Xbox=Cube=about 20 million sold - So why is one = failure?

[quote name='pimp tyranny']what was wrong with your xbox?[/QUOTE]
DREs. The thing about the xbox is that it has the most infuriating DRE message.
"The disc you are using is dirty or damaged".
Seriously, I keep my games in excellent condition, and it's insulting that they blame me rather than their shoddy drives. Anyway, I popped it open and cleaned the laser assembly and moved some parts around so that it was angled better, and it seems to be working again. Sometimes, the sound will skip though. Does anyone know why this may be?
 
[quote name='j.elles']...And for god sake Gamecube games aren't Kiddy.[/QUOTE]

Gamecube may have some adult titles, but the popular perception remains that Nintendo's games are child-friendly family entertainment. In my heart, Nintendo will always be the one company that censored the original Mortal Kombat for the common good of children everywhere. :D
 
Because the gamecube is rubbish at everything. They've got nowhere near the library that the other two systems have (in the u.s.) and the games we've got for Cube, save a few, are terrible ports or boring, should be rated EC, kid games that no one in their right mind would play. They have 'online play' but they released 2 games for it, and the service was terrible. The controller is rubbish, especially for shooters, which is surprising they even tried to release something on the cube involving guns
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Its a mistake to say that Microsoft loses money on the Xbox but Nintendo makes money on the cube. Both are profitable companies that lose money on their home consoles. MS loses money on each and every Xbox, but makes money on their other products, like windows. Nintendo loses money on the Gamecube, but makes it up with their other products, like the Gameboy line. One is #2 in america, and one is #2 in Japan, but their both fighting for second place worldwide. [/QUOTE]

I could be wrong, but I could have sworn that I read that Nintendo made a profit on Gamecube. Either way, they made a profit in the game business and MS did not - the difference is that MS makes more than enough other places to cover the loss. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison. The only reason people bring up the fact that Nintendo make money in this industry is when ignorant people claim that they're going to leave the market.

The fanboyism displayed by some on this thread is getting tired (not necessarily directed at you, Puffa). Claiming that one console or another is 'garbage' is juvenile asshattery. There are good games on all three systems, you go where the ones that appeal to you are. The only system I don't have is the Xbox, but I'm not going to bash it. It's a fine machine with a number of quality titles, the other two systems simply have more titles that I personally want to play (and I barely have time to play what I have). Don't be a hater.
 
[quote name='evanft']How about no?

PAD basically hit the nail on the head. Micrsoft can afford to lose $4 billion in one sector of its business, as they more than make up for it everywhere else. Also, they're willing to lose money in order to establish themselves in the console market so they can make money later on.

Nintendo has gone from absolutely dominating the market, to being beaten in two markets by Sega, to being outsold 3:1 by the newcomer Sony, to being outsold 4:1 by Sony and losing to another newcomer. They're basically living on their handheld systems now.[/QUOTE]


Microsoft can afford to loose 4 billion?
If they could "afford" to loose billions then they could've afforded to sell the Xbox system for $50 and outsell the Ps2 & Gc combined!!!!

The fact is that the Xbox is the biggest failure in videogame history and they lost WAY MORE THAN 4 BILLION IF YOU COUNT THERE STOCK PRICE!

I know 3 people who own stock in Microsoft & it has dropped ever since the Xbox was released. Since 2001 i think they've lost like $25 per share.
That's why microsoft has been giving ALOT of dividends to shareholders over the past few years. These guys are psst over the failure which is the Xbox.

It's a great system from a gamers standpoint but from a buisness standpoint it's been a disaster.
 
Exactly. WebSlinger69, and all you other fanboys. Stop Hating. All the systems are great. And Nintendo is not a Kiddy console. The Controller, some games suck, and all the other things are opinion, i.e. subjective. And really have no point or bearing when trying to prove a point. Unless the game was abysimal 1/5 type thing.

