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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Do you think the Wii's lower average usage helps its failure rate?

Khuutra on 24 November 2009
Smidlee said:
hsrob said:
The premise is reasonable, but the assumption is not.

I've had a good look through that Neilson data regarding console usage on a couple of occasions; their methods are questionable, their choices regarding the statistics they use and the way they present the data are strange and I've seen errors (mislabelled graphs) in their official videogame data releases on more than one occasion.

I would say that given the same R+D development and systems specs Nintendo would still produce a more reliable system with better build quality than Sony or MS simply because that has always been one of their focuses.

I totally hated the NES and N-64 analog control was a piece of junk.

What has either of those things got to do with failure rates?



Around the Network
Smidlee on 24 November 2009

NES was a pain to get a game working after a while. It was about as bad as the first PS where you had to eventually turn the PS upside down in order to load up games.  Thankful they didn't repeat the same mistake with SNES. While I had no problem with the N-64 itself I had tons of failure with it's controller. What good is a console without it's controller.



Hobowan on 24 November 2009
Samus Aran said:
My wii is turned on for more then a week now. Too lazy to turn it of. It's not hot nor does it make any noise.


my wii has been on solidly for about 5 months now... still no hint of trouble <touch wood>

 

it would be interesting to see an analysis of no. of breakdowns vs hours played to get a value of how many hours on average each console gives before dying



Muramasa: the Demon Blade

hsrob on 24 November 2009
Smidlee said:
hsrob said:
The premise is reasonable, but the assumption is not.

I've had a good look through that Neilson data regarding console usage on a couple of occasions; their methods are questionable, their choices regarding the statistics they use and the way they present the data are strange and I've seen errors (mislabelled graphs) in their official videogame data releases on more than one occasion.

I would say that given the same R+D development and systems specs Nintendo would still produce a more reliable system with better build quality than Sony or MS simply because that has always been one of their focuses.

I totally hated the NES and N-64 analog control was a piece of junk.

Pretty much anyone I know that still has an NES, still has a working NES and I've never seen a broken N64 controller.  Welcome to Anecdotalville.



Smidlee on 24 November 2009
hsrob said:
Smidlee said:
hsrob said:
The premise is reasonable, but the assumption is not.

I've had a good look through that Neilson data regarding console usage on a couple of occasions; their methods are questionable, their choices regarding the statistics they use and the way they present the data are strange and I've seen errors (mislabelled graphs) in their official videogame data releases on more than one occasion.

I would say that given the same R+D development and systems specs Nintendo would still produce a more reliable system with better build quality than Sony or MS simply because that has always been one of their focuses.

I totally hated the NES and N-64 analog control was a piece of junk.

Pretty much anyone I know that still has an NES, still has a working NES and I've never seen a broken N64 controller.  Welcome to Anecdotalville.

I still have a working C-64 with it's floppy drive yet it's floppy drive still had a high rate of failure. I have a working PS too but I got rid of the ones that stopped working.



Around the Network
Khuutra on 24 November 2009
Smidlee said:

NES was a pain to get a game working after a while. It was about as bad as the first PS where you had to eventually turn the PS upside down in order to load up games.  Thankful they didn't repeat the same mistake with SNES. While I had no problem with the N-64 itself I had tons of failure with it's controller. What good is a console without it's controller.

That has nothing to do with hardware failure rates either.

And breaking the joystick is not part of a console failure rate.



scruffybunny on 24 November 2009

Is the OP ssuggesting RROD happens because, on average 360 is played more than the Wii? And it has nothing to do with rushed engineering and shitty components?

I can't help but be rude here ... /FACE-FUCKING-PALM




Kenology on 24 November 2009

What a troll thread. You guys need to just let these types of threads sink into obscurity.



pastro243 on 24 November 2009

Fail thread, I think even if it was as played as the 360(I dont even know if actually ps360 owners play more) it would have a similar failure rate than what it has now.

The Wii is reliable, maybe because of its old structure or something like that, but in the end is more reliable and thats all that matters.



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

Rob6021 on 24 November 2009
dbot said:
The processors in the PS3 and 360 generate a lot of heat. Heat is the main cause of their failures. It has less to do with the quality of the manufacturing, and more to do with them trying to run all of the calculations required for a high definition gaming machine in a confined space. The Wii's cpu generates a lot less heat, and is less susceptible to heat related failures.

This is why^^