Support NeoGAF

[Shin Johnpv]

Guys, I think this is being disingenuous. I think most sane people will agree that the 7th generation ended when the Wii U got introduced, and was eventually followed by the PS4 and One. However, it is still perfectly reasonable to say that, on the basis and discussion of how many units were sold for that generation, we can't just disregard any new units of 7th gen consoles being sold just because 8th gen started.

I'm not being disingenuous. I just think at a certain points sales fall off that even if something is in production the numbers aren't going to matter. We are going to quickly hit that with the PS3. I also think it's disingenuous to a generation to say WELL during the main life of the generation such and such system kicked ass, BUT so and so kept their system on the market for another 20 years. So 8 years after the following generation started System Y finally outsold System X and therefore won the generation. To then claim that system as the victor paints a really really disingenuous picture of the generation. It ignores what was going on while the generation was truly active, and serves only to paint a revisionists history for folks who couldn't handle what really happened.

 

[flatearthpandas]

If the PS3 sells 20+ million more systems and overtakes the Wii several years into gen 8, sure, a case can be made that PS3 wins gen 7. No one will care, but people might entertain the argument despite needing 10+ years to compete with a console that was dropped after 4.

Why not shelve this until the day that somehow happens?

 

[Eusis]

Guys, I think this is being disingenuous. I think most sane people will agree that the 7th generation ended when the Wii U got introduced, and was eventually followed by the PS4 and One. However, it is still perfectly reasonable to say that, on the basis and discussion of how many units were sold for that generation, we can't just disregard any new units of 7th gen consoles being sold just because 8th gen started.

Missed that. Nah, I think GTAV quite thoroughly beat THAT idea to a very bloody pulp. Seriously, think of how ridiculous it is to have one of the best selling game of a proper generation be stated as having come AFTER it ended, what the fuck?

Similar applies to other generations too: SMB3 came after PC Engine and just before Mega Drive in Japan, and after both Turbo Grafx 16 and Genesis in NA, we had plenty of big 16-bit games hit in 1995 and I don't want to think about if we're counting the 3DO as the end point there, Dragon Quest VII, Final Fantasy IX, and Zelda: Majora's Mask all hit after the Dreamcast and Playstation 2 launched... Man, saying the FIRST next-gen console marks the end of the prior generation is as absurd as ripping off the end part of a book from just before the climax, just because the end is within sight.

 

[Mackins]

If the PS3 sells 20+ million more systems and overtakes the Wii several years into gen 8, sure, a case can be made that PS3 wins gen 7. No one will care, but people might entertain the argument despite needing 10+ years to compete with a console that was dropped after 4.

Why not shelve this until the day that somehow happens?

It's not beyond the realm of possibility, I think the PS2 sold about 40 million consoles after the launch of PS3.

 

[SmokedMeat]

What really happened is one system was forced to bow out early because all interest up and vanished. The other systems are following a sales path that's more inline with past popular systems. On top of that NEW licensed games are still being announced, and prices have yet to fall under $200, so I don't see sales just falling off a cliff.

 

[Interceptor]

It's not beyond the realm of possibility, I think the PS2 sold about 40 million consoles after the launch of PS3.

Singstar happened. At least in good old europe it was the Wii Sports of its time. Plenty of people just got a cheap slim as a combined DVD/Karaoke machine. Not going to happen with the PS3.

 

[Mackins]

Singstar happened. At least in good old europe it was the Wii Sports of its time. Plenty of people just got a cheap slim as a combined DVD/Karaoke machine. Not going to happen with the PS3.

What about the Chinese and Latin/South American markets being opened up though? That is a hell of a lot of potential customers!

 

[Interceptor]

What about the Chinese and Latin/South American markets being opened up though? That is a hell of a lot of potential customers!

Sure. And Sony is the only publisher allowed to sell consoles. How could i miss that.

 

[Kageshinzo]

I'm not being disingenuous. I just think at a certain points sales fall off that even if something is in production the numbers aren't going to matter. We are going to quickly hit that with the PS3. I also think it's disingenuous to a generation to say WELL during the main life of the generation such and such system kicked ass, BUT so and so kept their system on the market for another 20 years. So 8 years after the following generation started System Y finally outsold System X and therefore won the generation. To then claim that system as the victor paints a really really disingenuous picture of the generation. It ignores what was going on while the generation was truly active, and serves only to paint a revisionists history for folks who couldn't handle what really happened.

I understand what you mean but the thing is, this kind of discussion and line of thinking only matter to enthusiasts and console fanboys warring against each other (like what is happening to this thread). The companies (and the industry in general) do not care if system Y still sold X years after the accepted end of that generation. If we're going to be objective (and some people here really want to discuss it that way) and go purely by numbers, we really cannot discount officially produced units of system Y sold after the accepted "end of generation".

