Right but it is seriously Nintendo's cash cow, and failing to mention it seems like an oversight.
OP out of curiosity do you please have a concrete revenue figure for 2014 3ds sales? Have been doing some digging and can only find unit totals.
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PS4/3 sales generate more revenue than XB1/360/Wii & Wii U combined
- Thread starter ZhugeEX
- Start date
Right but it is seriously Nintendo's cash cow, and failing to mention it seems like an oversight.
OP out of curiosity do you please have a concrete revenue figure for 2014 3ds sales? Have been doing some digging and can only find unit totals.
Right but it is seriously Nintendo's cash cow, and failing to mention it seems like an oversight.
OP out of curiosity do you please have a concrete revenue figure for 2014 3ds sales? Have been doing some digging and can only find unit totals.
It was $1.3 billion in 2014. Revenue for hardware sales of 3DS (ALL SKU)
It talks about Nintendo's sharp decline in home consoles.
Would you have an issue if I wrote an article saying Mercedes A class sales are way down but you interject and say that their S series sales are good though? No you wouldn't because I'm specifically talking about the A class. Just like here it's specifically talking about home consoles. How are you not getting this?
The article doesn't go into the handheld industry at all really. It doesn't discuss Sony's rapid decline in handheld sales, it doesn't discuss Nintendo's decline in handheld sales. Nor does it discuss how mobile software sales have surpassed handheld console software sales last year and handheld is set to decline into irrelevancy even further.
If you want I can create an article on the handheld industry then just ask. Don't make pointless posts in this thread saying I'm not covering handheld stuff when the whole point of this thread is to talk about home/static consoles. It's even alluded to in the title.
Sorry Zhuge, I really mean no offense. I don't need a thread although I'm sure it would be interesting. Curious though if you do have a revenue figure for 2014 3ds sales?
It was $1.3 billion in 2014. Revenue for hardware sales of 3DS (ALL SKU)
Software revenue was roughly the same.
Cool thank you. Good to know.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
I think you're to an extent ignoring how long, and more important how late, Sony and Microsoft sold the PS3 and 360 at razor-thin margins to gain market share, i.e. those Black Friday sales where you could get the 360 for $100. Those padded hardware numbers without much profit and it's unlikely those very-late-life sales added much for software.
Oh I'm not disagreeing with that, I think it sold ridiculously fast and at a great profit margin, but it died quickly, and it wasn't seemingly a beast for anyone but Nintendo. I mean a few shovel ware titles did really well here and there, but as I mentioned I don't think it impacted the market (for good and bad realistically) as much as the other units. The fact that it died off so quickly still matters in the scope of it's life cycle, and it didn't continue to sell like the PS360 did. I just think it's a bit strange how well regarded the Wii is in the grand scheme of things.
I mean yes, an absolute beast for Nintendo no doubt, profit leader by a massive mile. But not some unstoppable decimator it's seemingly made out to be in my opinion, especially since it carried no momentum into the next generation.
Sorry Zhuge, I really mean no offense. I don't need a thread although I'm sure it would be interesting. Curious though if you do have a revenue figure for 2014 3ds sales?
It's cool. Just half the page was back and forth discussion around handheld/home console.
SteamyPunk
Member
Revenues don't mean much - it's profits that count. If I have $5 in revenue and $4 in profit that's better than $99999999999 revenue and $3 in profit (exaggerated numbers, of course).
This isn't exactly true. For many companies, especially young ones, revenue is the only thing that matters. A company with $9999999999 revenue has a lot of options. A company with $5 in revenue is a lemonade stand. Sometimes increasing revenue with decreasing profits is better than the reverse.
Fox_Mulder
Rockefellers. Skull and Bones. Microsoft. Al Qaeda. A Cabal of Bankers. The melting point of steel. What do these things have in common? Wake up sheeple, the landfill wasn't even REAL!
Waiting for microsoft to sell the xbox division
The Artisan
Member
it didn't really hurt 6th or 5th gens.Rather not have a total monopoly
Oh I'm not disagreeing with that, I think it sold ridiculously fast and at a great profit margin, but it died quickly, and it wasn't seemingly a beast for anyone but Nintendo. I mean a few shovel ware titles did really well here and there, but as I mentioned I don't think it impacted the market (for good and bad realistically) as much as the other units. The fact that it died off so quickly still matters in the scope of it's life cycle, and it didn't continue to sell like the PS360 did. I just think it's a bit strange how well regarded the Wii is in the grand scheme of things.
I mean yes, an absolute beast for Nintendo no doubt, profit leader by a massive mile. But not some unstoppable decimator it's seemingly made out to be in my opinion, especially since it carried no momentum into the next generation.
We could talk all day about third parties and the Wii because I think it's a very interesting topic that gets dismissed. For every comment that third parties just couldn't win there, there examples of just why they couldn't (see EA's handling of Madden and especially NBA Jam on the system and tell me they didn't reap what they sowed).
As for the Wii to Wii U transition, I think Nintendo's business model very quickly went from very successful to very unsuccessful due to the rise of smartphones and tablets and how demographics tie into that. That's also a discussion worth having (unlike third parties I think it's a bit of a dead horse at the moment) but I also don't think it retroactively negates what Nintendo did with the Wii. Nintendo put out an interesting product in the Wii U but the fact is by the time it saw release, the market had moved on. Perhaps had Nintendo been releasing the Wii U just a couple years later, or perhaps were the company headquartered in San Francisco and not Kyoto, they would have made some critical changes. Who knows.
Bottom line: I don't think it's any more fair to knock the Wii down a few pegs in hindsight than it is to say the PS2 wasn't a success because the PS3 lost Sony scads of money. A failure just doesn't erase a success from history (it might erase the money it made though!)
This isn't exactly true. For many companies, especially young ones, revenue is the only thing that matters. A company with $9999999999 revenue has a lot of options. A company with $5 in revenue is a lemonade stand. Sometimes increasing revenue with decreasing profits is better than the reverse.
No young companies being discussed here.
Oh I'm not disagreeing with that, I think it sold ridiculously fast and at a great profit margin, but it died quickly, and it wasn't seemingly a beast for anyone but Nintendo. I mean a few shovel ware titles did really well here and there, but as I mentioned I don't think it impacted the market (for good and bad realistically) as much as the other units. The fact that it died off so quickly still matters in the scope of it's life cycle, and it didn't continue to sell like the PS360 did. I just think it's a bit strange how well regarded the Wii is in the grand scheme of things.
I mean yes, an absolute beast for Nintendo no doubt, profit leader by a massive mile. But not some unstoppable decimator it's seemingly made out to be in my opinion, especially since it carried no momentum into the next generation.
Nearly 2/3 of all 900 million pieces of sold software on the wii were not first party
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Nearly 2/3 of all 900 million pieces of sold software on the wii were not first party
Yeah I'm sure I just pre-maturely jumped the gun by checking out the Wiki on most sold units. But to me seemingly nothing really blew up outside of Nintendo's franchises. At least not in like consumer appeal. I think Sony and Microsoft did a really good job blowing up with advertising.
Out of curiosity, do we have numbers regarding software sold by PS360?
Yeah I'm sure I just pre-maturely jumped the gun by checking out the Wiki on most sold units. But to me seemingly nothing really blew up outside of Nintendo's franchises. At least not in like consumer appeal. I think Sony and Microsoft did a really good job blowing up with advertising.
Out of curiosity, do we have numbers regarding software sold by PS360?
PlayStation 3 sold ~750 million units of packaged software as of March 31st 2013. It is estimated according to market research reports that the total number of software sold by end of 2014 is somewhere around 900 million to 1 billion
Xbox 360 is estimated to be around 1 billion but this cannot be confirmed.
DangerMouse
Member
They couldn't put the rumble on PS3 initially because Microsoft was patent-trolling them for that technology, so Sony made up that excuse. Once they settled the lawsuit Dual Shock 3 was released.
Yup.
