By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
holzi said:
Endymion said:

This line of reasoning never made sense, even in 2017.

The whole Switch was setup to maximize profitability (unique development environment instead of being split, push toward higher margin digital sales and additional revenue through cheap DLCs, online subscription bring in recurring revenue etc.).

Switch is going to sell less hardware and software than Wii+DS yet the Switch era is going to be much much more profitable than the Wii/DS era.

Pretty funny that the PS3 is now considered a decent success and the Wii U is considered as a huge failure. The losses that Sony made in 2007 alone were larger than a losses of Nintendo over the lifetime of the Wii U generation combined and it took until 2018 for Sony to make up for the losses they had in the PS3 generation.

It depends on how you define success and failure.  If you define success as "was this console fun to play", then I would pick the PS3 over the Wii U.  On the other hand if you define success as "how profitable was this console", then the PS3 might be the biggest failure in the history of gaming.  (Although, we don't know how much money any of these XBox console lost....)

I personally think it is easier to make a console that people like if you are willing and able to lose billions of dollars in the process, and that makes the PS3's install base somewhat less impressive.  It takes more business skill to make a highly profitable console that is also well loved by consumers.  However, we tend to get at least one console like this in every generation, and I think everyone can agree the consoles that are both highly profitable and popular are successful.