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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Offical Sell-in numbers for PS3 - credit to ArmGunar.

DonFerrari said:
Eagle367 said:

Actually not at all for Nintendo. Because even in their worst hour, they never stopped giving numbers. So if you crunch in the numbers for all of the 3ds hardware and software and take them out of the equation plus the other stuff ninty spent money on, you can tell how much of it the Wii U was eating up. And have you seen the charts of Sony when PS3 was selling Vs now? And the same for Ninty with Wii U. Ninty was always close to 0 with little losses while Sony's gap was huge. Ninty are just better at managing their business when their consoles fail than Sony are, which is why we're lucky they are so good at marketing their consoles. Otherwise PS and possibly Sony would die out. If you want to actually dig deep, it is not only possible but also probable that you can prove or disprove my hypothesis.

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

That would be an effective argument had the switch not sold well because of the Wii U or people who bought the Wii U loving it as a console. It's a much smaller group of people than the PS3 and of course not a 100% love it but still ultimately as we are discussing business and sales, I think Ninty's strategy was much more effective than Sony's. Ninty lost less money, recovering in a couple years time what they lost, showed they still can make a successful console, is recovering third party support which it lost, gained a lot of trust and goodwill from the indies during the Wii U era and still produced quality games which the fans adored and not all of them are yet on the switch for a bigger audience. Hell some games just can't be as good as they were on the Wii U like zombiU or Rayman legends. It was a dark time for sure but never a 100% negative time. The wiiU taught ninty some really important lessons and helped Ninty in some subtle ways which people fail to acknowledge.

But ultimately the past is behind us and we can look back at both consoles as something that people who bought them adored for the most part while their successors are huge successes for the companies, console gaming and gamers alike. I hope the console marker stays strong especially against the upcoming streaming competition and PS5, neXtbox and switch 2(probably?) are all successful consoles that improve our gaming experience and deliver awesome games



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Around the Network
Eagle367 said:
DonFerrari said:

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

That would be an effective argument had the switch not sold well because of the Wii U or people who bought the Wii U loving it as a console. It's a much smaller group of people than the PS3 and of course not a 100% love it but still ultimately as we are discussing business and sales, I think Ninty's strategy was much more effective than Sony's. Ninty lost less money, recovering in a couple years time what they lost, showed they still can make a successful console, is recovering third party support which it lost, gained a lot of trust and goodwill from the indies during the Wii U era and still produced quality games which the fans adored and not all of them are yet on the switch for a bigger audience. Hell some games just can't be as good as they were on the Wii U like zombiU or Rayman legends. It was a dark time for sure but never a 100% negative time. The wiiU taught ninty some really important lessons and helped Ninty in some subtle ways which people fail to acknowledge.

But ultimately the past is behind us and we can look back at both consoles as something that people who bought them adored for the most part while their successors are huge successes for the companies, console gaming and gamers alike. I hope the console marker stays strong especially against the upcoming streaming competition and PS5, neXtbox and switch 2(probably?) are all successful consoles that improve our gaming experience and deliver awesome games

It was asked why PS3 is considered a bigger money loser, that is the explication.

And for the Switch, you can be sure most of the sales come from the HH folks. Besides Wii that had the blue ocean new market since SNES no console from Nintendo had sold more than 40M.

So the people buying Switch aren't doing it because they loved WiiU (well even if they did, that wouldn't be more than 15M of Switch sales).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Eagle367 said:

That would be an effective argument had the switch not sold well because of the Wii U or people who bought the Wii U loving it as a console. It's a much smaller group of people than the PS3 and of course not a 100% love it but still ultimately as we are discussing business and sales, I think Ninty's strategy was much more effective than Sony's. Ninty lost less money, recovering in a couple years time what they lost, showed they still can make a successful console, is recovering third party support which it lost, gained a lot of trust and goodwill from the indies during the Wii U era and still produced quality games which the fans adored and not all of them are yet on the switch for a bigger audience. Hell some games just can't be as good as they were on the Wii U like zombiU or Rayman legends. It was a dark time for sure but never a 100% negative time. The wiiU taught ninty some really important lessons and helped Ninty in some subtle ways which people fail to acknowledge.

But ultimately the past is behind us and we can look back at both consoles as something that people who bought them adored for the most part while their successors are huge successes for the companies, console gaming and gamers alike. I hope the console marker stays strong especially against the upcoming streaming competition and PS5, neXtbox and switch 2(probably?) are all successful consoles that improve our gaming experience and deliver awesome games

It was asked why PS3 is considered a bigger money loser, that is the explication.

And for the Switch, you can be sure most of the sales come from the HH folks. Besides Wii that had the blue ocean new market since SNES no console from Nintendo had sold more than 40M.

So the people buying Switch aren't doing it because they loved WiiU (well even if they did, that wouldn't be more than 15M of Switch sales).

