Nobody batted an eye at that because (a) Nintendo said it was standard protocol and that movies had the same warning and (b) because Japanese scientists' statements seem to support their position. (I will be honest, I cannot find any other support for that on the Internet. But given the way some websites that love to be critical of Nintendo -- such as Kotaku -- seemed not to have a problem with the statement, I tend to think Nintendo has a point).

Plus, the game can be shifted to 2D, it is not like the machine would be totally unusable by those under 7.

Mike from Morgantown 

Ha ha supply and demand my friend. I actually forgot you were the one out of three people who cares how much it costs to build the console. The reality is, 99% of people in this world don't care how much it costs to build something. If you can supply it at a reasonable price, people will be willing and able to buy it at the price, thus leads to Wii's success (somewhat). The price of the Wii obviously has not all to do with its success but its some of the reason.

And did you know 99% of the world likes to make up facts? Of course how much it costs to build the console matters. Hell, even you know should take that as a consern when you buy a product. Let's say you're buying a.... mp4. And let's say that there is a product much better than the iPod. Even tho this product isn't very well known, it's sold for the same price, but it's a new product, made on 2010, while the iPod was made on 2008. And the iPod is obviously the most popular product. Which mp4 would you choose? (Remember this is a hypothetical situation)

Anyway, I've explained on another post what I think about that: if a company doesn't even try to offer a good service to the customer, I won't bother to support 'em and I hope no one else will so they make fair prices. To me, the price of a console should be a balance between the supply/demand and the price to be built.

The production costs of an item shouldn't actually matter at all to your end. All that matters to you is the use / enjoyment you get out of the product, and whether the price fits that value.

Is the PS3 or Xbox360 worth paying more for, simply because they cost more to produce? What if the Wii is the most used console in the house? What if a $600 PC offers more / better features than the $800-to-produce (at the time) PS3?

The "production costs matter" argument can apply to videogames themselves, of course. Do you think GTA4 is worth paying more for because it cost so much to produce? Are 2D games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii not worth paying full price for because they cost less to make, even if the end product turns out more enjoyable than big-budget titles?

Companies like Apple or Nintendo are able to charge more because they create value out of ideas that their competition either hasn't thought of, or can't understand. As a result, these companies also happen to be the ones pushing creativity / innovation, so I'm glad they're as successful as they are.

Take your mp4 example: you say there is a product much better than the iPod, but what does that mean? It may have more features, but is it as user-friendly, as stylish, or as "fun?" Really, all that matters is whether the product itself is worth the price or not. You should be focusing on the differentiating features, the opportunity costs, stuff that actually affects the buyer (you), not the production costs.

It's not as if Sony owes you a price cut each time they reduce the costs of its system. While we're at it, why do you expect the price of Nintendo games to go down over time? If the game is good enough to stand the test of time, the price shouldn't be dropping.

There is a fatal flaw in that, one gaming machine does not equal another the same as the content on one does not equal another because unlike music formats you can't simply play a 360 game in a PS3.  So rather the price of a console is not only judged by the things it can do, the hardware it's built from, etc. but the content it provides, you simply cannot get a Mario game on the PS3 and vice versa you cannot get God of War on Wii.

Value is all relative to the person buying, when the demand for said product drops below what you want you drop your own prices to match the consumer demand, it's the basis of business lol

I really don't think they're aren't getting the criticism they deserve. I really do think they're getting it. And 2 address some specific things you mentioned,

1. Why would the 3DS need a 2nd analog stick when it has a touch screen? Almost every function of a 2nd stick can be covered by the touch screen.

2. Ur LBP & Mario Galaxy comment. I think LBP got the acclaim it deserves 4 innovation. Galaxy 2 didn't get any acclaim for innovation, it got for polish/improvement/perfection. When the likes of GOW (both gears & god) or FPSes get improved & therefore critically acclaimed, I don't see people complaining as much as they did for galaxy 2.

3. Miyamoto comment-he created the likes of mario & zelda (probably along with their genres) before. Now he's creating casuals (nintendoggs, wii series). Give the guy a break! We can't expect him 2 come up with GOOD  hardcoe ips, he's probably run out of those. (but we should complain about other nintendo staff not doing so anyway). Yeah, I'm also wishing they'd come up with some new IPs, I've been trying 2 imagine a FPS & an M-rated horror TPS with the nintendo touch.

4. 3DS comment-I wasn't aware dat people were dissing sony's 3d attempt so I can't comment on that. But I don't see 3D for only 1 as much of a bummer cuz its a handheld portable device. It's unavoidable dat it will suffer lots of ports like the PSP. And why do u say they aren't making bite-sized games? In the kid icarus trailer, Palutena said she could only maintain flight for 5 minutes. Probably 5 mins aerial stages then 5 minute land stages.

5. I don't think Twilight Princess was overrated. We Zelda fans just expected too much from it bcuz of OoT & Majora's Mask. I got tired of the dated Zelda elements but more tired of the weak enemies, even weaker than previous Zeldas. But let's face it, It was a 2006 game. Give that game to a Zelda noob (especially if they played it in 2006 or 2007) and it would just flat out blow them away.

   With all that said, I criticize Nintendo a lot but I think u went too far.