backtop


Print 39 comment(s) - last by jrb531.. on Apr 14 at 11:04 AM

Despite slowing sales, Nintendo doesn't have plans to lower the price of the Wii or DS

Nintendo has survived through a global recession and has no immediate plans to cut prices on the Wii game console or DS handheld console any time soon.

"The Wii is in the most unhealthy condition since it hit the Japanese market," Nintendo president Satoru Iwata recently admitted during a press conference.  "The current condition in the Japanese market is not the one we want.  A price cut in a difficult economy cannot really excite the market and drive up sales."

Iwata added that he doesn't think "a price cut is a good option" for Nintendo at the moment.

Both Sony and Microsoft have been forced to cut prices on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 game consoles, while the Wii has remained the same price since its launch.  The console, still priced at $249 in the U.S., is slowly becoming available on shelves after a couple of years of high demand, low supply.

However, thanks to the recent release of two exclusive game titles, the PS3 outsold the Wii in Japan in the month of March -- marking the first time in 16 months that Sony grabbed the upper hand against its domestic rival.  Since its launch in late 2006, the Wii has sold more than 50 million units across the world.

The DS handheld console has consistently outsold the Sony PlayStation Portable, with the DSi, Nintendo's latest console, selling 600,000 units in the U.S. and Europe since its launch over the weekend.  The console has sold more than 2 million units after being available five months in Japan.

The DSi launched after Nintendo saw the DS Lite begin to falter on the sales charts in Japan and the United States.

Even though the global economy has limited consumer spending, the game industry still sees strong sales numbers.  Nintendo's efforts to cater to a wider variety of casual gamers -- especially compared to the Xbox 360 and PS3 -- has helped it through this turbulent time.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Clauzii on 4/10/2009 8:02:42 AM , Rating: 5
I don't think neither Microsoft or SONY did expect the 'inferior', 'too old-tech', 'not so advanced' Wii to actually win big time.

Content and new-style controller won over raw power this time.




RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By G2cool on 4/10/2009 9:00:39 AM , Rating: 3
Sony and Microsoft also probably didn't expect a wider audience. Now they'll have to explain to their shareholders why they didn't market to casual gamers, and why they have to drop prices to expand their user base.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Mitch101 on 4/10/2009 9:37:51 AM , Rating: 2
My Take and Im taking fanboism out of the picture. Im a PC Gamer.

If we go back to basics its the games and genre that are selling the consoles.

While the Wii is fun it lacks blockbuster games. But it sure is fun and parents love it and the kids arent seen as just sitting on the couch. The Wii Targets the DISNEY side of gaming without the images of the kids sitting around.

The 360 vs the PS3.
Well both are pretty much on par power wise.

PRICE 360 vs the PS3.
The 360 has an advantage with Price although I would like to see the top end come down in price otherwise if your budget allows the PS3 is an option.

The 360 has the advantage over the PS3 in games. The PS3 has some great titles but the 360 has more. Those looking for a game console first will go with the 360. Those looking for a BLU-RAY player that plays games will go the PS3 OR will get a set top BLU-RAY player and a 360.

DISNEY/FAMILY/KIDS = Get a Wii
More Serious GAMER = Get a 360
Movie Goer = Set Top BLU-RAY player
Movie Goer/Gamer = PS3
Movie Goer/Gamer = PS3 or (360 and Set top Player.)

While I commend Sony for cutting edge with BLU-RAY I believe they jumped the gun a few years early and would have been a better competitor had they offered the BLU-RAY as an add on.

In the end you bought whatever console for whatever reason. Enjoy it and don't tell anyone they are stupid for not making the same choice as you just enjoy your purchase.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Imaginer on 4/10/2009 9:53:43 AM , Rating: 2
I am primarily a PC gamer too and liked the platform but I mainly purchased the Wii only because of costs comparatively for what I get in fun.

I don't think I would have as much fun with the other systems comparatively and it would basically feel the same video game experience I have had before.

