Steve Youngblood
Member
Don't you worry, ghst. Once the new normal of doomed consoles is established, Wii U will be doing gangbusters by the new metric.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wii U sales compared to PS2, 360, PS3, & Wii - Not doomed
- Thread starter Mr.Squirrel
- Start date
Don't you worry, ghst. Once the new normal of doomed consoles is established, Wii U will be doing gangbusters by the new metric.
metalslimer
Member
A little ironic coming from you though
does that mean the vita is the true industry trailblazer?
Barry Burton
Member
The Wii U isn't "doomed" or anything close to that, but it's not because of how the sales compare to previous consoles. As others have pointed out, it's not nearly the same situation (I had trouble finding a 360 until the following April, and I was very lucky to have a Wii reserved for Day 1; launch day for the Wii U was eeeeasy for me, and it seems like its gotten easier to find since then).
Even if Jan-June are slow sales-wise for the Wii U, which I fully expect, I don't think they necessarily need to panic. Their future is going to depend heavily on how it performs next fall against one or both new consoles, what games it has, what partners with 3rd parties Nintendo forges or doesn't forge, etc.
They're hardly doomed right now, although I can certainly see the possibility where the Wii U performs poorly in the long-term. That's the thing -- I don't really feel like it has underperformed. With the lineup of games, both at launch and coming in Q1/Q2, and the hype (or lack thereof) leading up to the launch, I hope most people weren't expecting anything near a repeat of the Wii's 2006/2007 success.
Historically, a console's performance at launch is very much over-blown. Obviously, you want to do well, but especially for a console that is launching first to lead off a generation, a system doesn't get defined right away. The 360 hardly had a great start, and even the PS2 had a slow first 6-9 months in America. I actually remember reading articles back in Spring/Summer '01 about how Nintendo and/or Microsoft could overtake Sony, based on the marketshare at that point in time. It seems laughable looking back; IIRC, the PS2 more than doubled the combined sales of the Xbox and GameCube over the 2001 holiday (with the ridiculous lineup of GTA3, MGS2, FFX, DMC, etc.). It was an unbelievable time...that was where the PS2 was really defined, and basically the "console war" was a battle for 2nd place between MS and Nintendo from the start.
The point is, there's so many "what if's" that proclaiming the Wii U as a success or failure is incredibly premature at this point. From where I sit, nothing has been unexpected about the Wii U based on my expectations since the re-debut at E3. Except ZombiU being a hell of a lot better than I thought it would be.
Without knowing what the next MS and Sony systems are, when they are both launching, what game's they'll have, what games Nintendo will have after Q2, etc., it's incredibly early to speculate on what the Wii U is eventually going to be. Nintendo definitely has a lot of work to do if they want the system to remain viable over the next several years, but again, this has been readily apparent for several months. The Nov/Dec sales are reflective of that.
Even if Jan-June are slow sales-wise for the Wii U, which I fully expect, I don't think they necessarily need to panic. Their future is going to depend heavily on how it performs next fall against one or both new consoles, what games it has, what partners with 3rd parties Nintendo forges or doesn't forge, etc.
They're hardly doomed right now, although I can certainly see the possibility where the Wii U performs poorly in the long-term. That's the thing -- I don't really feel like it has underperformed. With the lineup of games, both at launch and coming in Q1/Q2, and the hype (or lack thereof) leading up to the launch, I hope most people weren't expecting anything near a repeat of the Wii's 2006/2007 success.
Historically, a console's performance at launch is very much over-blown. Obviously, you want to do well, but especially for a console that is launching first to lead off a generation, a system doesn't get defined right away. The 360 hardly had a great start, and even the PS2 had a slow first 6-9 months in America. I actually remember reading articles back in Spring/Summer '01 about how Nintendo and/or Microsoft could overtake Sony, based on the marketshare at that point in time. It seems laughable looking back; IIRC, the PS2 more than doubled the combined sales of the Xbox and GameCube over the 2001 holiday (with the ridiculous lineup of GTA3, MGS2, FFX, DMC, etc.). It was an unbelievable time...that was where the PS2 was really defined, and basically the "console war" was a battle for 2nd place between MS and Nintendo from the start.
