Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakex]

And why they should care? is just an opinion, words. As far as they get benefits, it´s not important if Microsoft want to forget them.

Having that attitude is what got Nintendo in the position they are. They don't take companies seriously. They didn't take Sony seriously last gen, and Sony took them over. They didn't take MS seriously this gen and once again they're going to lose to a new comer in the industry. Out of the 3 companies, Nintendo is the one with the "we don't care attitude'. Both Sony and MS refuse to let one another get a leg up on them, Nintendo on the other hand just continues to let both of them do exactly that to them. Nintendo doesn't even try to combat it.

 

[Alcibiades]

Having that attitude is what got Nintendo in the position they are. They don't take companies seriously. They didn't take Sony seriously last gen, and Sony took them over. They didn't take MS seriously this gen and once again they're going to lose to a new comer in the industry. Out of the 3 companies, Nintendo is the one with the "we don't care attitude'. Both Sony and MS refuse to let one another get a leg up on them, Nintendo on the other hand just continues to let both of them do exactly that to them. Nintendo doesn't even try to combat it.

"Sony took them over"

that's a new one, especially considering that recent financial reports indicated a strong profit for Nintendo and a loss from Sony's Playstation division (not to mention their 7-year break-even plan)...

Nintendo may have the "We don't care" attitude, but it seems to be working for them, if I were Nintendo, I wouldn't want to be combating to be in either Sony's or Microsofts position when it comes to profits (5 and 7-year plans instead of constant profitability). Sure Nintendo would like to be #1 in marketshare and popularity (instead of #2/#3), but I think they'll take being #1 in making money...

 

[SolidSnakex]

Nintendo may have the "We don't care" attitude, but it seems to be working for them, if I were Nintendo, I wouldn't want to be combating to be in either Sony's or Microsofts position when it comes to profits (5 and 7-year plans instead of constant profitability). Sure Nintendo would like to be #1 in marketshare and popularity (instead of #2/#3), but I think they'll take being #1 in making money...

I'm sure both Sony and MS could constantly be posting profits if they were as conservative as Nintendo is. The difference is that they want to win and to win you can't be conservative.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Nintendo may have the "We don't care" attitude, but it seems to be working for them, if I were Nintendo, I wouldn't want to be combating to be in either Sony's or Microsofts position when it comes to profits (5 and 7-year plans instead of constant profitability). Sure Nintendo would like to be #1 in marketshare and popularity (instead of #2/#3), but I think they'll take being #1 in making money...

#1 in profitability? Maybe just in the video game market. Your post doesn't make sense to me in that Sony and MS are huge multi-divisional corporations... Nintendo is just a games maker, with some games-related subsidiaries. The need for profit in this market is of more importance to them more immediately as it's the only one they operate in.

Anyway, what seems obvious is that Nintendo is falling further and further from where they once were in the industry.

 

[Teddman]

Big deal. Nintendo and Sony dominated and had the number 1 consoles with their debut machines!!

OK. Well, Nintendo has been dominated by a newcomer twice in a row now.

 

[Alcibiades]

yeah, that's what I meant, their videogames division...

of course Nintendo doesn't have electronics or PC market to fall back on, but if you took the videogame parts of Sony and Microsoft, like Perrin Kaplan indicated, they are #3 in perception, #2 in marketshare, and #1 in profits...

 

[Acosta]

Having that attitude is what got Nintendo in the position they are. They don't take companies seriously. They didn't take Sony seriously last gen, and Sony took them over. They didn't take MS seriously this gen and once again they're going to lose to a new comer in the industry. Out of the 3 companies, Nintendo is the one with the "we don't care attitude'. Both Sony and MS refuse to let one another get a leg up on them, Nintendo on the other hand just continues to let both of them do exactly that to them. Nintendo doesn't even try to combat it.

I would be agree with you if Nintendo had the economic situation of Sega beefore Sammy, but that is not the case.

Maybe for fans of console wars it´s very important that your home system sell more than the other. But if I were CEO of Nintendo, I will be much happier with my company having benefits than having the situation that Xbox division have.

