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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - FACTS vs. FICTION – Volume 1

johnlucas said:
Seece said:

Skimmed your post, your maths leaves much to be desired, born in 88 (greatest year ever).

None of what you say has any logic in it, how powerful the 360 is or what it sells today (or the last 7 years) has absolutely nothing to do with how Playstation or N64 sold.

And with that I'm done. Until you start answering the questions people actually want answering, and not falling into your "debates" there is no point to your threads.

One last shot tho, go on, ignore this question and really show us you have no idea what the future holds.

How, and when, will WiiU beat PS4. Don't write me a novel, aboslutely no need. Just a couple of sentances. (That don't involve irrelevent guff about "power").


Skimmed because you can't debate it.
FACTS are hard to get around.

And I told you on my wall what you have to do to get that conversation going.
You get my UNITY thread reopened & we can discuss that situation.

This is not the UNITY thread Seece.
Keep it on topic.

If it's not related to the 5 subjects I discussed in the opening thread...

1: Reality of the Second System
2: Microsoft unbundling Kinect
3: Truth of the "Traditional Controller"
4: Japanese Market is Capital of Videogame Industry
5: Most Powerful Console Never Wins

...then you're derailing the thread & disrupting the conversation.


You wanna discuss my predictions & general analysis on 8th gen race?
You know what you have to do.

Reopen my UNITY thread.
John Lucas

I am not a mod, I didn't get it locked and I don't have the power to unlock it.

Many suspect it was you that had that thread locked as it wasn't going your way.



 

Around the Network

johnlucas said:

-Snip-

More to come in Volume 2...

John Lucas


First things first, you need a really good editor. You're terribly guilty of prolixity.

Second System:

As far as I can tell, the effect of the second system theory would be very minimal.

-It only includes gamers who buy multiple systems.

-It only includes gamers who are swayed by exclusives.

-It only includes gamers interested in Nintendo franchises and the Wii U hardware.

This sub-section of the market is not large enough to have a significant impact on LT sales.

So if 'exclusivity is key', and the PS4 and Xbox One also have titles you can't play anywhere else, why will Wii U titles be more of an incentive to gamers with only one other system?

The Wii U does not have the traction, novelty, word of mouth, advertising or mass market appeal of it's predecessor. As a result, it's a less appealing product and has less of a differentiation factor to the Xbox One and PS4. Or as the Wii had- the perception of gaming systems in general.

'Wii60' is about as relevant as presenting data taken from a vgchartz forum poll. The focus, like the second system theory, is far too limited.

So, it is a consolation prize. A largely irrelevant one.

Japan is the Captial of the videogame industry:

A Capital implies an area of greater importance. Gaming doesn't need a capital, or a complete reliance on only one territory- a market for publishers or hardware manufactures to focus predominantly on. It's global. The manufacturer or publisher with the stronger global appeal and presence, wins out. It's much the same for many other industries. As it stands, all of the console manufactures could survive without Japan.

Saying Nintendo is the ruler of the gaming market, is to say Sony is the ruler of electronics. Times change, and they have changed. This is actually an extremely important point for you. You rigidly cite gaming trends of the past, using examples from gaming history to strengthen your theories, while at the same time predicting new and unprecedented events to occur. Which is it? If history lays out a blueprint for all to come, how are you also predicting completely new things, that follow no previous trends, to materialize?

Which leads into...

The strongest console never wins:

The inference appears valid. But it's based on the past, and the future can be different (times change) so an argument can be made that it's not valid.

The main point is one you questioned yourself "Maybe just maybe raw horsepower is not the key to victory in the videogaming medium".

The PS4 is not selling on raw power alone. It's an advantage it holds, but the theory that the strongest console never wins, is again, like the second system and Japan is the Capital theories, far too limited in it's scope.

The PS4 may be the strongest console, but it's also competitively priced. It actually launched cheaper than the Xbox One, and is only marginally more expensive than a Wii U. It's already gained massive support from third parties (if you consult gaming history what has that achieved?) and has so far rode of wave of very positive feedback, word of mouth and PR. Sony have entered this generation with a vastly improved online infrastructure, excellent marketing and a much stronger first party development team.

A single pattern that has thusfar existed (for rather obvious reasons) does not negate all the other patterns and trends that we can see pointing to success. It's simply not the be all end all, there is no rational reason to believe so.



