yeah the graph means that 2 months after the ps2 launched it had it's lowest average weekly sales and never droped lower than that it's entire life. Wii U's 3 month is near Gamecube's 60th month in terms of low sales.
BTW Badgenome - I saw your post on gaf in the link in this thread
Mnementh said:
Dude, really, look at the graph carefully:
Look careful and notice the timespan taken into account for Nintendo- and non-Nintendo-systems. Notice also that PS3 more than doubles GC in NPD-data according to this. Now look at another graph showing PS3 and GC according to NPD - so basically the same:
Congratulations mazty, you found the most biased article EVER. Also for everyone: if the WiiU is on the same level as the Wii nothing can go wrong! |
(Referring specifically to the PS3 vs Gamecube comparison)
That only makes the Gamecube look even worse. PS3 was $600, Gamcube was what? 200?
Anyway PS3 was pretty much guaranteed 3rd party support no matter how poorly it would have sold. Wii U doesn't have that so a slow start is something it may never recover from. It won't peak in its 5th or 6th year like PS3 has.
Soundwave said:
It's going to end up nowhere close to DS sales over here. The DS used to crush 400k-600k even in a month like February, 3DS is putting up 190k in Feb with two hardware models, three big Mario games, Kindgom Hearts, Resident Evil, Kid Icarus, etc. all available and a new Fire Emblem bundle for the month too. It's only in Japan where it's really selling great. |
But its got Pokemon coming up at the end of the year. 3DS may not reach DS levels in America, but it's still a healthy platform to release games.(at least for Nintendo)
Mazty said:
So if you want to compare handhelds to consoles using the above, are you going to ommit smartphones and tablets? Handhelds are clearly not aimed at the same market, therefore comparing sales is utterly pointless. You may as well compare compact car sales to 18 wheelers. |
It appears that you see different devices as being unable to have a hand in the same market, like a company is only allowed to go after one specific market at a time when it produces a product. You're basically saying "Product A is a ___ made primarily for the X Market; therefore, it cannot compete with Product B in the Y Market, even though they share much functionality and there is a significant portion of consumers that may choose one over the other in the Y Market because many of their functions overlap."
You want a visual? Refer to the Euler diagram below. The circles in the bottom right rectangle represent the video game market (A), the home console market (B), and the smartphone/tablet market (C). B and C are independent of each other. All B are A, but not all C are A. More C is becoming A, leaving less room for B.
Comparing a compact car to an 18-wheeler is a sensational strawman argument, and I think you already know that. A compact car is a consumer vehicle bought for personal use and an 18-wheeler is overwhelmingly used for commercial purposes. These really are for different markets because you don't use them for the same reason at all. I can't go to a dealership and purchase an 18-wheeler, and even if I could, it would require a special license to operate it. I can walk into a store and purchase a home console, a handheld console, a phone or a tablet with no objections provided I have the money. I can buy them all, or I can choose just one or two that are most relevant to my tastes and interests... the very thing hundreds of thousands of consumers do every day. And a factor in those decisions is the gaming capabilities of these devices.
So while smartphones, tablets and especially portable consoles are not completely representative of the entire video game market, to say that they don't have an effect on home console sales is to stick your head in the sand. That's like saying smartphones haven't taken a major bite out of the home phone business because one is tied to a land line but offers higher quality and the other is portable but has a Swiss army knife of features. That's like saying smartphones haven't taken a bite out of the consumer digital camera market because one is made only for snapping photos while the other has it as a side feature (if you think not, then Kodak shareholders would like to have a word with you).
I have more to add, but it's almost quittin' time at work, so I must end this already lengthy reply now.
Yeah, sales or bad. And although it`s easy to point out - and understand - where the problem lies (games, marketing) that`s reality.
But in all honesty, it means nothing. Look how great GC started and look how it ended. Look at PS1`s start or even DS' start. Did anyone predicted their success after how they started?
VGKing said:
(Referring specifically to the PS3 vs Gamecube comparison) Anyway PS3 was pretty much guaranteed 3rd party support no matter how poorly it would have sold. Wii U doesn't have that so a slow start is something it may never recover from. It won't peak in its 5th or 6th year like PS3 has. |
I think it will. Price cut and games will assure it that. Nintendo expects to ship 1 million units in Jan-March to increase total sales to 4 million. They will most likely miss that number by a good amount considering Nintendo only sold 120k in NA for 2/3rds of the quarter and will most likely sell similarly in March. And selling 175k in Japan and be lucky to pass 200k by the end of March... With things looking worse than NA in Europe. and to top it all off Nintendo wasn't supply constrained for fourth quarter and probably had a lot of stock left over from demand not meeting expectations. So.. how many units could they possibly ship for the entire year if after 6 months they can't even reach 4 million with no holiday sales to help? They will be lucky to reach 6 million (shipped) by it's first year anniversary which means ~5million sold.
