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

Forums - Gaming - Where Does Nintendo Go If Wii U Never Takes Off?

Jay520 on 22 January 2013
KHlover said:
torok said:
Claymore said:

Little hint Sony due to business model didn't make anywhere near the amount of money with the playstation brand as many seem to think.


The GBA profits are embedded in this data, so it doesn't say a lot about GC. But it's impossible for GC to give more money than PS2, it didn't sell less, it sold abysmally less than PS2. And almost 50 million PS2 units were sold after the start of this gen, all sold at a profit. GC stopped selling quick, so it didn't had teh advantage of selling when it was cheaper to manufacture. Besides that, the software sales are completely different. PS2 was a monster in that regard. The top selling PS2 game almost outsells the GC lifetime hardware sales. It's not even a fair comparison in this case. Even with the model of selling it above cost price, PS2 simply sold too much to not being profitable. It's a difference of more than 6 times the installed base.

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.



Umm yeah those sales did produce profit. Just because PS3 caused more losses doesn't mean the PS2 didn't make profit. Sure Sony as whole didn't profit, but that's not what they're discussing. They're discussing the PS2's profit versus the Gamecube's profit.

Around the Network
KHlover on 22 January 2013
Jay520 said:
KHlover said:
torok said:
Claymore said:

Little hint Sony due to business model didn't make anywhere near the amount of money with the playstation brand as many seem to think.


The GBA profits are embedded in this data, so it doesn't say a lot about GC. But it's impossible for GC to give more money than PS2, it didn't sell less, it sold abysmally less than PS2. And almost 50 million PS2 units were sold after the start of this gen, all sold at a profit. GC stopped selling quick, so it didn't had teh advantage of selling when it was cheaper to manufacture. Besides that, the software sales are completely different. PS2 was a monster in that regard. The top selling PS2 game almost outsells the GC lifetime hardware sales. It's not even a fair comparison in this case. Even with the model of selling it above cost price, PS2 simply sold too much to not being profitable. It's a difference of more than 6 times the installed base.

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


Umm yeah those sales did produce profit. Just because PS3 caused more losses doesn't mean the PS2 didn't make profit. Sure Sony as whole didn't profit, but that's not what they're discussing. They're discussing the PS2's profit versus the Gamecube's profit.

Technically you're right, but don't you think Nintendo profited more from the GCN's profit as they were actually able to use it instead of having to use it to cover up losses?



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

torok on 22 January 2013
KHlover said:

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


The comparison is between PS2 and GC. If we throw GBA, DS, PSP, PS3 and everything else, it would be a Sony/Nintendo comparison and that isn't the case. I'm just pointing that is ridiculous to think that a console that sold 150~160 million units and 1.6 billion games generated less money than one that sold 25 million units and 200 million games. It is a massive difference.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

KHlover on 22 January 2013
torok said:
KHlover said:

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


The comparison is between PS2 and GC. If we throw GBA, DS, PSP, PS3 and everything else, it would be a Sony/Nintendo comparison and that isn't the case. I'm just pointing that is ridiculous to think that a console that sold 150~160 million units and 1.6 billion games generated less money than one that sold 25 million units and 200 million games. It is a massive difference.

↑↑↑Look above you, that discussion is already over^^↑↑↑ 



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

Tarumon on 22 January 2013
Claymore said:
torok said:
Salnax said:
Worst case scenario, Nintendo repeats the GameCube era, sells 30 million Wii U's, tightens their belts, lives off of 3DS income, and releases a new system in 2017 or so.

After the success of the Wii/DS, Nintendo can survive a relative failure.

This. They survived the GameCube, they can survive anything. I think that they only would have problems if a home console bombed hard and their handheld bombed too (wich definitively isn't the case with 3DS).

 

Claymore said:
Little tip Nintendo made more money off the Gamecube than Sony did off the PS2.

 

Man, do you really think that a console that sold 160 million units with a great tie ratio made less money than one that sold 25 million?

 


Little hint Sony due to business model didn't make anywhere near the amount of money with the playstation brand as many seem to think.


Great chart.  I don't need to read other comments but I can already tell people will think the losses are due to other business lines.  Look at MSFT, it eats Nintendo for breakfasts, if you are comparing consolodated numbers.  This is showing gaming only results.  



