170 Millions Less for the Big N [Archive]

ezzkmo

11-26-2005, 11:31 AM

Nintendo has always been a smart and profitable company. I'm not denying the GameCube is falling off a cliff fast and never took off as good as the other systems, but Nintendo cannot leave the age 0-13 demographic untouched. That is a huge freaking market! You don't see 7 year olds posting on forums or writing up columns of what they want to see in games; all that crap comes from older teens and adults. That is why Nintendo gets bashed all the time, it's older kids writing about how they are teh gay and kiddy.

But what we fail to see is that Nintendo, unlike its competition, can turn a profit. They don't sell 20 million units at $400 and still take a lose just to gain market share. They sell their systems at half the price and still make a profit. They are smart and cannot afford to throw money away like Microsoft. Little kids don't give a shit about high-def. Sure it'd be nice, but I understand Nintendo's stance on this. Hell I'm 22 and am not getting a next-gen system because it wouldn't be worth it for me because my TV is crap. But I'll get a revolution because even though my TV is crap I'll get something new besides graphical updates.

They will be around awhile, as long as kids are still around. And Japan. (The U.S. is kinda harsh on Nintendo lately).

NeuroMan42

11-26-2005, 11:34 AM

Even at their worst, Nintendo is turning a profit. Nobody seems to notice this.

Very very ture. Nintendo has always MADE money.

carneconcarne

11-26-2005, 11:35 AM

i don't care about any of this as long as I can dl and play old games on my revolution.

Kelegacy

11-26-2005, 11:40 AM

Captain Awesome

11-26-2005, 11:42 AM

Even at their worst, Nintendo is turning a profit. Nobody seems to notice this.

"Profits went from $200 million last year to $150 million this year. Ladies and gentlemen, Nintendo is doomed."

Yeah but it doesnt project well to your home console owners either. They have always made money with their handheld market domination but slowly their console market is dwindling. Which is sad, because they have more than enough content to have a very domination game library. As for why they're not more agressive in that area? who knows.

ezzkmo

11-26-2005, 11:44 AM

Yeah but it doesnt project well to your home console owners either. They have always made money with their handheld market domination but slowly their console market is dwindling. Which is sad, because they have more than enough content to have a very domination game library. As for why they're not more agressive in that area? who knows.
2 reasons: lack of marketing and lack of balls. Which is sad. They do have much more potential if they would just change some things up and market the hell out of it the right way. But yeah, who knows why they don't...

Well they do have some balls though with their new crazy ideas (the DS, Revolution).

Steamtron

11-26-2005, 11:50 AM

I only own a Gamecube and to be perfectly honest, I have had no interest in buying anything new for it for a while now (the last game i bought was re4 last february). But I've got to say that I like the way they're approaching this generation; Sony and MS can duke it out, and they will just try to make the Revolution everyone's second console. If Nintendo has been able to make profit off the Gamecube which really hasn't sold well since they first dropped the price to 99$, it'll be interesting to see how much money they rake in if their Revolution strategy is a success.

Reanimated

11-26-2005, 12:02 PM

The downward spiral continues.

Rock on.

Morrolan

11-26-2005, 12:04 PM

I buy GC games very rarely. It has a much smaller library of interesting games than the XBox or PS2. What's interesting, though, is that I own as many GC games as XBox or PS2. Why? Because if a game is 100% stellar, I return it for credit toward another game. In the end, the GC has just as many great games as either of the other consoles, and has far less filler. Since I only have time to play the great games, that's really not a detractor, for me. I love my GC.

TheBrainKills

11-26-2005, 12:39 PM

The downward spiral continues.

Rock on.

Until next year yes, they should get a good boost from Zelda and hopefully the revolution will release early enough to recoup some losses. Still, MS and Sony wishes they could have Nintendo's spiral:

"Net profit fell to 36.63 billion yen from 46.45 billion yen a year earlier, in line with the company's forecast of 36 billion yen. The figure was higher than Nintendo's initial expectation due to favorable foreign exchange rates."

MasterEvilAce

11-26-2005, 12:41 PM

WTF is with all this "demise" news?

Nintendo going out of business
Apple going out of business
General Motors going out of business
Google taking over, forcing companies out of business

People need to calm the fuck down.

Heretic Machine

11-26-2005, 12:52 PM

Hell I'm 22 and am not getting a next-gen system because it wouldn't be worth it for me because my TV is crap. But I'll get a revolution because even though my TV is crap I'll get something new besides graphical updates.

