Quantcast
Locked: Is this game over for Sony?

Forums - Sales Discussion - Is this game over for Sony?

Lord N said: It's got nothing to do with hardcore gamers. Casual gamers play games like Tekken, Devil May Cry, Gran Turismo, Halo, God Of War, Dead Rising, Armored Core, Soul Calibur, GTA, etc, and those games aren't going to see a release on the Wii for the reasons I've already given(plus the fact that some of them are Sony and Microsoft owned franchises). Other than the party games and offbeat titles, the Wii will probably be a lot like the Gamecube in that its most popular titles will be first and second party. Legend Of Zelda outshines everything it's got right now, and its most anticipated titles are Super Smash Brothers Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. Even casual gamers are going to want more than that.
The "Metroid, Mario, Smash Bros." mantra is inaccurate. Maybe "Wii Play, Mario, Animal Crossing" would be a better 3 to pick, as far as the most important games Wii has coming up.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Around the Network

celine said: I mean that not all casual gamers buy that titles and that only hardcore gamers are really interesting in resolutions or polygon count. Wii have Sonic Wild Fire , No more heroes, Resident Evil : Umbrella Chronicles ... that are all Wii exclusive that can be purchased by hardcore gamers and casual gamers too. IMO Wii have most chance to obtain casual support than other consoles. Wii thanks to low development cost and unique features can be the house of many B software that can appeal to different target ( non-gamers, lapsed gamers, hardcore gamers, casula gamers, female, elderly, child etc..). Wii strenght is not in Mario Galaxy but in many unknow titles that will be next sleeper hits. Casual gamers like novelty and this is what Wii bring. Wii is not GameCube, it have a different business strategy and I think that many people that buy only one console will take Wii because have lots more B games than Ps3 or 360. Nintendogs is a B software but outsold Halo ... My sister never buy a console, she take Wii after she saw a Wii sports session.
Nintendogs is AAA software. By "B" software I mean stuff you've never even heard of, which just hits a little niche audience, but makes up both the bulk of all games produced and the bulk of all games sold. PS2 had it in spades, and right now you're seeing some "B" games start getting made for PS2 and Wii, but not the other consoles.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

mamec said: NINTENDO ISN'T REVOLUTIONARY, IS A DINOSAUR -'Casual Gamers' topic is a myth, Microsoft launch a pad whit sensor 7 years ago and was an unsuccess, ¿how many 'casuals' purchase a PC for this?. -About 'lightgun': Time Crisis 3 for PS2 isn't a superhit for PS2, ¿How many games can be profited for lightgun?, PS2 and PC gamers NOT demand a lightgun for play. the people was not turn crazy for lightgun. Maybe is great for first person games but for the third person games such as GTA or Resident Evil suchs whit lightgun. -The analog control, no much comments (if it was introduced is for cheap and comodity), is the 'cheap mouse' of the consoles.
Lightgun? What are you talking about? Nintendo don't have a standard gamepad with motion sensers, nor a light gun, they have a remote with a pointer and motion sensers. The Wii controller is unlike anything else ever released before. Not that it matters: the past failure of other controllers with some of the same functionality was that there wasn't the games to back it up. Just like everything else, it goes back to the games.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

-I said 'lightgun' (whit '). -Please, do you have played or seen Police 24/7 (Konami,2000) at arcades?, do you have played or seen The House of the Dead 4 (Sega,2006)?, nevermind the implementation of a thecnique, becouse the final results is the impact and Wii controls suchs (none of these games seems to have a port for the home systems.). ¿how can you kick a soccer/football ball?, giving a kick to Wii mote?. -Another example: Red Steel, Namco released an arcade game whit swords and the people not turn crazy. -Wii is an old invent reaporfited such as Nintendo DS (Also Kredited As): Nintendo's Game & Watch whit PDA functions.



Round 3: What about Playstation Network and Xbox Live Arcade? Both are HUGE mediums for both systems that allow developers to make games on the cheap, distribute them cheap, and keep their costs low. Yes, a PS3 game will cost a huge amount to make, but there are other means to bring the games to the gamers. On another note, I really wonder what the true costs of making a PS3 game to a Wii or any other system will truely be. About publishers adopting the Wii: Remember how long it tpok for the DS to get major 3rd party support? 2 years from DS's launch. And thats the DS - one of the fastest selling systems in history. How quickly will devs jump on board for a system that has a 1.1m user base in America that only had a 14m userbase last generation? This is a questions dev's have to answer before they act.
You say Wii has a 1.1m user base in the US like it is something to scoff at. But that makes Nintendo basically as successful as Sony and Microsoft combined at this point from launch. And unlike Sony, Nintendo are still having sell-outs around the world. Even on PSN and XBLA, devs still have to make games in HD. Its still more expensive than producing games for the VC, at least in theory (won't know until PSN and VC original content get off the ground). And the VC is designed to build up a giant library of titles regardless of it can get developers on board for new content. There is already as much content on VC as there is on XBLA. The success of online stores is dependant on selection, and the success of videogame consoles is dependant on selection, so it stands to reason that selection will determine the success of these services as well. And just like the physical systems, it stands to reason that success snowballs. Games cause sales, sales cause developers to get on board.