With time not on my side, it is nice to have fun with video games without being all too overly engrossed and serious about the supposedly FUN hobby (i.e. technicalities, competition, etc).


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/10/2009 3:16:33 PM , Rating: 3
Serious gamers still own PC's!

Why?

No matter how you slice it...

PS3 = Nvidia 7900 video card
360 = ATI 1950XT

Both great cards 3-4 years ago but so out of date that they are an utter joke in the PC community by today's standards. Even a $65 video card today will run rings around those video cards. So for the price of a single game you get state of the art graphics.

Now in it's day those consoles actually beat the PC's of that day and this is the blessing/curse of console vs PC gaming.

Consoles still cannot be updated so the hardware you buy today is the hardware you get for years. I can pop in a new video card, memory, hard drive, CPU or whatnot in a PC and you often have a new PC.

Now consoles, to be fair, do offer a more stable system and less hassle but ask anyone who is "fair" about the difference in playing a first person shooter with a mouse/keyboard combo vs a controller and see who is the better player.

So who wins? Well Nintendo in the short term because they have suckered millions of people into buying "very" overpriced consoles (last check the Wii cost less than $100 to produce - what a markup!) and these people seldom ever buy a second game!

In the long term... PC's all the way!


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By dubldwn on 4/10/2009 3:24:40 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Now in it's day those consoles actually beat the PC's

Actually, because of the blu-ray diode hold up, the PS3 and the 8800GTX (peace be upon it) came out on almost exactly the same day.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/10/2009 3:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
Point taken.

The "design" of the PS3 was finalized a year before it came out. Instead of updating the console to a faster (and still compatable) video card they kept it a 7900 and thus sealed their fate.

Had the PS3 gotten a better video card and been able to show better graphics (at it's best the PS3 can often only equal a 360's graphics and often it's worse or runs at half the fps) then the PS3 could have been the clear winner in "all" areas.

Instead the 360 "always" has either better graphics, FPS or at worst... equal graphics as a PS3 and at a much cheaper price with a larger library.

Nothing can shake the utter shock of Madden only running at half speed on a PS3 vs the 360!

Nail in the coffin IMHO.

and all because Sony kept that Nvidia 7900 in the PS3 spec when they could have opted for a much better video core since they had an extra year.

Sony waited an extra year for Blu-Ray! Everything else in the PS3 is from the same design year as the 360! The PS3 was dead before it came out and all because of some horrible marketing.

Had Sony released the PS3 at the same time as the 360 (it was ready aside from the Blu-Ray) but with a standard DVD drive...

Sony wins!

Had Sony used that extra year to upgrade the PS3 to state of the art tech...

Sony wins!

Instead Sony released a design that was out of date (aside from the Blu-Ray player) the day it came out. Sure the 360 was in the same boat but it used that year to good advantage.

Was Sony so arrogant that they figured that we would by whatever tech they slapped together just because it was called a Playstation?


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By brightstar on 4/12/2009 12:52:39 AM , Rating: 3
The 360 gpu is the forerunner to the R600 and has very little in common to the R580.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By kyp275 on 4/12/2009 3:43:37 PM , Rating: 2
the reason some titles looks "the same" or "worse" on the PS3 have more to do with the programming than anything else. The 360 is simply easier to program for, and that showed in the earlier titles.

That being said, we're getting to the point where some developers are starting to be able to better utilize the PS3's hardware. Titles like Eternal Sonata and now Tales of Vesperia are being brought over to the PS3, and the "ported" version have improved framerate/graphics compared to the 360 version(ES), and the additional space offered by the bluray also allowed extra content (ToV).

Also, you can't compare consoles to PC directly on a hardware level, as PCs are designed as general purpose while consoles are dedicated machines. Just look at the PS2, you'd be hard-pressed to find a PC with similar specs that can play many of today's PS2 games.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By AstroCreep on 4/10/09, Rating: 0
RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/10/2009 3:51:17 PM , Rating: 3
Nope....

it's a 7900 look at the specs. Had the PS3 a 8800 based video card and it would 100% kill the 360 in every game!

