Support NeoGAF

[Frillen]

Nintendo didn't won with Wii.

In fact, they lost BIG TIME.

Why? They sold A LOT, fine... but they failed to establish themselves as an alternative in the long term.

Today, they are DEAD for big consoles because they don't have a truly big fanbase supporting them.

So the PS2 didn't win its generation either because the PS3 was a failure in the beginning and made Sony lose tons of money. That's going by your logic.

This thread is only this long because people can't accept that the Wii won last generation in terms of hardware and software sales.

 

[Nikodemos]

It seems they are not ever interested in a 99 dollar SKU which is about the only chance they have of outselling the Wii.

Didn't IBM just sell its fabs? Maybe the new owner can give Sony a good price for die-shrunk Cell/RSX parts (assuming the shrink process is still ongoing). Or does it not work that way? After all, if PS3 chips are now cheap enough to be put in thousands of server blades, that would signify the system is ripe for a major price drop somewhere in the near future (FY2014 start maybe?).

 

[BGBW]

If we're going to carry on this false narrative can we bring back the PS2 is more powerful than the GCN debate as well.

 

[GuessMyUserName]

Not that I think this discussion is entirely fruitful but where the hell are you getting the bolded from?

Heh, indeed. Just 10 pages? This topic is ending up nowhere near that number!

 

[PezDispenser]

OP by all means bump the thread if either of them end up closing the gap, but until then you can't argue with the numbers. You refuse to agree that they've "won" but it seems you still think of them as "winning," so essentially all you're doing is arguing over petty semantics, with one completely hypothetical future scenario as a rationale.

All the remarks about brand cultivation are entirely valid observations that apply to an entirely different argument

 

[Eusis]

They mode the most profit and sold the most consoles by sacrificing a large portion of their audience that they're never going to get back. They won a battle at the expense of a larger war. The war to continue to exist 10 years later.

Yeah... if they bled that off it was mainly in the 90s, when Sega stole/expanded the audience and Sony went even further by getting followups to classic 3rd party Nintendo console series and being more appealing to the mainstream beyond that. If anything Wii U might be a regression to that core audience they "sacrificed" while failing to keep hold of the audience they gained.

I think I get the point you're trying to make, but what you're ignoring is that, while the Saturn has some great games, they're mostly niche experiences and arcade ports.

That's kind of the thing though, the core Nintendo games were the common ground shared by the blue ocean and the core audience. Beyond that you had some successful casual IPs (but not as successful as some of the biggest 3rd party multiplatform series that hit it big on PS3/360/PC) and a lot of those niche experiences on Wii. Like I mentioned and some have continued off of there's something of a cognitive dissonance because many of the biggest games period were hitting the other two platforms, and so in a sense the "HD side" was the winner even though the Wii was the individual best performing console and 360/PS3 won't catch up any time soon if ever pending some huge price drop surge of life; so long as over 20 million units on at least one side AREN'T overlapping with each other they even have a larger unified base.

Broken down to the company level Nintendo's probably the clear cut winner of all the gaming companies anyway, the CoD games sell crazy but I don't think as many of them reliably hit the numbers the better performing NIntendo games have, which were likely produced at a much lower cost too, and then there's the DS side too. As badly as Nintendo focuses on some core IP they aren't quite as much of a one trick pony as Activision, Bethesda, or Rockstar.

 

[encephalon]

The Wii library is much more varied than the Saturn's, and has wider appeal overall. That's why it did as well as it did. Comparing it to the Saturn is nonsensical. How did this comparison even come about? I've forgotten already!

I'm not even sure your first claim is true. I should probably qualify this with the fact that I'm basing this on owning a Japanese Saturn and having access to the Japanese library, but regardless. The Saturn had platformers, horror games, action games, puzzle games, fighting games, 2D shooting games, 3D shooting games, JRPGs, SRPGs, horror games, racing games, and what was NiGHTs anyways? Among these were well known 3rd party games like Castlevania, Bomberman, Resident Evil, and Megaman. However, much like the Wii, the number of high quality titles was in fact extremely limited. Like the Wii it was heavily reliant on strong first party support. And like the Wii, despite boasting a number of titles its library was inundated with shovelware.

