Who cares about the console war - THQ

By Ellie Gibson Published 7 April, 2008

Exec reckons it's "totally irrelevant".

Jack Sorenson, head of worldwide studios at THQ, has said he reckons the hardware battle between Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo is "irrelevant".

Speaking to GamesIndustry.biz, Sorenson said there's "too much of an emphasis on the sports aspect of who's winning and losing".

"I think [the console war] is totally irrelevant. Even in the history of the business, other than something like the Dreamcast, you can do decent business on lots of platforms," he continued.

"So the issue is not who wins, it's can an independent publisher do a good business on that platform. We're thinking everything from high-end MMO all the way to cell phones."

Just look at THQ's success with the Game Boy Advance, Sorenson said. "There's a ubiquity of gaming out there, and the platform is really just a medium. If that makes sense [we'll publish on] PlayStation 2 next year for something, PS2 two years from now.

"We certainly probably carried on longer on the GBA than most and had a very nice business out there because there're 80, 90 million GBAs out there - maybe a bunch left in closets and drawers, but there's still enough audience to buy them. All these platforms kinda win."

For the full story, visit GamesIndustry.biz - where fact is always relevant. Totally.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (35) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #1 4 years ago

    teh fanbois care!

    Edit: FiRSt!!!1111!!!!!!!1
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 12:39

  • miiiguel #2 4 years ago

    oh the blasphemy! what about the passion for the plastic and the circuits, and logo on the box ? Shut up, you're making sense!
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 12:39

  • agparrot #3 4 years ago

    If only all developers could be of this mind, and not feel the need to indulge in 'only possible on XXXX console' BS as a result of funding or marketing incentives by the console manufacturers.

  • Freek #4 4 years ago

    For gamers it's irrelevant but I'd image that if you're funding game development the installed base of your target platform is extremely import when factoring in potential sales. Which in turn would effect whether or not you'd green light the project.

  • Stu #5 4 years ago

    Poor old Dreamcast, being singled out like that.

  • miiiguel #6 4 years ago

    I know know the logo "only on ..." but not including the "possible" lexic. And those are the ones who are funded by the manufacturer. Like Mystwalker titles, it is a company built from ground up by MS, it would make no sense if they didn't take some advantage of it. And, anyway, Blue Dragon is suppose to come to DS.
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 12:45

  • monkie_king #7 4 years ago

    I reckon it's "totally brilliant". This is definitely the most entertaining console war ever.

  • agparrot #8 4 years ago

    @monkie_king

    This console war might have better graphics than the last one, but the last one had 2D gameplay, so was inherently better.

    u r teh next-gen fanboi

  • bigbadbeasty #9 4 years ago

    "the last one had 2D gameplay"

    It had gameplay!!! :)

  • agparrot #10 4 years ago

    I should probably point out that I was joking.

    There, I've done it.

  • Les #11 4 years ago

    "I think [the console war] is totally irrelevant."

    It's annoying that it's consistently called a war. It's competition, just like with cars, beer, insurance, TVs, etc. It tells you that gaming is a long way removed from mainstream acceptance.

    "So the issue is not who wins, it's can an independent publisher do a good business on that platform."

    Only half true. The platform holder has to be able to make money as well. If they can't, eventually they'll drop out of the business.

  • Moz #12 4 years ago

    The console wars have matter on several occations just talk to sega about Saturn and Dreamcast.

    Also it matters to MS, Sony and Nintendo as they need to generate enough interest to at least give them a big enough market share so that THQ and a like will develop for their system.

    Add to that human need to feel like part of a clan, if people weren't so passionate then they wouldn't buy so many games, I know i'm guilty of buying games based more on how they look or what platform they are on. e.g. if UT3 had come out on 360 first instead of PS3 i wouldn't have bothered with it cos Halo 3 is my shooter of choice on 360 where as I was looking for a new shooter on PS3

    edit: also think he should be grateful their is a console "war" as it pushes development so they have better hardware to work with, also if we stopped tussling over which console was the best then evently one would gain total dominence so then people would turn to the different games publishers for their brandloyalty fix.
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 13:08

  • stampax #13 4 years ago

    There's a console war?

  • Moz #14 4 years ago

    *Hands stampax his glasses*

  • Mr_Brown #15 4 years ago

    Agreed. In the end, if all competitors are sucessful and are turning in a profit, then surely everyones winning in a business contest and just turns into an irrelavent pissing contest of whos 'most sucessful' which doesn't really matter in regards to each cometitor.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #16 4 years ago

    "I think [the console war] is totally irrelevant to THQ. As long as younger-teenage boys continue to like American Pro Wrestling, well be putting out games on any old platform that'll make us a fortune"

  • Skooch #17 4 years ago

    I care.

  • UncleLou #18 4 years ago

    "I think [the console war] is totally irrelevant to THQ. As long as younger-teenage boys continue to like American Pro Wrestling, well be putting out games on any old platform that'll make us a fortune"


    If their earnings from stuff like American Pro Wrestling means they continue to be one of the best and most daring publishers out there, I am all for it. If there's one publisher from the last few years with whose games I've had consistently great experiecnes, it was THQ. Company of Heroes, Stalker, Titan Quest, Supreme Commander, etc.

    Really, time to update these 10 year old prejudices that haven't been true anymore for years.

  • anomagnus #19 4 years ago

    stupid console war, why can't there be a single platform?!?!

