Quantcast
Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

ArchangelMadzz said:
Mandalore76 said:

 

The PS4 also received 2 official price cuts during that time.  The Switch is still selling at original launch price.

2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?

PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years.

 

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?

PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years.

The Switch will be 2 years old in less than a month. The PS4 was a month and a week away from being two years old when it got an official price cut. So you made an error in your correction. 

But I get what you mean. There wasn't two official price cuts to my knowledge. Maybe he confused it with a deal? Harmless miscalculation if so.

You're both right.  I just went back to the 2 articles I had looked at before posting.  I do see that I misread the amount of time from launch to the 2 price cuts I was referencing.  They were just shy of 2 years and 3 years out.  So, it was in fact 1 price cut for PS4 inside of 2 years.  My bad.  I stand rightly corrected.  

 



Around the Network
StreaK said:
Haha, honestly...the only thing here impressive to me is the fact that every...single....PlayStation console is on this graph! ALL of em! That's just so freaking cool to me. The Xbox 360 was considered a huge HIT, and the PlayStation 3 (while I don't agree) is actually considered a flop to some. Ohhh man an 85+ million selling console being seen as a disappointment. Then what do you say about the OG Xbox, Gamecube and N64 systems selling like anywhere between the 15-30 million range. I'll count the days before I see a PS console sell less than even 60 million.

Sony really nailed the PlayStation brand as the greatest in gaming. There's just no denying it. Quickest to 100 million? Doesn't matter...I always cared more for the MARATHON.


 

DonFerrari said:

 

StreaK said:
Haha, honestly...the only thing here impressive to me is the fact that every...single....PlayStation console is on this graph! ALL of em! That's just so freaking cool to me. The Xbox 360 was considered a huge HIT, and the PlayStation 3 (while I don't agree) is actually considered a flop to some. Ohhh man an 85+ million selling console being seen as a disappointment. Then what do you say about the OG Xbox, Gamecube and N64 systems selling like anywhere between the 15-30 million range. I'll count the days before I see a PS console sell less than even 60 million.

Sony really nailed the PlayStation brand as the greatest in gaming. There's just no denying it. Quickest to 100 million? Doesn't matter...I always cared more for the MARATHON.


Don't worry, Sony <100~M flop, others >30M success, you just have to accept people expectations.


 

When referring to the PS3 as a failure, it is very important to look at the context of what is being discussed.  It is very easy to say, how can 86 million units be considered a failure?  But, when you look at the bigger picture, it very definitely was.  In the 6th console generation, Sony sold nearly 158 million consoles and controlled 74% of the home console gaming market.  By the end of the 7th console generation, Sony had lost over 70 million customers, and had ceded 42% of the console gaming market back to its competitors.  This was despite Kaz Hirai stating in 2008 that the PS3 would go on to sell 150 million units by 2015.  Even worse than these precipitous drops was the fact that the PS3 cost Sony over $3.3 billion in losses.  The amount was so staggering in fact, that the PS3 losses completely negated all of the profits Sony had made in the previous gen on the 158 million PS2's that they had sold.  That's why the PS3 is considered a failure.  70 million lost customers, 42% of marketshare lost, and $3.3 billion+ lost that wiped out all profit from previous gen.  There is no good way to spin that trifecta.  The reason why 22 million Gamecube's sold isn't looked at in the same way, is because Nintendo didn't lose $3.3 billion while selling them.  Nintendo was profitable during that gen.  Same for Wii U.  Nintendo posted losses early in the gen, but had returned to profitability prior to the launch of the Switch.  It's all about context.



Mandalore76 said:
StreaK said:
Haha, honestly...the only thing here impressive to me is the fact that every...single....PlayStation console is on this graph! ALL of em! That's just so freaking cool to me. The Xbox 360 was considered a huge HIT, and the PlayStation 3 (while I don't agree) is actually considered a flop to some. Ohhh man an 85+ million selling console being seen as a disappointment. Then what do you say about the OG Xbox, Gamecube and N64 systems selling like anywhere between the 15-30 million range. I'll count the days before I see a PS console sell less than even 60 million.

Sony really nailed the PlayStation brand as the greatest in gaming. There's just no denying it. Quickest to 100 million? Doesn't matter...I always cared more for the MARATHON.


 

DonFerrari said:

 

Don't worry, Sony <100~M flop, others >30M success, you just have to accept people expectations.

 

When referring to the PS3 as a failure, it is very important to look at the context of what is being discussed.  It is very easy to say, how can 86 million units be considered a failure?  But, when you look at the bigger picture, it very definitely was.  In the 6th console generation, Sony sold nearly 158 million consoles and controlled 74% of the home console gaming market.  By the end of the 7th console generation, Sony had lost over 70 million customers, and had ceded 42% of the console gaming market back to its competitors.  This was despite Kaz Hirai stating in 2008 that the PS3 would go on to sell 150 million units by 2015.  Even worse than these precipitous drops was the fact that the PS3 cost Sony over $3.3 billion in losses.  The amount was so staggering in fact, that the PS3 losses completely negated all of the profits Sony had made in the previous gen on the 158 million PS2's that they had sold.  That's why the PS3 is considered a failure.  70 million lost customers, 42% of marketshare lost, and $3.3 billion+ lost that wiped out all profit from previous gen.  There is no good way to spin that trifecta.  The reason why 22 million Gamecube's sold isn't looked at in the same way, is because Nintendo didn't lose $3.3 billion while selling them.  Nintendo was profitable during that gen.  Same for Wii U.  Nintendo posted losses early in the gen, but had returned to profitability prior to the launch of the Switch.  It's all about context.

Yes, sure...



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363


DonFerrari said:
Mandalore76 said: 

When referring to the PS3 as a failure, it is very important to look at the context of what is being discussed.  It is very easy to say, how can 86 million units be considered a failure?  But, when you look at the bigger picture, it very definitely was.  In the 6th console generation, Sony sold nearly 158 million consoles and controlled 74% of the home console gaming market.  By the end of the 7th console generation, Sony had lost over 70 million customers, and had ceded 42% of the console gaming market back to its competitors.  This was despite Kaz Hirai stating in 2008 that the PS3 would go on to sell 150 million units by 2015.  Even worse than these precipitous drops was the fact that the PS3 cost Sony over $3.3 billion in losses.  The amount was so staggering in fact, that the PS3 losses completely negated all of the profits Sony had made in the previous gen on the 158 million PS2's that they had sold.  That's why the PS3 is considered a failure.  70 million lost customers, 42% of marketshare lost, and $3.3 billion+ lost that wiped out all profit from previous gen.  There is no good way to spin that trifecta.  The reason why 22 million Gamecube's sold isn't looked at in the same way, is because Nintendo didn't lose $3.3 billion while selling them.  Nintendo was profitable during that gen.  Same for Wii U.  Nintendo posted losses early in the gen, but had returned to profitability prior to the launch of the Switch.  It's all about context.

Yes, sure...

Well, he makes a good point. Everything must be considered in context. 86 million in isolation sounds great, but when you consider PS3 lost nearly half of PS2's marketshare, bled billions of dollars, and lost the 7th gen sales war, it's hard to see that as much of a success.

I mean, theoretically speaking, if Switch sold less than the 3DS lifetime and was a net financial loss it'd be hard to argue that as a real success story too.

Last edited by curl-6 - 2 days ago

curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes, sure...

Well, he makes a good point. Everything must be considered in context. 86 million in isolation sounds great, but when you consider PS3 lost nearly half of PS2's marketshare, bled billions of dollars, and lost the 7th gen sales war, it's hard to see that as much of a success.

I mean, theoretically speaking, if Switch sold less than the 3DS lifetime and was a net financial loss it'd be hard to argue that as a real success story too.

From failure to flop there is a big gap. And SNES to N64 would be the greatest flop ever on his metrics (Sony was newcomer and took PS1 several years before really lightning up), then what would be WiiU 85% drop?

And as I said, we have to accept that the expectations and bar is held very very very high for Sony where a single system selling below 100M is all doom and gloom and others when doing over 30M are celebrated even if at the time they were much older companies in the field or much much much richer.

Also the loss on PS3 was a calculated move, they bet on BD using PS3 to win the race, which it did royally, but costing that division a lot of money they expected to recoup on other divisions that couldn't push the format alone. So we know it's disengeneous to put the financial loss on the calculated move of the HW as PS3 being a flop. Let's remember it had higher attach ratio than PS2, and saw more 1st party sales (from what I can remember) than PS2 as well. So from SW perspective they made more money from HW sold.

Plus 

Xbox One goal was 200M https://stevivor.com/features/interviews/xbox-phil-spencer-brand-leadership/ (don't mind he thinking PS2 only sold 120M). So they reaching 1/4 of the target is a comparable flop?

Or would you preffer Yusuf Mehdi forecast of 400M to 1B Xbox One sold?? https://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-microsoft-aims-for-1-billion-lifetime-sales-100-million-xbox-360-units/

People at Nintendo expecting WiiU to sell 100M http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/nintendo-wii-u-sales/

For N64 coming from the successfull SNES and having no name Playstation and limping Saturn as competition. Higgins, David (April 22, 1997). "Nintendo's black box hides a brilliant brain". The AustralianThe Nintendo 64's simplicity is a key factor for projected sales of 50 million units over a decade-long product life cycle, according to Mr. Jim Foran, SGI's director of engineering for the project

Gamecube also had a 50M sales expectation by 2005 https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube

Yes, only Playstation 3 is flop in context.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363


Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Well, he makes a good point. Everything must be considered in context. 86 million in isolation sounds great, but when you consider PS3 lost nearly half of PS2's marketshare, bled billions of dollars, and lost the 7th gen sales war, it's hard to see that as much of a success.

I mean, theoretically speaking, if Switch sold less than the 3DS lifetime and was a net financial loss it'd be hard to argue that as a real success story too.

From failure to flop there is a big gap. And SNES to N64 would be the greatest flop ever on his metrics (Sony was newcomer and took PS1 several years before really lightning up), then what would be WiiU 85% drop?

And as I said, we have to accept that the expectations and bar is held very very very high for Sony where a single system selling below 100M is all doom and gloom and others when doing over 30M are celebrated even if at the time they were much older companies in the field or much much much richer.

Also the loss on PS3 was a calculated move, they bet on BD using PS3 to win the race, which it did royally, but costing that division a lot of money they expected to recoup on other divisions that couldn't push the format alone. So we know it's disengeneous to put the financial loss on the calculated move of the HW as PS3 being a flop. Let's remember it had higher attach ratio than PS2, and saw more 1st party sales (from what I can remember) than PS2 as well. So from SW perspective they made more money from HW sold.

Plus 

Xbox One goal was 200M https://stevivor.com/features/interviews/xbox-phil-spencer-brand-leadership/ (don't mind he thinking PS2 only sold 120M). So they reaching 1/4 of the target is a comparable flop?

Or would you preffer Yusuf Mehdi forecast of 400M to 1B Xbox One sold?? https://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-microsoft-aims-for-1-billion-lifetime-sales-100-million-xbox-360-units/

People at Nintendo expecting WiiU to sell 100M http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/nintendo-wii-u-sales/

For N64 coming from the successfull SNES and having no name Playstation and limping Saturn as competition. Higgins, David (April 22, 1997). "Nintendo's black box hides a brilliant brain". The AustralianThe Nintendo 64's simplicity is a key factor for projected sales of 50 million units over a decade-long product life cycle, according to Mr. Jim Foran, SGI's director of engineering for the project

Gamecube also had a 50M sales expectation by 2005 https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube

Yes, only Playstation 3 is flop in context.

Strawman much? Nobody ever said anything about N64, GC, XBO or Wii U being a success.

 

Also how do you figure Sony made more on PS3 software than PS2 software? Having a slightly higher tie ratio doesnt mean much when you sell ~700 million fewer units of software.



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

DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Well, he makes a good point. Everything must be considered in context. 86 million in isolation sounds great, but when you consider PS3 lost nearly half of PS2's marketshare, bled billions of dollars, and lost the 7th gen sales war, it's hard to see that as much of a success.

I mean, theoretically speaking, if Switch sold less than the 3DS lifetime and was a net financial loss it'd be hard to argue that as a real success story too.

From failure to flop there is a big gap. And SNES to N64 would be the greatest flop ever on his metrics (Sony was newcomer and took PS1 several years before really lightning up), then what would be WiiU 85% drop?

