Squilliam said: Hey how does this sound. Each console has key niches in the market where they enjoy great strengths where compared to other consoles. In these niches they enjoy great success. Nintendo has several large niches where the competition just isnt considered viable, they have the simple gamplay type games down to an art, the lifestyle type games such as guitar hero, wii sports etc they have an advantage and they have a great price and a keen following from people who've owned nes-gamecube. These are all niches where the competition LOOKS like it doesn't exist, because its irrelevant. The PS3 and the Xbox360 compete for a lot of the same niches, the Xbox360 has better offerings for people who want multiplayer, people who don't like motion controls obviously won't buy a Wii. The PS3 has the Blu ray whilst the 360 is better on games currently. Now there is some overlap but for a lot of Wii purchasers the Wii is the only console to consider. Look at how the Xbox360 dropped the price below the Wii and Wiis sales weren't even changed. People obviously value the Wii more highly than the Xbox360 or the PS3 because even at the same price they still buy the Wii. If the Wii is $250 but you would pay $300 for it and the PS3 is $400 but you'd only pay $400 for it and the Xbox360 is $250 but you would only pay $250 for it because of how you value the console, then obviously the Wii is the best value for you. Not completely holeproof but its my take on it. Think economic value - How much you'd pay for a console. Remember those people willing to pay $800 for a Wii? Thats how much they value it! Edit: I hate saying this, because personally I would love to never see the Wii in the top 50 so I can easier compare the Xbox360 with the PS3! I get bored honestly with seeing Wiisports week after week! Its because the conclusion has been made! I want to see the information where the competition is still up in the air!

Not bad. I would more likely put it in the same way with Sean Malstrom, to upmarket and downmarket. If we start with upmarket, right from the top of it, this market is for demanding gamers, who require highest-level visuals for their games, and this is where Wii doesn't compete with PS360, but it's where they jump to PC territory. Moving one step down, would be the core market, into which the vast majority of the current gamers are and this market is where the competition is most fierce. Then the downmarket, where Wii is almost the only factor (competition having only few games which appeal this demographic, Scene It, GTA4, Singstar, DDR) it's where the PS2 and PC compete the Wii. And below the downmarket, is the Blue Ocean market, where only DS is the competition for Wii. And there's also one more "side" market, which caters every market propably besides the "Blue Ocean" market (although most of these people are in the core market), it's the "casual" group who wants their games to be more cinematic, interactive movies, instead of games. And that's the market where the market last time expanded.

The ammount of denial in this thread is most amusing. I guess I wouldn't believe the Wii was competing either if it was kicking the trash out of my console in sales, lol.

Very good point NJ5,

I believe people dont see these sales strong evidence because they keep looking the line-up or the market targeted : the sales show the Wii is making dammage to the PS360 but a part of the last-gen owners are still going to buy a PS360 and no Wii.
That is why, I think, Wii is competting versus PS360 but a lot less than the PS2 with the GC/Xbox/DC because the market has been divided by Ninty aiming the casual/familly market since day1.

They are directly competing with each other in the market however they are not always directly competing from certain consumer demographic points of view.

Of course, unlike previous generations of consoles there are a few other moving parts this time that make the situation more complex:

1) HD vs non HD and the impact of HD TVs

2) The impact of Wii in terms of the motion control and family gaming

3) The introduction of a new format (Blu Ray)

4) The growth of the videogame market

5) The current economic conditions globally

6) The skew of demographics by platform (let's face it few Wii owners are playing online FPS MP games, while few PS3/360 owners are sitting down with their families for a group gaming session) and the impact this has on genre game sales on each platform

All of the above can be used to skew things to your point of view I guess - but in the end all three players are trying to influence the market and gain the most sales/influence, they are all fighting for the best retail space, and they are all targeting multiple demographics (although as I said some platforms better target/suit certain demographics than others).

I think Fishy put it best though... fanboys want to chose when (and when not) this is the case but that's neither here nor there in reality.

@Reasonable: I think it's much simpler than you make it sound. With so much evidence in the form of sales, we almost don't need to analyze the surrounding factors you mentioned. Of course, there are some segments in which the Wii doesn't compete (High-def movies for example) but the question of competition is easier than that.

It's not "neither here nor there", it's very much "there" according to all available evidence.