 

Dallinor said:


First things first, you need a really good editor. You're terribly guilty of prolixity.

Second System:

As far as I can tell, the effect of the second system theory would be very minimal.

-It only includes gamers who buy multiple systems.

-It only includes gamers who are swayed by exclusives.

-It only includes gamers interested in Nintendo franchises and the Wii U hardware.

This sub-section of the market is not large enough to have a significant impact on LT sales.

So if 'exclusivity is key', and the PS4 and Xbox One also have titles you can't play anywhere else, why will Wii U titles be more of an incentive to gamers with only one other system?

The Wii U does not have the traction, novelty, word of mouth, advertising or mass market appeal of it's predecessor. As a result, it's a less appealing product and has less of a differentiation factor to the Xbox One and PS4. Or as the Wii had- the perception of gaming systems in general.

'Wii60' is about as relevant as presenting data taken from a vgchartz forum poll. The focus, like the second system theory, is far too limited.

So, it is a consolation prize. A largely irrelevant one.


Yeah I'm wordy I know. Got so much to say & so little time to say it. Working on it, Dallinor.
By the way THANK YOU for intelligently discussing the points I made. It makes for a better debate. Here we go...

The second system effect is NOT irrelevant ESPECIALLY in this generation.
I spoke about Uncanny Valley effect in an earlier reply to someone here.
PlayStation 4 & XBox One are TOO CLOSE to resembling both PC & each other for them to overlap any significant degree.
I CONSTANTLY hear the "PC Master Race" guys look down on these 2 platforms since by default nature PC is the most powerful platform & nearly the entire libraries of the consoles exist ON the PC yet run BETTER & STRONGER.

It's like a teenage boy preening around like he's a grown man. Puffing his chest out, straining to put the bass in his adolescent voice, pointing out the peach fuzz on his top lip.
Nobody's buying the act. This is how many PC gamers see the PS4 & XOne. As POSERS.

Uncanny Valley effect is being too close to an image without being exact.
Your mind is prepped to see a particular being but certain details are off & it throws off that expectation in a creepy way.
The further away you are from the image of that expected being the better.
Your mind is not expecting that being & accepts what's presented as is.
A realistic depiction of a person with dead-looking eyes disgusts people because they're expecting a human being.
An exaggerated cartoony abstract of a person is accepted because we have no expectation of it being real.
That's why Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within bombed at the box office. The eyes looked dead & Square was trying to pass it off as realistic.

Wii U doesn't pretend to be PC-like so it's more accepted by PC gamers because of its authentic presentation.
It's not trying to bleat on & on about "1080p! 60FPS!" since that's old news to PC gamers.
It's not trying to pass itself off as the most powerful platform because it's a farce for any console to do that. PC is ALWAYS the strongest.
Wii U is not some CGI representation of a human being trying to pass itself off as a REAL human being.
It's a doll comfortable with you seeing it as a doll. It's not pretentious like that teenage boy trying to pose as a grown man.

That's the PC gamers side of the equation.

The other side is within the console world & with XBox One dismantling Kinect, the XBox One & PlayStation 4 platforms are virtually identical.
The exclusives that separate are probably not compelling enough or numerous enough for gamers to want to buy the opposing system.
Wii U on the other hand not only has NUMEROUS exclusives but COMPELLING exclusives that will be MORE of a draw than PS4's or XOne's exclusives.
I have read comment boards on financial sites talking about this game race, gamer websites, & all kinds of forums.
There were gamers totally not into buying ANY of the 8th generation consoles UNTIL that E3 2014 Nintendo Digital Event...
...And then they wanted a Wii U.

No one out-exclusives Nintendo. NO ONE. That's how 3DS shut out the Vita.
Wii U gained GREAT word of mouth in 2014. You see a LOT less of those Nintendoom articles than you used to.
It will build that appeal game by game by damn game until it is The People's Console & THE MOST electrifying console in videogame entertainment today.

You are SEVERELY underestimating that Second Console advantage.

Dallinor said:

Japan is the Captial of the videogame industry:

A Capital implies an area of greater importance. Gaming doesn't need a capital, or a complete reliance on only one territory- a market for publishers or hardware manufactures to focus predominantly on. It's global. The manufacturer or publisher with the stronger global appeal and presence, wins out. It's much the same for many other industries. As it stands, all of the console manufactures could survive without Japan.

