Jump to content
IGNORED

Nintendo Versus Everyone: The Business Of Business

JPickford (retired mod)
 Share

Recommended Posts

inquisitor

inquisitor

Posted
Posted
What about using a games attached ratio? The xbox has the largest ratio of games owned per system owner. A while back I read that there were on average, 7 games owned by each Xbox owner, compared to say, 4 or 5 for each PS2. I have no idea what the Cube's is nor what the figures are for each system now.

That doesn't really mean much when the PS2 has outsold the xbox by shitloads.

Random example.

10 xbox with attach rate of 7 = 70 titles sold.

100 ps2s with attach rate of 4 = 400 titles sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OuttaHere

OuttaHere

Posted
Posted

The only way of measuring a console's success with numbers is by the profit that the machine has generated for the creator. This is from hardware, 1st party software, 2nd & 3rd party licencing, accessories, etc. Otherwise I could sell a console for minus £50 and it would be the best selling console in the world.

The only other measure of a console's is the brand value gained which is pretty hard to put a figure on, except to say that Sony are doing fantastic, MS are doing meh, and Nintendo are doing awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poet

Poet

Posted
Posted
Surely Nintendo will release the Play Yan at the same time as the GBMicro. For around a hundred quid you'll have your own portable media centre that also plays games. Bargain!

On a screen about an inch across! YAY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OuttaHere

OuttaHere

Posted
Posted
the only way to judge how well a console has performed is by how many it's sold. the attach rate, profit etc doesn't come into it. how many machines in people's homes in the only measure.

So you believe that if MS gave you an Xbox for free (with a free cheque for £100 in the box), and therefore became the best selling console ever, this would then make it the most successful console ever? Bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andy_Tanner

Andy_Tanner

Posted
Posted
So you believe that if MS gave you an Xbox for free (with a free cheque for £100 in the box), and therefore became the best selling console ever, this would then make it the most successful console ever? Bollocks.

yeah cos that's gonna happen. if you're going to contribute then at least be sensible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JPickford (retired mod)

JPickford (retired mod)

Posted
  • Author
Posted
hoover flights

Exactly. You could argue that it was an extremely successful promotion (especially for those who got free trips to NY). But ultimately a disaster for Hoover.

Judging success depends on the perspective of the observer. The whole point of the article was to look at it from a cold, hard cash perspective. From that angle GC=Success, XBOX=Disaster. Now if MS ultimately go on to dominate the games industry then the early years could be seen as a loss leader. I don't think that's going to happen mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andy_Tanner

Andy_Tanner

Posted
Posted
Judging success depends on the perspective of the observer.  The whole point of the article was to look at it from a cold, hard cash perspective.  From that angle GC=Success,  XBOX=Disaster.    Now if MS ultimately go on to dominate the games industry then the early years could be seen as a loss leader.   I don't think that's going to happen mind.

i agree. Nintendo as a business is successful but if you're going to have to say which is the most successful console you can only really measure it by it's demand. therefore NES and Gameboy are N's most successful to date.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OuttaHere

OuttaHere

Posted
Posted
oh come on, subsidising it and actually giving it away for free with £100 cash/cheque are entirely different.

John has stated exactly the point that I was trying to get across to you; I just don't think that you want to see it.

Let's put it another way. If Nintendo had subsidised the GC as much as MS have subsidised the Xbox then the GC *would* be free and maybe even have a negative prive.

Where do you draw the line on subsidy? If a console costs £500 to make but is sold for £199 that is okay? But if a console costs £179 to make but is sold for minus £122 that is not? What if a console costs £1200 to make but is sold for £299, is that okay?

All I'm saying is that you can't judge a console's success *from the console creator's point of view* (which is what this thread is about) on sales alone. The only measures are the profit earned by the company, and the value of the brand recognition gained over the console's life.

Like I also said, Nintendo have MS beat on the first one, whereas MS have Nintendo beat over the second one. I don't think MS gained enough brand recognition for it to be worth it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stolly

Stolly

Posted
Posted

The only thing that worries me is that although Nintendo have been successful in attracting a high proportion of what I would consider AAA games to their console they have not been successful financially, if the cube is looked at in isolation. The GBA/SP/DS have given them their real financial success.

On the MS front they have in the UK at least given themselves a chance to do well next generation, largely by trying to mimick the PS2 'lad-ability' with the odd great game thrown in too and of course their on-line leading edge. I have to say though that Allard really really annoys me with his hype and 'vision', but others seem to like it so maybe its just me :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

This is interesting.

Effectively, Nintendo cares little for many of it's fans. Including Europe. Mostly, Europe. Why should they overly bother? Why should they give us competitive prices if they still sell *enough*.

I knew this, of course, but I'd hoped that perhaps they were going to do something for us for once - instead of cocking up the N64 very much and not getting HALF of much out of the Gamecube as they could.

Effectively they are happy in their little universe, they make enough cash, the big people live in big houses, and as much as we might want them to be BETTER, they aren't going to be.

Because they make enough.

If it ain't broke, sell it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lovelyman

Lovelyman

Posted
Posted
the only way to judge how well a console has performed is by how many it's sold. the attach rate, profit etc doesn't come into it. how many machines in people's homes in the only measure.

This statement is totally wrong.

It is a factor in the success of a console, in that they won't ever get a return on the investment if the hardware doesn't sell, but the idea of getting consoles into people's homes is so that they can make money on the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lovelyman

Lovelyman

Posted
Posted
I bet Nintendo though are seriously down on what they hoped to make in the first place with the gamecube - a failure in their own eyes I suspect.

Which is why the Yamauchi dude stepped down for Sawata or whatever he's called.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Project 2501

Project 2501

Posted
Posted
This is interesting.

Effectively, Nintendo cares little for many of it's fans. Including Europe. Mostly, Europe. Why should they overly bother? Why should they give us competitive prices if they still sell *enough*.

I knew this, of course, but I'd hoped that perhaps they were going to do something for us for once - instead of cocking up the N64 very much and not getting HALF of much out of the Gamecube as they could.

Effectively they are happy in their little universe, they make enough cash, the big people live in big houses, and as much as we might want them to be BETTER, they aren't going to be.

Because they make enough.

If it ain't broke, sell it again.

You should go to business school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I hated business studies, and i don't especially like business.

It just rankles that I feel they could achieve more, but decide not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stolly

Stolly

Posted
Posted

Ignoring the usual lack of marketing criticism or their lack of perceived interest in Europe, you could argue that what Nintendo have done so far with the cube could have succeeded, given a little more luck or timing or a different gaming 'fashion' emerging.

What is great about the cube is that at least it positively supplements other gaming platforms brilliantly - to me it offers very different games to my PC and PS2 anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andy_Tanner

Andy_Tanner

Posted
Posted
This statement is totally wrong.

It is a factor in the success of a console, in that they won't ever get a return on the investment if the hardware doesn't sell, but the idea of getting consoles into people's homes is so that they can make money on the games.

precisely, and the more consoles in people's homes, the more software sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept