Gotta love the revisionist history BS about the Wii

[curl-6]

Soundwave said:

curl-6 said:

Of course there's always luck involved, but the narrative being pushed is that Nintendo didn't know what it was doing, took a random shot in the dark, and got undeserved success through luck alone. This isn't true, the Wii was very specifically designed and planned to do exactly what it did. They didn't hit their target by blind accident, they took careful aim and scored a bullseye. (Something they've utterly failed to do with Wii U)

I would more or less agree with that, however it's hard not to admit Nintendo's overall performance in the console business post-SNES colors the discussion considerably.

If Sony's history in the game console business looked like this

Playstation 1 - 33 million LTD (ala N64)

Playstation 2 - 22 million LTD (ala GCN)

Playstation 3 - 100 million LTD (ala Wii)

Playstation 4 - just launched, epic disaster of a 1st year. (ala Wii U)

A lot of Nintendo fans would probably be inclined to say the PS3 was a bit of a fluke.

I do think the Wii was certainly an anamoly (a brilliant executed one, but an anamoly just the same). It's not a repeatable formula because it basically relies on the company coming up with some unbelievable, industry shaking idea every 5-6 years that has the same impact. It's just impossible.

Being an amomaly doesn't make it magically not count though. Those 100 million consoles don't somehow not exist just because they defy a prior trend.