Wii may make it.  It may run into something of an SD/HD ceiling.  While the world moves to HD and the PS3 drops in price, Wii will have to sell its 140 million units in fewer years than PS2 got.  So it doesn't matter if Wii is tracking above PS2.  Plus, I think the successor to Wii will cut off Wii sales way more than PS3 cut off PS2 sales, because PS3 is expensive and Wii 2 (or whatever) won't be. 

In Wii's favor is the fact that the videogame market overall is bigger now and people in more countries have the cash to spend on this kind of thing, so 140 million Wiis sold won't be as dominant as 100 million PS1s... because PS3 / 360 / 720 will be selling a lot more than PS1 or PS2's competitors were.  It's just a bigger market now, period. 

Barring Wii Fit becoming a household necessity, the bigger market is the salient fact, the only fact, that may allow the Wii to match PS2.

When did PS2 come out?  2001?  Then it will be around, cheap and with a huge game library, until 2011.  Selling. 

Loud_Hot_White_Box, don't bet on HD vs. SD having any impact on the Wii. The average consumer does not value HD over SD, and the few that do don't account for nearly enough sales for it to matter. We've discussed this already at length in the topic, in fact. The "quality" of a product is insignificant next to the "value" of the product to the consumer.

The "value" of a product is derived from how well it does the job the consumer wants the product to fulfill. Normal consumers buy a product to fulfill a single job, usually with a very simple definition which does not prioritize things like quality of visuals over things like quality of experience. Ergo, HD has nothing to offer over SD (the experience is identical, it just looks better).

Totally agree with this and I want to add that many HD adopters that has a Wii are fully satisfied with the Wii on their HD televisions not all HD owners will be disapointed and revert to another console because the other consoles have better resolution and graphics.

I think the DS has a good shot, and at this rate, the Wii could also, however, it's not for certain that the Wii numbers will hold on as strong for so long.

No way to know for sure, so arguing about it is pointless.

The Wii is actually EDTV enhanced definition, so there in the middle of Standard and High.

I invented these arguments in earlier threads, as a matter of fact.  ;)

PS2's success as a cheap DVD player provides a counterexample to your argument (dual use: console and DVD player and both contributed synergistically to its success). 

Your lesson in consumer purchasing is sophistry.  Average people will take an HD video feed for their HDTV rather than an SD feed, if available at a "value" price.  Similarly, as most TVs become HDTVs, when choosing consoles and a cheap PS3 being available, they'll take HD along with a horde of other benefits.  That offers value to the consumer.  Then again, Wii and PS3 don't compete all that directly, and a lot of people will end up owning an HD console and a Wii, which I fullly admit. 

On to the "experience": you and I know that the experience of an AAA HD game on an HDTV is not the same experience as that of a Wii game.  Further, the different game libraries themselves offer different experiences.  In a way, it does come down to marketing, "buzz," and cheapness, then, and Wii has those, just as PS2 did.  On the other hand, the difficulties faced by Wii and not by PS2 are real (advent of HD, and a Wii successor will neuter Wii sales...It would be funny if Nintendo went 10 years without a Wii successor just to keep the Wii going, but I guess if you want to argue in hypotheticals, it could happen).

You honestly believe that people got the PS2 because it could also be a DVD player? That's... wow. I'm not sure what to make of you if you're going to try that argument. Nobody in their right mind would look at a product called "PlayStation 2" and think, "Hey, that thing can play DVDs!" No, average consumers looked at the PS2 and thought, "Hey, that thing can play games!"

If I'm so incredibly wrong, then why did the NES outsell everything else available at the time, even though it was the weakest system on the market? Why did it not get turned into last week's fad when the Sega Master System came out? Why did the Sega Genesis not turn it inside-out instantly as soon as it came out? Surely a system with better graphics must be a top-end value by your argument, because it delivers a better visual experience. Yet the NES was not knocked out of the market by any of its competitors, and ultimately only succumbed to market saturation.

In a more modern context, why is the US government having to FORCE people to adopt HDTV if it's valued by consumers? You do not force somebody to adopt something if they want it; they'll adopt it on their own because they see the value in it. Your very argument hinges on consumers valuing things highly which most consumers do not, and the evidence shows how short-sighted your viewpoint really is. You appear to be placing YOUR values as EVERYBODY'S values, which is foolishness.

You've totally missed the point. I can only assume that you are so thoroughly entrenched in the values of the HD marketing ploy that you cannot see where the actual average consumer's interests lie. Which is especially comical since average consumers voice their feelings with their wallets, not on internet forums. As this is a site which revolves around sales, your refusal to accept that the average consumer values the Wii over the PS3 and 360 is even more comical.

I'm sorry but it's common knowledge that, especially early on, PS2's DVD drive drove sales significantly.

Was NES the weakest upon release?  By as much as the Wii?

Top-end value is just a lot of good features and games for the price.  Good games and cool controls from the Wii also imparts value; I'm not saying otherwise.  I'm also not saying my values are universal.  I own Nintendo stock and like the Wii...so guess what?  You don't even have my values pegged.

The Gov't is forcing adoption of digital signals.  CE companies happen to only be manufacturing HDTVs at this point.

I'm not denying Wii's sales, I'm listing factors that may limit its sales long-term.  YOU are missing the point, and -- to repeat -- my motivation, fanboy.  I like the Wii just fine.

"Common knowledge" is a tricky thing. Because more often than not, it turns out to be "corporate propaganda" or "internet rumor". I don't trust it; if it cannot be backed up with valid research, then it's anecdotal.

The NES was a half-decade out of date when it came out in Japan, and even more outdated when it reached the US. Its central processor was first made in 1978.

Incidentally, it's interesting that you've decided to arbitrarily label me, whereas I was simply attempting to understand your reasoning and explaining what it looked like you were saying. Did I actually say that you do think that way? No, I said you "appear" to think that way. All you had to do was clarify your reasoning, and yet, your response was to declare me a "fanboy" instead. I don't really see the reasoning behind this labeling, either, as I've largely only been explaining basic consumer marketing theory. How does explaining that consumers value utility over extraneous features make me a "fanboy", exactly? Again, I am inquiring as to your reasoning, because in this case, I cannot even come up with a reasonable explanation. Help me out here.