By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Rpruett on 06 January 2012
Edit Thread
scottie said:
Rpruett said:
scottie said:
Rpruett said:
 They live and die the most by their systems. Microsoft and Sony have sustainable business elsewhere to prop their companies up if things go South for a generation or two.

 

In reality,  the Wii in my estimate was their last ditch type of console effort.  Crazy far out, Motion controls, bargain basement pricing, backwards compatibility for Gamecube owners.  No worthwhile online network initially, No HD.  Released last.  Priced the cheapest.   One more Gamecube, N64 type generation and a less than favorable handheld generation and I think Nintendo might just be publishing games on a frugile sense.  This generation for Nintendo had all the makings of a console that was built as cheaply as humanly possible, while trying to be as different from its competitors as it could possibly be, because frankly that was the only chance they had.

 

So now you have changed your tune to " They live and die the most by their systems. Microsoft and Sony have sustainable business elsewhere to prop their companies up if things go South for three consecutive generations"

Changed my tune? I said that in my first post.  Lol.

 

Excellent. So lets assume that the Wii U sells 34 M (ie about 30% of the final sales of its predecessor), and lasts for 5 years, that will take us to late 2017, then the Wii U 2 comes out and sells 21 million, leading to the Wii U 3 releasng in late 2022. Assuming it flops as well, then we have hit three consecutive failoures and thus we hypothesise that, as early as the year 2027, Nintendo may leave the home console business by not creating a Wii U 4! The end is imminent.

I never said the end of Nintendo is imminent.  I just said they are the most likely to be the 'next' to leave.  The wild success and profit of the Nintendo Wii has saved Nintendo for a forseeable timeframe in my estimate.  However,  Nintendo has no assets or sustainable business beyond video games.  Where as Microsoft and Sony have far more resources at their disposal for a bad streak of generations. If Sony wanted to adopt a strategy similar to Nintendo, they could produce the components of a PS3.5 at a bargain rate similar to how Nintendo created a GC 2.0 with the Wii.  And it's likely the strategy they would take if it ever came down to it. 


And yes, they only got through the N64 and GC years (making a profit every single year) because of the success of their portables. Well, lucky for Nintendo, the 3DS is to be the fastest selling console to 15 million units ever, by 2 months. Vita hardly looks like it's going to shake that dominance.

What were their profit margins on GC and N64?  I don't care if they ended up in the black if their profits were minimal.  Because that's precisely my point.  Minimal profits means Nintendo can hardly compete moving into the future.  Nintendo needs to make a profit because otherwise they are going to come to a stand still.  They don't have sustainable business beyond gaming.

Sony could drop handhelds tomorrow. That doesn't mean they're going to leave the gaming industry.