By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Squilliam on 19 December 2008
Edit Thread
Lord N said:
Squilliam said:
Lord N said:

So let me get this straight......

Not only do you truly believe that the PS3 and 360 would combine for 170 million+ sales, you also believe that all of these people, including the non gamers, who are buying the Wii like crazy would spend $400-$600 dollars on a PS3 or 360 if they were the only options, and after that, you still believe that non-traditional games would sell well on the PS3 and 360 despite the fact that only one has managed to do so thus far(Little Big Planet)?

You must have access to some damn fine drugs.

 

I believe that both are losing the battle for the hearts and minds of most gamers to the Wii, but in the absence of the Wii and Nintendo that the consoles would follow a generational progression from the PS1 -> PS2 -> PS3/Xbox 360 sharing X % of the market between them. So whilst I do doubt that they would have bought the Wii, but I do believe Microsoft would be doing even better and the same would apply to Sony, but especially Microsoft with the $200 Arcade.

The PS2 outsold the PS1 even though the latter was really just a performance upgrade on the former. So I believe that the current generation would out perform the previous, following that same model except it would not have grown by nearly as much. If a graphical improvement wasn't apreciated by some then I don't believe that the HD consoles would have nearly the sales strength they currently have, so in that respect they are able to draw in the people who refused to play games that "look stupid", and I used to know a few.

 

 

It should be pretty obvious that a mere graphical upgrade was not the reason for the PS2's success. The HD consoles only have sales strength outside of the holidays. As a matter of fact, the only non-Nintendo console with strong sales in all regions throughout the year is the PSP.

The Wii from the start was at a price point that people are willing to pay, and the most important thing, it offered a new gaming experience that appealed to masses and managed to bring in an entirely new group of gamers that never would have bought a PS3 or 360. The PS3 and 360 simply don't offer this. The Wii also has a steady stream, a strong, standing library of games that appeals to every demographich whereas the PS3 and 360 have only big name exclusives that appeal to core and hardcore gamers. Combine that with their very high entry prices, and there's no way in hell that they would have sold 85 million consoles each. The people who are buying the Wii right now simply would have never spent that much money on consoles that really don't offer anything new other than a graphical upgrade.

 

 

 

Thats because the Wii dominated. The Xbox 360 did launch at a reasonable price @ $300, the same as the PS2 but obviously a little lower adjusted for inflation. Theres nothing that indicates that for the first time in many generations the industry would have shrunk between the PS1->PS2->Xbox 360/PS3 generations in the ansence of Nintendo. Its obvious it wouldn't have grown so fast but not that it would have shrunk. You're looking at the way things are now and just removing the Wii without adjusting the sales of the Xbox 360/PS3 to compensate for its absence as far as I can tell. Just because the Wii gets all the lifestyle/non gamer type gamers doesn't mean they wouldn't have been made on other platforms.

 



Tease.