I forgot to add that the PS3 has 256meg of ram and 256meg of video ram... the video ram cannot be used for games.

The 360 has 512meg of shared ram which can be used for either.

If the PS3 actually had an 8800 based video card and madden would look and run faster on the PS3 and not at half speed.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Clauzii on 4/10/2009 9:44:46 PM , Rating: 2
The RSX chip of a PS3 can access main memory thru the FlexIO-bus using DMA transfers. So I really don't see a big problem there.

And no, it's actually 'only' a customized 7800 - not that there is much difference anyway.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/11/2009 11:16:28 AM , Rating: 2
Not much difference between a 7800 and 7800 - yes

There is a "huge" difference between a 7800 and 8800 :)

The PS3's CPU runs rings around the 360's CPU but in games all this extra horsepower is wasted as the much slower video just cannot keep up.

Look at this direct comparison between the 360's 1950XT and the PS3's 7800/7900

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=313&...

Now for yuks look at the comparison between the 1950XT and a $70 ATI 4830 that a PC gamer can pop in:

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=586&...

The aging 1950XT, already a ton faster than the PS3's 7800, gives a score of 30,000 vs the $70 4830's score of 736,000!

Note that FLOPS and Shaders are not an exact comparison but needless to say the special graphics effects abilities on even cheap modern video cards blows those old PS3 and 360 graphics out of the water.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By AstroCreep on 4/11/2009 9:29:41 AM , Rating: 2
Hmmm...well I guess I need to brush up on my history! Sorry for the confusion.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By DJ Philme on 4/12/2009 5:44:38 AM , Rating: 2
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but in my opinion you are an idiot. Keep to yourself.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By xti on 4/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By The0ne on 4/10/2009 12:17:15 PM , Rating: 4
I too see a problem with most gamers nowadays defining themselves as "serious" or "hardcore" gamers. Makes me laugh to hear their reasoning.

From a technical side of all three consoles it's even more hilarious. Words like "the most advance", "the latest and greatest", "the best graphics" and so on gets toss around without the realization that there are still limitation as to what can be with the hardware. Companies are still getting better and better at coding for each of the systems. There are a few select companies that really knows how to take advantage of the hardware and make it shine. This has always been the case with consoles. Spouting these types of arguments is almost worthless. Sure, there are hard limitations to Wii and other consoles but don't think for a minute that that limit has been reach.

If history hasn't taught you what the trend is at least accept that the Wii has done something that both Sony and MS had never imagined or if they did they laughed and scoffed at the idea(s).


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By quiksilvr on 4/10/2009 12:02:20 PM , Rating: 2
Your analysis is very informative, however a bit skewed in 360's direction a bit. Having more games on a console doesn't necessarily mean that's the one that's a "More serious GAMER". There are plenty of PS3 hard core gamers. There is quantity and quality. Wii has a ton of games but a ton of REALLY crappy games and a few REALLY good ones. And just to put in perspective, the 360 has around 600 games and the PS3 has around 440 games.

Another major point to bring up is that the PS3 has free online gaming. That's a MAJOR advantage. The $100 price difference becomes pretty moot at that point given that it costs ~30-50 dollars a year to play Xbox online.

My final point to make is that the PS3 has many exclusives that are solely on the PS3 and not a console-PC combo. IMO, it's not an exclusive if you can play it on a PC at the same time.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By WalksTheWalk on 4/10/2009 2:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
I think everyone is not quite getting the hardcore gamer vs the casual gamer vs the family gamer.

Having once been a hardcore gamer, I always owned both major consoles to be able to play all of the best games. Atari 2600 & ColecoVision, NES, Genesis & SNES, Saturn & PS1. It was the last generation that I stopped buying all consoles and started gaming less. I bought a Dreamcast and Xbox but not a PS2. As for the PC, during those days I had multiple gaming PCs, did LAN parties, etc.

