I was just over at Kotaku and they had a nice looking chart that showed how many consoles were sold in the first four months of their lives...click the link to find out who sold well out of the gate. These are just the US sales figures btw.
http://kotaku.com/gaming/nintendo/charticle-the-first-four-months-249629.php
Or if you are lazy...here is what the chart says.
PS2 - 1,360,000
PS3 - 1,060,000
Xbox - 1,690,000
Xbox 360 - 1,000,000
Gamecube - 1,380,000
Wii - 1,860,000
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
-
JustLikeHeaven1
- Posts: 2971
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
-
Paul Campbell
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
The Gamecube outsold the PS3 in that much time. Interesting.
-
Adamant1
- Posts: 2088
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
It also outsold the PS2, which is even more interesting.
-
feilong801
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
What's really surprising is Microsoft.
You would have thought they would have done much better, after all, they were the only next gen game in town at the time.
It makes me really question Microsofts ability to market products. If you think about it, much of that companies success has been in scoring sweet deals (MSDOS as the IBM compatible's operating system) and putting themselves in a position where you are pretty much forced to use their product.
Seriously, when is the last time you just went out and purchased a Microsoft product on the open market, other than the game systems? I use Office because, well, it came on my computer. Ditto for windows, of course, and Internet Explorer.
It seems like very few of their products are actually made to go out there and really compete. I haven't given one microsecond of thought to buying myself a Zune.
The heck of it is, the Xbox360 is a great console! It should sell more than it has!
-Rob
You would have thought they would have done much better, after all, they were the only next gen game in town at the time.
It makes me really question Microsofts ability to market products. If you think about it, much of that companies success has been in scoring sweet deals (MSDOS as the IBM compatible's operating system) and putting themselves in a position where you are pretty much forced to use their product.
Seriously, when is the last time you just went out and purchased a Microsoft product on the open market, other than the game systems? I use Office because, well, it came on my computer. Ditto for windows, of course, and Internet Explorer.
It seems like very few of their products are actually made to go out there and really compete. I haven't given one microsecond of thought to buying myself a Zune.
The heck of it is, the Xbox360 is a great console! It should sell more than it has!
-Rob
-
Steerforth
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
But the Wii is a 'fad'.
Some 3rd paties want the Wii to fail, they just don't make as much money selling against Nintendo. Miyamoto pointed out that even the big names who are making games for the Wii are ussually having their B-squads make 'em, with their elite groups focusing on PS and XBOX. So I guess the Wii is really getting only 1rst and 4th party support.
Lack of 3rd party support on Nintendo is becoming an industry mindset, and a self fulfilling prophesy. At least with N64 they had a good reason not to support it.
Some 3rd paties want the Wii to fail, they just don't make as much money selling against Nintendo. Miyamoto pointed out that even the big names who are making games for the Wii are ussually having their B-squads make 'em, with their elite groups focusing on PS and XBOX. So I guess the Wii is really getting only 1rst and 4th party support.
Lack of 3rd party support on Nintendo is becoming an industry mindset, and a self fulfilling prophesy. At least with N64 they had a good reason not to support it.
-
feilong801
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
I think that's maybe an overplayed gripe, though. EA alone has contributed 3 solid efforts in Madden, SSX, and Godfather. They didn't even have to make new games: "Wii makes" can be perfectly fine if a developer actually spends a bit of time with the controls.
Sega's already provided the best new Sonic game in years. Elebits was third party.
I do agree with Miyamoto, though. Third parties need to step up to the plate. But with Wii's continued success, which shows no signs of stopping in the immediate future, you will see more support. It's that simple.
-Rob
Sega's already provided the best new Sonic game in years. Elebits was third party.
I do agree with Miyamoto, though. Third parties need to step up to the plate. But with Wii's continued success, which shows no signs of stopping in the immediate future, you will see more support. It's that simple.