Again, having that 20 or 60gb HD will come in very handy. IF people really like games that aren't pushing the envelope with the hardware, the PSN will do very well to entice developers to develop games. Programming for a PS3 with 7 cores is hard, but you can always take the Saturn route, and program with 1 SPU. Remember, 1 PS3 PSU is twice as fast as the CPU in the Wii, therefore the graphics would STILL be better, and dev costs would be very very small.
The storage capacity of the Wii is ample to store every NES game ever made; it is fine for classic content. But Nintendo's system allows unlimited re-downloads of games attached to your console's account. This allows them to forego the harddrive, and further keep costs down... And yet they still already have the online store with the most content...
Look at the MONTHLY charts first, buddy. The PS1 launched with 144k units, then only went on to sell roughly 2m units in the next year before the N64 launch. The N64 launched with nearly 400k units in sales, and beat the PS1 every month except for 1 from that September to the next August. It nearly overcame a 2m unit deficit that the PS1 had gained in the hear. However, in the next September FFVII launched and the rest is history. Get your facts straight - N64 had a superb launch, but eventually the lack of 3rd party support killed it.
I know the N64 had a better launch. It was an established brand. The lack of games on N64, regardless of whether they were first party or third party, caught up to it. Creating a superior environment and superior profit potential for developers resulted in the success of PS. And I'm not wrong to say that PS had an early lead; it did, and it never gave it up.
Yet the fact is, I seriously doubt that in the US and Europe, the non-gamer really wants to buy a game. Thus why they are a non-gamer. Yes, I am sure non-gamers would be interested in the Wii, but are they really $250 interested in it? Lets look at the facts, during the Wii launch in the US and Europe, Zelda: TP had a 85% attach rate. Zelda is NOT a non-gamer game. It is a hardcore Nintendo fanboy game. Japan has a huge casual market, thats why TP didn't do nearly what it did in the US. Not only that, we cannot actually see who makes up the Wii purchase base in the US, since Wii Play isn't out, and Wii Sports is a pack-in. Now, if Wii Sports wasn't a pack-in, and it outsold Zelda, or got very very close, we could assume that casuals bought the Wii, but we cannot. However, again, when 85% of Americans and Europeans bought Zelda, that tells me its mostly hardcore consumers that waited in line because Zelda was coming out. Not john and suzie casual.
People are non-gamers because games have not been made for them. When the games for them do show up, like Nintendogs or the Sims, they sell like hotcakes. The market is untapped, and so the few games that get released into it expand to fill this giant space, and become killer apps of the highest order. Yes, it is the existing customer buying Wii in the US and Europe at launch. But thats why it was important to have Zelda at launch, and its why Mario, Metroid and Smash are all scheduled for the first year too. Nintendo want to sell to the existing customer as much as possible in the first year, because they know from experience with the DS that it can take time to gain that casual audience. The DS was neck and neck with the PSP in worldwide sales just a year ago, and now its opened up this gigantic lead after the "casual" audience came aboard.
But certainly not in the same way. I can say the same thing about the US: No system has won the world without winning the US. PS2's fanbase in Japan actually was less than that of the PS1. Despite that, PS2 outsold PS1 in Europe and the USA. Japan isn't the trendsetter anymore. It's a huge, very important market, but it isn't the be-all end-all of gaming anymore.
The point is that the systems which first catch on in Japan oftentimes later catch on in the rest of the world. NES, PS and DS all took off like rockets in Japan before anywhere else.
We're comparing DS titles (which Nintendo has ALWAYS dominated the handheld market since they invented the market itself) to console titles....Huge difference.
Nintendo not only invented the handheld market, they reinvented it. Twice. Game Boy was predicted to fail since it was following the business plan for consoles, instead of the established handheld market of Game and Watch. And everyone knows "the handheld market is different from the console market." And then DS reinvented the handheld market again. Unlike GBC and GBA, which hit the ground running, DS had to build up slowly and prove itself. The key games on DS hit markets which handhelds had never hit before, and eventually DS reached a point where it sold faster than any Game Boy ever had.
Actually, World of Warcraft is threatening the Sims, and has a 8m PAYING MONTHLY userbasis. That earns Blizzard far more money than Maxis does with the Sims. I don't remember Sims: Hot Date selling 2.64m units w/w in 24hrs like Burning Crusade did, did you?
The "8 million paying monthly" goes back to the differences in gaming culture: lots of those are bulk subscriptions from internet cafes in China and other parts of Asia. But WoW is an interesting case, seeing that is has caught on with both gamers and non-gamers. Lots of girls play WoW because they like the chat room aspect of it. Who cares what a game sells in the first day, btw. Thats evidence of having a strong, established brand with loyal (possibly starved) fans. Halo 2 sold 2/3rd of its lifetime total in the first month, but might end up 4 or 5 million total sales behind Nintendogs, which sold better Xmas 06 than Xmas 05 in many territories.
Also, your comparing 1 Sims game with 50 expansions to just upto 3 GTA games....Huge difference there. Thats like saying "every game with mario, added together has outsold every game with Halo characters in it".
Fair enough. The Sims alone still outsold every GTA title alone.
Then why has Gears of War outsold Wii Sports, despite 1.1m copies being giveaways?
Because its a freakin' console launch. D'uh. Wii Sports is essentially sold out around the world, while Gears has sold most of what it will sell lifetime (going by sales trends of similar titles) so you can't exactly judge its sales yet. Oh, and Wii Sports actually IS more prolific than Gears already too.