Missed that. Nah, I think GTAV quite thoroughly beat THAT idea to a very bloody pulp. Seriously, think of how ridiculous it is to have THE best selling game of a proper generation be stated as having come AFTER it ended, what the fuck?

I don't really think it's ridiculous at all. I can certainly accept the notion that a system sold one of its (if not THE) best game after its generation has ended. Purely on the basis of reference, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that 7th gen spanned 2004 - 2012, although if people are going to say that it won't end until the last console of the 7th generation is discontinued, I can get behind that as well. As long as we all know when a generation started and what are involved in that generation, you won't get an argument from me. Hence why I can agree for not declaring who the real "winner" of the last generation is until the last PS3/360 unit has been sold.

 

[Mackins]

Sure. And Sony is the only publisher allowed to sell consoles. How could i miss that.

Obviously not, I'm on about it reaching the 100 million mark, no need for sarcasm.

 

[Eusis]

I don't really think it's ridiculous at all. I can certainly accept the notion that a system sold one of its (if not THE) best game after its generation has ended. Purely on the basis of reference, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that 7th gen spanned 2004 - 2012, although if people are going to say that it won't end until the last console of the 7th generation is discontinued, I can get behind that as well. As long as we all know when a generation started and what are involved in that generation, you won't get an argument from me. Hence why I can agree for not declaring who the real "winner" of the last generation is until the last PS3/360 unit has been sold.

No, I think when you're slicing off many of the most prolific years of consoles - reliably happening each generation - it's a fundamentally ridiculous definition. I'm guessing by that logic the PS2's generation ended with the DS, which is actually probably one of the least egregious but STILL is just barely past GTA:SA, MGS3, and Halo 2, and manages to knock off DQVIII, RE4, and GoW 1&2, and with the 3DS in early 2011 that ALSO knocks off Skyrim, Dark Souls, Skyward Sword, two CoD games... it's absurd how many games "come after the end of the generation", to the point that marking it from the release of the first platform of one generation to the release of the first of the next one just does not work.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

What really happened is one system was forced to bow out early because all interest up and vanished. The other systems are following a sales path that's more inline with past popular systems. On top of that NEW licensed games are still being announced, and prices have yet to fall under $200, so I don't see sales just falling off a cliff.

The bolded is a great point. The PS3 & 360 are following the typical sales path that we've seen in past gens, it's just a longer and more drawn out path.

 

[jroc74]

Before I didnt know about console sales. Now I cant get it out of my head.

I thought about something recently.....software sales, market share for platforms. If the Wii sold the most consoles....but software market share, sales overall were better on the PS3, 360....what did the Wii really win? Console sales? Ok...great for Nintendo as a console maker. I see ppl mentioning revenue....but some multi plat games either didnt make it or sold poorly on the Wii.

I dont know the total software market share totals....but I think Wii software and console sales started dropping off in 2009, while PS3, 360 consoles and software sales never really declined or declined that much.

Some of the software market share has to do with some multi plat games not making it to the Wii. And I would really like to find out the software sales, market share of the PS2. Look at some of the Media Create and NPD threads...PS3 and 360 consoles are still selling decently vs the Wii. I would also say software sales on the other consoles didnt drop off like it did with the Wii.

I think if we can compare/know the software totals for the Wii and/or the PS2 that might tell a different story. Congrats to Nintendo for the success the Wii had for console sales....too bad it isnt translating into success for the Wii U. MS has seen only positive momentum with the Xbox to 360 (to XBO so far..) Sony isnt seeing PS2 console sale numbers mainly because they have some actual good competition last gen and this gen.

Ppl arent really buying Wii consoles anymore...and barely buying the Wii U. Anytime I see PS3's still selling like mad, 360 too...something isnt adding up with the Wii. GTA 5 coulda easily played a part for the PS3....Sony did a bundle with GTA 5. But that would mean some ppl still dont have a PS3, or maybe got another one.

Missed that. Nah, I think GTAV quite thoroughly beat THAT idea to a very bloody pulp. Seriously, think of how ridiculous it is to have one of the best selling game of a proper generation be stated as having come AFTER it ended, what the fuck?

Similar applies to other generations too: SMB3 came after PC Engine and just before Mega Drive in Japan, and after both Turbo Grafx 16 and Genesis in NA, we had plenty of big 16-bit games hit in 1995 and I don't want to think about if we're counting the 3DO as the end point there, Dragon Quest VII, Final Fantasy IX, and Zelda: Majora's Mask all hit after the Dreamcast and Playstation 2 launched... Man, saying the FIRST next-gen console marks the end of the prior generation is as absurd as ripping off the end part of a book from just before the climax, just because the end is within sight.