Garbage. You're saying you won't get a 360 or PS3 because you don't have an HDTV, and you think that all they are going to give you is graphics updates? Well my friend, you haven't given the new XBOX Live a try yet. Besides that, HD is nothing but a slight graphics upgrade, which doesn't even compare the level of textures, polys, and general hottness that the systems are capable of. HD is just one small part of the big picture.

I mean, I'm getting a Revolution too, it looks awesome. But saying that a 360 isn't worth it just because you don't have an HDTV is an uneducated statement.

trip1eX

11-26-2005, 12:56 PM

Their net profit only fell 21%. They made $308 mil vs $370 mil the year before. The gamecube is slowing way down in the US, but also they have hefty Revolution development expenses.

This just in also. MS has lost $4 bil and counting on the xbox. So if they make $4 bil plus in the next 4 years they still won't have made on the xbox what Nintendo made in the past 6 months off the slumping gamecube and DS and company.

Abednigo

11-26-2005, 12:57 PM

LiquidRain

11-26-2005, 01:14 PM

Out of curiosity, how much did Microsoft's Xbox division and Sony Computer Entertainment pull in as profit for an entire year? I'm pretty certain of myself it was less than the profit Nintendo did in this "slump". (and this "slump" was half a year, not an entire year)

Also, if I remember correctly, do not forget that all these profits for years now have gone straight into Nintendo's warchest. They're sitting pretty on a very, very large pile of cash. (again, IIRC, I am extremely tired and I wouldn't be surprised if my memory's playing tricks on me)

If somebody has the numbers and can prove me wrong, then I'll gladly eat crow, but this is how I remember reading things.

ezzkmo

11-26-2005, 01:17 PM

Garbage. You're saying you won't get a 360 or PS3 because you don't have an HDTV, and you think that all they are going to give you is graphics updates? Well my friend, you haven't given the new XBOX Live a try yet. Besides that, HD is nothing but a slight graphics upgrade, which doesn't even compare the level of textures, polys, and general hottness that the systems are capable of. HD is just one small part of the big picture.

I mean, I'm getting a Revolution too, it looks awesome. But saying that a 360 isn't worth it just because you don't have an HDTV is an uneducated statement.
I agree I sounded ignorant. But the bigger picture I didn't really get into was the price and lack of games right away, even though it is impressive for a launch lineup. I'm limited on money and the games I do own are more than enough to entertain me right now. I'd love to get some of them 2K games, but I've heard from people that they are identical to the regular xbox versions, except for the graphics. And they've also said if you don't have an HDTV, you won't notice a huge change anyways. So why buy a new system and spend 60 bucks per game to get a few more pixels that my TV won't pick up anyways? And I can play my xbox versions on my Live account now as it is.

But yes I agree, Xbox Live is very innovating and I love the direction they are going with it. And there is much more the system can offer, it's an entire media center. I don't wanna discredit it. But I don't have wireless connections, media center PC with streaming goodies, HDTV, surround sound, or tons of cash. So I'd be missing out on all this anyways. And so comparing it to the Revolution, if it were out today as well, I'd get more bang for my buck with that i'm thinking, seeing as how they take the less-technology, more weird ideas approach. Just my opinion...

Exodus

11-26-2005, 01:27 PM

*shrugs*
you do realize this will all turn around when the new zelda game comes out right?

Royal Fool

11-26-2005, 01:52 PM

Oh My Gosh Nintendo Is Gonna Get Bought By Microsoft Oh No!

Exodus

11-26-2005, 01:54 PM

oh NO'S
what will we do :(
Microsoft is are teh b0rg T_T
picard save me...
now was I the only one who thought dr. crusher was a fox? :(

Blade

11-26-2005, 02:05 PM

Troi > Crusher.

Exodus

11-26-2005, 02:06 PM

I used to like troi but crusher's buxom and got that older women thing going on ;D

kokyunage

11-26-2005, 02:12 PM

you haven't given the new XBOX Live a try yet

That is why I think Microsoft will not take first place in the console war (meaning clear out winner, like the PS2 is this generation). Because some people aren’t interested in LIVE/multiplayer. Unlike some Xbox haters, I do think the xbox product will always be around because of its excellent multiplayer component. It offers something that others do not. However, Live only really targets more of the hardcore community. Other than hardcore players, who really is interested in the Live stats or player profiles? If you exclude Live, the Xbox360 is an AVERAGE console at BEST.

