Nintendo Revolution...

They don't have the resources? They've only been the leading gaming console for 18 years they shouldn't have any issues with resources.

They don't have a hundred-billion-dollar computer corporation to fall back on, and they're not the leading manufacturer of consumer electronics either, numbnuts. They make videogames, and that's it. Their competitors have the Windows and Sony Electronics empires to fall back on. How in the name of God do you just forget about that, you warbling blob-tard?

The new markets?

People who don't play videogames normally. Sony and Microsoft continue to sell only to teen/20-year-old males, while Nintendo is aiming to make money off of the children, women and older consumer markets, all of which combined form a much larger piece of the world population than high school boys do, D3V.

Wow that's a load of shit, if you could please find me some charts / statistics (not from www.nintendo.com) showing their global earning of the past few years, please share with the community, because that sounds alot like a load of horse shit. DO you even have any idea how much it costs to slap together a PS2 / Xbox? I'm guessing around 50-70 dollars, and since they are so dominant and have uber resources, they lose no money, please give me some facts bitch, and quit posting all of this lying ass bullshit. Calling me an ignorant fuck.

For earnings, look at NPD numbers, jackass. They don't lie. None of this is secret information. It's widely reported and fully accessible to the public. You want the proof, go find it yourself. www.npd.com

As for console costs, it's widely known that Microsoft's console costs around 700 bucks per unit because it's made of expensive, off-the-shelf PC parts. However, the individual unit cost is not only derived from manufacturing costs, but in design, distribution and a few other factors that determine the overall cost of each individual unit. Search IGN or Gamespot and have a ball looking for the individual costs of the production of each console Sony and Microsoft make. They've been losing money on the XBox and PS2 since the beginning of the generation, and this is a widely known fact. It's simply a concession of being a console developer. You lose a lot of money on the console, but you make up for it by screwing the customer on game costs. The fact that you even dispute this, after having been an established fact since the dawn of the videogames industry is staggering.

In regards to Nintendo's profit on hardware, search IGN Cube for articles. I'm not about to spend an hour on dial-up looking through old Mailbags for the information you want. Again, this is widely known to be true, and IGN (the most successful, reputable and sizeable source for videogame news online) has reported this several times. Go look for yourself. I'd recommend even looking through the boards. You'll find this same argument echoed constantly, because it's the truth. Here's somewhere to start, if you feel so inclined:

http://boards.ign.com/message.asp?to...cribersendto=1

People only listen to you because you try to the point if somebody doesn't giggle or golfclap at it they'd feel bad for you.

People listen to me because I'm an intelligent, capable, respected member of the community. You, on the other hand, are a racist pig that gets off on talking constant shit about a videogame company. People listen to me because I'm awesome, people hate you because you are the textbook definition of "suck."

Just one thing, you say that as a company, you lose a lot money on the consoles but than said that NIntendo doesn't.

"You lose a lot of money on the console..." but than then you make it sound like Nintendo doesn't, which is it?

(I'm not backing up D3V, just asking. No bone to pick here)

The standard is that usually, all console makers lose a chunk of cash on the hardware, but make up for it in software sales. Nintendo started this generation out by making a console that, against the norm, was cheap enough to manufacture that they could actually make money off the hardware sales. There aren't any official reports or charts or sales graphs to consult, because videogame companies don't usually release that sort of information. Hardware analysts figure out exactly how much each piece of the hardware would cost to manufacture and they create an estimate based on this. The videogames industry was generally under the belief that up until they dropped the GCN price to $100, Nintendo was actually making cash on hardware sales. Whether or not they're still making a profit at this lowest price is anyone's guess, but nobody has come forth to settle the argument one way or another.

Aight, that clears it up easily. Just gotta be nice and you get a straight up answer. At $100, they must be on the line of no profit though, but maybe it only cost them $75 to make. We will never know unless Nintendo says something. Oh well.

If it only costs them 75 bucks to make one, it's gonna suck.

I was refering to the Gamecube's price. Sorry for the confusion.

yeah nintendo is the leading hand held seller. Sony's PSP if you ask me is more of a Multimedia client than truely a handheld game station. I mean the PSP is basically a PDA on Steriods.

Wait, I've already seen this movie...Raziel wins.

Thanks for spoiling it...:P

A nice quote I remember, arguing with Raziel is like slapping a cruise missile.