 

bdbdbd said: Squilliam said: Hey how does this sound. Each console has key niches in the market where they enjoy great strengths where compared to other consoles. In these niches they enjoy great success. Nintendo has several large niches where the competition just isnt considered viable, they have the simple gamplay type games down to an art, the lifestyle type games such as guitar hero, wii sports etc they have an advantage and they have a great price and a keen following from people who've owned nes-gamecube. These are all niches where the competition LOOKS like it doesn't exist, because its irrelevant. The PS3 and the Xbox360 compete for a lot of the same niches, the Xbox360 has better offerings for people who want multiplayer, people who don't like motion controls obviously won't buy a Wii. The PS3 has the Blu ray whilst the 360 is better on games currently. Now there is some overlap but for a lot of Wii purchasers the Wii is the only console to consider. Look at how the Xbox360 dropped the price below the Wii and Wiis sales weren't even changed. People obviously value the Wii more highly than the Xbox360 or the PS3 because even at the same price they still buy the Wii. If the Wii is $250 but you would pay $300 for it and the PS3 is $400 but you'd only pay $400 for it and the Xbox360 is $250 but you would only pay $250 for it because of how you value the console, then obviously the Wii is the best value for you. Not completely holeproof but its my take on it. Think economic value - How much you'd pay for a console. Remember those people willing to pay $800 for a Wii? Thats how much they value it! Edit: I hate saying this, because personally I would love to never see the Wii in the top 50 so I can easier compare the Xbox360 with the PS3! I get bored honestly with seeing Wiisports week after week! Its because the conclusion has been made! I want to see the information where the competition is still up in the air!   Not bad. I would more likely put it in the same way with Sean Malstrom, to upmarket and downmarket. If we start with upmarket, right from the top of it, this market is for demanding gamers, who require highest-level visuals for their games, and this is where Wii doesn't compete with PS360, but it's where they jump to PC territory. Moving one step down, would be the core market, into which the vast majority of the current gamers are and this market is where the competition is most fierce. Then the downmarket, where Wii is almost the only factor (competition having only few games which appeal this demographic, Scene It, GTA4, Singstar, DDR) it's where the PS2 and PC compete the Wii. And below the downmarket, is the Blue Ocean market, where only DS is the competition for Wii. And there's also one more "side" market, which caters every market propably besides the "Blue Ocean" market (although most of these people are in the core market), it's the "casual" group who wants their games to be more cinematic, interactive movies, instead of games. And that's the market where the market last time expanded.

I think we are on similar pages, but not quite the same. I perfer to think of games like guitar hero, SMG, Wii sports as more lifestyle games. Anybody can integrate these types of games into their life, which is why they sell so well on the Wii and on consoles in general. Besides I think the distinction between casual and hardcore is how gaming is integrated into their life not by the types of games they play. Someone for example who plays games instead of watches tv is more hardcore than someone who would watch tv before playing game. Distinctions based on the type of games played don't tell the full picture and tend to mislead.

I also don't like the distinction between the level of graphics and the difficulty of the game and control scheme to define whether or not a game is hardcore. I believe its how you play the game and why you play it. If you play Mario Kart just to bide time and not care if you win or lose - thats casual, if you play it online competitively thats hardcore. You can play GTAIV by messing around and blowing shit up - thats casual, or you can play it in a hardcore way. That partly explains why it is so successful. It appeals to a lot of different people in a different way. Games with a good mix of both can do very well for everybody.

 Im not contradicting you, but im explaining some of your points with my own perspective.

 

 

NJ5 said: @Reasonable: I think it's much simpler than you make it sound. With so much evidence in the form of sales, we almost don't need to analyze the surrounding factors you mentioned. Of course, there are some segments in which the Wii doesn't compete (High-def movies for example) but the question of competition is easier than that. It's not "neither here nor there", it's very much "there" according to all available evidence.

You're not understanding that phrase - it means it doesn't matter how you spin the factors to suit yourself the truth is plain : in this case that they're competing.

Given that total of HD consoles sold is actually higher than Wii (although adjusting for 360 time lead its more of a 40% HD 60% Wii split at the present) I think that point number 1) I made is actually pretty massive.  A vast number of gamers want HD which means that while they may purchase a Wii it will not be their only console - which is going to change the ratio relationship in a way not evident last gen when I believe a majority of gamers settled for one console.

 

 