There's no denying that the Wii outperformed the other two platforms last generation. And Nintendo wont he sales war. But it's a strange sight to see such a console sport a library more similar to a third party console than, say, a Super Nintendo. Or a Playstation.

Spoiler

A more limited library heavily reliant on arcade ports might be a better description of the Dreamcast.

 

[Metallix87]

I'm not even sure your first claim is true. I should probably qualify this with the fact that I'm basing this on owning a Japanese Saturn and having access to the Japanese library, but regardless. The Saturn had platformers, horror games, action games, puzzle games, fighting games, 2D shooting games, 3D shooting games, JRPGs, SRPGs, horror games, racing games, and what was NiGHTs anyways? Among these were well known 3rd party games like Castlevania, Bomberman, Resident Evil, and Megaman. However, much like the Wii, the number of high quality titles was in fact extremely limited. Like the Wii it was heavily reliant on strong first party support. And like the Wii, despite boasting a number of titles its library was inundated with shovelware. And only lasted about 4 years.

There's no denying that the Wii outperformed the other two platforms last generation. And Nintendo wont he sales war. But it's a strange sight to see such a console sport a library more similar to a third party console than, say, a Super Nintendo. Or a Playstation.

Spoiler

A more limited library heavily reliant on arcade ports might be a better description of the Dreamcast.

Okay, quick, before I go to sleep:

1.) The bolded is wrong on both counts. Both have very many high quality titles, the difference is the Wii's appeal to an overall larger audience.

2.) Fine, Saturn had the variety, but it was poorly utilized, since most of it was exclusive to Japan, and it lacked the big sellers.

3.) Most bizarre of all, Sega's biggest seller, Sonic the Hedgehog, was surprisingly absent overall from the system. Yes, there were ports, but not a new, original title.

4.) Your spoiler is wrong. Saturn is a lot more guilty of relying on arcade ports than the Dreamcast.

 

[redcrayon]

People that want to know who sold the most consoles in Gen 7 will care. Whether they review the data in 2020 or 2090, they'll want to know who sold the most. If the PS3 did overtake the Wii (which I find unlikely), it would rightfully be classed as the winner.

It would also be interesting for the fact that nobody has won 3 gens in a row before. Even more interesting if the PS4 won Gen 8.

Considering the PS3's rough start, it's had an amazing comeback. Sony's record of continual support (major first party releases just months before it's successor is launched) combined with Japanese support for aging hardware over newer machines is a pretty good selling point for a console, knowing it won't be abandoned if you buy one a few years in.
'

 

[encephalon]

Okay, quick, before I go to sleep:

1.) The bolded is wrong on both counts. Both have very many high quality titles, the difference is the Wii's appeal to an overall larger audience.

2.) Fine, Saturn had the variety, but it was poorly utilized, since most of it was exclusive to Japan, and it lacked the big sellers.

3.) Most bizarre of all, Sega's biggest seller, Sonic the Hedgehog, was surprisingly absent overall from the system. Yes, there were ports, but not a new, original title.

4.) Your spoiler is wrong. Saturn is a lot more guilty of relying on arcade ports than the Dreamcast.

1. Quality of library = ... appealing to an overall audience?

2. Quality of library = ... "the big sellers?"

3. Quality of library = ... reliance on a specific, trusted IP?

4. I haven't done the math, but it seems like the Saturn had more non-arcade first party games, at the very least. I could be wrong here. Bug (2), Clockwork Night (2), Panzer Dragoon (3), Shining Force (3), Dragon Force (2), Terra Phantastica, Deep Fear, NiGHTs, Burning Rangers, Sakura Taisen (2) and WachenRoder off the top of my head. That's 17 titles. Dreamcast had ... Shenmue (2), Ecco the Dolphin, Jet Grind Radio, PSO, Sakura Taisen (2), Sonic Adventure (2), and Space Channel 5 (2). ... 11? This isn't a conclusive list, mind you. But it's a hefty number of non-arcade titles from SEGA themselves.

 

[Celine]

2.) So games like Ratchet and Clank, Dark Souls 2, and Persona 5, don't count as big?

Depend what you consider "big" and seeing you cited P5 I suppose not so big..

 

[Turrican3]

Finding out what the 360 did right regarding attach rate would probably be worth someone's time.