The point is, there's so many "what if's" that proclaiming the Wii U as a success or failure is incredibly premature at this point. From where I sit, nothing has been unexpected about the Wii U based on my expectations since the re-debut at E3. Except ZombiU being a hell of a lot better than I thought it would be.
Without knowing what the next MS and Sony systems are, when they are both launching, what game's they'll have, what games Nintendo will have after Q2, etc., it's incredibly early to speculate on what the Wii U is eventually going to be. Nintendo definitely has a lot of work to do if they want the system to remain viable over the next several years, but again, this has been readily apparent for several months. The Nov/Dec sales are reflective of that.
Unknown One
Member
Didn't the 360 and PS3 launch in US first then Europe months later?
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
360 launched in the US and Europe pretty much simultaneously, which is why there were HW shortages until the following March or so.
Steve Youngblood
Member
It was ahead of its time in every way.
Kacho
Member
Obviously, but it is fun to discuss and speculate where things may go.
At this point, the Wii U is not "doomed", but it's not looking good either.
Silver_DNA
Member
The Wii U didn't outsell the Wii lifetime sales in two months, of course it's doomed.
Also, I just escaped from a North Korean labor camp and no one there even knew what a Wii U was. Where's the marketing Ninendo?
Also, I just escaped from a North Korean labor camp and no one there even knew what a Wii U was. Where's the marketing Ninendo?
TheNatural
My Member!
Holy shit lol. Seriously? Even that fucked up logic isn't counting Nintendoland for $60 bundled in the $350 package.
Some of you are hopeless if anyone is going to seriously argue the price difference between the HD consoles at launch vs. the PS2 and Wii was way, WAY more of a difference than Wii U vs. current systems.
This is a whole different animal. The supply isn't constained, and it's not a huge price difference either. That in a nutshell is why the Wii U numbers can't be compared to anything else, because nothing else fits this context.
Dion Blaster
Member
You're only setting yourself up for disappointment. It's best to keep them low for now.
Version 3.0
Member
And Gamecube and Xbox.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I'm not setting myself up for disappointment. I won't be flabbergasted if a video game company defies logic and doesn't produce a competent launch. However, I think at least one of them will produce a product that is technologically impressive for a reasonable price. My biggest question mark is really in regards to whether or not software that demonstrates a real generational leap will be ready to go.
toddhunter
Member
But not too early to comment.
Direct comparisons to the 360 and PS3 launch are interesting but not particularly useful. The measure for success is constantly changing.
The wii u was always going to do "well". It is a nintendo console with mario. As a nintendo console it will do just fine.
For perhaps a regular gaffer, things are different. Nintendo are asking 3rd parties to invest in their console and make great and interesting games. This is despite there being existing consoles that are selling better and next gen coming to boot. Time is the issue here.
The PS4 and 720 can start slow and not be doomed. Companies that make games have little choice, they will make games for them (already are) and hope it all works out.
Devs for nintendo have a choice. Based on early sales? The suspicion is they will give the wii u a miss because there just doesn't seem to be a big enough demand to make it attractive enough. Practically for many? This is doomed.
Interfectum
Member
They also didn't have a direct competitor come out 12-14 months after that blew their systems away in terms of system power, 3rd party participation and gamer mindshare. The PS2 and 360 had time to grow, time to get 3rd parties to learn the system hardware and pump out some crazy shit... The Wii U doesn't have the luxury of time. If either the PS4 or Xbox 3 come out this fall they will be at the forefront of the conversation, not the Wii U. What crystal ball am I using? It's called common sense.
This. I believe a console is usually defined by its first holiday season after launch. That's usually when it starts to get its first true hit games.
The PS2 launched with a pretty mediocre lineup, but by the fall of 2001 it had GTA3, GT3, FFX, MGS2, DMC, SH2, Ico, etc. It was insane really.