Yea...GTA 5....best selling console game of 2013...and its absent from the Wii U. I think ppl that really dont know the ins n outs of specs, gaming info like ppl on this forum would see that and conclude the Wii U isnt up to par with the PS3, 360.

Perception is reality.

 

[Mackins]

I personally see a generation ending when production ceases. I don't see it ending when the first of the next generation starts, that's nuts!

I see generations as flexible and over lapping.

 

[Shig]

I'm not being disingenuous. I just think at a certain points sales fall off that even if something is in production the numbers aren't going to matter. We are going to quickly hit that with the PS3. I also think it's disingenuous to a generation to say WELL during the main life of the generation such and such system kicked ass, BUT so and so kept their system on the market for another 20 years. So 8 years after the following generation started System Y finally outsold System X and therefore won the generation. To then claim that system as the victor paints a really really disingenuous picture of the generation. It ignores what was going on while the generation was truly active, and serves only to paint a revisionists history for folks who couldn't handle what really happened.

Saying that the Wii ran away with the generation firmly in its pocket paints a pretty disingenuous picture, too. That statement conjures the idea that Wii was an industry darling, supported throughout by a broad slate of the generation's most notable software. Not that its release slate totally shriveled up two years before its successor came to market and it eked out its twilight years gnarling on a diet of Just Dance and Disney Movie: The Game dreck.

 

[Mondy]

I don't judge a console the winner of a generation by how much it sold. I judge it by how many quality games it had on it. By that reckoning, the Wii was dead last.

 

[Nikodemos]

Singstar happened. At least in good old europe it was the Wii Sports of its time. Plenty of people just got a cheap slim as a combined DVD/Karaoke machine. Not going to happen with the PS3.

Because the PS3 isn't really cheap yet. Were it in the 129+/-10 band people would buy it as a BluRay player/streaming box with benefits.

 

[spookyfish]

I don't judge a console the winner of a generation by how much it sold. I judge it by how many quality games it had on it. By that reckoning, the Wii was dead last.

So, by that reasoning, GameCube won the previous generation, because it had Nintendo first-party games and didn't have all of the dreck that PS2 had which was then ported to the Xbox.

(No, I don't believe that, because it would be a stupid argument to make, with opinions being what they are, and all.)

 

[Mackins]

So, by that reasoning, GameCube won the previous generation, because it had Nintendo first-party games and didn't have all of the dreck that PS2 had which was then ported to the Xbox.

(No, I don't believe that, because it would be a stupid argument to make, with opinions being what they are, and all.)

I disagree with your version of that reasoning, the PS2 had probably the most diversity and quality of games of any console. Ever.

 

[iidesuyo]

Saying the generation ended with Wii U is ridiculous. With that logic PS1/N64 era ended in November '98 with the release of the Dreamcast, by that time even Final Fantasy VIII had not been released, not to mention IX or Paper Mario and all the other classics that came in 1999 and beyond.

 

[Eusis]

Yea...GTA 5....best selling console game of 2013...and its absent from the Wii U. I think ppl that really dont know the ins n outs of specs, gaming info like ppl on this forum would see that and conclude the Wii U isnt up to par with the PS3, 360.

Perception is reality.

Not quite the point I was going for, but it does highlight how the Wii U was more the one that fired prematurely, more Dreamcast and less Xbox 360 or Genesis.

I don't judge a console the winner of a generation by how much it sold. I judge it by how many quality games it had on it. By that reckoning, the Wii was dead last.

That's just personal favorites though, maybe winner of your heart or something. Though there is something to be said for where 3rd party sales are and the games with the most buzz, and beyond Nintendo that was generally 360/PS3. But like I said that was like one divided platform going against a strong solitary one, had you lumped PS3/360 together and snipped out the overlap that hypothetical console would probably have a crazy lead albeit not the kind the PS2 had.

 

[mantidor]

Before I didnt know about console sales. Now I cant get it out of my head.

I thought about something recently.....software sales, marketshare for platforms. If the Wii sold the most consoles....but software marketshare, sales overall were better on the PS3, 360....what did the Wii really win? Console sales? Ok...great for Nintendo as a console maker. I see ppl mentioning revenue....but some multi plat games either didnt make it or sold poorly on the Wii.

The Wii also sold the most software, obviously, it was almost 900 million lol people have such weird perceptions about reality indeed.

Unless you are taking both HD twins as one? in which case they also won in hardware numbers.

People are really inventive in trying to downplay Wii´s success. I get it, you guys don´t like it, but it was very successful, you have to accept it. And if we are doing console wars with objective data, it also "won", in raw numbers.

If I were to spin stuff I would say the Wii U is the one winning this gen because it has by far the best quality games I´ve ever played, but that is lol worthy.

Console wars never change.

 

[Currygan]

To listen to Nintendo fans, its more like "last gen is over when Nintendo says so".

nope, last gen is over when the new machines are out. Or we'll still be in the PS2/GCN generation since the first is still selling, according to the wacky revisionist logic in this thread

 

[jroc74]

The Wii also sold the most software, obviously, it was almost 900 million lol people have such weird perceptions about reality indeed.

Unless you are taking both HD twins as one? in which case they also won in hardware numbers.

People are really inventive in trying to downplay Wii´s success. I get it, you guys don´t like it, but it was very successful, you have to accept it. And if we are doing console wars with objective data, it also "won", in raw numbers.

If I were to spin stuff I would say the Wii U is the one winning this gen because it has by far the best quality games I´ve ever played, but that is lol worthy.

Console wars never change.

Thats why I said this:

I think if we can compare/know the software totals for the Wii and/or the PS2 that might tell a different story.

I said that about software as in I really dont know.

Almost 900 million huh....and whats the software total for the PS3 or 360? Whats the market share of all 3? If you know please by all means enlighten me...knowledge is power...

Every where I read shows a decline in Wii software and console sales since 2009 and not so much for the PS3 and 360. If ppl are buying PS4 and PS3, 360 and XBO...but not really buying Wii...what did it really win? The first console to reach 100 million since the PS2? Great.

The PS2 was still selling good after the PS3 launched.

And funny thing...I play my Wii and Wii U about the same. I like them both. Doesnt mean I cant question what does winning last gen really mean. I am also curious about PS2 software sales now.....

EDIT....I saw where to look for PS3 software sales...Sony financial reports...counting software sales now...looks like PS3 software sales are also almost 900 million Its a lil more than the Wii figure tho. ( Sony decided to add together software for PS2 later on for some strange reason). Ok....based on this....might bother to do it for the 360....I would say Wii won last gen vs the PS3.

Amazing looking at the quality of all games on each console. I would argue the PS3 had alot more quality games vs the Wii.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

The Wii have sold the most, but it spawned the Wii U.

Console generations really don't exist in a vacuum.

While Sony and MS were constantly adding features, updating their SKUs, improving their OS, and making the PS3 and 360 more competitive over time, the Wii stagnated.

The Wii was invested in technology and concepts that aren't really being used anymore.
At the same time, Sony and MS were heavily investing in network infrastructure, OS features, modern development tools, and third party relations.

As the Nintendo sat back, collected money, and enjoyed some great success, there was some real damage being done. The technology behind the Wii didn't have real lasting power and third party relationships didn't really do so hot.

The Wii brand has been tarnished and it didn't translate well into this generation. Ultimately, while the Wii was probably the right choice for Nintendo and the benefits of those choices were obvious, its clear that there were some hidden drawbacks, too.
Last generation, once the Wii took off, Nintendo didn't really need to do much to improve themselves. When a company is backed into a corner, we see some really great things. But when that pressure comes off, we see complacency. And unfortunately, I think Nintendo has suffered from that due to Wii's success.

So yes, the Wii won, but it didn't come without a price.

 

[SmokedMeat]

nope, last gen is over when the new machines are out. Or we'll still be in the PS2/GCN generation since the first is still selling, according to the wacky revisionist logic in this thread

Then all hardware sales of past systems need to be revised to reflect the generations "ending" early to satisfy the new revisionist version of a generation.

 

[Armaros]

After 30 pages, it's good to still see the same moving goalposts about this topic.

 

[Jado]

I personally see a generation ending when production ceases. I don't see it ending when the first of the next generation starts, that's nuts!

I see generations as flexible and over lapping.

Same here and I'm sure that's how the entire industry sees it. It's a fluid transition from one model to the next. This has been especially true with the Playstation brand. I obtained a PS1 months after the Dreamcast came to market and shortly before the PS2's arrival. New software continued to come out after the fact and even a new hardware revision (PSone). From Wikipedia:

It was released on July 7, 2000,[23] and went on to outsell all other consoles throughout the remainder of the year—including Sony's own PlayStation 2

See, it becomes clear that one can't say a generation suddenly ends because Nintendo abruptly stops supporting one piece of hardware in favor of another. The 360 and PS3 are not over and they have employed a smoother, overlapping shift. A smaller, cheaper model or a decent price drop for either of these could see additional sales into the millions, as has repeatedly been the pattern in the past. I would not at all be surprised if the PS3 surpasses total Wii hardware sales in 1-2 years. Possibly the same for the 360?

I really don't understand this bogus statement that the previous gen is already over and there is a hard cutoff of sales data that arbitrarily declares Wii the winner. This isn't reality. And I'm pretty sure the people feverishly making this claim wouldn't be sticking to this flimsy argument if the Gamecube had somehow skyrocketed in sales past the PS2 after the launch of the Wii/PS3/360... or if the Wii U gets a second wind late into its lifecycle and trounces the PS4/XBone after the start of the 9th generation around 2020.

