MaxwellGT2000 said:
Which isn't what you said at all, since you said things like "nintendo made money but it wasn't because of the gamecube." and "with all that nintendo made almost the same as the ps2." which may or may not be true since Gamecube had some of the best selling titles of last gen and most of which were made by Nintendo which means they brought in more money from that title, so they not only made money on the console but games as well, even then Sony had other things involved skewing things like PS1 still selling and selling software into the PS2's life and just like you said PS2 selling into PS3's life helping out those losses. Now if you're going to settle on that point than saying things like Gamecube not bringing in that much in profit, then yes PS2 likely did bring in more profits than GC alone, the only issue the only facts to prove one way or the other is collective data, and that proves the point of this thread that a business model that doesn't sell at a loss is a better way to go, since MS still hasn't made a profit on their game division and the PS3 has almost eaten away at the entirety of the PS brand, but if they had went with the sell hardware for a profit model, they wouldn't be in that bind, period. |
only the gamecube, then i said they make money of the gamecube+gba+GC+software sale, the gamecube was sold at 99$ last years.
but profits of the gamecube alone weren't as big of the ps2.
sony did it well with the ps1,ps2, and this time they decided to over engineer the console, big mistake, from the profits , but awesome of the engineering stand point.
Essay Pro