Support NeoGAF

[ElFly]

.if a new wii is released in 2010. preproduction would proabably be using the new 4870 and gt200 architecture for their gpu. it they continue using ati and go with the new dual core 4870X2 the graphics on the wii will be much more than double. i would be think graphically it would closer 3-5 the prowess of the current machines. the current 8800gt and gtx walk away from these machines without breaking a sweat. nintendo is going to be jumping 2 and half generations graphically with their new console. it would be like going from playstation to 360 in one jump since the stuff thats in the wii is less than 2 gamecubes bootstapped together. i dont see nintendo every needing an upgrade past that within conventional console means.

It remains to be seen how Nintendo will manage to do backwards compatibility with the Wii in the next gen. BC with the gamecube really held the Wii back; they used a gpu design pretty dated, without even standard pixel shader technology, just so developers could stick to the technology developed for the gamecube. Same thing with the CPU.

If the technology jump is big enough, they could emulate it, but until now, every nintendo solution for BC has been including the original hardware in the machine (GBA to GBC, DS to GBA, Wii to GC).

 

[ElFly]

From this i don't see why MS would make 1080 in 2011.

MS/Sony new exactly this was a long haul. That's why they built $500-800 consoles to reach point when consumer will not care for anything else. And I think it is better for anybody. Nobody will fear emerging next-gen to just throw away everything they know when only they started to get a hand of current technology and making really great games.

360/ps3 are at least $3B (that's $5B for ps3) investments. And both companies will see the point when this investments will generate profit for them. Releasing new console will only axe that plan.

Technology won't dictate how long the current HD consoles will stay around, but the market.

Those billions that MS and Sony used to create their current consoles are already spent. They are Sunk Costs. They shouldn't influence the decision of making a new console. The only variables for that are what new costs/benefits will the new console bring.

 

[Atreides]

It remains to be seen how Nintendo will manage to do backwards compatibility with the Wii in the next gen. BC with the gamecube really held the Wii back; they used a gpu design pretty dated, without even standard pixel shader technology, just so developers could stick to the technology developed for the gamecube. Same thing with the CPU.

If the technology jump is big enough, they could emulate it, but until now, every nintendo solution for BC has been including the original hardware in the machine (GBA to GBC, DS to GBA, Wii to GC).

I don't think that BC had so much impact in the Wii. Using that logic, a Pentium IV is really held back because it is BC with Pentium I (actually, it IS held back. But not so much that there isn't a big jump)

 

[ComputerNerd]

Well this is currently the FY 2009. So FY 2002 would've been April 2001-March 2002.

I was referring to the "billion" Nintendo made a killing that year

 

[ElFly]

I don't think that BC had so much impact in the Wii. Using that logic, a Pentium IV is really held back because it is BC with Pentium I (actually, it IS held back. But not so much that there isn't a big jump)

it uses the same 2001 technology as the gamecube. if that's not holding back, I don't know what it is.

I bet that in 2006 there were much better, cheap, low power GPUs available from ATI, but Ninty's decided to stick with an upgraded flipper, just to make transition from GC to Wii painless to developers.

 

[Atreides]

it uses the same 2001 technology as the gamecube. if that's not holding back, I don't know what it is.

I bet that in 2006 there were much better, cheap, low power GPUs available from ATI, but Ninty's decided to stick with an upgraded flipper, just to make transition from GC to Wii painless to developers.

Let me explain. Wii is indeed not a very big jump from gamecube. I'm just saying that Wii being BC is not the reason because it is a small jump.

 

[ElFly]

Let me explain. Wii is indeed not a very big jump from gamecube. I'm just saying that Wii being BC is not the reason for that.

Oh yeah, I bet that making GC games available in the Wii wasn't the main reason for doing that, with the low market share of the Gamecube and all.

But if the Wii keeps its success, it would mean the Wii2 better have BC with the Wii, or risk pissing a few consumers.

I don't really think BC is that important a feature, but some people really like it, and Nintendo maydesign their next console with it in mind. Or try to keep the architecture close to the Wii.

 

[Atreides]

Oh yeah, I bet that making GC games available in the Wii wasn't the main reason for doing that, with the low market share of the Gamecube and all.

But if the Wii keeps its success, it would mean the Wii2 better have BC with the Wii, or risk pissing a few consumers.

I don't really think BC is that important a feature, but some people really like it, and Nintendo could design their next console with it in mind.

No, I don't mean that. You said that Wii2 having BC would held it back in the same way that Wii is hold back because it has BC with GC. I say that having BC in that way (Wii2 CPU and GPU being BC with Wii CPU and GPU) would not necessarily mean that Wii2 is hold back, in the same way that a Pentium IV is not a small jump from Pentium I, even if it is BC.

 

[jarrod]

They'll just integrate the Wii chipset somehow... look at DS and it's GBA slave chip.

 

[gcfan2k5]

They'll just integrate the Wii chipset somehow... look at DS and it's GBA slave chip.

Wii on a chip is entirely feasable on a 32nm process, especially two years from now. Such a chip would be ridiculously small, as for the memory they would still have to integrate 24MB of 1t-sram and at least 3meg of edram, other than that the main memory would be DDR based anyway so that could be replaced entirely.


Wii 2 will be a significant leap graphically, if only because an ati gpu coming out today will be super cheap 2 years from now and on a smaller process.

 

[ElFly]

No, I don't mean that. You said that Wii2 having BC would held it back in the same way that Wii is hold back because it has BC with GC. I say that having BC in that way (Wii2 CPU and GPU being BC with Wii CPU and GPU) would not necessarily mean that Wii2 is hold back, in the same way that a Pentium IV is not a small jump from Pentium I, even if it is BC.

Well, they certainly didn't do that this generation.

 

[Atreides]

Well, they certainly didn't do that this generation.

Yes. But they didn't do that for other reasons. Having BC wasn't the problem.

 

[ElFly]

Yes. But they didn't do that for other reasons. Having BC wasn't the problem.

yeah, it was a consequence of the decision of making the GC-to-Wii transition painless


I doubt the Wii2 will be just a overclocked Wii, so I am intrigued about how they will do BC in the next gen

 

[Shinz Kicker]

yeah, it was a consequence of the decision of making the GC-to-Wii transition painless


I doubt the Wii2 will be just a overclocked Wii, so I am intrigued about how they will do BC in the next gen

the tech was small in the gamecube. the tech is smaller in the wii. 2-4 years from now it will be smaller. i wouldnt be suprised to have a wii inside of the new wii. having the old wii in the new wii will make bc to gc and wii and i think most important of all would be BC with all your wii ware and Vc games. nintendo needs to roll out gamertag/ nintendo esque social security not attached to your console but to a centralized wesbite/portal you could probabaly access through the opera browser on the wii or whatever the next console is.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

They had a single quarter with losses (not for the fy as a whole though), the first in their over 100 years of existence. Don't recall which quarter it was, but it was late into the GC era before DS was released.

Edit: Looks like it was the fourth quarter of 2004.

I don't think they were reporting quarterly results for most of that existence, though, so there could've been instances of quarterly losses that we just didn't see since other quarters made up for them.

 

[LCGeek]

It remains to be seen how Nintendo will manage to do backwards compatibility with the Wii in the next gen. BC with the gamecube really held the Wii back; they used a gpu design pretty dated, without even standard pixel shader technology, just so developers could stick to the technology developed for the gamecube. Same thing with the CPU.

If the technology jump is big enough, they could emulate it, but until now, every nintendo solution for BC has been including the original hardware in the machine (GBA to GBC, DS to GBA, Wii to GC).

TEV does pixel shaders or has components to it's vertex shaders that the issue.

Also BC on the next Wii let alone their handheld won't be an issue. Matt of IGN already outted what they are doing with this chip design and nintendo made him take it down super fast.

 

[jarrod]

Also BC on the next Wii let alone their handheld won't be an issue. Matt of IGN already outted what they are doing with this chip design and nintendo made him take it down super fast.

What was it?

 

[LCGeek]

What was it?

