for sloppy seconds. Nintendo already dominates the kid market and with their brand recognition and if the GBA and GC connectivity is marketed, Nintendo will easily gain a huge marketshare. The Gamecube should at least exceed the N64's performance.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Go check the article at Forbes again now, and you will see that they have edited it, mostly for the better, but check out their explanations for the editing in the footnotes at the bottom of the page! Funny stuff.

BTW, what are you apologizing for? This is the forum I mostly visit, so I probably missed something..</div>

<div style='font: 10pt arial, Modern; text-align: left; '>Is there ever a time when you don't play the devil's advocate, Don? :)</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial, Modern; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 8% 0% 8%; '>I'm a former and returning/new poster. I play online computer games and puzzle/RPG/adventure console games (though I love Tony Hawk).

You're right that opinion against opinion usually leads to ungrounded pissing contests or flights of fantasy, but IGN is right here. They quote facts as opposed to Forbes' opinions. Such as: Nintendo was a year later than Sega with its' 16-bit machine yet managed to outsell it by a factor of about 4 in the end (if I remember right), and the console's "skin" (if that's what they meant by "stylish") generally has about zero effect on sales. "Stylish" is an adjective about as far removed from any relevance to video-game demand as I have ever seen, anyway, in any sense of the word (and I can back that one up if you like, but my <i>opinion</i> is that that opinion can stand on its own). And other such facts.

Just to disagree. And hey! Nice to "meet" you though. =)</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>There's a big difference between what ought to be work and what does work. The gaming fanbase operates on what ought to work. E.g. if game X is good it ought to sell. But it doesn't work this way in the real world.
Hell, take Pokemon... most of the Shrine say it's the scourge of the Earth, and it's the most popular franchise in the history of video games.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>I agree......if that were the case. It's not</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>The writer was referring to the completely unsubstantiated points Forbes made. The fact that they new less than my grandma about games. It doesn't matter what happens, this article blows</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>In a way, that's true. But you're still missing the point. Forbes knows zero and is only going on hype and a grade 2 level economic analysis of the industry</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>Looooooooong story</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>DC has had an awesome year and a half. Too bad it's gone</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "Arial bold", Modern; text-align: left; '>Mental, Pete Wisdom used to be known as EsquE (which I still call him, but hey...). I'm pretty sure you remember him :-)</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Even grade 2 level economic analysis is better than no economic analysis at all.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>The only reason it sold at all was that it came in funky colors as opposed to the boring old white box.

How is the Nintendo versus Sega stuff in the 16 bit era has anything to do with the next generation system battles? At any rate, Nintendo do not possess the same kind of firepower that made them such a force in the past: 3rd party support. I find it hard to imagine that Nintendo suddenly will have this huge 3rd party support when the N64 is pretty much 1st party only. Yeah I heard Nintendo forces people to develop for Gamecube if they want to sell stuff on GBA, but you can't force people to make games on a system that's not profitable.

IGN's facts are the same as Nintendo propaganda. Nintendo's been quoting that they got 97.5% of the Top Sellers since forever, and that has never mean anything about the situation of the market.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial, Modern; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 8% 0% 8%; '>Whoa! Wow. Really? Hi EsquE!</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Garamond, Modern; text-align: left; '>...and howdy stranger ;)

As far as these articles go, the whole thing is pretty sad and makes game player's like ourselves look really, really pathetic. No doubt that the Forbes' article was sloppily written and could use more research, but the tone of it was clearly that of an editor's opinion. IGNIGNIGN, seeing a chance to jump all over a big name like Forbes, went absolutely overboard in picking it apart, unfairly for the most part. They took the writer's opinions and twisted them to say they were presented as facts, and proceeded to rebut with their own opinions, also presented as facts.

While Nintendo having a lot of top selling games is a fact, the idea that having those games guarantees success is an opinion (sure didn't help them outsell the PSX). While the Game Boy Advance is an excellent system, its becoming as successful as the Game Boy is an opinion, just as Forbes' saying that the GB Advance may take away from Game Boy sales is an opinion. While I agree that the look of a system means nothing to me, it may cetainly have a meaning for someone else...the whole lynchpin of IGNIGNIGN's proof of Forbe's hypocrisy is a rather minor issue, wouldn't you say?

It was the wrong way to handle the conflict, and came off as petty. It's easy to pick something apart, it's hard to rise above and lead by example...

<b>Spoiler Message:<b>
<span style="background: black; color: black;">...it's sad how the internet is destroying journalism...</span></div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", Modern; text-align: left; '>Sega always loses first. Duh!</div>