Now, as a casual gamer, I own a Wii and an Xbox360 with less than ten games for each console. I don't even use my PC for gaming because I can have a great experience with the 360 on a large screen TV for a fraction of the cost.

My wife is a family gamer and only uses my Wii. (Can't get enough of Wii puns.)


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By ClownPuncher on 4/10/2009 4:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
I never understood why people dont factor in the cost of their tv to the console gaming end price. From where I sit, PC gaming is less expensive than console gaming. If you have a $1000+ tv and a $300+ console, thats more than it takes to build a really decent PC + monitor and speakers.

That isnt even including HDD's or wifi or extra controllers or headsets or Live! subsription. Not to mention PC games are priced at $10-20 less than each console game, add in the online mod community and you have free "DLC".


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By WalksTheWalk on 4/10/2009 4:33:00 PM , Rating: 3
That's because the cost of the TV is a sunk cost. I've incurred the TV cost already with or without the game console cost. If the TV is dedicated to gaming, then yes, the cost of the TV should be included and expands the cost of console gaming.

One of the other reasons I've switched to consoles is the physical media. I can resell that at any time whereas PC games are starting to become download only or DRM-laden which adds to the ultimate cost if I can't recoup *some* cost later on. For example, I sold my old Sega Saturn system + games on eBay for > $500 which helps defray the cost of my gaming hobby.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By ClownPuncher on 4/10/2009 6:37:31 PM , Rating: 2
If gaming affects your descision on whether to purchase a certain tv or not, is it still a sunk cost? With that mindset, couldn't you say that a computer is a sunk cost if it's primary function isn't to game, but plays games anyway? When I cost out a PC, I don't omit certain parts of it from the price since some of those parts arent for gaming.

If youre saying that you were using the tv for other things like watching movies and cable before you bought the console, couldn't the same apply to a PC if you weren't using it for gaming until you bought the games? A PC doesn't just play games, in the same respect a TV doesn't just play games.

My PC isn't dedicated to playing games, does it mean it was free?


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Thrawn on 4/11/2009 8:21:36 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know if anyone is still reading this but I also wanted to note one other consideration. In my house we haven't had a normal TV for years. No cable or satellite either. A good net connection and DVDs are all we are interested in.
On the other hand we have more computers then people in the house (desktop and laptop each.) So TVs do not have to be a standard cost as there are other ways of doing things.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/11/2009 11:29:23 AM , Rating: 3
Then you are not a "serious" gamer if you shun the PC.

Serious gamers do not game on low-res "console" screens. Playing on an upscaled 1080p screen? Well paying $2000 for that big screen TV allows you to game on the cheap? How is this cheap when I can get a 24" 1080p monitor for under $200???

Serious gamers play on PC's with high mhz quad core cpu's with high speed single or dual video cards.

Serious gamers play on systems with at least 4gig of memory and not the "tiny" 512meg that the 360 or PS3 have.

Serious gamers play first person shooters with the proper mouse and keyboard for wuick response and accuracy and not a silly controller trying to aim with two thumbs in the heat of battle.

Serious gamer you are not and I do not say this to offend.

As far as saving money....

Serious "PC" gamers pay an average of $29-$39 for the same games that cost $49-$59 on consoles! Look as the same games on PC vs consoles and you willl see every time that the PC game looks better, has a better fps and costs at least $10 less.

So when you add in the cost of that monitor (you cannot say that you already have a TV because people also already have a computer for email/internet LOL) and the cost of paying extra for every game you buy and I say that console gaming actually costs more considering you can get decent gaming computers for about $600 these days.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By stratamini2 on 4/12/2009 2:13:19 PM , Rating: 1
..which is moot if over 90% of so called 'serious' PC gamers use dinky LCD monitors for gaming. All those LCD monitors suffer from serious input lag, scaling lag, high response time, less color gamut, poor black, poor viewing angles (colors wash out even in the sweet spot) that easily negate any benefits PC gaming may offer. Higher resolutions mean jack if these points are ignored. If the overall quality is concerned, I'll gladly choose Xbox360 with Pioneer Kuro over Core i7 rig with any Dell monitor. I'm a hardcore shmup gamer and only CRTs and plasmas offer acceptable input lag and response time performances.

