Quantcast
Nintendo has a realistic shot at returning to #1 this fiscal year - RESULT: Nintendo back on top (21.45m), Sony second (19m+)

Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo has a realistic shot at returning to #1 this fiscal year - RESULT: Nintendo back on top (21.45m), Sony second (19m+)

Which company will sell the most consoles in the fiscal year ending March 2018?

Sony (by more than 3m) 260 27.84%
 
Sony (between 2-3m more) 52 5.57%
 
Sony (between 1-2m more) 73 7.82%
 
Virtually tied (within 1m of each other) 133 14.24%
 
Nintendo (between 1-2m more) 150 16.06%
 
Nintendo (between 2-3m more) 59 6.32%
 
Nintendo (by more than 3m) 104 11.13%
 
Microsoft (seriously) 15 1.61%
 
Microsoft (for the lulz) 30 3.21%
 
Scoreboard 58 6.21%
 
Total:934
CrazyGamer2017 said:
Malt4zar said:

Sorry to barge into this conversation like this but, isn't it also unfair to discount the still decent sales of the 3DS last fiscal year just because its most direct competidor (the Vita) sells/sold poorly? 


The old portable still means a lot to Nintendo's future, so why ignore it in this kind of comparisons?

No need to be sorry, your question is totally fair so here is my reply:

I would never ask of 3DS sales to be discounted or ignored. If the thread had been 3DS vs Vita, 3DS totally crushing Vita in sales, then I would have been totally ok with that as a comparison of 3DS vs Vita is totally fair because they are direct competitors that are fighting for the exact same market: Portables.

It's the fact the thread is pitching Switch + 3DS vs PS4 sales which seems wrong. As Louie said it himself, Vita figures are unknown. So comparing to unknown sales of a system seems kind of an unfair way to put forth figures. And this is just my opinion, you are of course free to disagree

Thank you for the response.

Let me use a little bit of analogy to present my case a little bit better.

The user RolStoppable is the referee in a wrestilling match including both Sony and Nintendo. Sony is clearly the best during a solo hand to hand combat but Nintendo has the upper hand when combos are throw into the misture.

If this was a boxe match. Sony would win without much problems. The same with Nintendo in jiu-jitsu (or something like that, i don't watch this kind of sport! :P)

Would it be fair to exclude certain combos in the wrestiling match just because one of the competidors doesn't know how or is incapable to perform them?



Around the Network
CrazyGamer2017 said:
RolStoppable said:

The Vita figures in your example are mentioned shortly afterwards in the update of the same date. The Vita gets mentioned repeatedly throughout the entire original post and its updates. This includes the final update that determines that Nintendo's margin of victory falls into the range of 1-2m despite the officially announced figures being 21.45m for Nintendo and 19m for Sony.

You said that it is a fact that this thread does not acknowledge PlayStation Vita in the comparison. That's blatantly false and you've been made aware of that a few times before I first responded to you. You cannot claim ignorance in this case, therefore the only logical conclusion is that you lied in the face of evidence.

Yet those figures clearly do NOT mention the Vita's. In that example I gave your total goes 7.5 million PS4 (VITA NOT INCLUDED) and 7.75 million Switch + 3DS.

If you had meant to add Vita figures you would have added them RIGHT THERE, or updated them right there. but you LEFT that and did not change it and I'm sorry but 7.5 millions units is for 1 system (PS4) and 7.75 millions is for 2 systems (Switch + 3DS) And that is only one example as you keep doing the same across your entire post.

I have so far only given an opinion on what I consider fair comparison and everyone is free to disagree. Yet you claim to logically conclude that I'm lying. Again I'm not sure why you use that specific word. You on the other hand as seen in my example do not have figures for the Vita and yet you go on comparing its figures that you don't have to both the Switch and 3DS. I would not call that a lie as AGAIN that word does not apply, instead the correct word here is DISHONESTY in figures.

Sorry about that, I don't wish to make this about your intentions, I only meant to voice an opinion, but since you TOO seem intent on speaking about my alleged intentions rather than my opinions then I have to call your intentions out for what they are.

I listed officially announced figures in each update, followed by a note that PSV still exists and has to be factored in. If you quote selectively, then you may appear to be correct, but anyone who checks the original post will be able to quickly verify that you are quoting out of context.

You made the claim that it's factual that this thread compares Switch and 3DS vs. PS4 when the thread clearly compares Switch and 3DS vs. PS4 and PSV. When you call something a fact that is not a fact after you've been made aware of your error multiple times, it is a lie. If you had said that at one point you believed the thread was about something that it isn't, it would have been an opinion. But you clearly stated that it is fact that the thread is about something that it actually isn't, so you weren't stating an opinion in that instance. For reference, Malt4zar's quote further down in this post contains your false statement.

Lauster said:
Louie said:

But PSVR is just an add-on, not a standalone platform. There are also no NES or SNES Mini figures included.

Well, it's like the Sega CD that needs a Sega Genesis but is considered like a different platform in VGC (http://www.vgchartz.com/platforms/).

Someone (Rol ? I don't remember) said in this thread that NES and SNES mini are not included because it's not current gen games. That's why I said gaming hardware for this gen.

We can add them if you want, but it proves that this result is just a part of reality according to the limits we want to consider.

I only said that SNES Mini doesn't count, but never gave a reason. The reason I would give is that the SNES Mini doesn't work like a conventional console by today's definition: It's not possible to buy additional games for the SNES Mini.

Generations are irrelevant when the methodology concerns fiscal years. It's a simple and straight-forward methodology because it eliminates all longwinded debates about which systems belong to which generation.

Malt4zar said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:

No need to be sorry, your question is totally fair so here is my reply:

I would never ask of 3DS sales to be discounted or ignored. If the thread had been 3DS vs Vita, 3DS totally crushing Vita in sales, then I would have been totally ok with that as a comparison of 3DS vs Vita is totally fair because they are direct competitors that are fighting for the exact same market: Portables.

It's the fact the thread is pitching Switch + 3DS vs PS4 sales which seems wrong. As Louie said it himself, Vita figures are unknown. So comparing to unknown sales of a system seems kind of an unfair way to put forth figures. And this is just my opinion, you are of course free to disagree

Thank you for the response.

Let me use a little bit of analogy to present my case a little bit better.

The user RolStoppable is the referee in a wrestilling match including both Sony and Nintendo. Sony is clearly the best during a solo hand to hand combat but Nintendo has the upper hand when combos are throw into the misture.

If this was a boxe match. Sony would win without much problems. The same with Nintendo in jiu-jitsu (or something like that, i don't watch this kind of sport! :P)

Would it be fair to exclude certain combos in the wrestiling match just because one of the competidors doesn't know how or is incapable to perform them?

While your point would have merit if this thread were as CrazyGamer2017 said, this thread isn't like that to begin with. During the compared fiscal year, Nintendo had two consoles and Sony had two consoles. CrazyGamer is the first person in this thread's year-long existence who does not grasp that Vita shipments were always supposed to be estimated and added to the final tally.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

 

Malt4zar said:

Thank you for the response.

Let me use a little bit of analogy to present my case a little bit better.

The user RolStoppable is the referee in a wrestilling match including both Sony and Nintendo. Sony is clearly the best during a solo hand to hand combat but Nintendo has the upper hand when combos are throw into the misture.

If this was a boxe match. Sony would win without much problems. The same with Nintendo in jiu-jitsu (or something like that, i don't watch this kind of sport! :P)

Would it be fair to exclude certain combos in the wrestiling match just because one of the competidors doesn't know how or is incapable to perform them?

While your point would have merit if this thread were as CrazyGamer2017 said, this thread isn't like that to begin with. During the compared fiscal year, Nintendo had two consoles and Sony had two consoles. CrazyGamer is the first person in this thread's year-long existence who does not grasp that Vita shipments were always supposed to be estimated and added to the final tally.

Sony was clearly facing a disadvantage during last fiscal year with the vita completely dead and the 3ds still going "strong". Estimated shipments or not, the comparison was fair in my book because it wouldn't change anything in the long run. Nintendo is back in the top thanks to the 3DS. Too bad Sony barely tried with the vita back in the day, or else we could have had a different outcome in the end today. 

Last edited by Malt4zar - on 02 May 2018

Biggerboat1 said:
Lauster said:

Ok, I'll try to express my point of view.

By my developer logic, I would say that Wii Balance Board and Labo simply change the interraction in your game, not the game itself in the way you create it, technically. You always develop it with the same technical requirements of any game on the same platform. You only change / redefine the shape.

For Sega CD or PSVR, you have different needs from the "main" platform they depend on, you have different requirements. Not only the interraction, but the display of the game is different, you have to think not only the shape but also the heart.

Sorry if it's not very clear ^^"

The RAM expansion pack for the N64 gave the developer different technical requirements to hit, but again I don't think anyone would consider that a different platform...