I personally thought Metriod Prime 1 and 2 are the best overall FPS of this generation. Thats my opinion. I still like Halo 1 and 2. as well as Project Snowblind etc. . . I just like the other more. And I personally thought the controll scheme for first person shooters on the cube is great. But thats me thats opinion and only has bearing to me not everyone else. So I don't usually go shouting about it.

And I love and play pretty much only mature titles and I love the Cube. It's one of my most played systems. Especially since it has so many great A+ titles for cheap. Eternal Darkness was great and it's under $10. For graphics lovers, MGS TS remake is a must. For resident evil fans or graphics lovers RE1 and 0 and 4 are a must. Fire Emblem that I just broke down and bought is great. and plus theres all the other games. I thought most of the ports were fine and I say this from playing them and the xbox, pc version NOT reading some other article or something.

Really talk from experience and fact please. Don't be all like 'the controller sucks' or 'only kiddy games' or 'bad ports' because thats usually not true for everyone or only a half statement. Since for a few ports of ps2 games got horrible load times, and horrible graphics compared to the cube and Xbox. That and PS2's got a lot of exclusive odd kid style games too from what i've seen at the gamestores.
 
Damm right. Love the PC.

And that's kind of true for Microsoft. But I think there thinking long term. Microsoft makes so much money that if they can get a good amount of videogame market, the largest growing market in the entertainment sector, then they will have a better outlook for the far future

HAVE you seen SONY's profits for the past while. THey'd be bankrupt if they didn't get into gaming back in the day. Microsoft is relising that and applying it to them. Diversifying is good and will help them in the long run. That's not to say there pissed it lost so much money but like Gates said. There in this for the long haul.
 
[quote name='captaincold']
If they could "afford" to loose billions then they could've afforded to sell the Xbox system for $50 and outsell the Ps2 & Gc combined!!!!

The fact is that the Xbox is the biggest failure in videogame history and they lost WAY MORE THAN 4 BILLION IF YOU COUNT THERE STOCK PRICE!

[/QUOTE]

English muthafucker. Do you speak it?
 
It's because Nintendo makes a profit and the 'cube, and MS is losing boatloads of money on the xbox.

Didn't you learn anything from Mr. Internet Bubble[tm]? This is the 21st century, you're not successful unless you lose money.
 
[quote name='Stryffe2004']Personally, I am not convinced the Revolution controller is going to be enough to carry the day. It amounts to a "specialty" controller and third parties are not going to produce games for it in droves. How many non-Namco games were made for the Guncon? How may ghames use the fishing controller? Steel Battalion controller?[/QUOTE]

The Revolution controller will be packaged with every Revolution system sold, unlike the other controllers you mentioned which had to be purchased seperately. Not saying it will be a success, but at least the Revolution controller is standard and not a add-on that no one will support.
 
Only reason I haven't eBayed the GC is because of the new Zelda and that has already been delayed until next year. By then, Xbox 360 and PS3 might be out?!? WTF!?!

Since I bought the GC when it dropped in $ I've only bought Zelda and RE 4. Rented Metroid Prime but thought it was overrated. Otherwise I consider the system junk. But at least my gf thought it was cute that the GC had a handle?!?
 
[quote name='Morpheus']The Revolution controller will be packaged with every Revolution system sold, unlike the other controllers you mentioned which had to be purchased seperately. Not saying it will be a success, but at least the Revolution controller is standard and not a add-on that no one will support.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you there. I does have a much better chance than 3rd party controllers since it is the standard or default controller. I j ust wonder how many third parties will develop Revolution specific games, when they can just as easily develop the same game for the PC, PS3 and 360.

Thinking back, I have owned the SNES, N64 and currently have a GC. I don't have anything against Nintendo, so I hope it does not sound like it.
 
[quote name='captaincold']Microsoft can afford to loose 4 billion?
If they could "afford" to loose billions then they could've afforded to sell the Xbox system for $50 and outsell the Ps2 & Gc combined!!!!

