The complaints we are hearing about Nintendo’s under supply and Sony’s oversupply (i.e., constrained supply in Sony-speak) cause me to wonder if maybe video game companies would be better to go back to the old staggered regional release dates.  I know there are good reasons for a world launch, it’s the internet age, companies don’t want any consumers to feel left out, they don’t want poor sales in one region to adversely affect consumer interest in another region, they risk angering regional 3^rd parties whose region is last, and so forth.

I’m beginning to think though that the benefits of launching in one region 4-6 months ahead of the second and then 2 or so months before the third would have outweighed the costs for all three companies.  Here are my reasons:

Microsoft-  Launching in America first would have given them an opportunity to fix their shoddy manufacturing before it caused issues in Japan and Europe.  Japan just cares about quality and Europe is Sonyland, poor quality is all many Euros need to ignore the 360.  Microsoft could have fully supplied demand in the US (as I recall it was sold out until Feb 06, I may be wrong), creating a boomlet that 3^rd party companies could use to generate great first year sales.  MS could use that to gain support from Japanese and Euro 3^rd party devs.  MS would have also had more time to get Japan/Europe specific games ready for launch instead of trying to get Japanese to pay $500 to play CoD2.

Sony-  Launching in Japan only last November with the US in say September and Europe in November would have allowed Sony to fully satisfy initial demand instead of only tossing 80k units to the Japanese.  Sony would also have learned from the sharp sales drop off that followed launch that the system was too expensive.  A year would have given them time to get the price down to $450-500 by eliminating features and better design so they didn’t see the same effect in NA and EU.  They would have also had more time to get more games than Resistance and Motorstorm out. The third party companies would likely be treading somewhat more gingerly towards the Wii at the moment since poor sales in the US would not have already happened.  Sony could write off low sales in Japan as mistakes that are being corrected.  They would have also discovered the 20GB model was a waste of money before it made around a million of them.

Nintendo-  I don’t see any way they could have launched in the US this year since I don’t think they would have made their home market wait, especially not if the PS3 launched in Japan first.  Had Nintendo done that Japan would easily have the 3-4 million Wiis they could demand by now.  Nintendo would have realized that producing 1 million Wiis a month was not going to be sufficient for the world market.  They would be increasing supply right now, just as they are, but it would be before the system launched in the US.  I don’t think a June US launch would have been crazy, it would be just as summer begins and the Wii is cheap enough to be a non-Christmas purchase for many.  Nintendo would have had Pokemon at launch, and the big guns would be ready for the Wii’s first holiday season.  Then Nintendo could have supplied America’s initial 4-5 million demand and been stockpiling for a healthy September Europe launch and holiday sales.  They would have learned early that they weren’t producing enough Wiimotes and Nunchuks nor producing them at the best ratio.  Nintendo could have used the buzz and interest the Wii created in Japan along with its great sales there to lean on 3^rd party devs to have good Wii games ready for its launch in NA/EU (I know that’s contrary to Sony using Japan sales to counter 3^rd party drift to the Wii but I’m looking at it from each companies perspective, which are different).

Basically, each company would do as they did before, use their first region to test market their systems, find its flaws, get production going at a more accurate rate, get games ready, and then launch prepared in the next 2 markets.  I know there are a lot of complaints about Nintendo not making enough systems but if I’m not mistaken they’ve sold more systems in the first 4 months globally than any other in history (I don’t mean JP first 4 months + NA first 4 months + EU first 4 months).  I could be mistaken since the lack of US historical charts on VGChartz makes it difficult to say at the moment.  On the other hand Sony wouldn’t have walked so blindly into the sales drop off like they did had they had more time to digest the lessons of Japan only.  Granted this means we would still be waiting for the Wii and PS3 in the US and Europe. 

Anyways, anything I may be missing, overstating, understating here? 

when you have 2 mill supply, then make a world wide launch.

Good topic.

In a way, Im all for regional launches (rather than global ones) except for one point:

Because I live in Australia, I (and other gamers here) get shafted. There is nothing more frustrating than waiting for a "local" release of something that has come out in Japan 12 months (or more) ago, and the US 6-9 months ago. Places in Europe are even worse than us.

With a global launch, because Im a keen enough gamer I can be "rewarded" with a console around the global launch time - because Im willing to preorder/line up at midnight. I really like this.

The downside is (global launch again), without a "big" local launch (lots of units, etc..) there isn't a chance for everyone else to get excited about the product. 

...

Much of it comes down to demand and marketing dollar spends. If your demand greatly exceeds supply, you might as well do local launches. You may need to focus on one territory for 6 months or until demand dies down. This delays launches in other countries, and if you are "competing" for market share - this can hurt.

...

I personally think Nintendo did the right thing with the Wii. They have a very simple problem, which is a good one to have - demand is FAR outstripping expected demand (and supply). They can't lose really, just crank up their manufacturing - and in 12 months time, will be a really strong (and profitable) position.

Yeah one of the problems with staggered launches is even the US wouldn't get new systems for half a year after Japan.  So it's sort of replacing the current shortages with universal shortages.  Then again at least we would get a system that has games to play at launch, rather than having to play CoD2, Zelda, or Resistance for 4 months.

@Hus

Didn't Nintendo have 2 million before launch?  The Wii has sold over 6 million after just over 4 months of 1 million units a month production.  Maybe they should wait for 3 million?

I would say worldwide launches are best. However, they should be met with the planning showed more by Nintendo than sony/MS.

MS rushed the product with no where near the expected demand available.

Sony did not have a worldwide launch. They realized that they would make the same mistake MS did and decided to hold back on EU/AUS. Thier stock levels reached ok levels in January or within 2 mos of launch. Which isn't really that bad or out of the ordinary.

Nintendo really tried to do it right. They aimed, and nearly got, 4m out in a little over a month. Under any other system launch that probably would have been really good for normalized stock to be seen in January. However, they completely didn't see the huge demand and thus are now scrambling to quickly increase production before PS3 gets any big guns on the table and tries to make a comeback.

Basically, if it is done right with a huge amount of stock released on launch, it should be fine. However, judging that initial amount of stock is the tricky part. PArt of the buzz that has helped the Wii has been its worldwide launch. The reports of being sold out world wide and lines in every region, created a lot of positive free news. 

Yeah this is definitely ONE area that Microsoft innovated.

Microsoft is an outsider trying to shake up the establishment and ushering in the worldwide launch forced the other companies to follow suit with. Their desire to shorten gaming generations to an average of 4 years instead of 5 is how they got the headstart on the competition which intentionally or unintentionally gave them this solid base they gathered. No one to compare to and a whole year to build up library and respect.

This was most probably pointed at Sony as Microsoft's whole reason for doing what they do in this biz is to cut Sony off at the pass. If MS launched in league with the competition they'd be nowheresville and Sony would look a lot stronger than it is right now. The systems are aiming for the same audience and are executing the same approach. The only difference is brandname.

In reality we STILL DO sorta have staggered launches just that the staggers are a lot closer together than in times past. Instead of months apart it's now weeks apart. We really can't go back to oldstyle launches anymore due to internet. Games may be able to stagger like that more but systems in this highly competitive period doing that would end up being self-defeating. Sony coulda moved more PS3's in Europe if they put something together last November. Even if just 10,000 units. It'd make it look rare and the hot go-to item. PS3's in a lottery system. ANYTHING but what they did! The buzz cooled because the world's closer together technologically than it used to be. Many a time I could just hop on to Yahoo messenger and talk to people in Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Finland, Australia. No charge.

Before Microsoft changed the game you could still do this. Now like with air conditioning and microwaves there's no turning back. And Nintendo knew it as well. Wii wouldn't have been as buzzworthy if the launch separations were too far apart. They would have heard people badmouthing it dismissing it and let that influence their decision. For once Nintendo's strategy was influenced by the actions of another company. Nintendo jumped on board with upstart Microsoft's industry change and made it work for them. Sony should have not stuck to the old rules.

Now people expect launches closer together and soon they'll want games to come out closer together as well. ESPECIALLY in those poor neglected PAL regions. You guys have my sympathy.

John Lucas 

At my point of view, global launches are good thing. Even if supply is insufficient, this anyway offers even a chance to get the console early. Situation with the Wii is pretty strange in the PAL regions, here we are used to it, that when a console comes out, there's a lot of games available, or if not available, a lot of games is short only from release date since games have been out a long time in Japan or NA. To think of business strategies, global launch isn't necessarily good thing. You can play it safe when you have regional releases. For Wii global launch has been good thing, but PS3 could have had more benefit from 3 regional lauches. Personally i would like to see global game launches instead of global console launches. In PAL regions, which usually gets all the games last, you get stuck in a just released game and try to find some help from the internet, you get guides for 100% walkthrough. Doesn't feel so new game anymore. They should make the localization before game release, although this makes game more risky if it doesn't sell good enough.

After seeing Sonys launch, I now believe the global launch isn't a good thing for all companies. For MS and Nintendo, they could of done better by doing a staggered launch.

Microsoft:

US: Launch first on the same day/period as they did, but route all of the systems to the US. This would of given MS about 60k more systems via Japan and 200-250k systems via Europe in November. Also, this would of given them around 60k from Japan, and another 190-250k from Europe. This would of allowed MS to sell around 500k more systems in the holiday period. MS could of put out 500k more systems than that and still of sold them in Nov-Dec, as there was no word of defects (upto that point), and consumers were still hype-happy with the machine.

Europe: The 360 launched to decent fanfare only to have mediocre sales about 3-4 months in. If MS could of launched in March when GRAW came out, it would of possibly meant holiday-like sales. Sony has proven that you can launch mid-year and do good. If MS would of waited until March, it could of given the US much-needed supply without affecting the Europeans.

Japan: The big MS blunder for global launch. MS basically let 60k unsold systems stay in Japan, when in the US, they would of been bought in about 3 hours. Why was the launch as bad as it was? Games. Pure and simple. Look at the charts when EM and DOA4 came out. They weren't uber-games, but having them at actual launch would of helped tremendously. MS could of sold 90k or more if they would of launched with just these 2 games, and seen bigger sales. Would it mean MS would be 1m units ahead of what it is now? No. But holding it back could of easily given such a horrible system a bit more sales (maybe 50k more than it has as of now)

 Nintendo:

Nintendo did what it could as of right now. Sales are great everywhere. However, since Sony delayed their PAL launch, if I was Nintendo, I would of done the same, and moved the PAL launch as well. This would mean 500k more units to a US and Japan that is starved for Wiis. The European demand is there, but I'd rather ratchet up dominance in Japan, and try to make inroads on MS quicker if I was MS....But that's me..

 The BIG question about next generation:

If more consoles see global launches, they MUST MUST MUST MUST MUST, increase SUPPLY before doing such! Every system is selling good, yes, but they are all losing sales due to no units being on the shelves. The 360 did great in Nov-Dec because PS3s were to expensive, and Wiis were nowhere to be seen. MS and Nintendo expecially (if they released systems to similar fanfare next generation) need far more consoles at launch. Nintendo could of easily had another 3-5m units in November sold if they had the systems. MS could of sold nearly the same in the US and Europe. Sony did right by the PAL launch - although sales are probably lagging now, they've ALREADY out-sold Japan in a mere 3 weeks. That's uncanny. It's not like the PS3 launch was just mediocre - 600k systems is HUGE for a region that is typically pidgeonholed when it comes to units. Nintendo sends the least of their units here (with good reason due to poor sales, typically), and MS really isn't trying as hard as they should.

So really what we need to see are STRATEGIC launches versus global launches. Each region needs to be analyized about what games they like, their affinity for the system, then referenced with sales. Japan didn't need 120k systems, but the US needed 120k more. Europe needed the delay in the PS3 because demand would of died down quickly (as it has) in January, and would of left Sony with the same numbers of systems sold (as of now), but far less momentum in europe.