The problem here is the same than always, Nintendo has lost their semi-monopoly on the world of consoles, and that makes people thing they are in a bad situation. Reality is that is one of the japanese companies that better has survived the Japanese crisis, has created profitable IPs, they have a solid model of business, with various fields among systems, games and merchandising.

Their business model is flawless, the company is bigger now, and they still create benefits. Nobody in the economic field will tell you that as company Nintendo is failing, go ask EA directives about the model of Nintendo to check it. Every CEO of any publisher would dream to have a situation like Nintendo.

But if you want to reduce it to "they are third", well, I have nothing to add.

I'm sure both Sony and MS could constantly be posting profits if they were as conservative as Nintendo is. The difference is that they want to win and to win you can't be conservative.

For the families of the employers, I hope you don´t reach to CEO of a company. Companies that play to "my penis is longer" don´t finish well in most of the cases.

 

[FightyF]

Sure Nintendo would like to be #1 in marketshare and popularity (instead of #2/#3), but I think they'll take being #1 in making money...

Exactly.

Though keep in mind that this is their bread and butter. Sony and MS have a lot of other money making products.

 

[kaching]

The question is , do people really care about Sony and MS and Nintendo ?
or do they really care about Madden, Halo, FF, Dragon Quest, Mario, GTAuto, Gran Turismo etc?

I think too much stock is put into the loyalty to the console brands, because outside leety gamers, i doubt people really care.

Stick GTA on Xbox 2 or Nintendo Rev only and watch those machines fly...

I'm not sure the sales numbers agree with you here, DC. Approx. 70 million PS2s have been sold worldwide, most of those sales occurring *after* the GC and XB arrived. Now, granted, GTA shows up in the same season that the GC and XB first go on sale, but GTA has only sold to a fraction of the PS2 worldwide audience (approx. 1/5th I believe). So you've got 50-55 million PS2 owners worldwide who don't own GTA. How many PS2s were sold in the year prior to competition from the Xbox and GC? 10 million or so? Even if you assume that none of those PS2 owners bought GTA and all GTA sales were from people who bought PS2s after GTA arrived, take those people away and you still have at least 40-45 million PS2s sold worldwide, post XB/GC, who didn't buy it for GTA. That number is still approx. 3 times the worldwide sales of the XB or GC.

I don't think leety gamers are the only ones concerned about console brand...

 

[Rhindle]

Would any of you like to share your secret numbers demonstrating the awesome profitability of Nintendo's console business? Because Nintendo certainly is very methodical at not sharing any such numbers.

If Microsoft consolidated its Windows and Xbox divisions, I'm sure we would all be very impressed with the fabulous profitability of Xbox.

 

[Acosta]

I'm not sure the sales numbers agree with you here, DC. Approx. 70 million PS2s have been sold worldwide, most of those sales occurring *after* the GC and XB arrived. Now, granted, GTA shows up in the same season that the GC and XB first go on sale, but GTA has only sold to a fraction of the PS2 worldwide audience (approx. 1/5th I believe). So you've got 50-55 million PS2 owners worldwide who don't own GTA. How many PS2s were sold in the year prior to competition from the Xbox and GC? 10 million or so? Even if you assume that none of those PS2 owners bought GTA and all GTA sales were from people who bought PS2s after GTA arrived, take those people away and you still have at least 40-45 million PS2s sold worldwide, post XB/GC, who didn't buy it for GTA. That number is still approx. 3 times the worldwide sales of the XB or GC.

I don't think leety gamers are the only ones concerned about console brand...

Reducing all to GTA of course don´t work. PS2 had Gran Turismo, Devil May Cry and Onimusha before Xbox and GC. That makes three platinum sellers only in Japan.

When GC and Xbox arrived PS2 was already well stablished. With only "Playstation" or "Sony" name, you can´t do anything. But other thing is that you show that you have content and that the future content is there. If you has already that titles and you show that games like Final fantasy IX are coming, if so, you can use the name "Playstation", because you have proved that you can maintain the quality of the name.

Nobody will buy a "Playstation" based on that name if s not convinced that Sony and the industry can assure that this name already implies the quality gaming you are looking for. Brand names gives advantages, but this is not the car industry, nobody is going to buy a "Sony" like you could buy a "Mercedes". Videogames are about content.

 

[Acosta]

Would any of you like to share your secret numbers demonstrating the awesome profitability of Nintendo's console business? Because Nintendo certainly is very methodical at not sharing any such numbers.

The financial results are public and well known, you have PDFs and official documents that are mandatory for a company that has public stock.

About Xbox, sure, no doubt. But they still has to prove it. Funny you doubt about the facts and are sure about a guess.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Maybe for fans of console wars it´s very important that your home system sell more than the other. But if I were CEO of Nintendo, I will be much happier with my company having benefits than having the situation that Xbox division have.

As a gamer, the sales of a system have to matter because it's going to determine what type of support that system gets. If you're a 1 console owner you don't want to have to sit through constant gaps of not having any new games to buy because the system you supported isn't selling well enough.

 

[Rhindle]

The financial results are public and well known, you have PDFs and official documents that are mandatory for a company that has public stock.

OK, feel free to point me to a Nintendo report that separately breaks out the profitability of the Gamecube business, because I have never seen one.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

I think Nintendo just needs to provide the hardware that the developers want. I'm not talking the all in one super set top boxes that MS & Sony want, but equal disc capacity, and a REAL online component. If the devs have the ability to make the games they're making without going to 2 discs, or taking out a online mode, they would most likely make it for that system. In turn, maybe some of us would gladly buy more multiplatform games on a Nintendo system since they wouldn't be stunted.

 

[Acosta]

As a gamer, the sales of a system have to matter because it's going to determine what type of support that system gets. If you're a 1 console owner you don't want to have to sit through constant gaps of not having any new games to buy because the system you supported isn't selling well enough.

As a gamer, there is a high chance that you have no idea about how many units of PS2 are in the world or how many units sell your favourite game, and possibly you don´t care at all.

The geeks like us that pass our time around forums when we haven´t better things to do maybe care or find it interesting. But most of the people that buy videogames don´t visit GA or any other forum online. Maybe they will check some magazine or so, but won´t come here to check if the system they want to buy is selling more or less.

They will check if their friends have the same system, maybe they have seen a game on TV that think could be cool, will check how many games are for rent in his videogame shop or which system has more games. But the last thing they will do in most of the cases is checking how is selling each system.

GA will have millions of users if everybody thought as you.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Gaijin and Solid, somewhere in the middle, I agree with both of you.

 

[Acosta]

OK, feel free to point me to a Nintendo report that separately breaks out the profitability of the Gamecube business, because I have never seen one

¿? I´m here defending that what matter is the financial result as company, the business strategy of all the company. If Nintendo is a gaming company, and they have benefits doing it, that is what matters to me If I want see it from a financial viewpoint.

So, why do you tell me such thing? that is just the opposite of what I´m saying. GC, GBA. or whatever individual point of a company is unimportant from a financial viewpoint, what matters is how are you doing as a company.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

You're right, it's not the sales that matter to the public, but games do, and they do see the shelves, and what system has what games. Without support from publishers, the gaming public will see less games for that system, and get the feeling it's lesser, or not as good.

Of course it's all mindshare in the end. the Xbox compared to the GC is about 1.5 mill ahead, and yet it gets most of the great games coming out. People perceive the Xbox as a true competitor, and the publishers feed that, even when reality says it's no where near being one this generation.

 

[SolidSnakex]

As a gamer, there is a high chance that you have no idea about how many units of PS2 are in the world or how many units sell your favourite game, and possibly you don´t care at all.

Those gamers know what the best selling system is simply because it's the popular choice is. You don't need to go to a message board or even get on the internet to know what the popular system choice is among most gamers.

 

[Rhindle]

¿? I´m here defending that what matter is the financial result as company, the business strategy of all the company. If Nintendo is a gaming company, and they have benefits doing it, that is what matters to me If I want see it from a financial viewpoint.

