Mr Khan said:
Because both are lies. PS3 won't go any longer than 7 years without replacement at the absolute most, with 6 being the more likely one, and likely Wii 2 is coming, but it's obviously in Nintendo's interest to deny it |
The misunderstanding is born from people on opposite fronts, both Sony fans and haters, that want to see a "10 years plan" for what it isn't. A 10 year plan can mean 6-7 years on the market as main console, as you write, and keeping on selling it as long as enough people buy it after the successive console is released and becomes the main console. PS2 is completing a ~10 yrs plan, but it was the main offer just for ~6yrs. And obviously, also Wii should be able to do the same, if not better, while PS3 could do roughly the same in time, thanks to having peaked later than Wii, but reaching lower total lifetime sales, most probably around 80M if things go satisfactorily but nothing more, 100M if things go very well, but reaching PS2 would be very, very unlikely. OTOH, Wii can reach 100M or more in 2012 without any problems, and it could beat even PS2 with a 10 years plan (that doesn't mean releasing Wii2 10 years after Wii).
2012-2013 makes sense the most, 2011 doesn't mainly for costs issues, releasing too early gave both to MS and Sony costs problems and to MS reliability ones too. Releasing Wii2 in 2011 would allow to barely make it twice as powerful as a PS3 and profitable, with very little margin to add also a camera with hands-free motion control, should Kinect sales show that it became necessary, and by then such a controller would be still too expensive for usual Nintendo strategies. And then there are a lot of other good reasons for not releasing so early.