That’s why I think the next generation (PS3, Xbox360, Revolution) will be relatively split once each console has had 1-2 years out in the open market. At worst I see a 40 to 40 percent split w/ Microsoft/Sony and the remaining with Nintendo. Ultimately, this is really a success for Microsoft, being tied with Sony.

Sl1pstream

11-26-2005, 02:32 PM

Well, I wasn't sure what to expect from the DS wifi stuff, but if they keep releasing stuff half as fun as Mario Kart I'll continue to be a happy camper. It doesn't get much better than that. And if it's this easy to setup a multiplayer game with the Revolution via their wifi network, I can't wait to get my hands on that.

Mario Kart isn't that great online imo. Pretty laggy at times, even without any form of communication. Not knowing who you'll play, as you can't invite individual people, even when they're on your friends list, which changes in each game. Limited amount of players and tracks doesn't help either. Sure, the racing itself is fun, but you might as well be playing the singleplayer game.

Sure, it's easy to set up, but so is Xbox Live.

Achilles

11-26-2005, 02:49 PM

2 reasons: lack of marketing and lack of balls.They've got too much in the way of balls. Instead of sticking with better versions of what works, adding features that consumers ask for, and trying to win 3rd parties over- they cut their own path with some strange controller and tiny disc format or dual screen device with a microphone.

And I think their marketing is great. They make good commercials, usually funny and run them at prime time on appropriate networks and cable channels. I see more Nintendo commercials than I do Microsoft or Sony commercials. I don't think marketing is the problem.

What I think the problem is is them not shipping enough games or winning over enough 3rd parties by expanding their install base. Their games also aren't selling nearly as well this generation as they have last generation for the most part. When a month goes by without one game shipping for your system, that's a huge problem and it makes sense that their profit is down.

Of course they'll earn a profit, they could make nothing and earn an even larger profit if that's their only goal.

Achilles

11-26-2005, 02:54 PM

Other than hardcore players, who really is interested in the Live stats or player profiles? If you exclude Live, the Xbox360 is an AVERAGE console at BEST.You're forgetting about Live Arcade, Marketplace, PC connectivity, the sheer convenience of the guide set-up and all the other non-hardcore software features that it's got. If you strip away all its software features (which is the same as taking the Revolution's controller and throwing it away because really they're the defining advantage of the system) it's still the most powerful console on the face of the earth with the best wireless controller, so I don't agree with you.

Sl1pstream

11-26-2005, 04:24 PM

it's still the most powerful console on the face of the earth with the best wireless controller, so I don't agree with you.

You aren't comparing systems from the same generation, as Xbox 360 is next-gen (current gen, whatever) and it's two current rivals are current gen (or previous gen, whatever).

Without Nintendo and it's wavebird, Xbox 360 wouldn't even have wireless controllers.

kokyunage

11-26-2005, 04:48 PM

Live Arcade, Marketplace

So, to counter my argument you list Live and Marketplace? Both which require you actually require you to connect your XBOX online. Like I said, about 1/2 of the market won't be interested in pluggin in their console for MP, marketplace, or any other "online" feature. This doesn't mean Live sucks or anything. It just means some people aren't interested in what Live offers (most likely will be the same for any PS3/Rev features).

Kelegacy

11-26-2005, 04:56 PM

Exodus

11-26-2005, 04:57 PM

So, to counter my argument you list Live and Marketplace? Both which require you actually require you to connect your XBOX online. Like I said, about 1/2 of the market won't be interested in pluggin in their console for MP, marketplace, or any other "online" feature. This doesn't mean Live sucks or anything. It just means some people aren't interested in what Live offers (most likely will be the same for any PS3/Rev features).

half the market won't be interested about online?
okay, 'some people', the percentile of people who can't afford a high-speed connection, can't afford a 360 you mean. I completely understand. Sucks to be those people but yah, there will always be those 'some people'.