So, why do you tell me such thing? that is just the opposite of what I´m saying. GC, GBA. or whatever individual point of a company is unimportant from a financial viewpoint, what matters is how are you doing as a company.

I wasn't really responding to you, but rather to the usual suspects in this thread fawning about how great Nintendo's console strategy is because its so profitable.

The fact of the matter is that Nintendo could be losing money hand-over-fist on the Gamecube for all we know, but those numbers are buried under a mountain of monopoly profits from the GBA business.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Doesn't most of their profits from software, not hardware? I doubt the GBA makes a huge dent in actual profits.

 

[Grubdog]

Having that attitude is what got Nintendo in the position they are. They don't take companies seriously. They didn't take Sony seriously last gen, and Sony took them over. They didn't take MS seriously this gen and once again they're going to lose to a new comer in the industry. Out of the 3 companies, Nintendo is the one with the "we don't care attitude'. Both Sony and MS refuse to let one another get a leg up on them, Nintendo on the other hand just continues to let both of them do exactly that to them. Nintendo doesn't even try to combat it.

Would you throw money away just to get people to look at you?

 

[GDGF]

Would any of you like to share your secret numbers demonstrating the awesome profitability of Nintendo's console business? Because Nintendo certainly is very methodical at not sharing any such numbers.

Sure. It's called the financial statement they recently posted (comes every year BTW)

I'm sure you can find it if you search the board.

 

[Acosta]

Those gamers know what the best selling system is simply because it's the popular choice is. You don't need to go to a message board or even get on the internet to know what the popular system choice is among most gamers.

"Popular" is attached to your own ratio of capacity to check it. The usual ratio for a normal user is composite of friends, TV, maybe some specialized press and little more.

If most of your friends have a GC, or even a N-gage, is likely that you will end buying one. And yes, having more systems will mean more chances that your friends have that system and you will end buying it, that is natural.

What I don´t get is what we are actually discussing here. My original point was to defend that the position of Nintendo is not bad but good, and that this "they are doomed" and "they doesn´t count" it´s unimportant for them as a company because they have benefits and have them because they have a solid business model, where the sell systems and content for it.

Of course than selling 40 million of units more that your competitor is very important, no ones doubt that. And I find logical than MS like to be put as the real competitor of Sony for the videogames market. But that alone won´t change the fact that Nintendo is there and have an good health.

 

[GDGF]

The fact of the matter is that Nintendo could be losing money hand-over-fist on the Gamecube for all we know, but those numbers are buried under a mountain of monopoly profits from the GBA business.

Considering the fact that they're the number one publisher on their system, and considering the staggering ammount of software (even just GCN software) that they sell every year (and the fact that they recieve royalties on every third party game on the system)....yes the GCN business (and just the GCN business if you want to isolate) is profitable.

We've been down this road before, too. Guess you missed it.

 

[Rhindle]

Sure. It's called the financial statement they recently posted (comes every year BTW)

I'm sure you can find it if you search the board.

OK. Show me.

Here, I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/annual_report.jsp

 

[Grubdog]

I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo made more money from GCN than GBA actually.

 

[SolidSnakex]

What I don´t get is what we are actually discussing here. My original point was to defend that the position of Nintendo is not bad but good, and that this "they are doomed" and "they doesn´t count" it´s unimportant for them as a company because they have benefits and have them because they have a solid business model, where the sell systems and content for it.

Of course than selling 40 million of units more that your competitor is very important, no ones doubt that. And I find logical than MS like to be put as the real competitor of Sony for the videogames market. But that alone won´t change the fact that Nintendo is there and have an good health.

They're the ones that have put them in the place they're as not really being competition for Sony or MS. They don't really seem to be trying nearly as hard as Sony and MS and that's why they're viewed as not being competiton.

 

[Grubdog]

They're the ones that have put them in the place they're as not really being competition for Sony or MS. They don't really seem to be trying nearly as hard as Sony and MS and that's why they're viewed as not being competiton.