There sticking the GC/Wii architecture in to the next handheld. They've been shrinking and since the wattage on it at gc levels is insanely low good battery consumption with another one over the next few years they should be ready to launch this next one and keep full bc compatibility via the whole online service. Pretty amazing strategy if you ask me using the Wii to fix up hardware issues in various ways as a testing bed for next time.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

There sticking the GC/Wii architecture in to the next handheld. They've been shrinking and since the wattage on it at gc levels is insanely low good battery consumption with another one over the next few years they should be ready to launch this next one and keep full bc compatibility via the whole online service. Pretty amazing strategy if you ask me using the Wii to fix up hardware issues in various ways as a testing bed for next time.

Ahh, GCN dual screen? Day one. Make both touch screens and include some waggle. Or, just one big screen.

 

[pieyow]

Lost posting priviliges -- can only update. Up is the latest.

FY*       Sony**        Nintendo        Microsoft
1998    974,000,000    629,000,000
1999   1,130,000,000   645,000,000
2000    730,000,000    421,000,000
2001    -409,000,000   726,000,000
2002    623,000,000    800,000,000     -750,000,000
2003    939,000,000    560,000,000     -1,191,000,000
2004    650,000,000    316,000,000     -1,215,000,000
2005    404,000,000    777,000,000     -485,000,000
2006    75,000,00      894,000,000     -1,262,000,000
2007   -1,969,000,000  1,489,000,000   -1,892,000,000
2008   -965,000,000     2,193,000,000   532,000,000                        
Totals  2,182,000,000  9,450,000,000   -6,263,000,000

Microsoft – Entertainment and Devices Division (Home and Entertainment) through 2nd Q FY 2008 ended December 31 2007
Sony – Game division through 3rd Q FY 2007 ended December 31 2007
Nintendo – Overall through 3rd Q FY 2008 ended December 31 2007.
Exchange rate from Nintendo's Financial Results Briefing for the 9 month period ended December 31 2007 Supplementary Information 1$ == 118.05 ¥

* -- it's fiscal year for both Microsoft and Nintendo
** -- it's FY+1 for Sony for comparison reasons


All the numbers but last year were collected by our best man sonycowboy and are from previous thread.

So we could all remember the name of the game. It's not for the love of interactive entertainment.

The most pure videogame sector here is Sony's reports.

Entertainment and Devices division includes other sectors like computer games, Zune etc. most of them are considered to be profitable. They also started losing money on Xbox before 2002 as it had to be R&D'ed and produced. Which is more than likely another billion or so.

Nintendo releases overall earnings reports – stake in pokemon + currency investments + some other minor things.

Additions, suggestions and comments are welcome.




Okay I think I may be a total accounting idiot, but how did you come up with these figures from the Annual reports? Are you doing entire company profitability or specifically the game section of each company?

I'm not very good at reading these financial reports but I don't see where these numbers are listed at. Can someone clear this up for me?

 

[Stumpokapow]

Okay I think I may be a total accounting idiot, but how did you come up with these figures from the Annual reports? Are you doing entire company profitability or specifically the game section of each company?

Those are specifically the game section with the following quid pro quos:
- Microsoft's game division includes Mac Office, the Zune, and several small projects that are all profitable.
- Sony's game division does NOT include SOE, which is a separate company.
- Nintendo is AFAIK the full company, but their non-gaming revenue is very very low.

 

[D.Lo]

yeah, it was a consequence of the decision of making the GC-to-Wii transition painless

Painless who who though? Most devs never bothered to make use of the GameCube's features anyway, so it doesn't make any sense to 'keep it the same' as a system no-one used. That's why we've got PS2 ports that look worse then the originals, as no-one had any idea about the GCN architecture.

Personally, I do think they did partly gimp the system for the BC bullet point. And it was the console that least needed it too.

The only exceptions are Galaxy and Metroid, both of which still tower over anything else on the Wii graphically.

 

[bycha]

Updated for MS 4th Q FY 2008

MS is in the red again somehow.

 

[M3wThr33]

Updated for MS 4th Q FY 2008

MS is in the red again somehow.

Warranty allowance.

 

[FrankT]

Updated for MS 4th Q FY 2008

MS is in the red again somehow.

And the first fiscal year behind them in the black.

http://venturebeat.com/2008/07/17/microsoft-hits-profit-target-for-xbox-360-business/

Microsoft hits profit target for Xbox 360 business
Dean Takahashi | July 17th, 2008

Microsoft’s video game and entertainment business was profitable for the first time in its history for the fiscal year ended June 30, the company said today.

