Gamecube production halted!

Gene Poole wrote in message ...
Brad Bishop wrote:

I don't think the GameCube sucks or is crappy or anything, I think it's just
losing out to a more popular competitor (for whatever reasons). Sony's
Playstation2 is obviously doing well. The XBox is doing fairly well as a 2nd
place condendor even though it's numbers aren't all that great either with
MS losing money over the deal. They're still in the game, though.

this always strikes me as funny, and seems like people either hold MS
and Nintendo to two different standards, or talk out of both sides of
their mouths.

MS is doing great, only the xbox isn't selling that much!

Nintendo is doing lousy. they're still around, and selling just as much
as MS, but come on...they're dead in the water!

I hate spin.

as far as I can tell (unless I'm wrong, which is entirely possible as
I've been absent for like a month here) the GC and Xbox, overall, have
pretty much the same sales. yet one os doomed while the other is a smash
success. I don't get it.

You are wrong, latest numbers have Xbox up on GC by 4 million units.
Even if you spot it the 800k is this announcemnet from Nitendo thats
still 3.2 million more Xboxes sole than GCs. Of course the PS2 has
sold 40 million more than the Xbox so it's satying #1 in sales.

"Scott H" wrote in message
...
snip
Agreed, if anything can be gleened from this article, it's that
Nintendo
*might* be redesigning the Gamecube a little bit and re-releasing it.
Possibly something with DVD playback or maybe even something better.
Hell,
if Sony can remake the PS2 into something with TIVO and make new regular
PS2
with progressive scan and get away with it, surely nobody will feel
"ripped
off" if Nintendo remakes the Gamecube right?

I hope they don't give it DVD playback. They need to stick to their guns
about that one. The Gamecube is a /GAME/ console, not a frickin' home
entertainment system...

I hate machines that combine functions...

"Pham" . wrote in message ...
Ballpark math really, the exchange rate would come out to some $45 US.

Not after shipping, tax and importer markup for a £ price. The £1:$1 is a
pretty good rule of thumb.

patrickp


"Ben Pope" wrote in message
...
GTD wrote:
****, go farther back and the games were literally more expensive,
too. Cartridge games always used to cost $60 as a standard price,
that goes all the way back to the Atari 2600. During the 16-bit
era, large games like Chrono Trigger or Phantasy Star IV cost up to
$80 or $90 when they were released. What short memories people have.

I don't think that's right, I bought Space Invaders, (The 2600's
flagship game) before the first holliday season it was out and only
paid $30. I really don't remember any that cost more than that(besides
Adventure an Megamania, which I believe were $35 when they first came
out), And I had over 80 games for it.

I seem to remember games for Atari ST being about £30. Which would be
about
$30 given the exchange rate and some bad mathematicians.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a string...

On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 12:04:49 -0700, "SewerFiss" typed:

****, go farther back and the games were literally more expensive, too.
Cartridge games always used to cost $60 as a standard price, that goes all
the way back to the Atari 2600.

Not quite, Atari 2600 games were $30-$40 and early NES and SMS games
were also under $40. It wouldn't be until late '80s when the price
started to climb toward the $60 mark. But if you adjust for inflation
compared to today's price you're looking at a big drop in price of game
cart.

Gameboy has been pretty much $30 for its whole life.
--
All viruses and spams are automatically removed by my ISP before
reaching my inbox.

Sean Connery wrote in message
...
In article , SewerFiss
wrote:
Robert P Holley wrote in message

****, go farther back and the games were literally more expensive, too.
Cartridge games always used to cost $60 as a standard price, that goes
all
the way back to the Atari 2600. During the 16-bit era, large games like
Chrono Trigger or Phantasy Star IV cost up to $80 or $90 when they were
released. What short memories people have.

No. The average standard price of cart games in and around the 2600 era
was most certainly NOT $60. Not for carts. Not for disks. Not for
tapes. You obviouslly did not buy games back then and have pulled this
number from your head^H^H^H^Hpick an orifice.


Damn. Refuted again. How will I live down the shame of it all.


....word is bondage...

"Phil" wrote in message
om...
"El Guapo" wrote in message
news:w6SYa.98516$Ho3.12507@sccrnsc03...
"Roj" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:10:50 GMT, Impmon wrote:

Not necessarily. It could be just too many unsold GC sitting around
and
they'd resume production after a few months.

Um, it's August. This is not a month typical of
unsold-inventory-after-the-holiday-buying-spree.

Umm... this was for the April - June period, remember?

let's face it:

The thing was always an "also ran" compared to both the X-Box and PS2.

That "also ran" has sold as many machines as the XBox.


No 4 million less than the Xbox, of course the Xbox has also sold 40
million less than the PS2

According to EGM anyway.

How many times do we have to point out to you that EGM was wrong? Did you
recently take a hit to the head? Have you been chewing on lead paint chips?
I mean, come on!

"Pluto (M)" wrote in message
...

