Sony has turned in four annual losses in the last five years

[pratty]

In fairness to Sony, after further research I'd say Playstation are probably in the black overall also, so it would seem I was too hasty to lump them in with Xbox as being an overall loss maker, I probably did so based on recent losses. I can' seem to find seem any definitive source covering Playstation's entire history but from what I can gather the success of the first two Playstations afforded them the losses they have made since.

 

I believe the original Playstation console made the brand consitant profits during the late 90s. Now I read in 2013 Playstation made it's first annual profit for several years, indicating further losses for 2011 and 2012, however they have also increased profits since those announced for 2013, which the OP alluded to. If the profits from the early 90s were greater than the recent losses, and they probably were, then they're probably safely in the black overall.

 

My point is this though, Playstation weathered the storm in the late 2000s and early 2010s and are apparently on the upswing again. So why all the doom and gloom for Nintendo, why do so many people think they should suddenly be put out their misery over a relatively few poor years? If Sony/Playstation are afforded the chance to bounce back, why not Nintendo? Especially as I mentioned earlier, any losses Nintendo make include all operating losses, where as the Playstation and XBox division's losses we compare them too are limited to their specific divisions.

 

But the 360 is a drop in the ocean for Microsoft. I'm sure they happily write off a lot of the Xbox division's cost simply because it keep Microsoft much more relevant to people - it helps their image so much.

 

Very true. But it's not a level playing field when people compare Nintendo to Microsoft, and expect Nintendo do what Microsoft can, when Microsoft are content and able to run Xbox essentially as a loss-leader, as opposed to Nintendo which runs it's gaming 'division' as it's primary source of business.

 

For example a developer will say they prefer to develop for the Xbox One instead of the Wii-U because of it's fancier specs etc, and if Nintendo had the same high specs they'd happily develop for them too. But Nintendo can't afford to manfacture their consoles at a loss the way Microsoft can, it's an unfair expectation to expect Nintendo to do the same as Microsoft, when Microsoft don't give a toss about overspending on hardware and making a loss, and Nintendo have to.

Edited May 14, 2014 by pratty

[Daft]

I don't think anyone ever said it was a level playing field. This is business. But look at this thread; Sony have turned in four annual losses over the past five years - that's not a level playing field because it's taking into account the whole of Sony (bits that are hemorrhaging massively) instead of just the gaming division alone (which might be doing the best out of all three companies, or at least projecting to do much better). Is that a fair comparison?

 

Not really, but it's still relevant to a degree.

 

Edit: I think you actually said all this anyway...

 

I guess, Nintendo feels shackled by its hardware. It's a relativel small company (it's smaller than just Microsoft's marketing division); it can't support two platforms fully. Sony are bigger and even they can't support two platforms. People love Nintendo's games. Their hardware, leaves a lot to be desired. If they didn't have to worry about investing in and supporting a piece of hardware - one that realistically can never hope to compete, why bother? Why not focus all their creativity on just the software (at least in terms of home consoles).

Edited May 14, 2014 by Daft

[dwarf]

My point is this though, Playstation weathered the storm in the late 2000s and early 2010s and are apparently on the upswing again. So why all the doom and gloom for Nintendo, why do so many people think they should suddenly be put out their misery over a relatively few poor years?

The hardware is a problem for Nintendo in that they don't have the muscle to compete as a multimedia platform. The brand, however, is enough to push consoles if the variety of games is there, but it simply isn't there at the moment. Nintendo need to change their approach and recognise that they rely too much on nostalgia to push sales. They need to maintain their key franchises as well as create new ones, they need to be at the cutting edge of game design again. If they can't change approach, then going third party seems like a fruitful option. Chasing trends the way they do is a risky practice.

 

My bet is that they will resign the home console within the next ten years.

[pratty]

I don't think anyone ever said it was a level playing field. This is business.

 

I agree. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it ought to be a level playing field, Microsoft and Sony are right to exploit whatever advantages they have over Nintendo. What I'm saying is in their criticism of Nintendo too many people act as though it is a level playing field.

[Daft]

Maybe. Personally, I would say making hardware doesn't work to Nintendo's strengths. They make brilliant software regardless of platform, so why a) restrict it to hardware that can't compete in terms of sales and b) plunge resources into a hardware division when the money would be better spent elevating their portfolio of IPs.

 

And realistically, there is no reason why they couldn't release their own peripherals still.

[pratty]

Maybe. Personally, I would say making hardware doesn't work to Nintendo's strengths. They make brilliant software regardless of platform, so why a) restrict it to hardware that can't compete in terms of sales and b) plunge resources into a hardware division when the money would be better spent elevating their portfolio of IPs.

 

And realistically, there is no reason why they couldn't release their own peripherals still.

 

That just seems too drastic to me, to abandon hardware after one failure, which hasn't even run it's course yet. I think producing hardware is almost as much part of Nintendo's M.O. as it is making software. I would think it would take them at least two successive home console failures to make them comtemplate action like that.

 

When you look at how lucrative hardware can be when you get it right (eg the Wii and DS) I think Nintendo owe it to themselves to suck up the disappointment of the Wii-U, to go back to the drawing board and at least give it one more bash.

[Daft]

They're good with handhelds. There's no reason they shouldn't continue making those. But the Wii is a statistical anomaly in a trend of decreased hardware sales every generation. When it comes to home consoles, I feel hardware is something the shackles Nintendo rather than liberates them.

[Choze]

The problem for Nintendo is that being a 3rd party is not the same. They will never earn as much. The real power is in owning a platform. Its hard to feel sorry for them though. Everything is very much their own fault.

 

Right now PS4 is running away with the lead. So its great for Sony but hardly going to save the company on its own either. Certainly useful long term.

 

The did lose an absolute fortune with Xbox but there was no other way. It was always going to be cost them to get a foothold into the market and gain marketshare.

 

lol no. The xbox is the definition of a mess. That is a textbook example of how to not enter a market. The costs were staggering. Gaming isnt that important to get that kind of investment. With the Xbone gaming has been downgraded massively at MS. MS have poured tons of resources into platforms but the two really making headway are iOS and Android. Thats the problem all of the companies here have. In the future there could be more Android and IOS devices.

[dwarf]

I don't think Microsoft necessarily regrets dipping their feet into the gaming pool. Nobody had any idea where games were headed back then, and we likely don't know the full extent of their potential application now. The technologies aren't restricted to the one sphere.