And as I said, we have to accept that the expectations and bar is held very very very high for Sony where a single system selling below 100M is all doom and gloom and others when doing over 30M are celebrated even if at the time they were much older companies in the field or much much much richer.

Also the loss on PS3 was a calculated move, they bet on BD using PS3 to win the race, which it did royally, but costing that division a lot of money they expected to recoup on other divisions that couldn't push the format alone. So we know it's disengeneous to put the financial loss on the calculated move of the HW as PS3 being a flop. Let's remember it had higher attach ratio than PS2, and saw more 1st party sales (from what I can remember) than PS2 as well. So from SW perspective they made more money from HW sold.

Plus 

Xbox One goal was 200M https://stevivor.com/features/interviews/xbox-phil-spencer-brand-leadership/ (don't mind he thinking PS2 only sold 120M). So they reaching 1/4 of the target is a comparable flop?

Or would you preffer Yusuf Mehdi forecast of 400M to 1B Xbox One sold?? https://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-microsoft-aims-for-1-billion-lifetime-sales-100-million-xbox-360-units/

People at Nintendo expecting WiiU to sell 100M http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/nintendo-wii-u-sales/

For N64 coming from the successfull SNES and having no name Playstation and limping Saturn as competition. Higgins, David (April 22, 1997). "Nintendo's black box hides a brilliant brain". The AustralianThe Nintendo 64's simplicity is a key factor for projected sales of 50 million units over a decade-long product life cycle, according to Mr. Jim Foran, SGI's director of engineering for the project

Gamecube also had a 50M sales expectation by 2005 https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube

Yes, only Playstation 3 is flop in context.

Show me where I ever said N64, Gamecube, Wii U or Xbox One were success stories.

The fact remains that PS3 lost billions of dollars, was outsold, and gutted Sony's console marketshare. It's hard to frame that as a success.



zorg1000 said:
DonFerrari said:

From failure to flop there is a big gap. And SNES to N64 would be the greatest flop ever on his metrics (Sony was newcomer and took PS1 several years before really lightning up), then what would be WiiU 85% drop?

And as I said, we have to accept that the expectations and bar is held very very very high for Sony where a single system selling below 100M is all doom and gloom and others when doing over 30M are celebrated even if at the time they were much older companies in the field or much much much richer.

Also the loss on PS3 was a calculated move, they bet on BD using PS3 to win the race, which it did royally, but costing that division a lot of money they expected to recoup on other divisions that couldn't push the format alone. So we know it's disengeneous to put the financial loss on the calculated move of the HW as PS3 being a flop. Let's remember it had higher attach ratio than PS2, and saw more 1st party sales (from what I can remember) than PS2 as well. So from SW perspective they made more money from HW sold.

Plus 

Xbox One goal was 200M https://stevivor.com/features/interviews/xbox-phil-spencer-brand-leadership/ (don't mind he thinking PS2 only sold 120M). So they reaching 1/4 of the target is a comparable flop?

Or would you preffer Yusuf Mehdi forecast of 400M to 1B Xbox One sold?? https://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-microsoft-aims-for-1-billion-lifetime-sales-100-million-xbox-360-units/

People at Nintendo expecting WiiU to sell 100M http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/nintendo-wii-u-sales/

For N64 coming from the successfull SNES and having no name Playstation and limping Saturn as competition. Higgins, David (April 22, 1997). "Nintendo's black box hides a brilliant brain". The AustralianThe Nintendo 64's simplicity is a key factor for projected sales of 50 million units over a decade-long product life cycle, according to Mr. Jim Foran, SGI's director of engineering for the project

Gamecube also had a 50M sales expectation by 2005 https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube

Yes, only Playstation 3 is flop in context.

Strawman much? Nobody ever said anything about N64, GC, XBO or Wii U being a success.

Also how do you figure Sony made more on PS3 software than PS2 software? Having a slightly higher tie ratio doesnt mean much when you sell ~700 million fewer units of software.

Read original argument that PS3 is considered a flop selling 85+M while others are being considered a success selling less than 30M.

You may have skipped (or I worded wrong) sold more SW per HW, not more SW total. And it wasn't 700M less, from what I remember was more like 500M (I remember last official numbers from Sony on total SW for PS2 being 1.5B and PS3 basically 1B). That is why I put more 1st party sold game and more 3rd party sold per HW.

curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

From failure to flop there is a big gap. And SNES to N64 would be the greatest flop ever on his metrics (Sony was newcomer and took PS1 several years before really lightning up), then what would be WiiU 85% drop?

