TheLastStarFighter said:
chris_wing said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
chris_wing said:
I'm just going to address this one more time. Nintendo isn't in the money loosing buisiness. Just because Nintendo has more money now then Sega did when they were forced to go 3rd party doesn't mean that it's not in Nintendo's best interest to become a third party developer/publisher. Nintendo mega fans react emotionally to the suggestion that Nintendo should or may be restructuring their buisiness to meet their only real goal, which is to make money. Nintendo could continue to be in the hardware buisiness for the next 40 years, but is it worth the title of "hardware producer" to be loosing money in a modern world where the video game console is far from the only place to play video games. When I bought my NES, SNES, and N64, those systems were my only access to video games. Today devices that play video games are litterally (not actually litterally) falling out of our ears.
Anyways, thanks for calling me an idiot.
TheLastStarFighter said:
Because Nintendo gets about 65% of their revenue from hardware. Educate yourself.
|
Um, are you guys going to tell him or should I?
|
What are you going to tell me?
|
Nintendo get's the vast majority of their net revenue from software. The Wii U is sold at a loss.
|
You're incorrect. Even if Wii U is still sold at a loss, Nintendo makes most of its revenue by being a hardware provider. Almost all hardware they sell is sold at a profit (even Wii U will be for about 75% of its life), and then a huge portion of their revenue come from licencing fees on software sold for their hardware platforms. The $7 per $60 game fee is pure profit that all of the console makers build their buisiness around. Even on 1st party software, Nintendo would make $34 on their own platform but only $27 on other platforms - in other words 20% of even their own software revenues are due to being a hardware platform owner. Your statement clearly indicates that you don't understand the video game business. Nintendo has stated that just under 2/3's of their buisiness and revenue stems from the hardware side of things.
|
Revenue from hardware, and revenue from licencing 3rd parties to publish on your hardware ecosystem are a bit different. Yes I know about licensing fees that hardware puplishers have, but Nintendo would out weigh the profits they make from third parties licensing fees by selling their own software to a larger base. They could also move to an open source platform like android to avoid having to pay licensing fees.
The idea that the Wii U will become cheeper to produce over the years is grounded in the idea of mass production, but unfortunatly the Wii U is selling slowly and the componant makers aren't producing the large amounts they had hoped for, which means that it will take longer for the manufacturing costs to fall. Nintendo launched the Wii U selling at a loss for $350, the Wii U is now selling at $300 and is probably loosing more money now per unit than it did when it launched & people are still asking for another $50 price cut.
I'll particialy withdraw my original statement, but if we are including licensing revenue then isn't Sony making more money on it's hardware? Isn't that "65% of it's revenue from hardware" claim dependent on 3rd parties actually publishing & having success with their games on the Nintendo system?
