I have to agree with those who pointed out the role of hand-held in those numbers but I also think that the article and perhaps more so the graphs themselves illustrate very well why Nintendo can come in last in back to back generations and still be happy with the results while a company like MS and Sony probably wouldn't be able to.
I'm fairly confident that if MS doesn't see good headway being made in the console market by the end of the next generation they will look for other opportunities. While they are able to absorb the costs and weather the tough spots there is always another way they could invest that money and if 12-15 years in a market isn't sufficient to become an industry leader with the kind of money they've poured into it already then I doubt they will see cause to continue.
If MS does make progress it could very well be at the expense of Sony, although I do doubt Sony is headed anywhere soon even if that is the case since they already know they can be extremely successful in this market. However in the long term even Sony will need to make adjustments if they are going to stay in the market.
I think ultimately this generation has shed a lot of light on why Nintendo is a tough competitor in this market and I would hope Sony and MS are taking some notes. Nintendo holding themselves to a product that is profitable from day 1 obviously has the advantage of being profitable but it also has a weakness of limiting what can be done within the scope of what consumers are willing to pay. As a result they are limited compared to MS and Sony who are willing and able to go negative to achieve success. In short they have a great advantage in the potential value proposition yet they have been unable to leverage this advantage so far. That is something that they should be looking at for the next generation already, and we should see what they've learned in 2-4 years at E3.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
