You mind back this up? I mean, in more of a 'Every companies goal is to own the market olol' way?
It's not that I don't believe you, I just thought I heard nintendo say stuff like they weren't trying to compete with sony and ms and they were just trying to redefine gaming.
But it's all based on what I *thought* I heard, so chances are good I'm way off.
They're not competing with them in the sense that they're not focusing on the same thing. They're going after gameplay and broadening their market, the others are going after raw power/graphics.
Of course they're competing with the other consoles in terms of marketshare. It's analogous to Microsoft vs. Apple. Are they moving in the same directions? Not exactly. Are they competing? They sure are.
Can Wii "beat" either the PS3 or 360 if it leads the market largely by attracting consumers who never would have purchased a 360/PS3?
Quite easily.
There are far more people who've never touched a video game/fallen out of the hobby, then there are people who own and play a system.
Nintendo's goal with the Wii and DS is to have a majority of households owning one. If they do not do this, then they will concider both systems a failure.
I thought the goal if the Wii/DS were to redefine the way people game? Not to have the majority in the market.
The goal of the Wii/DS is to make money. The method by which they convince you to buy it is to offer something the competition doesn't: a new way of playing. They think it'll make them money because they think that's what people want.
The sales figures tend to bear that statement out.
One thing that had really bugged me since the PS3 and Wii launch is most people are getting into fights on "who won". Not only is this stupid because it's only been 5 months, but because it really shouldn't matter to us. We see what each system specializes in, and we see what "major" names are coming to each system. Since when did the number of sales dictate how much fun your going to get? I'm sure people still enjoyed their gamecube despite selling the least units.
Always and forever. More sales = more games, just look at the PS2. I'm not saying you can't have fun on console that sells less, but better selling consoles are bound to have more games.
More games doesn't equal more fun. I liked my Dreamcast more then I liked my Xbox, Gamecube, and so on. A really good example may be the GBA. A vary large majority of the games are movies/shows made games, or some generic side scroller that no one has ever heard of. You might enjoy those games, but I don't.
More games equals more potential for fun, or more fun for different types of people. You just said it yourself: we might enjoy games that you don't. If a system only had platformers then only I might buy it. If a system only had puzzle games then only you might buy it. If a system has both, then both of us would buy it, which would lead me to believe that it's more fun than both of the first two systems since more people are getting enjoyment from it.
One thing that had really bugged me since the PS3 and Wii launch is most people are getting into fights on "who won". Not only is this stupid because it's only been 5 months, but because it really shouldn't matter to us. We see what each system specializes in, and we see what "major" names are coming to each system. Since when did the number of sales dictate how much fun your going to get? I'm sure people still enjoyed their gamecube despite selling the least units.
Always and forever. More sales = more games, just look at the PS2. I'm not saying you can't have fun on console that sells less, but better selling consoles are bound to have more games.
More games doesn't equal more fun. I liked my Dreamcast more then I liked my Xbox, Gamecube, and so on. A really good example may be the GBA. A vary large majority of the games are movies/shows made games, or some generic side scroller that no one has ever heard of. You might enjoy those games, but I don't.
More games equals more potential for fun, or more fun for different types of people. You just said it yourself: we might enjoy games that you don't. If a system only had platformers then only I might buy it. If a system only had puzzle games then only you might buy it. If a system has both, then both of us would buy it, which would lead me to believe that it's more fun than both of the first two systems since more people are getting enjoyment from it.
Let her set up her straw-man in peace, keep your logic away.
I think Halo 3 has sold all the systems that it will sell. There's only a very few stragglers (such as myself) that haven't bought our 360s yet, but will.
I think people underestimate the force that is Halo. Halo 2 sold 2.4 million copies in one day, making the most money of anything ever in the entertainment industry in its first 24 hours. November (it came out in November) and December 2004 were the only months Xbox outsold the PS2 in the US ever.