Trying to do what? Your posts make no sense to me.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Trying to do what? Your posts make no sense to me.

I don't see how they make no sense when i've been talking about winning this whole time. Nintendo doesn't seem to be trying to win, atleast not as much as Sony and MS are.

 

[GDGF]

OK. Show me.

Here, I'll make it easy for you:

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/annual_report.jsp

I'll let you do your own dirty work, but if you want an idea of how absurd you sound, figure out the number of GCN's sold this year and the fact that they're maybe losing 5 bucks a system or some low low number like that and contrast that against the ammount of GCN games they sell a year, cash earned from said games, and royalties from every third party GCN game sold per year.

Get the point?

 

[ManDudeChild]

Not to hijack this thread, but how are those quotes news?

 

[Acosta]

They're the ones that have put them in the place they're as not really being competition for Sony or MS. They don't really seem to be trying nearly as hard as Sony and MS and that's why they're viewed as not being competiton.

The problem is that this is not competition, is business. If I have a company I want the company to be profitable, to pay to the employers, to grow, to develop good products... They don´t need to compete, but stay sure about the company is safe.

If Nintendo has lost so many units in the home system maket maybe is because they couldn´t maintain its position at all. As a company you can a) cry b) try to be aggresive with the risk of creating bigger problems or c) look for other type of business in videogames that you can use to keep profitable the company. Nintendo did it with Pokemon and GBA, and I find this position intelligent, but of course this is pure IMO.

 

[GDGF]

I don't see how they make no sense when i've been talking about winning this whole time. Nintendo doesn't seem to be trying to win, atleast not as much as Sony and MS are.

That's the thing, SS. We're all speaking English, but we're not all speaking the same language.

Nintendo isn't trying to win in your sense of the word. Hell, I'd say that at the end of the day he who posts a profit wins, and this is certainly Nintendo's philosophy. I'd hate to be the guy that mailed a letter to my employees and shareholders that read 'The good news is we win! The bad news is we just had to lay off 500 employees, reduce the winter company bouns, and take quite a hit in the bottom line to do it...but we win!'

 

[Rhindle]

I'll let you do your own dirty work, but if you want an idea of how absurd you sound, figure out the number of GCN's sold this year and the fact that they're maybe losing 5 bucks a system or some low low number like that and contrast that against the ammount of GCN games they sell a year, cash earned from said games, and royalties from every third party GCN game sold per year.

Great, now take that number and subtract out the hundreds of millions Nintendo is spending on R&D for their next console, if they really are developing a new console. That would be the only reason Sony is now reporting a loss for its Playstation division, and the only reason the H&E division at MS isn't moving closer to profitability.

And you're wrong about Nintendo separately reporting console profitability.

 

[GDGF]

Great, now take that number and subtract out the hundreds of millions Nintendo is spending on R&D for their next console, if they really are developing a new console. That would be the only reason Sony is now reporting a loss for its Playstation division, and the only reason the H&E division at MS isn't moving closer to profitability.

.

I can do it too, watch

Now take that number and realise that it's payed for using Nintendo's massive coffers of around SIX BILLION US DOLLARS and remember the facts that earlier this year they set up a fund using said coffers to pay for technology used in it's upcoming consoles (a fund that didn't even make a dent in the six bil, btw) and that alot of it's R&D is handled through deals with partners (like ArtX and IBM) and you should see why the GCN is profitable. (and btw the next console isn't the Gamecube, so as you don't want to link the GBA's success to the GCN, we shouldn't be linking the next Nintendo system's losses to the GCN's gains, but since I kick ass and am correct, I will endulge you )

 

[SolidSnakex]

That's the thing, SS. We're all speaking English, but we're not all speaking the same language.

Nintendo isn't trying to win in your sense of the word. Hell, I'd say that at the end of the day he who posts a profit wins, and this is certainly Nintendo's philosophy. I'd hate to be the guy that mailed a letter to my employees and shareholders that read 'The good news is we win! The bad news is we just had to lay off 500 employees, reduce the winter company bouns, and take quite a hit in the bottom line to do it...but we win!'

