actually i thought it was just hardware as well. it coulda been categorized seperately.

Nintendo made gigantic profit and found a gold mine, and htye pu it to good use for 3DS, mayeb they will rake lots of profit with that this year.

No company separates their hardware and software revenue when reporting to the SEC or investors.  In fact, it would make very little sense to ever do that other than as supplementary info.

Further still, notive that both Sony and MS have attachted their games divisions inside larger divisions to legally "hide" their games only financials.   But it's just Sony and MS doing that as hundreds of large companies do this to reduce investor worry for a financially struggling department.

oh, they only make -$2 - $5.5 ? that's way less then I imagined ;) 

I guess your x-achsis is meant to say $1bln/2bln/...

uhm.. don't you think that it's more likely GBA and DS are responsible for Nintendo's profits during the GC era?

Yup, those quantities are billions of US$

As crazy as it may sound I think Sony isn't focused soley or entirely on making money with it's video game lineup.   This isn't to say that Sony wants to lose money or not make money but it isn't their number one goal.  Sony is an entertainment company first and foremost and if I were going to wager, I would say they are the biggest, best entertainment company in the world on a broad picture sense.   Everything that Sony does is in an effort to maintain / increase this status and not just for, or even primarily for money. 

I really believe that Sony views Video games as just another piece to their entertainment puzzle.  By keeping their products all on the minds of the consumer they maintain their status as the leader in entertainment and the more avenues of compelling products they have in that manner on the market,  the greater this status remains.  This also is a wise business strategy on a long-term basis.   As Sony will have it's paws on just about anything entertainment or technology related.   Regardless, of the way the world changes they will have ample resources, time, and man power to get their fingerprints all over it. 

So in a way it is about brand loytalty but by the same token brand loyalty is just a side benefit from the over-arching goal which is maintaining Sony as a known quantity / house-hold name.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A common theme among these massively large corporations like MS / Sony is expanding your product lines and essentially 'getting your fingers on everything' type of attitude.    This only makes sense to diversify your company in such a manner.   It constantly keeps them in-touch with whatever next big thing hits the market.    Look at all the products, goods, services that Sony owns, manufactures, owns percentages of, etc or Microsoft for that matter.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Microsoft and Sony are very similar in many ways.  However, actively seeking to make money is what I believe Microsoft's #1 goal is and that is where Sony and Microsoft differ.  (Possibly even on just a cultural sense).  This isn't a shot at Microsoft either,  they're just a company focused on making money.   Decisions they make seem catered towards the mainstream individual (Biggest potential dollar).   Advertising products to mainstream masses,  spending lots on mainstream advertising, advertising to the largest markets, etc.   Even on a gaming sense, Microsoft has cut ties to certain studios (Age of Empires)  and kept a relatively small first party offering on their payroll.    I believe they are 100% driven to be profitable first and foremost. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nintendo is the odd ball in the bunch.  However, when you look at the dynamics of Nintendo you realize why they operate in the manner that they do.  Nintendo is fundamentally conservative because they have essentially one form of income.  Video games.  This is drastically different from MS or Sony.   Nintendo is conservative in their approach because they don't have a fall-back option if their video games fail.   

This very same dynamic that has made Nintendo successful has also spawned a generation of  Pro-Nintendo / Anti-Nintendo to some degree.  

It has created Pro-Nintendo because people in this camp feel the genuine care, thought,  and to some degree small companyish attitude that Nintendo operates with contained in it's products.  When you play a Nintendo console you can tell that it's all about video games for them and whether or not if you enjoy the games, you can appreciate the approach taken.

The downside with Sony/MS in the market vs Nintendo is it has created in my opinion what I would call Anti-Nintendo to some degree.  The people in this camp, feel that Nintendo has been too conservative / slow to react with various things.   Whether that be reliable online gaming or graphical prowess or creation of numerous unique IPs.   Their competition has been quick to act on these peoples complaints and this is why we have a pretty comparable market either way. 

Nintendo in my opinion isn't conservative because they necessarily want to be,  they are conservative because they rely on Video games and video games alone to suppliment their business.  They don't have the resources (Well they might now after the Wii / DS),  to sell systems 'reuglarly'  at a loss with big beefy specs.    

However, contrary to popular belief around here,  I don't think they want to be so conversative and I don't think they are opposed to acting exactly like MS or Sony for that matter.  They just don't have the same circumstances surrounding them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nintendo in this generation has been anything but conservative. DS touch screen, Wii motion control are very different of what everybody would consider conservative, conservative is doing the same but bigger, as Sony and Microsoft have done this generation.

I agree, Nintendo have taken the most risks, but in regards to Wii, they had no choice. Thye knew they couldn't make another console similar to PS3/360 or it'd get ripped apart and do less than 20 mill lifetime.

Not on a monetary sense.  On a monetary sense,  Nintendo took very little risks beyond motion controls.  Monetarily, Nintendo operates in a conservative manner and needs to operate in a conservative manner to maintain a quality business.

Nothing wrong with being fiscally conservative. Apple works in a fiscally conservative manner and it didn't stop them from beating everyone else.

You don't have to lose money to make money.