People like to throw around facts arguments a lot on these very forums of how this console has more value because you get ALL THIS! and it's only THIS MUCH DEARER! or you get this, this and this and if you take into account that that console has that but it's extra, it's got more value! However does anybody actually define value?

Value is a fairly easy concept to understand. Value = Benefits/Costs. That means that the value that any one console has is all the tangible and intangible desirable attributes of owning that console in respect to the tangible and intangible costs of the console over the LIFE of it's ownership. What do I mean intangible costs? Doesn't cost only mean money? Money is an important cost to consider but think about all the other costs there are to owning any product. Is it harder than a competitors product to use? Is it more time consuming? Is it harder to set up? What's the failure rate? How easy is it to buy? Is it in supply? Will it hurt the consumers image in owning it? And so on... 

What about the benefits? Is this console cheaper to buy? Is there a large brand behind it? Is it of higher quality? I think you get it.. Basically value means everything a consumer sees that is desirable to them in a product verses everything they find less desirable. We'll come back to that concept but it's important to understand.

When you buy a mobile phone what are you actually buying? You aren't buying a mobile phone, you're buying a product so that you have the ability to call or sms people. If somebody tells you they bought a fuel efficient car, what did they really buy? They bought the ability to save money on fuel, they bought the ability to feel less guilty when they drive as a result of greenhouse gas emmisions and obviously they bought the ability to get from A to B in a more comfortable and much quicker fashion. So what are people actually buying when they buy a video game console? When you wittle a console down to it's core principle, this is what you get: A videogame console is a means to prevent software made for that particular console from being used, unless the user owns said console. So when people buy a video game console, what are they really buying? 

Firstly and most importantly, they are buying the ability to play certain software. System sellers are named as such for a good reason, desirable software results in people wanting to have the ability to play said software and with a video game console, they simply can't. Take a look at the biggest games of this generation:

Wii Sports 46.1M

Wii Play 23.81M

Wii Fit 21.04M

Mario Kart Wii 16.71M

Halo 3 9.94M

Super Smash Bros. Brawl 8.53M

Super Mario Galaxy 8.04M

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 7.62M

Grand Theft Auto IV 7.15M

Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games 7.02M

The biggest games of the generation are on the Wii. This gives the Wii an enormous amount of value when compared with the Playstation 3 and the XBOX 360. If somebody wanted to play Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wii Fit or Mario Kart Wii, and over 15 Million people wanted to play each of those games, then they would have to buy a Wii. The case becomes even more fuzzy when you take into account Call of Duty 4 and Grand Theft Auto IV are both not only available on the XBOX 360 but also on the Playstation 3. It means that these must have titles are on multiple consoles and can't be a factor if comparing those two consoles. This only intensifies the fact that 6 of the 10 top games this generation can ONLY be played on Wii and the other is a console exclusive.

People bought a Wii so that they could play Wii Sports, does that mean they were really buying Wii Sports and the Wii is merely a gateway to that? In some respects perhaps but there are many more valuble traits that people would have looked at and the tie ratio suggests that these people (the majority of Wii owners) are buying a lot more games in addition to Wii Sports. Has anybody noticed how Wii Fit and Mario Kart Wii sales change in accordance to Wii sales? It means that when more value is added to the console at particular times, it tips people on the fence about either title (or many others) over the edge and they buy a Wii at times when it has a greater value to them.

To say PS3 has blu-ray or wi-fi built in compared to the 360 or saying that the 360 has a rental service is all well and good but it simply doesn't outweigh the costs to a lot of consumers. The Wii has the greatest amount of benefits which this generation is centred around the software and the lowest amount of costs. This adds up to a fairly simple thing.

Wii is the console with the most value.

Sometimes its easy to overlook the fact that Nintendo and the Wii in particular is a software monster.

The demarcation line between ironic and serious threads is becoming too fuzzy for my limited expertise of English language undertones. I'll just sit here and watch what side of the hill this one rolls down.

So because those games sold the most, the Wii has the most value?

Seriously, did you read the OP? I explained quite clearly why the Wii has the most value. Value is mostly in the games this generation where as Sony and Microsoft put more effort into the hardware. The fact that these games sold so much and they corralate to very high hardware sales is the proof, and no, this isn't a joke thread :P

See what you started, Rol?

I tried but by the second paragraph it was like "blah blah blah" I'm sorry I got bored.

I did notice you highlighted the top ten games of this gen ... how though you relate the sales of certain games to = value is beyond me though, maybe you should sum up your thread at the end?

no seece, you have to read it :P In summary value = benefits/costs (the top games give Wii the highest benefit in ownership) it's a fairly simple concept and one Nintendo lives by.

But what if you're not into the 'top games'? then the Wii isnt beneficial to that person at all. 

In reality and generally, the console with the most value is the one that comes with the games/features the buyer desires thats why they buy it in the first place.  And in time the buyer's desire can change to what the other console has and then it could be beneficial as well but it doesnt neccessarily mean that the Wii has the highest benefit due to 'top games' and being the lower cost.

So wait, the Wii is the most popular because it has the most value because it has the best selling games because it's the most popular?

SPACETIME LOOP.