You could be the one trying to convince 3rd party companies to support your system after coming in last again, and having weak 3rd party sales. You could ofcourse bring up all the profit you make, although it won't matter much to them since 3rd party games don't sell that well on your system so they won't see that type of profit from their games.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

I bet this thread gets to 300 with Lost Weekend & Rhindles back & forth alone.

 

[GDGF]

You could be the one trying to convince 3rd party companies to support your system after coming in last again, and having weak 3rd party sales. You could ofcourse bring up all the profit you make, although it won't matter much to them since 3rd party games don't sell that well on your system so they won't see that type of profit from their games.

That would me Miyamoto's job, if this gen is anything to go by, and I'd say (judging the N64's third party output against the GCN's) that he has done a hell of a job. I'm sure he'll be up to the task next gen. Hell, one could put up the same argument for the GBA that aside from a few huge third party stars, Nintendo games carry the system. This didn't stop the Nintendo DS from getting a shite load of great games coming from every company and their mother


I'm sure alot of the reason for that was the innovation of the DS, and it looks like Nintendo's planning revolutionary features in it's new home console as well.

I'd say Miyamoto is up for the challenge

 

[SolidSnakex]

"That would me Miyamoto's job, if this gen is anything to go by, and I'd say (judging the N64's third party output against the GCN's) that he did a hell of a job."

Sure he did a great job. But now 3rd parties know their games still aren't going to sell on the system. So he can talk all he wants, but if the sales don't back up the support, then what exactly is the point? What real exclusives have they managed to secure? Almost every big game they get ends up going multiplatform. Considering how few exclusives they get to begin with, that's a big deal.

"Hell, one could put up the same argument for the GBA that aside from a few huge stars, Nintendo games carry the system."

Having a userbase that's that big doesn't exactly hurt either. Nintendo owns the handheld market right now, so it's not really surprising that 3rd parties throw their support at the systems.

 

[GDGF]

Innovation in design, Miyamoto, cash incentives, (and hopefully a streamlined development process)

Those things will be the keys Nintendo needs. The Revolution will be supported, (if not more than the GCN, as much at least) as long as Nintendo sticks to the plan they started with the NDS. And if not, there will still be plenty of Nintendo games, and that will make me happy

(and Nintendo too, since they will be receiving the lions share of that profit, and to go a nice full circle with the argument)

 

[Prine]

I wasn't really responding to you, but rather to the usual suspects in this thread fawning about how great Nintendo's console strategy is because its so profitable.

The fact of the matter is that Nintendo could be losing money hand-over-fist on the Gamecube for all we know, but those numbers are buried under a mountain of monopoly profits from the GBA business.

ahhhhhhhh good point

/sratches chin

 

[GDGF]

Sarcasm

 

[sonycowboy]

It's surprising how quick people are to write off the big N. Despite everybody calling Nintendo's Gamecube a non-factor, not catering to the mature audiences, having huge droughts in quality games, etc, they are still essentially even with Microsoft.

To me, Microsoft is going to have the most difficult path next generation for several reasons. Of course, these reasons are based on current speculation, but hey that's all we've got.

1) They will not have the technology advantage. By far, this was their biggest key this generation. Without it, and if fact, potentially being in 3rd place in the horsepower war will make it difficult to maintain their current fans who clearly want the most powerful system.

2) They will come out first and they will have to face the hype of the other two systems much like the dreamcast. It's very difficult to fight a ghost and people like to wait for more options to show up before they make the "big" decision.

3) Sony will have an Xbox Live "like" service from day 1. Again, it may not be as advanced as Microsoft's, but it will again counter one of their key advantages.

4) Microsoft, as far as consumers go, by far has the weakest 1st party lineup. For casuals you've got Halo and that's it. RSC, PGR, MechAssault, etc may be great games, but as far as sales go, they haven't become huge franchises like Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Gran Turismo, Twisted Metal, J&D, R&C, SOCOM,etc.