The fact is that the Xbox is the biggest failure in videogame history and they lost WAY MORE THAN 4 BILLION IF YOU COUNT THERE STOCK PRICE!

I know 3 people who own stock in Microsoft & it has dropped ever since the Xbox was released. Since 2001 i think they've lost like $25 per share.
That's why microsoft has been giving ALOT of dividends to shareholders over the past few years. These guys are psst over the failure which is the Xbox.

It's a great system from a gamers standpoint but from a buisness standpoint it's been a disaster.[/QUOTE]

I guess that Anti-trust lawsuit had nothing to do with the stock drop. Curse you XBOX. . .!
 
[quote name='Morrigan Lover']It's because Nintendo makes a profit and the 'cube, and MS is losing boatloads of money on the xbox.

Didn't you learn anything from Mr. Internet Bubble[tm]? This is the 21st century, you're not successful unless you lose money.[/QUOTE]

LOL, I didn't realise there were any people left that still believe it costs Nintendo "$20.00" to make a Gamecube like that rumor from awhile ago.

Profitable at the original $200? Possibly. Profitable at $99? LOL!
 
[quote name='captaincold']The fact is that the Xbox is the biggest failure in videogame history [/QUOTE]

I'm willing to bet you're not old enough to remember the Virtual Boy.
 
Do people not understand that MS more than makes up for the loses of the Xbox with their other businesses? Or are people just that fucking stupid?
 
[quote name='evanft']Do people not understand that MS more than makes up for the loses of the Xbox with their other businesses? Or are people just that fucking stupid?[/QUOTE]

Let's say you worked in the perfume department of a major department store. Overall profits of the entire store were 12 Million. The perfume department lost 2 million dollars. Would you consider the perfume department to be a success or a failure? Regardless of how well Microsoft does as a whole, their gaming division is seriously in the red.

So Microsoft may not be getting out of the gaming business any time soon, but if the 360 performs as poorly (financially) as the Xbox, will they be getting out of the gaming hardware business?
 
LOL, I didn't realise there were any people left that still believe it costs Nintendo "$20.00" to make a Gamecube like that rumor from awhile ago.

Profitable at the original $200? Possibly. Profitable at $99? LOL!
Click to expand...

Video game console makers make their profit off of software licensing.
 
[quote name='captaincold']The fact is that the Xbox is the biggest failure in videogame history and they lost WAY MORE THAN 4 BILLION IF YOU COUNT THERE STOCK PRICE!

I know 3 people who own stock in Microsoft & it has dropped ever since the Xbox was released. Since 2001 i think they've lost like $25 per share.
That's why microsoft has been giving ALOT of dividends to shareholders over the past few years. These guys are psst over the failure which is the Xbox.[/QUOTE]

You are too stupid for words.

First, Microsoft stock has split since 2001. What does that mean? That means there's twice as many shares. If you owned 100 shares in 2001, you now have 200. That means if the market price was $100 a share when the stock split those 100 shares at $100 became 200 shares at $50. If shares are $25 less than before the stock split that means your initial $10,000 worth of stock is now worth $15,000.

Microsoft paid out massive dividends because they haven't paid one dividend since the creation of the company and were sitting of $50 billion in cash. You know eventually investors want to get back money from their investments. 30 years and $50 billion pretty much ensured a dividend payment would have to be paid as the insane market cap that people had been measuring their MS stock value had pretty much capped.

Shut your stupid fan boy freakin' mouth. Microsoft investors don't give a shit about any money MS is losing on the Xbox. Financial loses on the product hasn't come up in one shareholders meeting since it was launched.

You are the dumbest freakin' poster I've seen today and I spent time on the Politics board.
 
