Nintendo Failures seem exaggerated

[kilenem]

Because barring the Wii U, Nintendo consistently makes a profit on hardware.

We debunked that one a couple times for you, up to and including sources.

I believe that Nintendo makes 60% of its profits on hardware.

[citation needed]

To be fair, they made massive profits off the Wii. Though, I'm not one to suggest that those profits should be seen as an get out of jail free card for the current debacle with the Wii U.

Of course, if 60% of their profits DID come from the hardware sales, that would actually be unhealthy. Other console developers always sold the console at a loss and tried to make it up in software. If 60% of Nintendo profits came from hardware, that would suggest that software sales were very poor. Even with the profitability of the Wii.

Have any companies made a profit on there system selling them at a loss.

 

[Roxas1359]

Have any companies made a profit on there system selling them at a loss.

Both the PS1 and the PS2 did, especially the PS2 seeing as it was the most successful selling console of all time (still is as well). It can work if priced correctly. The reason why the PS3 burnt through the money was because the production for the systems cost way too much to be stable, and Ken Kutaragi lied to the investors on the cost of production. The $500 30 GB ones actually cost about $900 to make, while the 60 GB models cost over $1000 to make and were only sold for $600. This resulted in Ken's eventually ousting from the company in a similar way that caused Gunpei Yokoi to leave Nintendo. Eventually Sony broke even and started to profit on the PS3 in I believe 2010, but they had already burned through the money the PS2 made them.

The Wii U is currently burning through the money that the Wii made Nintendo because they are selling the Wii U at a loss because the parts alone almost make the entire price of the Wii U, with assembly, packaging, and shipping not being included. It's why some people say that the GamePad should be dropped because it raises the cost of the console part wise by about $100, similarly to how the Kinect raises the Xbox One's price. Generally Nintendo has the production cost of their consoles be extremely cheaper than that of their prices they set for it. For example, the GameBoy Micro, while not really the most successful handheld thanks to the DS, cost around $44 to produce and they sold them for $100. The GameCube was also rumored to cost only around $20 to produce and even when selling them for $99 still got in profits. The Wii U on the other hand has parts that cost about $228 and doesn't include the manufacturing, distribution, etc for it.

 

[kilenem]

The reason why the PS3 burnt through the money was because the production for the systems cost way too much to be stable, and Ken Kutaragi lied to the investors on the cost of production. The $500 30 GB ones actually cost about $900

Holly crap 900 to make. I thought the 360 was bad at 715. I assumed the PS2was sold at a profit since it was the weakest of its generation.

 

[Roxas1359]

Holly crap 900 to make. I thought the 360 was bad at 715. I assumed the PS2was sold at a profit since it was the weakest of its generation.

Yeah, and it definitely wouldn't have passed through Sony's board if Ken told the board the truth, so he lied to them. It's why after Ken was gone the PS3 had things removed to lower the price. Generally as well consoles are only sold at a loss in the beginning, but later on the tech that goes into them becomes cheaper to produce over time, hence price drops over time.

As for the PS2, remember it had a built in DVD player from the start, at a time in which DVD players were about as expensive as Bluray players were at launch. Sony had to also pay licensing fees for both the ability to play music and the ability to play movies now. It was the PS2 that actually got Japan to start using DVD players because the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player for Japan at it's launch and was marketed as such and it was extremely successful because of it. While no official numbers have been released, it was rumored that the PS2 once everything was done cost about $488 to make (that includes the licensing fees) and was sold for $299 at launch. Over time the tech became cheaper to produce since Sony was able to get the DVD to become standardized worldwide and the fact that Sony had the PS1 games, memory cards, and controllers work on the system effectively pushed it more. PS2 still has the largest console library to date, about 3780 games total and when combined with PS1 games (which totaled 2418) the PS2 has effectively a total of 6198 games. Sony tried to pull the same magic twice with the PS3 when trying to use it to popularize Blurays, but they've not been as successful since DVDs are still so widely used.

Nintendo technically can do what Sony couldn't and they could have made the Wii U backwards compatible with GameCube games as well, because the Wii U Optical Drive is just a slightly modified Wii Optical Drive, and the Wii Optical Drive was a modified GameCube Optical Drive. There are two reasons why the Wii U can't play the GameCube games, and those are that the Wii U's OS locks out the ability to read mini-discs like what the GameCube has, and the second is because there is no slot for the controllers. Nintendo could have an easier time than Sony did because they only modify their older tech for the newer ones. I mean someone is hacking the Wii U to be able to play GameCube games and if one programmer can do that then I'm pretty sure Nintendo could easily do it. Of course I think Nintendo might be wanting to do what Sony does with PS2 games on the PS3 and make something like GameCube classics or something.

 

[Lightknight]

Agreed. But I think Gen 8 has a challenge that others really didn't face. I'm not seeing a huge difference in the quality of visuals I did going from NES to SNES, to N64 and really being blown away by Mario jumping into a painting, to the first time I saw Ratchet and Clank on a PS2, to watching a dead guy float in space in Quake 4... and now... this. It's nice, but nothing has really knocked my sox off. I'm playing Metro Last Light and Bioshock Infinity on a PS3 and they look acceptable.

Every generation has new challenges. We really have reached a time where graphics are "good enough" for most people to make games playable today. I played Bioshock 1 back in 2011 and you know what? It was still playable. So yes, graphics already reach beauty in the previous generation and successfully crossed the uncanny valley in some games or got darn close to it.

What we're going to see in this generation is a fine tuning of those graphics and hopefully some advancements in physics and AI. An overhaul of physics in games will actually do more for graphics than more polygons at this point.

Even then, what games have you played that are 8th gen? Killzone is stunning at points and is an excellent example of what this console generation has to start with. There's an issue with object collision in the game but it's otherwise prettier than almost anything we had in the ps3 generation and it's a starting entry. Do you remember the 7th gen console's starting games?

John Woo Presents Stranglehold [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vuqyFMu0Sg]. That Youtube link is Stranglehold at it's best. Reviews at the time called the environment graphics great but said that character models took a hit because of the destructable environment. But come on, it's all ugly and the environments have so much copy/paste of object modles that it's just silly (especially when you look at columns that are missing tiles in the same place). It looks closer to a PS2 game than it does to modern PS3 games. I mean, have you compared Call of Duty 2 (a 360 title) with Call of Duty:Ghosts' 360 version? It's a different world. Most of the games being made for the 8th generation are also being made for the old consoles. This means that it's the same game engine under the hood but with the graphics turned up. Games specifically made for the next gen consoles are the ones who should show the advantage early with the others catching up as the 7th gen gets phased out. This is the same as it was with the 7th generation with the games made for both systems too (though that John Woo game was only on 7th gen consoles).

My prediction: Next holiday season, PS4 and Wii U sales will be comparable to each other, but lower than rates of sale of the Wii U and PS3 in the same period.

What in the world gives you that idea? The WiiU is doing almost exactly the same as it did this time last year and the XBO is coming in at around 2x its sales with the PS4 more than doubling the XBO sales without even having launched in Japan yet (Friday of next week is the launch date, I think). This is an incredibly unlikely prediction unless you have some sort of massive game changer in mind (which I'm happy to hear).

My prediction is that if Microsoft makes no significant change then next year will show both the WiiU at a much lower level with the XBO in second place but not close to the ps4. That's the way things look now. Console sellers (games that greatly increase the sales of the system) are often new IPs altogether and not subsequent installations of old IPs. Nintendo is a good example of this with their existing IPs selling well while their overall console market share dwindled unitl the Wii generation which opened new IPs and a new gaming mechanic that the new IPs were based on. Donkey Kong and {insert super or another prefix hereif relevant} Mario {insert rest of the name here} games are fun and if you own a WiiU you WILL get them. But people who haven't already gotten the console aren't necessarily going to run out and get a WiiU just because known Nintendo IPs are released. This really is just one publisher (albeit huge and possibly the best one) carrying a whole console. As such, they need to put up or shut up.