Now of course, PCs can be hooked up to CRTs and plasmas and I agree only with those certain conditions I would agree with some of your points. But then such setups are quite a rarity, and cost even more especially when going with the HDTVs. I currently have one of the best CRT monitors (Sony FW900) and even I cannot say my monitor is superior to Pioneer plasmas anymore. And the immersion factor from going to a bigger screen cannot be underestimated either. My 24 inch monitor just simply can't cut it.

HDTVs have improved so much to the point that it's a much bigger priority for me to have a quality display than to have a quality rig. I'm also an audiophile so game audio quality is important to me as well. To get acceptable game audio performance on PC, you need to have a Creative card and all Creative cards come with unacceptable DACs and stupid resampling to the original sound. (last time I checked, it still can't pass through bitperfect bitstreaming to my seperates) Get an audiophile quality soundcard and the game performance will be lacking compared to the Creative one. I lose either way if I go PC only. With Playstation3, I compromise nothing. I get pure non-resampled original sound from the game going straight to my audio gears through HDMI. and game audio performance is not too bad compared to the best that Creative can offer either. Things would've been different if either Creative could offer competent DAC or at least lossless bitstreaming. But that's not happening now and I no longer game on PCs until either Creative gets it right or let those audiophile soundcard companies have at least half decent EAX format. Different strokes for different folks I guess, but as a 'serious' gamer, I just can't see Creative to offer any serious sound solutions to the true serious gamers.

I'm not shunning PC. I still game often on PC. But to say PC is the only serious gamer's solution is simply not true. My arcade cabinets are already more hardcore enough than those so called MAME emulators.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/14/2009 10:59:19 AM , Rating: 2
Having a kick ass monitor connected to a piss poor console (360 or PS3) makes you a serious gamer?

Both consoles use out of date tech with old video, 512meg of ram and slow CPU's as compared to even the slowest computers being sold today.

How can anyone seriously think that a 360 or PS3 is a good way to play games? Yes they have advantages but as I said before... try playing a 1st person shooter with a mouse/keyboard and then try playing the same game with a controller.

End of story.... while controllers are great for sports games and platformers... they are "horrible" for 1st person shooters.

BTW.... my 24" 1920x1080 LCD monitor may not be as big as your 50" but then again I sit right in front of it and unless you want to claim that you sit 2 feet from your TV... my 24" monitor is actually larger in net effect as your 50" is from across the room.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By jrb531 on 4/10/2009 3:29:15 PM , Rating: 2
The 360 wins because Sony forgot the age old rule...

A system only goes as fast as it's slowest part.

In this case the PS3's CPU runs rings around the 360 but...

The 360 ATI 1950XT is faster than the PS3's Nvidia 7900 so it's matters very little that the PS3 has a faster CPU... it's bottlenecked by the slower Video Card.

End of story.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By AstroCreep on 4/10/2009 3:44:42 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know that Sony jumped the gun too soon with slapping the BluRay drive into the PS3; that move is pretty much what won them the HDDVD vs. BluRay war.

Too soon because it was too expensive? Yeah, I can give you that, but they now have no real competition in the HD home video market.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By mezman on 4/10/2009 4:11:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Content and new-style controller won over raw power this time.


Maybe new style controller but I don't think that the Wii is winning on content.


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Clauzii on 4/10/2009 9:20:16 PM , Rating: 3
One game: Wii Sports, the most sold game - Ever!


