By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Reggie: WiiU is profitable with just 1 game purchased

MDMAlliance on 21 November 2012
kain_kusanagi said:
For some reason it bothers me that they are breaking even on the system instead of selling it at a loss. MS and Sony have always sold at a loss at launch so we gamers don't have to empty our checking accounts to get the latest in gaming tech. I would rather Nintendo sell at a loss with higher end hardware or sell the lower end hardware for far less than they are asking for the Wii U.

If Sony or MS built a system today with the Wii U's specs would they have sold it for $150-$200 at launch? I don't know, but it kinds f sucks that Nintendo isn't passing their savings on to their customers. Especially with how much money they have in the bank and know they will pad their pockets with in the coming years.


Something for you to keep in mind:  Nintendo is only gaming.  Sony and Microsoft have other things to set them off so they aren't risking NEARLY as much by selling it at a large loss.  

 

edit: I'd also like to point out about your second point that Sony and Microsoft have large amounts of assets as well.  Microsoft overcharges on their OS, and Sony generally has a lot of profits left over from their glory days (but they're losing money fast).



Around the Network
Mummelmann on 21 November 2012
Pesmerga7551 said:
osed125 said:
Pesmerga7551 said:
animegaming said:
glad to see it selling well so far


It has nothing to do with how well it is selling.

The statement is like this: For every one WiiU console made, we have to sell 1 game at full price to have the console not lose money.

Because the WiiU sells at a loss per console.

I'm pretty sure 90% of Wii U owners bought NSMBU, so Nintendo is pretty much set.

No release in history, even at a launch period has numbers anywhere this high. To even think a game has a 30% attach rate per console purchased is unrealistic.

That's almost as unrealistic as Mario Kart Wii having over 32 million sales on a 97 million userbase.



Galaki on 21 November 2012

We can probably guess the loses to WiiU is $20 or less?



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

sethnintendo on 21 November 2012
Galaki said:
We can probably guess the loses to WiiU is $20 or less?

Minus one Reggie blumpkin.  You know anything that comes from Reggie will cost market value.



Veknoid_Outcast on 21 November 2012
prayformojo said:
And IF they had just went with a normal controller, the entire console would sell at a profit AND would probably be a little more powerful.

You're probably right, but would it sell as well? It might lead to another Gamecube scenario. Don't get me wrong; the Gamecube was profitable, but it performed poorly compared to its competition. The Wii marked a renaissance for Nintendo, and I think the company needs to continue its legacy of innovation in order to be successful.



Around the Network
kupomogli on 21 November 2012

So how many people are going to buy the Wii U not to play games?



sethnintendo on 21 November 2012
Veknoid_Outcast said:
prayformojo said:
And IF they had just went with a normal controller, the entire console would sell at a profit AND would probably be a little more powerful.

You're probably right, but would it sell as well? It might lead to another Gamecube scenario. Don't get me wrong; the Gamecube was profitable, but it performed poorly compared to its competition. The Wii marked a renaissance for Nintendo, and I think the company needs to continue its legacy of innovation in order to be successful.


Funny becuase I view the Wii U situation as GCN scenario now.  I don't really give a shit what third parties do with the Wii U right now but GCN didn't stand out enough.  The Wii U tries with the gamepad.  I'm not sure if the gamepad is enough but at least Nintendo tried to do something different with the controls (more than GCN generation).  Playing safety with controls will only get you so far (PS1, PS2).



Ryushi on 21 November 2012
Veknoid_Outcast said:
prayformojo said:
And IF they had just went with a normal controller, the entire console would sell at a profit AND would probably be a little more powerful.

You're probably right, but would it sell as well? It might lead to another Gamecube scenario. Don't get me wrong; the Gamecube was profitable, but it performed poorly compared to its competition. The Wii marked a renaissance for Nintendo, and I think the company needs to continue its legacy of innovation in order to be successful.


If it didn't, it wouldn't be having such phenomenal beginning success, or such strong third-party support; sure a lot of it are ports, but the fact of the matter is the Wii U is receiving some of the best games from third-party developers, including a decent looking Zombie exclusive. Regardless, the Gamecube had a rough time because of the fact it just lacked third-party support, or decent third-party support at least, and yes I realize you could try to say that about the Wii, but it also brought in Nintendo's attempts to enter the Online community, despite how weak it was. If you look at the Gamecube you'll see that North America practically got no games that supported online play, most of that was reserved for Japan.



Who?

Veknoid_Outcast on 21 November 2012
sethnintendo said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:
prayformojo said:
And IF they had just went with a normal controller, the entire console would sell at a profit AND would probably be a little more powerful.

You're probably right, but would it sell as well? It might lead to another Gamecube scenario. Don't get me wrong; the Gamecube was profitable, but it performed poorly compared to its competition. The Wii marked a renaissance for Nintendo, and I think the company needs to continue its legacy of innovation in order to be successful.


Funny becuase I view the Wii U situation as GCN scenario now.  I don't really give a shit what third parties do with the Wii U right now but GCN didn't stand out enough.  The Wii U tries with the gamepad.  I'm not sure if the gamepad is enough but at least Nintendo tried to do something different with the controls (more than GCN generation).  Playing safety with controls will only get you so far (PS1, PS2).

Fair enough. I might be being too optimistic, but I see the Wii U as more of a SNES. Meaning this: it has great first-party games from the big franchises -- Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Star Fox -- plus really strong support from Japanese developers, and many of the big multiplatform games that appeared on its main competition. I think that, along with the hook that is the GamePad, is enough to make it successful.



Ryushi on 21 November 2012
sethnintendo said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:
prayformojo said:
And IF they had just went with a normal controller, the entire console would sell at a profit AND would probably be a little more powerful.

You're probably right, but would it sell as well? It might lead to another Gamecube scenario. Don't get me wrong; the Gamecube was profitable, but it performed poorly compared to its competition. The Wii marked a renaissance for Nintendo, and I think the company needs to continue its legacy of innovation in order to be successful.


Funny becuase I view the Wii U situation as GCN scenario now.  I don't really give a shit what third parties do with the Wii U right now but GCN didn't stand out enough.  The Wii U tries with the gamepad.  I'm not sure if the gamepad is enough but at least Nintendo tried to do something different with the controls (more than GCN generation).  Playing safety with controls will only get you so far (PS1, PS2).

I don't really see what you're trying to say, there's substantial differences in the launches between the two. Could you be kind enough to elaborate?



Who?