So on the one hand, you have accessories which change the way you interact - Wii Balance Board, Labo, the bongo drums, Kinnect and indeed the PSVR.

On the other you have ones that change or improve on the capabilities of the hardware - which would include the ram pack, Sega CD, N64DD etc.

In either scenario, I personally think it'd be silly to class them as their own platform, and I feel that trying to justify the decision to do so is just muddying the waters and, intentionally or otherwise, derailing the thread...

OK, my explanation wasn't perfect.

The RAM expansion pack for N64 didn't change the way of developping the game. It was truly accessory, every games could be played without it (except DK64 because they didn't find another way to resolve a bug, that's why the RAM expansion was free with this game). 

VR is a new medium (even more than that), not just an accessory. It has its own games, its own accessories and a price in the same order of magnitude as other platforms.

We are talking about vg hardware sales in a context of fiscal year results. So I think I am perfectly in the subject by mentioning a device currently produced in the factory, delivered worldwide, related to video games and with its own lineup of a hundred titles from different developpers. That's not because we have a different vision that you can imply that I derail the thread. My question of "why no PSVR figures" is perfectly legitimate in this context.

 

RolStoppable said: 
Lauster said:

Well, it's like the Sega CD that needs a Sega Genesis but is considered like a different platform in VGC (http://www.vgchartz.com/platforms/).

Someone (Rol ? I don't remember) said in this thread that NES and SNES mini are not included because it's not current gen games. That's why I said gaming hardware for this gen.

We can add them if you want, but it proves that this result is just a part of reality according to the limits we want to consider.

I only said that SNES Mini doesn't count, but never gave a reason. The reason I would give is that the SNES Mini doesn't work like a conventional console by today's definition: It's not possible to buy additional games for the SNES Mini.

Generations are irrelevant when the methodology concerns fiscal years. It's a simple and straight-forward methodology because it eliminates all longwinded debates about which systems belong to which generation.

Ok, and I can agree. It all depends on the limit you want to put.

I misused the term "generation", I said too in the past that this notion is no longer relevant. My idea was to separate the hardware that uses modern games from the other that runs old Roms.



Lauster said:
Biggerboat1 said:

The RAM expansion pack for the N64 gave the developer different technical requirements to hit, but again I don't think anyone would consider that a different platform...

So on the one hand, you have accessories which change the way you interact - Wii Balance Board, Labo, the bongo drums, Kinnect and indeed the PSVR.

On the other you have ones that change or improve on the capabilities of the hardware - which would include the ram pack, Sega CD, N64DD etc.

In either scenario, I personally think it'd be silly to class them as their own platform, and I feel that trying to justify the decision to do so is just muddying the waters and, intentionally or otherwise, derailing the thread...

OK, my explanation wasn't perfect.

The RAM expansion pack for N64 didn't change the way of developping the game. It was truly accessory, every games could be played without it (except DK64 because they didn't find another way to resolve a bug, that's why the RAM expansion was free with this game). 

VR is a new medium (even more than that), not just an accessory. It has its own games, its own accessories and a price in the same order of magnitude as other platforms.

We are talking about vg hardware sales in a context of fiscal year results. So I think I am perfectly in the subject by mentioning a device currently produced in the factory, delivered worldwide, related to video games and with its own lineup of a hundred titles from different developpers. That's not because we have a different vision that you can imply that I derail the thread. My question of "why no PSVR figures" is perfectly legitimate in this context.

The RAM expansion pack changed the way that the game were developed in terms of improving the resources available to the developer. In addition it Donkey Kong 64, it was also required by Majora's Mask & Perfect Dark, so a small but overall great list of exclusive games!

I guess we're just not going to agree on this. In my opinion to count as a platform it needs to function on it's own. All of the heavy lifting on PSVR is done by the PS4, so to say that PSVR can stand on it's own as platform smacks of counting the PS4 twice...

The specs that a dev has to work to for the PSVR is essentially the same as the base PS4/Pro, so all that's weighing in it's favour of being a separate platform is exclusive games, which again you could say for lots of accessories that I've already mentioned.

Likewise, if Nintendo release a VR mount for the switch, a la the samsung oculus headsets, I wouldn't count it as a platform either.

If you want to discuss Nintendo vs Sony gaming in the overall fiscal year, which can include accessories and games, then feel free to create a thread - but that's not what's being discussed here.

 

P.S. sorry for late response