-Rob
-
chrisbid1
- Posts: 941
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
3rd parties will follow install bases. the PS2 got the most shovelware last gen, and it looks like the wii will become the shovelware system within a year. fad or not, ignoring nintendos numbers is dumb business.
-
Cataclysm1
- Posts: 103
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Initial Hardware sales mean nothing...?
[QUOTE=Steerforth]But the Wii is a 'fad'.
Some 3rd paties want the Wii to fail, they just don't make as much money selling against Nintendo. Miyamoto pointed out that even the big names who are making games for the Wii are ussually having their B-squads make 'em, with their elite groups focusing on PS and XBOX. So I guess the Wii is really getting only 1rst and 4th party support.
Lack of 3rd party support on Nintendo is becoming an industry mindset, and a self fulfilling prophesy. At least with N64 they had a good reason not to support it.
[/QUOTE]
Everything you said is incorrect.
The most unreported story of last generation is that when Microsoft moved into the console business, it began throwing money around to publishers. Microsoft's idea was that if their console had all the third party support, it would beat the PS2 in sales. Microsoft went so far as to try to make Madden exclusive to the Xbox but the NFL contract said Madden had to be made for all platforms. Many developers wanted to publish their games on Gamecube (and why not? More cashflow with little expense) but publishers axed it. Comically, there were some games that sold their best on the Gamecube and the sequels would appear on the other systems omitting the Gamecube altogether!
One of the reasons why Nintendo differentiated the Wii so much from the competition was because of these moneyhats. It is no surprise why Nintendo positioned the Wii to have very cheap developmental costs (development kits are very cheap, around $2000). Meanwhile, it looks like Microsoft is trying to put very good, very easy to use development tools to developers (along with moneyhats) to get games to be made for Xbox 360. With many PS3 games going multi-platform with Xbox 360 (and probably not the other way around as Dead Rising and Lost Planet show), you can see how Microsoft is attempting to bleed and why its financial report shows the Games division still losing billions upon billions of dollars.
Also, what is not said is that Sega had the same exact problems with third parties in the pre-Dreamcast/ pre-Gamecube eras. During the 16-bit days, Sega wanted to BE Nintendo and put out the same harsh contracts. Sega's similiar contracts with third parties is never mentioned, I'm afraid, because it would pop the Playstation Generation Myth. This also explains why people only look at Nintendo's systems at the N64 and beyond. There is no mention of the NES or SNES or the handhelds where there was huge third party support. Why? Because Sony didn't have a system out then so, apparently, that time period doesn't *matter*.
Third party games on the DS and Wii are very much outselling the ones on PSP and PS3. Industry "mindsets" revolve around sales data. But old mindsets are hard to break, especially for journalists. You haven't seen any stories written on it since they don't know how to think that way. Journalists, as well are analysts, are still in a state of shock over the meteoric sales of the Wii and the very slow sales rate of the HD systems (Xbox 360 is tracking closely to the original Xbox, PS3 is doing abysmal).
A console's reputation is defined within the first year on the market (for better or worse). The Gamecube's kid friendly games the first year defined the system as "kiddie" despite games like Resident Evil 4 coming out later on. Once your system is 'defined', it is hard to break out of it. Xbox 360 has had over a year on the market and it is now defined as a FPS/racer console. Even though PSP got some good games, the first year had too many PS2 ports with very few original games so the PSP got the reputation of having "no games" which it cannot shake off. The DS, however, exploded in sales with Nintendogs well before its one year anniversary (which was when Mario Kart DS was released).
Console business is momentum based. The platforms tend to "snowball" within the first year and generally one system runs away with the market. The so-called "console war" is already essentially over within the industry. But analysts, who need to appear relevant and get free PR due to journalists mindlessly quoting them, will keep saying "it is too close to call!" to drag out their 'expertise' in media circles as long as possible.
The Wii is outselling the PS2 in a similiar time frame with people still lining up to get the system. Nintendo is opening up new factories to get even MORE units out there. Meanwhile, the 'competition' costs $400-600 and won't get down to mass market prices until the generation is over. The "industry mindset" already knows the 'winner' even though the industry journalists do not.
