ninetailschris said:
|
No, I just couldn't parse your English lol.
ninetailschris said:
|
No, I just couldn't parse your English lol.
Where is the link that says that Reggie or Nintendo backtracked on one game sold and it makes up the loss? AFAIK as long as the Wii U sells one software (the Nintendoland bundle don't count) that Nintendo made up the loss. Also it had better be some legit shit and not some poster from Gaf. If it came from a forum I call a big pile of B$ on that one!
| oni-link said: Where is the link that says that Reggie or Nintendo backtracked on one game sold and it makes up the loss? AFAIK as long as the Wii U sells one software (the Nintendoland bundle don't count) that Nintendo made up the loss. Also it had better be some legit shit and not some poster from Gaf. If it came from a forum I call a big pile of B$ on that one! |
You have every right to doubt anything written in this - or any other - forum without hard proof.
I did some research and found this a while back:
http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_22013695
I believe it to be true but I will leave that decision up to you. I think it is significantly more than one piece of software simply because if it was a small figure they would have proudly stated it. The bigger the number the more embarassing it becomes so best to keep the figure hidden. That of course is speculation on my part.
Here is the extract:
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT (publ. 11/25/2012, pg. A2)
In a story about Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aime, Fils-Aime incorrectly said that Nintendo makes a profit on the Wii U console after consumers buy one piece of software. The number is more than one, but the company declined to say the exact number.
justinian said:
I did some research and found this a while back: http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_22013695 I believe it to be true but I will leave that decision up to you. I think it is significantly more than one piece of software simply because if it was a small figure they would have proudly stated it. The bigger the number the more embarassing it becomes so best to keep the figure hidden. That of course is speculation on my part. Here is the extract: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT (publ. 11/25/2012, pg. A2) |
thanks for that.
It looks like nintendo isn't going to cut the price anytime soon

| KylieDog said: $50 cut in Sept/Oct, if sales don't pick enough after MK8 and co another $50 at E3. Third party for home consoles annoucement E3 the following year (2015). |
I'm going to assume the last part was a joke and not totally lose it.

Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
I bought my WiiU Basic at Target (Canada) for $149.99!!!! Definitely a loss there 

PSN: Saugeen-Uwo Feel free to add me (put Vg Chartz as MSG)!
Nintendo Network ID: Saugeen-Uwo
This was obvious for anyone who wasn't nintendo fan. Not only did they say they needed more than one game per unit to turn profit but the technology they went with wont drop as fast as something like the x1, ps3, 360, or ps4 will have. On top of that, the comment about being profitable after one game went with their projection of 5.5mil at the end of march. Law of diminishing returns here. After sales slumped as much as they did the losses increased.
| goodgamesir said: Gaming journalist hating on Nintendo again, Reggie said they only needed to sell one software to turn a profit on the wii U and they sold 8,364,467 games so far so they made money on 8,364,466 games. keep hating, haters |
Good point about the games. So now the hardware isn't losing money for Nintendo... It's just the games... Maybe if they sell a gamepad for each game sold they will turn profit.
Damn. Figured they'd be profitable by now, however with the low sales they likely never hit good production yield to be profitable. In fact, its likely that they are even losing more now than at launch due to lower production qty which raises per item costs.