Quantcast
Console Naming

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Console Naming

The names of the consoles reveal the strategy that the company is using. Let's start with Sony.  PS1, PS2, PS3, etc....  It seems predictable, but that is actually Sony's strategy.  Predicatable = reliable.  You know what you are getting with a PS5, for example.  It's going to be just like a PS4, but more powerful.  A lot of people like that reliable nature for Playstation so that makes it a good strategy.

The XBox names are all style and no substance, which is very much what the XBox strategy is as well.  Their third console is called XBox One.  The more I think about it, the more moronic it seems.  It sounds cool at first though.  It's basically empty marketing, without a lot of guarantees, which reflects the XBox strategy as a whole.

Nintendo I find most interesting of all.  Each console has a different strategy, and it is revealed in the name (except maybe Gamecube...not sure what that strategy is).  The systems thought up by Iwata often have double meanings on top of that.

Famicom - Family Computer.  This is a cheap computer system that the whole family can use.  In Japan it had a disk drive, keyboard, and a bunch of other features that a computer can use.  Of course it also had games, but their were a wide variety of games that appealed to all members of a family, kids and parents.  Plenty of Go and Majong games in Japan to go with Mario and Zelda.  A system for everyone.

Super Famicom - Like the Famicom, but better.
N64 - We have 64 bits!  Look how powerful our system is.

Wii - Bring everyone together to play.  Wii = We (local multiplayer).  Also Wii = Whee!  (It's fun.)  Simple fun for everyone.  Not complicated.
Wii U - Combines "a multiplayer system for everyone" with "a system just for you".  It's a nonsense strategy which helps explain why it flopped so badly.

Gameboy - It's a little game system for on the go.  It's not quite a full grown up game system.  Simple, quick games.
Virtual Boy - Like the Gameboy, but with Virtual Reality.
Gameboy Color - Like the Gameboy, but now in color.
Gameboy Advance - Like the Gameboy but Advanced, more powerful.  (See also Super Famicom.)

DS - Stands for Dual Screen and Developer's System.  They made it easy for developers to make games for it.
3DS - Like the DS, but in 3D.

Switch - You can switch between home and handheld mode.  I also think they intend gamers to switch from Playstation to Nintendo.  The latter is my personal speculation and still remains to be seen.



Around the Network
The_Liquid_Laser said:

The names of the consoles reveal the strategy that the company is using. Let's start with Sony.  PS1, PS2, PS3, etc....  It seems predictable, but that is actually Sony's strategy.  Predicatable = reliable.  You know what you are getting with a PS5, for example.  It's going to be just like a PS4, but more powerful.  A lot of people like that reliable nature for Playstation so that makes it a good strategy.

Being seen as new and fresh isn't always a bad thing though.
Case in point: Wii, DS, Switch. - They all ditched the baggage from their previous system naming convention and also sold like gangbusters.

The_Liquid_Laser said:

The XBox names are all style and no substance, which is very much what the XBox strategy is as well.  Their third console is called XBox One.  The more I think about it, the more moronic it seems.  It sounds cool at first though.  It's basically empty marketing, without a lot of guarantees, which reflects the XBox strategy as a whole.

The entire point if the Xbox One name was to be the "One" place for all your entertainment needs, whether it was gaming, movies, tv shows, social media.

Obviously the name didn't catch on... And oft-confused with the Original Xbox which now required "Original" to precede the name "Xbox" so people knew what you were talking about.

And that does reflect Microsoft's strategy somewhat.

But I agree, it is a moronic name and reflected Microsoft's lack of commitment to pure gaming at the time... I just wish Microsoft would actually catch on that "Xbox" was a good name. "Xbox 360" was also a good name.

Xbox One was not a good name.
Xbox Series X is also not a good name. (And I often accidentally call it Xbox One series X which compounds the issue.)

The_Liquid_Laser said:

Nintendo I find most interesting of all.  Each console has a different strategy, and it is revealed in the name (except maybe Gamecube...not sure what that strategy is).  The systems thought up by Iwata often have double meanings on top of that.

Switch - You can switch between home and handheld mode.  I also think they intend gamers to switch from Playstation to Nintendo.  The latter is my personal speculation and still remains to be seen.

Well the Switch name itself isn't really a reflection of the platform anymore... As now there are Switch consoles that don't... Well. Switch.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Azzanation said:
There is something in a name, adding numbers isnt a way to show it.
Numbers can make a product feel old in comparison to something with a unique name.

Names like Dreamcast, Xbox 360, Gamecube, N64 etc to someone that doesnt know the age of those systems will believe there recent compared to a PS2 which is soon to be 3 numbers behind the current system.

I for one support creative names, it makes a system feel unique and special compared to lets say a iPhone 3 or Samsung S4 etc. Numbers are easy however it ages the previous models considerably and makes people believe you just need the latest one.

Anyway thats my take.

That's... true though. Especially when the latest one is backwards compatible too.



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

I really like the name Playstation. Numbering them thereafter makes sense, although one could argue it lacks creativity.

