The whole "weakest console wins the generation" trend is more coincidence than anything, being the weakest console was never a selling point; you have to look at the extenuating circumstances to understand the results. The original playstation, while much weaker than n64, had an overwhelming library of games thanks to a more open policy regarding third parties and really forcing the industry to move to disc from cartridge, which made for a substantially cheaper alternative to nintendo's offerings at the time.
PS2 carried the popularity of the first playstation and was many people's first dvd player. However, though ps2 was the weakest of the sixth gen, there was no huge difference between the three consoles.
Last gen the wii captured the imagination of millions with motion controls and sony alienated a ton of people with its strange architecture, ridiculously high price of entry and flippant attitude towards its customers. Without the motion controls the wii would have sold a fraction of what it managed and the 360 would likely have taken the gen and it wasn't that much weaker than the ps3.
This gen nintendo lost a lot of its product awareness since the wii more or less pulled out of the competition a couple years early leaving the market to microsoft and sony nigh unchecked. I can't say this for certain, but it feels as though nintendo thought they could dictate where the market goes given the wii's success (much like what happened with the n64), which has proved spurious as microsoft and sony took it in a different direction leaving nintendo further behind than they may have expected this gen, not to mention its pricepoint isn't that much more desirable compared to the ps4's at this point. And microsoft this gen pulled a ps3 with their pr, and price of entry for a weaker machine.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