Now I know what you're saying, I for one had live for 2 month and that was just for the squad based game, can't seem to remember it for the life of me but it was the modern version of brothers in arms and is used as a command sim for the military. *shrugs* it was fun for 1 month, the 2nd month was devoted to burnout. Live is great, I love it, but other than those 2 months I didn't need it. It truley depends on what they do with it and the potential right now and what they are doing, it's great :)

Exodus

11-26-2005, 05:01 PM

KamaItachi

11-26-2005, 05:07 PM

So, to counter my argument you list Live and Marketplace? Both which require you actually require you to connect your XBOX online. Like I said, about 1/2 of the market won't be interested in pluggin in their console for MP, marketplace, or any other "online" feature. This doesn't mean Live sucks or anything. It just means some people aren't interested in what Live offers (most likely will be the same for any PS3/Rev features).

I hear what you're saying, but with the Silver/Gold accounts and different groups (recreational, family, pro) MS are trying to target the not-so-hardcore crowd this generation. Previously, with LIVE it was pretty much pot-luck who you'd end up playing and as a casual gamer, I got fed up of losing everything I played against the more hardcore crowd. The new segregation makes a much more hassle-free kind of live experience (I'm guessing) and with the the Silver accounts being free I think it might encourage those who wouldn't normally pay for it to try it out.

Achilles

11-26-2005, 05:12 PM

You aren't comparing systems from the same generation, as Xbox 360 is next-gen (current gen, whatever) and it's two current rivals are current gen (or previous gen, whatever).

Without Nintendo and it's wavebird, Xbox 360 wouldn't even have wireless controllers.I don't know how you can be sure about the Wavebird thing, it's a natural progression for the controllers to go wireless as soon as they can make them cheap enough. Nintendo didn't invent wireless and they didn't even include a wireless controller with their system. You had to plug in a dongle to get it to work, and select the controller port on a dial, it also didn't have any vibration. The 360's controller is essentially a wireless controller S, I don't think you need an example to follow from Nintendo to end up there.

I'd compare the 360 to other next-gen consoles but Nintendo hasn't seen fit to release anything on their system and Sony hasn't shown anything on their system other than the system itself, which will be comparable in power to the 360 but seems to include none of the software services or extra stuff. Right now the other two look pretty feature bare (not compared to past game consoles but compared to the 360s features), and the defining feature of the Revolution with the exception of its controller is the ability to download old games, which the 360 also has and is already doing.

Heretic Machine

11-26-2005, 05:33 PM

So why buy a new system and spend 60 bucks per game to get a few more pixels that my TV won't pick up anyways?

Go into a recent PC game. Turn the resolution down to 640x480. Then put in Warcraft II, and do the same. YOu essentially turned off HD for that first game. Do you still notice a difference? Ya, I thought so.

I have a normal TV, and I can see PLENTY of difference between Kameo and Grabbed by the Ghoulies. Perfect Dark Zero, and Halo.

Now if it's just about cost, that's cool with me, I'll agree that the 360 is at least $50 more expensive than it should be. But games and graphics aren't something that it's lacking, between Kameo, PDZ, and DoA4 I'll have the equivallent of what I had when the original XBOX launched (Halo, DoA3, and Oddworld)

Kelegacy

11-26-2005, 05:52 PM

Now if it's just about cost, that's cool with me, I'll agree that the 360 is at least $50 more expensive than it should be. But games and graphics aren't something that it's lacking, between Kameo, PDZ, and DoA4 I'll have the equivallent of what I had when the original XBOX launched (Halo, DoA3, and Oddworld)
This has me curious about what the PS3 will release with. Now, if they were smart, the PS3 would launch with FFXII and the Rev with Twilight Princess. Those games alone would potentially catch up with any headstart Microsoft had by releasing a year early. Anyway, Nintendo I'm not worried about--they will have a great 1st party title or two for the Revolution that will probably warrant a purchase at launch, but the PS3? I haven't heard much in the way of games (I haven't really been following much, either) so I wonder what would be available by the launch. In Japan it could launch with some stupid Irritating Stick game, or Mahjong, but here in the states it wont be so easy.

I never wish a bad launch on anyone, so I hope that the Rev and PS3 have some great games to start them off with. While I'm not interested in most 360 launch games, PDZ and Kameo are the only two I'd really like to have. And for a launch, 2 great games is really all you need (N64, anyone?). EA can fill in the rest of the hole with their raw sewage.