Squilliam said: bdbdbd said: Not bad. I would more likely put it in the same way with Sean Malstrom, to upmarket and downmarket. If we start with upmarket, right from the top of it, this market is for demanding gamers, who require highest-level visuals for their games, and this is where Wii doesn't compete with PS360, but it's where they jump to PC territory. Moving one step down, would be the core market, into which the vast majority of the current gamers are and this market is where the competition is most fierce. Then the downmarket, where Wii is almost the only factor (competition having only few games which appeal this demographic, Scene It, GTA4, Singstar, DDR) it's where the PS2 and PC compete the Wii. And below the downmarket, is the Blue Ocean market, where only DS is the competition for Wii. And there's also one more "side" market, which caters every market propably besides the "Blue Ocean" market (although most of these people are in the core market), it's the "casual" group who wants their games to be more cinematic, interactive movies, instead of games. And that's the market where the market last time expanded. I think we are on similar pages, but not quite the same. I perfer to think of games like guitar hero, SMG, Wii sports as more lifestyle games. Anybody can integrate these types of games into their life, which is why they sell so well on the Wii and on consoles in general. Besides I think the distinction between casual and hardcore is how gaming is integrated into their life not by the types of games they play. Someone for example who plays games instead of watches tv is more hardcore than someone who would watch tv before playing game. Distinctions based on the type of games played don't tell the full picture and tend to mislead. I also don't like the distinction between the level of graphics and the difficulty of the game and control scheme to define whether or not a game is hardcore. I believe its how you play the game and why you play it. If you play Mario Kart just to bide time and not care if you win or lose - thats casual, if you play it online competitively thats hardcore. You can play GTAIV by messing around and blowing shit up - thats casual, or you can play it in a hardcore way. That partly explains why it is so successful. It appeals to a lot of different people in a different way. Games with a good mix of both can do very well for everybody.  Im not contradicting you, but im explaining some of your points with my own perspective.

Actually i do agree with you. I should have been more specific about how the upmarket and downmarket relates to your post i quoted.

Everyone is in the upmarket by their own personal standards, but the upmarket consumer in question, demands the type of games that have long developement times, in this case mostly high-end graphics and "deep" gameplay, but in exchange, are willing to invest a lot of money for gaming. This group also is experienced in gaming, but not necessarily buy a lot of games.
Going down the line, the amount of money people are willing to spend on gaming decreases, as well as technical requirements considering the games they play.
Then the most interesting group, the blue ocean gamers, can be divided to two groups; people who are new to gaming and people who play flash-games, solitaire, sudokus etc. on their PC for free.
The blue ocean groups don't use money on games at all, but that's largely because the market doesn't cater for them. The blue ocean gamers that get sucked in, eventually end up to the upmarket, downmarket or in between or just become lapsed gamers.
Gamers in different categories can also move to another category, up or down or change along the market and remain stagnant.

And for the "hardcore" and "casual", they definately are just a way of playing games, as you may have noticed, in my earlier post i type "casual" once to demonstrate the "sidemarket" with term widely in use and i didn't classify upmarket as "hardcore".

Reasonable said: NJ5 said: @Reasonable: I think it's much simpler than you make it sound. With so much evidence in the form of sales, we almost don't need to analyze the surrounding factors you mentioned. Of course, there are some segments in which the Wii doesn't compete (High-def movies for example) but the question of competition is easier than that. It's not "neither here nor there", it's very much "there" according to all available evidence.   You're not understanding that phrase - it means it doesn't matter how you spin the factors to suit yourself the truth is plain : in this case that they're competing. Given that total of HD consoles sold is actually higher than Wii (although adjusting for 360 time lead its more of a 40% HD 60% Wii split at the present) I think that point number 1) I made is actually pretty massive.  A vast number of gamers want HD which means that while they may purchase a Wii it will not be their only console - which is going to change the ratio relationship in a way not evident last gen when I believe a majority of gamers settled for one console.

One thing to consider is that the "Vast Number" of gamers who want HD are probably the most likely to be early adopters; and the Wii's ability to outsell the XBox 360 and PS3 combined since its release, and to go from 0% marketshare to 45% in 18 months only adds strength to the argument that HD gamers are the minority.

HappySqurriel said: Reasonable said: NJ5 said: @Reasonable: I think it's much simpler than you make it sound. With so much evidence in the form of sales, we almost don't need to analyze the surrounding factors you mentioned. Of course, there are some segments in which the Wii doesn't compete (High-def movies for example) but the question of competition is easier than that. It's not "neither here nor there", it's very much "there" according to all available evidence.   You're not understanding that phrase - it means it doesn't matter how you spin the factors to suit yourself the truth is plain : in this case that they're competing. Given that total of HD consoles sold is actually higher than Wii (although adjusting for 360 time lead its more of a 40% HD 60% Wii split at the present) I think that point number 1) I made is actually pretty massive. A vast number of gamers want HD which means that while they may purchase a Wii it will not be their only console - which is going to change the ratio relationship in a way not evident last gen when I believe a majority of gamers settled for one console.     One thing to consider is that the "Vast Number" of gamers who want HD are probably the most likely to be early adopters; and the Wii's ability to outsell the XBox 360 and PS3 combined since its release, and to go from 0% marketshare to 45% in 18 months only adds strength to the argument that HD gamers are the minority.

Just because i buy an HD console doesn't mean i want HD or will even use the HD features.  Many people just buy the system for the games.