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

Forums - Gaming - Can anything save us from the "can anything save the Wii U" debates?

Jimbo1337 said:
Giggs_11 said:
Jimbo1337 said:
How could selling 80 million units for both MS and Sony not turn a profit when Nintendo, the company that has been in the console business the longest, only surpassed that mark ONCE with the Wii?


Dude, seriously, This is what i was talking about. U cant measure success on units sole alone. Production costs are not same for every console on every generation...

I understand that production costs aren't the same for every console on every generation.  But how can you say that a company lost money on the previous generation when they just came out with their newer consoles??  Companies aren't going to lose billions of dollars out of the kindness of their own heart.  They are also not going to invest billions of dollars into a division in which they hope will be successful.  Instead, they would gladly invest that money elsewhere.

If XB360 and PS3 weren't profitable, then they would have dropped out of the gaming market like Sega did...

The point that I was trying to make is that Nintendo, time and time again, does not have impressive numbers every single console generation like Sony, yet they are still around....

If Nintendo is making a profit, then everyone in the console business is too


You also forget one big thing. Portable. That is something Ninty has been doing since they started. Something the other two havent really cracked. Their portable division has actually been consistent. GBA kept them afloat against GC and i wouldnt be surprise if 3ds is doing the same for Wii U. Hell i would say if it wasnt for their portables Ninty would have fell a long time ago.



Around the Network
Jimbo1337 said:
Giggs_11 said:
Jimbo1337 said:
How could selling 80 million units for both MS and Sony not turn a profit when Nintendo, the company that has been in the console business the longest, only surpassed that mark ONCE with the Wii?


Dude, seriously, This is what i was talking about. U cant measure success on units sole alone. Production costs are not same for every console on every generation...

I understand that production costs aren't the same for every console on every generation.  But how can you say that a company lost money on the previous generation when they just came out with their newer consoles??  Companies aren't going to lose billions of dollars out of the kindness of their own heart.  They are also not going to invest billions of dollars into a division in which they hope will be successful.  Instead, they would gladly invest that money elsewhere.

If XB360 and PS3 weren't profitable, then they would have dropped out of the gaming market like Sega did...

The point that I was trying to make is that Nintendo, time and time again, does not have impressive numbers every single console generation like Sony, yet they are still around....

If Nintendo is making a profit, then everyone in the console business is too

Nintendo makes a profit off software and accessories.......first party software ....do you realize mario kart wii sold 35 million copies(1 game) ,wii sports 80 million,wii fit 20 million that's more than some entire franchises  ...this is all first party software no middle man ...also their accessories wii motes,wheels ,etc etc .....whereas Sony and Microsoft spend a lot of money for graphic chips and things of that nature which makes them being sold at a loss when released ...then they have to rely on software or xbox live etc to make it profitable.....the wii u was the only nintendo console released at a small loss 



Ka-pi96 said:
Giggs_11 said:

Sorry but your wrong. Truly, a business is successful when it meets the goals it was set out to achieve (if you were expecting 500b profit and only get 10b, you might consider it unsucessful). But even more than that, a business is worth it when you meet your break-even. Why? Because it was enough to feed every worker (and that's the ultimate objective of every firm, to feed its members), to pay ur suplliers, taxes, social security, etc. Of course a big profit is better cuz you have more to invest next time, but ultimately I'd start a business if at least i could pay my bills with it, and if I make a profit, better.

The brand awareness, although undoubtly important, it's secondary when conceiving a console. Brand awareness in a worldwide business with only 3 main competitors, such as videogaming, is a given. Every hardcore gamer (as people like to call it nowadays) knows about gaming and about the consoles out there. And hardcore gamers are what really feeds the console videogame market, not the casuals (ok they helped for Wii console sales, and at lesser degree they tend to help every console, but only partially). Brand awareness is already there, it's how you place yourself to the market (marketing) that may help you or not. And that is independent from previous console sales - Gamecube (20M) to Wii (100M) and PS2 (155M) to PS3 (80M) say hello. Marketing helps a lot and in this particular case, Sony excels at it, Nintendo sucks.

The amount of consoles you sell in previous generation doesn't influence how many you sell now all that much. Ok granted it can earn you a legion of fans, but if you present them with a bigger, better product many will shift. Many other things do, such as the price, the quality,  the way consumers look at it (example: Nintendo being seen as kiddy hurts them), marketing (yes, the hype), the games, etc.

Your idea of what a company is is very wrong. They couldn't give a shit about paying the employees, why do you think so many different kinds of workers have to go on strike to get pay rises and such. They also couldn't care less about paying taxes, all companies do everything possible to minimise taxes and some even try to avoid them completely.

The amount of consoles you sell in previous gens has a very big impact on the future. Brand awareness and consumer goodwill are hugely important. The Wii is an exception, other than that all Nintendo home consoles have sold similar amounts. Same with the PS3, that is an abberation on Sony's side. They screwed up the PS3 launch, but since their previous consoles were so wildly succesful and well known they were still able to get to 80 million sales. We are seeing the same now with Microsoft, they screwed up the Xbox One launch but are selling way better than they would be if the Xbox 360 hadn't done so well.


Dude, your arguments in 1st paragraph make no sense for This discussion. Im not saying they give a rats ass about their workers (dont know the administration personally) nor am i saying they like to pay them or the taxes, im saying they have to. At the end of the day every bill has to be paid, and after that ir you have extra money left, thats good. Now if you think u can earn more money with the same amount invested elsewhere, you do it. Ir not, you keep doing what ur doing cuz, u know, it puts food on ur table and even turns you a profit, as small as it might Be.

