Well, seeing as how versatile and easily upgradeable the PS3 has been, Sony would be stupid to go next gen since the PS3 can do a hell of a lot more for a lot longer than the competition. Why throw money away on a gamble if it is not necessary.
I don’t see either Microsoft or Sony in a hurry though. Microsoft has lost too much money with the RROD fiasco, but it also has a sustainable base of software, though the PS3 seems to be the stronger of the two now. They do not have to rush, but Nintendo does. The gimmick has pretty much run its course and they will have to do something within the next few years to maintain any form of third party development for the platform. Third party is already abysmal as it is, when the inevitable brick wall rears its head soon, that will be it for any non Nintendo owned IP on the Wii. That might sustain them, but it will not push them any further.
An “advantage” that’s reversed by the [url=http://news.cnet.com/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose]pain in the butt programing curve[/url] that developers find so difficult it’s harmful, the SCE’s infamous"rejection/cancellation policy against third party developers, and the ridiculously high costs to actually develop something innovative.
Are we even looking at the same sales data? According to a news report I just saw this morning: Wii is now over 60 million. It sold 3.8 million consoles in December. PS3 only sold 1.4 million and XBOX sold 1.3 million. Check it out: the DS sold 3.3 million. You can take BOTH competitors, combine their numbers, and Nintendo sells OVER TWO TIMES more than them. Nintendo is RAPING the market at the start of 2010.
On the software side of the market: Nintendo commands 47% of the market - with minimal third party hits (i.e. Nintendo alone). Microsoft has 37% of the market with massive third party support. Meanwhile Sony has a mere 19%. Things are better than Sony, when compared to how poor Sony was last year, but things are not better for Sony, compared to Nintendo and Microsoft.
I chuckle at how people keep saying that Nintendo lost 200 million dollars this year in profit, compared to last year. Well Microsoft also lost 200 million dollars this year in profit, compared to last year. So nothing changed there (which is good for Nintendo). What about Sony? Sony LOST 1.3 BILLION dollars. Yea. Guess what’s Sony going to do, like they did every year before: take money from another department to save a sinking ship. Again.
Stop reading the fan generated spin and look at the real economic numbers: despite any gains Sony has made, they are still losing this war. Badly.
Why does Nintendo have to rush? They made MORE MONEY than everyone else combined. How is that a sign that their doom is approaching? They’ve sold more games and more consoles than everyone else combined. How is that a portent of a dark future? What Nintendo needs to do, is keep pushing innovation and making the Wii more immersive. That is what gamers obviously want, because the sales obviously reflect that.
As for 3rd party support: you’re twisting it wrong. The issue isn’t that 3rd parties don’t want to develop for the Wii - the issue is that 3rd parties don’t know what to make on the Wii that’s successful. Huge difference. Once is abandonment, the other is learning to adapt.
I agree: the Wii and DS are not for the hardcore gamer. However the hardcore gamer is not where the profit is. Nintendo has no doom approaching, because a lack of hardcore gamers is obviously NOT going to bring doom. Doom is from a lack of casual gamers, who are freaked out by the price and lack of casualness that PS3 presents. Microsoft has made a lot of inroads for the casual gamers, and hoping that Project Natal is the nuclear weapon for their war. However as we noticed: no 3rd party developer has figured out the “secret” that makes motion sensing games earn massive profit. So far only Nintendo knows the answer. Without that knowledge, Project Natal is useless. Sony noticed that, and delayed their own version.
This is exactly why Nintendo hasn’t told 3rd parties their secrets: because they’re worried they might use it for their competitors. However I’m sure there’s backdoor deals going on, that Nintendo will at share it with the reliable companies (CAPCOM, Konami, etc) for console exclusives and deals to only make motion games on the Wii.
Did you know that the N64 sold more than 35 millions of unit (againts between 20 and 25 millions for the GameCube and first X-Box).
Did you know that until the DS and Wii, the N64 was the Golden Egg of Nintendo.Nintendo earned a fucking lot of money with the N64… And the record Earning for Nintendo that the N64 setted alone (in 1997/98) was only beaten by the Wii+DS duo.
Lot of people tend to think that the N64 was an Epic Fail for Nintendo.Market Share and Third party game wise that’s true… But Money Wise not at all.
In fact the GameCube, the DS and Wii dev and production was possible because of the Money Earned by the N64.
While the GameCube fail, people trhinked that Nintendo was going to Die… That was far, very far from true.Nintendo still had a fucking lot of money.