The Wii have sold the most, but it spawned the Wii U.

Console generations really don't exist in a vacuum.

While Sony and MS were constantly adding features, updating their SKUs, improving their OS, and making the PS3 and 360 more competitive over time, the Wii stagnated.

The Wii was invested in technology and concepts that aren't really being used anymore.
At the same time, Sony and MS were heavily investing in network infrastructure, OS features, modern development tools, and third party relations.

As the Nintendo sat back, collected money, and enjoyed some great success, there was some real damage being done. The technology behind the Wii didn't have real lasting power and third party relationships didn't really do so hot.

The Wii brand has been tarnished and it didn't translate well into this generation. Ultimately, while the Wii was probably the right choice for Nintendo and the benefits of those choices were obvious, its clear that there were some hidden drawbacks, too.
Last generation, once the Wii took off, Nintendo didn't really need to do much to improve themselves. When a company is backed into a corner, we see some really great things. But when that pressure comes off, we see complacency. And unfortunately, I think Nintendo has suffered from that due to Wii's success.

So yes, the Wii won, but it didn't come without a price.

Thank you. This sentiment is shared by many gamers with no interest in console wars and fanboyism. It's just the disappointing truth.

 

[Mariah Carey]

What really happened is one system was forced to bow out early because all interest up and vanished. The other systems are following a sales path that's more inline with past popular systems. On top of that NEW licensed games are still being announced, and prices have yet to fall under $200, so I don't see sales just falling off a cliff.

Interest "up and vanished" because companies (Nintendo included) stopped making quality games for it. Just Dance was a big hit recently, these people will buy games if you give it to them, but the games just weren't there.

I think it's been really, really understated around here what the biggest travesty of the last generation was: the industry treated these customers like crap.

 

[randomengine]

Let me preface this by saying that I love Nintendo and if we measure units in Generation 7 as we have in all previous generations we come to the conclusion that Wii won.

However, I don't believe that Gen 7 should not be measured like all previous generations. Why? Well, because we had 2 systems that were so similar in content to be almost indistinguishable. A ballpark figure is that 90% of the contemporary content that was on Sony's PS3 was the same as what was available on Microsoft's Xbox 360.

As such, this leads to the conclusion that Generation 7 was not a 3 console race, but actually only 2. One was Nintendo's Wii and the other was an amalgamation known as PS360. If you combine just the shared content and sales of that content (ignoring all exclusives), I believe sales of that content dwarf what Wii content sold as a whole. That content (the shared PS360 content) defined Generation 7 more than any Wii content did - long term, specifically in console gaming culture.

While Wii sold well and had enjoyable content, the feeling of its lifespan is one of Saturn/Dreamcast levels. This is inherently subjective of course. But historically, Wii has the feel of a failed console, despite it's sales, and its cultural footprint is exemplified in the time period it existed and does not reach outside of it as much as the software that was available for the PS360 (Meaning that popular Generation 8 content reflects mostly PS360 trends rather than Wii trends).

Just my two cents.

 

[The Ps4 Looks Great]

Let me preface this by saying that I love Nintendo and if we measure units in Generation 7 as we have in all previous generations we come to the conclusion that Wii won.

However, I don't believe that Gen 7 should be measured like all previous generations. Why? Well, because we had 2 systems that were so similar in content to be almost indistinguishable. A ballpark figure is that 90% of the contemporary content that was on Sony's PS3 was the same as what was available on Microsoft's Xbox 360.

As such, this leads to the conclusion that Generation 7 was not a 3 console race, but actually only 2. One was Nintendo's Wii and the other was an amalgamation known as PS360. If you combine just the shared content and sales of that content (ignoring all exclusives), I believe sales of that content dwarf what Wii content sold as a whole. That content (the shared PS360 content) defined Generation 7 more than any Wii content did - long term, specifically in console gaming culture.

While Wii sold well and had enjoyable content, the feeling of its lifespan is one of Saturn/Dreamcast levels. This is inherently subjective of course. But historically, Wii has the feel of a failed console, despite it's sales, and its cultural footprint is exemplified in the time period it existed and does not reach outside of it as much as the software that was available for the PS360 (Meaning that popular Generation 8 content reflects mostly PS360 trends rather than Wii trends).

Just my two cents.

I'm stumped, I've type up 2 rebuttals and I still feel like an asshole trying to figure out what your post is implying.
Wii has the feel of a failed console

What does this even mean

 

[Boogybro]

Let me preface this by saying that I love Nintendo and if we measure units in Generation 7 as we have in all previous generations we come to the conclusion that Wii won.

However, I don't believe that Gen 7 should not be measured like all previous generations. Why? Well, because we had 2 systems that were so similar in content to be almost indistinguishable. A ballpark figure is that 90% of the contemporary content that was on Sony's PS3 was the same as what was available on Microsoft's Xbox 360.

As such, this leads to the conclusion that Generation 7 was not a 3 console race, but actually only 2. One was Nintendo's Wii and the other was an amalgamation known as PS360. If you combine just the shared content and sales of that content (ignoring all exclusives), I believe sales of that content dwarf what Wii content sold as a whole. That content (the shared PS360 content) defined Generation 7 more than any Wii content did - long term, specifically in console gaming culture.

While Wii sold well and had enjoyable content, the feeling of its lifespan is one of Saturn/Dreamcast levels. This is inherently subjective of course. But historically, Wii has the feel of a failed console, despite it's sales, and its cultural footprint is exemplified in the time period it existed and does not reach outside of it as much as the software that was available for the PS360 (Meaning that popular Generation 8 content reflects mostly PS360 trends rather than Wii trends).

Just my two cents.

Your two cents just opened up Pandora's Box.

 

[Armaros]

Your two cents just opened up Pandora's Box.

The new strategy is "I am a Nintendo fan" <insert new goalpost>.

 

[randomengine]

I'm stumped, I've type up 2 rebuttals and I still feel like an asshole trying to figure out what your post is implying.
Wii has the feel of a failed console

What does this even mean

Popular content today reflects mostly ideas/trends from the PS360 shared content, rather than the Wii content.

The trends and ideas from failed consoles usually remain in the generation from which they spawned. They may show up in future generations, but may not be popular.

For example, look at all the most successful consoles from previous generations. The ideas/trends from those consoles are usually brought over into the generations that follow them. NES->SNES->Playstation->Playstation 2-> PS360.

Things like d-pads, shoulder buttons, RPGs, third-person action-adventures, shooters migrate. While cartridges from N64 died, anything Nintendo tried that the successful console of that generation did not adopt died. It is like evolution. The strongest (most popular) ideas/trends survive.

So looking at Generation 8, what is most popular what is thriving? All the ideas/trends that are popular are coming from the PS360 shared content from Generation 7.

But I also admit it's not entirely objective, which is why I call it a "feel". Wii and its content was popular in a vacuum and its content/trends don't translate to the next generation (they aren't popular). Which gives it that failed console feel from previous generations, despite the fact that Wii unit sales is more than PS3 or 360 individually.

 

[lherre]

Sure. And Sony is the only publisher allowed to sell consoles. How could i miss that.

No, but Wii is no longer manufactured (if we believe nintendo's reports) ... so it will be irrelevant in those markets (the same as wiiu/ps4/xbone, but this responds to price reasons).

So the only real "competition" there will be 360 mainly if MS is interested in them.

 

[randomengine]

The new strategy is "I am a Nintendo fan" <insert new goalpost>.

At some point we have to describe the reality in which we live. The reality is that Wii outsold both the 360 and the PS3. However, unlike previous generations, the winner in many people's minds does not comport with the observational console gaming culture.

My post was an attempt to explain the two in a way that both make sense. Yes, the Wii outsold the 360 and the PS3, however the reason the culture does not behave as if the Wii won is because something else is going on, specifically this virtual console known as the PS360 (the shared content between 360 and PS3) was actually the most popular blob of gaming in Generation 7.

Have we had in any previous console generations two systems that have as much content in common as the 360 and the PS3? SNES and Genesis come close, but I think 360 and PS3 are even more similar. Even so, that situation is not the same because SNES was the winner. In Generation 7 we have the winner as being wholly dissimilar from the most popular content (the PS360 shared content).

 

[BGBW]

Some of best friends are Nintendo fans…

 

[randomengine]

In an attempt to better explain why Wii won but still lost (won due to previous measures, but lost in gaming culture), I made this graph to show the trunk structure of console gaming culture. The mainline (or trunk) is usually holds the winner of the previous generation and note that usually if a parent console is extremely popular the successor will be popular as well. Where does this concept diverge? Generation 5 and Generation 7.

In Generation 4, gamers were presented with an evolution from NES and as such they choose SNES, however Genesis did well too, why? Because the content for SNES and Genesis was similar. Looking at Gen 5, gamers were presented with a revolution. Games on all systems were not very similar (with Saturn and Playstation being the most similar, but not enough). Games were not similar to each other OR to the previous generation of games. This presented a dilemma to gamers and an opportunity to define the destiny of future gaming culture. They chose Playstation.

In Gen 6, PS2 was very similar to the previous generation, while the competition tried to remain dissimilar. This proved unsuccessful as the trend continued and anyone that did not mimic the trend of PS2 content lost (Xbox tried to mimic it, but not enough).

In Gen 7 something interesting happened, you have 2 consoles that were extremely similar (the 360 and the PS3), and something completely different the Wii. If previous gaming culture behavior were to predict the outcome, the sales winner (the Wii) would have dominated Gen 8 and become the new main trunk of gaming culture. Obviously this did not happen the successor to the extremely popular Wii, the Wii U, has apparently failed to become popular despite no competition in the same generation.

The question is why? The answer - PS3 and 360 were so similiar that their shared content became the new trunk. In Gen 8 this trend will continue as long as the Xbox One has a sufficient amount of similiar content to the PS4 and visa versa.

So this leaves Nintendo with two options in the console space.

1. Be unique and have the gaming culture adopt you as the main trunk of gaming culture. This did not happen with the Wii apparently, despite the sales. So in order to accomplish this Nintendo needs a new system that was more popular than the Wii.

2. Be similar enough to the Sony/Microsoft console that developers make the same games for the Nintendo system.

To give a better answer to the person who contested my "feel" of Wii being a failed console. Look at the graph, all system not on the main trunk of any given generation are especially unique with respect to the main trunk. This uniqueness is what makes them popular with some people. Dreamcast and N64 and GameCube for some people are beloved, but it also makes them a console that failed to become adopted to the main trunk (which is part of the main console gaming culture). Wii has that same feel of uniqueness, great unique content feel, that was not at all adopted by the main trunk. Sure Sony and Microsoft did their own motion controls but they had no staying power and eventually become very unpopular.

 

[mantidor]

EDIT....I saw where to look for PS3 software sales...Sony financial reports...counting software sales now...looks like PS3 software sales are also almost 900 million Its a lil more than the Wii figure tho. ( Sony decided to add together software for PS2 later on for some strange reason). Ok....based on this....might bother to do it for the 360....I would say Wii won last gen vs the PS3.

lol why do you think is that? why did sony report sales back at the beginning of the ps3 life as "playstation family" adding the vita and ps2 into the mix? why Nintendo reports WiiU sales on the holiday as increased percentages and not raw numbers?

 

[Jado]

The new strategy is "I am a Nintendo fan" <insert new goalpost>.

Do you have any worthwhile rebuttals or do you just continue saying "y'all moving goalposts?" Try looking at this objectively rather than as an upset fan with an angry gut reaction.

I disagree that PS3 and 360 should be lumped together, but I do agree with randomengine's general points: core gamer-minded sales do exceed (in numbers and mainstream impact) what the Wii accomplished. If only the PS3 or the 360 existed (and not the other), I do believe a mostly combined core gamer userbase would've arisen and been significantly larger and standing firmly behind the single HD console. The newest generation is not at all heavily influenced by the Wii.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Cool analysis, randomengine. A solid read

 

[BlackJace]

Wait so, now we're at "it feels like it came in last"?

What the flying fuck?

 

[FyreWulff]

The olympics must be on because I see some gold medal level mental gymnastics going down

 

[Jado]

Wait so, now we're at "it feels like it came in last"?

What the flying fuck?

To give a better answer to the person who contested my "feel" of Wii being a failed console. Look at the graph, all system not on the main trunk of any given generation are especially unique with respect to the main trunk. This uniqueness is what makes them popular with some people. Dreamcast and N64 and GameCube for some people are beloved, but it also makes them a console that failed to become adopted to the main trunk (which is part of the main console gaming culture). Wii has that same feel of uniqueness, great unique content feel, that was not at all adopted by the main trunk. Sure Sony and Microsoft did their own motion controls but they had no staying power and eventually become very unpopular.

I think this is entirely correct. The Wii fizzled early, has had no lasting impact and arguably tarnished Nintendo's reputation even further going into the current gen. The Wii had a goal of changing the gaming landscape and give longterm success to Nintendo in the minds of consumers by having the industry move in Nintendo's desired direction (low-priced hardware, demphasizing graphics and technical specs, minimal focus on entertainment and online features, etc). It never happened. Gamers are moving on to improved versions of the HD consoles. Do you think any of this is not true?

 

[Shig]

Randomengine, you should probably stop harping on your point that SNES/Genesis had a similar percentage of overlapping content as PS360. That is wildly not the case, there were tons of exclusives to each system, and even a lot of licensed games that were ostensibly using the same name were, in fact, totally different games on either system. It's really not the same ballpark.

But I agree with the larger point that generally a system that put up a sales performance like Wii should have become a beacon for the industry to follow. Yet it clearly didn't. Aside from flirtations with motion control, the industry at large is trying to distance their systems from comparisons with the Wii, not move towards them.

 

[leroidys]

In an attempt to better explain why Wii won but still lost (won due to previous measures, but lost in gaming culture), I made this graph to show the trunk structure of console gaming culture. The mainline (or trunk) is usually holds the winner of the previous generation and note that usually if a parent console is extremely popular the successor will be popular as well. Where does this concept diverge? Generation 5 and Generation 7.

In Generation 4, gamers were presented with an evolution from NES and as such they choose SNES, however Genesis did well too, why? Because the content for SNES and Genesis was similar. Looking at Gen 5, gamers were presented with a revolution. Games on all systems were not very similar (with Saturn and Playstation being the most similar, but not enough). Games were not similar to each other OR to the previous generation of games. This presented a dilemma to gamers and an opportunity to define the destiny of future gaming culture. They chose Playstation.

In Gen 6, PS2 was very similar to the previous generation, while the competition tried to remain dissimilar. This proved unsuccessful as the trend continued and anyone that did not mimic the trend of PS2 content lost (Xbox tried to mimic it, but not enough).

In Gen 7 something interesting happened, you have 2 consoles that were extremely similar (the 360 and the PS3), and something completely different the Wii. If previous gaming culture behavior were to predict the outcome, the sales winner (the Wii) would have dominated Gen 8 and become the new main trunk of gaming culture. Obviously this did not happen the successor to the extremely popular Wii, the Wii U, has apparently failed to become popular despite no competition in the same generation.

The question is why? The answer - PS3 and 360 were so similiar that their shared content became the new trunk. In Gen 8 this trend will continue as long as the Xbox One has a sufficient amount of similiar content to the PS4 and visa versa.

So this leaves Nintendo with two options in the console space.

1. Be unique and have the gaming culture adopt you as the main trunk of gaming culture. This did not happen with the Wii apparently, despite the sales. So in order to accomplish this Nintendo needs a new system that was more popular than the Wii.

2. Be similar enough to the Sony/Microsoft console that developers make the same games for the Nintendo system.

To give a better answer to the person who contested my "feel" of Wii being a failed console. Look at the graph, all system not on the main trunk of any given generation are especially unique with respect to the main trunk. This uniqueness is what makes them popular with some people. Dreamcast and N64 and GameCube for some people are beloved, but it also makes them a console that failed to become adopted to the main trunk (which is part of the main console gaming culture). Wii has that same feel of uniqueness, great unique content feel, that was not at all adopted by the main trunk. Sure Sony and Microsoft did their own motion controls but they had no staying power and eventually become very unpopular.

In what way were they so incredibly similar? The hardware is pretty much as different as xbox and PS2. The marketing was completely different for both. Microsoft pushed xbl/FPS/kinect, Sony advertised blu ray/multimedia/supercomputer/some hollywood-esque games. They got a lot of the same 3rd party ports, but so did PC.

There's literally no reason to make that grouping based on your other gens.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

In what way were they so incredibly similar? The hardware is pretty much as different as xbox and PS2. They got a lot of the same 3rd party ports, but so did PC.

There's literally no reason to make that grouping based on your other gens.

Is your question about the 360/PS3? Their software library has like a 95% overlap. How is that not similar? The hardware being different is irrelevant. Both had the same library and roughly the same power. They were very similar.

 

[BGBW]

What is gaming culture? There has never been a time when there's been a general gaming mindset. You know how people talk about the casuals with the Wii, people were talking about the users of the SNES and Megadrive in the same light back in the 90s! Tastes have always differed. Also I find it odd that you split generation 6 when the three main systems (sorry Dreamcast) shared a lot of third party titles. In fact it was the last time Nintendo's home console had the big third party games. And then you lump the XBone with the PS4 when the two machines have a different message. XBone is all about the complete all in one entertainment package whereas the PS4 seems to follow the GCN's ethos of being all about the games. So much for that branch not taking off.

 

[randomengine]

Randomengine, you should probably stop harping on your point that SNES/Genesis had a similar percentage of overlapping content as PS360. That is wildly not the case, there were tons of exclusives to each system, and even a lot of licensed games that were ostensibly using the same name were, in fact, totally different games on either system. It's really not the same ballpark.

But I agree with the larger point that generally a system that put up a sales performance like Wii should have become a beacon for the industry to follow. Yet it clearly didn't. Aside from flirtations with motion control, the industry at large is trying to distance their systems from comparisons with the Wii, not move towards them.

I actually pointed out that SNES/Genesis were not as similar as PS360. However, they were similar enough that their fate/sales became intertwined much like the PS3 and 360 are.

 

[JCX]

I think this is entirely correct. The Wii fizzled early, has had no lasting impact and arguably tarnished Nintendo's reputation even further going into the current gen. The Wii had a goal of changing the gaming landscape and give longterm success to Nintendo in the minds of consumers by achieving that objective. It never happened. gamers are moving on to improved versions of the HD consoles. Do you think any of this is not true?

The Wii had the goal of selling millions of units and succeeded in selling millions of units. That is the goal of every console release. Nintendo didn't release the Wii U saying "Eh let's sit this generation out. They are failing at their goal of selling millions of consoles.