Neuromancer
Member
There will never be a total monopoly in video games. If one console is outselling the others by a significant margin, there will always be competition - in fact you could argue that competition would be better as the weaker systems differentiate themselves with other games and services to try to catch up. Even in a a worst case scenario where one company eventually drops out, like Sega did after the Dreamcast, someone else would come along and throw their hat in the ring. There's too much money in the game for it not to have players.Rather not have a total monopoly
There will never be a total monopoly in video games. If one console is outselling the others by a significant margin, there will always be competition - in fact you could argue that competition would be better as the weaker systems differentiate themselves with other games and services to try to catch up. Even in a a worst case scenario where one company eventually drops out, like Sega did after the Dreamcast, someone else would come along and throw their hat in the ring. There's too much money in the game for it not to have players.
Yup, just look at the Xbox One now compared to when it was first announced.
Look at the PS3 now compared to when it was first announced.
Yeah I'm sure I just pre-maturely jumped the gun by checking out the Wiki on most sold units. But to me seemingly nothing really blew up outside of Nintendo's franchises. At least not in like consumer appeal. I think Sony and Microsoft did a really good job blowing up with advertising.
Out of curiosity, do we have numbers regarding software sold by PS360?
That nothing blew up and became a ridiculous success (outside of a few notable success stories like just dance, rabbids, guitar hero, etc) is almost entirely the fault of third parties.
Anyone talking about a monopoly in gaming is conveniently ignoring the fact that there's a lot more to the industry than home consoles. If any player dominates home consoles and proceeds to enact anti-consumer practices, then gamers will simply move to other platforms.There will never be a total monopoly in video games. If one console is outselling the others by a significant margin, there will always be competition - in fact you could argue that competition would be better as the weaker systems differentiate themselves with other games and services to try to catch up. Even in a a worst case scenario where one company eventually drops out, like Sega did after the Dreamcast, someone else would come along and throw their hat in the ring. There's too much money in the game for it not to have players.
LegendofLex
Member
It talks about Nintendo's sharp decline in home consoles.
Would you have an issue if I wrote an article saying Mercedes A class sales are way down but you interject and say that their S series sales are good though? No you wouldn't because I'm specifically talking about the A class. Just like here it's specifically talking about home consoles. How are you not getting this?
In Nintendo's case, they're the only major platform holder who's injecting substantial effort and capital into both console and handheld platforms. So naturally the way their home console business tips is impacted by this in a way that isn't true for other home consoles. That's context that's important to consider when comparing the performance of multiple console companies, especially since software throughput is one of the biggest predictors of a console's performance.
Doesn't necessarily squash your point, but it does make it something of an apples to oranges comparison.
In Nintendo's case, they're the only major platform holder who's injecting substantial effort and capital into both console and handheld platforms. So naturally the way their home console business tips is impacted by this in a way that isn't true for other home consoles. That's context that's important to consider when comparing the performance of multiple console companies, especially since software throughput is one of the biggest predictors of a console's performance.
Doesn't necessarily squash your point, but it does make it something of an apples to oranges comparison.
It doesn't though. Sony doesn't just do video games. Neither does Microsoft. Not seeing why that's relevant. Just seems to be more of a cop-out so that Nintendo doesn't look as bad. Numbers are numbers.
LegendofLex
Member
It doesn't though. Sony doesn't just do video games. Neither does Microsoft. Not seeing why that's relevant.
Sony Computer Entertainment does indeed just do video games. As does Microsoft Game Studios.
Nintendo doesn't have a handheld division and a console division; they just have one gaming division. And measuring the performance of their gaming division against others purely on the basis of home console revenues doesn't make sense when their consoles don't make up the same share of their revenues compared to those other game companies.
Sony Computer Entertainment does indeed just do video games. As does Microsoft Game Studios.
Nintendo doesn't have a handheld division and a console division; they just have one gaming division. And measuring the performance of their gaming division against others purely on the basis of home console revenues doesn't make sense when their consoles don't make up the same share of their revenues compared to those other game companies.
I'm not sure, but have you looked to see if the PSP/Vita have their own Sony division? If they don't, then your argument has no merit.
In any case, this thread is about home console sales. That's it.