• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

What console had (or has) the most clear and consistent branding?

ScOULaris

Member
Consoles are unique in that they are essentially personal computers optimized for gaming that engender most of their identity through marketing, branding, and building a memorable and diverse library of games. The very notion of "console wars" exists largely due to these differences in branding, as consumers tend to gravitate toward products from manufacturers that they've bought into and enjoyed in the past. This is also why it's hard for a new player to come into the industry and steal consumers away from the established giants. You can call it fanboyism if you'd like, but brand loyalty has always been relatively strong in the videogames market.

Now we've seen what happened to the Wii U as a direct result of unclear branding and poor marketing. The console had some unique experiences that it was trying to offer players via the new control method and asymmetrical multiplayer designs, but most of that was completely lost on the average consumer. There is still a sizable proportion of consumers to this very day who think that the Wii U is merely an upgrade to the original Wii, and that's a marketing and branding failure.

So which console, past or present, do you think did the best job at maintaining a clear and consistent brand?

I'm gonna cast my vote for the most successful console in gaming history: the Sony Playstation 2.

ps2-500x500.jpg


Anyone who was around at the time of the PS2 launch remembers what a sensation it was. Coming hot off of Sony's breakout success with the PS1, the hype for their sophomore effort was through the roof. The reason why I think the PS2 was best at maintaining its clear and consistent brand was because of how it took the edgy, sophisticated branding of its predecessor and matured it even further. Sony succeeded in the crowded marketplace by differentiating itself from the competition with the PS1's extensive third-party library and its attempts to elevate gaming above that of a children's hobby, and it kept that ball rolling right along with the PS2.

The PS2 would continue Playstation's tradition of enjoying immense third-party support while also having its library bolstered by both first- and second-party studios. It was the best of all worlds. The perfect storm. There's a reason why the PS2 will probably never be surpassed in terms of worldwide sales, and that's because it consistently delivered on its promise of being home to the widest variety of games both mainstream and niche in their appeal. It was the platform of choice for developers big and small, from the western hemisphere of the world and the east. Also, its inclusion of a DVD player further cemented its appeal with mainstream consumers at a time when the transition to DVD's was right on the brink of becoming ubiquitous.

Basically, the PS2 was Sony's most confident and consistent era. It was the Playstation brand perfected.
 
I think Wii's brand was pretty strong and consistent. The aesthetic and design of everything reflected its brand. The logo was even designed to both reflect people playing together, and also the general look of the Wii remotes, while also being pronounced "We" as in "we play together;" ie bringing people together regardless of their hardcore gamer cred. The small, sleek white look was a different course than the big, heavy black consumer electronic / gamer looking machine, and more in line with the "fashion" of Apple's design. Do you remember their catch phrase? "We would like to play."



I can barely remember PS2's catch phrase. RU red-e? UR not Red-e? Or something? Was that the PS2?

That the PS2 sold the most is a good metric but not 100% proof of it having the best marketing/branding. It was in an ideal situation to win market share; and let's be fair, with so many DRE-failing PS2s and so many revisions, who is to say that some percentage of owners rebought PS2 that had failed on them?

Secondly, the PS2 was also marketed as the best value DVD player. MANY people at its launch bought it just for that, or primarily for that. To say it had a strong gaming brand is true, but it's not the only focus.

In fact the brand was a bit muddied when Sony tried to pass it off not as a gaming machine, but as a "computer" when they released that Linux kit. Sure, they may have been trying to avoid tax laws (or something) but it muddied things at least a tiny bit. Sony was trying to get the PS2 to look like more than it was honestly capable of.



PS2 is still my favorite console due to its amazing library by far. But its hype levels and sales numbers weren't merely due to strong marketing and branding upon the PS2 itself, a lot of that was momentum built up from its predecessor; and a perfect storm where the competition was at its weakest, and it launched at a pretty ideal time.
 
^^ Good post.

You make a very strong case for the Wii. It's baffling how Nintendo went from that clear focus and outstanding success to a relative failure across the board with the Wii U.

