Nowadays there are so many people on video games forums speaking about sales, the future of consoles and still so few of them seem to understand the most basic concepts about this market.

Comparative installed bases is certainly the most important thing to consider to know the real situation of a console in terms of sales because that's the key point that will decide the third party support of a console in the future. Third parties will obviously compare the situation of each platform to decide which are their best options. But yet it's incredible how so few analysts (lol), journalists or forums experts, that talk about sales every week, predict the fate of consoles with very definitive opinions, seem to understand that the situation of a console with an installed base of 5 millions with the competiton at 0 can certainly not be compared to the one of a console with an installed base of 5 while the competition is at 20 or more.

It's very funny to see that in some message boards like NeoGAF where people are too pedant to use VG Chartz numbers for their meaningful analysis there is pretty much noone to understand that the situation of the WiiU for this manner can certainly not be compared to the GC or Vita for instance. And because noone seems to understand that forums these days are just incredibly full of pointless analysis.

And I'm not even talking about the concept of killer apps that the same people don't seem to get either...

''But yet it's incredible how few so called analysts (lol), journalists or forums experts that talk about sales every week, predict the fate of consoles with very definitive opinions seem to understand that the situation of a console with an installed base of for example 5 millions with the competiton at 0 can certainly not be compared to the one of a console with an installed based of 5 while the competition is at 20 or more.''

Holy crap that was hard to read.

So are we to presume you think the Wii U is not competing against PS3 and 360, because it has an arbitary label of being 8th Gen. Because youd be wrong.

The WiiU is of course competing against PS3 and 360 but so will be PS4 and X1 which is another point that many seem to forget especially when so many big "next gen" games are in fact cross gen. Whatever, PS4 and X1 will be the ones to be in direct competion against the WiiU during most of its life cycle so of course those are the ones that matters, PS3 and 360 won't.

A big part of the marketing challenge in a new gen is still persuading people that they need new consoles and that the previous ones are of no use anymore.

PS4 and X1 will also compete against ps3/360, more than ever before I think, as the gen gap looks smaller this time.

Plus PS360 will be supported longer than previous gen were (from what PR says, of course), so I would say that wii U, while having a clear advantage (right now), still has a lot of competition.

True.

Actually, even the so-called videogame media (journalists, web and magazine editors, reviewers, etc etc etc) don´t understand basic concepts of marketing and economy then, don´t understand how this market really works.

I´d say that the future of the videogame console industry depends today much more on those two things (marketing and economy) than ever before.

Many people who played on consoles in the past are not interested in them anymore. Some are changing handhelds for tablets and smartphones, others are playing only on PC. What the industry can do in order to make people believe they actually need a dedicated gaming device ? What is the real competition of consoles right now? What can be done for this kind of product be profitable if the market is getting niche more and more?

Those are not easy questions but it´s clear that the success of a console can´t be measured just by comparative numbers. A product may be a success if it can provide its manufacturer a reasonable profit, even if it´s not the best seller or it´s not aimed to a broad range of consumers.

Well I'm sorry but I don't really agree with you. In fact I'm pretty much stating the opposite. Sure, marketing and new trends like smartphones or tablets are important but I think they are way too overrated. With 3DS we have here a great example that smartrphones haven't change that much this market. I think people talk too much about those aspects while they are marginally important in the success of a gaming machine. Games really represent probably something like 90% of what really matters for a console to sell well and when you have great and appealing ones it's really easy to make a good marketing campaign as well. This is exactly what guys like Pachter probably will never get : games are pretty much all that really matters, everything else is just a bonus.

So when it's about the future of a console like the WiiU people usually talk about things like the concept, about marketing, about power and so on... but when you have games like Mario 3D, Mario Kart, Wii Fit... to come those aspects are totally negligeable imo. Line-up and killer apps are what is really important and has to be taken into account way before considering any other point.

The same thing can be said about the installed base of a plateform in comparison to its main competitors to know if it's in good position or not. Looking just at the weekly charts, making comparison out of context with previous consoles, without taking into account what marketshare it already has in comparison to its main competitors is meaningless because again what matters the most at the end of the day  for publishers is to know what are/is the platform(s) with the best installed base(s). So here again before considering any other aspect if you don't get this simple point which is by far the most important one you certainly can't really get this market imo and certainly won't be able to make a  good analysis or prediction of what will happen.

well the PSX killed dreamcast basically, then PS2 finished it off.

it's not black and white tho