Onoda, is that you? The war is over, you can quit fighting.

By this definition:
"Someone who is money-grubbing has money as their main interest and does anything possible to get a lot of it."

I would say Microsoft, with everything they have done and tried to do, it is evident that they are willing to go pretty far to get money and power.

They all want to make money and profit and have their own ways in doing so, Nintendo has succeeded best in making money from gaming, but it also seems to be the one who also values other things and doesn´t only have money as the incentive.

With game cube, wii and wii u nintendo had the lowest price among the three, largest amounts of bc with games and controllers, no online fees and those consoles rarely broke down.

I for one was supprised that many seem to think that Switch is expensive, I think the price seem reasonable, but 1,2 Switch would have been better bundled with the console, that game seem to have about same value as some of the free apps on smartphones.

And those of you who are calling amibo expensive need to look at the other figurines, toys etc., if anything amibo are cheap.

In terms of just overall greed and no sense of artistic ambition or integrity, it is without a Doubt Microsoft. Say what you want about Nintendo being underpowered or Sony trying to charge a bit too much for their consoles. You can see the effort and investment both of those companies have made towards gaming. That shows in their 1st Party studios and titles.

It's not just about making money, it's about making worthwhile experiences. Something Microsoft lost sight of when they started pushing their Kinect initiative all the way to the Xbox One-Eighty launch blunder.

Sure the costs of high end hardware have decreased, but the costs for low-end have remained quite constant because there is a minimum fixed cost for production. This has nothing to do with inflation though. Inflation still affects the prices even when they decrease. If there were no inflation the nominal prices would be even less than the trend you constructed. 

Guys...unless is going to circle back to the topic, drop it or take it to PM. We don't need this spiel every single thread.

A handful of games seem to pale in comparison to the list for the PS4 Pro, and I imagine that list will only grow. And you need the proper TV to get the most out of the system, which could be more of an investment for the system if you lack that.

sony with psplus and ms with live they were the first to grab money from consumers without being ashamed

MS was the first. Then Sony joined in. And now Nintendo. None of them seem to feel ashamed. Which one is the worst, considering they all do it now? 

It started on the original XBox, in 2002 if I'm not mistaken. Sony didn't charge for its online infrastructure until PS+ was introduced. But that service added features to what was already provided with every connected PS4. It's only with the PS4 that PS+ became mandatory to play online. 

Sega started pay to play online with the Dreamcast, charging $10 a month to access their games. It was a bare bones service and didn't work across all games. Rest assured there's no way Nintendo can have the least valuable online pay service ever, Sega did it generations ago.

I guess many here are too young to remember it. This was after their ISP portion of SegaNet folded.