No one is questioning that it will sell well. What is being scrutinized is its ability to sell consoles to those who otherwise would not be attracted to the platform. Halo will draw in current Halo fans who have yet to buy, but that demographic is limited (not small, just limited).
In the same vein, Twilight Princess(To use the Wii's current "heavy hitter") will make people buy a Wii, but only if they are a huge fan of the series. And that is also a limited demographic.
Exactly, even the best selling games on sell a certain number of consoles and usually don't have a very good attach rate. Hell, no PS2 game has sold over 15 million copies despite the fact that there's like 110 million PS2s sold. As far as system sellers, Halo is about as big as it gets, along with Dragon Quest (Japan), and Grand Theft Auto.
I think Halo 3 has sold all the systems that it will sell. There's only a very few stragglers (such as myself) that haven't bought our 360s yet, but will.
I think people underestimate the force that is Halo. Halo 2 sold 2.4 million copies in one day, making the most money of anything ever in the entertainment industry in its first 24 hours. November (it came out in November) and December 2004 were the only months Xbox outsold the PS2 in the US ever.
No one is questioning that it will sell well. What is being scrutinized is its ability to sell consoles to those who otherwise would not be attracted to the platform. Halo will draw in current Halo fans who have yet to buy, but that demographic is limited (not small, just limited).
In the same vein, Twilight Princess(To use the Wii's current "heavy hitter") will make people buy a Wii, but only if they are a huge fan of the series. And that is also a limited demographic.
Exactly, even the best selling games on sell a certain number of consoles and usually don't have a very good attach rate. Hell, no PS2 game has sold over 15 million copies despite the fact that there's like 110 million PS2s sold. As far as system sellers, Halo is about as big as it gets, along with Dragon Quest (Japan), and Grand Theft Auto.
And Smashbrothers. Though I think it might be the comparatively weakest of the lot.
Of course games move consoles, I've never argued otherwise.
Specific game sales have also never been shown to make a lick of fucking difference in who ends up selling the most consoles. Exclusives don't win console wars, quantity of games and consumer perception win console wars.
Horse shit. The mere inclusion of blood in the genesis version of Mortal Kombat led to it dominating the market for a good 2 years until Nintendo started dropping bombs like ff6, DKC and KI while the genesis could only respond with vectorman, a gripping tale of a pile of balls. The concept that specific games don't move consoles is utter bullshit.
Plus your logic is motherfucking retarded. You're saying whoever leads the market first wins. Then why the fuck do you think the wii is going to win over the 360 when the 360 was both out first and has sold more units? Oh right.
I think Halo 3 has sold all the systems that it will sell. There's only a very few stragglers (such as myself) that haven't bought our 360s yet, but will.
I think people underestimate the force that is Halo. Halo 2 sold 2.4 million copies in one day, making the most money of anything ever in the entertainment industry in its first 24 hours. November (it came out in November) and December 2004 were the only months Xbox outsold the PS2 in the US ever.
No one is questioning that it will sell well. What is being scrutinized is its ability to sell consoles to those who otherwise would not be attracted to the platform. Halo will draw in current Halo fans who have yet to buy, but that demographic is limited (not small, just limited).
In the same vein, Twilight Princess(To use the Wii's current "heavy hitter") will make people buy a Wii, but only if they are a huge fan of the series. And that is also a limited demographic.
Exactly, even the best selling games on sell a certain number of consoles and usually don't have a very good attach rate. Hell, no PS2 game has sold over 15 million copies despite the fact that there's like 110 million PS2s sold. As far as system sellers, Halo is about as big as it gets, along with Dragon Quest (Japan), and Grand Theft Auto.
And Smashbrothers. Though I think it might be the comparatively weakest of the lot.
Yeah, I'd maybe put Super Smash Bros./Mario Kart as a single system seller. I know lots of people bought N64s and and Gamecubes to play mostly just those games.
Of course games move consoles, I've never argued otherwise.
Specific game sales have also never been shown to make a lick of fucking difference in who ends up selling the most consoles. Exclusives don't win console wars, quantity of games and consumer perception win console wars.