The Entertainment & Devices Division reported an operating profit of $426 million for the fiscal year, compared to a loss of $1.9 billion a year earlier. The year ago results included a $1.1 billion write-off for the cost of replacing defective Xbox 360 consoles.

The company said it sold 1.3 million consoles during the fourth fiscal quarter ended June 30, bringing its total sold to date to 20 million units. The Xbox Live online game service has more than 12 million subscribers now — both free and paid — and Microsoft and its partners are selling 7.7 games for each console sold. Research and development costs were up $141 million, reflecting higher headcount costs.

The business includes PC games, Xbox 360, the Zune handheld music player, Microsoft Surface, and Windows Mobile software for cell phones. The division has never been profitable since its inauguration.

But not everything was good news. The division lost $188 million in the fourth fiscal quarter, compared to a profit in the previous third fiscal quarter of $89 million. Typically, the summer season is slow for video game sales. Microsoft still faces stiff competition from both Sony and Nintendo.

Sales for EDD in the fiscal year were $8.1 billion, up 34 percent from $6 billion a year ago.

 

[Replicant]

MS is winning in reverse... that's... something... right?!?!??!

:lol :lol :lol :lol

MS is in the red again somehow.

Well, all of those money-hatting must come from somewhere....

 

[Linkup]

No Halo 3 level of profits, price cuts, and the 3 yr warranty.

 

[NolbertoS]

Goes to show you, that MS is splurging the moneyhats like a cheap pimp and could be not getting any luving in return in the long haul. SE could be described like a cheap one night stand to them. Good for one night, but over the long run, jump into bed with whomever "caters" and has more "cash" incentives to be with and at the moment that's Nintendo. I wonder how long they'll keep being in the negative, till the shareholders say "Pull the plug or we walk out with our stock and make your stock price worthless.

 

[Tormentoso]

The Xbox Live online game service has more than 12 million subscribers now — both free and paid

Hey wait a minute didn't MS say that all the figures they release for live where just gold users.?


So 12 millions but no one knows for sure how many gold users.???

 

[phez]

Microsoft Corporation
    Segment Revenue and Operating Income (Loss)
    (In millions)

                                        Three Months Ended      Year Ended
                                             June 30,            June  30,
                                          2008     2007        2008     2007
    Revenue
    Client                               $4,367   $3,809     $16,865  $14,976
    Server and Tools                      3,737    3,084      13,170   11,171
    Online Services Business                838      677       3,214    2,441
    Microsoft Business Division           5,263    4,634      18,932   16,402
    Entertainment and Devices Division    1,575    1,153       8,140    6,069
    Unallocated and other                    57       14          99       63
    Consolidated                        $15,837  $13,371     $60,420  $51,122

    Operating Income (Loss)
    Client                               $3,228   $2,778     $13,052  $11,467
    Server and Tools                      1,373      987       4,593    3,643
    Online Services Business               (488)    (210)     (1,233)    (617)
    Microsoft Business Division           3,341    2,983      12,358   10,777
    Entertainment and Devices Division     (188)  (1,223)        426   (1,969)
    Corporate-level activity             (1,582)  (1,326)     (6,704)  (4,777)
    Consolidated                         $5,684   $3,989     $22,492  $18,524

Fourth Quarter

EDD revenue increased primarily due to increased Xbox 360 platform sales. Xbox 360 platform and PC games revenue increased $234 million or 35%, primarily as a result of increased Xbox 360 console sales, Xbox 360 video game sales, and Xbox Live revenue. We shipped 1.3 million Xbox 360 consoles during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008, compared with 0.7 million Xbox 360 consoles in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007.

EDD operating loss decreased primarily due to decreased cost of revenue and increased revenue, partially offset by increased research and development expenses and sales and marketing expenses. Cost of revenue decreased $826 million or 49%, reflecting the $1.1 billion charge in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007 related to the expansion of our Xbox 360 warranty coverage, partially offset by increased Xbox 360 product costs related to increased unit console sales. Research and development expenses increased $141 million or 38%, primarily reflecting increased headcount-related expenses, increased product development costs, and costs relating to Danger, including a $24 million in-process research and development expense. Sales and marketing expense increased $63 million or 22%, reflecting an increase in marketing and advertising campaigns and an increase in headcount-related expenses associated with product marketing and the retail account sales force. Headcount-related costs increased 24%, driven by an increase in headcount during the year.

