JWeinCom said:
I've already defined gamers as gaming enthusiasts/hobbyists versus non-gamers who typically didn't play games before hand. As for the question about how many were previously playstation gamers, we don't have any information on any of that nor any information on the demographics of those who were non-gamers. The only thing we have is how much each gen of Nintendo's consoles have sold.
I have countered your arguments, but your "terms" make it pretty much impossible. Case in point, here.
Semantics. Non-Gamers are concerned people who aren't gamers. Gamers are consider people who have gaming as a hobby.
So, I pointed out that a lot of Nintendo's Wii gamers likely came from the PS2 gamers.
That would place them directly in competition, which would directly counter your argument.
Claim with no evidence.
Like... all of yours?
Your response is since we don't have a detailed study of what PS2 gamers would up buying, we can only compare Nintendo sales figures to Nintendo sales figures. We can make the assumption based on popular casual franchises
no because their appeal is subjective
Uhhhhhh... what does that mean? The appeal of every game is subjective.
that Nintendo took market share from Sony,
So... the fact that franchises were popular on the PS2 became popular on the Wii in no way suggests an overlap of fans? Seems pretty sound logic to me. I'm not sure what you expect, a letter from each person who bought Guitar hero world tour?
but we can assume that 50 million people who bought Nintendo consoles were all non-gamers. Uhhhh what demographics are backing you up?
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Instead, I use the 5th (30 mill) and 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the Wii (100 mill). That's at the very least 50 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.
|
Ummmm... how does that exactly suggest that the 50 million people were non-gamers? You've shown that they're 50 million non-nintendo gamers, but that says nothing about their previous gaming habbits. So here, have your jpg back.
Wait let me try something...
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Instead, I use the 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the XBox 360 (80 mill). That's at the very least 60 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.
|
Applying the same logic to the XBox 360 as you did to the Wii (that is that we compare a system's current gen to last gen and every new owner is a non gamer). Then you get that the XBox 360 had 60 million non-gamers. Of course, that doesn't work, but it doesn't work with the Wii either.
that can't count by the rules you set up.
We can only use information we have, this is the point of being objective.
The data is objective. Your conclusion is subjective. The data does not state that 50 million people were non-gamers. The data states 50 million people did not previously own a Nintendo console. Big difference.
The only data we could compare Nintendo to is other Nintendo consoles.
And anyone who didn't buy one of Nintendo's earlier consoles is branded as a nongamer and is an outlier that doesn't count.
I did not say this.
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Instead, I use the 5th (30 mill) and 6th (20 mill) generations and compare that against the Wii (100 mill). That's at the very least 50 million non-gamers as rough low estimate.
|
Yeah... ya did. Nongamer-outlier. Outlier- someone not included in your data set. You identified anyone out of the 30-50 million N64 cube range as an non-gamer, and excluded them from the market. Hence, outlier.
As for the information regarding the demographics of the Wii's audience.
Right back at ya slick.
|