Horse shit. The mere inclusion of blood in the genesis version of Mortal Kombat led to it dominating the market for a good 2 years until Nintendo started dropping bombs like ff6, DKC and KI while the genesis could only respond with vectorman, a gripping tale of a pile of balls. The concept that specific games don't move consoles is utter bullshit.
Plus your logic is motherfucking retarded. You're saying whoever leads the market first wins. Then why the fuck do you think the wii is going to win over the 360 when the 360 was both out first and has sold more units? Oh right.
Retarded, my bad.
Who ever sells consoles the fastest for a sustained period of time after launch wns, who gets to market first aint got shit to do with it.
But thanks for putting arguments into my mouth asshole.
One thing that had really bugged me since the PS3 and Wii launch is most people are getting into fights on "who won". Not only is this stupid because it's only been 5 months, but because it really shouldn't matter to us. We see what each system specializes in, and we see what "major" names are coming to each system. Since when did the number of sales dictate how much fun your going to get? I'm sure people still enjoyed their gamecube despite selling the least units.
Always and forever. More sales = more games, just look at the PS2. I'm not saying you can't have fun on console that sells less, but better selling consoles are bound to have more games.
More games doesn't equal more fun. I liked my Dreamcast more then I liked my Xbox, Gamecube, and so on. A really good example may be the GBA. A vary large majority of the games are movies/shows made games, or some generic side scroller that no one has ever heard of. You might enjoy those games, but I don't.
More games equals more potential for fun, or more fun for different types of people. You just said it yourself: we might enjoy games that you don't. If a system only had platformers then only I might buy it. If a system only had puzzle games then only you might buy it. If a system has both, then both of us would buy it, which would lead me to believe that it's more fun than both of the first two systems since more people are getting enjoyment from it.
Which you know, is exactly my point, to a point. One system may have more puzzle games, but another systems puzzle games might be more appealing. What I'm really getting at is that it's stupid for people to say "such and such has won", when it's been five months and each system has it's own specialty and brands that will appeal to the people who enjoy them.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Honest to god? I am looking forward for the second iteration of the Wii. A fully backwards compatiable console with a more sophisticated controller that is still similar to the Wii with souped up hardware and graphics. If we are right, and the Wii does take first place by a wide margin, chances are the Wii will be what the PS1 was for Sony, and its successor will be just as popular as the PS2.
Nintendo is laying the base, and they are gonna be extraordinarily successful. In 2011-12 I expect to pick up a DVD/Blu-Ray Whatever accessible console with a powerful graphic capability and an even more advanced controller and an established online field. I don't doubt this will happen to with Nintendo's current move to creating a hub with the Wii.
Who ever sells consoles the fastest for a sustained period of time after launch wns, who gets to market first aint got shit to do with it.
Your first statement is about as wrong as anything ever has been. the part about first to market is accurate though.
Edit: Let's pretend, just for the sake of not getting into a page long flame war that your theory is accurate. That the company with the fastest sales for a sustained amount of time does win. Even if that's true, proclaiming wii the victor after all of 4 months based on this premise is still dumb as hell. If we're in the same position at the end of january 08, then I'll be willing to say the wii has probably won, barring something huge. Not a mere 4 months in.
I think Halo 3 has sold all the systems that it will sell. There's only a very few stragglers (such as myself) that haven't bought our 360s yet, but will.
I think people underestimate the force that is Halo. Halo 2 sold 2.4 million copies in one day, making the most money of anything ever in the entertainment industry in its first 24 hours. November (it came out in November) and December 2004 were the only months Xbox outsold the PS2 in the US ever.
No one is questioning that it will sell well. What is being scrutinized is its ability to sell consoles to those who otherwise would not be attracted to the platform. Halo will draw in current Halo fans who have yet to buy, but that demographic is limited (not small, just limited).
In the same vein, Twilight Princess(To use the Wii's current "heavy hitter") will make people buy a Wii, but only if they are a huge fan of the series. And that is also a limited demographic.