  • Kremlik Verified Co-Founder, Crash To Desktop #20 4 years ago

    All that matters is turnover if the console makes profit for another console later on thats a success, take the Wii thats in no way 'going to win the war' however with the profit margin on the console sales alone your damn sure to find 'Wii 2' in the future.

    @Miii: FYI on Myst Walker, it's only funded by MS, it's owned by Hironobu Sakaguchi, but Freeplus was created by MS soley to help MW with coding and Artoon another group of coders work with MW and currently work on 360 titles, still Myst Walker isn't owned by MS only works with them and partner coding devs

  • Wyrm #21 4 years ago

    Console war is pathetic. People argue about hardware, why? It's a piece of plastic, it doesn't do anything on it's own. Worry about the games, not the logo on the machine.
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 14:51

  • fightman3b #22 4 years ago

    i think that peter molyneux is nothing but a publicity seeking cunt (also a chimp-faced motherfucker, but that's irrelevant at this juncture)

  • nickthegun #23 4 years ago

    "other than something like the Dreamcast, you can do decent business on lots of platforms,"

    YOU TAKE THAT BACK!

  • Les #24 4 years ago

    "take the Wii thats in no way 'going to win the war'"

    ?! Living on a different planet? It's beating the 360 and PS3 in sales without breaking a sweat. And it's generating lots of cash for its platform holder without ridiculous initial investments.

  • Calgon #25 4 years ago

    The platform holder has to be able to make money as well. If they can't, eventually they'll drop out of the business.

    Still talking the same bullshit Les? Again nobody is going anywhere this generation youd be unbeleivably idiotic to beleive otherwise, so why did it matter to begin with? Oh yes I forgot you're another obsessive anti-MS clown who pretends theres some deeper meaning for their need to troll.

    Since all three are making profit already(Sony have actually spent more than anyone this gen) then you can just drop your Anti-MS FUD tactics now... fun speculating while it lasted for you though eh?(how long have you been at it? a good few years now... noticed how much Sony have to make back on PS3 now have you? PS2 sales wont last forever and I doubt PS3 will do well enough to excuse PS4 from a fair comparison next gen... falling back on the PS2's success is all Sonybots have done this gen it seems)

    P.S: I agree Wii is the only console right now that looks like acheiving anywhere near PS2 like sales. I'd be surprised if they didnt come first place but Im not sure it will be by as wide a margin as some beleive, if sales do drop off as people notice the benchmarks on the other platforms are way out of the Wiis league, there might not be much in it in the end.(I beleive casuals are sometimes sold on graphics alone more than hardcore gamers are)
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 16:06

  • Amoebalove #26 4 years ago

    headbog cares, but then he is a cock!!!

  • bigbadbeasty #27 4 years ago

    @Calgon

    I think that casual users would not know good graphics if they came up and bit them on the arse. I understand what you mean though.

    I would say that the sales of the Wii have been so strong worldwide that I would very surprised if the others can compete now. If the sales do drop, Nintendo will just release new colour consoles, and/or drop the price a bit, and it will pick back up.

  • Dan234 #28 4 years ago

    @MrMilad

    "In my opinion the best option is a 1 console future, BUT with only the base technology being the same, with several companies putting their own spin on it."

    Like PCs with blue screens and driver problems? I'm sure there's a better alternative than that.

  • vegard #29 4 years ago

    Jack Sorenson is irrelevant. DELETE!

  • captainrentboy #30 4 years ago

    ...... Headbog and Apologie care, that's who!!
    Edit- Beaten to it, never mind.
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 17:45

  • Landmaster #31 4 years ago

    Spot on Mentalist, spot on. ;)

  • FourZeroSeven #32 4 years ago

    @anomagnus
    There is. Its called the PC ;)

  • AOFanboi #33 4 years ago

    Single console platforms have been tried (MSX, 3DO) and not much came of them.

    Competition === good.

  • neosalad #34 4 years ago

    hmm..
    why no love for the dreamcast?
    silly man...

  • FooAtari #35 4 years ago

    "Add to that human need to feel like part of a clan, if people weren't so passionate then they wouldn't buy so many games"

    There is being passionate about gaming and there is being zealous about it...

    Anyway I don't really care for the hardware that much I just play and buy the games. Why can't people just be passionate about games?

    It's not totally irrelevant but some people take it way to seriously. As long as each platform is doing well, which they all seem to be at the moment I'd say that's all that matters really. Who gives a shit if the PS3 sold 1000 more units than the 360 last week.

  • zedzee #36 4 years ago

    I think he'd care very much if a console stopped selling or became second fiddle (like the PS2 is now to PS3).

    And why single out the Dreamcast? Does he mean he won't write any games for it now? Rather obvious! Or he wouldn't have written any games for it when it first came out? Even more obvious!

    THQ like every other developer is a business trying to make money and they have a business strategy (at least I hope they do) and they will follow that. Usually, that means follow the money and take any other incentives (cash injections from console vendors) along the way, if they're offered. So they're no different from anyone else in this or any other type of business.

    I've never heard of a company releasing something because of nostalgia or because they love something so much, they decided to foolishly sink the company's money into a venture that they probably knew would not sell well, but would mean they'd be proud to see it on shelves (if anyone's mad enough to stock it) or in a glass cabinet in their office reception!

    Useless article. BS comments by a BS developer.
    Edited by 3 at 08/04/08 @ 09:24