PantherModern

11-26-2005, 06:07 PM

So do all the swanky new Xbox Live! features make people not be assholes? I know it has the different sections, but that won't last long. Just like a guy jumping into a N00b room in CS, there will be people to spoil the party. I still can't play a game of Halo 2 without some complete jerk ruining the game for me. It's not the quality of the service that kills the fun for me, it's the caliber of the people using it. In some ways, making it that easy for people to play online kind of brings in the chaff. I guess it's ok if you can get together a big enough group of guys to play, but coordinating all my friends to be online at the same time and ready to play is a hassle.

Besides, for a system to be that powerful and awesome and have its best feature be an online service that they've had for 3 years is kind of sad.

Zeal

11-26-2005, 06:34 PM

Nintendo goin' down, niggas.

bapenguin

11-26-2005, 06:45 PM

I don't know...I really thought Nintendo's Wi-Fi implementation was half-assed. I mean friend codes? WTF. The fact that it will change with each title is just retarded.

Anyway...Nintendo isn't going anywhere...but they are no longer the "big one" as they used to be in NES/SNES days. Now they are a niche market for kids and fanboys of old who still wish to have their NES/SNES days back.

Kelegacy

11-26-2005, 06:54 PM

Now they are a niche market for kids and fanboys of old who still wish to have their NES/SNES days back.
Says the guy who's playing Joust and Smash TV on his Xbox 360. ;)

Exodus

11-26-2005, 07:23 PM

Says the guy who's playing Joust and Smash TV on his Xbox 360. ;)

If it's really him playing them then he knows better than anyone how it is then doesn't he?

jestercap

11-27-2005, 12:07 AM

A "real tough year," eh? Relative to last year or to target, perhaps, but in relation to the competition, Nintendo is having an incredible year financially, just like it always does. For instance, Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division (Xbox, PC games, etc.) lost over $390 million during its fiscal 2005 year according to SEC filings. I'm too tired to find stats for Sony, but I believe their entertainment division is losing money this year as well (as are most of their divisions at the moment).

And, as Nintendo notes, it is "sticking to full year forecasts of operating profit of ¥90 billion ($758m), net profit of ¥75 billion ($631m) and sales of ¥400 billion ($3.4bn)." Just a hunch, but with profits like that - not to mention that profits have been at or above those levels for quite some time now - I think Nintendo will be just fine. And yes, profits have decreased - but not to the point where it could be called a "downward spiral," especially with a new Zelda title coming out and expected strong DS and GBA holiday sales.

Plus, I think a lot of you - as "hardcore" gamers (although I would argue Xbox fans to be the true 18-24 "mainstream," and nothing even close to "hardcore," but we can get into that later) - are writing off the Revolution much too easily. Never doubt the power of an innovation that can reach out to the masses AND to a company's faithful fan base. Revolution is going to be absolutely HUGE, and that's not even the fanboy in me talking.

KamaItachi

11-27-2005, 12:28 AM

Plus, I think a lot of you - as "hardcore" gamers (although I would argue Xbox fans to be the true 18-24 "mainstream," and nothing even close to "hardcore," but we can get into that later)

Oh please, let's do.

Twigz'N'Berries

11-27-2005, 12:38 AM

The Gamecube is pretty much dead. However, if Nintendo focuses all its energy on the Revolution instead of trying to resuscitate a terminal son, they could have a prodigy that reawakens their latent console powers.
Nintendo is not doomed, but their last two consoles have essentially been flops...though I believe each of those 'flops' generated money. The 64 and the Gamecube have greatly tarnished the image of the Big N in some gamers eyes. However, the market for Nintendo seems to be shrinking. They have posted declines (not losses) for the past two years in the console market.
Nintendo is not out of the business by a long shot, but they need to improve on the appeal of their console or else things could get much worse for them there. At least 'N' isn't losing money on their consoles like MS...or is tied to a larger failing business unit like Sony.

Personal, I like MS and Nintendo (for the most part Zelda). I am only somewhat indifferent to Sony. But, that may change when the vaporware system PS3 becomes a reality. Until then, I am feasting on the Xbox 360 goodness. Mmm...Condemned...

bapenguin

11-27-2005, 05:09 AM

Says the guy who's playing Joust and Smash TV on his Xbox 360. ;)

Hey....I'm not saying there's anyting wrong with liking nintendo and the nintendo classics of yesteryear...hell SMB is a permanent addition in my NDS. :)

fitbabits

11-27-2005, 06:33 AM

Mark me up as one of those people who doesn't care what Live! offers. Maybe I'll do some more online in the next-gen, but I lived without it this generation, so I'll probably do the same next.

