moycon Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Well, in the end it'll all be on the same balance sheet. Of course, should Microsoft lose any money this/next year they can easily blame the crisis, like everyone else I wasn't speculating whether or not the division will make or lose any $$$ for whatever reason. (Personally, I suspect with Halo Wars coming in March they probably will.) I was merely responding to this statement. M$ loses money on each unit sold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royalshin Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How is a tv toy related to a videogame system. A Tv toy is any toy that you play with a television. Like a videogame unit made special. This is what Nintendo advertised the earlier products for. Nintendo's reputation for kiddy-friendly fair precedes the Wii and Hillary's run for president. It might come from the Lieberman "MORTAL KOMBAT IS KILLING OUR KIDS!" era, but I wouldn't look too much into it Well Nintendo did too said. Non violent system. I know for a fact this was true. After seeing Wiiware demo's. Even alot of parents who I know brought the Wii and mentioned how they were going to ban videogames. Force? Entice, maybe. Kids play with videogames along with gamers ( consumers ) who are now grown ups. In comparision with the GCN the Wii is really just an add-on for the Cube that was never made. that were never made, but your theory is a little pointless. It is not pointless. Everybody knows this to be true. Yes I know the N64 was sappose to have a upgrade but we were robbed of that also. Well, yes there is. You might argue there is no meaning to this term, but there certainly is a term. Nope it was just a cool term to use at the time. Hell the only real use of it was Star Treck: The Next Generation. Which made more sense and was a completely differnt show from the last. So if there is a term then it is the one I just mentioned. However that term is not used in Videogames at all. they are not the "exact product" It is too. I have more fun with Sonic on the Genesis then the Dreamcast. The only bid differnce is the uneeded cut scenes. Then what up the next game. More uneeded cut scenes and then there is the Shadow, Future, God ring bit. I could go on forever with this. The point is there is no Next Generation. A game machine is no differnt from the last Game machine. I am playing a PCE just like a Saturn. They even call the Wii controllers "Wii-motes"! Nintendo just trying to find another reason to buy there product. There was many game systems with controllers like that in the past. Even the PS2 and X-box has controllers that is practically TV controllers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atarifever Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Uhh.The Wii has the largest user base and M$ loses money on each unit sold. I have no idea what to do with this. Why are you restating what I said about the Wii, and then mentioning something that has no bearing on what I said? I am lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I think you've got a bad floppy there, chief. The floppy works fine chief. You are correct. They did change the hardware, the 360 cost less to manufacture now. Don't take my word for it. Just do some reading. in the first half of fiscal '08 sure helped, but so did "decreased Xbox 360 manufacturing costs" and "a decline in Xbox 360 platform marketing expenses" – it's costing less to build them and less to promote the brand. But... no, I wasn't talking about that one article from 2006. 2006 was when MS started turning a tiny profit on 360 sales, why some people still think and post that they lose money on every sale is beyond me. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6140383.html Too much M$ fanboyism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Well, in the end it'll all be on the same balance sheet. Of course, should Microsoft lose any money this/next year they can easily blame the crisis, like everyone else I wasn't speculating whether or not the division will make or lose any $$$ for whatever reason. (Personally, I suspect with Halo Wars coming in March they probably will.) I was merely responding to this statement. M$ loses money on each unit sold. http://kotaku.com/gaming/lol-they-made-a-b...r-ms-255654.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombiecraig Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Well, in the end it'll all be on the same balance sheet. Of course, should Microsoft lose any money this/next year they can easily blame the crisis, like everyone else I wasn't speculating whether or not the division will make or lose any $$$ for whatever reason. (Personally, I suspect with Halo Wars coming in March they probably will.) I was merely responding to this statement. M$ loses money on each unit sold. http://kotaku.com/gaming/lol-they-made-a-b...r-ms-255654.php That article is from April 26, 2007. What is the date today? I'm just kidding, I really don't care. I'm just trying to cause trouble! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atarifever Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Well, in the end it'll all be on the same balance sheet. Of course, should Microsoft lose any money this/next year they can easily blame the crisis, like everyone else I wasn't speculating whether or not the division will make or lose any $$$ for whatever reason. (Personally, I suspect with Halo Wars coming in March they probably will.) I was merely responding to this statement. M$ loses money on each unit sold. http://kotaku.com/gaming/lol-they-made-a-b...r-ms-255654.php That article is from April 26, 2007. What is the date today? I'm just kidding, I really don't care. I'm just trying to cause trouble! Kidding or not, you raise a relevant point. Given that the 360 division made their first ever year long profit in 2008-2009, I fail to see what articles from two years ago have to do with anything. Go back a year further and you'll find ones about how the Wii will fail "for sure." Early 2007 is not early 2009. So to get this straight Atarian, your best supports are one article from 2005 and another from almost two years ago. This just