Saying Nintendo is the ruler of the gaming market, is to say Sony is the ruler of electronics. Times change, and they have changed. This is actually an extremely important point for you. You rigidly cite gaming trends of the past, using examples from gaming history to strengthen your theories, while at the same time predicting new and unprecedented events to occur. Which is it? If history lays out a blueprint for all to come, how are you also predicting completely new things, that follow no previous trends, to materialize?


One of the easiest ways to understand why Nintendo is the Ruler is knowing that NO OTHER CONSOLE MAKER IN HISTORY has EVER been able to sustain TWO entire platforms simultaneously generation after generation.
No one has really mastered the home console + handheld console combo that Nintendo is known for.
Many try but they don't succeed. And Sony is indeed in that 'Try' group. PSP was a high-selling failure.
They publicly gave up on producing for the Vita last year, remember? At best it will only end up as a 3DS alternative in Japan only.

ANOTHER way to know this is to check every player in the videogame market & ask the question "What happens if they don't have the 3rd party on their side?"
Sega crumbled without the 3rd Party on Saturn & Dreamcast. NEC/Hudson Soft crumbled without the 3rds on PC Engine/TurboGrafx-16.
3DO crumbled. Bandai crumbled on Wonderswan. Atari crumbled on Jaguar. SNK crumbled on the NeoGeo & NeoGeo Pocket.
Who's the only one who could survive AND EVEN THRIVE without the 3rd party?
You know who. Dem Kyoto boyz who make da hanafuda cardz.

Those who don't accept Nintendo as the leader of this business may never understand the FACT about Japan being the Capital.
So I understand the gap. Many see Nintendo as a dinosaur waiting to die. Others see them as merely 'a player' in the market.
The FACT is that they are the DESIGNER of this market. They built this market in this way 30 years ago.

But that just talks about the core reason why Japan still matters.
I also said that TWO out of your THREE console makers are based in Japan—Nintendo & Sony from Japan,  Microsoft from America.
Sony being in this business along with other Japanese entities add extra layers reinforcing this reality.

Japan going mobile was happening in the early 2000s WAY before the rest of the world really got into the mobile craze.
It's not the biggest market in population but it has the biggest influence.

Microsoft CANNOT survive without Japan & Sony ESPECIALLY cannot.
Microsoft entire goal with the XBox is to unseat Japanese consoles & return focus to PCs in America where videogaming was born.
That's what The Manhattan Project AKA DirectX was all about. That's what Project Midway AKA DirectX Box AKA XBox has been fighting for going on 14 years now. If they can't unseat Japan, they can't return the Capital to America.
Can't unseat Japan as long as 2 major Japanese players keep hanging around keeping Japan relevant.

Sony is making a MAJOR mistake chasing Microsoft in "The West" & that's where Nintendo will get them.
Sony's not taking care of its house. And when you don't take care of your house, another man moves in on your old lady.

When we talk about global presence, no other gaming brand is bigger than Nintendo.
What other company can keep franchises as hot as ever over 2 & 3 decades long?
You can't compete with an appeal & presence that's bigger than Disney's Mickey Mouse.
Like Corn Flakes is to Cereal...Like Coca-Cola is to Soda...Nintendo is to Gaming.

When I talk about these future trends, I know that all things go in cycles.
You can't know where you're going unless you know where you have been.

You will NEVER understand that FACT about Japan unless you accept the reality of Nintendo's place in this industry.
Nintendo is NOT The Past. Nintendo is THE PRESENT...AND THE FUTURE.

Dallinor said:

Which leads into...

The strongest console never wins:

The inference appears valid. But it's based on the past, and the future can be different (times change) so an argument can be made that it's not valid.

The main point is one you questioned yourself "Maybe just maybe raw horsepower is not the key to victory in the videogaming medium".

The PS4 is not selling on raw power alone. It's an advantage it holds, but the theory that the strongest console never wins, is again, like the second system and Japan is the Capital theories, far too limited in it's scope.

The PS4 may be the strongest console, but it's also competitively priced. It actually launched cheaper than the Xbox One, and is only marginally more expensive than a Wii U. It's already gained massive support from third parties (if you consult gaming history what has that achieved?) and has so far rode of wave of very positive feedback, word of mouth and PR. Sony have entered this generation with a vastly improved online infrastructure, excellent marketing and a much stronger first party development team.