[quote name='klwillis45']I wouldn't call the 7800, TG16, and Saturn sustained consoles. And the NES bascially dominated the 8 bit era too. I don't really care though, I liked em all.[/QUOTE]

SMS only really did well in europe, didn't do much in the u.s. The 7800 was a failure any way you look at it, Saturn is debatable but is close enough to say the market sustained 3 consoles (as it was a major player during the bulk of that generation). The TG16 is the most interesting one. It flopped in the u.s. (although it did last from 89-93, it was marginal after the initial sega vs nec period) due to poor marketing and refusal to release many of the top games. Still, it cannot be considered a failure. Why? The pc engine (what it was called in japan) was an absolutely massive success, even outselling the famicom in japan.
 
[quote name='shipwreck']Regardless, Nintendo systems are now secondary systems. You buy a Nintendo system to sit beside either your Sony system or your Microsoft system.[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ. My Cube is my primary system this year.

But regardless, all current-gen systems are secondary to my SNES.
 
remember MS had given up on projects and got out of market that didnt turn profitable. Just because they have money doesnt mean they will throw it away. A few Xbox titles were drop by MS when they are not making money. MS is expecting the Xbox to at least support itself. If they lose too much money on X360 they will at least have to consider getting out of the market.
 
[quote name='shipwreck']Regardless, Nintendo systems are now secondary systems. You buy a Nintendo system to sit beside either your Sony system or your Microsoft system.[/QUOTE]

What's interesting about this is that Iwata seems to be embracing this position. He made a comment a week or so ago that the Rev would be unique enough that people who bought a 360 or PS3 would also want a Revolution.

Surprising statement in an industry that usually uses the "buy me instead of the other guy" approach, going for "buys ours too." This *could* work for them though. If enough people were to buy it as a second console it could still amount to a lot of units sold.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']You are too stupid for words.

First, Microsoft stock has split since 2001. What does that mean? That means there's twice as many shares. If you owned 100 shares in 2001, you now have 200. That means if the market price was $100 a share when the stock split those 100 shares at $100 became 200 shares at $50. If shares are $25 less than before the stock split that means your initial $10,000 worth of stock is now worth $15,000.

Microsoft paid out massive dividends because they haven't paid one dividend since the creation of the company and were sitting of $50 billion in cash. You know eventually investors want to get back money from their investments. 30 years and $50 billion pretty much ensured a dividend payment would have to be paid as the insane market cap that people had been measuring their MS stock value had pretty much capped.

Shut your stupid fan boy freakin' mouth. Microsoft investors don't give a shit about any money MS is losing on the Xbox. Financial loses on the product hasn't come up in one shareholders meeting since it was launched.

You are the dumbest freakin' poster I've seen today and I spent time on the Politics board.[/QUOTE]


So do i believe you or people that actually own the stock?

Microsoft stock split in feburary 2003 from $48 to $24 roughly.
Almost 3 years later and it's valued at roughly $25.

If you think the loses for the Xbox had nothing to do with that then your sadly mistaken. If they were making money on the Xbox i'm sure that stock price would be higher.

There's a reason microsoft scraped/sold or refused to publish numerous games.
Here are a few:

True fantasy online
BC
Psychonauts
Tork
There whole sports division
Top spin
Amped 3 (i may be whong on this one)
Phantom dust


Also i'm not a fan-boy & i don't know where you would get that from. I own more games for the Xbox than any other next gen system because i don't like RPG's & multi-platform games are usually better on the Xbox.
 
How about I know more about corporate finances in my little finger after passing my Series 7, 31 and 66 and working for Morgan Stanley for three years than you have in your empty little head. What makes you think I don't own Microsoft stock? What makes you think I don't have it in three mutual funds and a managed money account?

BTW Brainiac, MS split at $22 and has been floating between $25 and $30 since the split. So if you had stock at the split, you're still well ahead.
msft


Like I said, you're an armchair and message board economist that doesn't know shit.

They scrapped those games for one simple reason, they didn't think they would make money. Psychonauts and Phantom Dust drove Majesco into the ground. Top Spin and Amped were sold outright to 2K sports. TFLO; here's no sense in releasing an MMORPG for a console with 12-18 months of life left in it. You'd never recoup your development costs or operating expenses. BC was Lionhead Studios, that cancellation was their choice. So they scrapped their sports games, big deal. They sucked.

