By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Why people are overestimating the Wii's life time sales

TheBigFatJ said:

Less than 10% of the US playstation owners bought Final Fantasy 7. More than twice as many people in the US bought super mario 64. So, uh, how exactly was this a huge release that killed the N64? 


Super Mario 64 was also a launch title.  Shall we compare quantities sold of Wii Sports to Super Mario Galaxy now as well because the result would be just as meaningless.



Around the Network

The same reason people underestimate it ???




PS-She said:
TheBigFatJ said:

Less than 10% of the US playstation owners bought Final Fantasy 7. More than twice as many people in the US bought super mario 64. So, uh, how exactly was this a huge release that killed the N64?


Super Mario 64 was also a launch title. Shall we compare quantities sold of Wii Sports to Super Mario Galaxy now as well because the result would be just as meaningless.

 

It would be meaningless for a different reason. Wii sports is bundled.

My point is that Super Mario 64 had a bigger impact in the US than final fantasy 7. Launch title or not.  He was saying that Final Fantasy 7 killed the N64.  In the general scope of things, Final Fantasy 7 was less than 1/10th of what sold playstations. (1/10th would be the ceiling, assuming that everyone who bought a final fantasy 7 bought a playstation for final fantasy 7 and wouldn't have otherwise).

 



You know eugene, you have good logic there, and the percentage you estimated, could happen among existing gamers, although, Wii may still get bigger share than your estimation.
Now, predicting sales among existing gamers, is rather easy, but the real question is, that how will the non-gaming audience adopt Wii. Or what do the lapsed gamers think.
So far Wii has been adopted by existing gamers and to some extent lapsed gamers. Existing gamers see potential in Wiis controls, and a lot of them are still for more games to come. A lot of lapsed gamers are interested in Virtual Console, since a lot of their favourite games are downloadable for a reasonable price. A lot of non-gamers are interested in fun and the easy approach of Wii, and for them games like Wii Sports, Wii Play, Mario Party, Boogie, karaoke games etc. are needed. A lot of elderly people, who sees computers too complicated for them, will find news channel and weather channel very useful and since you can even have fun with Wii, it's even better and even the familys kids like it. There's this old joke about gramps, who couldn't see or hear anymore, and relatives were thinking what to give him for his birthday, and they decided to buy him a moped (that actually was the joke). Now, think how many people decide to buy Wiis for their elderly relatives, because they see it useful.

So, basically only the sky is the limit for Wii, but nobody can tell at this point, that will Nintendos strategy work among the non-gamers, Wii has already won the existing gamers and lapsed gamers to their side, but the question is, will they win the non-gamers.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

TheBigFatJ said:
PS-She said:
TheBigFatJ said:

Less than 10% of the US playstation owners bought Final Fantasy 7. More than twice as many people in the US bought super mario 64. So, uh, how exactly was this a huge release that killed the N64?


Super Mario 64 was also a launch title. Shall we compare quantities sold of Wii Sports to Super Mario Galaxy now as well because the result would be just as meaningless.

 

It would be meaningless for a different reason. Wii sports is bundled.

My point is that Super Mario 64 had a bigger impact in the US than final fantasy 7. Launch title or not.

 


No more or less than Super Mario 64 practically was.  For early n64 owners, it was their first game.  Of course, Wii Sports was also not bundled everywhere IIRC.

Your point is supported only by sales of that single game and nothing else however.  My point is supported by the fact the Playstation won that generation.  Final Fantasy VII proved that you could make a great and profitable game with CDs and on a non-Nintendo console.  Developers were getting pissed at Nintendo and Squaresoft showed them that Sony had a future.   Maybe its sales weren't what SM64's were, but the ripple effect from its success more than made up for its (still highly profitable) sales.



Around the Network

Simple.At this point of time it's not an unrealistic scenario for the WII to stay at the top and to end with lifetimesales of 62{ :) }-90 million.For 360 maybe 45-55 million.Now for the difficult part : for PS3 nearly everything from 50-130 million could be possible.



Quality for Life

PS-She said:
TheBigFatJ said:
PS-She said:
TheBigFatJ said:

Less than 10% of the US playstation owners bought Final Fantasy 7. More than twice as many people in the US bought super mario 64. So, uh, how exactly was this a huge release that killed the N64?


Super Mario 64 was also a launch title. Shall we compare quantities sold of Wii Sports to Super Mario Galaxy now as well because the result would be just as meaningless.

 

It would be meaningless for a different reason. Wii sports is bundled.

My point is that Super Mario 64 had a bigger impact in the US than final fantasy 7. Launch title or not.

 


No more or less than Super Mario 64 practically was.  For early n64 owners, it was their first game.  Of course, Wii Sports was also not bundled everywhere IIRC.

Your point is supported only by sales of that single game and nothing else however.  My point is supported by the fact the Playstation won that generation.  Final Fantasy VII proved that you could make a great and profitable game with CDs and on a non-Nintendo console.  Developers were getting pissed at Nintendo and Squaresoft showed them that Sony had a future.   Maybe its sales weren't what SM64's were, but the ripple effect from its success more than made up for its (still highly profitable) sales.


Your knowledge of gaming history is more than a little fuzzy.  Developers refused to support the Nintendo 64 because of high development costs and high royalties.  They chose to support the PSX because Sony offered to subsidize development, and CD development costs were signifficantly lower than cartridge.  Similarly, Wii development costs are signifficantly lower than PS3 and 360 development costs, and Sony has been the ones refusing to pay for assisted or subsidized development this generation.  



^ Well said.Crossing fingers for that scenario:)



Quality for Life

If they were to get 70% marketshare, they need to win 70% marketshare on a weekly basis, but their not. The PS2 however did. They usually get about 45% marketshare on a weekly basis. Typically PS3+360 > Wii



RolStoppable said:
This thread didn't bring up any compelling reasons why the Wii would end up with less than 70 % market share.

Price drops didn't help struggling consoles in the past (Xbox, GC) and the resource shift of publishers will only improve Wii sales. Higher Wii sales will increase 3rd party support which will lead to even more Wii sales.

 The 360 looks like it will easily outsell the Xbox, and the PS3 will easily end up outselling the Gamecube, so even if the Wii managed to beat the PS2, it couldn't hold the same dominant marketshare.