That being said, I do feel that the Wii U's library is about on par if not slightly better than the Wii's. The Wii had some all-time greats like the Mario Galaxy games, but otherwise its immense library was 90% shovelware. The Wii U, on the other hand, has bad practically no support from third-party publishers but has been home to some of Nintendo's best first-party output in years.
 
Dreamcast was about "128 bit power", with never-seen-on-consoles graphics, online gaming and web browsing and perfect or superior arcade experiences. I think it was well-branded by Sega and delivered it somehow.
 
I'd probably have to go with the Wii.

Nintendo's work on communicating and branding Wii extended past the box and the hardware, it seeped through to the software design, through the branding of the games themselves, and to select software ranges like "New Play Control!" and "Touch Generations". Even Mario Kart Wii's logo and menu design felt distinctly Wii-like, and the Wii Wheel add-on of course felt like an extension of the experience most players had come to expect from the format. Wii's branding was so evident throughout the platform that third parties even aimed to make their software fit in. See the Netflix app, which is a native pointer-driven piece of software, or games like Shaun White's Snowboarding and Go Vacation.

Early-gen PSP is also a great one. Sony was confident enough in executing its vision for a multi-purpose portable media device, and made a big deal (at least in Europe) of featuring the format's XMB icons heavily in marketing to communicate what it was for. Sadly by the time the iPod Touch and iPhone rethought media interfaces, that communication became rather moot and efforts to say the PSP was "the whole world in your hands" just didn't work or some convincing. Particularly as the bullet points for camera and internet functionality (on the side of my PSP-3000 box) have asterisks next to them. But I think there was a period of about 1-2 years where the PSP definitely felt like a confident step forward for the portable multimedia device.

Once DS found its feet in late 2005-mid 2006 I think Nintendo nailed the branding of that format as well, right through to the DSi XL which was really Nintendo seeking new markets and diversifying the hardware, while maintaining that familiar DS design language.
 
In the last generation - definitely Wii.

Never changed the logo, the name, or the colour of game boxes. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 kept making NXEs and altering the look of the logo while PS3 was completely rebranded. (Both of them, as well as PSP, were also guilty of creating multiple discount software labels per platform, which is an insanity.) Heck, even Nintendo's own DS was a rather different beast after DS lite and before it.

EDIT: To be honest, I forgot about Wii Mini. Where does that thing fit?
 
When it comes to marketing/branding - Sony trashes the other two console mft (and Sega before that). That's why they are the console king.

PS1 had great/consistent branding

PS2 did as well as OP noted

PS3 was a tad rough initially then refocused and came out better

PS4 is on fire for a reason and will likely be the only one of the three that does better than the previous generation.
 
360 at launch was the most consistent console I've ever seen, but it changed so much over the years though it was always consistent in a period until the next change.
 
When it comes to marketing/branding - Sony trashes the other two console mft (and Sega before that). That's why they are the console king.

PS1 had great/consistent branding

PS2 did as well as OP noted

PS3 was a tad rough initially then refocused and came out better

PS4 is on fire for a reason and will likely be the only one of the three that does better than the previous generation.

I'd really discount the PS3, their branding was pretty unfocused across the generation (think of the number of slogans they went through), and there was a long period where the brand was in a state of limbo until they rebranded with the Slim.

Overall I think Sony does a good job, though as a platform they do have the luxury of basically continuing where they left off, whereas Nintendo and Sega had (and still have in the former's case) a habit of radically reinventing themselves every two generations and ditching the previous brand.

The actual PlayStation branding, and the four face buttons, is certainly of iconic status and I also think Sony Interactive Entertainment does a really good job at making PS owners feel like they are part of an exclusive club.
 
The Wii had super consistent branding. The Xbox 360 inspired other companies to use 360 in the names of their products (Norton 360, Anderson Cooper 360, etc.). The PS2 had that sound byte they used in their commercials that has stuck with me.
 
Yeah I go with the Wii too for consistent branding.

