By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - How long does each console have left on the market?

bdbdbd on 22 April 2010

@Squill: It could be because of the price. If you want to play Wii Fit, but you're able to do it 150 cheaper, i believe many would consider it as a better option.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network
Squilliam on 22 April 2010

@BD: There will be very few people interested in Wii Fit who hadn't got one by then. Anyone seriously considering it new as a game console would save little money with the whole kit of controllers etc and theres always the fringe benefit of used sales to target the tardy customers and to encourage upgrades to the latest generation.



Tease.

scottie on 22 April 2010
Squilliam said:
scottie said:
Squilliam said:


I understand, but given the paradigm shift to gaining relatively high margins on the device itself, I cannot see them wanting to continue selling a relatively low margin $100-150 Wii alongside the N7. In addition to that they probably wouldn't want to keep a console on market for the issues of the complexity to support circa 2000 technology 12 years after release with software.

Who would buy a $150 Wii when you could get a $200-$250 N7 with 30* the performance and with whatever new innovative features they might add?

 

High margins on hardware is hardly a paradigm shift. Infact one could argue that if one does a thing for their entire existence (yes, even when they sold card they made a good profit on the hardware), then continues to do it, it is exactly the opposite of a paradigm shift

 

I would certainly buy a $250 N7 over a $100 Wii, as would most of the people on this or any other forum. However, a lot of people would choose the much cheaper option. Like the PS2, the Wii will continue to get the Guitar Heroes and maddens for a long time, and it will have a massive backlog of extended audience Nintendo games

 

Also, 30 tiems the power of the Wii for the N7? Really Squilliam?

Sorry, not a paradigm shift but I couldn't think of anything better to call it.

Why would anyone buy a Wii when they can get a system which plays all the Wii titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely 2.5 times as much What does Nintendo get out of it? They get lower margins and no fringe benefits for market share and 3rd party attention in the next generation. It simply doesn't make sense outside of the third world to release a console with such low margins which competes against their own higher margin products.

Yep and I stand by the 30* stance I made. The PS2 was 6.2 Gflops peak and the PS3 is >150 Gflops peak which is about a 30* increase. Since the PS3 has 600M transistors, they ought to be able to fit ~1.2B transistors into ~100mm^2 on the 28nm process at Global Foundries which translates into roughly double the performance and probably more in real world scenarios due to much greater efficiency per transistor, high memory bandwidth etc.

*travels back to the days when PS3's were backwards compatible*

 

Why would anyone buy a PS2 when they can get a system which plays all the PS2 titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely 2.67 times as much. What does Sony get out of it? **They get lower margins** and no fringe benefits for market share and 3rd party attention in the next generation. It simply doesn't make sense outside of the third world to release a console with such low margins which competes against their own higher margin products.

 

 

** This is incorrect for the PS3/PS2 situation, why would it be the case for the Wii2/Wii situation?**



jarrod on 22 April 2010
scottie said:
Squilliam said:
scottie said:
Squilliam said:


I understand, but given the paradigm shift to gaining relatively high margins on the device itself, I cannot see them wanting to continue selling a relatively low margin $100-150 Wii alongside the N7. In addition to that they probably wouldn't want to keep a console on market for the issues of the complexity to support circa 2000 technology 12 years after release with software.

Who would buy a $150 Wii when you could get a $200-$250 N7 with 30* the performance and with whatever new innovative features they might add?

 

High margins on hardware is hardly a paradigm shift. Infact one could argue that if one does a thing for their entire existence (yes, even when they sold card they made a good profit on the hardware), then continues to do it, it is exactly the opposite of a paradigm shift

 

I would certainly buy a $250 N7 over a $100 Wii, as would most of the people on this or any other forum. However, a lot of people would choose the much cheaper option. Like the PS2, the Wii will continue to get the Guitar Heroes and maddens for a long time, and it will have a massive backlog of extended audience Nintendo games

 

Also, 30 tiems the power of the Wii for the N7? Really Squilliam?

Sorry, not a paradigm shift but I couldn't think of anything better to call it.

Why would anyone buy a Wii when they can get a system which plays all the Wii titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely 2.5 times as much What does Nintendo get out of it? They get lower margins and no fringe benefits for market share and 3rd party attention in the next generation. It simply doesn't make sense outside of the third world to release a console with such low margins which competes against their own higher margin products.

Yep and I stand by the 30* stance I made. The PS2 was 6.2 Gflops peak and the PS3 is >150 Gflops peak which is about a 30* increase. Since the PS3 has 600M transistors, they ought to be able to fit ~1.2B transistors into ~100mm^2 on the 28nm process at Global Foundries which translates into roughly double the performance and probably more in real world scenarios due to much greater efficiency per transistor, high memory bandwidth etc.

*travels back to the days when PS3's were backwards compatible*

 

Why would anyone buy a PS2 when they can get a system which plays all the PS2 titles, upscales them, plugs into the TV via HDMI and plays all the newer titles for merely 2.67 times as much. What does Sony get out of it? **They get lower margins** and no fringe benefits for market share and 3rd party attention in the next generation. It simply doesn't make sense outside of the third world to release a console with such low margins which competes against their own higher margin products.

 

 

** This is incorrect for the PS3/PS2 situation, why would it be the case for the Wii2/Wii situation?**

GBA makes a better example imo.  People were still buying it for years after DS launch (remember the GBA vs PS3 NPD battles of 2007?), and it was just $50 less than a DS that did everything it did and more.



valen200 on 22 April 2010
HappySqurriel said:

As has already been said, it depends on what you mean by "how long does each console have left on the market?"

I could be wrong but I expect that you will have Nintendo or Microsoft releasing a new console in 2011 or 2012, and the remaining manufacturers will release their next console the following year.

All three consoles have sold enough hardware that (as long as their next generation system is backwards compatible) I suspect there will still be games on store shelves for these systems until 2015 at the earliest; and the Wii might still have software in stores (mostly in bargain bins) for a few years after that.

While many people will probably disagree with me, I think that the PS3 has the greatest risk of rapidly declining hardware sales after the next generation of consoles is released. Unless the PS3 continues to see rapid large price reductions, the PS3 could still be a relatively expensive console which has less processing power, features and is simply “less cool” in comparison to the new consoles; and that makes the PS3 a difficult sell to a lot of consumers. Systems like the Playstation, PS2, Gameboy/Gameboy Color, and Gameboy Advance were able to see decent sales for several years after their successor was released in a large part because they were such cost-effective gaming; many of these systems could be bought for $100 (or less) and you could pick up a massive collection of games (both new and used) for $5 to $20 a piece.

Well with the Xbox to 360 transition Microsoft just quit making the system to encourage upgradeing. Now this gen they have performed much  better overall, so maybe they won't try something similar but I do think it is possible Microsfot might try to force an upgrade again by stopping the 360 production. I could see the 360 thriving like the Ps2 at 100 dollars for several years, if microsoft felt inclinded to do so.

otherwise I agree with what you said.

 

Ps2s are still on the shelf after all this time. $100 dollar systems with a good library can fair quite well.

 



"But as always, technology refused to be dignity's bitch."--Vance DeGeneres

 

http://cheezburger.com/danatblair/lolz/View/4772264960

Around the Network
jarrod on 22 April 2010
valen200 said:
HappySqurriel said:

As has already been said, it depends on what you mean by "how long does each console have left on the market?"

I could be wrong but I expect that you will have Nintendo or Microsoft releasing a new console in 2011 or 2012, and the remaining manufacturers will release their next console the following year.

All three consoles have sold enough hardware that (as long as their next generation system is backwards compatible) I suspect there will still be games on store shelves for these systems until 2015 at the earliest; and the Wii might still have software in stores (mostly in bargain bins) for a few years after that.

While many people will probably disagree with me, I think that the PS3 has the greatest risk of rapidly declining hardware sales after the next generation of consoles is released. Unless the PS3 continues to see rapid large price reductions, the PS3 could still be a relatively expensive console which has less processing power, features and is simply “less cool” in comparison to the new consoles; and that makes the PS3 a difficult sell to a lot of consumers. Systems like the Playstation, PS2, Gameboy/Gameboy Color, and Gameboy Advance were able to see decent sales for several years after their successor was released in a large part because they were such cost-effective gaming; many of these systems could be bought for $100 (or less) and you could pick up a massive collection of games (both new and used) for $5 to $20 a piece.

Well with the Xbox to 360 transition Microsoft just quit making the system to encourage upgradeing. Now this gen they have performed much  better overall, so maybe they won't try something similar but I do think it is possible Microsfot might try to force an upgrade again by stopping the 360 production. I could see the 360 thriving like the Ps2 at 100 dollars for several years, if microsoft felt inclinded to do so.

otherwise I agree with what you said.

 

Ps2s are still on the shelf after all this time. $100 dollar systems with a good library can fair quite well.

 

No, they killed Xbox 1 because they were still taking a loss on each unit due to nVidia royalties.  The market actually wanted Xbox to last longer, and consoles started getting scarce and selling at a premium by mid 2006.

Microsoft's in an entirely different position with 360.  They make money on the hardware, they own all the chips, they're the defatco lead platform for the industry and they're strongly ahead of PlayStation in the west.



TheNoobHolocaust on 22 April 2010

Wii - 4 years, I don't expect to see a Wii HD, Wii 2(we'll call it that even though I doubt it will be anything like the Wii) will release in 2014, at that point Nintendo will phase out the new best selling console of all time, the Wii.

360 - 3 years, I have a feeling they will begin development Xbox 720 roughly a year after PS3 catches 360 in sales, which has a good chance of happening next year, so Xbox 720 would release in 2013.

PS3 - 6 years, even when PS4 comes out, which I expect to come in 2014, Sony will continue to support PS3 and stretch its lifespan to 10 years.




Get your Portable ID!

Carl on 22 April 2010
Squilliam said:
Xbox 360: ~4 years
PS3: ~4 years
Wii: ~2 years.

I simply don't expect Nintendo to keep the Wii on the market after the successor is released.

I agree with this. Although the 360's lifespan IMO depends on if Natal flops or becomes huge. If Natal fails, i would lower it to 2/3.

My reasons for the Wii -

The Wii is selling mainly from Nintendo support. Not the 3rd party support like SNES, PSone, PS2...

With poor 3rd party support on Wii (when compared to other consoles), and with Nintendo focusing on N6, i can't see there being THAT much more interest in Wii for new buyers... As the next "Wii Sports", "Wii Fit", Mario... Will all be releasing on the next console.

And i think Sony will keep the PS3 on the market for a loooong time, i also think that the public will want to continue buying it. It has or will have 3D, Motion Control gaming, excellent graphics, Blu-ray. And it is STILL yet to reach a mass market pricepoint.

I think when it does reach $200 (along with a REAL slimline console), we will see the true potential of the system.



                            

dunno001 on 22 April 2010

Hmm... some people's guesses make me think that they expect absolutely no tail for some systems. But for total time left on market well, let's see...

Wii: 4.5 years. I don't quite see it lasting as long as the PS2 in the post-gen market, but I see a new Wii for release in 2012, maybe holiday 2011 if things go weird sooner.

X360: 4 years. I see Natal being different enough from what's out there to generate renewed interest in the system. I also predict holiday 2012 for the 720.

PS3: 3.5 years. I think Sony has learned from all the mistakes of the PS3, and will not use them all with the PS4. I see PS4 as being backwards compatible and released at a lower price. The slim margins on the PS3, coupled with reduced interest in some markets, will result in Sony trying to phase it out on a high note, before letting it become the "bargain system gasping for breath."



-dunno001

-On a quest for the truly perfect game; I don't think it exists...

jarrod on 22 April 2010
Carl2291 said:

The Wii is selling mainly from Nintendo support. Not the 3rd party support like SNES, PSone, PS2...

With poor 3rd party support on Wii (when compared to other consoles), and with Nintendo focusing on N6, i can't see there being THAT much more interest in Wii for new buyers... As the next "Wii Sports", "Wii Fit", Mario... Will all be releasing on the next console.

Again, this thinking is almost entirely debunked by GBA.  That platform has worse 3rd party support than Wii does, and lived a healthy 3 years after DS launched on the back of Nintendo support almost single handedly.  Would you like me to repost the list I made for in that other thread Carl?