You'd be hard pressed to find any major game studio today that doesn't cancel titles in development or past franchises. Microsoft Game Studios is not exempt from that marketplace reality. They're no different than Nintendo, Sony, Capcom, Konami, Activision, EA or anyone else that looks at a game, doesn't like it, doesn't think it can be re-worked and cans it.

smartchart.jpg
 
Wow, thats a long bit of stuff to read, I'll just say this and nothing more. Dr. Pepper will prescribe a beat down to both Pepsi and Coke....that is all.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']How about I know more about corporate finances in my little finger after passing my Series 7, 31 and 66 and working for Morgan Stanley for three years than you have in your empty little head. What makes you think I don't own Microsoft stock? What makes you think I don't have it in three mutual funds and a managed money account?

They scrapped those games for one simple reason, they didn't think they would make money.
[/QUOTE]

So you own Microsoft stock? Didn't it close at around $25 today?
If so, you mean to tell me the 4 billion that the Xbox venture has lost never factored into the value of the stock?

It may have not factored into your mind but according to your own quote "They scrapped those games for one simple reason, they didn't think they would make money" microsoft as a company sure noticed!!!
 
[quote name='lebowsky']Let's say you worked in the perfume department of a major department store. Overall profits of the entire store were 12 Million. The perfume department lost 2 million dollars. Would you consider the perfume department to be a success or a failure? Regardless of how well Microsoft does as a whole, their gaming division is seriously in the red.

So Microsoft may not be getting out of the gaming business any time soon, but if the 360 performs as poorly (financially) as the Xbox, will they be getting out of the gaming hardware business?[/QUOTE]

If the loss was an attempt to get a foothold in a market, then it'd be fine. That's why MS threw money at the Xbox. They're looking at this long-term. They don't care about losing a few billion here and there if it means they can reap in tens of billions down the road.

[quote name='captaincold']So you own Microsoft stock? Didn't it close at around $25 today?
If so, you mean to tell me the 4 billion that the Xbox venture has lost never factored into the value of the stock?

It may have not factored into your mind but according to your own quote "They scrapped those games for one simple reason, they didn't think they would make money" microsoft as a company sure noticed!!![/QUOTE]

Scrapping a few games =/= Scrapping a console.

Again, think long-term.
 
the people at nintendo dont seem to focus on what america wants in gaming as much as they focus in japan.

Game selection is mostly platforming and rpg so your pretty much excluding 'cool' from ur system put some thought into it and concider that if a popular kid in school goes to school and talks about grand theft auto word will fly.

A nerd goes to school and talks about an rpg maybe one person is listening to him.

I dont think nintendos market here is just for kids I belive its for nerdy kids who probly are playing gamecube when the others are out dating.

Yes this concept is very out there.
 
[quote name='captaincold']So you own Microsoft stock? Didn't it close at around $25 today?
If so, you mean to tell me the 4 billion that the Xbox venture has lost never factored into the value of the stock?

It may have not factored into your mind but according to your own quote "They scrapped those games for one simple reason, they didn't think they would make money" microsoft as a company sure noticed!!![/QUOTE]

I don't check individual stock prices daily. I'm invested for 30 years worth of ups and downs not 30 days.

Here are some facts for you.

Current Microsoft Market Capitalization: $273,500,000,000
Annual Revenues: $39,700,000,000
Current Cash Flow from Operations: $16,100,000,000
Free Cashflow: $11,350,000,000
Current Balance Sheet: $37,750,000,000 cash reserves
Total Debt: $0
Total Debt/Equity Ratio: 0

Let's pro-rate that out over 4 years and say there's been growth in all sectors.

$140,000,000,000 in revenues. Roughly $60,000,000,000 in cash flow. Zero debt.

So let's see. What has the Xbox changed. Certainly not their revenues. They're estimated to lose $160 million this quarter on the division (Which includes more than Xbox.) so currently the quarterly loss will subtract 1% from annual cash flow from operations.

