Nabraham said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Nabraham said:
HappySqurriel said:
Nabraham said:
HappySqurriel said:
McStormy1 said:
Playing games on an SDTV make my eyes bleed. A Ps3 game on an SDTV looks like crap compared to an HDTV. If the Wii 2 is not 1080p it's going to look like crap (again) compared to its competition. Then again Nintendo only cares about the Benjamins so I doubt they care if their quality suffers as long as their profits soar. |
I think it would be difficult to demonstrate that Nintendo cares any less about quality than the competition does, or any more about money, but as a company they do have to consider how they will survive ...
People are often critical about Nintendo because they have sold more than 100 Million units of hardware in the past few years, but they never consider the reality Nintendo was facing when they were designing these systems. Back in 2003, 2004 and 2005 (when the planning for the Nintendo DS and Wii was mostly being done) Nintendo was looking at how the Gameboy Advance underperformed compared to previous Gameboys, the Gamecube was a failure in terms of sales, Sony was releasing a "Highly Anticipated" handheld which could cut into Nintendo's strongest market, and Nintendo was facing competition in the home console market that seemed to have unlimited money to lose.
In order for Nintendo to survive as a hardware manufacturer they had to deal with reality, and that meant that they couldn't afford to spend a lot of money on R&D, they couldn't lose a lot of money up front selling hardware at a loss, and they couldn't afford to have software development costs skyrocket.
|
Hasn't Nintendo pretty much made a profit every year since they have been around? The GBA did not underperform either. I'm sure Nintendo could have afforded to invest a little more into their R&D....their not poor so quit making them out to be.
|
Nintendo may not be a poor company, but in there is a real legitimate concern that your system will sell less than 10 Million units you have to be very careful with how much money you invest in the hardware; and you have to be careful of how expensive game development becomes.
|
What!? Other then the virtual boy what Nintendo system has ever sold under 10 million units? Your acting like it would have cost and will cost Nintendo billions of dollars to add high def output in their system.
|
You clearly missed the point. He didn't claim billions, just a lot more than Nintendo was willing to risk. And the Virtual Boy was anticipating a market that wasn't there. That's what Nintendo feared with putting processing power over everything else.
|
Nah i didnt miss his point. I was harping more on his 10 million number he pulled out of his ass. When has Nintendo lost money on a console besides the virtual boy? Nintendo has it's following, they had no risk, especially with the franchises they own.
|
You may think that 10 Million was some random number, but a pattern that was talked a lot about by industry analysts and journalists was the steady decline in popularity of Nintendo's systems:
NES: 61 Million
SNES: 49 Million
N64: 32 Million
Gamecube: 25 Million
Now, you say that there are no risks for Nintendo even if they see Gamecube level sales ... But consider how the increased development costs and longer development timelines would impact Nintendo's profitability. Every major western third party publisher is facing record revenues and massive losses primarily because development costs have become too large, and Nintendo wouldn't have the luxury of having 10+ Million selling games like Grand Theft Auto, Rockband and Guitar Hero to minimize their losses primarily because their small userbase couldn't support sales on that level.
You can continue to bitch about how Nintendo has done you wrong, but as a company Nintendo had to make decisions about what was important to them and their potential customers in order for them to survive as a hardware manufacturer.