in, Atari to re-enter the console market with Atari 7800! I'll find you a source to back me up, from 1987. Edited January 14, 2009 by Atarifever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisrael Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How is a tv toy related to a videogame system. A Tv toy is any toy that you play with a television. Like a videogame unit made special. This is what Nintendo advertised the earlier products for. OK, so is the argument, "A Wii for most people is just a dedicted Wii Sports machine?" There's a decent argument to be had there, but calling it a "TV Toy" isn't clear. Nintendo's reputation for kiddy-friendly fair precedes the Wii and Hillary's run for president. It might come from the Lieberman "MORTAL KOMBAT IS KILLING OUR KIDS!" era, but I wouldn't look too much into it Well Nintendo did too said. Non violent system. I know for a fact this was true. After seeing Wiiware demo's. Even alot of parents who I know brought the Wii and mentioned how they were going to ban videogames. Like in their home? Force? Entice, maybe. Kids play with videogames along with gamers ( consumers ) who are now grown ups. Game companies are not "forcing" anything. About the closest they come is if downloads, tied to a console, start outdoing physical media sales, and trashing the used market. In comparision with the GCN the Wii is really just an add-on for the Cube that was never made. that were never made, but your theory is a little pointless. It is not pointless. Everybody knows this to be true. Yes I know the N64 was sappose to have a upgrade but we were robbed of that also. Jeez, we weren't robbed of anything. I remember all the crappy Genesis add-ons? Maybe we should be grateful that they don't do more of that! Well, yes there is. You might argue there is no meaning to this term, but there certainly is a term. Nope it was just a cool term to use at the time. Hell the only real use of it was Star Treck: The Next Generation. Which made more sense and was a completely differnt show from the last. So if there is a term then it is the one I just mentioned. However that term is not used in Videogames at all. It's used by marketing people and game fans all the time. Again, you may argue it doesn't mean much, but it is a term. they are not the "exact product" It is too. I have more fun with Sonic on the Genesis then the Dreamcast. The only bid differnce is the uneeded cut scenes. Then what up the next game. More uneeded cut scenes and then there is the Shadow, Future, God ring bit. I could go on forever with this. The point is there is no Next Generation. A game machine is no differnt from the last Game machine. I am playing a PCE just like a Saturn. Yeah, have fun playing Crackdown on your N64. Nintendo just trying to find another reason to buy there product. Gee, why would they have to do that when they can force us? There was many game systems with controllers like that in the past. Even the PS2 and X-box has controllers that is practically TV controllers. No, there wasn't. You're trying to argue points that are too big. Maybe you feel games aren't advancing that much, that the term "Nextgen" doesn't mean much, that the Wii is more of a dedicated "Wii Sports" machine, etc, but pretending that there aren't generations of games is just dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STICH666 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Yes if it was made past 2004 it is next gen. It may not have the best graphics but it sure makes it up with unique controls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Too much M$ fanboyism You just posted two links one from 2005...and one from 2007. (And the one from 2007 doesn't mention production costs or profits made per unit sold something that was happening at that time.) Check the calendar and get back to us when you have information that relevant to now. Posting facts isn't fanboyism. When people read mis-information, it makes them just a little bit stupider. Do you want to be responsible for making people dumber? It's simple... M$ lost money on the Xbox 360 at first. It doesn't now and hasn't for awhile. We live in the now artarian63...2009. That's not fanboyism (god I hate that word, are you 14?) it's simple truth. Deal with it. Edited January 14, 2009 by moycon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisrael Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Someone please remind me why we care if Xbox 360 makes money on the hardware, or if Microsoft takes a hit and plans to make that up in software? Is it because people are worried Microsoft might go bankrupt and leave the system stranded? Is it because it "proves" it's a better value for the money for the consumer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbanes Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) It's simple...M$ lost money on the Xbox 360 at first. It doesn't now and hasn't for awhile. We live in the now artarian63...2009. That's not fanboyism (god I hate that word, are you 14?) it's simple truth. Deal with it. You're not listening. Microsoft lowered the price on the console after they managed to turn a profit. The console that was selling for $299 and $399 is now selling at $199 and $299. A more complete bundle of hardware is sold at $399. Microsoft's profit on the previous models was figured to be ~$75/console BEFORE shipping. Thus they are now running a $25/console deficit on the mid-range model and an unknown (though potentially huge) deficit on their low-end model. While it stands to reason that Microsoft may have found ways to further reduce production costs, it's also a known fact that Microsoft has had to do some re-engineering to improve the reliability of the system. You'll notice that Microsoft has not given any numbers on the system since their 2006 profit/console. That's because they operate on the razor-blade model. They intentionally sell the console for no profit or even a slight loss, then make it up in licensing fees for games. And with an attach rate of 7.5 game/system, Microsoft is making a killing on this business model. Interestingly, Sony pioneered this business model in the game industry, but has been losing