Power has absolutely nothing to do with sales, nothing. No system sells due to power, or lack of it. Systems sell because of games. Power helps augment things, but it does not hurt it (unless the system is $600, like the PS3).
Thanks for seeing things my way. You don't sell a system to developers with power either. You have to deliver the end users to the developers.
Again, as I have stated, I don't think Sony is using a great strategy. Again, I believe the PS3 will lose 40% of Sonys entire fanbase. That is ungodly. No system has EVER done that poorly. Nintendo was on a downward trend from SNES to N64 to GC, but none of those systems saw more than a 33% decline in fanbase. The PS3, however, will see that. But again, my belief is that all the gains the Playstation brand gained in the past 10 years won't entirely be lost. Tons of it will, but I still just dont see it being enough to "dethrone" it from #1. However, Sony will take such a beating this generation from the Wii in Japan, and the 360 in the US to only give the PS3 a shadow of its former self.
I don't think much momentum carries from one generation to the next beyond the launch. There have been many cases of a follow-up system losing faaar more than 40% of its predecessors base, including two collapsings of the entire home console market with the downfall of Magnavox and Atari. Sega Genesis far outsold all its successors combined too, though they mismanaged things far beyond how much Sony has.
Your comparing Nintendo, a company that has been around for 100 years, helped create a major console market, and has atleast 5 of the top 10 franchises in history, to Microsoft a no-name console startup that recieved tons of bad publicity and negativity surrounding them cash-cowing into the console market, and asking WHY the GC nearly beat out the Xbox? Like you said, Games. GC didn't have them then, and I don't think they have them now.
They honestly don't have a ton more than GC at this very point in time, but then PS3 has a fraction of what PS2 had. Wii games seem to be announced with more frequency than for the other two systems too. And Wii also has the least redundancy between titles, and more exclusives. And uh... You were saying that third parties were the be-all end-all, and I was pointing out that far superior third party support didn't help XB much. Then you comment how Nintendo has at least 5 of the top 10 franchises in history, and then say GC didn't have the games. Are we having the same conversation? Due to Nintendo having so much first party development, they need less third parties on board to reach a critical mass.
And the vast majority of those 500k to 1m units were sold and established on Playstaiton systems. Again, devs would have to sell 500k to break even if they were spending $10m or more on a game. I still don't believe games like Guitar Hero 1 or even 2 cost that much, and despite that, sold very very well.
Again, are we having the same conversation? The vast majority of those 500k to 1m units were sold on PS systems...? What? The vast majority of PS2 games sold were NOT from what we'd call "hit" games. The mass of non-hit games are what drove the PS2s success. These types of games are still coming to PS2 more than any other system (which is why some are predicting PS2 will be the best selling system of 2007, even with the AAA titles moving on). But these games will be viable on the Wii far earlier than they are on the PS3 or even the 360.
A dev has to consider what system is cheap to develop for, and what systems you can port to. The PS3 has the advantage of getting major support from multi-ports that the 360 and PS3 will get, but not the Wii. There is still a huge list of games that will be on PS3 and 360 but not the Wii. Most of these games will help repair that negative Playstaiton image.
And the Wii is getting ports from PS2, which is still more popular than 360 or PS3. Wii is designed NOT to get the same games going to PS3 and 360. They didn't get those games anyways when they TRIED to. Now instead, when they get games, more will be exclusives. PS3 and 360 will be fighting over existing franchises for existing fans, and cutting that segment of the potential audience in half, while Nintendo has free range to market to any other audience they want.
Nintendo games are alot more important to Nintendo systems compared to Sony games on Sony systems, and/or Microsoft games on Microsoft systems. Nintendo has a huge publishing basis, and they need that, and always have since the SNES era. Sony and MS have video game divisions of a much larger company. Nintendo isn't a side-business by a larger company (atleast for the most part), and they need games to survive. Sony and MS really do not.
Well Sony arguably does. They've been pretty mismanaged for the past several years. I wasn't talking about Nintendo "needing games to survive" though, I was talking about their far greater first party meaning they'll need less third party contributions to reach a critical mass.
Every smallish studio is going to go for the medium that gives them the most profit, and I don't see it being 100% on the Wii. I believe with the strides the PSN and XBLA are trying to do are steps in the right direction. The Wii has limited multiplayer support versus the 360 and PS3, and I believe that will kill them in the long run. More and more homes are able to support larger and larger functions for downloadable content and games, and the Wii just cant do that. The PS3 uses a 20/60gb storage medium compared to a 512mb medium that the Wii uses. Devs won't be able to use that as a storage medium - not when VC is already out and snatching up a large portion of that drive. Yes you can easily upgade, but not everyone will want to, as people are lazy.
The cheif form of distribution for this entire generation will be physical. Nintendo will have the most successful digital store, due to having so much more content. Their storage space won't be a major issue, due to their unlimited re-download policy, and their use of the standard SD card format to expand system memory. The lack of a hard drive is one small reason they can keep cost down, which is the right move to make as long as physical media rules.