The Xbox one? Best marketing of the 3, but I'm not sure who will be buying it.

The XBO is selling significantly better than the WiiU was at this point. They have dumped the most money into marketing but I think our generation is a little more ad blind to their methods than others have been in decades past. Looke at how much they throw into Win8, for example.

They also have a VERY uphill battle of resolving the PR shitstorm they created in the last E3. So, that they're still doing better than Nintendo is good for them, especially when they're so close to the break even point on their console sales.

Nintendo, however, is taking hundreds in losses per console and is doing terribly. They're in the same spot that the PS3 was in for a while but with none of the redeeming qualities that eventually saved the PS3. You may like your WiiU, and that's great, but it simply isn't picking up and there's nothing more they can really do if they're going to keep the gamepad and won't release new IPs.

 

[gorfias]

We really have reached a time where graphics are "good enough" for most people to make games playable today. I played Bioshock 1 back in 2011 and you know what? It was still playable. So yes, graphics already reach beauty in the previous generation and successfully crossed the uncanny valley in some games or got darn close to it.

What we're going to see in this generation is a fine tuning of those graphics and hopefully some advancements in physics and AI. An overhaul of physics in games will actually do more for graphics than more polygons at this point.

Good selling points. I've got a buddy asking me why he should ever upgrade from his PS3. Will graphics improve enough for it to matter. I think the phyics, better frame rates, an over-all smoother experience will matter.

what games have you played that are 8th gen?

I don't think "Outlast" counts. Assassin's Creed 4 likely does. I think I over did it showing my boy the difference. I showed him it compared to AC3 on a PS3. I think AC4 for PS3 probably took a giant leap forward over AC3. It did look horrible by comparison.

Killzone is stunning

I know I have to get that ASAP. Right now, I have more games than money or time. I'm blown away by what I got for PS+. $50 for a year and I've already got about $200 in games. I wonder how often they update the free games? If it's monthly, I'm going to need more storage.

Do you remember the 7th gen console's starting games?

I do. Your Stranglehold clip is terrific! But nowhere near, say, Metro Last Light on the same console. A couple of my first 360 games:

Burnout Revenge. Also for the original Xbox, the environments look like they're made out of modeling clay.
Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. To imagine, Skyrim is the same generation
And Call of Duty 2. Not MW2. COD 2.

COD 2 did feel like a light year from what I was playing on the original Xbox. But then, Doom 3 looked pretty good on that old system.

They also have a VERY uphill battle of resolving the PR shitstorm they created in the last E3. So, that they're still doing better than Nintendo is good for them, especially when they're so close to the break even point on their console sales.

Nintendo, however, is taking hundreds in losses per console and is doing terribly. They're in the same spot that the PS3 was in for a while but with none of the redeeming qualities that eventually saved the PS3. You may like your WiiU, and that's great, but it simply isn't picking up and there's nothing more they can really do if they're going to keep the gamepad and won't release new IPs.

Good analogy comparing it to early PS3, which I thought a waste as did many friends. We all went on to buy one. I got two, though, mostly due to the Bluray. If I was (back then) going to spend $200 on a player anyway, made sense to throw in another few bucks to get the PS3 for seperate rooms. Nintendo doesn't have that going for them.

I've heard Donkey Kong is out, and it is only good for someone that wants to revisit mid-1990 games that are only shinier now. That isn't enough to be a system seller.

Is it fair to write that the Wii won last gen in terms of console sales? As those Wii's break, will people replace them with a Wii U or something else (The Xbox One, for one thing, does seem to be the one with the gimicks people might love).

 

[Roxas1359]

The WiiU is doing almost exactly the same as it did this time last year and the XBO is coming in at around 2x its sales with the PS4 more than doubling the XBO sales without even having launched in Japan yet (Friday of next week is the launch date, I think). This is an incredibly unlikely prediction unless you have some sort of massive game changer in mind (which I'm happy to hear).

