Nintendo more interested in =) than tech.

  • 103 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Nohtnym
Nohtnym

1552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#101 Nohtnym
Member since 2010 • 1552 Posts

[QUOTE="Nohtnym"]

[QUOTE="TheGuardian03"]Why can't you do both Nintendo?NaveedLife

When you release high spec console, production cost of that console may be so high that console maker has to sell it at loss, since otherwise people wont buy it, case in point ps3 - it was estimated to cost 800 per unit for sony. When nintendo releases low spec console like the wii, they can sell it at profit.

Because the PS3 was expensive due to having current tech, not because they used a stupid architecture and included blu-ray :roll:

The answer is, they could do both! They just don't want to, as they prefer to sell their consoles to EVERYONE. so the hardcore gamer who is willing to spend a tad more, suffers because the casuals are not.

Bluray was high tech hardware when it came. It stored 5 times more data than dvd (singlelayer). How is ps3 architecture stupid? Games seem to work fine on it...

Nintendo was only consoles maker who sold at profit, that was due to nintendo selling old hardware at higher price. Like apple does with mac (expect that is high end stuff, but they sell it at even higher price.)

Avatar image for NaveedLife
NaveedLife

17179

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#102 NaveedLife
Member since 2010 • 17179 Posts

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

[QUOTE="Nohtnym"]

When you release high spec console, production cost of that console may be so high that console maker has to sell it at loss, since otherwise people wont buy it, case in point ps3 - it was estimated to cost 800 per unit for sony. When nintendo releases low spec console like the wii, they can sell it at profit.

Nohtnym

Because the PS3 was expensive due to having current tech, not because they used a stupid architecture and included blu-ray :roll:

The answer is, they could do both! They just don't want to, as they prefer to sell their consoles to EVERYONE. so the hardcore gamer who is willing to spend a tad more, suffers because the casuals are not.

Bluray was high tech hardware when it came. It stored 5 times more data than dvd (singlelayer). How is ps3 architecture stupid? Games seem to work fine on it...

Nintendo was only consoles maker who sold at profit, that was due to nintendo selling old hardware at higher price. Like apple does with mac (expect that is high end stuff, but they sell it at even higher price.)

I love blu-ray, but it was an extremely expensive option that was far from necessary.

The architecture is REALLY stupid, since it didn't help much (actually hindered more than helped usually), and is very different and difficult to program for. The way the PS3's processor is setup is very different from all other consoles. It has 6 cores (named synergistic processing unit) and they are set up in serial. It is just a very different and overly complicated structure that hurt them in the long run.

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#103 AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

Hopefully this means no bad games. :D

LegatoSkyheart
Or maybe this means.... only 2/100 of great third party games once more