Full Fiscal Year

EDD revenue increased primarily due to increased Xbox 360 platform sales. Xbox 360 platform and PC game revenue increased $1.7 billion or 41% as a result of increased Xbox 360 console sales, video game sales led by Halo 3, Xbox Live revenue, and Xbox 360 accessory sales. We shipped 8.7 million Xbox 360 consoles during fiscal year 2008, compared with 6.6 million consoles during fiscal year 2007.

EDD operating income increased primarily due to increased revenue and decreased cost of revenue, partially offset by increased research and development expenses and sales and marketing expenses. Cost of revenue decreased $683 million or 13%, reflecting the $1.1 billion Xbox 360 warranty charge in fiscal year 2007 described above, partially offset by increased Xbox 360 product costs related to increased unit console sales. Research and development expenses increased $242 million or 18%, primarily reflecting increased headcount-related expenses and costs relating to Danger, including a $24 million in-process research and development expense. Sales and marketing expenses increased $93 million or 8%, primarily reflecting increased headcount-related expenses and increased bad debt expense. Headcount-related costs increased 21%, driven by an increase in headcount during the year.

pertinent parts.

 

[PistolGrip]

Hey wait a minute didn't MS say that all the figures they release for live where just gold users.?


So 12 millions but no one knows for sure how many gold users.???

MS has never release gold member info.

 

[FrankT]

Goes to show you, that MS is splurging the moneyhats like a cheap pimp and could be not getting any luving in return in the long haul. SE could be described like a cheap one night stand to them. Good for one night, but over the long run, jump into bed with whomever "caters" and has more "cash" incentives to be with and at the moment that's Nintendo. I wonder how long they'll keep being in the negative, till the shareholders say "Pull the plug or we walk out with our stock and make your stock price worthless.

You kidding me, they just had their first year of full profit. More like the other way around nothing but up from here until the next jump.

 

[tehrik-e-insaaf]

just want to add the sony numbers are a bit unfair because they allocated a great deal of R&D to other divisions in the past - now with Stringer in charge and a thorough review of the games business, they have to account for all of it in their internal department and can charge revenue back to different sony divisions to cover that R&D

hence, in all likelihood, a great deal of the engineering costs associated with the original PS and PS2 were never reflected in the SCE P&L

 

[NolbertoS]

You kidding me, they just had their first year of full profit. More like the other way around nothing but up from here until the next jump.

Uhmm...400 Million a year and they're still 6 billion in the red, yeah. I'm sure MS is going up, assuming 400 Million profits per year and RROD's are negligible, they would need 15 year's to break even. Keep telling yourself chief, that MS is going to make a profit anytime soon. If the shareholders are willing to suck it up for 15 years, than MS will last at least 2 more gens.

 

[SickBoy]

Uhmm...400 Million a year and they're still 6 billion in the red, yeah. I'm sure MS is going up, assuming 400 Million profits per year and RROD's are negligible, they would need 15 year's to break even. Keep telling yourself chief, that MS is going to make a profit anytime soon. If the shareholders are willing to suck it up for 15 years, than MS will last at least 2 more gens.

I just peeked in this thread, because I saw news stories about the results and wanted to see how they broke down.

However: Microsoft has already "paid" for its RRODs (that was that huge charge they took last year), so they shouldn't be a factor looking ahead.

 

[Maximilian E.]

Uhmm...400 Million a year and they're still 6 billion in the red, yeah. I'm sure MS is going up, assuming 400 Million profits per year and RROD's are negligible, they would need 15 year's to break even. Keep telling yourself chief, that MS is going to make a profit anytime soon. If the shareholders are willing to suck it up for 15 years, than MS will last at least 2 more gens.

Funny you would mention this..
When I met J Allard at X02 in Seville, I asked him about the commitment and all the "billion sanked in" into the project. J said that they were in this for the long run and said that they would get back their investment in at least 10-15 years...

So expect at least 2 more MS consoles...

 

[Uncle]

How do I sunk costs?