OMG, I'm losing sleep. :roll:

Find me a better way to enter a market that will expand to $58 billion in 2-3 years than Microsoft has. Nintendo's approach? Sega's approach? This project isn't going to be measured in a 5 year span but a 20 year span. Your day trading mentality doesn't comprehend that.
 
Ugh since this whole thing is opiniated my follow post might have some opinions.
Get the facts straight with Micrsoft, its a Trillion plus company, and the xbox was basically a test to see what they can do, and how they can excel in next generations. The cost of buying a computer with aronud the same power and such as an xbox is about 300 dollars, and they sell it at 150, how did they explain it? Software, they said they made like 30 dollars per ever software being produced, but they didn't want you to release so does PS2 and GC. Hell Microsoft can go 2 more gens without having to worry about money, they are just establishing a name in the video gaming business. They also have a kick-ass feature no other consoles have, the major pc-os out there, there gonna be linking pc-xbox360 games soon using XNA and they even have driver software to use xbox360 controllers on the computers. I would also like to say that I read somewhere this summer or last summer the xbox past the ps2 in console sales for each month, and thats because consumers wanted the better graphics.

The Playstation 2 probably had the best generation ever, I mean the first off had the first new console (that didn't go broke like dreamcast) and it had someone no one else had, backwards compatibillity. That made consumers to buy it now and not worry about the games, which they can buy later. And now that it has such a huge list of games those early consumers are paying off even more. The only bad thing I would have to say is that consumers bought the xbox more at the end of this gen purely because of graphics, why? I don't know.

The Gamecube, Ohh the Gamecube. This section will be completely opiniated due to the fact I don't really watch the GCN and that may also show that a lot of people don't. I don't even remember the launch date for this puppy, but i know the PS2's was in 2000 and the Xbox was 2002 or something. The gamecube seems to purely just be a hardcore only console ... and a kiddy console. Sadly that kiddy console has been the masking of what the gamecube is, and the hardcore part has been excluded. I think another turn off is the controller, comparing it to the ps2/xbox ones, it doesn't seem to flow as much. People don't seem to like minidiscs either (atleast my friends). This one doesn't have TRUE online play. All of the good games seem to be Mario Franchise here and Mario Franchise there. I know theres Zelda and Metroid, but those are also slowly evolving overused franchises too.

Summing it up:
PS2 - Started out the best and remained the best until the very end.
Xbox - Slowly started and has recently seemed to be the best (Halo 2 didn't affect this or anything *cough*)
GCN - Slowly started, and will slowly end...
 
[quote name='pimp tyranny']it's beginning to fell a lot like gamefaqs

ohhh i just can't wait for christmas[/QUOTE]

Yeah, the thread is about as useful as it will get at this point. I'm surprised no one has locked this mutha yet.
 
Any brain-dead idiot can see what Microsoft is doing:

- Losing money on the Xbox (costs ~$300 to build - sold for $150) to make a name for themselves - which worked
- Now they are producing a bugdet-concious console (360) that will make a small $10-20 profit per sale.
- So even if Microsoft comes in at 2nd again, they'll still have made profit between 2006-2010

It's so obvious... I might as well tell you that grass is green.



As for Nintendo positioning itself as #2 to Sony or Microsoft... that's cool too. Nintendo makes great games, and that's why I have a Cube sitting next to my main console.

troy
 
[quote name='Haggar']LOL, I didn't realise there were any people left that still believe it costs Nintendo "$20.00" to make a Gamecube like that rumor from awhile ago.

Profitable at the original $200? Possibly. Profitable at $99? LOL![/QUOTE]

You do realize that production costs decrease over time with ALL systems right? Whatever it costs Nintendo to make a Gamecube in 2001, it costs them much less now. Decreasing production costs and increased production effeciency is why the Slim PS2 exsits, why the GBA SP now has a backlit screen, etc.

