Gaming's worst marketing/business decisions?

[Miyamotoo]

DonFerrari said:

KBG29 said:
Worst buisness decisions ever have to go to Sony and Nintendo on the Vita and the 3DS. These should both have been gaming phones as well as handhelds. The end of the dedicated handheld was already written on the wall, but the smartphone market was not settled yet.

At this point both have a major up hill battle to ever become relevant in the space they created. This is extremely sad.

Sony tried Playstation Phones with no luck, but that could be because of implementation

Miyamotoo said:

OK, you refuse to talk, but some clear facts: back than DVD player like that in PS2 had pretty high price, PS2 definitely had much higher price because of full DVD player, GC almost whole life span had around 100$ cheaper price than PS2, definitely mini dvd that plays only GC games had much less price than full DVD player that played almost every media, and that affected on lower price of GC.

You could fit some of PS1 games on N64, but not only developers would need to cut lots a thing from PS1 version of games but scaling some PS1 game from few hundreds MB to only 64MB was very complicated, expensive and requires lots a time, so huge majority of devolpers refues to do that becuse they thought it wasnt profitable. So like I wrote, reason why N64 had bad 3rd party suport and actualy is Nintendo console with smallest number of relased games (ask yourself why that is case when N64 isnt nearly worst selling Nintendo console), is very obvious very small size of N64 catriidges (max 64MB) for 3rd partys that were relased games on CD.

Its important to have good 3rd party suport, espacily today when 3rd parties are stronger than ever before, so its important to have also good 3rd party relationship, but not great 3rd party relationship didnt prevent Wii to become best selling Nintendo console ever, and thats why I didnt mentione bad relationship with developers like one of worst Nintendo marketing/business decisions.

I refuse because you have 0 evidence... you are giving conjectures. GC was always cheaper than PS2 because Nintendo was trying to sell it against a market leader with very strong grip on the market. And the drive wasn't 100,00 I'm sure.

Yes it wouldn't be easy to fit. But RE2 with 2 CDs fitting on one N64 cartridge is proof enough that it was doable. It just wasn't cost effective because sales weren't there to be captured.

Wii even though sold more than PS360 had very bad SW sales overall and only sold 1st party. And being Wii the only case of a console that sold a lot even with negible 3rd party support (and not to gamers in general, as you can see the plummet on WiiU) isn't evidence that you can succeed with no multiplats so it can't be taken of their worse decisions.

Nintendo sold much stronger GC with profit with lower price of $100 than PS2 that actualy was sold with loose. Like I wrote, I remember back then DVD player prety high price and with PS2 you had console with built in DVD playyer, that definatly had huge imapact on PS2 price, very posible for around $100.

Yes RE2 fit, and it was nightmare for devolpers, why is RE2 basicly only stronger PS1 game that ended on N64!? Becuse it wasn't profitable, it was very complicated, expensive and requires lots a time becuse very small size of cartridges, not beacuse N64 sales. You totally ignoring fact that GC had around 50% worse sales than N64 while GC had much better 3rd party support!? Like I wrote, why N64 is Nintendo console with smallest number of released games ever when isn't nearly worst selling Nintendo console!? It's very obvious that is because of very limited size of N64 cartridges, but you can keep deny that.

Sry, but in what world 915m sold copies of SW on 101m HW is bad, that is attach rate of 9, do you realise that only GC had better attach rate with 9.5!?

Wii is clear fact that Nintendo could succeed even with bad developer relationships, offcourse that is better that Nintendo have great developers relationships, but this is a clear fact.