Around the Network
torok on 22 January 2013
KHlover said:
torok said:
KHlover said:

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


The comparison is between PS2 and GC. If we throw GBA, DS, PSP, PS3 and everything else, it would be a Sony/Nintendo comparison and that isn't the case. I'm just pointing that is ridiculous to think that a console that sold 150~160 million units and 1.6 billion games generated less money than one that sold 25 million units and 200 million games. It is a massive difference.

↑↑↑Look above you, that discussion is already over^^↑↑↑ 


Yes, Jay was faster than me, can't believe... Anyway, I still disagree that the financial status of the two made GC profits better. It is a direct comparison between two machines and not two companies.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

peachbuggy on 22 January 2013

runqvist said:
And I think Nintendo will go the way of the dodo.If their home console brings losses which I see it do, they will have to consider if they should release successor for Wii U.



Their handhelds will be losing a lot of marketshare for tablets and whatnots, so they can't retreat there either. I see nintendos future as a 3rd party developer, much like sega.

You can bet whatever you like that Sony will go bankrupt far before Nintendo, just like Sony will leave the gaming hardware business far before Nintendo!



DON'T WIN ME CHIBI BUDDY DON'T WIN ME.

ANIMAL CROSSING NEW LEAF FRIEND CODE:- 5129 1175 1029. MESSAGE ME.
ANDY MURRAY:- GRAND SLAM WINNER!

In my opinion the N64 was not just the best console of the 5th gen but, to this day the best console ever created!

KHlover on 22 January 2013
torok said:
KHlover said:
torok said:
KHlover said:

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


The comparison is between PS2 and GC. If we throw GBA, DS, PSP, PS3 and everything else, it would be a Sony/Nintendo comparison and that isn't the case. I'm just pointing that is ridiculous to think that a console that sold 150~160 million units and 1.6 billion games generated less money than one that sold 25 million units and 200 million games. It is a massive difference.

↑↑↑Look above you, that discussion is already over^^↑↑↑ 


Yes, Jay was faster than me, can't believe... Anyway, I still disagree that the financial status of the two made GC profits better. It is a direct comparison between two machines and not two companies.

I'll give you the same answer as Jay: Technically you may be right, but to me it doesn't make sense to look at the profits without taking the companies into the equation.



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

Claymore on 22 January 2013

Nintendo as a company hasn't posted a loss in there yearly financial statement in the last 30 years and made massive profits in the last 4-5 years due to the DS and WII, they're a company that runs on selling hardware at a profit while sony sells hardware at a loss and hopes to make the there money back on the software.

Old picture from a old thread.

 

If anybodies at risk of going third party taking all things into account is Sony they're not in a situation where they can ride out another 6-7 years of losses the company simply not in the postion to screw up again.



Jay520 on 22 January 2013
KHlover said:
Jay520 said:
KHlover said:
torok said:
Claymore said:

Little hint Sony due to business model didn't make anywhere near the amount of money with the playstation brand as many seem to think.


The GBA profits are embedded in this data, so it doesn't say a lot about GC. But it's impossible for GC to give more money than PS2, it didn't sell less, it sold abysmally less than PS2. And almost 50 million PS2 units were sold after the start of this gen, all sold at a profit. GC stopped selling quick, so it didn't had teh advantage of selling when it was cheaper to manufacture. Besides that, the software sales are completely different. PS2 was a monster in that regard. The top selling PS2 game almost outsells the GC lifetime hardware sales. It's not even a fair comparison in this case. Even with the model of selling it above cost price, PS2 simply sold too much to not being profitable. It's a difference of more than 6 times the installed base.

And yet Sony didn't profit from it. They made a loss each fiscal year after the PS3 launch, the PS2 could have sold 200Mil and they would not have seen a single cent of profits.


Umm yeah those sales did produce profit. Just because PS3 caused more losses doesn't mean the PS2 didn't make profit. Sure Sony as whole didn't profit, but that's not what they're discussing. They're discussing the PS2's profit versus the Gamecube's profit.

Technically you're right, but don't you think Nintendo profited more from the GCN's profit as they were actually able to use it instead of having to use it to cover up losses?



I don't see how you can profit more from less profit. The discussion is about which console produced the most profit, not which company was better equipped to use that profit.

By the way, I'm not even sure what you mean by "use" profits anyway.