Quality singleplayer is where it's at for moi.
While I do care what happens with Live! (if only because Microsoft has so much riding on it and the people who love it REALLY love it), I agree that a good single player experience is paramount. Give me SotC over multiplayer CoD 2 any day of the week.

The Iron Weasel

11-27-2005, 10:55 AM

The downward spiral continues.

Rock on.

God The Downward Spiral was one AMAZING cd!

Achilles

11-27-2005, 03:13 PM

Give me SotC over multiplayer CoD 2 any day of the week.Especially CoD2 on Live. 8 player max?! Weak. I hope they patch that.

jwbxx

11-27-2005, 03:56 PM

This is coming from a hardcore nintendo fan. Nintendo was my first console, and ever since I bought every other one.

But GC was crappy at all levels. I thought ps2 and xbox mopped the floor with the GC. I hope nintendo does something with the revolution to turn things around in the american markets for them. Because if it doesn't, it will just be sony and microsoft as the big video game companies in america.

Losing market share in America is bad, even if you still are making a profit in other areas. The american market should be a top priority for japan. Instead of focusing more on what the Japanese want. Nintendo should focus more on what Americans want. Microsoft is doing that, and that is how they will become the solid number 2 in america.

mister_slim

11-27-2005, 04:34 PM

This has me curious about what the PS3 will release with.
Lair and Killzone maybe? I don't really care about Killzone, but Lair is one of the most beautiful games I've seen yet (and should be, for the cost), and Factor 5 does good work (as long as they don't spend too much time on the ground). The animation looks truly next gen.

Kelegacy

11-27-2005, 04:52 PM

Lair and Killzone maybe? I don't really care about Killzone, but Lair is one of the most beautiful games I've seen yet (and should be, for the cost), and Factor 5 does good work (as long as they don't spend too much time on the ground). The animation looks truly next gen.
Lair? Is that the complete name? And yes, Factor 5 is a great house. I WOULD be interested in Killzone if it was any good, and I actually think they'll have better success this time, especially after the PS2 hardware ruined some of their aspirations with the first game.

I hope there are some great games they are being tight lipped about, but then again, developers still have nearly a year to finalize their products for an American release, so announcements should be being made relatively soon.

Zeal

11-27-2005, 05:23 PM

I award this the best thread ever.

mister_slim

11-27-2005, 05:30 PM

Lair? Is that the complete name? And yes, Factor 5 is a great house. I WOULD be interested in Killzone if it was any good, and I actually think they'll have better success this time, especially after the PS2 hardware ruined some of their aspirations with the first game.

I hope there are some great games they are being tight lipped about, but then again, developers still have nearly a year to finalize their products for an American release, so announcements should be being made relatively soon.
Tentative, I believe. Gametrailers has a... umm, trailer. There are certainly a lot of games under development, including a Makai game (IIRC), but who knows when we'll see them and how good they'll be.

Zeal

11-27-2005, 05:32 PM

By the way, this is completely off topic, but does anyone remember the news story posted at EA explaining how the 360 CPUs worked? It stated that two of the CPUs were used primarily for Xbox Live Marketplace, Live!, etc. The main CPU was actually used for calculating game code.

I'd really appreciate if anyone could point me to that or repost it. Thanks.

Tohoya

11-27-2005, 06:31 PM

Am I the only one who thinks this looks eerily like the report back in the 80s that said that Atari's profit projections were way down? It lead to a huge downfall of Atari stock, and indirectly lead to the video gaming crash of the 80s.

Kelegacy

11-27-2005, 06:52 PM

I award this the best thread ever.
I'm curious. Why?

Zeal

11-27-2005, 06:54 PM

I'm curious. Why?
Because seeing Nintendo lose money makes me rub my nipple.

TheBrainKills

11-27-2005, 07:47 PM

Because seeing Nintendo lose money makes me rub my nipple.

I award you the Idiot of the Day award.

Nintendo is not losing money , they are just not making as much as they usually do. They are still making a profit.

You must have failed in your reading comprehension classes in school.

TheBrainKills

11-27-2005, 08:17 PM

But GC was crappy at all levels.