So you don't think with a lower price and better sw Nintendo can improve sales in the next few years? I think they will. However, as I made a thread about it, I don't think sales will increase by how much Nintendo fans are wanting or expecting it to. Next years sales might get close to 8million or something and 4th or 5th year sales might get close to 12mil.
RolStoppable said:
So you believe that the PS2 was still pushing 200k units in the most recent February? The timeframe taken into account for the PS2 is October 2000 to October 2006. |
Which is what the graph states at the top. I was talking about it didn't drop under it's low that happened 2 months after launch for the time the graph covers obviously
I think Nintendo will start to focus on a tablet style console/portable hybrid by the time the Wii U is in its 4th/5th year, but the benefit will be that they'll be able to release cross-platform games between the Wii U and tablet platform (thus not requiring extra dev resources or minimal amounts of it).
burninmylight said:
It appears that you see different devices as being unable to have a hand in the same market, like a company is only allowed to go after one specific market at a time when it produces a product. You're basically saying "Product A is a ___ made primarily for the X Market; therefore, it cannot compete with Product B in the Y Market, even though they share much functionality and there is a significant portion of consumers that may choose one over the other in the Y Market because many of their functions overlap."
You want a visual? Refer to the Euler diagram below. The circles in the bottom right rectangle represent the video game market (A), the home console market (B), and the smartphone/tablet market (C). B and C are independent of each other. All B are A, but not all C are A. More C is becoming A, leaving less room for B.
Comparing a compact car to an 18-wheeler is a sensational strawman argument, and I think you already know that. A compact car is a consumer vehicle bought for personal use and an 18-wheeler is overwhelmingly used for commercial purposes. These really are for different markets because you don't use them for the same reason at all. I can't go to a dealership and purchase an 18-wheeler, and even if I could, it would require a special license to operate it. I can walk into a store and purchase a home console, a handheld console, a phone or a tablet with no objections provided I have the money. I can buy them all, or I can choose just one or two that are most relevant to my tastes and interests... the very thing hundreds of thousands of consumers do every day. And a factor in those decisions is the gaming capabilities of these devices. So while smartphones, tablets and especially portable consoles are not completely representative of the entire video game market, to say that they don't have an effect on home console sales is to stick your head in the sand. That's like saying smartphones haven't taken a major bite out of the home phone business because one is tied to a land line but offers higher quality and the other is portable but has a Swiss army knife of features. That's like saying smartphones haven't taken a bite out of the consumer digital camera market because one is made only for snapping photos while the other has it as a side feature (if you think not, then Kodak shareholders would like to have a word with you). I have more to add, but it's almost quittin' time at work, so I must end this already lengthy reply now. |
No it's not a strawman argument. The selling point of handheld consoles is that they are *gasp* HANDHELD. They are self-contained units that offer a portable gaming experience. Consoles are in no way self-contained. They need a TV and power supply.
Okay compare a compact car to an BMW 5 series. Both cars are they not? This is as much as I'm going to talk about this topic because, frankly, its fucking rediculous. To compare a handheld to a fucking console shows just how far some people are willing to stretch things in order to lessen the severity of a situation. I work in buisness & know that if you really, truly, honestly believe that they are part of the same market, I hope to god you don't go into buisness/economics/retail. It's simply common sense that they are not part of the same market as what the offer are two completely different things.
Mazty said:
No I'm not impossbile to talk to; I've just been educated in how to debate correctly. Your argument is completely vaccous and based on utterly arbritary reasoning, reasoning which you have yet to even attempt to justify. I'm guessing you haven't finished high school? I say that because your argument is devoid of logic - compare handhelds to consoles because they do generally the same thing, but don't compare other items that do generally the same thing as one another. The hell? It's disappointing to see your replies lack substance and then see the attitude you convey when this is pointed out. |
I would agree with NinPie on this, actually. The main purpose of both handheld and home consoles is gaming, and, thus, comparing sales trends between them is not necessarily apples-to-oranges. The 3DS's very weak start and partial recovery can be examined to see if the Wii U is capable of doing so as well (software, advertising, pricing, etc.).
Okami
To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made. I won't open my unworthy mouth.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Thanks for sharing, this OP gives me a good laugh. The next article in the series compares the worst yearly GDP of the US since its independence with the worst of the last 8 years for the Netherlands to show how economical inferior the US is.
