Why are core gamers buying wiis even 360 and ps3 have price cut

[bdbdbd]

Dragon007 said:

yushire said:

Ok, sorry about that. Even with shovelware coming out on the Wii, why does it keep selling? 2 million software is sold a week, I know that even Wii Sports can't be produced 2 million times in a week. With that attach rate, the gamers who make up such a large sum of weekly sales are the core gamers. Like what everyone says here, only the casual gamer buys 1 or 2 games in an entire year. So why the 2 million?

I fixed it already sorry if no one understands it first

---Edit by Montana: I fixed it again. Now it should be much more legible.  

 

 

Who said core gamers were buying the Wii? I would argue that non-gamers are buying the Wii, ie people who never played games before the Wii came out. 

I think to most hardcore gamers, the Wii is about as appealing as the Gamecube and we all know how well that did. If the Wiimote doesn't rock your boat what's different?

SMG = Sunshine

Brawl = Melee

MP3: Corruption = MP2: Echoes

Mario Kart = Double Dash

Twilight Princess = ...Twilight Princess

I guess you could say the same for the PS3

Final Fantasy XIII = Final Fantasy X

DMC4 = DMC3

MGS4 = MGS2

etc...

But the difference is the PS3 took a significant step forward and the PS2 was successful so it would make sense for it to sell anyway.

First, i'd like to point out a couple of things about your post. The core gamers are buying the Wii. The industrys core is its "casual" audience, and as said, you were referring how GC appealed to the "hardcore", which it did, but it didn't have the casuals, unlike PS2.
Or if we put in context what i said earlier, PS2 had the "hardcore" (the casuals that PSX gathered), while GC had mostly the Mario/Zelda fans.
Secondly, obviously you haven't played either Sunshine or SMG and MKDD or MKWii and Metroid Primes and the Twilight Princess comparision failed with its logic, since it had simultanous release on both platforms.
And even if the games would be "remake" type of sequels, the around 22M userbase is so small, in comparision to six times as big PS2 userbase, added with the same sized XB userbase, that the gaming audience outside GC owners would still have the games as "new".
Thirdly, the Wii Remote does have its appeal, but without the software supporting it, it's nothing. As for the "hardcore" games on Wii, atleast MP3, RE4, REUC and MKWii have managed to use the functionalities in the ways they should be used.
Fourthly, let's look at what kind of steps PS3 took forward: Improvement in processing power/graphics, internal memory by default, downloadable games, online by default (and notionworthy motion sensing, which isn't getting much support).
What Wii took forward: Improvement in processing power/graphics (not as big as PS3), internal memory by default, downloadable games, online by default, motion sensing controller (wholly different from Sixaxis, which is supported in nearly all games), BC.
Let's count out the features that the previous consoles had as peripherals, which leaves PS3 with graphical improvements and motion control (again, rarely getting a decent support) and Wii with graphical improvements, on-board memory, online (on a side note that Phantasy Star Online did use this feature, but outside of that, never got support in games), motion sensing controller, BC.
So, Wii actually improved a lot more than PS3.
Fifthly, i agree that PS3 was supposed to get the PSX audience, if Nintendo wouldn't have disrupted the market.