Console launches in Japan this Saturday actually. Japan's government has it set up that new video game consoles must launch on the weekends (Friday-Sunday) so that kids won't skip school and so that the Akihibara district is able to do all their work correctly since it's the main tech center for Tokyo and a console launch would cause delays in other businesses. So they have it that all the major companies launch it on a Saturday so as to not make more of a mess of the district, and generally because console launches are usually first in the Akihibara district before other stores, unless they were Mom and Pop stores.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

 

[kilenem]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

That was all consoles for rhythmic and Dance titles. Dance central was one of the best Kinect games.

 

[VG_Addict]

How badly will Tropical Freeze's sales (in Japan) be eclipsed by the PS4's launch? It's already come out for Japan, but I would imagine a lot of people there are saving up for the PS4.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

No, they sold the NES, the SNES, the N64, and the Gamecube at a profit.

Already been addressed.

Nintendo's consoles being underpowered only started with the Wii.

Of course, they did other things before that. Like stick to expensive carts when disc media was cheaper, or minidiscs that spin backwards because reasons....

Except even then, the Gamecube was more powerful than the PS2, and the N64 was on par with the PSX.

In power yes. But the software was better on the PS consoles. You could put more game on a PSX Disc than an N64 cartridge. You could also have more discs to have even more game thanks to the memory card. FF7 on 9-13 cartridges would be stupid.

And the GC disks held less than the PS2 disks. Had memory cards but still, multiple disks are a bother and if you can't put that much onto a disk, you can't utilize he consoles power to its fullest. When you refer to a consoles "power" that's one thing, but looking at all aspects of consoles side by side and there's a reason why GC games didn't run as powerfully as PS2/Xbox games.

And to your earlier post/point on how Nintendo has always made a profit on hardware. You are aware that Nintendo's hardware per generation has sold millions less with every generation barring the Wii right?
NES:61 million
SNES:49 million
N64: 32 million
GC:21 million

What does that have to do with it? They still made money on those consoles, even if they didn't sell the most of their generations.

Of course they made money off of the consoles. People bought them to play the 1st party games. Problem is the hardcore Nintendo fans are clearly diminishing at a steady rate. Nintendo's lack of any good relationship with 3rd party publishers/developers doesn't help either.

Point is, even if Nintendo's next console is the most powerful on the market (like the Dreamcast upon its release), if no 3rd party companies get behind it, it'll have a very hard time gaining traction. If the Wii U being over a year old is going to be passed by the 3 month old PS4 in sales within a month, how many hardcore Nintendo fans do you think will be there in 7-10 years from now when the next generation comes along?

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

Because as well as the 3DS and DS sell, it still has the problem of not too many 3rd party games selling well. With a select few companies like Capcom, Square Enix, and Namco (aka Japanese 3rd party devs), 3rd party games sell like crap on the 3DS. Nintendo's handheld supremecy has never been challenged to there are a few franchises that can sell well like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter. Most new IPs not made by an old industry standby (i.e. Squeenix and Bravely Default) usually flop.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

Because as well as the 3DS and DS sell, it still has the problem of not too many 3rd party games selling well. With a select few companies like Capcom, Square Enix, and Namco (aka Japanese 3rd party devs), 3rd party games sell like crap on the 3DS. Nintendo's handheld supremecy has never been challenged to there are a few franchises that can sell well like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter. Most new IPs not made by an old industry standby (i.e. Squeenix and Bravely Default) usually flop.

Interesting views, but I got the impression this thread was not merely about financial failure. In 10-15 years as long as Nintendo is still alive which I think it will be, we'll be judging past consoles on the quality of their games. A lot of people still have old consoles like the SNES and N64 and still play them because they had some great games. Will anyone be playing the Wii in 20 years when the new ultra-3D vibration gamepad swing-movement fad comes along? I doubt it.