Anyway there is an interesting mix of intelligent people and fanboys/mis-informed people in this thread. I'll just interject my opinions/observations. The bottom line (IMO) is this:

-The Xbox has lost MS a lot of money. But they knew it would. They intend to go the distance with this. How far is this distance only they know. But even though the system hardly appeals to me, they have done their job and succeeded in getting a foot in the door. I just worry that with the Xbox360, since with will likely be weaker thena the PS3, they will lose their edge for most 3rd party games (which aside from Halo was their BIGGEST asset in the eyes of the casual gamer). That WILL hurt. Plus the PS3 and Rev will have better online plans. SSBM online WILL give Halo some competition.

-Nintendo has made money off the Gamecube (as well as their handhelds obviously). Nintendo likes to do things cheap. The reason the GCN didn't have things like a DVD drive or a hard drive or whatever was to save them money. They also try either to be the first on the market with a new concept to give their product a huge edge/distiction (DS touch screen, Rev controller, the digital pad and analog stick from generations before) or they wait till they can do something as cheaply as possible. Nintendo could have gone all hardcore online this gen if they wanted but they waited till now so that they could minimize costs. Thankfully, they tend pass it on to us. (Free DS Wi-Fi) Their games tend to emphaize gameplay (which isn't expensive to do relatively) rather than graphics, sound, etc. (Not to say there haven't been amazing Nintendo games that fit that profile but Nintendo-made games are rarely super cinematic and what-not). It's why they are promoting many "non-games", as some call them, like Nintendogs. Cheap to make but often just as fun. Or look at their Pokemon series (the main games not spin offs like the GB games and Colleseum). Underwhelming in terms of sounds and graphics but the gameplay is ROCK SOILD so it sells and Nintendo doesn't spend much. This all reflected in their Revolution ideology. They don't care if they are third place case they still make tons of money by virtue of spending less. Plus don't forget every Zelda sold nets as much profit for Nintendo as 5 GTAs for Sony (I don't have the numbers of course and Nintendo has R&D costs to pay but it still ends up with Nintendo being able to make more money with fewer games sold). The Rev isn't going to shoot to first place but it won't need to. It will still make Nintendo money.

-Despite being the worst hardware-wsie, PS2 won cause it had tons of games for casual and hardcore gamers. Also, when it was first release, having a built in DVD player actually made a difference since at that time, affordable good DVD palyers were rare. I'm a little concerned with the format war. So far there isn't a clear winner in Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD. That could go either way and either hurt or help Sony. Then again, since the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD is smaller than the one between VHS and DVD + requires state of the line TVs to notice the difference, I dont't think format will be as big a boon next time around. Realisitcally, developers know the PS2 had the biggest usere base and will develop for the PS3 out of habit. Sony has to mess up BIG to not have a huge lead next gen. They could, but I doubt it.
 
[quote name='Crocodile']SSBM online WILL give Halo some competition.[/QUOTE]

Umm, yeah. . . I stopped reading right there.
 
[quote name='Haggar']Umm, yeah. . . I stopped reading right there.[/QUOTE]

So you refuse to entertain the thought that one quality fanchise might give another one some competition (which is different from rule/take over) if both were put on good online services? Not saying you have to agree but I don't see what I said that's so outlandish. However, I think that may speak more to your state of mind than mine.

Well thanks for taking the time to read what I said and, if you disagreed, to offer a temperate and perhaps informative rebuttal. I appreciate it. (/sarcasm)
 
Okay we don't know if Microsoft or Nintendo lose/profit from their consoles. BUT HERE'S THE FACTS:

- Microsoft's Xbox division lost ~$4 billion dollars since 2000 (yes this is a verifiable fact).

- Nintendo's Gamecube division has several billion in cash reserves (yes again verifiable by reading the anual financial booklet).



So even though many people consider Nintendo a "doomed console company", on the verge of becoming the next Sega (no console), the truth is that Nintendo is actually in GREAT shape.

troy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top