And? I never said people are buying the switch because they loved Wii U. You said that people were buying the PS4 because they loved PS3 and I'm just pointing out the previous gen really doesn't matter all that much. The people are buying the PS4 and switch because of their own merits and not their predecessors good and bad points. My question was more of a statement rather than a question in what sort of business decisions was Sony making at the time. It was a stupid decision



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Man I wish 2008 was back again when I bought a ps3 absolutely fantastic I got so much use out of it games and blurays and dodgy video streaming for latest films



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

Eagle367 said:
DonFerrari said:

It was asked why PS3 is considered a bigger money loser, that is the explication.

And for the Switch, you can be sure most of the sales come from the HH folks. Besides Wii that had the blue ocean new market since SNES no console from Nintendo had sold more than 40M.

So the people buying Switch aren't doing it because they loved WiiU (well even if they did, that wouldn't be more than 15M of Switch sales).

And? I never said people are buying the switch because they loved Wii U. You said that people were buying the PS4 because they loved PS3 and I'm just pointing out the previous gen really doesn't matter all that much. The people are buying the PS4 and switch because of their own merits and not their predecessors good and bad points. My question was more of a statement rather than a question in what sort of business decisions was Sony making at the time. It was a stupid decision

But you fail to see that a lot of early adopters of PS4 came from PS3 end days being good.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
Eagle367 said:

Actually not at all for Nintendo. Because even in their worst hour, they never stopped giving numbers. So if you crunch in the numbers for all of the 3ds hardware and software and take them out of the equation plus the other stuff ninty spent money on, you can tell how much of it the Wii U was eating up. And have you seen the charts of Sony when PS3 was selling Vs now? And the same for Ninty with Wii U. Ninty was always close to 0 with little losses while Sony's gap was huge. Ninty are just better at managing their business when their consoles fail than Sony are, which is why we're lucky they are so good at marketing their consoles. Otherwise PS and possibly Sony would die out. If you want to actually dig deep, it is not only possible but also probable that you can prove or disprove my hypothesis.

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

The Wii U hasn't been forgotten though, because it was an evolutionary step towards the creation of the Switch.  The touchscreen of the Gamepad lives on in the Switch.  The ability to continue your console game if your wife/other wants to use the TV lives on in the Switch.  Successful new IP's born on the Wii U continue on the Switch with Splatoon 2 enjoying great sales and Mario Maker 2 being highly anticipated.  The amount of Wii U games that have been ported to the Switch and are selling well show that the Wii U had "a lot of good games" as well.  The Switch is basically a more streamlined Gamepad that has been fully liberated from it's tether to proximity to your TV if you need it to be.



DonFerrari said:
Eagle367 said:

Actually not at all for Nintendo. Because even in their worst hour, they never stopped giving numbers. So if you crunch in the numbers for all of the 3ds hardware and software and take them out of the equation plus the other stuff ninty spent money on, you can tell how much of it the Wii U was eating up. And have you seen the charts of Sony when PS3 was selling Vs now? And the same for Ninty with Wii U. Ninty was always close to 0 with little losses while Sony's gap was huge. Ninty are just better at managing their business when their consoles fail than Sony are, which is why we're lucky they are so good at marketing their consoles. Otherwise PS and possibly Sony would die out. If you want to actually dig deep, it is not only possible but also probable that you can prove or disprove my hypothesis.

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

The PS3 Slim costs production was about $ 240 and the company was selling for 299. Sony lost money until release PS3 slim, after this every console sold was a surplus. PS3 sold 1 billion software and left a great legacy for PS4. When Sony released the PS3 slim the numbers at the time was only about 24 million units. But theres no denie that the console was Sony biggest mistake.



Mandalore76 said:
DonFerrari said:

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

The Wii U hasn't been forgotten though, because it was an evolutionary step towards the creation of the Switch.  The touchscreen of the Gamepad lives on in the Switch.  The ability to continue your console game if your wife/other wants to use the TV lives on in the Switch.  Successful new IP's born on the Wii U continue on the Switch with Splatoon 2 enjoying great sales and Mario Maker 2 being highly anticipated.  The amount of Wii U games that have been ported to the Switch and are selling well show that the Wii U had "a lot of good games" as well.  The Switch is basically a more streamlined Gamepad that has been fully liberated from it's tether to proximity to your TV if you need it to be.

WiiU was forgotten/hidden by Nintendo as fast as possible. And in the way you portray every console is a step to the next anyway.

paulrage2 said:
DonFerrari said:

When PS3 costed (lost) 200 per console, selling 80+M will be a much bigger loss than the 15M sold by WiiU.

Still, people will have a lot of good games and follow through to PS4 because of it, while WiiU wants to be forgotten.

The PS3 Slim costs production was about $ 240 and the company was selling for 299. Sony lost money until release PS3 slim, after this every console sold was a surplus. PS3 sold 1 billion software and left a great legacy for PS4. When Sony released the PS3 slim the numbers at the time was only about 24 million units. But theres no denie that the console was Sony biggest mistake.