I think we can all agree that fall 2013 will be the most crucial time for the Wii U. That will be its most important time to get out a killer app -- possibly the game(s) that actually prove the GamePad's worth and sell some systems. Something tells me Nintendo's gonna have Mario Kart ready but it could be 3D Mario. We could pray for some more 3rd party support but that's really impossible to tell until E3.
Maybe Nintendo will surprise us with some actually new and interesting titles instead of Mario Kart x and other titles we've all been playing for the last decade.
If all we can hope for are re-treads of tired old Nintendo franchises that have gone one iteration too far then the Wii U is clearly in dire straits.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Pics or it did not happen.
Boss Man
Member
I kind of wish the word doomed was banned or censored or something. Anytime you talk about something not performing well, the retort is "OMG YEH IT'S TOTALLY DOOMED MAN W/E." Wii U isn't doing well. There's a big long-term difference between selling two apples because only two people wanted your apples, and selling two apples because you were only able to get a hold of two since everyone on Earth is desperate for an apple.
Randolph Freelander
Member
We are going to wrap Usain Bolt in chains. We are going to bind his legs at the hips, thighs, knees, calves, and ankles. He is going to have a dump truck attached to his waste, and that truck will not have wheels. And we're going to line him up against a four year old kid and have them run the 40 yard dash. We will ignore everything. The chains. The dump truck. The bindings. All of it. We will in fact declare the kid the fastest man in the world.
That's this comparison. "Wii U is tracking ahead of other consoles!"
Intellectually lazy analysis.
That's this comparison. "Wii U is tracking ahead of other consoles!"
Intellectually lazy analysis.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I don't think it'st that bad of a comparison, but I do agree that it's intellectually lazy analysis. One shouldn't disregard the numbers to concoct wildly speculative narratives when actual number do serve a purpose. However, one also shouldn't just worship the notion that numbers give us charts, and charts are king! There's room for context to flesh out the meaning of the raw data.
In short, conclusions are meaningless without data to back them up. But also raw data is meaningless without useful conclusions that can be drawn from it, which requires some degree of context.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I don't think it'll do that badly.
Majmun
Member
Gamecube and Xbox performed better during their launch?
Or am I not reading this right...
metalslimer
Member
If it does there will actually be a legit reason to uae the word doomed
shinra-bansho
Member
The 360 and PS3 launches weren't "good."
The 360 was supply constrained.
The PS3 had an ASP greater than $550.
When one begins using them as a basis for comparison, then one should realise the situation isn't that rosy.
The 360 was supply constrained.
The PS3 had an ASP greater than $550.
When one begins using them as a basis for comparison, then one should realise the situation isn't that rosy.
This would be epic! Think of all the N64 ambassador games when they had to lower the price to, "free with purchase of wii!"
I don't think I've seen a post about how much wii u should sell. Sold out is obviously an easily understandable metric for success, but did anyone have an idea of what they thought it would sell through the holidays? I And don't say 5.5 mm by April cause its pointless to talk about that number until nintendo hits or misses it.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Who is arguing that the company isn't at fault. What people are is that -- in terms of establishing long term demand for a product -- declaring victory against a company that failed to deliver enough product to meet demand isn't all that worthy of boasting.
Reallink
Member
Yea about that OP, the U's problem is outlook. Monthly sales volume will almost assuredly tank to PS360 levels in Q1/Q2 (I wouldn't be surprised to see it fail to top 100k at its worst). The key difference is PS360 had the luxury of rolling (technologically) uncontested for 5-10 years to build up mindshare, developer support, and steady growth. Nintendo faces 2 new consoles that could be on a completely different level (both technologically AND innovation wise), possibly sold at equal or lower cost through subsidy plans, and with vastly superior developer support. This is how people would be arriving at "Nintendo's doomed". Lets be honest here, the U's best shot was again catching on fire with the larger audience (see Wii), earning developer support through sales success, and slowly winning over the multi-million buying core. It certainly seems to have failed to do that as no doubt a vast majority of that 885k is owed to die hard Nintendo fans, super-core console gamers aching for something new in 6 years, and just general early adopter gadgetphiles.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think history dictates that, short of supply problems, the December number would have been expected to be 1.5 - 2 times November's figure. So, 425K for November would have been expected to hit 637.5 K to 850 K to be considered respectable.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
But the 'mitigating factors' game cuts both ways;
The PS3 sold at a high price with ample supply, but was not just being marketed as a videogame player, it was simultaneously being sold on the premise of being a high end multimedia machine for a brand new media format.