"Scott H" wrote in message
...
snip
Agreed, if anything can be gleened from this article, it's that
Nintendo
*might* be redesigning the Gamecube a little bit and re-releasing it.
Possibly something with DVD playback or maybe even something better.
Hell,
if Sony can remake the PS2 into something with TIVO and make new regular
PS2
with progressive scan and get away with it, surely nobody will feel
"ripped
off" if Nintendo remakes the Gamecube right?

I hope they don't give it DVD playback. They need to stick to their guns
about that one. The Gamecube is a /GAME/ console, not a frickin' home
entertainment system...

I hate machines that combine functions...

Me too... but they should definitely consider doing it anyway. I like the
XBox scheme, where they pushed the DVD consortium fees to the consumer by
selling DVD as an addon (with a remote to go with it so that people at least
get something for their money when they buy it). Gives you lots of
options - you can sell it separately, pack it in later, or give it away as a
special offer like MS has done.

42 wrote in message .ca...
wrestleantares wrote:
Its losing money. Anybody but micro$oft would have gone broke with this.
This is like like the .com fever ... when it was more important to have
hype, style, and cool products than it was to have boring things like
profit... or even revenue.

Everyone, including MS, knew full well that Xbox1 was going to be a
break even adventure at BEST. They are losing money on console gaming
so far... but... ummm.. so what? Its a pittley amount of $ and not
even close to being a negative impact on MSs business. You dont step
in the ring with Sony and Nintendo and try to carve out a nitch for
free. Its amazing that they have even managed to eek out a #2 spot.

Nintendo is doing lousy. they're still around, and selling just as much
as MS, but come on...they're dead in the water!

well, gc is losing developers and they sell less software AFAIK. As
we all know, software is where the $ comes from and titles per
console-wise, xbox is ahead of gc by quite a bit.

More hype. The company is profitable. Period. In 'the real world' that's
all that matters.

Im not sure what your point here is... Nintendo, Sony, and MS are all
profitable companies. Niether Ninny nor Sony can give MS any poop
$-wise... MSs market cap is rought 10x the size of Sonys. Xbox1 is a
down-payment on a long term investment for MS as it tries to move into
the videogame realm... $ they have lost so far is truly of no
consequence.

Nintendo has released it's fourth major console, and we can see them
going farther downhill (marketshare wise) each year.

From 90%+ with the NES they really only had one direction to go. Sure
Sony has won this round, everybody agrees, but all three are poised for
the next round.

correction, Sony has won the last 2 rounds...

Its far too early to call a winner for the next round.
Maybe it'll be Microsoft... maybe its their turn in the sun... but
consoles aren't like operating systems or office suites, they get
replaced wholesale every few years and the next round after that is
anybody's grab.

well.. not exactly. Some console buyers have a memory and buy the
next console based on previous experience. Its not always a
determining factor, but it IS a factor.

And again profitability rears its ugly head. We all know Nintendo was
making more per title than MS. So even if MS outsold 2 titles to 1 its
possible Nintendo walked away with more cash from it.

"possible" and actually happening are two different things.

Sooner or later MS is going to want to run XBOX like a business, with
profitability expectations. When that happens it will be a much more
interesting environment.

i dont think ms has any illusions about the business end of things...
xb2 will be where they look for the $. That said, as consumers, Im
not sure we will notice the difference in how ms acts as a company
during the "ok, lets make some $ now" phase. Basically they just need
the next gen to come along so they can compete head to head with sony
when sony doesnt have a bazillion unit lead in console sales.

*Any* company can buy sales. But there really isn't any sustainable
business model for doing it, other than as a brief (depending on just
how deep your pockets are) marketing ploy.

xbox1 isnt a "marketing ploy" any more than GC or PS2 is. MS is
coming to the game with a different history and is just starting out
in consoles, so their approach is different, but a "marketing ploy" is
not an appropriate way to describe it.

j

"Ribbit" wrote in message
...
Or a redesign that lowers the manufacturing cost, which is even more
likely.
It could even be that they are planning another price reduction or
packin,
and want to clear inventory before doing that. Even if there is too
much
overstock, 80K is really low in comparison to the number being sold
through.
Something seems a little strange here.

What would be nice is if they made the machine play GBA, N64, SNES and NES
games. That would boost sales for SURE! Imagine how many people have those
consoles. How much space do you have under your TV for 4 different
Nintendo
machines !? Makes sense.

Do you have any idea how nasty the machine would look if it had a catridge
port capable of playing each of those formats?

Scott H wrote in message
...

"Ribbit" wrote in message
...

What would be nice is if they made the machine play GBA, N64, SNES and
NES
games. That would boost sales for SURE! Imagine how many people have
those
consoles. How much space do you have under your TV for 4 different
Nintendo
machines !? Makes sense.

Do you have any idea how nasty the machine would look if it had a catridge
port capable of playing each of those formats?


Something like...THIS perhaps?

http://www.rattlebrain.com/~opaopa/ntower2.jpg


....word is bondage....