From what we know PS3 ended up at a major loss when all was said and done, probably much higher than WiiU that was early cut.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Mandalore76 said:

The Wii U hasn't been forgotten though, because it was an evolutionary step towards the creation of the Switch.  The touchscreen of the Gamepad lives on in the Switch.  The ability to continue your console game if your wife/other wants to use the TV lives on in the Switch.  Successful new IP's born on the Wii U continue on the Switch with Splatoon 2 enjoying great sales and Mario Maker 2 being highly anticipated.  The amount of Wii U games that have been ported to the Switch and are selling well show that the Wii U had "a lot of good games" as well.  The Switch is basically a more streamlined Gamepad that has been fully liberated from it's tether to proximity to your TV if you need it to be.

WiiU was forgotten/hidden by Nintendo as fast as possible. And in the way you portray every console is a step to the next anyway.

paulrage2 said:

The PS3 Slim costs production was about $ 240 and the company was selling for 299. Sony lost money until release PS3 slim, after this every console sold was a surplus. PS3 sold 1 billion software and left a great legacy for PS4. When Sony released the PS3 slim the numbers at the time was only about 24 million units. But theres no denie that the console was Sony biggest mistake.

From what we know PS3 ended up at a major loss when all was said and done, probably much higher than WiiU that was early cut.

The WiiU was discontinued as a product that wasn't selling well.  But, Nintendo pushed it as best they could (advertising early on could/should have been pushed much harder though to be honest) for just over 4 years until the Switch was ready to launch.  Unlike the Virtual Boy which Nintendo dropped in less than a year.  Or Sega's Dreamcast, which was discontinued after only 1 year 7 months in NA (2 years 4 months including Japan).  The Wii U still has a "Games Page" on Nintendo.com showing release dates updated through April of this year, over 2 years after discontinuation (https://www.nintendo.com/games/game-guide/#filter/:q=&dFR[availability][0]=Available%20now&dFR[platform][0]=Wii%20U&indexName=noa_aem_game_en_us_release_des).  Wii U is still featured all over the "My Nintendo" site with discounts for software and digital content (https://my.nintendo.com/reward_categories).  So, no, they haven't "hidden" or erased the Wii U from memory.

Nintendo's consoles typically change more radically from one system to the next than "every console" by comparison.  But, to put it in terms that you might more readily accept, it was a failure that was a necessary failure to get to where Nintendo wanted to go.  Like the PS3 adding the expensive Bluray drive to pave the way for the PS4, the Wii U gamepad was a necessary step towards the portable application of the Switch.



Mandalore76 said:
DonFerrari said:

WiiU was forgotten/hidden by Nintendo as fast as possible. And in the way you portray every console is a step to the next anyway.

From what we know PS3 ended up at a major loss when all was said and done, probably much higher than WiiU that was early cut.

The WiiU was discontinued as a product that wasn't selling well.  But, Nintendo pushed it as best they could (advertising early on could/should have been pushed much harder though to be honest) for just over 4 years until the Switch was ready to launch.  Unlike the Virtual Boy which Nintendo dropped in less than a year.  Or Sega's Dreamcast, which was discontinued after only 1 year 7 months in NA (2 years 4 months including Japan).  The Wii U still has a "Games Page" on Nintendo.com showing release dates updated through April of this year, over 2 years after discontinuation (https://www.nintendo.com/games/game-guide/#filter/:q=&dFR[availability][0]=Available%20now&dFR[platform][0]=Wii%20U&indexName=noa_aem_game_en_us_release_des).  Wii U is still featured all over the "My Nintendo" site with discounts for software and digital content (https://my.nintendo.com/reward_categories).  So, no, they haven't "hidden" or erased the Wii U from memory.

Nintendo's consoles typically change more radically from one system to the next than "every console" by comparison.  But, to put it in terms that you might more readily accept, it was a failure that was a necessary failure to get to where Nintendo wanted to go.  Like the PS3 adding the expensive Bluray drive to pave the way for the PS4, the Wii U gamepad was a necessary step towards the portable application of the Switch.

Putting Virtua Boy in the comparison doesn't make much sense since it was a basically a total catastrophe.

And sorry, but Nintendo didn't pushed the best they could. They certainly could have sold it much cheaper and increased number of releases by increasing the size of the team.

I actually don't remember anything outstanding they tried to make the sales of WiiU good. It seemed more like they saw early on that the system was going to do bad and just bought their time until they were ready for Switch (which probably couldn't have been released earlier, not only because it also is successor to 3DS, but also that technology for the affordable price wasn't ready yet), similar to Sony that as soon as they saw PSVita couldn't be a success they just let it die (versus PS3 where they done all they could because they thought it was still possible to sell good).

Anyway that isn't much relevant. The point I wanted to explain initially is why PS3 is considered a BIGGER MONEY LOSSER than WiiU. And that had to do with selling 85M consoles with a lot of them being 100-200 loss per sale, versus WiiU more or less selling 15M for break even.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."