Sure it is. They needed that extra market share then but not now.

So adding extra power would decrease the profits then?? I don't really understand what you're trying to say.

I disagree some of those are good games but still I just don't feel they have made a truly EPIC (OOT epic) game.



This as well. Forgot to mention that

It has more to do with fiscal responsibility than that. Microsoft and Sony gamble (and Sony was in deep trouble for several years due to the PS3). Nintendo doesn't gamble on hardware.

Says you, if they decide that there is enough profit to be made then they'll do it. If not, they won't. Only time will tell.

If they build the new system to be on par with the current gen they'll probably not see any real profits because there'll be no point in buying the system. This will probably be a pretty big upgrade, after all, people expect progress. Microsoft probably won't be too far behind in announcing their system, there were reports a few months back about them hiring people for it.

Of course not but you're missing my point. Pardon me for the example but the Bugatti Veyron supossedly costs 5 millions dollars to build and yet they sell at 1.7 millions. Profit: none.

So technically you can sell something cheaper than it costed to make, however companies only care about profit and so will always raise the price.

That's not how multiconglomerate corporations work. Yes, you are right that they can afford to take a loss in some business units because it will be balanced out by the profitable units, but profitable units will always get more attention from corporate headquarters than those operating at a loss. This means less resources, less talent, and less executive involvement for units in the red. Actually the more disparate a company's business units are, the more difficult it is for them to excel in any one area. This can be due to distraction, unforeseen market shifts, and a desire to unify processes and business procedures that might not work for different business units.

Nintendo doesn't have this problem as much as say M$, because they are focused solely on the game industry. M$ has to worry about much more than just games. It might seem like a subtlety from the outside, but it makes a huge difference in your market success. And not just for games companies, but all companies.

I'm not saying it's impossible or likely. We just don't know enough to make any sort of reliable conclusion. But if it's true and Nintendo makes a console on par with the strengths of the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 (let's face it—somebody starts that rumor every year), I would be surprised if Bethesda didn't at least try to make a port to their console.

I actually own a wii, i liked Zelda: TP, but I'm not much into the other games (other than mario kart. I admit i loved that game for a while). All those games are pretty cartoony too (Metriod being the least of which). maybe i should have said they can't come out with any decent "Mature" games at least...

It's sometimes speculated that Sony was willing to risk its Playstation brand to push Blu-ray, which it has a stake in.

I have a hard time believing that they thought they'd keep the number one spot with a $600 machine.

It also helped them win the HD format war, so I'm sure they consider it a win.

What's the purpose of a company? The answer is to create value for it's shareholders (read: "make profit").

How long to you think Bugatti would be in business if the Veyron was the only car they made and they took that kind of loss on each unit? Would you want to invest your money in that company?

I have enjoyed our time on this topic. I will now retire into my office to discuss my holdings in Nintendo with my accountant. Thank you for your time.

That just tickled me :biggrin:

Nintendo will do whatever they do. In the mean-time, lets all look forward to skyrim on the 3 platforms it's on,without bashing each-other.

Bugatti is owned by VW, and the only reason it was made was to prove how awesome it could be. You can't really use the Bugatti Veyron as a sensible example of a business model. The only thing you can use the Veyron as an example of is how fast you can make a production car.

And gaming companies tend to do that buy taking a loss on the hardware and making it up with licensing fees and such.

...annoy people



Atleast a million years.



I will stay on these forums and you're most welcome. Thanks for a good debate

Since this thread is more about the Nintendo Console, Nintendo and cars, I will move it to CD.

:celebration: I serously thought this was gonna be closed though

BTW you can the Bugatti has an example for everything considering how awesome it is :flamethrower:

But seriously I can use it since it's still in production..it wasn't a single car or a very very very limited edition. It's a regular production car...it's simply very fast and expensive :toughninja:

Pure speculation on my part, it seems unlikely.

No. And if it ever did find its way on that console, it would have to release after the PS3/360/PC on 11.11.11.

It's relatively new that game companies take a gamble like that. Sony is the one that really did it because if they didn't they really didn't have much of a shot at unseating Nintendo or Sega. Of course it worked. They killed Sega's console business and took the number one spot from Nintendo for two console generations.

Would there even be the market for that kind of game on a Nintendo console now, after what the Wii did to much of Nintendo's old fanbase?

Sadly I doubt it...atleast I still have Wind Waker :celebration: (yes I'm one of the few that think Wind Waker is better than Ocarina of Time )

Nonsense, Majora's Mask was the better. What a dark, dark game. so original too. If Nintendo still made games like that I would be all for it, but it seems Miyamoto (the life-blood of nintendo) just doesn't have it in him any more.