If you like rewarding for failure you might as well buy 100 copies of the game you hated the most in hope the developer makes something better next time.

So what is it being good at business? Demanding always the same price for a console that costs less and less to produce as time goes by? Demanding always the same price for a game that has decreasing sales along the time? Blackmailing retailers with artificial game shortages or making them to pay for what is not their fault? Then I guess Nintendo has been brilliant at business and Sony / Microsoft are just too stupid because they keep on caring about gamers and partners and what is fair.

Maybe the DRM policies Microsoft was about to implement was one of the few good business ideas they've ever had. Unfortunately, they got stupid again and decided to profit less at the gamer's expense. Nintendo is the only smart company, still keeping region lock, inflated prices, low budgets for game development and many other business decisions that dignify the only true game company out there producing consoles.

I hope this helps you: http://www.geekcomix.com/vgh/fourth/nesbad.shtml

Sony has dominated the 5th and 6th generations and I believe gaming is still alive. Don't you?

Have they?...while Microsoft tries to, Nintendo really does it. Because of the region lock, Nintendo can better squeeze each market of the world. And because of that very same policy, some gamers have wasted money on 2 3DS consoles. Now you tell me what is worst.

Still, at 600$, PS3 was the cheapest solution of the market. You can't say that a 60k€ Ferrari is more expensive than a 25k€ Ford. It is actually much cheaper and everybody would understand that although I don't think if that happened Ferrari could ever sell more than Ford. Same thing with a 600€ PS3 and a 250€ Wii.

Sony made some bad decisions with the PS3 and they took responsibility for it. They created an unecessary hugely expensive PS3 and they accepted losing hundreds of dollars per console. Nintendo made many (not some) bad (rather greedy) decisions during decades and they didn't took responsibility for it. Not only they did it at the gamer's expense but also they haven't taken lessons learned from it.

Nintendo going 3rd party won't kill gaming at all. I actually think it would strive like never before. Gaming will only be dead when people with your thoughts dominate the market.

Then they be as broke as Sony is now and have an 85 percent chance if going bankrupty in the next two years lol.

What the holy hell!?

This isn't some person, it is a company in a capatilistic market. If it fails, then it is because of their own idiocy of not knowing what the market wanted. Let them suffer so they either die out and someone else fills their shoes or let them learn and evolve to survive.

nintendo has 10 billion dollars in the bank, losses are not a problem. The only problem is if they can't find profitability ever again.

Sorry but that wouldn't help, you have to buy more consoles and games for each console you bought so now you would be helping them.

No, it wasn't. What pezus asserted was that there is a company that only cares about profit while there are others that care about gamers and history proves that. And I agree with this. Is it then impossible to care about gamers and make profits at the same time? No, and Microsoft proved that during the entire X360 period. But they certainly couldn't profit as much as Nintendo did with NES (with all those atrocities towards devs, retailers and gamers) or Wii (with all those low budget games ever costing 50€ while PC has the same kind of games for free).

I see here in this thread a lot of double standard. When Sony / Microsoft engage into greedy policies (which is rare, by the way) some people call them greedy. When Nintendo does it (which is much more often and intensive) the very same people call them smart and competent at business management.

When Sony / Microsoft fail, those people find it fair and call them incompetent and out of touch with the gaming industry (after all, they are not deticated gaming companies, as some say). When it's Nintendo, the very same people feel sorry for them and want everybody to donate money to them.

Companies are what we (consumers) allow them to be. With all this double standard, it doesn't surprise me that Nintendo is so much more greedy than Sony / Microsoft. That's obviously gamers' fault. What would have happened if the demanding Xbox clients became as "brand-protective" as those Nintendo fans I was talking about? I bet the DRM policies would have been on at this moment as well as other equally (or even more) aggressive measures that Microsoft has never even dare to think about. Nintendo fans with that attitude will only get harmed (by the very company they are trying to defend) and people like me will only avoid giving a dime to Nintendo.

What are you talking about? This is a classic Turkish thread!