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

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

noname2200 on 24 November 2009
Kasz216 said:

Seriously though... according to Nielson the average videogame using household makes 75K+ a year.

That isn't even remotely right.  I mean... the average gamecube user makes over 75K+ a year? 

Sounds like Nielson has a selection bias towards the rich.

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/stateofvgamer_040609_fnl1.pdf

I don't know enough about statistics to say one way or the other, but if they're aggregating household members' incomes (i.e. including both spouses+ live-in children) and treating the family as the console owner, it would make some sense. I'm not saying that's what they do though: I haven't looked closely enough to decide for myself.



Around the Network
psychoBrew on 24 November 2009
Kasz216 said:
famousringo said:
There is some evidence that the average Wii might not see as many hours of use as the average 360. Though those Nielsen press releases were always pretty confusing about their definitions and whether that reduced per-user usage carries over to the box itself or if it just represents that the average Wii has a lot more users than the average 360.

If true, it would likely result in fewer failures, though age can take its toll on electronics whether used or not. In some cases, disuse can be harder on electronics, as the heat kills microbes that might otherwise accumulate on circuit boards and frequent use prevents some moving parts from seizing up.

My gut instinct is that less use would mean less failures, but there's no hard evidence either way on this one.

I'm pretty sure the Nielson study was per user.  Not per household.

Which is offset by the fact that your average Wii was used by many more people.

Might be wrong in that though.


The Nielson studies in general seemed like there panel audience was pretty crappy though.  Their age demographics seemed way off and their average salary for all of them was like over 75k household or something silly like that.

The point of the thread was usage and failure rates.  It doesn't matter if it's used by one person or by many people since everybody's usage has the same effects on console wear.  Having said that, I'd like to see the source for your assumptions.



Kasz216 on 24 November 2009
psychoBrew said:
Kasz216 said:
famousringo said:
There is some evidence that the average Wii might not see as many hours of use as the average 360. Though those Nielsen press releases were always pretty confusing about their definitions and whether that reduced per-user usage carries over to the box itself or if it just represents that the average Wii has a lot more users than the average 360.

If true, it would likely result in fewer failures, though age can take its toll on electronics whether used or not. In some cases, disuse can be harder on electronics, as the heat kills microbes that might otherwise accumulate on circuit boards and frequent use prevents some moving parts from seizing up.

My gut instinct is that less use would mean less failures, but there's no hard evidence either way on this one.

I'm pretty sure the Nielson study was per user.  Not per household.

Which is offset by the fact that your average Wii was used by many more people.

Might be wrong in that though.


The Nielson studies in general seemed like there panel audience was pretty crappy though.  Their age demographics seemed way off and their average salary for all of them was like over 75k household or something silly like that.

The point of the thread was usage and failure rates.  It doesn't matter if it's used by one person or by many people since everybody's usage has the same effects on console wear.  Having said that, I'd like to see the source for your assumptions.

The actual studies have been linked in this thread a few times now.



Kasz216 on 24 November 2009
noname2200 said:
Kasz216 said:

Seriously though... according to Nielson the average videogame using household makes 75K+ a year.

That isn't even remotely right.  I mean... the average gamecube user makes over 75K+ a year? 

Sounds like Nielson has a selection bias towards the rich.

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/stateofvgamer_040609_fnl1.pdf

I don't know enough about statistics to say one way or the other, but if they're aggregating household members' incomes (i.e. including both spouses+ live-in children) and treating the family as the console owner, it would make some sense. I'm not saying that's what they do though: I haven't looked closely enough to decide for myself.

Even aggregate household it's way too high though.  I mean they're talking about this for gamecube too.

2 working parent families aren't that prevelant.

 

I mean, 2 household working parents would have to be near 50% of the group to get a median like that...

 

and if they aren't using median for that stat they should be slapped.



noname2200 on 24 November 2009

In that case, I gots nothin'.



Around the Network
inu_1607 on 24 November 2009

I play my wii like 12 hours per day and some months ago I have problems with disc reader =P



Metroid: Other M

psychoBrew on 24 November 2009
Kasz216 said:
noname2200 said:
mortono said:
Here's the actual Nielsen data whether you agree with it or not:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=24782

Currently, the Wii is used a bit less than 360. But this was a different picture in 2008 when Wii Fit, SSBB, Super Mario Galaxy, and Mario Kart Wii were all fresh on the market. PS3 gets the least usage by a pretty wide gap.

Overall, I don't think it has to do with usage. 360 and PS3 are more complicated systems that require heavier cooling systems. Sometimes these cooling systems are subpar, and the failure rate goes up in result.

For the Wii, the reduced processing power allowed them to create a very reliable system. They were able to work with older components that were refined rather than newer components that, while powerful, didn't have a chance to be refined and tested.

Wii gets used more than PS3?

Clearly it's wrong then. Taz!'s gut says otherwise, you know.

Actually i coulda swore that was a typo in their report and they had wii and PS3 swapped... maybe not, either way, I'm not a big fan of their reports.

Other interesting Nielson news from those reports though.

1 out of ever 3 games purchased is a used game.

Not sure if that's supposed to be close to the real numbers or not.  I do believe Pachter has said something similar as well.


Yes, there was an error in the original report.  Here is the corrected version, which shows the Wii had the highest usage (besides the PS2) for the month of January.

Nielson is the industry standard.  It doesn't matter if you are a fan of them or not -- they are the authority when it comes to data like this.



MaxwellGT2000 on 24 November 2009
mhsillen said:
Kasz216 said:
noname2200 said:
mortono said:
Here's the actual Nielsen data whether you agree with it or not:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=24782

Currently, the Wii is used a bit less than 360. But this was a different picture in 2008 when Wii Fit, SSBB, Super Mario Galaxy, and Mario Kart Wii were all fresh on the market. PS3 gets the least usage by a pretty wide gap.

Overall, I don't think it has to do with usage. 360 and PS3 are more complicated systems that require heavier cooling systems. Sometimes these cooling systems are subpar, and the failure rate goes up in result.

For the Wii, the reduced processing power allowed them to create a very reliable system. They were able to work with older components that were refined rather than newer components that, while powerful, didn't have a chance to be refined and tested.

Wii gets used more than PS3?

Clearly it's wrong then. Taz!'s gut says otherwise, you know.

Actually i coulda swore that was a typo in their report and they had wii and PS3 swapped... maybe not, either way, I'm not a big fan of their reports.

Other interesting Nielson news from those reports though.

1 out of ever 3 games purchased is a used game.

Not sure if that's supposed to be close to the real numbers or not.  I do believe Pachter has said something similar as well.

Actually Nielson had PS3 over Wii but it was a mistake and they put the wii over ps3.

I remember because it was all over other sites like IGN and gamepro, after Nielson corrected the data those other sites didn't correct there stories.

Of course not they don't even fact check their reviews apparently lol

But I did see another report with Wii having a higher online % vs userbase than the PS3 as well and no one reported on that either, funny how that works :\ Sometimes the people posting news do have an agenda and it's kind of dumb :P



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

shokenchi on 24 November 2009

ps3 and 360 uses more power and overheats more than the wii, which is a fact. so wii has less failure rates regardless of how many hours being played. just accept the wii is more reliable and swallow your hd pride.



CatFangs806 on 24 November 2009

The Wii uses older, more perfected hardware than the PS360, so of course it will have a lower failure rate than the HD consoles.