Some 3rd paties want the Wii to fail, they just don't make as much money selling against Nintendo. Miyamoto pointed out that even the big names who are making games for the Wii are ussually having their B-squads make 'em, with their elite groups focusing on PS and XBOX. So I guess the Wii is really getting only 1rst and 4th party support.
Lack of 3rd party support on Nintendo is becoming an industry mindset, and a self fulfilling prophesy. At least with N64 they had a good reason not to support it.
[/QUOTE]
Everything you said is incorrect.
The most unreported story of last generation is that when Microsoft moved into the console business, it began throwing money around to publishers. Microsoft's idea was that if their console had all the third party support, it would beat the PS2 in sales. Microsoft went so far as to try to make Madden exclusive to the Xbox but the NFL contract said Madden had to be made for all platforms. Many developers wanted to publish their games on Gamecube (and why not? More cashflow with little expense) but publishers axed it. Comically, there were some games that sold their best on the Gamecube and the sequels would appear on the other systems omitting the Gamecube altogether!
One of the reasons why Nintendo differentiated the Wii so much from the competition was because of these moneyhats. It is no surprise why Nintendo positioned the Wii to have very cheap developmental costs (development kits are very cheap, around $2000). Meanwhile, it looks like Microsoft is trying to put very good, very easy to use development tools to developers (along with moneyhats) to get games to be made for Xbox 360. With many PS3 games going multi-platform with Xbox 360 (and probably not the other way around as Dead Rising and Lost Planet show), you can see how Microsoft is attempting to bleed and why its financial report shows the Games division still losing billions upon billions of dollars.
Also, what is not said is that Sega had the same exact problems with third parties in the pre-Dreamcast/ pre-Gamecube eras. During the 16-bit days, Sega wanted to BE Nintendo and put out the same harsh contracts. Sega's similiar contracts with third parties is never mentioned, I'm afraid, because it would pop the Playstation Generation Myth. This also explains why people only look at Nintendo's systems at the N64 and beyond. There is no mention of the NES or SNES or the handhelds where there was huge third party support. Why? Because Sony didn't have a system out then so, apparently, that time period doesn't *matter*.
Third party games on the DS and Wii are very much outselling the ones on PSP and PS3. Industry "mindsets" revolve around sales data. But old mindsets are hard to break, especially for journalists. You haven't seen any stories written on it since they don't know how to think that way. Journalists, as well are analysts, are still in a state of shock over the meteoric sales of the Wii and the very slow sales rate of the HD systems (Xbox 360 is tracking closely to the original Xbox, PS3 is doing abysmal).
A console's reputation is defined within the first year on the market (for better or worse). The Gamecube's kid friendly games the first year defined the system as "kiddie" despite games like Resident Evil 4 coming out later on. Once your system is 'defined', it is hard to break out of it. Xbox 360 has had over a year on the market and it is now defined as a FPS/racer console. Even though PSP got some good games, the first year had too many PS2 ports with very few original games so the PSP got the reputation of having "no games" which it cannot shake off. The DS, however, exploded in sales with Nintendogs well before its one year anniversary (which was when Mario Kart DS was released).
Console business is momentum based. The platforms tend to "snowball" within the first year and generally one system runs away with the market. The so-called "console war" is already essentially over within the industry. But analysts, who need to appear relevant and get free PR due to journalists mindlessly quoting them, will keep saying "it is too close to call!" to drag out their 'expertise' in media circles as long as possible.
The Wii is outselling the PS2 in a similiar time frame with people still lining up to get the system. Nintendo is opening up new factories to get even MORE units out there. Meanwhile, the 'competition' costs $400-600 and won't get down to mass market prices until the generation is over. The "industry mindset" already knows the 'winner' even though the industry journalists do not.
Return to “Video Games General”