Exactly, even the best selling games on sell a certain number of consoles and usually don't have a very good attach rate. Hell, no PS2 game has sold over 15 million copies despite the fact that there's like 110 million PS2s sold. As far as system sellers, Halo is about as big as it gets, along with Dragon Quest (Japan), and Grand Theft Auto.
And Smashbrothers. Though I think it might be the comparatively weakest of the lot.
Yeah, I'd maybe put Super Smash Bros./Mario Kart as a single system seller. I know lots of people bought N64s and and Gamecubes to play mostly just those games.
I'm one of them, I knew I wanted a Gamecube as soon as I saw SSB:M at a demo kiosk.
Who ever sells consoles the fastest for a sustained period of time after launch wns, who gets to market first aint got shit to do with it.
Your first statement is about as wrong as anything ever has been. the part about first to market is accurate though.
Edit: Let's pretend, just for the sake of not getting into a page long flame war that your theory is accurate. That the company with the fastest sales for a sustained amount of time does win. Even if that's true, proclaiming wii the victor after all of 4 months based on this premise is still dumb as hell. If we're in the same position at the end of january 08, then I'll be willing to say the wii has probably won, barring something huge. Not a mere 4 months in.
It shouldn't be necessary to wait even that long, unless you honestly believe Nintendo is going to screw something up.
The nature of the Wii itself speaks against this. Imagine playing Red Steel with the 360 controller.
I agree a game planned as a Wii exclusive or built with very Wii-centric controls will probably stay a Wii exclusive. But as you said, there are games like Scarface and The Godfather that are multiplatform games with shoehorned in Wii controls (well, probably will be, we'll have to wait and see). Who's to say lazy devs won't make future games planned as multiplatform, start with the Wii version with shoehorned Wii controls and just tweak the graphics for the other two systems? Again, not saying it should happen, just saying it will.
The nature of the Wii itself speaks against this. Imagine playing Red Steel with the 360 controller.
I agree a game planned as a Wii exclusive or built with very Wii-centric controls will probably stay a Wii exclusive. But as you said, there are games like Scarface and The Godfather that are multiplatform games with shoehorned in Wii controls (well, probably will be, we'll have to wait and see). Who's to say lazy devs won't make future games planned as multiplatform, start with the Wii version with shoehorned Wii controls and just tweak the graphics for the other two systems? Again, not saying it should happen, just saying it will.
If the current trend is any indication, the games will be made for the PSP primarily and then be ported to the Wii while the PS3/360 get a seperate product entirely.
Neo Rasa on
"You know how Batman hangs people over the edge of buildings and gets them to spill information. That's Neo Rasa's way of it, but instead of information, he just likes to see people suffer." ~Senor Fish
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
because, nintendo is doomed.
duh
Guek on
0
Options
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
I'm still not seeing it. You are going to have to be more specific. If it's one lone post, that is hardly representative of the thread as a whole, specifically because I don't see anything resembling what was claimed to have been said actually posted and replied to.
He's being an idiot. I reread those pages. Nobody said anything as such the way he claims.
She, and you are right. They aren't word for word saying that. I don't see how quotes like this
"Xbox can do Half Life 2.
Wii is more powerful than Xbox.
Therefore, Wii can do Half Life 2.
.. Are LBP planet's physics more advanced than HL2's? I can't see much more in there than, say, Armadillo Run."
can really be interpreted any other way. The following post weren't that graceful either.
I still don't see how that says "Wii can do LBP," no matter how snarkily you reply.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
And all evidence would point to Nintendo not even being able to meet demand for the Wii yet.
I'm still not seeing it. You are going to have to be more specific. If it's one lone post, that is hardly representative of the thread as a whole, specifically because I don't see anything resembling what was claimed to have been said actually posted and replied to.
He's being an idiot. I reread those pages. Nobody said anything as such the way he claims.
She, and you are right. They aren't word for word saying that. I don't see how quotes like this
"Xbox can do Half Life 2.