5) Microsoft failed to make an inroads into Japan with the exception of Tecmo. While Japan may not be the "end all be all" of gaming anymore, you cannot simply have a 0% contribution of games like Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Tekken, etc.

Clearly, Nintendo has not executed well by everyone's admission. Similarly, Microsoft has done many things right and still Nintendo is even. I expect Nintendo to launch the Gamecube successor with a much, much stronger lineup and reverse their slide. They are also catering to a substantial market that the other guys aren't. While the market continues to skew older, kids still make a large percentage of VG sales.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

I think sonycowboy nailed it.

I just wanted to add:

6) early release of XENON (if as suspected)... 2005 will alienate fanbase. No BC will alienate fanbase. It is also unlikely that HALO 3 will launch with XENON

7) Itagi is a specs whore. If Xenon is not a grade. MS will lose him to Nintendo or SONY. Without its number 1, tits and ass and kickass franchise. UPHILL.

8) JAPAN JAPAN JAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPANJAPAN JAPAN in so many ways.

 

[Makura]

"Xbox hits it's sweet spot"

LOL

What use is a "#2 market position" if it's such a small margin? It certainly sounds good on paper though...

 

[SolidSnakex]

"Clearly, Nintendo has not executed well by everyone's admission. Similarly, Microsoft has done many things right and still Nintendo is even."

This is true, but you've got to consider that MS worked from nothing basically. They had no respect in the console industry and had to build it all up. From the start of this gen they were wrote off as having no chance. No one believed Sony would let them take the top spot and no one believed Nintendo was going to get beat by a new comer 2 times in a row. While they certainly aren't going to top Sony, they're definetly going to come out on top of Nintendo this gen unless they just stop production of the XBox.

Alot of your arguments seem to have more to do with Sony vs. MS than Nintendo vs. MS next gen also. The 4th and 5th things will be the biggest problems MS has to overcome next gen to top Nintendo. They did do it this gen though, so it's a good possibility next gen that they'll do it again if things go the way they are now. I'd say Nintendo overall has alot more to be worried about. Like you said, MS has done alot right this gen and Nintendo hasn't. MS is on a roll going into next gen, and Nintendo really isn't. Overall Nintendo's definetly the one that's having to come from behind, not MS.

 

[Kobun Heat]

If Nintendo decides to get into a money-bleeding contest with MS or Sony, Nintendo will lose. Why would they want to do that?

 

[TheGreenGiant]

"Clearly, Nintendo has not executed well by everyone's admission. Similarly, Microsoft has done many things right and still Nintendo is even."

This is true, but you've got to consider that MS worked from nothing basically. They had no respect in the console industry and had to build it all up. From the start of this gen they were wrote off as having no chance. No one believed Sony would let them take the top spot and no one believed Nintendo was going to get beat by a new comer 2 times in a row. While they certainly aren't going to top Sony, they're definetly going to come out on top of Nintendo this gen unless they just stop production of the XBox.

Alot of your arguments seem to have more to do with Sony vs. MS than Nintendo vs. MS next gen also. The 4th and 5th things will be the biggest problems MS has to overcome next gen to top Nintendo. They did do it this gen though, so it's a good possibility next gen that they'll do it again if things go the way they are now. I'd say Nintendo overall has alot more to be worried about. Like you said, MS has done alot right this gen and Nintendo hasn't. MS is on a roll going into next gen, and Nintendo really isn't. Overall Nintendo's definetly the one that's having to come from behind, not MS.

I still find it outrageous that the fact that the only reason why MS is surviving this gen is because they're serving a big wad of cash with each serving of xbox. They dished it out for rare, they dished it out with free games/bundles, they dished it out in the name of publicising the xbox brand name. But for what its worth, they're only managed to not really win; and buy themselves an uncertain future in the market now that the japanese market and developer has completely writtten them off. Next gen, I'd like to see how deep they're pocket can go and how far much they're willing to bleed. If the XBOX business was the sacrificial lamb, then xenon had better be some sort of holy grail.