Examples: Look at Xbox Live Arcade. The Nintendo fanboys get happy that the VC has sold 1.5m games. Geometry Wars alone has most likely sold that number or more. And thats just 1 of the 60-odd games that are on XBLA. PSN has the same advantage. Yes, the Wii has VC and promise to allow devs to make games and distribute them, but the hardware functionality really isn't there to truely take advantage of it like the PSN and XLBA systems are.
Geometry Wars has only sold about 250,000. I think Uno is around the same total. I haven't seen anything about overall XBLA sales recently, but I know they only sold 600,000 games through March. So at the least, the VC took off much faster. XBLA has to grow significantly before it becomes a solution for smaller, marginalized companies, and PSN obviously has to grow much more than that (I'm not excited about a 15 dollar, 1080p version of a free Flash game, personally...) Wii allows small companies to keep following their business plans and design team structures from PS2, and even port games between the two systems during the generational transition, which is more desirable in the short term (ie this generation, while physical still rules).



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Around the Network

I feel like people are missing several things... 1. Videogames are a momentum based industry. Sales breeds support, and support breeds sales. If you have neither, you have to do something to break into the cycle. Even if its a "gimmick", if it gets you sales, then it will get you more support, which will get you more sales. If you have both, but due to a higher price tag are losing sales, or due to longer development times and higher costs are losing support, you are in danger of this becoming a continuing cycle of less sales meaning less support and less support meaning less sales. This can happen regardless of what your competition does, but can be acclerated if they are moving in the opposite direction. Even at some point in the future, if no console has a price advantage, and no console is cheaper to develop for, the console with the momentum will keep gaining momentum. 2. The videogame market is currently very small. Less than 40% of homes have home consoles in the three major markets for them. Oftentimes, most people in a home with a console don't play the console. It is because of the content and gameplay of games that only the 14-34 male demographic buys so many games. If the content and gameplay changes, and appeals to a different demo, they WILL buy games. We see this time and again, with the DS being the biggest example. With 20/20 hindsight people say "of course girls and older people will play portable gaming systems", but we didn't know that 3 years ago. And early home games like Pong appealed to everyone; slowly that universal appeal was lost. Nintendo mostly appealed to little kids, and PlayStation increasingly only appeals to teens and twenty-something males. Increasing the cost of gaming while not expanding the demos aimed at will result in less sales than previous generations, like the pre-DS shrinking Japanese market. 3. There is no such thing as a "strong industry" or a "strong company" but only strong business plans. In videogames, there is even no such thing as a "strong hardware brand." Only strong business plans. Despite people's insistence in saying "Nintendo always owned the handheld market," if Sony had approached making their handheld the way Nintendo did, coming up with something which created a better user experience and would encourage the development of new types of games for new audiences, while Nintendo had Sony's approach, focusing on system power, storage space and multi-media functionality, Sony would be winning that war. When talking about the home consoles, some people say that yes, Sony has made awful moves, and yes, Nintendo has made great moves, but the strength of the Sony brand, and their past ability to garner support and sales will eventually catch up to them. Well, theres nothing that says it will. The plan behind the Wii is not so unlike what was behind the PSone or the DS or the iPod for that matter.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Erik Aston said: You say Wii has a 1.1m user base in the US like it is something to scoff at. But that makes Nintendo basically as successful as Sony and Microsoft combined at this point from launch. And unlike Sony, Nintendo are still having sell-outs around the world. Even on PSN and XBLA, devs still have to make games in HD. Its still more expensive than producing games for the VC, at least in theory (won't know until PSN and VC original content get off the ground). And the VC is designed to build up a giant library of titles regardless of it can get developers on board for new content. There is already as much content on VC as there is on XBLA. The success of online stores is dependant on selection, and the success of videogame consoles is dependant on selection, so it stands to reason that selection will determine the success of these services as well. And just like the physical systems, it stands to reason that success snowballs. Games cause sales, sales cause developers to get on board.
The 1.1m userbase is good (not as good as it should have been, but still good). But again, the question for western devs is how well to push for exclusives for a system that has been marginalized in the US the past 10+ years. I'm not saying they won't, but its a roadblock to a slap-happy Wii future that you dream of. The VC is designed to just have old games. None of the games are new content. Not that it's a bad thing (if I got a Wii it would be due to wanting the VC games). There is less content on VC than XBLA currently. XBLA has 60 full games, about 100+ demos & trailers of games, tons of downloadable content, and Bethsadia is putting Shimmering Isles out on XBLM in April.
The storage capacity of the Wii is ample to store every NES game ever made; it is fine for classic content. But Nintendo's system allows unlimited re-downloads of games attached to your console's account. This allows them to forego the harddrive, and further keep costs down... And yet they still already have the online store with the most content...
The huge problem I see with the Wii is the horrible flash drive. Yes, it can hold nearly every NES game, but it could barely hold more than 10 N64 games. Again, nowhere near the content of XBLM...PSN is yet to be seen, but I have never heard of the Wii actually having more content. How many demos of Wii games are there? How many VC games in the US right now? How many movie trailers, tv shows, movies themselves, IPTV, ect ect. Nintendo is far behind MS and maybe on par with Sony.
