I really didn't mean it in the extent that you thought I did [assuming I understand your intent]
Unnatural in the specific rates of growth not in the overall market behavior. Looking at the data, YOY change for 2006 - 2008 was +19%, +44%, and +19% respectively for an average growth rate of ~27% across those three years. The largest average 3 year growth rate during PS2's period was ~16% from 2001 - 2003.
It appears to be unnatural to the generalized data within the confines of the chart as presented. If I had to try and interpret it on a larger level contextually I would probably say something along the lines that the Wii [and the NDS] managed to hit along a lot of the same demographics that the PS1 and PS2 managed to hit but and here's the important part of my thought process, the Wii did it in a much much shorter time period which to the best of my knowledge is entirely unusual for the console market of which the US retail revenue mostly consists of. The end result doesn't appear to be too unusual for the larger market until the notable decline due to another platform taking over but the growth rate in that time period is certainly a lot more condensed than I have ever seen before. I wouldn't be surprised though if the likes of that had been seen before during 3 year periods during the Atari to Nintendo transition in the 80's but I don't have that data.
Thanks for the help again John. I did well this month
I'm not sure it's more rapid than the PS1 growth -- it's of slightly lower size, but the rate may have been faster.
Regardless, it still seems like a very weird line to draw in the sand. 27% annualized growth is "unnatural," but 16% growth is standard. I don't mean to suggest that 27% isn't bigger than 16%; obviously it is. And if those growth rates were sustained indefinitely,, 27% growth would produce a much larger end result than 16% would.
But over the course of a single year, or a couple of years? A 9% difference in growth is important, but not the difference between "normal" and "unnatural/surely something must be wrong." It's a good year vs. a great year, not a totally new animal. We aren't talking about order of magnitude differences, or even things which are twice as large; we're talking about a 9% difference in growth rates.
Again, PS1 grew the market by nearly 80%; the SNES/Genesis generation grew the market 50% relative to the NES market; the NES market more than doubled the Atari generation. By historical standards, the Gen-over-gen growth with the Wii/PS3/360 was neither the largest growth, nor the smallest growth. It fit right in line with historical norms.