Lets see;
Windwaker ... yup crappy game.
Viewtifull Joe ...crappy
RE4 ..... crappy
Soulcalibur 2 ... crappy

And on and on ... (thats sarcasm in case you can't tell)

As far as hardware is concerned, the Cube is a better machine than the PS2, but not as good as the Xbox.

jwbxx

11-27-2005, 09:43 PM

Lets see;
Windwaker ... yup crappy game.
Viewtifull Joe ...crappy
RE4 ..... crappy
Soulcalibur 2 ... crappy

And on and on ... (thats sarcasm in case you can't tell)

As far as hardware is concerned, the Cube is a better machine than the PS2, but not as good as the Xbox.Wow 4 games that just destroys the argument that the GC was a DOA in america.

Hey disagree if you want, but you cant disagree with the numbers. Nintendo lost market share in america, and now faces being number 3 in the console wars. There is no real positive way to fanboy spin this up into being something good. Anyone who has ever picked up a console made by nintendo prior to GC, can tell that the GC is pretty much a mediocre system.

I call them like I see them, and this system didn't deliver.

TheBrainKills

11-28-2005, 12:27 AM

Wow, I said I could go on .... but it would be lost on you.

Numbers are clear that Nintendo needs to work with 3rd parties better.
I actually only owned the Snes system and I remember that being a solid system but it in no way compares to the Cube. The N64 system was a piece of shit in my opinion, damned fugly, with mediocre games. The Cube is a solid machine that has a lot of great games for it, but it's just not cool enough for the leet crowd. You have your opinions and I have mine.

Zeal

11-28-2005, 12:39 AM

Nintendo has been trying to "work with third parties better" since N64. Revolution will be a repeat of N64 and the GCN, I assure you.

I.e, a few quality in-house games and lackluster third-party support.

51|RandoM

11-28-2005, 02:56 AM

Nintendo makes more profit 'failing' than either Sony or Microsoft make 'succeeding'.

Maybe some people need to have another look at their personal definitions for success and failure. :-)

I don't know how people rank xbox over gamecube. I guess they place significant value in a large selection of mediocre ports? If it weren't for my friends who love halo/halo2, I wouldn't even own an x-box.

Achilles

11-28-2005, 04:04 AM

Nintendo makes more profit 'failing' than either Sony or Microsoft make 'succeeding'.Well Sony and Microsoft are more than just their game groups, which are currently eating the enormous cost of launching a new platform. Both Sony and MS made more profit for the quarter than Nintendo did it seems. (252 million for Sony)

I assume you were talking about the games divisions though. Sony’s game division sold 1.5 billion in Q1 and they still came in at a loss. Microsoft’s Home and Entertainment group (more than just Xbox) sold $610,000 and also came in at a loss. Nintendo (more than just games, they own a baseball stadium for example) sold $639,000 and made in profit almost what MS lost. What this seems to mean is that their whole company has comparable sales to Microsoft’s home division and is wiped out by Sony’s game division, but it either has higher margins, reinvests less, or both, so it ends up with a higher profit number than either division.

All the numbers in the second paragraph are one quarter behind so don’t directly apply to this conversation, but they show that Nintendo's profit doesn't come from bigger sales, it just keeps more of what it earns.

Twigz'N'Berries

11-28-2005, 05:27 AM

Nintendo goin' down, niggas.
U r a f-ing jackass.

Twigz'N'Berries

11-28-2005, 05:30 AM

While I do care what happens with Live! (if only because Microsoft has so much riding on it and the people who love it REALLY love it), I agree that a good single player experience is paramount. Give me SotC over multiplayer CoD 2 any day of the week.
Hiya Fits.

Have you tried the new Xbox360 Live? It tastes like candy. From the interface to the implementation, MS did their homework and really kicked but on it. Being competitive, the Gamertag creation was awesome.

fitbabits

11-28-2005, 05:35 AM

Hiya Fits.

Have you tried the new Xbox360 Live? It tastes like candy. From the interface to the implementation, MS did their homework and really kicked but on it. Being competitive, the Gamertag creation was awesome.
Not hooked into Live as yet. I hope to this weekend while my wife is away at interviews. From what little I've seen though (dashboard blades, etc.), it does look like the best kind of candy available.

At the risk of starting yet another flame war - beat that, Sony and Nintendo. :rolleyes:

Exodus

11-28-2005, 12:45 PM

When it comes to online, unless both developers do a complete 180(har har har), it doesn't look like online is going to be very good compared to the leap the xbox has taken. if anything true can be said they really did take the bull by the horns and are doing pretty damn well from what I can see.

mister_slim

11-28-2005, 04:45 PM