 

[kilenem]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

Because as well as the 3DS and DS sell, it still has the problem of not too many 3rd party games selling well. With a select few companies like Capcom, Square Enix, and Namco (aka Japanese 3rd party devs), 3rd party games sell like crap on the 3DS. Nintendo's handheld supremecy has never been challenged to there are a few franchises that can sell well like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter. Most new IPs not made by an old industry standby (i.e. Squeenix and Bravely Default) usually flop.

Really I thought 3RD party did better on 3DS and DS then PSP and VITA. Since the amount of 3RD party games were a lot less.

 

[Lightknight]

I don't think "Outlast" counts. Assassin's Creed 4 likely does. I think I over did it showing my boy the difference. I showed him it compared to AC3 on a PS3. I think AC4 for PS3 probably took a giant leap forward over AC3. It did look horrible by comparison.

It's important to recognise that under the hood, both AC4 for the ps3 and ps4 are the same game but ported. PS4 got substantially better graphics but because it was developed with the ps3/360 in mind the engine isn't really that much better.

Games that are solely developed for the next gen consoles with a AAA budget are where this is going to shine and will only get brighter a as developers get more familiar with the ps4 hardware and begin optimizing for it.

I know I have to get that ASAP. Right now, I have more games than money or time. I'm blown away by what I got for PS+. $50 for a year and I've already got about $200 in games. I wonder how often they update the free games? If it's monthly, I'm going to need more storage.

It's monthly. But here's the thing, if you just "purchase" it when it's available but cancel the download, you'll be able to download it again any time in the future because it is linked to your account as a future. You do not have to hold these games on the 500GB drive.

I'd consider Killzone a really pretty game but evident of some serious work that still needs to be done to take advantage of the ps4. Like the texture pop-in issues I mentioned and the collision detection being off. Still, there's a lot of stunning stuff.

Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. To imagine, Skyrim is the same generation

Skyrim and Oblivion are one of the best examples. Though Oblivion itself was graphically shocking at the time, it was so amazing. Bethesda had been developing it five years prior for consoles that hadn't even been made yet.

But Oblivion and Skyrim make good bookend examples.

Good analogy comparing it to early PS3, which I thought a waste as did many friends. We all went on to buy one. I got two, though, mostly due to the Bluray. If I was (back then) going to spend $200 on a player anyway, made sense to throw in another few bucks to get the PS3 for seperate rooms. Nintendo doesn't have that going for them.

Actually, around the time the ps3 came out, there were still some $1,000 bluray players available for early adopters. The Bluray player practically saved the ps3 and here the WiiU is with an option that can't even play DVDs from what I'm told.

I've heard Donkey Kong is out, and it is only good for someone that wants to revisit mid-1990 games that are only shinier now. That isn't enough to be a system seller.

Right, and this is Nintendo's problem. Console sellers are usually new IPs, not ones that everyone has played at some time or another.

Is it fair to write that the Wii won last gen in terms of console sales? As those Wii's break, will people replace them with a Wii U or something else (The Xbox One, for one thing, does seem to be the one with the gimicks people might love).

It is fair to say that the Wii last the last generation in terms of many things. Profitability being the big one. The other two lost money from what I'm told and yet the Wii made money on every Wii ever sold while also selling a good 20 million more units than the others.

The kinect 2 may be great or not be great. We'll have to see. It's rare that I bring out my Kinect 1.

 

[gorfias]

Is it fair to write that the Wii won last gen in terms of console sales? As those Wii's break, will people replace them with a Wii U or something else (The Xbox One, for one thing, does seem to be the one with the gimicks people might love).

It is fair to say that the Wii last [won?] the last generation in terms of many things. Profitability being the big one. The other two lost money from what I'm told and yet the Wii made money on every Wii ever sold while also selling a good 20 million more units than the others.

The kinect 2 may be great or not be great. We'll have to see. It's rare that I bring out my Kinect 1.