Wii is more powerful than Xbox.
Therefore, Wii can do Half Life 2.
.. Are LBP planet's physics more advanced than HL2's? I can't see much more in there than, say, Armadillo Run."
can really be interpreted any other way. The following post weren't that graceful either.
I still don't see how that says "Wii can do LBP," no matter how snarkily you reply.
Instead of being mean, we'll just leave it at "AbsoluteZero doesn't see it, and Neva accepts that".
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
We can make guesses based on what we know already.
Look, the Wii has everything going for it. It's selling out still, it's popular, and it's getting a ton of positive media coverage. It's a disruptive product and it's doing its job well. Again, we have the success of the DS, a system with an identical stratagy, to base our guesses on.
Everything so far is pointing to me being right.
Go ahead, accuse me of bias. I don't care.
I'm still right.
Unless the Wii gains a cataclysmic level of failure and the PS3 and 360 begin selling at ungodly levels I can't see anything changing.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
We can make guesses based on what we know already.
Look, the Wii has everything going for it. It's selling out still, it's popular, and it's getting a ton of positive media coverage. It's a disruptive product and it's doing its job well. Again, we have the success of the DS, a system with an identical stratagy, to base our guesses on.
Everything so far is pointing to me being right.
Go ahead, accuse me of bias. I don't care.
I'm still right.
Unless the Wii gains a cataclysmic level of failure and the PS3 and 360 begin selling at ungodly levels I can't see anything changing.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
You've got to expect it to peter out quite a bit. It's only been out for three months, and that's normally the biggest time for sales. (Right?)
You have to foresee it changing as the Wii begins to sell at a more normal rate. Since it had such a big lead, the 360 has already slowed down, so when the dust settles in a few months you'll either have very little relative change in marketshare or the Wii will be gaining slowly...perhaps so slowly that it won't reach the 360 by the end of the generation.
I kind of expect it to catch up eventually, but it's not like it's a given.
EDIT: Neva, we just talked about handhelds on the last page..."handhelds are different from consoles" has never shown itself to be a very solid argument.
If the current average keeps up for all three consoles by august next year both the 360 and Wii will break 10 million with the Wii just in the lead. The PS3 will have just sold a little over 6 million, constantly losing ground.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
no, you see, you didn't answer the question. you're just dancing around the idea that we don't know and that your statement was just as much of an over generalization as anybody elses.
its silly to say that the wii will definitely be market leader, yes. but it is also just as ridiculous to say that we "know" that they wont be. i know this is what you were...somewhat...trying to say but you got off the wrong foot i think.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
It set something of a record for low unit production numbers tho, the Wii controversly has been shipping large steady numbers ever since launch.
Nintendo is shipping and selling lots of the things, lots and lots, and they still can't meet demand.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
no, you see, you didn't answer the question. you're just dancing around the idea that we don't know and that your statement was just as much of an over generalization as anybody elses.
its silly to say that the wii will definitely be market leader, yes. but it is also just as ridiculous to say that we "know" that they wont be. i know this is what you were...somewhat...trying to say but you got off the wrong foot i think.
I think he's trying to be as cautious and neutral as he can manage.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
Prove it.
I take it your joking.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
We can make guesses based on what we know already.
Look, the Wii has everything going for it. It's selling out still, it's popular, and it's getting a ton of positive media coverage. It's a disruptive product and it's doing its job well. Again, we have the success of the DS, a system with an identical stratagy, to base our guesses on.
Everything so far is pointing to me being right.
Go ahead, accuse me of bias. I don't care.
I'm still right.
Unless the Wii gains a cataclysmic level of failure and the PS3 and 360 begin selling at ungodly levels I can't see anything changing.
Once the Wii's supply can meet demand the Wii's average sales are going to average out. It's happened to pretty much every console that I can find sales data on. Basically, until we start seeing Wiis sitting in stores we're not going to know how much this thing is going to sell per month. Hell, the first two months the Gamecube and Xbox were out they sold better than the first 3 months of the PS2's lifespan. And we all know which console hands down won there.