PlayStation sold over 100 million units, crushing Nintendo (and Sega) like an insect.
Misleading. The N64 was the ONLY egg of Nintendo, if you mean tabletop console wise. You’re also overlooking the GBA.
N64 made some money, but N64 did NOT make more money than the Super Nintendo/Super Famicon, which sold more than 49 million units. Also the GBA outsold them [u]BOTH[/u]: with over 80 million units.
Sure. I can agree with that, since Nintendo was not in the red.
The money came from the Pokemon franchise and the GBA. Satoru Iwata, president of Nintendo, said so himself. He’s widely considered to be one of three men who saved Nintendo, and made the company so godly it is today (the other two being Shigeru Miyamoto and Satoshi Tajiri).
I won’t go in a Quote war… But search on the net, and you’ll see that the N64 was the console which earned the most money to Nintendo until the DS/Wii Duo.
The GB serie earned Nintendo a lot of money too, but not as much.
The thing with the N64 was :
75% of the game sold on it was a Nintendo game.(35 millions of N64)… And for info, Zelda, Ocarina of Time was owned by about 30% of N64 owner for exemple… That’s a fucking lot of money.
The royalties and the cost of the Cardbrige that the Third party was paying to Nintendo was high… Very High.
What i’m saying is not a “Secret”, it’s well know and can be found very easy ^^
I don’t see it. I’m using simple arithmetic. 80 million (GBA) > 33 million (N64)
I’m also using the revenue reports from Nintendo. The N64 [u]DID NOT[/u] make more money than the GBA. I know that as fact.
Please provide me a link claiming otherwise. Just one will be fine. I can go from there on my own.
The Pokemon games made more money on GBA (Red/Green/Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald) than ANY franchise on the N64. Says so in Nintendo’s financial reports. I’ll see if I can hunt one down that’s posted online.
That’s why Nintendo didn’t have much 3rd party support for the N64. No one wanted to pay that bill. So they didn’t.
Could I ask for your source? I’m getting this data straight from Nintendo’s financial reports, so unless Nintendo itself is lying ¬ñ which I seriously doubt ¬ñ this is Word of God. I’ve uploaded the financial report for your own viewing here. It’s in PDF format. Listing of the information I’m quoting below, can be found starting on page 12. I know the data is dated for 2008. Can’t post a newer report, until Nintendo does so publicly.
As of 31 March 2008:
Yes. I know Nintendo is ignoring the existence of the VirtualBoy. It was that bad. Please note that the NDS and Wii listings are OLD and not what they currently are. To date the NDS has sold 115 million handhelds and the Wii has sold 60 million consoles.
So that being said, according to Nintendo itself, the N64 has sold [u]fewer games[/u] and [u]fewer consoles[/u] than the NES, Gameboy, and SNES (to say nothing of the NDS and Wii). Only the GameCube (and the unmentioned VirtualBoy) performed worst than the N64.
Also by average - rounding down:
So even in terms of games owned, the N64 is not first. The earlier NES and SNES still beat it. In fact it’s the second worst system Nintendo ever made - the GameCube - that had the most hardcore fans.
Narg, I was never arguing profits at this juncture. The Wii is an undisputed juggernaut in that fashion. But as a sustainable gaming system it is the least viable of the three consoles. It is more a toy than a system at the moment and that will take its toll down the line. The gimmick needs to be integrated far more into the hardcore gaming scene or the Wii will be little more than another blip among uber popular fads that fade and disappear.
Reason being: Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep sold an outstanding 177,405 units in the same week. I expect that game to reach 2 (maybe 3) million units total when it hits the West. Kingdom Hearts is the new Final Fantasy. I read somewhere that it sold half a million copies in two days.
The PSP Go will probably be a decent enough machine once the digital market starts to actually intensify for gaming. Unlike the Kindle and Ipod, the software catalogue was not present at or near launch, so the machine took a nasty hit in percieved quality.
Oh, no. It’s more expensive and not as useful as the vanilla PSP. And it’s not compatible with the PSP, insofar as you can’t take your old PSP games and switch to PSP Go. It’s DOA.
The price of a N64 game was around 80 to 100¬Ä and, it’s not a secret about 25 to 33% of the price was royalties for Nintendo (because of the High Cost cardbridge they were using), even on Third party game.
It was because of that that the Third Party run away from the N64, but also because of that that Nintendo made a fucking crazy lot of money with the N64.
So you can trow me number, that i already know… But don’t forget the good one just because you want to proove you right even when your wrong.