A single pattern that has thusfar existed (for rather obvious reasons) does not negate all the other patterns and trends that we can see pointing to success. It's simply not the be all end all, there is no rational reason to believe so.


$400 is not competitively priced. That's expensive for a console. Especially with no games packed inside.
But it has benefitted because of XBox One's mistakes. $400 looks better when you're next to a console selling at $500.

We can look at last generation to see what all 3rd party support got Sony.
It got them massive losses that wrecked Sony Computer Entertainment into their current desperate state.
It got them a hard-fought 84 million units in 8 years with those billions of financial losses.
An 84 million that they might not have reached if they didn't mimic the 7th gen leader, Nintendo's Wii.
An loss-heavy 84 million that can't even match up to their 1st PlayStation from 20 years ago & its profitable 104 million units.
And I can say the same about Microsoft's never-profitable XBoxes. All those sales yet all that money loss.

Difference is Microsoft can afford to lose money with their $22 billion in profits last fiscal year.
Sony CANNOT with them having yard sales over divisions & headquarters hoping to make some extra scratch.
Microsoft's XBox One is so close to Sony's PlayStation 4 in so many ways including graphics that they will USURP Sony's position using their money muscle to do it. Them green steroids, man. They don't play!
Microsoft will buy off those mercenary 3rd party developers & publishers because it's still fighting to turn the capital back to America.
The worst thing Sony could have ever done was to put pressure on Microsoft in America.
XBox is NOTHING without America so Microsoft will fight to the death towards anyone that threatens that market.

The 2 platforms are so close together that with enough of those tactics what will be the draw to the PS4?
Microsoft's gonna undercut them in price, they're gonna steal their developers & publishers, they're gonna do every dirty trick in the book to get that headline saying "XBox One outsells PlayStation 4".
This was already shown this past holiday season.
The only thing left would be that power edge that makes the image A LITTLE bit crisper, the color A LITTLE more vibrant, the sound A LITTLE more fuller.

But power doesn't sell consoles.
And thus once again, the most powerful console NEVER wins.

You'll just have to see it for yourself.
There's not a truism stronger than that one in this business outside of "games sell consoles".

John Lucas



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

@ JL - I always enjoyed reading your passionate arguments and predictions back in the days when I lurked, and I am enjoying reading this one too - perhaps it's because of the sheer effort and volume of stuff that you put in to support it - I find it strangely uplifting in a way.

I'm not as well versed in the videogaming industry as some people here, but I'd like to offer my small input to the debate.

FICTION: Becoming everyone’s Second System is a nice consolation prize when you’re unable to become the First System.
FACT: Becoming everyone’s Second System automatically makes you the First System.

Agreed. If everyone who owns a gaming PC, X1 or PS4 then goes out and buys a Wii U, then there will be as many Wii U's out there as PC, X1 and PS4 combined, plus those who have the Wii U as their sole console. The Wii U would dominate. Maths proves that. But while Wii U's exclusivity is a very strong reason for getting one as a second console, sadly the reasons for not getting a Wii U as a second console still far outweigh it. (e.g., can't afford another console, Mario & Link don't appeal to all gamers, confused marketing, lack of advertising etc.) It's a hypothetical situation which unfortunately is unlikely to ever make it to reality.

FICTION: It was smart for Microsoft to unbundle Kinect from XBox One to improve sales.
Nintendo should do the same with Wii U & its Gamepad.
FACT: It was stupid for Microsoft to unbundle Kinect from XBox One to improve sales.
Nintendo should never & WILL NEVER do the same with Wii U & its Gamepad.

None of this is either fiction or fact. It is opinion.

FACT - By unbundling Kinect, Microsoft offer choice to consumers and a slightly more affordable price.

FACT - X1 has overtaken Wii U in sales.

Are these facts directly linked? Let's assume, for argument's sake, that they are. So in terms of sales, it would have been a smart move. But in terms of compatability with certain games, possibly not. That's why whether it's a smart move or not is down to opinion. If those two facts aren't directly linked, then even moreso.

The only thing on this topic we can be fairly certain on is that Nintendo is very unlikely to drop the Gamepad. But then Nintendo are very good at making surprise moves we don't expect.

FICTION: Nintendo should go back to making traditional controllers.
FACT: The “traditional controller” is Nintendo’s tradition.