I've never liked the name Xbox. I understand its origin, but it sounds like something an 11 year old would come up with: "I'm gonna invent the baddest video game system ever and call it XBOX!" Same with the look of the first system and its big "X" aesthetic. However, for whatever reason, I think the name "Xbox 360" sounds damn cool. After that, the numbering and now the "Series X" monikers are just too confusing for their own good.

Nintendo's consoles were all fine, including the Wii which was unique and catchy with its quirkiness. But the name WiiU is garbage, and the reasoning behind it (Wii - as in everyone, meets U - the core gamer) is just stupid. Gameboy was a pretty cool name (a play on the Walkman) and Nintendo's other handhelds were ok I guess (3DS is clever following its predecessor).

Sega Genesis was one of the best named systems of all time in my opinion (Mega Drive not so much though). Dreamcast... well, it's not that it sounds bad, but it reminds me too much of some pro fishing pole: "Caught me a good 8-pounder today with muh Dreamcast". Master System and Saturn were nothing special.

As for everyone else nothing really stood out as good or clever. I personally liked the ring of TurboGrafx-16, but both it and its name in Japan (PC Engine) made it sound more powerful than it really was.



I dont really care what they call the Xbox cause I just end up calling it Xbox in regular conversation. I feel like console names dont really matter much if it's from an established company. We do live in a world were a console named the "Wii" sold over 100m units.



Around the Network

VAMatt said:
MS doesn't want to do simple numbers, because they'd have to have a lower number than PS. So, they choose more creative names. They don't do a great job of it, but they try.

Maybe they should call the next one XBox 6, just to be ahead of Sony. Or, they could just count up every significant hardware revision, and call it the XB 10 (or whatever the number would be).

Are you sure?

Xbox One? Doesnt get much more simple than that. Last time i looked four was bigger than one. I know MS tried to convey a message. How this turned is a story told many times. A tragic tale of betrayal and foolhardiness. 

Not doing a great job... is putting it mildly. I mean, when hearing "Xbox1" no none gamer folk would think "oh its Microsoft All in One multimedia thingy". People like to point at Nintendos WiiU for bad marketing, attributing the name it was given. What about Microsoft and their Xbox1? 

It will get even more confusing.

https://www.businessinsider.de/international/microsoft-only-using-xbox-name-going-forward-2019-12/

PS5. Done.



Hunting Season is done...

Azzanation said:
There is something in a name, adding numbers isnt a way to show it.
Numbers can make a product feel old in comparison to something with a unique name.

Names like Dreamcast, Xbox 360, Gamecube, N64 etc to someone that doesnt know the age of those systems will believe there recent compared to a PS2 which is soon to be 3 numbers behind the current system.

I for one support creative names, it makes a system feel unique and special compared to lets say a iPhone 3 or Samsung S4 etc. Numbers are easy however it ages the previous models considerably and makes people believe you just need the latest one.

Anyway thats my take.

So you're saying that using numbers works perfectly?  Because any business wants people to think they need the latest release.  For that reason, the rest of what you said is largely irrelevant.  

At the end of the day, a "creative name" means nothing.  People don't care.  They'll buy an iPhone 7 or whatever else, as long as they think it's the best product for them.  The real goal for a business should be to not confuse the customer or create a negative connotation.  

Last edited by pokoko - on 17 December 2019

Zoombael said:

VAMatt said:
MS doesn't want to do simple numbers, because they'd have to have a lower number than PS. So, they choose more creative names. They don't do a great job of it, but they try.

Maybe they should call the next one XBox 6, just to be ahead of Sony. Or, they could just count up every significant hardware revision, and call it the XB 10 (or whatever the number would be).

Are you sure?

Xbox One? Doesnt get much more simple than that. Last time i looked four was bigger than one. I know MS tried to convey a message. How this turned is a story told many times. A tragic tale of betrayal and foolhardiness. 

Not doing a great job... is putting it mildly. I mean, when hearing "Xbox1" no none gamer folk would think "oh its Microsoft All in One multimedia thingy". People like to point at Nintendos WiiU for bad marketing, attributing the name it was given. What about Microsoft and their Xbox1? 

It will get even more confusing.

https://www.businessinsider.de/international/microsoft-only-using-xbox-name-going-forward-2019-12/

PS5. Done.

XBox One is definitely not an example of simple numbering. It's their third console.  So, if they followed the PS model, it would be the XBox 3.



pokoko said:

So you're saying that using numbers works perfectly?  Because any business wants people to think they need the latest release.  For that reason, the rest of what you said is largely irrelevant.  

At the end of the day, a "creative name" means nothing.  People don't care.  They'll buy an iPhone 7 or whatever else, as long as they think it's the best product for them.  The real goal for a business should be to not confuse the customer or create a negative connotation.  

I am looking at it in a customers perspective not a buisness perspective.

For me, unique names make the console feel unique and irreplaceable where as a numbered console gets tossed away the moment they buy the latest model.

I prefer creative names, numbers are just plain boring and expected. There is no creative thinking behind using numbers. That isnt just console based but Phones are also criminal to over using numbers for models.



I do hope the next Switch will be Switch 2. And so on until there is something that shakes up the console market.



Pocky Lover Boy!