Fallon is just... is just terrible.

I know Fallon loves doing the game stuff, but he really is one of the worst choices to promote it.
The market is split into two main groups. People who know what the 3DS is, and the people that don't.

The people who do know about the 3DS already made the decision to buy one or not. The people who don't know about 3DS most likely watch the more popular Leno, Letterman, Conan and then go to bed before Fallon. So marketing on Jimmy Fallon isn't exactly a hard ball move.

But its not a dumb move to be on Fallon altogether. Even if its on a late night show no one in the target demo-graph ever watches; Nintendo doesn't have to pay anything to show off a quick 3-4 minute demo of what their product is all about. Its free publicity. Fallon show gets paid by sponsors from ad-time, and Nintendo gets to have a full 5 minutes of glory on NBC showing some stuff off that a 15-30 second, $1,000,000 ad-time commercial can't show.

All 3DS stuff aside, Jimmy Fallon isn't all that bad.
Nightly Talk shows follow a regime. Monologue, then Skit, Main Guest, Sub-guest, then Music Guest. Fallon's ok with Guests, but he makes for a terrible host with monologue and skit times. He sucks at them, and he's terribly awkward. And that hasn't changed since he started out.

Coco's still the best, but he doesn't do as well as Leno because Conan's nature alienates the elderly audience.

i have a huge man-crush on craig ferguson. coco's decent, but craigyferg is really phenomenal, i watch almost every single show.
i occasionally watch letterman if the guest is interesting. leno i usually avoid, he's awful. i think the only leno show i ever watched was the one with obama.

like i said, oprah would have been the smart move to make for nintendo. also, why not do the daily show instead of fallon?

I wanted to choose a matrix that'll be slim (to fit in the lid), cheap (for the user and for Nintendo) and offers an acceptable quality of picture. 5 sounds just about right to achieve that goal.

About the price tag. I would DAMN RATHER pay 270$ for my little gadget if it had better cameras. At least I'd know I'm paying for "something".

Right now the 3DS's price is derrived from the simple fact that it's a Nintendo product.

Nintendo = Good = Buy it.

The company is milking this attitude for what it's worth for years and the consumer base doesn't seem to mind, so why would they re-invent the wheel and make money off us normally, via progress in used technology?

...now I'm going to have to dodge a thousand of Nintendo faboys, so before that happens, I'll answer some Frequently Spouted Half-truths (FSH!).

1. No. The 3DS isn't the first "3D-without-glasses" product. The technology has been around for quite some time. It's simply its first use in video gaming. If not Nintendo, Sony would jump on the bandwagon. They didn't invent anything special.

2. UUUR! Dual-CPU! So what? How is that new technology? They're both crappy, backwards CPU's from years back. Fuuuck, a 1Gz Snapdragon would be better, even though it has a long, grey beard.

3. Pica200. Fantastic, really. They discovered a tiny GFX-chip-producing company and everybody claps their hands. What, ATI wasn't around anymore? I was convinced from Nintendo's previous line of products that they're using THEIR GPU's...? Ah, right. Pica's are cheaper.

4. 0.3 Mpix cameras. In the 21st century. 'nough said.

5. Analog joy... slidey... stick-ish... mushroom. Congratulations, Nintendo. You discovered something that you used for the first time in history yourself waaaaay back with the N64. It's not about whether this is "new technology" or not. The question is WHAT TOOK YOU SO DAMN LONG?

6. We will, we will brick you! I just love Nintendo's newest scare-tactic. They actually believe that their ass won't be handed to them shortly. They're cursing every single pirate in the world while swiftly forgetting about the simple fact that most of them have no intention whatsoever in BUYING games. They do buy hardware, however, thus they bring some profit. Yelling at your most game-addicted demographic who will buy nearly all the add-on's to be "cool" isn't nice at all, I must say.

My rant has finished. For now...

This post has been edited by Foxi4, Sun, March 27th, 2011 at 11:42

Incorrect. Manufacturing cost =/= the cost of all raw materials combined. You also need to keep the software and the salary of the people who produce the 3DSes in mind. Hell, even the electricity needed to run the machines costs money - nothing much, but still. And all that combined is quite a bit more money than $101.

http://www.ds-scene.net/?s=viewtopic&nid=8923

EDIT: @Foxi: that 'scare tactic' was a rumour, Nintendo never actually said anything about it.

1. Asians work for a figurative bowl of rice. Remember that Ninny products are made in China.
2. Electronic parts are cheapo.
3. Nintendo DS sold well over 144 million units. So will the 3DS. Rising the price by 1 dollar gets you aprox. 144 million bucks. Njrg was really close with her aprox. cost-per-DS assumption. Manufacturing process and paying your workers is the smallest part of the total production cost.

Even though production costs are small, they exist, and you need to take count of them as well.

Apparently you forgot what the other $150 was for

Hmm?

Here we go cheaps
CLICK HERE TO SEE 200+mb of 3ds compatible photos
200+mb of high-res 3d images complete with .mpo
Some nice ones too like a Dedede costume with people behind, enjoy

Nice! Thanks