It's not an easy task: in this very same thread people are questioning the Wii's attach rate due to the bundled games skewing the number, but I am not aware of any actual bundled/not bundled split data (also for PS3/360, that had their fair amount of game bundles) to build an analysis upon.

I do want to point out that I don't think the vitriol the Wii generates is really directed at Nintendo specifically.

It's directed at the philosophy the Wii espoused, and the types of games it put forward. Nintendo just happened to be the (temporary) vessel by which these games were delivered to the public.

I agree it's not a Nintendo thing mostly (altough I believe during last generation the big N surely gained some extra hate by a certain demographics) but I swear I've never ever seen the same amount of vitriol on message boards against the Wii as during the pinnacle of its lifecycle.

The only thing about Wii sales figures that I HATE HATE HATE is that they tout Wii Sports as the best selling game of all time. Give that doesn't count used sales (which to my knowing is the only way to buy wii sports) that's unfair.

Wii Sports was not bundled in Japan and has been available as a standalone game for quite some time.

In addition, the Wii U is following in the similarly poor footsteps of post-2008 Wii. Some predict it will have an early demise, similar to the Wii. That simple.

You mean like December 2009 when Wii set the new record for US monthly HW sales?

I don't really get this narrative that Wii was a fad that lasted only a couple of years. Sure, Nintendo could have done a better job sustaining the platform longer than it did, but we're talking about a console that still managed to sold 2.3 million consoles in december 2010 alone.

 

[Parmenides]

OP

1) They don't know the history of PlayStation very well.

PlayStation HW - Console Transitions

  - PS1 72.92    (Mar 31, 2000)
  - PS2 106.5    (Sep 30, 2006)
  - PS3 80.0     (Nov 2,  2013)

Production Shipments of Hardware


       Ja-Mr'00    Ap-Jn'00    Jl-Sp'00    Oc-Dc'00     2000      LTD     

PS1      1.10        0.63        2.37        3.69       7.79      79.61

2) They think US + JP = world.

                       HW   PS Home Consoles

                                                                    
     Period         Sell-in      US+JP Retail
---------------                                       
  (2007 - 2013)      131.5          47.3

3) They don't know the PS3 has been outselling its competitors for years.

 HW  PS3 Slim Era (Jul 2009 – Nov 2013)

  - PS3 56.2      (Nov 2,  2013)
  - 360 48.5      (Oct 17, 2013)
  - Wii 47.68     (Sep 30, 2013)

 

[Chindogg]

OP

1) They don't know the history of PlayStation very well.

PlayStation HW - Console Transitions

  - PS1 72.92    (Mar 31, 2000)
  - PS2 106.5    (Sep 30, 2006)
  - PS3 80.0     (Nov 2,  2013)

Production Shipments of Hardware


       Ja-Mr'00    Ap-Jn'00    Jl-Sp'00    Oc-Dc'00     2000      LTD     

PS1      1.10        0.63        2.37        3.69       7.79      79.61

2) They think US + JP = world.

                       HW   PS Home Consoles

                                                                    
     Period         Sell-in      US+JP Retail
---------------                                       
  (2007 - 2013)      131.5          47.3

3) They don't know the PS3 has been outselling its competitors for years.

 HW  PS3 Slim Era (Jul 2009 – Nov 2013)

  - PS3 56.2      (Nov 2,  2013)
  - 360 48.5      (Oct 17, 2013)
  - Wii 47.68     (Sep 30, 2013)

Yet its still behind Wii in pure numbers. You can spin it all you want, Wii won last generation. It sold the most and made the most profit. PS2 sold the most and made the most in its gen so clearly it won. What happens this gen does not somehow wipe out what happened last gen regardless of how bad you want it to.

Spoiler

Seriously what's with people lately trying to actively erase anything Nintendo does well? "SM3DW isn't good because its not true 3D," "DKCTF has consistently terrible load times despite evidence otherwise," now "Wii didn't win because PS3 made ground over the last six years even though its still behind overall." At least give them some credit for the things they've done right ffs.

Actually I think the real question there is whether you count post-next gen launches or not.

I'd say that depends on the kind of support the system even sees, PS2 did keep getting releases and if that happens I think it'd definitely count as valid, whereas if it drops dead but gets good traction in normally neglected markets then that just means Sony's better at addressing the entire world than Nintendo and maybe Microsoft... not that that's much susprise with the way Nintendo is at times and Microsoft actually thinking always online DRM was an idea worth keeping up to the official unveiling.

lol what? IT SOLD THE MOST SYSTEMS AND MADE THE MOST MONEY. What other definition do we fucking use every goddamn gen? Seriously what's with all these "well if we calculate the support it gets after next gen and multiply it by the number of titles I perceive as of high quality and divide by Please Understand we can conclude that Wii Sux and PS3 dominated last gen despite taking massive, massive losses and not selling shit for three years straight?"

 

[RELIGHT]

OP

1) They don't know the history of PlayStation very well.

PlayStation HW - Console Transitions

  - PS1 72.92    (Mar 31, 2000)
  - PS2 106.5    (Sep 30, 2006)
  - PS3 80.0     (Nov 2,  2013)

Production Shipments of Hardware


       Ja-Mr'00    Ap-Jn'00    Jl-Sp'00    Oc-Dc'00     2000      LTD     

PS1      1.10        0.63        2.37        3.69       7.79      79.61

2) They think US + JP = world.

                       HW   PS Home Consoles

                                                                    
     Period         Sell-in      US+JP Retail
---------------                                       
  (2007 - 2013)      131.5          47.3

3) They don't know the PS3 has been outselling its competitors for years.

 HW  PS3 Slim Era (Jul 2009 – Nov 2013)

  - PS3 56.2      (Nov 2,  2013)
  - 360 48.5      (Oct 17, 2013)
  - Wii 47.68     (Sep 30, 2013)

 

[Eusis]

Yet its still behind Wii in pure numbers. You can spin it all you want, Wii won last generation. It sold the most and made the most profit. What happens this gen does not somehow wipe out what happened last gen regardless of how bad you want it to.

Actually I think the real question there is whether you count post-next gen launches or not.

I'd say that depends on the kind of support the system even sees, PS2 did keep getting releases and if that happens I think it'd definitely count as valid, whereas if it drops dead but gets good traction in normally neglected markets then that just means Sony's better at addressing the entire world than Nintendo and maybe Microsoft... not that that's much susprise with the way Nintendo is at times and Microsoft actually thinking always online DRM was an idea worth keeping up to the official unveiling.

 

[Chao]

How is not "BECAUSE IT DID" the first post?

I don't know how is this even debatable.
Like it or not, Wii won last gen. Winning isn't a matter of which one was the console with the games you like, but a matter of which one was the most popular and made most money for the company.

 

[Rocky]

Actually I think the real question there is whether you count post-next gen launches or not.

I'd say that depends on the kind of support the system even sees, PS2 did keep getting releases and if that happens I think it'd definitely count as valid, whereas if it drops dead but gets good traction in normally neglected markets then that just means Sony's better at addressing the entire world than Nintendo and maybe Microsoft... not that that's much susprise with the way Nintendo is at times and Microsoft actually thinking always online DRM was an idea worth keeping up to the official unveiling.

Somehow, I bet if the GCN had outsold the PS2 and the start of last gen and PS2 still sold an additional 50 mil last gen, the Nintendo diehards would claim that Nintendo still won and the 50 mil doesn't count and anyone saying they do would be accused of "moving the goalposts" as they so love to say.

 

[Eusis]

Somehow, I bet if the GCN had outsold the PS2 and the start of last gen and PS2 still sold an additional 50 mil last gen, the Nintendo diehards would claim that Nintendo still won and the 50 mil doesn't count and anyone saying they do would be accused of "moving the goalposts" as they so love to say.

For fun we should see if we CAN dig up hard Genesis/SNES numbers, because it'd seem to me that it might be a similar situation here. Though that could be for PS3 vs 360 rather than PS3 or 360 vs Wii.

 

[SmokyDave]

Yet its still behind Wii in pure numbers. You can spin it all you want, Wii won last generation. It sold the most and made the most profit. PS2 sold the most and made the most in its gen so clearly it won. What happens this gen does not somehow wipe out what happened last gen regardless of how bad you want it to.

The Wii is winning. The Wii has not won. I believe that's what Parmenides was getting at.

We won't truly know who 'won' until the PS3, 360, and Wii are no longer being sold.

 

[Chindogg]

Somehow, I bet if the GCN had outsold the PS2 and the start of last gen and PS2 still sold an additional 50 mil last gen, the Nintendo diehards would claim that Nintendo still won and the 50 mil doesn't count and anyone saying they do would be accused of "moving the goalposts" as they so love to say.

Because that's a shitty hypothetical considering PS3 still hasn't beaten Wii in numbers? Also, I don't see any of NintendoGAF moving goalposts when bringing in stupid opinion arguments like number of quality titles into what's basically a sales thread.

Winning a generation has always been around sales, except for last generation because Wii won and people want to erase that from their minds despite it being true. Casuals won last gen and there's nothing anyone can do to ignore that fact.

The Wii is winning. The Wii has not won. I believe that's what Parmenides was getting at.

We won't truly know who 'won' until the PS3, 360, and Wii are no longer being sold.

Last time I checked we calculated from a generation's birth til the next generation's birth, but if we're gonna move the goalposts I guess PS3 has some time to catch up. Regardless, to disregard what kind of money Wii made Nintendo is still ignorant, fanboy, Console Warz bollocks.

No its not, Nintendo fans are insisting that last gen is now over, yet the PS3 and 360 have games still announced for release going into 2015 so far (at least PS3, not sure about 360) and some of those games are big titles.

The PS2 sold 50 mil units last gen, so its possible that PS3 or 360 could do another 20 mil before they stop being sold, we don't know what's coming in the future as far as price drops and things like that.

It's possible, but it hasn't happened yet. Until then, Wii has still won. Trying to argue using hypothetical like possible price drops and continued first party support is often guffawed in Wii U threads, how about we don't use the same uncertainty in this debate as well?

Spoiler

I'm well aware that Wii U hypotheticals are flawed from the beginning but there's still no logic in using what might happen in an argument about what has happened. It's like Homer Simpson yelling "its still good" when his roast pig went flying across Springfield.

 

[Rocky]

Because that's a shitty hypothetical considering PS3 still hasn't beaten Wii in numbers? Also, I don't see any of NintendoGAF moving goalposts when bringing in stupid opinion arguments like number of quality titles into what's basically a sales thread.

Winning a generation has always been around sales, except for last generation because Wii won and people want to erase that from their minds despite it being true. Casuals won last gen and there's nothing anyone can do to ignore that fact.

No its not, Nintendo fans are insisting that last gen is now over, yet the PS3 and 360 have games still announced for release going into 2015 so far (at least PS3, not sure about 360) and some of those games are big titles.

The PS2 sold 50 mil units last gen, so its possible that PS3 or 360 could do another 20 mil before they stop being sold, we don't know what's coming in the future as far as price drops and things like that.

 

[batbeg]

No its not, Nintendo fans are insisting that last gen is now over, yet the PS3 and 360 have games still announced for release going into 2015 so far (at least PS3, not sure about 360) and some of those games are big titles.

The PS2 sold 50 mil units last gen, so its possible that PS3 or 360 could do another 20 mil before they stop being sold, we don't know what's coming in the future as far as price drops and things like that.

It's possible, but until it happens it's clearly just a hypothetical. As of right now the Wii is winning still.

 

[Eusis]

Missed this:

lol what? IT SOLD THE MOST SYSTEMS AND MADE THE MOST MONEY. What other definition do we fucking use every goddamn gen? Seriously what's with all these "well if we calculate the support it gets after next gen and multiply it by the number of titles I perceive as of high quality and divide by Please Understand we can conclude that Wii Sux and PS3 dominated last gen despite taking massive, massive losses and not selling shit for three years straight?"

I thought what I was getting at was pretty straightforward and like what SmokyDave said: systems are still being sold, the platforms are relevant, it won't be truly over until the consoles are either out of production or at least barely registering as selling at all. If anything I was making a case that Wii would still arguably be the proper "most units" winner if NA/EU/JP support is dead and PS3 just barely edged past with sales in secondary markets.

Profits IS a different beast, the PS3 was doomed from the start and the 360 doubly so with the RROD hit. But hell, you don't typically measure victory by which side took the least damage, though I certainly would agree Nintendo were the ones that came out ahead and Sony's potential victory would be hollow.

 

[SmokyDave]

Last time I checked we calculated from a generation's birth til the next generation's birth, but if we're gonna move the goalposts I guess PS3 has some time to catch up. Regardless, to disregard what kind of money Wii made Nintendo is still ignorant, fanboy, Console Warz bollocks.

No, we don't. We look at total unit sales for the devices in question. We don't cut them off at an arbitrary point. Whilst the products are still commercially viable, the 'race' goes on.

 

[Eusis]

No, we don't. We look at total unit sales for the devices in question. We don't cut them off at an arbitrary point. Whilst the products are still commercially viable, the 'race' goes on.

Seriously, at a minimum I'd count at least one more year per platform, if there's a lot of games still set to come out then they count as active in my eyes. And hell, the PS2 got localized significant-to-niche-audiences up to 2010, when FFXIII finally hit 4 years after the PS3 landed. And said niche game I'm thinking of came AFTER FFXIII.

 

[BlackJace]

Alright guys, I'm looking forward to the final tally of Gen 7 in 2022. Should be a nice treat for me and my kids. FF XV will have come out that year, so it'll be a great treat too.

 

[Chindogg]

Alright guys, I'm looking forward to the final tally of Gen 7 in 2022. Should be a nice treat for me and my kids. FF XV will have come out that year, so it'll be a great treat too.

I'm glad some of us at least see the absurdity in all this.

When people look at a historic list of 'best selling' consoles, do they look at 'total unit sales', or 'total unit sales prior to the release of a console (same manufacturer or otherwise) said to belong to the following generation'?

I think the answer is fairly obvious.

But who's won the gen so far? Also, PS2's legs come from a completely different position and environment than what happened with PS3. Last gen was far, far longer than the previous, economic conditions were different, and you could find PS2s for sub-$100 for quite some time while it continued to get support. There's still far too much uncertainty to what will happen to support this gen. It seems like 2015 is the cut off date and there's still zero guarantees that PS3 will grab another 20mil during that time.

Why people are somehow thinking what happened with PS2 will magically happen with PS3 kinda blows my mind. It's the same logic in thinking what happened with Wii will happen with Wii U.

See above. You honestly think the second definition makes more sense?

Do you honestly think its guaranteed?

 

[SmokyDave]

Alright guys, I'm looking forward to the final tally of Gen 7 in 2022. Should be a nice treat for me and my kids. FF XV will have come out that year, so it'll be a great treat too.

When people look at a historic list of 'best selling' consoles, do they look at 'total unit sales', or 'total unit sales prior to the release of a console (same manufacturer or otherwise) said to belong to the following generation'?

I think the answer is fairly obvious.

I'm glad some of us at least see the absurdity in all this.

See above. You honestly think the second definition makes more sense?

 

[Eusis]

I'm glad some of us at least see the absurdity in all this.

If it actually takes until then to be sure that only serves to prove the generation is far from concluded.

 

[Currygan]

so basically, last gen isn't over until PS3 overtakes the Wii and wins the race

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

OP

1) They don't know the history of PlayStation very well.

PlayStation HW - Console Transitions

  - PS1 72.92    (Mar 31, 2000)
  - PS2 106.5    (Sep 30, 2006)
  - PS3 80.0     (Nov 2,  2013)

Production Shipments of Hardware


       Ja-Mr'00    Ap-Jn'00    Jl-Sp'00    Oc-Dc'00     2000      LTD     

PS1      1.10        0.63        2.37        3.69       7.79      79.61

2) They think US + JP = world.

                       HW   PS Home Consoles

                                                                    
     Period         Sell-in      US+JP Retail
---------------                                       
  (2007 - 2013)      131.5          47.3

3) They don't know the PS3 has been outselling its competitors for years.

 HW  PS3 Slim Era (Jul 2009 – Nov 2013)

  - PS3 56.2      (Nov 2,  2013)
  - 360 48.5      (Oct 17, 2013)
  - Wii 47.68     (Sep 30, 2013)

Thank you. This thread needed some truthfacts.

I'm glad some of us at least see the absurdity in all this.

The only thing absurd is you believing this race is over. No amount of whining or hyperbole while make that statement true.

We saw PS1 sell 30 million after next gen arrived, we saw PS2 sell 50 million and we will see PS3 sell millions more as well. Just because the Wii died out quickly does not mean we have to ignore these sales.

so basically, last gen isn't over until PS3 overtakes the Wii and wins the race

Or how about last gen is not over till last gen stops selling. You know that is how we compile LTD sales......cumulative sales.

 

[BGBW]

You have to remember to divide the 360 and PS3 numbers by half to take into account all those who had to buy two systems because their first one died on RROD or YLOD.

 

[ReBurn]

I'm still trying to figure out if it matters who won, and if it does, why?

 

[Currygan]

Or how about last gen is not over till last gen stops selling. You know that is how we compile LTD sales......cumulative sales.

good, why are we even discussing it then

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I'm still trying to figure out if it matters who won, and if it does, why?

In the grand scheme of things its irrelevant. We all know Nintendo ran away with success this gen. However it is very surprising how the PS3 may overtake the Wii's LTD in the end. Tell that to someone 5 years earlier and you would be called a troll most likely.

 

[SmokyDave]

so basically, last gen isn't over until PS3 overtakes the Wii and wins the race

Man, there's just no need to be so salty. It isn't an inevitability given the rapid adoption of the PS4.

When people look at which console 'won' a historic generation, they look at the units sold of each device. That's that. No qualifiers necessary.

Now, if you want to feel that the Wii 'won' because of some other metric (be that 'units sold in my specified time frame' or 'profit generated' or 'number of titles I love' or whatever else), you're quite welcome to. If you want to class the race as over, then go ahead.

That doesn't change the fact that history will record the 'winner' as the device that sells the most units. Full stop. That's how it's always been, that's probably how it will always be. If the PS3 shifts another 30 million units, it will have sold the most of all Gen 7 consoles and it will be the winner. If it doesn't shift enough units to overtake the Wii, the Wii will have sold the most of all Gen 7 consoles and it will be the winner.

I'm still trying to figure out if it matters who won, and if it does, why?

It doesn't matter. It's just the sort of thing that enthusiasts take interest in. Like software LTDs and such.

 

[Eusis]

You have to remember to divide the 360 and PS3 numbers by half to take into account all those who had to buy two systems because their first one died on RROD or YLOD.

I don't know if it was really THAT bad, and do they count systems replaced via repair? Not as if the Wii was invulnerable either, just less likely to TOTALLY die. But there's always some degree rebuying and replacing, so you definitely can't count those sales as representing the number of people who actively have and play those systems.

In the grand scheme of things its irrelevant. We all know Nintendo ran away with success this gen. However it is very surprising how the PS3 may overtake the Wii's LTD in the end. Tell that to someone 5 years earlier and you would be called a troll most likely.

And it's still a remote possibility pending price drop surges. Still, Wii's basically frozen up if it did 200k-ish last year, while the PS3 SEEMS to have done at least 3 million given they reported surpassing 360 at 77 million then passing 80 million in November. Nintendo's basically frozen up, and I feel like the Wii Mini's just way too compromised to be taken seriously, so the question is if PS3 can still move ahead and pass Wii, or not. If they keep at 3 million a year it'll be close, but not past Wii.

 

[Chindogg]

Thank you. This thread needed some truthfacts.

The only "truthfact" here is that PS3 is closing the gap but not nearly selling as well as PS2.

The only thing absurd is you believing this race is over. No amount of whining or hyperbole while make that statement true.

We saw PS1 sell 30 million after next gen arrived, we saw PS2 sell 50 million and we will see PS3 sell millions more as well. Just because the Wii died out quickly does not mean we have to ignore these sales.

There's no guarantees to closing the gap yet for some odd reason we're denying who's winning now because reasons. No amount of snide comments will deny that fact, only if/when it actually happens.


On a side note, for the love of Christ can we please stop using the term 'salty' here? Its stupid as fuck in the FGC and its stupid to use it here. It's like this blanket statement used to completely disregard one's argument. It's a lazier version of a meme GIF, at least you have to find and link one that's at least somewhat amusing.