My thinking is that as the Wiis finally break, PS4 may be their last choice as they move on to either a Wii U or an Xbox as they may still love Gimicks. I think it was Yahtzee that pointed out though, that those that loved NES all along are probably around 35 by now. If the Wii U is thought to be a kid's toy, they aren't kids anymore and wont get one.

Sorry to ask again as you may have already stated it: You point out Nintendo actually made money on each Wii sold. Is the same true of Wii U? With that tablet, it seems to be a lot of hardware for the money. Sure, they saved by putting only 2 GIG of RAM rather than 8, but that was probably minimal.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Why is everyone talking about the Wii and Wii U and no one about the DS and 3DS? I'll remember the Wii consoles for rhythmic dance titles and guitar-hero type games for the casual gamer, while DS at least had a bunch of thoughtful titles which catered for experienced and serious gamers.

Because as well as the 3DS and DS sell, it still has the problem of not too many 3rd party games selling well. With a select few companies like Capcom, Square Enix, and Namco (aka Japanese 3rd party devs), 3rd party games sell like crap on the 3DS. Nintendo's handheld supremecy has never been challenged to there are a few franchises that can sell well like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter. Most new IPs not made by an old industry standby (i.e. Squeenix and Bravely Default) usually flop.

Really I thought 3RD party did better on 3DS and DS then PSP and VITA. Since the amount of 3RD party games were a lot less.

The gap between 1st party sales and 3rd party sales on the 3DS and DS is still astronomically large. On the PSP/Vita 3rd party games sell just as well if not more. There's also the fact that Sony has a lot more 2nd party companies making games for them than Nintendo.

3rd party games on the DS/3DS not made by Square Enix, Capcom, Namco, and other big companies typically do not sell that well, and those make up the majority of the 3DS/DS library. Also take into consideration that a lot of the best selling 3DS/DS games are ports. Take a look at the top 50 best selling games on the 3DS for example. It's majority Nintendo and Square Enix games. Some Namco and a good amount of Capcom.

The 3DS is seeing somewhat of a JRPG boom lately so that definitely slants the sales in the favour of Squeenix. Monster Hunter making the jump from a Sony exclusive to a Nintendo exclusive also help Capcom's relationship with Nintendo in the handheld department, as does Phoenix Wright. Professor Layton is also another big DS franchise and helps Level 5. But besides the few companies I mentioned, its hard for 3rd party games to sell on Nintendo hardware in general.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Interesting views, but I got the impression this thread was not merely about financial failure. In 10-15 years as long as Nintendo is still alive which I think it will be, we'll be judging past consoles on the quality of their games. A lot of people still have old consoles like the SNES and N64 and still play them because they had some great games. Will anyone be playing the Wii in 20 years when the new ultra-3D vibration gamepad swing-movement fad comes along? I doubt it.

Nintendo definitely will be alive in 10-15 years, but keep in mind we just came off of the longest console generation ever. 10 years from now will be the most likely point of us seeing the 9th generation of gaming consoles. That being said, Nintendo's position in the home console front will be decreased. I honestly don't think that a sudden paradigm shift will bring droves of Nintendo die hards to them will happen within the next 15 years, after seeing their home console sales get smaller with every generation since the 80s (barring the Wii).

I agree with you that no one will be playing the Wii in 20 years time. It didn't have a memorable enough library of games for gamers to look back to a love. If Nintendo is doing very well in the next generation I can guarantee th at it won't be due to sales of Mario, Legend of Zelda, Metroid and their other IPs that are older than the majority of their customer base now. Nintendo needs a gang of new IPs, especially with the newest Mario game failing to do Mario numbers and the "meh" feeling around the upcoming Smash Bros. There are a lot less Nintendo die hards even on these forums. The ones that couldn't stand Nintendo getting criticized like Sony was when the PS3 came out got banned and the ones that didn't are in the dozens in number if that. Threads like this one here are made by the same six or seven people theses days.

