By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
scottie on 22 April 2010
Edit Thread
Squilliam said:
scottie said:
Squilliam said:


I understand, but given the paradigm shift to gaining relatively high margins on the device itself, I cannot see them wanting to continue selling a relatively low margin $100-150 Wii alongside the N7. In addition to that they probably wouldn't want to keep a console on market for the issues of the complexity to support circa 2000 technology 12 years after release with software.

Who would buy a $150 Wii when you could get a $200-$250 N7 with 30* the performance and with whatever new innovative features they might add?

 

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 2.5 times as much 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.

*travels back to the days when PS3's were backwards compatible*

 

Why would anyone buy a PS2 when they can get a system which plays all the PS2 titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely 2.67 times as much. What does Sony 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.

 

 

** This is incorrect for the PS3/PS2 situation, why would it be the case for the Wii2/Wii situation?**