How is changing formats and processors on every console using the same formula.  Releasing a console that is only 1.5x's more powerful than the previous one is taking a very small risk.  If it failed Ninty is not out all that much.  Risk is selling a $800 pc of hardware for $600, not selling a "new" console that made profit from day one.  Compared to M$ and Sony, Nintendo has taken no risk.

That's a stupid business decision to start with. You can't call it risk.

I found the statement funny cause apparently you and I have a very different view on what risk is.

Looks like I derailed the topic a little talking about profit. It turned into a very nice discussion though.  This was the thread that I had on my mind...   http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=57802&page=1

@kjj4t9rdad... I just wanted to ask how old are you?

 LOL, i am counting only the consoles PlayStation was competing with.I didnt counted PSX and PocketStation because they were only realised in Japan. PS2 never competed with GBA, Sony didnt have handheld back then. I was counting 4 consoles vs. 4 consoles and PlayStation obviusoly win. Nobody plays SNES and NES anymore, , but i think there are still people out there who are playing N64 and PS1. PS1 was more popular than N64, PS2 was MUCH MORE popular than GameCube and Wii is more popular than PS3 for now.

I dont get it why people are comparing company and brand. Nintendo is not a brand, Nintendo is a video game company.

PlayStation have PS1, Ps2, PSP and PS3. That's only 4 machines and its still THE MOST POPULAR BRAND out there

Nintendo have NES, SNES, Gameboy, Gameboy colour, N64, GBA, GameCube and wii. That's 8 machines. Twice as much as PlayStation. That's why is not fair to compare company like Nintendo and brand like Playstation. Its same like comparing Microsoft and Ipod.

The most pupular brand: PlayStation

The most popular video game company: Nintendo

Nobody said anything about profits made. You are just trying to change the subject.

don't feel like arguing with you, but you should really be consistent.  You forgot the DS just there.  

and did you ever think that the reason the PS3 is loosing this generation is because it forgot what IT IS.  Playstation is a video game company.  It TRIED to become more and that is why it is loosing.  Not everyone wants a Blu Ray Player, a shitty internet browser and whatever else was thrown in the system.  People buy video game systems to play games.  

Yes there are some people who buy PS3's or 360's for their Blu Ray or Netflix, because my dad did that specifically.  But tell me how that is gonna help Sony.  As you have shown or others before, Sony sells at a Loss their system.  So for those people like my dad and many others who buy PS3 for Blu ray player only it is screwing Sony over.  No accessories, no games.  And in our case, don't say buying blu rays cuase we just rent them. But i'm sure others do buy, I know that.

@blade---

you fail to get that Nintendo=Brand and company

@Kj/Zone---how is playing to the same market taking a risk?

to me and many others nintendo trying to go after a completely new and uncharted market while risking all the faithful customers at first is a bigger risk then playing to the same old tried and true crowd

but ehh maybe playing safe is now risky?

@BladeofGod, did you miss the entire discussion about R&D costs and what not relating to profit. Go back about 10-20 posts and that was what people were talking about.

 4 systems to 4 systems is what you want? Very Well then GBA + GB + DS + NES is a little north of 340 million consoles sold. So you can either keep it confines to a single timeline in which case it is a simple fact that Nintendo released more consoles, or you can limit it to the best seller where Nintendo has just been more successful. Either way Nintendo wins so I don't think it matters much.