People are non-gamers because games have not been made for them. When the games for them do show up, like Nintendogs or the Sims, they sell like hotcakes. The market is untapped, and so the few games that get released into it expand to fill this giant space, and become killer apps of the highest order. Yes, it is the existing customer buying Wii in the US and Europe at launch. But thats why it was important to have Zelda at launch, and its why Mario, Metroid and Smash are all scheduled for the first year too. Nintendo want to sell to the existing customer as much as possible in the first year, because they know from experience with the DS that it can take time to gain that casual audience. The DS was neck and neck with the PSP in worldwide sales just a year ago, and now its opened up this gigantic lead after the "casual" audience came aboard.
Ok. Listen to why I am arguing PS3s sales against the Wii: Nintendo had a customer basis of 25m people last generation. If Nintendo caters to the non-gamer so much, exactly how many consoles are going to sell to non gamers to give Nintendo a lead over Sony and MS? If Nintendo kept their entire 25m user base, Nintendo would have to create the largest surge in gaming history (next to the 70s and 80s) to garner a 1st place lead. The market doesn't increase as fast as you'd think it does. Each generation of systems gains about a 20% increase versus the previous generation. The only one to really buck this trend was the PS1/N64/Saturn era, where they sold 160m units and this most recent generation, only sold around 175m. There are around 175m console buyers. Nintendo isn't going for the 150m that bought PS2s or Xboxes (they haven't secured any major IPs to the Wii as much as MS or Sony have). Now, don't get me wrong. I believe the Wii will get non-gamers involved, but not as much as you feel they will.
The point is that the systems which first catch on in Japan oftentimes later catch on in the rest of the world. NES, PS and DS all took off like rockets in Japan before anywhere else.
Could that be because they all launched in Japan first? Hmmm. Maybe. Actually, the Japaneese market doesn't emulate the rest of the world anymore. At one point it obviously was, but the past 5 years for J-gaming has been different. For example, the PS2 hasn't sold as well as the 1st one in Japan (by about 2m units, give or take). Despite this, it's sold better in the US and Europe than the PS1. We're comparing DS titles (which Nintendo has ALWAYS dominated the handheld market since they invented the market itself) to console titles....Huge difference.
And uh... You were saying that third parties were the be-all end-all, and I was pointing out that far superior third party support didn't help XB much. Then you comment how Nintendo has at least 5 of the top 10 franchises in history, and then say GC didn't have the games. Are we having the same conversation? Due to Nintendo having so much first party development, they need less third parties on board to reach a critical mass.
My point was that Nintendo is a very established company, but during the GC, they became even moreso marginalized due to far too much reliance on specific first party games during the N64 period, and continued to the GC period. Nintendo doesn't "need" third parties to sell 20m units, whereas Sony and MS could barely sell 10m units w/w on first party games. However, for any company in the future to actually go beyond their current fanbase of gamers X and Y, they have to secure strong 3rd party support. Nintendo has a horrible track record for that, but seems to be gaining it. Sony has had a fantastic 3rd party support base, but seems to be loosing it, and rapidly. However, we have to wait and see how much it erodes and how much Nintendo gains.
Geometry Wars has only sold about 250,000. I think Uno is around the same total.
Doubtful. Mygamercard.net has Geometry Wars at 312,000 paid users that have Geometry Wars on their list of people that have played it and unlocked achievements (which can only be obtained with the full version of the game). For refference, thats 33% of their card basis. Now, how much more than the 312k is there, who knows. For refference, on their site, Gears of War only has 550k users, or about 60% of their base (and GoW is at or near 3m copies sold thus far). I know you can't extrapolate that data, but it shows that your certainly wrong about 250k sold for Geometry wars.
I haven't seen anything about overall XBLA sales recently, but I know they only sold 600,000 games through March. So at the least, the VC took off much faster. XBLA has to grow significantly before it becomes a solution for smaller, marginalized companies, and PSN obviously has to grow much more than that (I'm not excited about a 15 dollar, 1080p version of a free Flash game, personally...) Wii allows small companies to keep following their business plans and design team structures from PS2, and even port games between the two systems during the generational transition, which is more desirable in the short term (ie this generation, while physical still rules).
I don't get this "Wii will give developers something Sony and MS won't cuz its in 1080p" bullcrap. Nintendo is trying to give devs the same service Sony and MS is doing (actually less than MS, since MS is offering XNA to allow devs to port to PC and 360 at the same time with the same costs. A game costs no more to make on XBLA than it will PSN or Wii. Just because a game is in HD doesn't mean that it's going to be pushing the chips an incredible ammount. Most of the arcade games have poor graphics that are nowhere near any full game. If they cost so much to make, then why does XBLA end up getting ports of cheap PC games like Bejewled? Its not like a game like that costs $1m. It would be relatively easy for a company to just upper convert a SD game to HD without any issues from MS. Also, Erik. We've been discussing how Sony's deminse will happen, and your arguing for Nintendo to dominate this generation. Despite this, you have never once posted in the prediction thread (atleast from what Ive seen) to actually put down numbers. Please, give me insight on exactly how many units you believe this uber-wii console will sale, and how poorly the PS3 will fail.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Sony have messed up with PS3 no matter how you wish to look at it...