Okay… you’re probably just trolling me, but now I’m gonna call your bluff.
First off, the cost of N64 games averaged around 50 to 70 in US dollars per game. Secondly, Nintendo generated 10 to 18 in US dollars per copy of a game sold in royalties. That makes the ACTUAL percentages: 20% to 25%. Now that $10 to $18 profit is misleading, because Nintendo spent half of that towards manufacturing of the carts. Therefore Nintendo actually only made $5 to $9 in royalties.
Fun fact #1: this is the same exact amount in royalty profits, that Sony made for each PS1 game sold - which was an average of $9. Fun fact #2: PS1 outsold Nintendo by tens of millions.
[b]Here’s something you ought to read[/b]. A good deal is about conjectural theory of what Nintendo could have done right for the N64, but the data mining is solid. Numbers don’t lie.
Please prove to me that N64 royalties made a fucking crazy lot of money. Go on. Show me a link. It can be in English, Japanese, or Korean. I’m good for all three languages. I wanna see where you derived this data. Don’t give me that lame, “it’s not a secret” answer, because evidently it is.
Nintendo did not collect royalties until the games were sold via wholesale, and because third party support was horribly dismal and third party games were not purchased in mass abundance by retailers due to poor sales… Look up a royalty contract from the N64 era: it’s all in there. I imagine you have access to one, since you know all these “not a secret” things. I’ll help you out. You’re looking for the line that says: Royalty Payable to Nintendo. ________ shall pay NINTENDO a royalty equal to __%, without deductions of any kind.
Lookie. Using the sales record of all N64 games ever made, Nintendo would have had to pull around $500 worth of royalty per $50 dollar game sold on average. That’s right: 1000% royalty. So for every $50 game that CAPCOM released on the N64, they lost out on $450 each time. No way does that make logical sense. Nintendo didn’t charge more than $20 per game as royalty fee. So yea. The “fucking crazy lot of money” didn’t come from N64 royalties. That’s no secret. It’s arithmetic. :roll: Look here instead. That got more royalties out the ying-yang. Nintendo said so.
So you say I’m wrong? Please enlighten me: what are your sources? You keep saying “this is no secret” yet you’ve shown me NOTHING that proves it. Talk is cheap: show me the money. I have access to stockholder finances of Nintendo, dating back to 1996 because that’s when I became a shareholder, and I still don’t see what you’re trying to claim. I have the percentage of Nintendo’s profits from the N64 were for each month of the year. They greatly conflict with what your claiming. Since you keep harping on this royalty matter, I’ve provided a third party market assessment, with its own evidence and mathematics for validity. I’ve also posted Nintendo’s official statements.
You’ve given me nothing, but your claim I’m wrong. Not gonna cut it. Nintendo says you are wrong.
If you want to have a serious conversation about video game market profits, I’m more than happy to oblige. It’s an area that I happen to know a lot and have access to a great deal of information on. But if you’re going to be a rabid N64 fanboy, please stop before you make it worst. [u]Support your claims[/u]. Show me your “it’s no secret” evidence.
EDIT
Just brought to my attention that Nintendo did release their 2009 earnings in public, [url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?2eemj5e5zzy]so here ya go if you’re curious[/url].
EDIT 2
Do you know how much raw profit Nintendo makes for each Wii console they sell? [url=http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/28/nintendo-wii-wii2-tech-personal-cz-cs-1201wii.html]Six US Dollars[/url].
If that quote isn’t just hype, and an actual statement of fact… awesome!
All this time, everyone has been wondering what Nintendo’s next generation move in the console market would be, and the Big N reveals they’re going to revolutionize the portable market. Of course seeing how Nintendo already dominates that…
Devil May Cry or Super Street Fighter IV on a portable? Where do I sign up? 8)
Of course, then they’d have to charge more for it. I think a lot of the DS’s success is going to be because of price point (among other things, the Wii vs the PS3 proved that). So I’ll be surprised if that actually turns out to be the case.
The more powerful the CPU, the more power it uses, and thus, the worse your battery life
Cost would be bigger than I think the handheld market has been used to
Might use the larger format for it thus put in a larger battery. It’s still in development stages though so they’ll have time to figure out ways to get more battery life. Pricing is the bigger issue as Nintnedo has always tried to be the more inexpensive system to attract sales. To do that they don’t have much room as the PSP is 200 and the PSP Go is 250 (and isn’t that popular).
I read somewhere that it sold half a million copies in two days.