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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Console Naming

Azzanation said:
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 think gaming console history actually proves that the overwhelming majority of people care about the console, not the name. 

Ask gamers about their favorite consoles of all-time and I bet you'll hear a lot of numbers mentioned, especially "PS2."  On the other hand, some of the most creatively named consoles have been less popular.  I very much doubt that the name plays much of a factor, if any, in people tossing out consoles, either.

Perhaps the name of the console is really that important to you but I believe we have more than enough evidence to say that most people feel otherwise, especially with Playstation having such reliable success and beloved iterations.  It's pretty clear to me that the perspective of the average customer isn't much troubled about numbered console versions.



Around the Network

As far as naming conventions are concerned, I think Sony has been the most successful overall with PlayStation. It's easy to understand, and when they add a bigger number at the end everyone gets what it means, and the same is true when they made the PlayStation Portable. It was instantly clear to everyone what it meant, which is unfortunately not the case with the Vita, which was their one bad console name.

Nintendo has been kinda all over the place with their names, and sometimes it works (NES, SNES, Switch), and other times not so much (WiiU, Virtual Boy). They clearly like to experiment and come up with a new name that fits the concept they have for each new console. Overall, though, they've been successful more often than not, and the new names do give the console a unique identity.

Microsoft is probably the most unwieldy with their names. Xbox works well, and Xbox 360 sounds like a good name for a successor to the first console, but after that its gotten a bit stupid. Xbox One, Xbox One X and S, and the name of the new console that I still don't properly remember without looking it up. It just doesn't look or sound good as a name in my opinion.

As far as how important names are, they can certainly have an impact, but there are always other factors to take into account. The Wii honestly wasn't, and still isn't a very good name for a console, but Nintendo managed to build a massive success around the brand. Then they made the WiiU, and a large section of the people on the casual side of gaming likely didn't understand what made it different than the Wii, so they didn't get it and the console failed.

In general, Sony seems to like to play it safe with the names of their consoles, while Nintendo tends to come up with new names every one or two generations, and Microsoft is somewhere between the two, sticking to one core brand, but doesn't stick with a specific naming convention otherwise.



The only problem with Nintendo's names was the WiiU. Still people out there that think it is a Wii add on.

Sony's method has been simple and effective for the most part, but VITA made no sense. Should have named it PSP2.

MS is all over the place. 360 made no sense, but at least people knew it was a new console. XBox One was a step back, as it made it sound like it might be an OG XBox (especially since Sony changed the PSX to the PS1 at the end of that gen). The you have One S and On X...which sounds very similar when saying it. XBox series X is even worse...I mean like WiiU levels of bad.

Nintendo is fine as long as it is clear that they are naming a new platform. No mote WiiU crap...

Sony is fine...

MS needs a lot of work in the naming department.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

I know consistency is good when maintained for a while but I'll be honest and say that if it's for too long, it just becomes boring. Sony is on the verge of falling into that trap in the future but we're years from that point still.

Anywoo, Nintendo is going more wild with their names although it often describe the purpose of the console in a nutshell which ends up having hit and miss in some cases. Pretty sure the Switch should get the "Super" treatment if they wanna make it right !

As for Microsoft, they got the first 2 right from the start but now it's going down the slippy slope of bad naming sake.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

Xbox X Series X Personal PC System X One X Home X Entertainment X System X



My Etsy store

My Ebay store

Deus Ex (2000) - a game that pushes the boundaries of what the video game medium is capable of to a degree unmatched to this very day.

Around the Network

I prefer the sequential name, it is very clear on which came before or after and is simple and strong enough that almost everyone knows playstation. Don't need to change what is working fine.



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."

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

My impression is that Nintendo keeps the name when the console do fine and change when it don't.

NES was a success, sucessor SNES.

SNES lost ground, sucessor N64.

N64 took a beat, sucessor GC

GC took a bigger beat, sucessor Wii

Wii made great success, WiiU

WiiU failed, Switch

Gameboy succeed and got Color that succeed and got Advance, not sure it they thought it was losing wind and thus came with DS

DS succeed and we got 3DS

3DS saw a big shrink we got Switch

Going this way and seeing Switch succeed then I think Switch something as successor is likely.



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."

Sony are never going to go for an original name again after how their only attempt crashed and burned. Poor Vita, you should have been name PSP2!



Signature goes here!

pokoko said:

I think gaming console history actually proves that the overwhelming majority of people care about the console, not the name. 

Ask gamers about their favorite consoles of all-time and I bet you'll hear a lot of numbers mentioned, especially "PS2."  On the other hand, some of the most creatively named consoles have been less popular.  I very much doubt that the name plays much of a factor, if any, in people tossing out consoles, either.

Perhaps the name of the console is really that important to you but I believe we have more than enough evidence to say that most people feel otherwise, especially with Playstation having such reliable success and beloved iterations.  It's pretty clear to me that the perspective of the average customer isn't much troubled about numbered console versions.

People dont base there purchase on a name, of course however popularity is besides the point.

Its just a nice little incentive to know there is more to a name than just a number. Like the meaning behind the number 360 or One or Xbox itself as well as other consoles like the Switch. 

Ill buy anything if its good enough and suits my needs weather it has a number or meaning behind its name. I just add alittle more respect to a name that has meaning etc. My Samsung S6 is forgotten since i moved to an S8 and my S8 will be forgotten once i move to a S10 etc.