 

[bycha]

So we don't know why MS was in red last Quarter? Was it pricecut in Europe and some actual sales of hardware in Europe on GTA4 ?

Updated, Sony made 51 profit in it's last quarter.

Nintendo soon will announce it's another huge quarter.


Next Q Sony will probably turn profit, Nintendo as usual, and MS might show another loss due to pricecut that is not a pricecut and lack of major software.

 

[bycha]

Nintendo's 1st Q FY 2009 is up -- $1.026B profit.

It crossed $10B profit in last 10 years. By far the most profitable company in the business.

I think with Wii momentum continuing we may well see it rise to 5 Billion profit per year. It's current predictions of $3B are quite laughable.

Of all next-gen consoles only Wii is doing money.

Sony had $51 profit for Game division last Q, but that was due to profitable PS2 and PSP. PS3 business is still operating at constant loss.

MS -- the same, inevitable pricecuts.

I think only in Oct-Dec 2008 Q we will see healthy figures for all next-gen consoles.

 

[Jokeropia]

The numbers in the OP seems to be a bit off.

It's possible that the companies have gone back and adjusted the numbers since they were first posted.

 

[bycha]

The numbers in the OP seems to be a bit off.

It's possible that the companies have gone back and adjusted the numbers since they were first posted.

To answer this and other comparisons with my numbers.

From most of the years my numbers are summed from Consolidated financial statements per quarter with exchange rates different in each quarter.

Psychotext's numbers are annual reports with exchange rate at the end of the Year.

As year progresses exchange rates fluctuate. My numbers are more accurate because they represent average rates.

In 1998-2000 yen/dollar exchange rate was jumping like crazy for example.

1998-01-01 129.5475
1998-02-01 125.8516
1998-03-01 129.0823
1998-04-01 131.7536
1998-05-01 134.8960
1998-06-01 140.3305
1998-07-01 140.7874
1998-08-01 144.6800
1998-09-01 134.4805
1998-10-01 121.0486
1998-11-01 120.2895
1998-12-01 117.0709
1999-01-01 113.2900
1999-02-01 116.6684
1999-03-01 119.4730
1999-04-01 119.7723
1999-05-01 121.9995
1999-06-01 120.7245
1999-07-01 119.3305
1999-08-01 113.2268
1999-09-01 106.8752
1999-10-01 105.9650
1999-11-01 104.6485
1999-12-01 102.5843
2000-01-01 105.2960
2000-02-01 109.3885
2000-03-01 106.3074
2000-04-01 105.6270
2000-05-01 108.3205
2000-06-01 106.1255
2000-07-01 108.2115
2000-08-01 108.0804
2000-09-01 106.8375
2000-10-01 108.4429
2000-11-01 109.0095
2000-12-01 112.2090


In their earning releases Nintendo sometimes had average exchange rates. Sony never had that.

About Microsoft -- they must've changed their numbers, I don't know why.

I don't think results per quarter are open to the public right now.

 

[Azelover]

Painless who who though? Most devs never bothered to make use of the GameCube's features anyway, so it doesn't make any sense to 'keep it the same' as a system no-one used. That's why we've got PS2 ports that look worse then the originals, as no-one had any idea about the GCN architecture.

Personally, I do think they did partly gimp the system for the BC bullet point. And it was the console that least needed it too.

The only exceptions are Galaxy and Metroid, both of which still tower over anything else on the Wii graphically.

The real reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33BGyhn_ryw

Whether you agree with it or not isn't the issue, but this is the main reason why they have done what they did. And it's surprising to see so many people argue over surrounding details for reasons(aka BC).

A Market Dilemma occurs when a sustaining market strategy(graphical improvements) becomes stale because it crossed the line of "good enough" to most people. And that's what's supposedly happened, the average consumer needs not better graphics than what was offered last gen. And according to the dilemma, that will continue to be the case in the future, that's the real reason.

I'm not saying you won't see an HD outputting Wii eventually, but other than the resolution increase you probably won't see visual improvements, maybe ever. So don't be surprised by that, the technology will come from things like the Balance Board and WM+, which is the reason why they're investing so much more into R&D, there's a lot of things being developed. New chip sets are on the low end of that.