yeah yeah yeah, the PS3 sucks and the Wii is god. that's why it's hard to find a PS3 in TN where the average household income is under 40,000/year. Just like the Wii... Oh... Wait... damn... that means the PS3 is selling as well as the Wii... Almost... just... 350$/more. So really you look at cash spent. It's about the same. And considering the only thing worth buying for the PS3 is Resistance... that's not saying much. Let's see if the PS3 starts doing a little better when word of mouth spreads around. Very few people who have bought a PS3 have bad things to say about it. Alot of people who have a x-box360, dont care for their Wii that much. and I'm not going to get into compareing the PS3 to the X-Box. But I think 2007 will be the decider as to if the x-box will make it another 5 years... or not. Things arent looking too good from the marketing side of things. if this site's numbers are right at ~8.5million, it's better than if the other websites who are saying ~10million. if they only plan on shipping 2million 360's over the next 6 months. Worldwide. They've already give up. But I think this site's sales are if anything a little high. I see 360's everywhere I go. and lots of them. And it is fitting to microsofts marketing theory. Stop makeing them for 400$/each, wait 6 months, as stock will hold, and start makeing them at ~250/each. Why continue makeing them for 400$/each when you have more than enough. It's microsoft makeing a good guess to stop takeing such large losses. Microsoft wont sellout. and if they do, it would be a very big mistake. The european launch for the PS3 is what everyone should be looking at and waiting for. Japan's PS3 isnt doing that well... but compareing it with PS1 and PS2, it's WAYY more than PS1. and it is just a little lower than PS2. (the PS2 had no competition in japan, the fact the PS3 is doing almost as well, without 1,000,000 units on launch week is saying it's doing very well in japan) When people talk about the PS3 being a super machine. I just wanna say. the GeForce3 had JUST come out, and the PS2 was almost as fast as a GeForce2. That was a year later when it came in america. on launch day, it was quite powerful. So really Sony is repeating their process. The only diffrence is sony is useing a IBM based steaming CPU, instead of a home baked one. So once agian, it's all in the publicity. The Cell processor is estimated at 70$/cost. Is that alot? no not really. the RSX, comes in at about 100 as well. Not really alot either. The only thing you can really hit sony for doing overkill was the BluRay drive. Wich on the original PS3 was costing them near 200$/unit. However in 6 months, I doubt it will cost them 50$. So those who bash the PS3 for haveing a bluray drive is well... moot. in 2 years the PS3 will be able to the HD-video standard. and the X-Box 360, wont be able to get within 10 feet of it. HD-DVD is already on the gangplank. Sony is tieing the chain-shot to it's legs right now, and just waiting for the people to give a little shove. BluRay has won. That means the 360 is nothing more than a DVD player. as the HD-DVD player is well... you cant buy new stuff for it. In refrence to makeing games for the VC. I havent read anywhere that they will get new content. The PS3 and X-Box 360 are great on that. The PSN has great content. the fact it's only a few months old. there are I think? 4 games to download through it. and dozens of trailers for upcomming games/movies. And almost a demo of every PS3 game. I have over 1GB of stuff downloaded on my PS3. That would fill your wii. Wii news is nice and all. But... I cant read that stuff. it's so small, and impossible to read on SDTV. and if you make it big enough to read, it's so big, it's annoying. I have a 40inch 1080p Samsung TV. Not everyone has one. but my PS3 emulating PS2 looks better than my Wii looks. Dont judge the PS3 untill it has software. The Wii has stupid minigame software. America loves that crap. Japan has seemed to fall in love with it too. I dont like it, and I would like for it to stop. I have lost ALOT of faith in nintendo, as they seem to have found out, people will pay for a 10$ budget game full of mini-games, with the nintendo name on it. well over 40$. It's a rip off, and I blame nintendo. Let's go though a game for game comparison. On exclusives. AA Great games. Wii: Zelda PS3: Resistance A Good games Wii: Trauma center B Decent games PS3: Lost Kingdom PS3: Full Auto2 C games to avoid PS3 has about 1 or 2 Wii has none D Games that rip you off. There arent really any exclusives in this one. F Games that are trash. Wii has two. (I'm not going to say wich one, but it was made by Ubisoft, and another by nintendo) There is a game for the Wii that is a multiplatform, that was the worst game I've played in years as well. The controls make me sick. They are stupid and not thought out. I bought the game, played it for 30 minutes, put it back in the box, and sold it for 25$. Never has a game in that series not... entertained me. Their not great games, but fun. The controls for the Wii made me sick. The PS3 has 1 great game. the Wii does too. The main diffrence is... Everyone says... OMGZOR MY WII ROXXORS MY SOXXORS YOU MUST BUY ONE! THEY AREZ 250$ AND A HOMELESS MAN CAN AFFORD ONE. YOU MUSTZOR GET ONE DUDEZOR!!@ THEY EVEN WORK ON YOUR 50 YEAR OLD SDTV DUDEZOR! SO YOU DONT NEED TO BUY A NEW 400$ LCDHDTV!!! OR A 50INCH LCD PROJECTOR TV FOR 1000$ THAT'S RIPOFF. 250$ AND IT WORKZ MAN! I'm sorry. I have taken a dislike to people who like Wii's. They dont understand gameing. Gameing is NOT about innovation in controls. Yes, it can be fun, it has alot of potential. But the most INNOVATIVE game comming out this year, is not for PS3, Wii, or X-Box 360. It's comming for the PC. Search SPORE. That is innovation. That is what launches games forward. I have seen 500$ 3D joysticks come and go. They all failed. I've seen games use 200$ controllers. Damn those are fun. But alas. They didnt sell many, and didnt make more sequels. (they made one but it was stupid online excluisve) My point is. The Controller on the Wii is creative, and has potential. The only thing that uses it to give it justice, is Wii sports. Everything else... Can seriously bite the bit hard. As Zelda's only bonus is the pointer. Everything else is a turnoff for me. It's not fluid enough. Alot of people agree with me. People I have played my Wii with say "OMGZOR THIS IS FUN." after about 8 hours their bored, and want to do something else. there are a total of about 3 games you can do that with... That's not much playtime. I've spent over that playing Resistance online... myself. (beat the game twice, about 12 hours each time, played halfway through about 5 times as well) Resistance isnt innovative, and in all honesty not a 100% complete game. but Boy the gameplay is fun! Another bash at the Wii. Online. I'm not saying more. omg... yet another bash. Wii+DS = where? If I didnt have 10 DS games I'd sell my 2 DS' and buy a PSP. You can download PS1 games for the PSP for 5.99/each. That's cheaper than a SNES game on the VM. And it works on your handheld wherever you go. I'm tired of typing.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