As for brand awareness, i think ir confusing the concept. It means to make people aware of the brand, i.e., that it exists and whats good/service it provides. People already know ir exists, It's the way the brands positions itself in the consumers minds that has great impact on buying decision (and i think It's what you mean when you say brand awareness, though It's not the same thing). 

Nintendo caters to gamers any age but with "goofy" aproach, sony does it too but they sell themselves as adult and hardcore. This 2nd approach is more appealing to the average man and kid.

for last, the amount consoles sold the generation before only affects a few, less rational consumers (and i dont mean it in bad way) aka the fanboys or the brand loyals, as you wanna call it. Snes had near 70m units sold, then despite all that brand awareness the next generation ppl shifted to ps1 which entered the market as the adult videogame console and swept people off their feet. Ps2 had 155m market share, then x360 came along with a cheaper, better, more easy-to-develop-for machine, and beginning was anihilating ps3 (but got sloppy and sony was able to regain market share), till the point both got about 80m, pretty much half of what ps2 sold to each, so i believe It's safe to assume x360 stole a big chunk of sony's market share. As for wii, well it presented a fresh new take on the videogame business at the time which also swept ppl off their feet. with xone microsoft drop the ball once again, and are now getting their asses kicked.

Companies can't rely on their past successes in this market, se already had many examples of how that ente wrong.



Jay70sgamer said:
oniyide said:
Going from a 100mil console to selling worse than GC is a failure no matter how one wants to spin it. That is about an 80% drop. These threads will stop when people stop lying to themselves and accept


So by your logic ps3 was a failure?....it sold half of what. The ps2 sold.......how you gonna spin that ?


um no it didnt actually. its a bit more than half and the pS3 is STILL selling. its actually been doing better than Wii U for most of the past weeks. Its story is not over. Its already past 83mil which is more than half of what PS2 did. It could still end up doing 90mil and even then. Are you kidding. a 50% drop is a BIG difference than 80% come on. IMHO anything more than a 50% is in failure terriority. 

But lets just say for the hell of it. PS3 was a failure. Ok. Now what? doesnt change the faith of Wii U which is what we are talking about.



I'd go with a 'derp, derp.' Throw in a 'lol' every now and then. Makes just as much sense as the stuff you're taking time and taxing your mind to spew out there.

'Nintendo isn't doing so bad because aren't they making a profit on every console sold I think they said that back in 2012 lol?'

It is easier and makes just as much sense to say "derp derp lol derp."

Moderated,

-Mr Khan



Around the Network
oniyide said:

You also forget one big thing. Portable. That is something Ninty has been doing since they started. Something the other two havent really cracked. Their portable division has actually been consistent. GBA kept them afloat against GC and i wouldnt be surprise if 3ds is doing the same for Wii U. Hell i would say if it wasnt for their portables Ninty would have fell a long time ago.

Oh I didn't forget about Nintendo's portable division.  There is no question that portable gaming is Nintendo's most profitable.  At the same time, Nintendo's home consoles are not causing them to lose money   If they were losing money every single console generation, then they would simply stick to their bread and butter.



The WiiU is over, stick a fork in the matter and just enjoy its many good games.



oniyide said:
Jay70sgamer said:
oniyide said:
Going from a 100mil console to selling worse than GC is a failure no matter how one wants to spin it. That is about an 80% drop. These threads will stop when people stop lying to themselves and accept


So by your logic ps3 was a failure?....it sold half of what. The ps2 sold.......how you gonna spin that ?


um no it didnt actually. its a bit more than half and the pS3 is STILL selling. its actually been doing better than Wii U for most of the past weeks. Its story is not over. Its already past 83mil which is more than half of what PS2 did. It could still end up doing 90mil and even then. Are you kidding. a 50% drop is a BIG difference than 80% come on. IMHO anything more than a 50% is in failure terriority. 

But lets just say for the hell of it. PS3 was a failure. Ok. Now what? doesnt change the faith of Wii U which is what we are talking about.

im trying to understand your logic .....so what you are saying if a company loses 80 % of their market share its a failure......but if you lose Less than 50 % its not a failure lol that makes alot of sense lol profits or success  arent measured by how consoles you sell smh ....its only a small part in the big picture of things ....and to answer your question Nintendo doesnt need saving it will be profitable just like every other home console has.....shrugs 



Jay70sgamer said:

im trying to understand your logic .....so what you are saying if a company loses 80 % of their market share its a failure......but if you lose Less than 50 % its not a failure lol that makes alot of sense lol profits or success  arent measured by how consoles you sell smh ....its only a small part in the big picture of things ....and to answer your question Nintendo doesnt need saving it will be profitable just like every other home console has.....shrugs 


See... "derp" would have been sufficient response.

Losing 50% of marketshare after the world's highest install base in history WAS considered bad.

Losing 80% of marketshare after third highest install base in history is much worse.

Hence, "derp."



Jimbo1337 said:
oniyide said:

You also forget one big thing. Portable. That is something Ninty has been doing since they started. Something the other two havent really cracked. Their portable division has actually been consistent. GBA kept them afloat against GC and i wouldnt be surprise if 3ds is doing the same for Wii U. Hell i would say if it wasnt for their portables Ninty would have fell a long time ago.

Oh I didn't forget about Nintendo's portable division.  There is no question that portable gaming is Nintendo's most profitable.  At the same time, Nintendo's home consoles are not causing them to lose money   If they were losing money every single console generation, then they would simply stick to their bread and butter.

im not so sure about that. IMHO i think Ninty WANTS there home console to be there bread and butter. I think they make enough money on portables that it would offset anything that happens on console side. I think Ninty has too much pride to ever drop home consoles until they had no choice.