What metric of success do you use for all the current generation consoles?

[phisheep]

It depends what you mean by success. I think that there are at least six main measures.

First, you must sell enough hardware to create a viable market for games on the platform. This is the baseline for success. If you don’t do that you have real problems.

At some level, all three consoles have achieved this, though there is room for argument as to whether Microsoft and Sony have each created enough of a market for high-budget games, hence the plethora of multi-platforms.

Second, you must achieve your collateral targets.

Nintendo has done this, in expanding the market. Sony has done this in winning the HD format war. It is not clear what, if any, collateral targets Microsoft had.

Third, you must not sully the brand. There is room for lots of argument here, but arguably all three have failed to some extent.

Nintendo – in ‘alienating the hardcore’.
Microsoft – with hardware unreliability.
Sony – in going too far upmarket to cater for the mass mainstream.

Fourth, you must sell games and continue to sell them. All three have succeeded to about the same extent here, averaging about one game sold per console per two-and-a-bit months.

Fifth, profitability. This is not as easy as the other metrics, as raw profitability in the gaming arena is the whole story only for Nintendo. Sony appears to have changed tack here, previously relying on high-end tech development to bolster the PS3 and now more profit-focused. Microsoft really doesn’t seem particularly focused on profit, it takes second place to market penetration.

Sixth, you must whup the competition. Nintendo has done this. Sony and Microsoft haven’t.