Could the Wii remain dominant another five years?

[Resident_Hazard]

patjuan32 said:

 

I ignored your comments about the PS2. Engineers can apated their engines to run on many different types of hardware. ID has a version of their Rage engine running on the Iphone. Capcom has their MTframe work (engine) running on the 3DS. I've also demonstrated through links that I provided in my previous post that Engineers have adapted engines, COD 4, Unreal 3, and the MTFramework, to run on the Wii. If you think the engines were gimped then provide links that prove your statements. The Engines are not gimped.

I would like to see your evidence that old, popular games suddenly all appear on sales charts when consoles are adopted.  Logically speaking, this means that if console sales are steady--as they typically are now--that game sales would remain steady throughout--which isn't generally true (except for a few Wii releases like Wii Play).  Again, not every game remains in production for the run of a console--as a matter of fact, almost no games remain in production during the entire run of a console.  Production of Bioshock, Burnout Revenge, Fable II, and several other titles had long ceased by the time that I got my Xbox360 in late 2008.  At the time, all copies of Bioshock were first-run copies that had been discounted to clear them out of stock.  In fact, my copy of Fable II is a Platinum re-release with two downloadable bits included. And that version is also no longer in production. 

This is a sales site and it's been discussed every time NPD, Media Crate, or Chart track data is listed in the forum. Games can be old like Mario Kart DS or GTA San Andreas for the PS2 but they stay in the charts because  new console owners are buying those games. Halo is another example and so is Halo 3. If the demand for a game continues. Retailers will continue to order and stock the game. The games that I mentioned perviously are examples of this.

How then, can sales of these titles--most of which would no longer be in production--suddenly shoot back up into the charts at any time just because hardware sales suddenly see a spike?  It's extremely rare to find any game, ever, that remained in steady production during the entire lifespan of a console.  Even Tetris wasn't constantly made for the entire run of the original Game Boy--and it's the highest selling title on that system because it was originally a pack-in.   By your logic, all "popular" titles would have suddenly jumped back into the charts just because the Game Boy Pocket was released.  I'm reasonably certain that many of those games, such as Metroid II and Super Mario Land were long out of production by the time the Game Boy Pocket brought new life to the Game Boy line. 

Nope, I talked about their previous consoles, N64 and the GameCube. Not once did I say that the Wii would follow this pattern. Nintendo could continue to support the Wii like Sony continued to support the PSX and the PS2 even when the successor was available to the public.

 

You shouldn't dismiss the PS2, and you're analogy of it essentially being a generation behind the GameCube is still foolhardy.  Wikipedia shows just how closely the PS2 and GameCube were in overall power.  Look at that, they really aren't that far apart:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(sixth_generation)
Edit:  I also grabbed this so you could see just how far behind, well, everything, the Wii is:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation) Now tell me that the Wii is comparable to the PS2, when compared to it's generational counterparts.  They are obviously not (technically) behind their genarational brothers in even remotely the same manner.

Anyway, logic dictates that any HD-specialized game engine rebuilt for the Wii will be gimped.  It will not feature, nor will it be able to handle the same levels of texture detail, poly counts, lighting, particles, etc.  Logically, if the engines weren't going to be gimped on the Wii, there would be no reason to rebuild them--they'd just use the same exact version of the engine found running smoothly on the Xbox360.

 

The games you pick out as "titles that sell to late console adopters" are of those very, very rare breed that are consistantly popular during the lifespan of the console.  Mario Kart titles are always  popular (for some reason) and GTA: San Andreas?  Dude, surely you must realize the fallacy in mentioning that title.  It's only one of the highest selling titles of all time.  Of course it was available throughout the lifespan of the PS2 (at least all they years after it's release).  And Halo?  Man, seriously?  Same category as GTA: San Andreas (or most GTA titles).  The plain fact is, the vast, vast, vast majority of titles released across any given system do not stay in production for more than a year.  Two at the longest.  And only the upper, say, 1% will ever reappear on sales charts when an update to a console is released.

Eternal Darkness on the GameCube sold about 250,000 copies--which isn't bad, but not what the game deserved.  It was not in production for nearly any of the GameCube's life cycle (though reports surfaced that a very tiny number of new copies were pressed during the GameCube's twilight for some reason--and only shipped, I think, to Wal-Mart).  If every game stayed in production the entire time, not only would there be no need to make new games, there'd also be no room for them in stores.  Yes, obviously some more popular titles will sell a bit more to late adopters--but again, that's not going to happen all at once.  When I buy a PS3, I'm not going to instantly buy all the older titles released the first couple years, thus adding to sales numbers--I'm going to buy the new title that has me interested (oh man, LBP2 is coming!), and maybe an older one if it's readily available--which they usually aren't unless I'm standing in GameStop.

The original point of this was that you essentially said that everyone (or most, anyway) of the people buying the new Xbox360 are just current owners "trading up."  And I agreed that a few of them would be, but more likely, a very large number of said people are new adopters--regardless of which games they might be buying.  Also, one should consider that late adopters may not necessarily be swayed by some of the more major titles.  For instance, when I bought my Xbox360 in 2008, Halo 3 was not one of the games I picked up.  One of the games I bought was used and no longer in production, so there was no way for it to reappear in sales charts anyway (Burnout: Revenge).  Which, I would imagine, is what makes up the bulk of games purchased by late adopters--used titles.

 

 

Simply pointing  out that this is a sales site doesn't instantly explain anything.  Aside from the fact that this is a sales site.  Which, I have to admit, I kinda already knew. 

Thanks for finally explaining what your final point was.  Now it makes sense.