They stuck that name on games throughout the entire gen "Wiiplay, WiiSports WiiFit" and ran those damned Wii would like to play commercials with the same theme music all gen too. It doesn't help that their rivals were shitting the bed last gen between trying to shake off the 3 red rings for Xbox and the absolute disastrous start for the PS3 last gen had Sony fumbling their marketing campaigns all over the place. That fucking PS3 Babydoll commercial is still the worst ad I have seen for a console ever. Absolutely dreadful.
 
Definitely the Wii. Everything down to the design language of the console, controller, marketing, UI, and games all shared this incredible consistency. Even many Nintendo published games shared UI in common with the system UI which went a long way I feel to make things feel familiar to first time video game players. Coming off of GameCube, which couldn't decide what it was, it was such a clear step away from everything they had done last gen and onto something so fresh and new. Can only hope Nintendo makes a similar paradigm shift with NX.

I always think its really cool after an unsuccessful system, console manufacturers go back to the drawing board and completely change the very DNA of what they're about. You say this from Saturn to Dreamcast, Gamecube to Wii, and even Xbox to 360. Sure Sony did a great job with establishing what PS4 was early on (for the players n such), but a lot of that was built on the upward momentum they had going at the end of the PS3 after the rebrand.
 
I'd have to say Wii. They really nailed it and rocked it until the wheels fell off. PS2 distant 2nd. PS1 and Dreamcast was pretty good too.
 
Wii and Dreamcast for sure.

They literally completely changed the Dreamcast branding halfway through its life. White packaging went to black, they brought back the Sega Scream, and they dropped the Sega name on a lot of packaging. And let's not forget that weird launch commerical with thw woman on the motorcycle that was really at odds with the rest of the marketing effort. Panic mode Sega was...interesting.
 
Sure Sony did a great job with establishing what PS4 was early on (for the players n such), but a lot of that was built on the upward momentum they had going at the end of the PS3 after the rebrand.

PS4's an interesting one. The actual system itself, before reveal, was probably the safest system Sony could conceive going into next gen while not risking the business, and the system after reveal very much feels like the Xbox 360 2 (or Xbox 360.5 depending on how you feel about current gen, har har).

Given Microsoft changed direction with Xbox One it's interesting how pretty much all of Sony's PS4 marketing indirectly hones in on those perceived Xbox One flaws (some of which are real flaws, others which were duff marketing and communication) and tells people "this is the no-nonsense system". It complements the safer approach to the PS4 well - people like what they know and are familiar with.

I guess it's worth taking points off given how the management at SCI didn't actually know why the PS4 was selling much better than they expected, but it's admirable that they aren't really changing what isn't broken. The endings to online PS4 software commercials are still peppered with "for the players", three years on.

Interesting contrast to last gen and the Wii for sure. It's consistent, but it's really just a bit boring and safe.
 
I can barely remember PS2's catch phrase. RU red-e? UR not Red-e? Or something? Was that the PS2?

That was the original PSone slogan. The PS2 adopted a slogan that was started during the PSone days, but was rarely used. I still think it's probably the best slogan ever for a console

sloganmlp97.jpg
 
they brought back the Sega Scream, and they dropped the Sega name on a lot of packaging

Which is interesting since they were planning to ditch Sega branding altogether from the start (like Nintendo with Wii later)... and yet they brought back Sega scream.

Besides, the differences in the US and European brandings, down to the colours of the Dreamcast squiggly, didn't add to the consistency.
 
Which is interesting since they were planned to ditch Sega branding altogether from the start (like Nintendo with Wii later)... and yet they brought back Sega scream.

Besides, the differences in the US and European brandings, down to the colours of the Dreamcast squiggly, didn't add to the consistency.

Oh, those easily-broken EUR region disc cases... *weeps at broken Shenmue case in dog-eared box*
 
For me I think the Wii wins for just pure consistency across the board. Every bit of branding, every marketing decision, every aspect of the design, videogame focus etc. Everything stuck rigidly to the same theme to the point where even 3rd parties Wii-ified everything to fit in.

The PS1 comes in a close second, for very much the same reasons, but with a totally contrasting message. Dark and mature, gaming for a limited audience (but a big limited audience: adults), going against everything that came before. Their messages really hit the mark.
 
Everything about the PS2's branding screamed futuristic. I love the minimalist elegance on the OG PS2 box. I think it demonstrates Sony's confidence at the time - the logo was enough to identify the product. They never went back to that kind of packaging post-PS2.
 
That was the original PSone slogan. The PS2 adopted a slogan that was started during the PSone days, but was rarely used. I still think it's probably the best slogan ever for a console

sloganmlp97.jpg

I agree that's a great slogan. I also liked the PS2's ad about the PS9 from the future.

But I guess this particular PS2 slogan just didn't stick out in my mind as well as things like URnotE or Wii's We Would Like to Play or Dreamcast's "It's Thinking"

Even so, the branding slogan is only one piece of the overall picture and the PS2's branding and marketing was extremely good all around. Damn good.
 
They literally completely changed the Dreamcast branding halfway through its life. White packaging went to black, they brought back the Sega Scream, and they dropped the Sega name on a lot of packaging. And let's not forget that weird launch commerical with thw woman on the motorcycle that was really at odds with the rest of the marketing effort. Panic mode Sega was...interesting.

Dreamcast is one of my favorite systems of all time, but I think it's a shame that between early, late, and all-star releases there are three different spine colors.
 
Playstation as a whole. Sony did it right from the get-go by naming their consoles clearly. PS, PS2, PS3, PS4. There's no name changing. Everyone knows exactly what it is and what the next one will be. There's no SNES > N64 > Gamecube > Wii > WiiU garbage.
There's no XBOX > X360 > XB1 crap. No Genesis > Saturn > Dreamcast idiocy.
 
Wii was very very consistent over the first 4/5 years, then it went downhill with the Wii U, some people here thought it was a add on for the Wii named U lmao

But PlayStation 2 was really powerful branding, console was everywhere across ads over here, "cheapest dvd player and best gaming console" etc etc... it made the damn thing sell like hotcakes across the country!

Honorable mention goes for the Xbox 360, a Console designed by games for gamers, the message was clear and made it the beast it became.
 
The Wii was successfully brand marketed but it also had a lot of flat spots too. For instance, the high amount of shovelware affected the brand to where it became difficult for customers to sift through and find good quality stuff. It was really similar to the mess of the Atari 2600 games library. Also, the clarity of the brand went down the toilet with the Wii U. It was confusing for both consoles and that's why I don't think it's an ideal example of good branding.

A good example would be the N64. I would argue that the use of cartridges helped its brand immensely. Everyone else was moving the disc but to parents who still held a lot of buying power in the console market, cartridges were very familiar and hassle free. I feel people see N64 carts as a handicap of the system but they don't realize that for simplicity it was a godsend and a great way to distinguish the brand with convenience. No load times and usually no memory card required. There were also no different OEM controllers like on PS1.

Also, back then adults knew better than to trust kids with CDs of any sort. The kids weren't going to put them back in the case, then the discs will get dusty and scratched and become unplayable.

So the N64 is a great example in consistency in a brand that did well with consumers. Even the graphics to this day are memorable and have their own feel, you know when you're looking at an N64 game.
 
Secondly, the PS2 was also marketed as the best value DVD player. MANY people at its launch bought it just for that, or primarily for that. To say it had a strong gaming brand is true, but it's not the only focus.

Very true, but that was part of the message.

I was in college at the time, and so many people who weren't really (or at all) into games were getting PS2s primarily for watching DVD movies after watching movies in a friend's dorm/apt.
 
Honorable mention goes for the Xbox 360, a Console designed by games for gamers, the message was clear and made it the beast it became.

I'm not sure I'd agree, the brand got revamped (almost) with every dashboard update. Things remained fairly consistent after the NXE (the slogan also remained "Jump In" if I remember correctly), but there was a fairly significant overall of the brand before Kinect was released (unleashed?), and it was a period where Microsoft itself was rebranding itself.

So there was a period of inconsistency where you'd see the old Microsoft logo alongside a new direction of design and the old Microsoft Studios logos, and the boxart for game cases would have been on its third iteration by now. Xbox as a business also shifted its direction mid- to late-generation to pose as more of a media platform than a platform that solely offered video games for entertainment. While there were Media Player-like features included in the Xbox 360 from day one, it was never a larger focus for marketing.

I'd also argue that the change of Xbox bosses mid-gen also impacted things and the way the platform was communicated, for example Microsoft stopped investing heavily in Microsoft-published exclusives or third party content.

I think subtle change in a brand is good (the new, more modern flat look to Xbox was a good thing), but I don't think Xbox 360 at the end of the generation stood for the same things it did at the beginning of the generation, and the platform ended up being in quite a different place. I guess that reflects how the 360 ended up being the most flexible platform of the three though.

Related: A good post: Design as Branding
 
The Wii had super consistent branding. The Xbox 360 inspired other companies to use 360 in the names of their products (Norton 360, Anderson Cooper 360, etc.). The PS2 had that sound byte they used in their commercials that has stuck with me.

My company uses 360 in their software names but marketing convinces me it wasn't because of the Xbox 360... :P

(all our codebase is on the .NET stack, too)

Sega Genesis was advertised as the anti-Nintendo and they kept that marketing throughout.

Genesis, at least in the US, was pretty consistent with its marketing. "You can't do this on Nintendo!", to arcade-power in your home, to the edginess that stayed with the system through its life.
 
I can think of a couple of examples.

Wii - I think we can all agree that Nintendo got almost everything right with their intentions for the Wii. They made it clear they wanted to expand the Gaming audience, and everything from advertising, PR, design ethos, and features was made to reflect that. Of course there were stumbles along the way, and Nintendo's mishandling of the platform later in it's life led to the cluttered, confusing nightmare that is the Wii U. But the Wii still remains one of the most intelligently calculated and well designed devices in the world.

Sega Genesis - After the Master System was completely crushed by the NES, how was Sega able to compete with a company that dominated bedrooms of kids everywhere? The Genesis was the answer, You Don't! Rather than go after Nintendo's audience, Sega instead cleverly played around Nintendo by going after a slightly older audience, with near-perfect arcade ports and edgy software. Campaigning that Sega was for cool, mature people and Nintendo was for babies. In a way, it was Sega's pre-cursor to Nintendo's Blue Ocean Shtick. Where they would occupy a market hole rather than compete in a saturated demographic. Of course when Nintendo responded with the SNES, Sega was forced to get much more aggressive, and tackle Nintendo head on.

That being said, Sega was on-point with their marketing. They made it clear who they were, why they were awesome, and why people should care. And they did it all though shameless mud-slinging, in-your-face advertising, and games that filed the whole edgy gaming experience that fed of the testosterone of Middle School boys in the 90s. Of course, now it reeks of dated-90s cheese, but is was one of the most well executed strategies in gaming. However, much like Nintendo with the Wii, Sega's gross mishandling of the Genesis later on doomed the company, and cut off another leg to the bloated, needlessly complicated albatross that was the Sega Saturn.
 
Yeah the Wii had insanely consistent branding. Tbh I don't think anything comes super close to it, even the PS2 which felt like it sort of got rebranded as a cheap alternative to 7th gen consoles towards the end of its life.
 
Regarding Sega and Nintendo, it was quite confusing at first. NES, Famicom, Genesis, Megadrive , Snes, Super Famicom, Segacd and 32x. Fortunately they ended up in a common name later on.

Regarding consoles, the Atari Jaguar, Amiga CD32 and Panasonic 3DO did a good job in introducing gaming to an older age group. Just like Ms-dos computers. Commodore and Atari did this already with their home computers in the 80s, so the branding was adequate. Unfortunately their internal troubles prevented them from making a bigger impact . Sony took the reins from there
 
Top Bottom