The 1.1m userbase is good (not as good as it should have been, but still good). But again, the question for western devs is how well to push for exclusives for a system that has been marginalized in the US the past 10+ years. I'm not saying they won't, but its a roadblock to a slap-happy Wii future that you dream of. The VC is designed to just have old games. None of the games are new content. Not that it's a bad thing (if I got a Wii it would be due to wanting the VC games). There is less content on VC than XBLA currently. XBLA has 60 full games, about 100+ demos & trailers of games, tons of downloadable content, and Bethsadia is putting Shimmering Isles out on XBLM in April.
Devs, and more important their publishers, aren't going to care if Nintendo has been marginalized in the past if they have the sales now. Its that simple. Nintendo, despite dropping the ball on meeting their shipment goals, are shipping more units than Sony, and selling out while Sony isn't. I wouldn't count free demos as being very important. Nintendo will implement them if it is inexpensive, and won't if it isn't. Its not something that is going to make a difference. Microsoft better hope people aren't buying their system for the free demos: the money is in actually selling software... The VC is designed just to have old games, but thats a technicality. Nintendo have plans for releasing new games as well, as has been confirmed repeatedly. BTW, my count was off for the XBLA because I missed games released on original Box. Sorry about that. With 4 new games today, VC's NA total is up to 46.
The huge problem I see with the Wii is the horrible flash drive. Yes, it can hold nearly every NES game, but it could barely hold more than 10 N64 games. Again, nowhere near the content of XBLM...PSN is yet to be seen, but I have never heard of the Wii actually having more content. How many demos of Wii games are there? How many VC games in the US right now? How many movie trailers, tv shows, movies themselves, IPTV, ect ect. Nintendo is far behind MS and maybe on par with Sony.
Movie trailers, TV shows, movies, IPTV... This stuff is not going to sell consoles, and it isn't going to sell video in numbers comparable to services with greater flexibility between devices, which will emerge during this console lifecycle... In fact, it could be detrimental for MS if 360s started selling because of non-gaming services: see the PSP. PSP has to compete with other portable multi-media solutions, and despite good hardware sales, they don't have the software sales--where the profit is made.
Ok. Listen to why I am arguing PS3s sales against the Wii: Nintendo had a customer basis of 25m people last generation. If Nintendo caters to the non-gamer so much, exactly how many consoles are going to sell to non gamers to give Nintendo a lead over Sony and MS? If Nintendo kept their entire 25m user base, Nintendo would have to create the largest surge in gaming history (next to the 70s and 80s) to garner a 1st place lead. The market doesn't increase as fast as you'd think it does. Each generation of systems gains about a 20% increase versus the previous generation. The only one to really buck this trend was the PS1/N64/Saturn era, where they sold 160m units and this most recent generation, only sold around 175m. There are around 175m console buyers. Nintendo isn't going for the 150m that bought PS2s or Xboxes (they haven't secured any major IPs to the Wii as much as MS or Sony have). Now, don't get me wrong. I believe the Wii will get non-gamers involved, but not as much as you feel they will.
If you give Sony the benefit of the doubt in reaching the 120 million mark and include Dreamcast sales, then its about 175 million consoles. Far less actual owners; most of the growth between the PS2 generation and PS1 generation was because of multi-console ownership. If you count the Dreamcast sales with the previous generation (it was dead by the time PS2 showed up, afterall), we're talking close to no growth at all, even with multi-console owners. The market didn't grow only because the games continued to aim at the same demographics. If you don't aim at new demographics, the only growth will continue to be due to expansion into new geographical territories and due to increasing multi-console ownership. Now when you have a drastic increase in the price of gaming, unlike between the PS1 and PS2, and don't expand the demographics you're aiming at, you're going to see the market shrinking. Lets say there were three consoles like PS3 or 360 on the market, all with more and more ports: would we see over 120 million total console sales? I think we'd see PS2 remain the lead console for 2 full years. Where does Nintendo get the sales? Well first, looking at their steady decrease between generations, they'd probably get back maybe 14 million buyers based on their regular old franchises and a regular controller, most of those from NA, and many of them multi-console owners. Thats the main buyer in NA and Europe right now. Instead, if multi-console ownership keeps rising (and I expect it will), you can count on the Wii being one of the two consoles in almost every multi-console home, due to all the ports between 360 and PS3, and the controller, and the price. Right there, with nothing but differentiation, they could expect to see a huge rise in sales from last gen. Second, remember that the bulk of the games bought by those 150m that Nintendo "isn't going after" are not "major IPs." Nintendo will be getting some of that audience for PS2. Most importantly... you make it sound like the home console market has this slow and steady growth, and Wii won't be able to outperform that. But the market had actually reached near-stagnancy. And if you look at historical growth, and assume nothing can outperform it, then you haven't begun to find out what "disruption strategy" means. Which means you haven't begun to look at Nintendo's strategy. Which means why am I talking to you?