their shirt on each PS3. They planned for an insane attach rate that simply never materialized. (Sony seemed to project a lot of data from the PS2 onto the PS3. Even though they had the historical data from the PS2 that should have told them it wouldn't be that easy out of the gate. *sigh*) Edited January 14, 2009 by jbanes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Well, in the end it'll all be on the same balance sheet. Of course, should Microsoft lose any money this/next year they can easily blame the crisis, like everyone else I wasn't speculating whether or not the division will make or lose any $$$ for whatever reason. (Personally, I suspect with Halo Wars coming in March they probably will.) I was merely responding to this statement. M$ loses money on each unit sold. http://kotaku.com/gaming/lol-they-made-a-b...r-ms-255654.php That article is from April 26, 2007. What is the date today? I'm just kidding, I really don't care. I'm just trying to cause trouble! Kidding or not, you raise a relevant point. Given that the 360 division made their first ever year long profit in 2008-2009, I fail to see what articles from two years ago have to do with anything. Go back a year further and you'll find ones about how the Wii will fail "for sure." Early 2007 is not early 2009. So to get this straight Atarian, your best supports are one article from 2005 and another from almost two years ago. This just in, Atari to re-enter the console market with Atari 7800! I'll find you a source to back me up, from 1987. So get this straight Atarifever, I am saying they are still losing on the unit, I have seen nothing else out there saying otherwise. They may have made a profit in general but the unit is still at a loss. M$ buying the market. If it were any other company they wouldnt be able to pull it off. As you can guess I dislike M$ for many of their practices. Besides according to your post you dont even play modern gaming.. am I wrong (not trying to be a jerk here) Edited January 14, 2009 by atarian63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Too much M$ fanboyism You just posted two links one from 2005...and one from 2007. (And the one from 2007 doesn't mention production costs or profits made per unit sold something that was happening at that time.) Check the calendar and get back to us when you have information that relevant to now. Posting facts isn't fanboyism. When people read mis-information, it makes them just a little bit stupider. Do you want to be responsible for making people dumber? It's simple... M$ lost money on the Xbox 360 at first. It doesn't now and hasn't for awhile. We live in the now artarian63...2009. That's not fanboyism (god I hate that word, are you 14?) it's simple truth. Deal with it. Sorry you don't like the terminology,(tough crap).As you mentioned it's 2009 I see nothing that says they make money on the unit now. Maybe as a division. You would think they would be shouting that but in a quick 10min search they wasn't anything. Here is some late 2008 http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/11/microso...nce-price-cuts/ Simply put, when you guve something away at a loss it's easy to sell alot, I imagine if crap were free someone would want it. Not saying the system is crap (though I would never buy one). Microsoft as company is greatly disliked, you deal with that. Edited January 14, 2009 by atarian63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbanes Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Sorry you don't like the terminology,(tough crap).As you mentioned it's 2009 No offense man, but your logic needs work. We already discussed all the articles you've been posting. They're irrelevant to the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starscream Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Someone please remind me why we care if Xbox 360 makes money on the hardware, or if Microsoft takes a hit and plans to make that up in software? Is it because people are worried Microsoft might go bankrupt and leave the system stranded? Is it because it "proves" it's a better value for the money for the consumer? Because for some reason, Nintendo fans always have to talk profits as though it matters. Usually though, Nintendo's profits are the most interesting thing about them so I do understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Sorry you don't like the terminology,(tough crap).As you mentioned it's 2009 No offense man, but your logic needs work. We already discussed all the articles you've been posting. They're irrelevant to the conversation. Must have missed those Still looks like they have a long way to go to make up for all the losses from xbox and the xbox360 problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royalshin Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You know what kisrael I give up. You want to believe tha mumbo jumbo about false promises, and hope that has nothing to do with you asides being a consumer then you go ahead and be happy pappy consumer. And then the next time when they start using words like proactive, and Dynomite we all will give praise to it again buying something that is a spare for the moment without accuracy for longtivity use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) You're not listening. Microsoft lowered the price on the console after they managed to turn a profit. The console that was selling for $299 and $399 is now selling at $199 and $299. You'll notice that Microsoft has not given any numbers They sell for $100 less now...right. Microsoft never released any official numbers, the numbers we all go by (as far as I know) have always been reported by others so the fact that Microsoft doesn't/isn't releasing numbers isn't surprising and I suppose without a true breakdown it's all speculation anyways. Back in November 2006 is when it was reported the Xbox 360 was turning a profit. I believe it was something like $74. The price cuts happened in Sept 2008. Are you telling me the Xbox 360 didn't cost $26 less to manufacture in Sept 2008 than in Nov 2006? I just find that hard to believe, any recent articles or data to back up the claim? My understanding is the Xbox cost