 

[CassSept]

OK, so:

a) the fact that Wii is currently leading by 20 million consoles sold (25% of PS3 sold) and is still leading in software sales doesn't matter because casuals and WiiU is failing on every front,

b) the possibility of PS3 maybe catching up to Wii in a couple of years based on previous PlayStation hardware (despite rapid PS4 adoption rate) is a truthfact.

Got it.

I don't know if it was really THAT bad, and do they count systems replaced via repair? Not as if the Wii was invulnerable either, just less likely to TOTALLY die. But there's always some degree rebuying and replacing, so you definitely can't count those sales as representing the number of people who actively have and play those systems.

It was a joke.

 

[Sandfox]

In the grand scheme of things its irrelevant. We all know Nintendo ran away with success this gen. However it is very surprising how the PS3 may overtake the Wii's LTD in the end. Tell that to someone 5 years earlier and you would be called a troll most likely.

I really don't think the PS3 will be able to outsell the Wii unless sales pick up which I don't see happening at a high enough rate due to the popularity and price of the PS4 along with the 360 still being big competition for it.

 

[BGBW]

I was going to buy a PS3 but thanks to this thread I've decided to not do so. I can't risk being the one sale that helps the PS3 outsell the Wii. This is a serious issue.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

How much has PS3 sold this year?

I was going to buy a PS3 but thanks to this thread I've decided to not do so. I can't risk being the one sale that helps the PS3 outsell the Wii. This is a serious issue.

 

[wildfire]

No, we don't. We look at total unit sales for the devices in question. We don't cut them off at an arbitrary point. Whilst the products are still commercially viable, the 'race' goes on.

Speak for yourself and people who think like you do. Once the new consoles are launched a certain percentage don't care about console sales for dying consoles and count winners based on that cut off point. I agree with you but let's not pretend there aren't different subsets on how long people will wait to stop counting the tallies.

 

[Eusis]

It was a joke.

Well with how people talk about those things and the truly insane failure rate you can never be sur-

I was going to buy a PS3 but thanks to this thread I've decided to not do so. I can't risk being the one sale that helps the PS3 outsell the Wii. This is a serious issue.

Nevermind.

 

[SmokedMeat]

No its not, Nintendo fans are insisting that last gen is now over, yet the PS3 and 360 have games still announced for release going into 2015 so far (at least PS3, not sure about 360) and some of those games are big titles.

The PS2 sold 50 mil units last gen, so its possible that PS3 or 360 could do another 20 mil before they stop being sold, we don't know what's coming in the future as far as price drops and things like that.

Yeah, that's the thing; we have yet to see PS3 and 360 at $149 or even $99. Not sure if they can catch the Wii, but they still have plenty of life left. Especially PS3, which seems to still be getting new game announcements.

Also, can't believe this thread is still going.

 

[SmokyDave]

On a side note, for the love of Christ can we please stop using the term 'salty' here? Its stupid as fuck in the FGC and its stupid to use it here. It's like this blanket statement used to completely disregard one's argument. It's a lazier version of a meme GIF, at least you have to find and link one that's at least somewhat amusing.

I thought about typing 'you ought to stop being so emotionally invested in hard numbers', but it took to long to type. Same goes for you though, you're clearly far too stressed about this subject and it seeps through your every word.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Speak for yourself and people who think like you do. Once the new consoles are launched a certain percentage don't care about console sales for dying consoles and count winners based on that cut off point. I agree with you but let's not pretend there aren't different subsets on how long people will wait to stop counting the tallies.

Those people are simply being ignorant.

Will PS2 be remembered as the console that sold 100 million or 150 million and becoming the best selling console.

Its simply ridiculous to ignore those sales just because it suits your argument because it was never done in the past so why now?

 

[Eusis]

How much has PS3 sold this year?

I speculated with my previous post that it may've been 3 million. But that was by comparing a number of shipped systems from early 2013 with a number at the START of November, so it could've jumped ahead just because of Black Friday.

 

[CassSept]

I thought about typing 'you ought to stop being so emotionally invested in hard numbers', but it took to long to type. Same goes for you though, you're clearly far too stressed about this subject and it seeps through your every word.

So what you're saying is you think he's salty?