RE: Wii - the underdog.....Not!
By Hiawa23 on 4/10/2009 4:20:46 PM , Rating: 2
There is no reason to raise the price of the Wii. I bought one for my kid, I don't like it at all other than retro gaming, so I would easily take the PS3 & 360 anyday over the enhanced Gamecube with the shaking controller, but it's good to see Nintendo back on top. I am inot the tech, online gaming, & HD, 5.1 sound is a must for me, but hats off to Nintendo


More money for Nintendo...
By The0ne on 4/10/2009 12:24:56 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I don't blame them for not cutting the price. It's business. Your manufacturing cost is down and your system is still selling well, a bit a little slower and you have no competition. Why would anyone make a price cut? If they were really hurting then yes, but at this point in time they can milk all they want. Granted that it's not really milking the consumers because they don't know about the cost savings and all.




RE: More money for Nintendo...
By TomZ on 4/10/2009 1:52:19 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, and I would add that if Nintendo sees soft demand, they will probably throw more extras in with the console instead of lower pricing. That way they keep the average selling price up, plus it doesn't irritate people who bought a console in the past as much as if there was a steep price cut.


By giantpandaman2 on 4/10/2009 1:05:09 PM , Rating: 2
It's games, plain and simple. There's recently been three or four big games released in Japan for the PS3, like RE5.

What Nintendo really has to do, and I'm sure they're very aware of this, is get some new major releases for the Wii in Japan. Right now there's just not a lot coming out in the near future. I, for one, am pretty disappointed that my PC has more and better JRPG's coming out for it than my Wii. Not that I wouldn't rather play on my PC anyway, but, come on, there's almost no good RPG's on the Wii.




By someguy123 on 4/10/2009 11:35:45 PM , Rating: 2
who said they're losing ground?

there have been very little high profile software releases on the wii for the past year, and yet it's STILL selling out globally without a price cut.

the difference this month is that the ps3 actually sold particularly well, not that the wii sold poorly.


Price cut? Nah...
By amanojaku on 4/10/2009 6:37:33 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think the Wii needs a price cut; two and a half years later it's still a great value considering Nintendo's titles (Zelda, Mario, etc...) and the virtual console. All the other games pretty much suck, though. I think Nintendo should slow down production to avoid market saturation and concentrate on updating the Wii's graphics and horsepower. 1080p, not just 720p. For the life of me I can't find it, but there's an article featuring HD Zelda stills which fueled the HD Wii rumors. Even if they were faked (I don't know, it was a Yahoo! News article) they were damn good and showed what the Wii SHOULD look like, IMHO.

Then develop some more games since other companies can't seem to get their sh1t together. And keep the price at $250.




RE: Price cut? Nah...
By jrb531 on 4/14/2009 11:04:13 AM , Rating: 2
The Wii costs less than $100 to produce... they sell it for 2.5 x the cost to produce. The library of games is horrible and aside from a small collection of decent games, most by Nintendo, the rest are crap.

So you spend more on the Wii than you could for a 360 and then have to select from poor looking mostly kiddie games???

If you're a kid fine... but adults are buying these things and the sad fact is that most of them are buying one because its the "in" thing to do... they have no idea about the three systems but "everyone" is buying them so I must want one too.

Sad that so many people often act like sheep.


Wii
By videog on 4/11/2009 9:09:12 AM , Rating: 2
The Wii is such a hot item that they can survive this recession without the need for a price cut. They have the edge over the other 2 game consoles. All Wii needs to do is continue creating great games and they'll be fine.
<a href="http://cm4.upclick.com/click.aspx?uid=999745&crid=...">Unlimited PS3 Cheats</a>




RE: Wii
By jrb531 on 4/11/2009 11:34:13 AM , Rating: 2
Continue to create great games????

What are you smoking.... 95% of the library of Wii games are utter and compete crap! Nothing but old PS2 games quickly posted over to try and get a quick buck.

The Wii is an insult to the public costing under $100 to produce yet charging more than the "much" better Xbox 360.

Want to know why Nindento cannot drop the price? Because they sell so few games per console... people buy the thing because it's "in" just like they bought furbies and pet rocks :)

When it drops out of the "in" it will be no more because most of these people by few or even NO games for it.

So Nintendo has to make money on the consoles because they are not going to make money on the games.


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki