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

Which do you like more?

Wii 132 34.74%
 
PS2 248 65.26%
 
Total:380
larrysdirtydrawss on 29 July 2014

this is even a question?.. the massive diverse library and endless exclusives from so many devs that weren't even 1st party, keep giving for years and years on the ps2



Around the Network
Azhraell on 29 July 2014
Faxanadu said:
The problem is Nintendo's product quality. Since Wiis almost never broke, no need to purchase a replacement.

As I heard, that was rather different with the PS2, hence the extended lifecycle. Limited BC from PS3 made that effect probably even more pronounced.

If we were talking about Gamecube or N64, that's ok. I don't know what will happen with my wii u in some years but at least for know it gives confidence of a long/permanent life, something that can't be said about Wii at all.

PS2 numbers seems about right given the huge amount of software that sold in its lifetime, almost 3 more games per console than wii.



TheLastStarFighter on 30 July 2014
Shadow1980 said:
TheLastStarFighter said:

You're getting very specific with numbers despite having nothing to base it on.  There certainly were some blue ocean people who picked up Wii's, but the ridiculously high sales of games like MKWii, NSMBWii and other classic style games - along with the major hype in the gaming community that existed during Wii's launch (remember the long lines at e3 2006?) and the slow early sales of PS360 tells me that the bulk of Wii's success came from the "mass market" portion of the gaming community.  People that grew up with NES or SNES but moved on to PS2's decided to give the more adult, sleek and high-tech looking Wii a try after skipping the purple gamecube.  Nostalgia was big in pushing Wii, and Nintendo was ahead of the curve with online service and the Virtual Console was a big selling point for these displaced older Nintendo fans.  But once homes got HDTV's and cool titles from 3rd parties (like COD and GTA) were only available on PS360, those same consumers began to pick up a new, more powerful console.  Those same consumers were also slow to look at Wii U as a worthwile update to their PS360.

This is what I've observed en masse in my part of Canada and it makes perfect sense.  Those that say the bulk of Wii owners were nursing home folks who bought it for Wii Sports have nothing to support this.  Wii's attach rate was similar to other systems, with average consumers buying over 9 games while PS2, PS3 and 360 owners buy just over 10 games.  To me this suggests the portion of grandma's who bought Wii for Wii bowling was about 10%.


Thank you. Somebody else gets it. The idea that the Wii was bought primarily by this "blue ocean" demographic of "casuals" and non-gamers that appeared out of nowhere and disappeared just as quickly never sat well with me. Everything from the attach rate of the Wii to the types of (non-bundled) games that sold well to the sales curves of the Wii and the fact that it appeared to delay the peaks of the 360 and PS3 (the Wii had a normal peak, while the 360 & PS3 not peaking until 5-6 years after launch was anything but normal) and various other factors all seem to suggest that the Wii was bought primarily by "traditional" or "core" gamers that buy other systems. I think the Wii just happened to have the right combination of price, marketing, games, and a gimmick that clicked with gamers, and the system ended up being a second console for a lot of gamers.

Yeah, people often draw conclusions without facts.  A few feel-good stories on evening news about old people playing Wii Tennis  and everyone lumps it with that.  But most of us core gamers were enthrawled with Wii upon release and maybe a bit pissed off when Sony announced the pricing of PS3 ( I know I was).  We also didn't know things that are clear in hindsight, such as Wii wouldn't get 3rd party support (there were a flood of early titles like RE4) and that COD would become so big.  People will believe what they want to believe, however, and their memories are short.



TheLastStarFighter on 30 July 2014
padib said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
DerNebel tride to pull a fast one.

Good job sidetracking.  So you agree that the PS1 and Wii have extremely similar sales lives?  The sales of Wii U and PS2 have nothing to do with it.  Further, as I've said in this thread, the successor to Wii from the mass-market perspective was the PS360.  Most consumers don't care about the brand.  They bought a Wii, then they bought a PS360 once they became cheaper and they had an HDTV making the systems worthwhile.  PS360 post-2010 has more practical relevance to Wii in the way that PS2 did to PS1 than Wii U ever had.

You're a fantastic poster and I almost always agree with your intelligent posts.

You are right, he's dead wrong and you and I as well as many others know it. Don't bother as he will never admit it.

Thanks, and I mostly played along with him because it was entertaining :)



STRYKIE on 01 August 2014
Faxanadu said:
The problem is Nintendo's product quality. Since Wiis almost never broke, no need to purchase a replacement.

As I heard, that was rather different with the PS2, hence the extended lifecycle. Limited BC from PS3 made that effect probably even more pronounced.

This is a... weird (to literally say the least) evalutation of why the Wii's legs fell short.

The reason why the Wii's hardware defects aren't well documented is pretty much because each system sold in high quantities last generation. The generation beforehand, for every Gamecube sold, there were 5-6 PS2s in the hands of the mass market, and it was quite simply inevitable that reports of defective PS2s would be far more widespread (I omit the OG Xbox here due to the abrupt circumstances in which it was discontinued and aligned numbers became a gray area from 2005 onwards, not to mention MS today tends to tip-toe away from remembering it ever existed). You can't have 25 million defective Gamecubes if there aren't 25 million GCs to begin with. And I can sure as hell tell you from personal experience that Sony didn't magically start making 'better product quality' disc drives with the PS3. 





Bet with Einsam_Delphin: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=172355&page=11

Around the Network
Shootdatrupee on 01 August 2014
bubblegamer said:
The PS2 was unmatched and the best console. However that poll will choose the Wii due to the numbers of Nintendo fans on this site. So no need to wait for the poll results.

Well it seems like PS2 has more votes!





AZWification on 02 August 2014
Viper1 said:
gcube2000 said:

really? wow that's insane that they said that. even im a nintendo fan and I wouldn't be that crazy to predict such a number.


No Nintendo fan did.   John Lucas made such a prediction and we all (Nintendo fans included) thought he was nuts.

Oh, John Lucas! He came back earlier this year just to make a MJ thread and then he left again! He was a really entertaining user!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Cobretti2 on 02 August 2014

well if Wii had as much 3rd party backing that the PS2 did who knows where it would have stopped.



 

 

AnthonyW86 on 02 August 2014
gcube2000 said:

Wii fell behind PS2 by having terrible legs.

The first PS2 FY is only a month of sales in Japan, so it makes it look a bit disorted. PS2's sceond FY includes 4-5 months of sales in the rest of the world, just like Wii's first FY.  And when you match FY sales after worldwide release a funny thing happens:

 

1st FY   PS2- (9.20) 10.61       Wii- (5.84) 5.84

2nd FY  PS2- (18.07) 28.68     Wii- (18.61) 24.45

3rd FY   PS2- (22.52) 51.20     Wii- (25.54) 50.39

4th FY   PS2- (20.10) 71.30     Wii- (20.54) 70.93

5th FY   PS2- (16.17) 87.47     Wii- (15.08) 86.01

6th FY   PS2- (16.22) 103.69     Wii- (9.84) 95.85

7th FY   PS2- (14.20) 117.89     Wii- (3.99) 99.84

 

You can still clearly see that Wii sold faster in a certain period, and if we factor in PS2's half year head start in Japan the Wii did get in front at some point. But it actually wasn't ever by more than a few million.(if you can find some proper Japan sales numbers for 2000 you could probably calculate by how much exactly).



gcube2000 on 02 August 2014
AnthonyW86 said:
gcube2000 said:

Wii fell behind PS2 by having terrible legs.

The first PS2 FY is only a month of sales in Japan, so it makes it look a bit disorted. PS2's sceond FY includes 4-5 months of sales in the rest of the world, just like Wii's first FY.  And when you match FY sales after worldwide release a funny thing happens:

 

1st FY   PS2- (9.20) 10.61       Wii- (5.84) 5.84

2nd FY  PS2- (18.07) 28.68     Wii- (18.61) 24.45

3rd FY   PS2- (22.52) 51.20     Wii- (25.54) 50.39

4th FY   PS2- (20.10) 71.30     Wii- (20.54) 70.93

5th FY   PS2- (16.17) 87.47     Wii- (15.08) 86.01

6th FY   PS2- (16.22) 103.69     Wii- (9.84) 95.85

7th FY   PS2- (14.20) 117.89     Wii- (3.99) 99.84

 

You can still clearly see that Wii sold faster in a certain period, and if we factor in PS2's half year head start in Japan the Wii did get in front at some point. But it actually wasn't ever by more than a few million.(if you can find some proper Japan sales numbers for 2000 you could probably calculate by how much exactly).

Wii sold faster in the early years. Thus it has terrible legs by dropping around 5 million every Fiscal Year since the 4th. PS2 only dropped 1 or 2 million in its last few fiscal years. Heck it even rose slightly in its 6th FY