scottie said:
High margins on hardware is hardly a paradigm shift. Infact one could argue that if one does a thing for their entire existence (yes, even when they sold card they made a good profit on the hardware), then continues to do it, it is exactly the opposite of a paradigm shift
I would certainly buy a $250 N7 over a $100 Wii, as would most of the people on this or any other forum. However, a lot of people would choose the much cheaper option. Like the PS2, the Wii will continue to get the Guitar Heroes and maddens for a long time, and it will have a massive backlog of extended audience Nintendo games
Also, 30 tiems the power of the Wii for the N7? Really Squilliam? |
Sorry, not a paradigm shift but I couldn't think of anything better to call it.
Why would anyone buy a Wii when they can get a system which plays all the Wii titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely another $100-$150 more? What does Nintendo get out of it? They get lower margins and no fringe benefits for market share and 3rd party attention in the next generation. It simply doesn't make sense outside of the third world to release a console with such low margins which competes against their own higher margin products.
Yep and I stand by the 30* stance I made. The PS2 was 6.2 Gflops peak and the PS3 is >150 Gflops peak which is about a 30* increase. Since the PS3 has 600M transistors, they ought to be able to fit ~1.2B transistors into ~100mm^2 on the 28nm process at Global Foundries which translates into roughly double the performance and probably more in real world scenarios due to much greater efficiency per transistor, high memory bandwidth etc.
Tease.