considerably less to manufacture now. I haven't seen actual numbers but I have repeatedly seen that it cost less to manufacture and promote now and that is from Microsoft reps. I'm not telling you you're wrong, but could you provide some more information? What exactly is causing the Xbox 360 to cost so much now? Edited January 14, 2009 by moycon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbanes Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The price cuts happened in Sept 2008. Actually, it happened in two major steps. In 2006 Microsoft cut $50/$20 off their console's prices. ($349/$279, respectively) This would have left them with a ~$25 profit on the Premium model if console defects and returns hadn't driven up costs for the year. In 2008, Microsoft had several sales on their Premium consoles, basically selling off the 20GB premiums for $299 to make way for the 60GB premiums. These were on the market for $349 for a few months before being permanently dropped to $299. Are you telling me the Xbox 360 didn't cost $26 less to manufacture in Sept 2008 than in Nov 2006? It's almost a given. Microsoft cut so many corners with the 360 that they had to re-engineer for reliability. The Jasper chipset contains an extended heatpipe in addition to significantly more memory, a different board layout, and other changes from the original system. While it's possible Microsoft is saving enough money from the 65nm changeover to make up for the extra hardware, the fact that Valhalla is in the works suggests otherwise. The Valhalla chipset is intended to run even cooler and cost less to produce thanks to a combined CPU/GPU chipset. This change should shave quite a few dollars off the manufacturing costs, potentially bringing the 360's manufacturing costs down again. That's my 2 cents worth, anywho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisrael Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Because for some reason, Nintendo fans always have to talk profits as though it matters. Usually though, Nintendo's profits are the most interesting thing about them so I do understand. Well, I think the most interesting thing about Nintendo is the games -- the way they're the only group who have something as neat and 8-bit as the old Marioverse to add a little signature to games, but whatever, if you like taking potshots, enjoy. It's interesting why Xbox 360's cost is presented as a minus, and not a plus for the customer. Is it a feeling that Microsoft is "cheating", and underpricing, to the long term detriment of gaming? (Or maybe to the detriment of Nintendo... and when Nintendo has looked weaker in the console market, many fanboys called for them to "do a Sony" and go to a straight software model) Similarly, I don't understand the opposite disdain for the Wii just being a souped up GC. Even though this is the "Modern" forum, I think we should appreciate when companies are doing interesting things (and you have to admit, Mario Galaxies is a pretty interesting thing, as are the Wii remotes and nunchucks) without expensive hard core technology. Unlike, say, PS3s "I'm an escaped early 80s VCR" look, the Wii is this great, efficient, compact thing, it leads the pack in emulating old consoles, there's a lot of shovelware but also some great titles, etc. Aargh, it's so stupid to hate any system. They all have some good points. I used to hate Sony for not putting 4 controller ports on the PS2, and thus hurting the cause of multiplayer gaming for a generation. I got over it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artlover Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Aargh, it's so stupid to hate any system. They all have some good points. I used to hate Sony for not putting 4 controller ports on the PS2, and thus hurting the cause of multiplayer gaming for a generation. I got over it! How else were they supposed to sell the Multitap and make more money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 (edited) It's almost a given. Show me. I keep trying to look for any article that supports your claim the Jasper costs more to produce than the price drop. I don't see any. All I can find are articles like this, that seem to paint an opposite picture in regards to the production costs of the Jasper. http://exophase.com/xbox360/xbox-360-coden...t-year-2198.htm According to The Mercury News, Microsoft plans to further lower Xbox 360 production costs and improve reliability by introducing Jasper. http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=15820 Takahashi further theorizes that the lower production costs of the Jasper will enable a further price cut for the Xbox 360, well in time for the Christmas 2008 gift buying season. http://www.dailytech.com/Xbox+360+Jasper+R...rticle13546.htm Much like computers, the hardware inside the Xbox 360 goes through periodic revisions to make it perform better, fix bugs, and lower production costs. Don't get me wrong. I understand MS doesn't make the bulk of it's money on console sales at all and I understand it benefits them to get units in peoples house so they can move software even selling the units at a loss to do it like they did at the launch. I just don't see any indication that MS is taking any kind of a loss now and if they were it must not be very substantial or you can bet the Sony/Nintendo boys would have it posted everywhere. Edited January 15, 2009 by moycon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godzilla Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 iddnt this all just a slight jott off topic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 iddnt this all just a slight jott off topic? This thread is ultimately all about questions that can't really be answered. Is the Wii Next-Gen? (Can't be answered because there is no set definition for the term "Next-Gen") What is a hardcore gamer? (Can't be answered because there is no set definition for the term "hardcore gamer" Does MS lose money of ever Xbox 360 sold? (MS doesn't release any official costs of production so any discussion is simply speculation) The thread title needs to be changed to: If you're bored, post here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.