I think the days of a single company dominating the console markets to a NES/SNES level or a PS1/PS2 level are gone because there's actually some competition now. Company mascot IPs can't sell games like they used to.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

It is fair to say that the Wii last the last generation in terms of many things. Profitability being the big one. The other two lost money from what I'm told and yet the Wii made money on every Wii ever sold while also selling a good 20 million more units than the others.

I'd say the Wii didn't actually win in terms of profitability. Think of it like this, Nintendo was actually posting losses in the last 2 years before the Wii U came out. That's due to stoppage of sales for the Wii in its last few years. Everyone who had a Wii got one early on, and there were next to no late generation games that were of major repute coming out. Even the Operation Rainfall games didn't do that well when localized. On the software side Nintendo was releasing less first party titles and as such was making less money. 3rd party titles on the Wii sold like crap overall the whole generation so a lot of 3rd party companies just stopped making games for the Wii period.

Now Sony and MS actually started to make a profit halfway through the last generation. That and with most of the libraries of both the PS3 and 360 being 3rd party games that sold well, they never saw the 2 year slump in hardware sales that Nintendo saw. Games with record breaking sales like COD and GTA V came out on a nearly yearly basis for the PS3/360. I'd say in software dollars Sony and MS won that fight. In hardware I'd say Sony won on that front. They didn't have to deal with a Red Ring of Death fiasco and considering the fact that they overtook the 360 in sales (with the 360 having a year long jump on release to the PS3 and Wii) as well as the fact that if you to put the release dates of the PS3 and 360 side by side, the PS3 sold just as well. Also keep in mind that MS was coming off of a 4 billion dollar loss on the original Xbox and did report that the Xbox division was losing MS the most money by the end of the 360 era.

Nintendo won in hardware sales, but that came at the cost of alienating a lot of gamers in order to sell things like Wii Fit and Wii Music (top selling Wii games). It also came at the cost of ruining the few good 3rd party relationships that Nintendo had.

 

[Lightknight]

My thinking is that as the Wiis finally break, PS4 may be their last choice as they move on to either a Wii U or an Xbox as they may still love Gimicks. I think it was Yahtzee that pointed out though, that those that loved NES all along are probably around 35 by now. If the Wii U is thought to be a kid's toy, they aren't kids anymore and wont get one.

Every PS4 controller is a PS Move controller, so maybe not. But I will point out that it was Nintendo's breach of contract that led to Sony's introduction into the market (they'd already created a console for Nintendo, what else where they going to do with it after all the costs they incurred at Nintendo's behest?) and it was ultimately Sony's conquering of the console market that killed Nintendo's ability to compete. I mean, heck, if the N64 couldn't compete with the ps1 and we all remember the N64 fondly, what chance did they have? Especially when they produced the gamecube which was the most powerful and cheapest console on the market but lost even more market share to even lose to the XBOX that sold 25 million units compared to the PS2's 154 million monstrosity.

Sorry to ask again as you may have already stated it: You point out Nintendo actually made money on each Wii sold. Is the same true of Wii U? With that tablet, it seems to be a lot of hardware for the money. Sure, they saved by putting only 2 GIG of RAM rather than 8, but that was probably minimal.

The WiiU was already losing money right out of the gate before dropping it by another $50. This is nothing but a huge money suck for them. The PS4 costs $381 to manufacture and package, the XBO coss $471. After shipping and retailer fees they likely lose a few bucks here and there but I don't know what the shipping costs per unit is since both are being made in China.

So both of the other consoles are in the same place. That's why my analogy is with the ps3. Because the ps3 also sold at a loss for years. Here's an article with Nintendo's CEO stating that they had to pick a price they thought consumers would buy at despite it being under-cost. [http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/10/why-nintendo-is-losing-money-on-each-wii-u-launch-unit/] But that's an article from October 2012, before the price cut even.

However, there are several sources that call Nintendo's statement into question. They estimate the cost at less than $230 so the question is whether or not Nintendo is lying or if they got a really bad contract or something unexpected, like their WiiUs secretly have more RAM and Storage and this was all just a dream...