Without doing hours of research to validate your argument, I'll buy this for now. :)

FICTION: The Japanese market is irrelevant to the videogame industry.
FACT: Japan is the CAPITAL of the videogame industry.

Your potted history  supporting this argument would make a great movie, but it's not well backed up. For example, did Microsoft really think they were buying DK when they bought Rare? Was buying Rare really a consolation move after failing to buy out Nintendo? If you can provide some links supporting that and some of the other things you've said on the subject of Japan and the videogame industry, I'd be interested to read it. Not because I'm challenging you, but because I want to be informed. Until then, I'm afraid I'm just going to be annoyingly skeptical. :)

FICTION:  PlayStation 4 will win the console wars.
FACT: The strongest console NEVER wins.

So this is what has ruffled all the feathers.

'Playstation 4 will win the console wars' is not fiction. It's not fact, either. However, it is a very strong probability based on the way things are going so far, unless unlikely or unknown events happen, just as it was with the Wii at around this point in the last generation.

'The strongest console NEVER wins' is not a fact, because the future cannot be accurately predicted. Ever seen those disclaimers on financial investment prospectuses that say 'past performance is not indicative of future returns'?

The strongest console may never have won yet, (again, I've not done the research to check that) but there's a first time for everything, and there's a very strong probability that it will happen this generation.

 

 

 

 




FICTION: The most powerful console can never win because the most powerful console has never won before.
FACT: The PS4 will win because no console with such a commanding lead has ever lost before. The Wii U will not win because no console that was in a distant third place after its second year on the market has ever won before.



Around the Network

tagged for later



 

 

badgenome said:

FICTION: The most powerful console can never win because the most powerful console has never won before.
FACT: The PS4 will win because no console with such a commanding lead has ever lost before. The Wii U will not win because no console that was in a distant third place after its second year on the market has ever won before.

FICTION: WiiU is going to sell 260 million units according to John Lucas
FACT: To my knowledge, no Nintendo system has ever peaked beyond the 3rd year. Therefore it will take an average of 30 years of WiiU selling 3m a year to beat PS4



 

johnlucas said:
Seece said:

Skimmed your post, your maths leaves much to be desired, born in 88 (greatest year ever).

None of what you say has any logic in it, how powerful the 360 is or what it sells today (or the last 7 years) has absolutely nothing to do with how Playstation or N64 sold.

And with that I'm done. Until you start answering the questions people actually want answering, and not falling into your "debates" there is no point to your threads.

One last shot tho, go on, ignore this question and really show us you have no idea what the future holds.

How, and when, will WiiU beat PS4. Don't write me a novel, aboslutely no need. Just a couple of sentances. (That don't involve irrelevent guff about "power").


Skimmed because you can't debate it.
FACTS are hard to get around.

And I told you on my wall what you have to do to get that conversation going.
You get my UNITY thread reopened & we can discuss that situation.

This is not the UNITY thread Seece.
Keep it on topic.

If it's not related to the 5 subjects I discussed in the opening thread...

1: Reality of the Second System
2: Microsoft unbundling Kinect
3: Truth of the "Traditional Controller"
4: Japanese Market is Capital of Videogame Industry
5: Most Powerful Console Never Wins

...then you're derailing the thread & disrupting the conversation.


You wanna discuss my predictions & general analysis on 8th gen race?
You know what you have to do.

Reopen my UNITY thread.
John Lucas

I could debate, just like everyone else, but you ignore TRUTH.

Also, for the last time, I did not get your thread locked, you likely did (actually why don't we get Kahn in here to clarify??) You keeping ignoring this for whatever reason ... ah I know, so you don't have to discuss WiiU sales.

Nobody cares for the conversation here Lucas, there is no point to it.



 

Seece said:
badgenome said:

FICTION: The most powerful console can never win because the most powerful console has never won before.
FACT: The PS4 will win because no console with such a commanding lead has ever lost before. The Wii U will not win because no console that was in a distant third place after its second year on the market has ever won before.

FICTION: WiiU is going to sell 260 million units according to John Lucas
FACT: To my knowledge, no Nintendo system has ever peaked beyond the 3rd year. Therefore it will take an average of 30 years of WiiU selling 3m a year to beat PS4

I believe NES peaked after its 3rd year.......so Wii U still has hope to win???



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:

I believe NES peaked after its 3rd year.......so Wii U still has hope to win???

It probably did, but only because of how staggered the launches were. Get back in your grave, Wii U!