The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I know some of you will point out the fact that, in spite of the loss compared to last year's earnings, Nintendo has still accrued a profit to the tune of $600,000,000. While that is a large sum of money it needs to be realized that the amount of that profit is not too far from being HALF of their previous year's profits. That means that Nintendo has that much money LESS to put into things like research and development for things like new games and new systems. Also, game companies are less likely to put their time and money into a company that posts losses as massive as 43%. If this trend continues, it could have some nasty repercussions. People could lose their jobs (I feel sure some heads have already rolled after the news of a profit loss this significant), for one thing. And companies will not want to invest in another company that will not post a meaningful profit for their efforts. So yeah, Nintendo still posted a profit. But when that profit is in the shadow of a previous year that was 43% HIGHER, then the 'profit' tends to lose significance. Just some things to consider.
The Gamecube is costing Nintendo big and sagging sales are a large part of their problem, ditch the deadwood before it's to late.
The Gamecube is costing Nintendo big and sagging sales are a large part of their problem, ditch the deadwood before it's to late.
Page:
This one has gone on rather well, even without my input!
I thought Win3.x was 16bit, while one of the major factors of Win95 onwards was the 32bit.
I thought Win3.x was 16bit, while one of the major factors of Win95 onwards was the 32bit.
Macintosh wrote:
> This one has gone on rather well, even with my input!
>
> I thought Win3.x was 16bit, while one of the major factors of Win95
> onwards was the 32bit.
Er didn't you just listen to what he just said?
Lets say it together.
NIN-TEN-DO FOR-UM
The last bit is a bit tricky.
> This one has gone on rather well, even with my input!
>
> I thought Win3.x was 16bit, while one of the major factors of Win95
> onwards was the 32bit.
Er didn't you just listen to what he just said?
Lets say it together.
NIN-TEN-DO FOR-UM
The last bit is a bit tricky.
NINE-TEN-ELEVEN...
**** !
I got lost. :S
**** !
I got lost. :S
FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> Dear ukchatforums users currently posting in this foum (132) thread
> number 118120,
>
> No-one cares.
> Four-fiths of my body, mind and soul slipped into a coma upon
> clicking into this thread. It has taken 5 days, several million volts
>
> Please use it to vent this pointless, endless, mindless, interestless
> drivel. Or, if you wish, place you ugly fase in a barrel of rabid
> gibbons armed with potato peelers and meat hooks.
>
> ThankyoueversomuchforyourIMMEDIATEcooperation,
> Yours, slowly slipping back into sleepy town,
>
> Micky "The Finger" Bishop, mk II
FFF for notable!
> Dear ukchatforums users currently posting in this foum (132) thread
> number 118120,
>
> No-one cares.
> Four-fiths of my body, mind and soul slipped into a coma upon
> clicking into this thread. It has taken 5 days, several million volts
>
> Please use it to vent this pointless, endless, mindless, interestless
> drivel. Or, if you wish, place you ugly fase in a barrel of rabid
> gibbons armed with potato peelers and meat hooks.
>
> ThankyoueversomuchforyourIMMEDIATEcooperation,
> Yours, slowly slipping back into sleepy town,
>
> Micky "The Finger" Bishop, mk II
FFF for notable!
But the revolution will run Windows XPX3000...
Page: