Support NeoGAF

[meppi]

I really wouldn't want to have a serious discussion with someone like you anyway.

Yeah, thanks for that. Very charming. Not that I even care if you're just posting dumb shit like that.

And waving an e-penis around telling us just how many games and systems you own won't impress most on here. Hell, I own close to 3500 games on every system starting with Game&Watches to the Wii U and soon a PS4 as well. I buy fricking everything, even shit systems like the Jaguar to play just Tempest 2000 and a Wonderswan to play Namco Wondergolf. Heck, I have multiple versions of most my hardware even. :-/
So yeah, not impressed. Again, not that this has anything to do with anything.

Being written off as a Nintendo fanboy is quite a thing really.
Especially since my system of choice was a 360 up till a couple of months ago as many know and now it's the PS3.
I just speak up more about the Nintendo bashing because it's so prevalent and popular on this board and it's utterly stupid.
If I'm not interested in something, let's say most Xbox 1 games for instance, I'm not going into every single thread and shit on the people that are, unlike what you see in again, every single Nintendo thread. Funny how that works.

So yeah, stating things like "The Wii offered nothing for Nintendo fans/people who like to play games." and then not being able to cope with the fact that others find such an idiotic statement laughable is not on me, it's on you. whether you play the whole bitter and burnt old-school Nintendo fan card or not.

 

[Represent.]

Yes. I think thats pretty obvious. The novelty died off and it died a slow horrible death. Most owners only played it when family came over too. Fad.

 

[StoopKid]

Yes.

 

[Coxswain]

this is truly the funniest part.

NES is the market leader for 5 years. Success.
SNES is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
GBA is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
DS is the market leader for 6 years. Success.
Wii is the market leader for 4 years. Fad.

"Fad" and "Success" are really, really not mutually exclusive, let alone opposites.

I mean, some people are definitely assigning that connotation to it (as I said in my last post), which I think is wrong and dumb, but I think there are also a fair number of people here who are calling it a fad and calling it a success (and, at least in my own, personal case, a pretty damn good console in general).

 

[MaximoffZero]

It seems to me like some people in this thread (and outside it) see calling something they're into a "fad" is an insult. It's not. A fad is something that is popular for a period of time, then fades. Everything that is popular will eventually become a fad. There's no shame in saying you were a part of it. It's just life.

 

[borghe]

This, well said +1

Wii fits the textbook description of the word "fad" perfectly

no it doesn't. the "textbook" definition of fad isn't merely popularity, but popularity without merit to actual qualities.

and it's that second part which is 100% opinion based in this thread and will doubtfully ever see eye to eye on.

It seems to me like some people in this thread (and outside it) see calling something they're into a "fad" is an insult. It's not. A fad is something that is popular for a period of time, then fades. Everything that is popular will eventually become a fad. There's no shame in saying you were a part of it. It's just life.

again, no. something that is popular for a while and then isn't is just... something that's popular for a while and then isn't. a fad is something that is popular, and no one can exactly explain why it is popular but it just is.

beanie babies. people went crazy for... bean stuffed dolls?
cabbage patch kids. for an entire holiday people went nuts for dolls, and then they disappeared.

Wii was to many many many people, a seriously quality gaming platform. It's success was predicated on tremendously entertaining hundreds of millions of people. The quality of the system is subjective, but just the fact that its quality IS subjective and can cleanly be argued by both sides lends more to not being a fad than being one.

 

[Duane Cunningham]

The PS2 was such a fad! It just fell right off the cliff in 2006. Same with the NES in 1992. What a fad.

 

[Mory Dunz]

What put it on top though? Was it the typical gaming consumer that has been growing over the years but who's make up has been steady? Was it te Nintendo fanbase that had been shrinking since the SNES? Or was it an influx of atypical consumers that saw the wii as a hot item for a while and since then have largely been abscent from the console arena? Namely casuals, non-gamers, females and people outside of the typical 18-35 market?

If Nintendo had set a trend most of those atypical consumers would still be around buying and playing console games but they aren't. Which seems to me to fit part of the definition of a fad.

But it did set a trend with all the motion control stuff obviously. And the wii u blows but who knows if casuals will get into the kinect 2 this generation. It's possible. But then the Xbox would become a fad if it had casual fans I suppose.

 

[Dysun]

It was a fad that burned too bright and burned out faster than it should have.

 

[SmokyDave]

I see the issue now. People think that 'fad' is a negative descriptor, even though it isn't. That explains the reluctance to accept it was a fad, even though it fits the definition perfectly.

You see a similar thing with 'gimmick'. People always assume that it's a negative descriptor, even though it isn't.


Edit: I find it very telling that nobody would suggest that the DS was a fad. It wasn't. Spot the differences between that and the Wii and you'll get closer to seeing why the Wii was in fact a fad.

 

[flyinpiranha]

BlackBerry is a fad. Keyboards on phones are a fad. Iphone is a fad. Android is a fad.

Pretty much. Depending on your intent, anything popular could be considered a fad. Or anything that has a following really. It's such a huge, broad term that its usage has become to mean something different. I think when people say it they mean "something that was short lived and non-influential".

 

[Brinbe]

Some hilariously defensive posts in here. Absolutely a fad. Same with the Kinect for a short while.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

Guys, the word "fad" isn't really something to be debated. It has a definition and it unfortunately fits the Wii situation:



The key word there is "behavior". If Nintendo had released a Wii 2 Or Wii HD or something and it took off like the original did then it wouldn't be a fad, it would be a trend. Saying things like fads don't last four years or selling 100 million of the them doesn't make it a fad are rediculous arguments because fads can indeed last for several years (look at 90s boy bands) and fads usually do bring in a lot of money because of their sharp rise in popularity. As it stands, the Wii was a pop-culture blip like Pogs, IMHO.

Quoted for posterity

 

[H_Prestige]

This is factually dishonest. There is still PLENTY of motion gaming on Wii U. The lack of bundled wiimote is a cost issue combined with... well, 100 million fucking Wiis. There are plenty of titles out there that support the wiimote successfully, the most profound being Pikmin 3 where it is actually the best control scheme.

You are being dishonest. Stop it. The wii u is no more a motion control console than the ps3 is.

I see the issue now. People think that 'fad' is a negative descriptor, even though it isn't. That explains the reluctance to accept it was a fad, even though it fits the definition perfectly.

You see a similar thing with 'gimmick'. People always assume that it's a negative descriptor, even though it isn't.

People on here get too caught up in sales numbers. "BUT OMG TEH WII SOLD 100 MILLIONZ AND IT WAS ON TOP FOR FOUR YEARS JUST LIKE TEH PS2!!1111!". That has nothing to do with it. It could have sold 50 million and it would still be a fad. What matters is where the majority of Wii owners came from and where they went. This is the characteristic of fad products. The Wii was not a trend like playstation consoles or Nintendo's handheld line.

 

[meppi]

I see the issue now. People think that 'fad' is a negative descriptor, even though it isn't. That explains the reluctance to accept it was a fad, even though it fits the definition perfectly.

You see a similar thing with 'gimmick'. People always assume that it's a negative descriptor, even though it isn't.

That's very true, although you have to admit that in most instances those terms are being used in a derogatory matter.

 

[Bulzeeb]

what killed the wii wasn't the console itself but the lack of support, even Nintendo stopped doing something for the console like 2 years before the wii U release and in consequence the sales dropped hard

 

[ASIS]

1.) look at the gamesutra chart. The wii's hardware sales are completely atypical of other consoles and Nintendo's trending hardware sales across generations prior to and after the wii.

2.) Again there is no inherent time period that qualifies a fad vs a trend. Beanie babies sold for years before they dropped off. Most successful consoles see a quick rise and a gradual fall, wii however saw a quick rise and a fairly quick fall. The reasons are debatable but its undeniable. Also undeniable is that the customer make up of its successor is different from its predecessor meaning what made it successful previously did not follow.

3.) is that is your metric then wii most certainly isn't a trend. Motion controls are almost completely gone at this point and the use is down trending. The overwhelming majority of games use either kbm or controller.


I guess for me it comes down to my own prying into the subject and the fact that those making the case for it being a fad are making a better argument then those saying it isn't.

1) The numbers are definitely atypical because the product is completely different. By this logic, if the Xbox one ends up selling 30 million units, then is the 360 a fad?

2) There is definitely a certain amount of time it takes to measure this. All consoles will decline at some point, it's a matter of when. The Wii U is not the same console as the Wii, not by a long shot. In fact, it could be argued that the Wii U's failure to capture the market is because it didn't follow the foot steps of the Wii.

3) I'm talking about controllers, like the Dual Shock, like the gamepad, actual controllers, they all use motion controls.

To make it everyone's life a bit easier, here's the diagram that suggests what is what:

The Wii is in the "fashion" cycle, here's what it means:

"A fashion is a current trend or popular style in a particular field. A fashion can have a long or short life cycle. Certain clothing fashions last for a short period and the product life cycle will decline very rapidly, whilst others will decline slowly or even turn into what is known as a timeless classic."

Just looking at the point of overtake is a rather disingenuous way to measure it. No console will probably ever outsell the DS in hardware numbers, does that mean that the DS is 'staying on top' of the market forevermore?

I don't understand, please elaborate.

 

[Mory Dunz]

I see the issue now. People think that 'fad' is a negative descriptor, even though it isn't. That explains the reluctance to accept it was a fad, even though it fits the definition perfectly.

You see a similar thing with 'gimmick'. People always assume that it's a negative descriptor, even though it isn't.

Fad and gimmick are negative descriptors though. As evidenced by this argument. The Webster definition of a word doesn't include connotations it has. like always saying someone is short isn't negative by definition, but it can be in actual use.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

I think it was. People get too hung up on fad being inherently negative. The reason I see it as a fad is because it did not create any sort of loyalty in its consumers. Sales of Wii U are enough to tell you that. People who spent hundreds of dollars on Wii and games and plastic peripherals and had Wii parties 4 years ago didnt become diehard Nintendo fans. As successful as Wii was, Nintendo almost had to start from scratch with Wii U.

 

[mantidor]

This, well said +1

Wii fits the textbook description of the word "fad" perfectly

So does every other console, handheld, hell even smartphones, otherwise they wouldn't need to keep releasing new hardware periodically, right? they all have a high point and then constant decline after it.

lol you people...

 

[PreyingShark]

It ended up being a fad because, as Just Dance and a few other games proved, people were more than willing to buy the software and stuff...

...but Nintendo stopped releasing a steady stream of software all of a sudden in 2011 and that pretty much killed it.

 

[Zombie James]

this is truly the funniest part.

NES is the market leader for 5 years. Success.
SNES is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
GBA is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
DS is the market leader for 6 years. Success.
Wii is the market leader for 4 years. Fad.

Bevahior. The audience Nintendo attracted due to the NES success led to the success of the SNES, same with Gameboy to GBA to DS (though the DS had some growing pains). The audience the Wii attracted, on the other hand, is long gone and there's no sign they're coming back. People got hooked on the novelty for a few years and then disappeared once it wore off. That's the definition of what a fad is.

 

[Seeds]

I am speaking for myself. As a NIntendo fan/some who plays games. If people like the Wii, then fine. There are those who obviously saw thing in the console I didn't. But to me, in my opinion is a reason why the Wii is a fad. Some of the best exclusives when multi platform with additional content, making the WIi version irrelevant. Of course Nintendo are going to have a top notch first party content...because it's Nintendo. Send out another Mario and Zelda and there. Repeat for another 20+ years.
If you're someone who only had a Wii, then missed out on so much of the industry during that time. Mainly because of so much that the Wii lacked that it sold itself on motion controls and the odd good game.

...

It [Wii] offered nothing for Nintendo fans/people who like to play games.

You're speaking for more people than just yourself there.

Bevahior. The audience Nintendo attracted due to the NES success led to the success of the SNES, same with Gameboy to GBA to DS (though the DS had some growing pains). The audience the Wii attracted, on the other hand, is long gone and there's no sign they're coming back. People got hooked on the novelty for a few years and then disappeared once it wore off. That's the definition of what a fad is.

PS3 sold half of what PS2 did. Is it also a fad?

 

[Mory Dunz]

I think it was. People get too hung up on fad being inherently negative. The reason I see it as a fad is because it did not create any sort of loyalty in its consumers. Sales of Wii U are enough to tell you that. People who spent hundreds of dollars on Wii and games and plastic peripherals and had Wii parties 4 years ago didnt become diehard Nintendo fans. As successful as Wii was, Nintendo almost had to start from scratch with Wii U.

I don't feel the wii u is indicative of the wii. The u is a worse product, plain and simple. The whole loyalty thing...the ps3 struggled at first off the back of two of the popular consoles ever. Brand loyalty doesn't go far if the product has flaws.

 

[VGChampion]

It's popularity was. The system wasn't.

 

[captmcblack]

If "fad" is based on some combination of time and behavior, does that mean if Wii U suddenly takes off and manages to hold and/or grow its lead all this gen that the original Wii would retroactively not be a fad? I mean, since the original Wii in such a hypothetical scenario set the consumer behavior in such a way to facilitate the success of the follow-up machine, that'd be the case right? Or would the argument there be that the Wii U would then be its own fad unrelated to the Wii?

It just seems so weird for something so absolutely successful for so long from a company that has released essentially nothing but long-term successful products since the 80s to have one of its most successful products dismissed as a consumer flight of fancy...as if the only reason anyone had one was because of the style or the time "back then".

 

[Jonm1010]

But it did set a trend with all the motion control stuff obviously. And the wii u blows but who knows if casuals will get into the kinect 2 this generation. It's possible. But then the Xbox would become a fad if it had casual fans I suppose.

Fads often times have copycats that find success during and toward the tail end of the fad. Companies see a bandwagon people are getting on and they want their piece. I think the fact that motion controlled games went from dominating the sales charts to now being relatively small in volume speaks to that.

Look deeper at wii sales. Their top sellers piqued between 2007-2009. Games like tiger woods peaked in 08 and 09 and then saw a gradual decline. Despite releases after. Same with madden. Sport games tend to have a steady stream throughout their life cycle yet with the wii sports titles looked like flash in the pan. Or, the consequence of sudden influx of new consumers followed by a rather quick exodus.

 

[RurouniZel]

In denial about what?

In denial of the fact that it smoked the PS3/360 in terms of overall units sold, had an library of incredible titles including two of the best Mario games ever made, Wii Sports (yes it's a great game with tons of replayability), Muramasa, Zach and Wiki etc., and that the idea of motion control was so successful that Sony and Microsoft jumped aboard.

GAF sights the failure of the Wii U as a sign that it was fad, but this is false. That'd be like saying PS/PS2 were fads because the PS3 bombed in its initial year. The Wii U was born out of a horribly maligned attempt to bring core gamer-centered 3rd parties back in their good graces. Had they not made the Wii U Gamepad at all and just refined the Wii remote, called it Wii 2, and launched with Wii Sports HD it would be selling much better.

 

[Heyt]

A fad that changed gaming forever, maybe?

 

[ASIS]

Bevahior. The audience Nintendo attracted due to the NES success led to the success of the SNES, same with Gameboy to GBA to DS (though the DS had some growing pains). The audience the Wii attracted, on the other hand, is long gone and there's no sign they're coming back. People got hooked on the novelty for a few years and then disappeared once it wore off. That's the definition of what a fad is.

The success of the DS did not translate to the 3DS.
The successof the PS2 did not translate to the PS3 until Sony basically relaunched the console. This alone is not indicative of the console itself. Esepcially when the Wii and Wii U are very different products.

 

[Timeaisis]

Oh yeah. Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, Galaxy 1 & 2, and Xenoblade were all fad games. Among others.

 

[mr_nothin]

No. It exploded the casual market, which has mostly moved to mobile.

Certainly not a fad.

But dont ppl usually move from 1 fad to another?

 

[BumblebeeCody]

Yeah, thanks for that. Very charming. Not that I even care if you're just posting dumb shit like that.

And waving an e-penis around telling us just how many games and systems you own won't impress most on here.

How-like, what? You can't be serious. You honestly missed the point.
I'll explain my point.
This isn't a dick measuring contest, but me showing that I'm not mindlessly bashing a console. I'm not someone who only has an Xbox who is bashing a console he doesn't own just like fanboys do. Me saying I own a Wii since launch and and Xbox/PS3/PC is to show that I've got all system to equally compare them too. How did you even come to that ridiculous conclusion of me waving my e-penis around? That's incredible as to how much of my point you missed. I was addressing:

It always ends the same way, lots of angry fanboys chomping at the bit to shit on X system or proclaim how superior they are to anyone else for playing on brand Y.

To which I made my response as someone who isn't mindlessly hating.

Being written off as a Nintendo fanboy is quite a thing really.
Especially since my system of choice was a 360 up till a couple of months ago as many know and now it's the PS3.
I just speak up more about the Nintendo bashing because it's so prevalent and popular on this board and it's utterly stupid.
If I'm not interested in something, let's say most Xbox 1 games for instance, I'm not going into every single thread and shit on the people that are, unlike what you see in again, every single Nintendo thread. Funny how that works.

You're the one who writes others off as fanboys. I wouldn't know about Nintendo bashing since I generally stay away from those topics. What's sad is that you consider it to be Nintendo bashing rather looking at what Nintendos flaws are as criticisms.

So yeah, stating things like "The Wii offered nothing for Nintendo fans/people who like to play games." and then not being able to cope with the fact that others find such an idiotic statement laughable is not on me, it's on you. whether you play the whole bitter and burnt old-school Nintendo fan card or not.

Even though I'm playing my Animal Crossing: New Leaf on 3DS and Wonderful 101. Right...old-school fanboy is me.

...and you wonder why I can't be bothered with your type of discussion. Where even someone who HAS the system is saying why it sucked can't even be taken seriously. Nintendo fans are just as bad as the haters.

...

You're speaking for more people than just yourself there.

Actually, after looking at those post, yes you're right and I'm wrong. I spoke for more people than myself. That being said, if you only owned a Wii, you did miss out on some amazing games that weren't on the system. As for "The Wii offered nothing for Nintendo fans/people who like games" that's a pretty stupid hasty statement on my part.

 

[Coxswain]

I see the issue now. People think that 'fad' is a negative descriptor, even though it isn't. That explains the reluctance to accept it was a fad, even though it fits the definition perfectly.

You see a similar thing with 'gimmick'. People always assume that it's a negative descriptor, even though it isn't.

To be fair, it's really not that unreasonable a leap for people to make. During the years where the Wii was on top, there was a really dumb narrative the entire time that framed the Wii vs the HD twins not as "console vs console", but "them vs us", like there was some nonsensical war going on between "gamers" and "casuals". And the battle cry the entire time from the group who thought the Wii was basically gaming's Darth Vader was "It's just a fad!" - as though the Wii's popularity tailing off represented some sort of perverse "victory" for "real gamers".
And that never really went away. Even in this thread, there are tons of people who are basically saying "Yep, it was a fad [and therefore was a bad, stupid idea, and thank god it died]". You can't really blame people for getting a little defensive, when that attitude actually does exist.

 

[MaximoffZero]

fad [fad]
noun
a temporary fashion, notion, manner of conduct, etc., especially one followed enthusiastically by a group.

 

[meppi]

screw it, not worth it...

 

[Jonm1010]

1) The numbers are definitely atypical because the product is completely different. By this logic, if the Xbox one ends up selling 30 million units, then is the 360 a fad?

2) There is definitely a certain amount of time it takes to measure this. All consoles will decline at some point, it's a matter of when. The Wii U is not the same console as the Wii, not by a long shot. In fact, it could be argued that the Wii U's failure to capture the market is because it didn't follow the foot steps of the Wii.

3) I'm talking about controllers, like the Dual Shock, like the gamepad, actual controllers, they all use motion controls.

To make it everyone's life a bit easier, here's the diagram that suggests what is what:

The Wii is in the "fashion" cycle, here's what it means:

"A fashion is a current trend or popular style in a particular field. A fashion can have a long or short life cycle. Certain clothing fashions last for a short period and the product life cycle will decline very rapidly, whilst others will decline slowly or even turn into what is known as a timeless classic."





I don't understand, please elaborate.

Honestly I think you are hurting your own argument with that graph. What I see is a Nintendo consumer base that is pretty steady for over a decade from console to console( steady but slightly declining) with the typical peaks and valleys of holiday seasons and/or big releases. then theres a sudden influx with the wii(which Nielsen and others tells us is in part made up of atypical consumers that came into the console market for a few years and have since left without a return) that then Valleys harshly. And now we see a return to normalcy for Nintendo's consumer market.

To me that screams fad. People jumped on board for the novelty and as the novelty peaked sales and software sales peaked and as the novelty wained so did hardware and software sales.

 

[Silvawuff]

I think it was a fad, but at the same time it was an important one because it introduced a new kind of paradigm to the gaming market, for better or worse.

 

[Shig]

this is truly the funniest part.

NES is the market leader for 5 years. Success.
SNES is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
GBA is the market leader for 4 years. Success.
DS is the market leader for 6 years. Success.
Wii is the market leader for 4 years. Fad.

Something can be wildly successful and still be a fad. Gangnam Style will probably still be the most-viewed video on planet earth 5 years from now, does that mean it wasn't a fad?

All those other consoles have a consistent graph of peaks and valleys going from one sales year to the next. The Wii is one huge peak, then one sustained drop. Wii was this gen's most relevant console like Tim Tebow was this gen's most relevant quarterback.

 

[Grief.exe]

1) The numbers are definitely atypical because the product is completely different. By this logic, if the Xbox one ends up selling 30 million units, then is the 360 a fad?

2) There is definitely a certain amount of time it takes to measure this. All consoles will decline at some point, it's a matter of when. The Wii U is not the same console as the Wii, not by a long shot. In fact, it could be argued that the Wii U's failure to capture the market is because it didn't follow the foot steps of the Wii.

3) I'm talking about controllers, like the Dual Shock, like the gamepad, actual controllers, they all use motion controls.

To make it everyone's life a bit easier, here's the diagram that suggests what is what:

The Wii is in the "fashion" cycle, here's what it means:

"A fashion is a current trend or popular style in a particular field. A fashion can have a long or short life cycle. Certain clothing fashions last for a short period and the product life cycle will decline very rapidly, whilst others will decline slowly or even turn into what is known as a timeless classic."

Wii graph looks exactly like the Fad example.

GC looks more like Fashion then Wii does.

 

[H_Prestige]

The success of the DS did not translate to the 3DS.
The successof the PS2 did not translate to the PS3 until Sony basically relaunched the console. This alone is not indicative of the console itself. Esepcially when the Wii and Wii U are very different products.

You guys are complicating this way too much.

Do you even believe in the concept of a fad? If not, there is no point in continuing this discussion.

If yes, how do you define it? Does tickle me elmo qualify as a fad or a non-fad?

If you take tickle me elmo as the classic fad, then you'll realize the DS, 3DS, ps1, ps2, and ps3 were not fads. They had differing levels of success based on market conditions and level of competition.

 

[Seeds]

Honestly I think you are hurting your own argument with that graph. What I see is a Nintendo consumer base that is pretty steady for over a decade from console to console( steady but slightly declining) followed by a sudden influx(which Nielsen and others tells us is in part made up of atypical consumers that came into the console market for a few years and have since left without a return) and now we see a return to normalcy for Nintendo's consumer market.

To me that screams fad. People jumped on board for the novelty and as the novelty peaked sales and software sales peaked and as the novelty wained so did hardware and software sales.

It took longer for the Wii to both reach its peak and drop off. That is, both N64 and GC reached their peak during their second year, and by its fourth sales were below release figures. Compared with the Wii who reached its peak during its third year and only recently had it sales drop below release figures, six years later. Wii had a healthy life cycle.

I.e. Relative to its other consoles, people jumped on slower than they did for N64 and GC, and the 'novelty' wained slower than it did for N64 and GC.

 

[ASIS]

Honestly I think you are hurting your own argument with that graph. What I see is a Nintendo consumer base that is pretty steady for over a decade from console to console( steady but slightly declining) with the typical peaks and valleys of holiday seasons and/or big releases. then theres a sudden influx with the wii(which Nielsen and others tells us is in part made up of atypical consumers that came into the console market for a few years and have since left without a return) that then Valleys harshly. And now we see a return to normalcy for Nintendo's consumer market.

To me that screams fad. People jumped on board for the novelty and as the novelty peaked sales and software sales peaked and as the novelty wained so did hardware and software sales.

I think we are looking at the situation from different view points, if you are talking about the sustainability of the consumer base from generation to generation, then yes, obviously the Wii did not do that. But again this metric does not say much as different consoles have had a very rough transition in the past. However, if behavior really is such a fundamental part of the equation then I left it out completely. I've not seen any evidence that supports that though.

In my view, its about a product's performance in a given time in a given industry. To that extent the Wii did have a normal life cycle as its previous consoles, and the sharp decline, as I've already mentioned, was due to lack of support in the maturity stage.

Wii graph looks exactly like the Fad example.

GC looks more like Fashion then Wii does.

Look closer at the time axis.

You guys are complicating this way too much.

Do you even believe in the concept of a fad? If not, there is no point in continuing this discussion.

If yes, how do you define it? Does tickle me elmo qualify as a fad or a non-fad?

If you take tickle me elmo as the classic fad, then you'll realize the DS, 3DS, ps1, ps2, and ps3 were not fads. They had differing levels of success based on market conditions and level of competition.

I've already explained this a million times, read my previous posts if you want to know what my definition is.

 

[Woo-Fu]

It was a fad for one group, it was something else to many other groups.

All those non-gamers you know who have a wii sports console gathering dust somewhere? It was a fad for them.

 

[Roto13]

Fads don't last as long as the Wii did.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

...



You're speaking for more people than just yourself there.



PS3 sold half of what PS2 did. Is it also a fad?

Ps3 didnt attract a new audience that later left it, so no.

 

[H_Prestige]

The ps2 sold more than the wii. The wii was more popular than the ps2. It was a pop culture phenomenon. Everyone had to have it, including people who didn't like video games. And then just as fast the Wii was no longer part of pop culture, the excitement leveled off, and it just became another product on the rack. This is the effect fad products have. No other console experienced this. This kind of popularity only happens to a few products in general.

Fads don't last as long as the Wii did.

LOL, so precisely how long do fads last? One year? Two years? Three? Where do you draw the line?

 

[Currygan]

No. It was just popular.

and done

 

[gemoran4]

A fad? no, people still play wii sports all the time. It's more the people who bought the wii for a game like wii sports has no incentive to get a wii u or another console to satisfy that particular need

 

[Seeds]

Ps3 didnt attract a new audience that later left it, so no.

I should have made it clearer that I was talking about the PS2.

The PS2 attracted a new audience that later left it.