Many early adopters of the PS3 were primarily buying a top end new format Bluray player, and high end AV equipment buyers might overlap with consumer videogame system purchasers, but are not entirely either group.
Steve Youngblood
Member
What does that have to do with anything? Yes, it was marketed as something more than just a video game console to justify the high price tag, and that dog didn't hunt. How is that a mitigating factor worth exploring in light of concerns over low Wii U sales?
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Holy shit, what a rational, well-written post.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say?
That the PS3 would have sold even more poorly without BluRay to drive it? So the Wii U comparison is more favorable?
Without BluRay the PS3 likely wouldn't have cost $599. :/
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Because - in the quote in the post you just quoted - the implication that PS3 sales shouldn't be compared because of its high price is not a given; high end AV enthusiasts and new format early adopters aren't as price conscious as console purchasers.
If the PS3 had only had a DVD drive and been the same price, it would have sold even worse.
EDIT:
Yes, I am saying that.
Even if it had launched at $500 with only a DVD drive (which is a a plausible cost) it would also have sold worse.
Console purchasers are extremely price sensitive.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Of course. However, this is a stupid and pointless observation.
Terra Firma
Banned
Wii U launched in a next-gen vacuum (if you consider the Wii U next gen). It is supposed to have zero competition as it is supposed to be a step up.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
As opposed to "The PS3 wasn't supply constrained because it cost over $500"?
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think the point is that trying to compare sales favorably (i.e. November + December numbers for Wii U are better) to a console that costed $599 (or $499 if you could get the cheap SKU) isn't much to brag about.
shinra-bansho
Member
The PS3 did launch at $500, with a $600 premium SKU. A plausible cost would be $400-500 with only a DVD drive, considering BD drives at the time were still incredibly expensive.
Who was making this point exactly?
The point is, selling better than either the 360 or the PS3 is a low bar to set. The PS3 was ridiculously expensive. The 360 had supply issues.
The Wii U has an ASP of ~$330 last I recall. And has sufficient supply.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
And to reiterate my point; the PS3 wasn't a Neo-Geo or a 3DO.
It wasn't 'a console' on just it's own merits, and picked up sales from more audiences than just day one console purchasers.
The 'oh, but you can't compare PS3 because it was expensive' argument is not a compelling one, because at least some of that audience are not as price conscious as traditional day one console buyers.
Byakuya769
Member
PS3 was supply constrained. Just because there were pockets of availability doesn't change the fact that there were many pockets of scarcity and ebay prices stayed high for quite a while. Those are lost sales.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Define how much of that audience it was, or why this matters to begin with. It was an expensive console that wasn't regarded as having a great launch. It just appears that you are pulling nonsense out of thin air to make some ridiculous case for Wii U beating the PS3 as some sort of indication of a quality launch.
Suffice to say, this strikes me as some of the more bizarre apologetics I've seen yet. "Sure, it was an expensive failure of a launch, but the PS3 was regarded as a multimedia behemoth. Surely, the Wii U's two-month victory in sales is indicative of the Wii U's desirability in the pantheon of great launches!"
Again, this all gets rather tedious after a while.
Edit: And futher, nobody says 'oh, but you can't compare PS3 because it was expensive'. The argument is "why would you want to compare it to that." The PS3 stateside isn't a high bar. Why would you want to use that as your metric for success? Twisting the numbers to argue that the machine was "desired by gamers and multimedia enthusiasts alike" is massive revisionist history.
Similar threads
- Poll