I'm not accusing anyone of bias here. All I'm saying is we don't know what's going to happen. The Wii could end up having a much higher average sell rate than it does right now simply because more units are produced. Even if it stays where it is right now (400000+ per month) it has the other two consoles beat. But expecting thing to stay the same isn't going to happen. These numbers are going to go up or down, not be the same.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
Prove it.
I take it your joking.
Fuck no, prove it.
I really don't know what I can say. Try thinking laptops and desktops. Jog that brain.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
I really don't know what I can say. Try thinking laptops and desktops. Jog that brain.
Really man, burden of proof is on you.
People who buy consoles don't factor PSP and the DS into their decision making? Consoles and handhelds are different? I really don't understand what the fuck you want out of me here.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Posts
They're not competing with them in the sense that they're not focusing on the same thing. They're going after gameplay and broadening their market, the others are going after raw power/graphics.
Of course they're competing with the other consoles in terms of marketshare. It's analogous to Microsoft vs. Apple. Are they moving in the same directions? Not exactly. Are they competing? They sure are.
The goal of the Wii/DS is to make money. The method by which they convince you to buy it is to offer something the competition doesn't: a new way of playing. They think it'll make them money because they think that's what people want.
The sales figures tend to bear that statement out.
Let her set up her straw-man in peace, keep your logic away.
And Smashbrothers. Though I think it might be the comparatively weakest of the lot.
Horse shit. The mere inclusion of blood in the genesis version of Mortal Kombat led to it dominating the market for a good 2 years until Nintendo started dropping bombs like ff6, DKC and KI while the genesis could only respond with vectorman, a gripping tale of a pile of balls. The concept that specific games don't move consoles is utter bullshit.
Plus your logic is motherfucking retarded. You're saying whoever leads the market first wins. Then why the fuck do you think the wii is going to win over the 360 when the 360 was both out first and has sold more units? Oh right.
Retarded, my bad.
LoL: failboattootoot
Who ever sells consoles the fastest for a sustained period of time after launch wns, who gets to market first aint got shit to do with it.
But thanks for putting arguments into my mouth asshole.
Which you know, is exactly my point, to a point. One system may have more puzzle games, but another systems puzzle games might be more appealing. What I'm really getting at is that it's stupid for people to say "such and such has won", when it's been five months and each system has it's own specialty and brands that will appeal to the people who enjoy them.
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Nintendo is laying the base, and they are gonna be extraordinarily successful. In 2011-12 I expect to pick up a DVD/Blu-Ray Whatever accessible console with a powerful graphic capability and an even more advanced controller and an established online field. I don't doubt this will happen to with Nintendo's current move to creating a hub with the Wii.
Your first statement is about as wrong as anything ever has been. the part about first to market is accurate though.
Edit: Let's pretend, just for the sake of not getting into a page long flame war that your theory is accurate. That the company with the fastest sales for a sustained amount of time does win. Even if that's true, proclaiming wii the victor after all of 4 months based on this premise is still dumb as hell. If we're in the same position at the end of january 08, then I'll be willing to say the wii has probably won, barring something huge. Not a mere 4 months in.
LoL: failboattootoot
I'm one of them, I knew I wanted a Gamecube as soon as I saw SSB:M at a demo kiosk.
It shouldn't be necessary to wait even that long, unless you honestly believe Nintendo is going to screw something up.
If the current trend is any indication, the games will be made for the PSP primarily and then be ported to the Wii while the PS3/360 get a seperate product entirely.
This is not what is going to happen and we all know it.
So what do we "know" and how do we "know" it?
OK then, what will?
because, nintendo is doomed.
duh
I still don't see how that says "Wii can do LBP," no matter how snarkily you reply.
