noname2200 said:
If you use this site's data and align the three consoles by date of launch, the Wii would have 55% market share at this point (even after the effects of having the 360 be the only current-gen console on the market for a full year).
By contrast, the PS2 had only a 53% market share at a similar point (launch-aligned) despite having a full year's head start over its competitor (i.e. the inverse of the Wii's situation).
From this, I can safely conclude that the Wii can at least feasibly demonstrate the same long-term market dominance as the PS2, although there are many unaccounted variables.
But that's not directly addressing your question, which I take to be "how can the Wii sustain its incredible momentum long enough to pull a PS2"? I originally had a much longer post, which examined the DS' history and made comparisons, before picking the comparisons apart. But let's try this instead.
The mass gamer does not seem to care about graphics or online. By "mass gamer" I do not refer to the average forum-poster (although that holds true for some of us too), but to the masses as a whole. Nintendo simply needs to continue feeding their desires to sustain the momentum on that front, and I wouldn't deign to tell them how to do so.
But you're doubtless concerned with the more traditional gamer, the one who has voted with his dollars in favor of an HD console. For them, Nintendo needs only one thing to lure them in: more games.
They're seeing success by creating games targeting everyone, especially gamers willing to play something different. If they (or more likely, third-parties) start making games targeted more towards the traditional gamers' more narrow tastes, they will start to chip away at that block as well. Traditional gamers are, after all, gamers, and they go where the games go.
Some die-hards, of course, will refuse to budge, insisting on the HD consoles' better graphics and sheer power. But then, to this day some die-hards take the same attitude towards the DS. I would submit that that group is a miniscule minority. Many folks are entranced by the HD features, but they are even more entranced by good games made to appeal to them. If the Wii gets those, the gamers will inevitably follow.
*Insert short history of DS here*
I don't think this is too far-fetched: when the Wii was first unveiled, I recall all but the most stalwart gamer greatly anticipating what the Wii's new controls could do for traditional games, despite knowing that the graphics couldn't hold a candle to the HD systems. Many are disappointed with the system because that promise was not kept (*insert comment about needing to broaden horizons here*). But if it does, if we get those 1:1 sword-fights, those quality FPS games with MoH's controls, those RTS games, etc., I have no problem seeing most gamers changing their tune within a year.
|
I didn't realise that the Wii was so close to the PS2 in terms of market share under that perspective. I guess the truth is, people simply tolerated the controls and I bet the majority never really liked the console controls as they existed on the PS2 or as they exist on the PS3/Xbox 360. An interesting observation made by a game developer elsewhere is that some people wouldn't even pick up an Xbox 360 controller to test a game in a focus group environment. I know I hated them until this current generation.
I believe the area where Nintendo is winning, is that they have created a participative product. The controller, interface, and games all indicate why the Wii is doing so well and continues to improve upon itself. Even if the performance of the system is somewhat of a letdown for some users who wish for a more visually pleasing library of games. The important factor as I understand it is that they solved a fundamental problem of user-interface in the games industry that no-one acknowledged was there. This fundamental issue trumps the other advantages the other consoles may bring to the table.
One of the issues of being so successful is that everything you do appears to be a success. Perhaps even going so far as to delude yourself as to why you are successful. The interesting difference between Sony and Nintendo is this. Nintendo lost the 5th generation by themselves, Sony just filled a gap in the market. Sony in this generation was always trumped, I believe even if the PS3 wasn't made as a Blu Ray trojan it still would have lost to the Wii. So really in asking this question I was really looking for answers as to if they could do it again with their next console.
Its interesting that Microsoft instead of Sony are taking the first real step at challenging Nintendos dominance of participative gaming. Sony seem to be following Microsofts game release schedule, one year removed. Its like they are reading from the same play book. Microsoft thus far has made one real stab at the market with Netflix (Yes I know its not a game), but it does make the console more relevant to people who do not see gaming as a desired activity. Their next interesting and you could say first real step into Nintendos primary realm is their online game show participation. Its interesting and possibly dangerous for Nintendo because the subscription model essentially locks the consumer and their business partners into a relationship between each other with Microsoft as the eternal middle-man in the centre of it all.
It is interesting, I wonder how far the updated motion controls will go in satisfying areas of the market Nintendo have not as yet captured. Perhaps in a way it will help their concept of upstreaming their present audience by making games both more intuitive for lifestyle gamers and sort through some of the final objections some of the long term gamers may have had with the controls at the same time. Perhaps that is the key to that final 20% market share I have been wondering about.
(mostly)