My point was that Nintendo is a very established company, but during the GC, they became even moreso marginalized due to far too much reliance on specific first party games during the N64 period, and continued to the GC period. Nintendo doesn't "need" third parties to sell 20m units, whereas Sony and MS could barely sell 10m units w/w on first party games. However, for any company in the future to actually go beyond their current fanbase of gamers X and Y, they have to secure strong 3rd party support. Nintendo has a horrible track record for that, but seems to be gaining it. Sony has had a fantastic 3rd party support base, but seems to be loosing it, and rapidly. However, we have to wait and see how much it erodes and how much Nintendo gains.
Its a momentum based market. We're seeing more Wii games announced, and more PS3 ports to 360 announced all the time. What can stop those trends? Only better PS3 sales performance. And how is that going to happen with less exclusive games?? How can Sony get momentum back? Certainly some key games will boost their sales, as will price cuts. But if the other consoles have more momentum beforehand, will it matter? Further, look at all the games Nintendo wants to get out in the first year of Wii. Zelda, Mario, Smash, Metroid, Pokemon Battle, Paper Mario, etc. And then theres games for the new audience they've expanded to with DS: Brain Academy, Animal Crossing, Wii Sports and Wii Play. Nintendo want to build on their momentum as fast as possible in the first year. On messageboards, you even see people saying "what key franchises will Nintendo have left after the first year?" But its all about getting momentum, looking for the Wii equivalent of Nintendogs, and stalling for third parties. And to go beyond your current fanbase, you have to make software for different people. Doesn't matter if its first or third party.
Doubtful. Mygamercard.net has Geometry Wars at 312,000 paid users...
Okay. Must have been old data I saw. Was there anything about XBLA sales among the other recent sales announcements from MS?
I don't get this "Wii will give developers something Sony and MS won't cuz its in 1080p" bullcrap. Nintendo is trying to give devs the same service Sony and MS is doing (actually less than MS, since MS is offering XNA to allow devs to port to PC and 360 at the same time with the same costs. A game costs no more to make on XBLA than it will PSN or Wii. Just because a game is in HD doesn't mean that it's going to be pushing the chips an incredible ammount. Most of the arcade games have poor graphics that are nowhere near any full game. If they cost so much to make, then why does XBLA end up getting ports of cheap PC games like Bejewled? Its not like a game like that costs $1m. It would be relatively easy for a company to just upper convert a SD game to HD without any issues from MS.
There have been a couple developers complaining about dev costs for XBLA, talking about it being in the hundreds of thousands, but MS are making great strides in that area. I think we'll see the content flow pick up a little, and I think we'll see MS in a better place to move towards total digital distribution 5 years from now than either Sony or Nintendo, just because they've got a several year advantage already. I don't think XBLA will outsell the VC. Now, going HD does drive up development costs some, and that will become less noticable in the future, but the greater point about HD is that it drives the price of the console up, which in turn drives the price of games up, yet doesn't give the developers a break due to the higher price. There's all sorts of articles out there right now about how best to get more money per game from the customer, simply because they need it... Charging more per game will mean less customers.
Also, Erik. We've been discussing how Sony's deminse will happen, and your arguing for Nintendo to dominate this generation. Despite this, you have never once posted in the prediction thread (atleast from what Ive seen) to actually put down numbers. Please, give me insight on exactly how many units you believe this uber-wii console will sale, and how poorly the PS3 will fail.
I haven't studied the numbers extensively. But I honestly think if Nintendo follow through with the promise of Wii, they can top 100 million sales. I know no company has ever had that kind of growth from one generation to the next, but then we've only had 6 generations so far, so not every scenario has played out... No company has ever even made 5 viable consoles in a row either... And a company has become market leader on their first attempt several times... I think 360 will do better than Box1, ending around 45 million sold (price cuts, GTA4, and a library that increasingly rivals Sony's will start to push their sales more significantly beyond Box1's sell rate late this year... And then the system will stay on the market for at least 5.5 years...) PS3... Hard to say how epic the collapse will be... I think they will beat 360 in sales, seeing as they'll have 7 or 8 million more sales in both Japan and Europe, but they may end up behind or in a dead heat with 360 in NA. I guess I'd put them at 55-60 million, with by far the least bank made of the three due to price cuts made in desperation... In 3 years time, Wii could be a $120 system, 360 $200, while PS3 is still $300... So from that "175 million" you put out there, I think only about 100 million will buy a "traditional" console this time. How can that be? Well, with GTA and so many other games going multi-platform, there will be less people who own both a PlayStation and an XBox. Higher prices... Japan abandoning Sony... Less overall games produced from last gen...



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.