And as I said, we have to accept that the expectations and bar is held very very very high for Sony where a single system selling below 100M is all doom and gloom and others when doing over 30M are celebrated even if at the time they were much older companies in the field or much much much richer.

Also the loss on PS3 was a calculated move, they bet on BD using PS3 to win the race, which it did royally, but costing that division a lot of money they expected to recoup on other divisions that couldn't push the format alone. So we know it's disengeneous to put the financial loss on the calculated move of the HW as PS3 being a flop. Let's remember it had higher attach ratio than PS2, and saw more 1st party sales (from what I can remember) than PS2 as well. So from SW perspective they made more money from HW sold.

Plus 

Xbox One goal was 200M https://stevivor.com/features/interviews/xbox-phil-spencer-brand-leadership/ (don't mind he thinking PS2 only sold 120M). So they reaching 1/4 of the target is a comparable flop?

Or would you preffer Yusuf Mehdi forecast of 400M to 1B Xbox One sold?? https://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-microsoft-aims-for-1-billion-lifetime-sales-100-million-xbox-360-units/

People at Nintendo expecting WiiU to sell 100M http://fortune.com/2016/07/08/nintendo-wii-u-sales/

For N64 coming from the successfull SNES and having no name Playstation and limping Saturn as competition. Higgins, David (April 22, 1997). "Nintendo's black box hides a brilliant brain". The AustralianThe Nintendo 64's simplicity is a key factor for projected sales of 50 million units over a decade-long product life cycle, according to Mr. Jim Foran, SGI's director of engineering for the project

Gamecube also had a 50M sales expectation by 2005 https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube

Yes, only Playstation 3 is flop in context.

Show me where I ever said N64, Gamecube, Wii U or Xbox One were success stories.

The fact remains that PS3 lost billions of dollars, was outsold, and gutted Sony's console marketshare. It's hard to frame that as a success.

So you jumped to defend only part of the argument but forgot to mention it? Because original point is PS3 being a flop by selling 85+M while others being a success selling less than 30M and all of that because of "context". There is as much or more context to say those systems are flop than to PS3 being a failure.

I explained the lost of billions but sure ignore it. On being outsold it was by a system that both companies admit didn't directly compete. Now if you want to say MS stole about half the sales PS3 could have coming from PS2 that would be another point.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363


DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Show me where I ever said N64, Gamecube, Wii U or Xbox One were success stories.

The fact remains that PS3 lost billions of dollars, was outsold, and gutted Sony's console marketshare. It's hard to frame that as a success.

So you jumped to defend only part of the argument but forgot to mention it? Because original point is PS3 being a flop by selling 85+M while others being a success selling less than 30M and all of that because of "context". There is as much or more context to say those systems are flop than to PS3 being a failure.

I explained the lost of billions but sure ignore it. On being outsold it was by a system that both companies admit didn't directly compete. Now if you want to say MS stole about half the sales PS3 could have coming from PS2 that would be another point.

Again, I never said systems selling less than 30 million were successful.

How other non-gaming divisions fared does not change the fact that PS3 lost billions. And tbh the "don't directly compete" card is only ever played when someone wants to try to claim their preferred system being outsold "doesn't count".



DonFerrari said:
zorg1000 said:

Strawman much? Nobody ever said anything about N64, GC, XBO or Wii U being a success.

Also how do you figure Sony made more on PS3 software than PS2 software? Having a slightly higher tie ratio doesnt mean much when you sell ~700 million fewer units of software.

Read original argument that PS3 is considered a flop selling 85+M while others are being considered a success selling less than 30M.

You may have skipped (or I worded wrong) sold more SW per HW, not more SW total. And it wasn't 700M less, from what I remember was more like 500M (I remember last official numbers from Sony on total SW for PS2 being 1.5B and PS3 basically 1B). That is why I put more 1st party sold game and more 3rd party sold per HW.

 

Nobody said they were a success though, that is something you made up.

Like I said, having a slightly higher tie ratio doesnt mean much when the overall number is significantly lower.



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