We know that averages aren't an accurate representation of how many units these consoles are going to sell in the future (also, those units were US only, not worldwide). The 360 is the most accurate, since it has 15 months worth of sales data, but the Wii and PS3 only have 3 (that I could find). The chances that those are going to keep the same (especially considering that they were barely out in November and the average is based on 3 months that contain December) is minuscule at best. If I were to do the same sort of calculations in 6-7 month they would probably come out completely different.
We can't see the future. The Wii hasn't "won". The 360 hasn't "won". And I don't think anyone believes the PS3 has "won". Right now it's too early to tell what's going to happen. If we try to predict we're really just doing the jobs of all those market annalists we all hate so much.
This is me being unbiased about the whole thing. How about that.
And all evidence would point to Nintendo not even being able to meet demand for the Wii yet.
Instead of being mean, we'll just leave it at "AbsoluteZero doesn't see it, and Neva accepts that".
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
We can make guesses based on what we know already.
Look, the Wii has everything going for it. It's selling out still, it's popular, and it's getting a ton of positive media coverage. It's a disruptive product and it's doing its job well. Again, we have the success of the DS, a system with an identical stratagy, to base our guesses on.
Everything so far is pointing to me being right.
Go ahead, accuse me of bias. I don't care.
I'm still right.
Unless the Wii gains a cataclysmic level of failure and the PS3 and 360 begin selling at ungodly levels I can't see anything changing.
Wasn't the 360 selling out four months after its release as well? And you can't really compare it to the DS, cause for one, handhelds and consoles are different, and two, the only competition is the PSP.
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
You have to foresee it changing as the Wii begins to sell at a more normal rate. Since it had such a big lead, the 360 has already slowed down, so when the dust settles in a few months you'll either have very little relative change in marketshare or the Wii will be gaining slowly...perhaps so slowly that it won't reach the 360 by the end of the generation.
I kind of expect it to catch up eventually, but it's not like it's a given.
EDIT: Neva, we just talked about handhelds on the last page..."handhelds are different from consoles" has never shown itself to be a very solid argument.
no, you see, you didn't answer the question. you're just dancing around the idea that we don't know and that your statement was just as much of an over generalization as anybody elses.
its silly to say that the wii will definitely be market leader, yes. but it is also just as ridiculous to say that we "know" that they wont be. i know this is what you were...somewhat...trying to say but you got off the wrong foot i think.
It set something of a record for low unit production numbers tho, the Wii controversly has been shipping large steady numbers ever since launch.
Nintendo is shipping and selling lots of the things, lots and lots, and they still can't meet demand.
Don't remember, actually. I'm pretty sure by march demand had settled down though.
And also, the DS/PSP situation is exactly the same as the current one.
The DS, a market disrupter, changing the rules. The PSP was "more of the same" making a bigger, faster handheld experience.
Stop looking at it like two different video game markets and start looking at it like two indentical sets of business stratagies.
I think he's trying to be as cautious and neutral as he can manage.
Which is fine and all, if the markets were the same. Handhelds are not the same market as consoles, just as consoles aren't the same market at PCs. What exactly do you feel is their business strategy?
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Prove it.
I take it your joking.
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Once the Wii's supply can meet demand the Wii's average sales are going to average out. It's happened to pretty much every console that I can find sales data on. Basically, until we start seeing Wiis sitting in stores we're not going to know how much this thing is going to sell per month. Hell, the first two months the Gamecube and Xbox were out they sold better than the first 3 months of the PS2's lifespan. And we all know which console hands down won there.
I'm not accusing anyone of bias here. All I'm saying is we don't know what's going to happen. The Wii could end up having a much higher average sell rate than it does right now simply because more units are produced. Even if it stays where it is right now (400000+ per month) it has the other two consoles beat. But expecting thing to stay the same isn't going to happen. These numbers are going to go up or down, not be the same.
Fuck no, prove it.
I really don't know what I can say. Try thinking laptops and desktops. Jog that brain.
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
Really man, burden of proof is on you.
wow, you are... wow... just wow.
People who buy consoles don't factor PSP and the DS into their decision making? Consoles and handhelds are different? I really don't understand what the fuck you want out of me here.
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz