Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

How we justify all that high-dollar hardware.

Moderator: Hoser

Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:07 am

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2013/131030e.pdf

Nintendo's second quarter earnings are out, and there's two highlights.

1. Wii U sold minus 20k units in the Europe/Others region in Q2. This brings the net number of Wii Us sold this year in the region to minus 10k. Sadly that is not a mistake.

2. The total number of Wii Us sold in the last six months worldwide is 460k. That's tracking well behind the Gamecube at the same point in its life. Despite this, Nintendo's forecast for the next six months is 8.5 million units sold. That's just not possible.

Shouldn't they just give up at this point?
Last edited by Game_boy on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:53 am

Yeah, the Wii was a fun novelty but I guess there's no real reason to buy a Wii U.
What made the Wii a success was the wand, which was unique in a market full of gamepads. The Wii-Fit helped push the market size up by putting a Wii in homes that had never considered a games console before.

The touchscreen isn't as unique today, with the Kinnect stealing a lot of the Wii's previous non-gaming market, and a healthy tablet gaming ecosystem already dominating Wii U's "unique" selling point with better options.
Yet the Wii U relies on the touchscreen feature; it requires a game made specially for it. Developers won't bite because the number of potential customers is way too small (kind of Catch 22, really).

I think Nintendo are going the way of Sega and Atari, because their DS sales can only fund them for so long in a market that's increasingly being overtaken by tablet gaming.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:42 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:Yeah, the Wii was a fun novelty


Which is also the 2nd highest selling console of all time for hardware and software, and by FAR the most profitable. I don't understand this narrative that it was a fad. It was a legitimately strong business for five years.

The touchscreen isn't as unique today, with the Kinnect stealing a lot of the Wii's previous non-gaming market, and a healthy tablet gaming ecosystem already dominating Wii U's "unique" selling point with better options.
Yet the Wii U relies on the touchscreen feature; it requires a game made specially for it. Developers won't bite because the number of potential customers is way too small (kind of Catch 22, really).


There's nothing that can be made with it that really makes non-gamers rush out and buy it. Games sell consoles, not gimmicks.

I think Nintendo are going the way of Sega and Atari, because their DS sales can only fund them for so long in a market that's increasingly being overtaken by tablet gaming.


The DS is doing fine. Look at the current massive Pokemon awareness and sales. They tripped up focusing on 3D, but the return to handheld suited games like Animal Crossing, 2D Mario and Pokemon is working.

The customers might be leaving for tablets, but the money isn't. What mobile gaming company is able to make a consistent profit? They're all one hit wonder and tiny compared to the scale of the revenue and profit in the DS market in 2006 and on.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:47 pm

I completely forgot he Wii U existed. I don't know of anyone who owns one.
Intel I7-2600k, Asus P8P67, 16GB DDR3 1600mhz, Geforce GTX 780, ASUS Xonar D2, Samsung Evo 250GB, Western Digital Black 1TB, Corsair HX750w
Omniman
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:24 am
Location: White River Junction, Vermont

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:58 pm

Game_boy wrote:
Chrispy_ wrote:Yeah, the Wii was a fun novelty


Which is also the 2nd highest selling console of all time for hardware and software, and by FAR the most profitable. I don't understand this narrative that it was a fad. It was a legitimately strong business for five years.


And then suddenly nobody wanted one, and along with that, nobody wanted its successor. Soooooo it's *not* a fad how?
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21407
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:12 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:
Game_boy wrote:
Chrispy_ wrote:Yeah, the Wii was a fun novelty


Which is also the 2nd highest selling console of all time for hardware and software, and by FAR the most profitable. I don't understand this narrative that it was a fad. It was a legitimately strong business for five years.


And then suddenly nobody wanted one, and along with that, nobody wanted its successor. Soooooo it's *not* a fad how?


They stopped making games for it. Games sell consoles.

The highest selling games were Wii Sports (even where not bundled), Mario Kart, Wii Fit, Smash Bros, and 2D Mario. They didn't make sequels to any of those after 2009. Can you imagine if they stopped making CoD and Halo for the 360? It would similarly die.

They've only made one of those five for the successor, and not coincidentally it's the only decently selling game.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:33 pm

What the...

the Wii came out with almost no software but because there was Wii Sports it sold. And you're saying a variety of software is what sells a console? I'm confused. Does software sell the system or not?

My personal opinion is the newness sold it and when it was found to be really freaking shallow, people quit. People who own the system quit using it and people who don't own the system quit buying. Been there, done that, now do something good. No can do, partner.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21407
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:13 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:the Wii came out with almost no software but because there was Wii Sports it sold. And you're saying a variety of software is what sells a console? I'm confused. Does software sell the system or not?
Fanboy logic! It burns ussss!
derFunkenstein wrote:My personal opinion is the newness sold it and when it was found to be really freaking shallow, people quit. People who own the system quit using it and people who don't own the system quit buying. Been there, done that, now do something good. No can do, partner.
Yeeep.

Wii had a gimmick and got fat housewives and trendy hipsters to buy it. Combine that with regular gamer and Nintendo fan sales, and that's where you got your big sales. Everyone got bored with it after every game was just the same "waggle the wiimote" gibberish. Even MotionPlus didn't help that much (although Red Steel 2 remains one of my favorite games of all time.)

Lack of HD support really hurt them in the long run too, especially since most cheap 720p and 1080p TVs don't scale 480i input very well, which makes the non-native input look like an awful, blurry mess. Say what you like about "regular consumers", but regular consumers absolutely notice this; my brother used to be manager at a Gamestop store and he used to have to explain to people all the time why the Wii looked "bad".
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:03 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:the Wii came out with almost no software but because there was Wii Sports it sold. And you're saying a variety of software is what sells a console? I'm confused. Does software sell the system or not?


Software is the only thing that sells systems.

Big software causes a large boost on arrival. And a deep library of games being continuously released is what causes ongoing strong sales.

So, Wii Sports sold out the system for six months on arrival. If they'd released nothing else, it would have died. But they released the other four games and a Wii Sports sequel through 2009, making it continue to sell well. It sold out for months AGAIN upon the release of New Super Mario Bros. And then after that there was nothing and it died.

Compare Wii U. Actually really good sales at launch due to NSMB U, then dropped like a rock as nothing else valuable.
Compare PS3. Terrible launch sales because it had no games, gradually and continually released a solid library, ramped up in sales over time because of it.
360 and PS3 still recieve ongoing top class support so sell as such. If Wii continued to recieve the same from Nintendo or third parties it would be selling.

My personal opinion is the newness sold it and when it was found to be really freaking shallow, people quit.


Five years is an awfully long time for people to be duped. If it was six months I'd agree.

People who own the system quit using it and people who don't own the system quit buying. Been there, done that, now do something good. No can do, partner.


And now we come to your BIG problem.

You don't like it. And you don't see why anyone else likes it.

YES, you and your friends and even me (the hardcore) quit. But, you must realise, you and me are a tiny market. The Wii wasn't even aimed at us. It succeeded almost entirely without the support of the gaming core (media, third parties, fans).

To those people, it WASN'T shallow. It provided exactly what they wanted and the type of games they want to spend time on. Party/casual/sports games aren't a lesser kind of game just because they require less time investment. And the revenue is just as real.

Quality =/= what you want.

The Wii U has actually been much more of a core console. Wind Waker HD and Pikmin 3 make it a kind of Super Gamecube. It got all the third party ports this and last year as well: Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, Batman Arkham. And that's where Nintendo screwed up. They aimed at the core again instead of keeping up with the five major casual audience games I said.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:08 pm

auxy wrote:Lack of HD support really hurt them in the long run too


Data, please. The 360 and PS3 have yet to be net profitable over their lifetime; doesn't that show HD was a poor business choice?

Would HD alone really have sold more Wiis? It would have added at least $150 to the launch price, for a start.

especially since most cheap 720p and 1080p TVs don't scale 480i input very well, which makes the non-native input look like an awful, blurry mess. Say what you like about "regular consumers", but regular consumers absolutely notice this; my brother used to be manager at a Gamestop store and he used to have to explain to people all the time why the Wii looked "bad".


If he had to explain it to them, doesn't that mean they didn't care in the first place? That it wasn't noticeable?

For the kind of games that sold well on the Wii, graphics weren't actually a factor in the buying decision. This allowed much cheaper games development and higher margins. I fail to see the downside UNLESS you are a hardcore gamer, in which case the Wii wasn't for you at all.

Please try to separate "did I personally like the Wii" from "was the Wii a business success".
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:04 pm

Game_boy wrote:Data, please. The 360 and PS3 have yet to be net profitable over their lifetime; doesn't that show HD was a poor business choice?
Can you back up THAT statement with data? Last I read they weren't making money on the systems, but the divisions themselves were making serious bank off software and accessories.

My statement was made based on deductive reasoning and simple observation of market trends. The Wii stopped selling shortly after the initial surge and has been all but dead for the last couple of years, because it was a fad, and failed to find a core audience.

People like to put down 'gamers', but in the end, it's this core audience, the so-called "hard core", who keep a product going. This is basic marketing knowledge; without a core base of "fans" who are the primary uses of your product, you can at best be a fad.

Nintendo has fans, to be sure, but the core audience of gamers as a whole look down on the Wii, for many reasons. Because these 'core' gamers deride the machine, it cannot sustain a long-term success because once the fad was over, there was no-one left who wanted it. Core gamers don't want it, kids don't want it because it's not cool to the core gamers, parents don't want it because their kids don't want it, housewives stopped wanting it because the fad was over (and in the end, it's still a video game machine, which makes it 'bad' in the eyes of the contemporary western housewife), and the hipsters stopped liking it because it achieved a measure of mainstream success. So who's left to like it?
Game_boy wrote:Would HD alone really have sold more Wiis?
It would have sold at least one more, yes, because I would have bought one. Lack of HD was the 'critical mass' factor for me -- it was the proverbial straw that ruined the camel. So literally speaking, yes, it would have sold more Wiis.
Game_boy wrote:It would have added at least $150 to the launch price, for a start.
Where are your numbers on THIS? $150? Please. The Wii was still much simpler hardware than the other systems and it would have taken naught but a beefier GPU to run higher resolutions. It would certainly have raised the price, but $150 is nonsense. Neither you nor I can say how much it would have raised the price, but $150 is an extreme number picked to make your argument seem more meaty.

The reality is that it still would have been markedly cheaper than the other machines, and thus would have maintained its consumer-perception price advantage, which is the important thing.

Game_boy wrote:If he had to explain it to them, doesn't that mean they didn't care in the first place? That it wasn't noticeable?
Why would they ask if it wasn't noticeable? It's reasonably obvious from my words that they asked why it looked "bad" -- this is why it was in quotes.

The Wii was not a business success. Making a lot of money in the short term on a short term product seems good, but when you realize that game consoles are not a short-term product -- rather, they are an investment with significant mindshare -- you realize that the Wii failed to establish a brand or name that gave consumer confidence and made people interested in it. People were not interested in the Wii after the initial novelty wore off, and Nintendo failed to realize this. It was a grand blunder to make the Wii U inherit the aesthetic and name of the Wii, and this is why it is an abject failure in the market.

Cute rhetoric, and a nice attempt to twist my words, but ultimately you failed. Your skill at wordplay makes you look more like a troll than an honest debater, though; you yourself must have known that your question was insincere and purposefully mis-read my meaning, unless you honestly didn't understand what I meant, in which case you must be such a fanboy that you have some serious confirmation bias going on. In either case, I don't really care to continue this conversation with you.
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:38 pm

auxy wrote:Either...


On your last point: yes I did misunderstand, sorry. You meant "they asked why it was so bad", I thought you meant "he had to tell them it was bad", which would be disingenuous. Apologies.

auxy wrote:Can you back up THAT statement with data? Last I read they weren't making money on the systems, but the divisions themselves were making serious bank off software and accessories.


Image

Here's the proof. This is all sourced from their financial statements for the games divisions only. Sony and MS lost so much money early on that they never made it back. Nintendo was not only consistently profitable, but their peak profits were in 2008 and 2009 - over two years after the Wii actually launched. This contradicts an early fad then dropoff.

My statement was made based on deductive reasoning and simple observation of market trends. The Wii stopped selling shortly after the initial surge and has been all but dead for the last couple of years, because it was a fad, and failed to find a core audience.


Incorrect. The Wii's highest sales years were well after the 2006 launch.

Image

edit: missing from chart: q4 06 ~2m, q1 07 ~3m, q2 07 ~2m

It was indeed dead post-2011, due to the completely barren release schedule from Nintendo themselves. This does not justify your assertions that it was because of a lack of core audience specifically.

People like to put down 'gamers', but in the end, it's this core audience, the so-called "hard core", who keep a product going. This is basic marketing knowledge; without a core base of "fans" who are the primary uses of your product, you can at best be a fad.


Data please?

Nintendo has fans, to be sure, but the core audience of gamers as a whole look down on the Wii, for many reasons.


No, Nintendo fans I included in the 'core' there. Nintendo fans hate the Wii. They saw some very cool franchises of theirs get ignored (F-Zero, Pikmin), dumbed down (Mario Kart, Smash Bros) or burnt (Metroid Other M). They behave like a core, informed market.

There are three groups worth talking about. Xbox/PS Core, Nintendo Core, Casual. The Wii was clearly supported by #3 the most, with #2 only a little bit. A console relying only on #2 looks like the Gamecube, or the Wii U.

Because these 'core' gamers deride the machine, it cannot sustain a long-term success because once the fad was over, there was no-one left who wanted it.


Why would the opinion of people outside the product's market influence sales? People 35+ don't listen to 18-25 gamers.

Explain why Wii sold out in America in 2009, three years after launch, upon the launch of NSMB Wii.

Core gamers don't want it, kids don't want it because it's not cool to the core gamers, parents don't want it because their kids don't want it, housewives stopped wanting it because the fad was over (and in the end, it's still a video game machine, which makes it 'bad' in the eyes of the contemporary western housewife), and the hipsters stopped liking it because it achieved a measure of mainstream success. So who's left to like it?


Well, it sold tons of units, was immensely profitable, and shifted a ton of software in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010. If none of those are your success metrics then what are?

It would have sold at least one more, yes, because I would have bought one.


One more sale does not justify the expensive added cost, size, weight, power and development costs.

You said yourself the system's games did not appeal. If the only thing changed was 720p output, that would not persuade the core to buy it.

Where are your numbers on THIS? $150? Please. The Wii was still much simpler hardware than the other systems and it would have taken naught but a beefier GPU to run higher resolutions.


My numbers are the 360. Show me that you could build an HD console for less than the Xbox 360 launch price. In fact, very few games on the 360 even run at HD resolutions. CoD4 ran at 600p. I do not believe a console weaker in ANY area

The Wii would have needed a much better CPU to do 720p. The Wii has a slightly upclocked Gamecube CPU. The 360 has three of them. Developers also stated that the 360 GPU was too weak, and they had to shift certain culling operations to the CPU. This implies all that CPU power was needed.

Do you have evidence that a console weaker than the 360 could have run 720p games? Remember it also has to run third party ports, since your goal here is to get core games and gamers.

It would certainly have raised the price, but $150 is nonsense. Neither you nor I can say how much it would have raised the price, but $150 is an extreme number picked to make your argument seem more meaty.


Let's go $75. Launch price of Wii $325 with Wii Sports. Do you really think that would have sold BETTER than the numbers it did at $250?

The Wii was not a business success. Making a lot of money in the short term on a short term product seems good, but when you realize that game consoles are not a short-term product -- rather, they are an investment with significant mindshare -- you realize that the Wii failed to establish a brand or name that gave consumer confidence and made people interested in it. People were not interested in the Wii after the initial novelty wore off, and Nintendo failed to realize this. It was a grand blunder to make the Wii U inherit the aesthetic and name of the Wii, and this is why it is an abject failure in the market.
[/quote][/quote]

I agree with you that the Wii U name was wrong. Because it implied a casual console, but the Wii U philosophy is actually pretty opposed to that. Expensive, higher powered relative to the market, core focused games.

Not a business success? Tell me any company in the world wouldn't die for the crazy margins Nintendo had 2006-2011 (see financials). Even temporary.

So, I have ALL the data. I'd love for you to show me where I'm mistaken, so I can fix it.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:11 pm

Game_boy wrote:Compare PS3. Terrible launch sales because it had no games, gradually and continually released a solid library, ramped up in sales over time because of it.


You can't continually release a solid library of games for a console that nobody is buying, because no developers are ineterested in writing software for an unsuccessful platform. Chicken-and-egg, Catch 22 - call it what you will but that's Nintendo's predicament right now.

What you forget about the PS3 is that many many people bought one solely as a Blu-Ray player at first, because it was a decent Blu-Ray player AND a next-gen games console for less than the price of similar standalone Blu-Ray players. That provided a significant boost to the number of consoles in the wild and prompted more developers to code games for the PS3.

People aren't going to buy a Wii U for non-gaming activities because it's only non-standard feature is the touchscreen aspect, and everyone already has several of those.
I, for example, have a smartphone, a tablet (TF Prime) and my work laptop is also a touchscreen model. I don't need a fourth touch-tablet any more than you average phone-owner needs a second or third....

In fact, the Wii U has zero applications outside of a games console. You've already stated that there aren't many popular games for it and I don't believe that a strong library of games will materialise over the coming year or more.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:49 pm

Game_boy wrote:(spreadsheet image)
What is this? This isn't a source, or data. I can type numbers in a spreadsheet and screenshot it too.
Game_boy wrote:This contradicts an early fad then dropoff. (...) Incorrect. The Wii's highest sales years were well after the 2006 launch.
Nothing I stated implied "an early fad". I said initial surge as in, "the first surge." Nothing about that implies "early in the console's lifespan".
Game_boy wrote:(console sales image}
I like how your source image conveniently ends before the sales fell off.
Game_boy wrote:It was indeed dead post-2011, due to the completely barren release schedule from Nintendo themselves. This does not justify your assertions that it was because of a lack of core audience specifically.
No, it doesn't. It also doesn't counter them. Your own statement -- "completely barren [1st-party] release schedule" -- serves to justify it, though. They alienated the core audience and it is the core audience that drives the market. You don't seem to understand this, saying things like this:
Game_boy wrote:Data please? (in response to my comment that a core audience sustains a product)
Game_boy wrote:Why would the opinion of people outside the product's market influence sales? People 35+ don't listen to 18-25 gamers.
There's no "data" -- this is Marketing 101 stuff; go pick up a textbook. You build a core audience which advertises and hypes your product for you.

People 35+ do in fact listen to 18-25 gamers when it comes to games, exactly the same as you would ask a movie buff what movies to watch, or ask your hipster friend how Indie Band's new album is. This is how 'buzz' works -- word spreads from the core audience out to the mass-market. Besides, older folks ask their younger relatives or associates (students, children of friends, etc) constantly about tech products, and when Aidan the Core Gamer says "Nah, the Wii is junk," well, that means Gordon the Middle Manager -- who doesn't have time to research on his own, or doesn't care enough -- is probably not going to buy one.
Game_boy wrote:No, Nintendo fans I included in the 'core' there. Nintendo fans hate the Wii. They saw some very cool franchises of theirs get ignored (F-Zero, Pikmin), dumbed down (Mario Kart, Smash Bros) or burnt (Metroid Other M). They behave like a core, informed market.
We're both being verymuch overly-general; I'll take some of the blame for that, sure. Still, I know a lot of hardcore Nintendo fans who love the Wii and its games. Maybe I just happen to be surrounded by idiots -- I'm willing to accept that explanation. (・∀・)
Game_boy wrote:Well, it sold tons of units, was immensely profitable, and shifted a ton of software in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010. If none of those are your success metrics then what are?
I think it should have been clear I was talking about the Wii post-fad.
Game_boy wrote:One more sale does not justify the expensive added cost, size, weight, power and development costs.
It was obviously a rhetorical statement; I was not genuinely suggesting that my one extra sale would have validated the decision. I am an exemplar in many ways of the typical core gamer, and being able to run games in my display's native resolution would at least have smoothed over that concern.
Game_boy wrote:You said yourself the system's games did not appeal. If the only thing changed was 720p output, that would not persuade the core to buy it.
That being the only thing, no. It would have helped, however. It would have increased sales.
Game_boy wrote:My numbers are the 360. Show me that you could build an HD console for less than the Xbox 360 launch price. In fact, very few games on the 360 even run at HD resolutions. CoD4 ran at 600p.
I'll do you a favor and cull the unfinished statement there. Most games on the 360 do run in HD, 720p, or a near approximation of it. Some games do run lower resolutions, but the hardware is plenty capable of 720p with AAA titles (see Halo 4), and 1080p on some Arcade games. Just as importantly, though, regardless of what the render resolution is, the Xbox 360 uses a special scaler processor to scale the output to the selected display resolution, which can be fairly arbitrary. This avoids the nastiness of non-native input on relatively dumb consumer displays, like low-end HDTVs.
Game_boy wrote:The Wii would have needed a much better CPU to do 720p. The Wii has a slightly upclocked Gamecube CPU. The 360 has three of them. Developers also stated that the 360 GPU was too weak, and they had to shift certain culling operations to the CPU. This implies all that CPU power was needed.
The 360's CPU is not symmetric and does not use even remotely the same core as the Wii's processor. They're not even similar; they both use PowerPC-derived ISAs, and that's about as far as it gets. The 360's "XCPU" is much more closely related to the PS3's Cell Primary Processing Element than to anything in the Wii.

Not only that, but you're a little mistaken about how computers work. Increasing render resolution doesn't require anything more of the CPU -- it just requires more fillrate, bandwidth, and memory. They literally could have added an AMD GPU based on a newer architecture -- something similar to what the 360 got in Xenos, perhaps without the eDRAM -- and had the same games running better, in 720p. It's likely that (hypothetical) GPU could even run some Wii games in 1080p natively, since they're relatively simplistic, like some of the Xbox Live Arcade games which do run in 1080p.

The 360 has the most powerful GPU in the current console generation, so saying that the 360 GPU was "too weak" seems suspect to me. Are you sure you aren't thinking of the PS3, which has a relatively anemic (and old, inefficient fixed-function) GPU, but a powerful CPU? I know Naughty Dog does a lot of shader work on the Cell SPEs because the RSX isn't very programmable.
Game_boy wrote:Do you have evidence that a console weaker than the 360 could have run 720p games? Remember it also has to run third party ports, since your goal here is to get core games and gamers.
Sure. Ouya. Ouya can run games in 720p all day, and it uses four slow ARM cores and a much weaker GPU than the Wii, much less the Xbox 360. Tegra 3 doesn't begin to approach the performance of Xenos + XCPU. ("lol ARM")
Game_boy wrote:Let's go $75. Launch price of Wii $325 with Wii Sports. Do you really think that would have sold BETTER than the numbers it did at $250?
Nice strawman! I never said it would have sold better at launch -- I said the lack of HD hurt its overall success.

As I mentioned, the Wii failed to establish a trusted and liked brand, and so while it may have made Nintendo a lot of money, as a product, it was a failure. Nintendo should have dissociated themselves from it with their next product, which they didn't. If the Wii had HD graphics, it may not (see that? "may not", implying that I don't know, because we don't) have acquired the reputation it had for being pathetically weak.
Game_boy wrote:Not a business success? Tell me any company in the world wouldn't die for the crazy margins Nintendo had 2006-2011 (see financials). Even temporary.
If they intended to fold immediately afteward? Sure. Ask any company in the world if they'd sacrifice all consumer confidence in their name and products in exchange for a few good years and see how that goes for you.
Game_boy wrote:So, I have ALL the data. I'd love for you to show me where I'm mistaken, so I can fix it.
In the end, you have basically no data. What now? (✿◠‿◠)
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:17 pm

What is this? This isn't a source, or data. I can type numbers in a spreadsheet and screenshot it too.


They are sourced from the financial reports for each year for the three companies. I'm not out to decieve you. You can check each number yourself if you wish.

http://www.nintendo.com/corp/annual_report.jsp
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/
http://www.microsoft.com/investor/annua ... fault.aspx

I like how your source image conveniently ends before the sales fell off.


I'm not denying sales fell off.

But I cannot see how five years of great sales can be called a brief surge, when the entire 4th and 5th generations of consoles only lasted that long. And I cannot see how a final total and profit as high as it is can be dismissed. It is opinion, sure, but you're reaching to describe it as you do.

There's no "data" -- this is Marketing 101 stuff; go pick up a textbook. You build a core audience which advertises and hypes your product for you.


There is no evidence for that assertion.

I would actually run this in reverse: the Wii proves that you can get better results totally ignoring this.

It would have helped, however. It would have increased sales.


I believe, but cannot prove, that the extra cost would have negated any increased sales.

360 stuff


OK we have different criteria here. You're talking purely, can it literally output 720p? Of course the Wii could with a small extra chip and cost, yes.

But you're weird. Anyone else who argues that the Wii should have been HD is arguing that it should run the HD games the 360/PS3 ran at their graphical fidelity levels. Which definitely costs a lot more.

720p capabillity at all (minimally) isn't hardware-critical and could have been put in an updated revision in 2010ish. In fact I think I agree with you it should have, right as HDTVs became ubiquitous. That's irrelevant to an overall judgement of the console's strategy though.

As I mentioned, the Wii failed to establish a trusted and liked brand, and so while it may have made Nintendo a lot of money, as a product, it was a failure. Nintendo should have dissociated themselves from it with their next product, which they didn't. If the Wii had HD graphics, it may not (see that? "may not", implying that I don't know, because we don't) have acquired the reputation it had for being pathetically weak.


I dunno. Even ignoring everything else, I'd consider any product that made its kind of money a success. Even a temporary one. Just me perhaps?

Which kind of 720p do you want? The cheap ability-to-output kind that "the Ouya can run", or the expensive kind that affects performance and fix its "reputation"? They're mutually exclusive and the distinction is important.

Ask any company in the world if they'd sacrifice all consumer confidence in their name and products in exchange for a few good years and see how that goes for you.


Nintendo was NOT in a good position in 2005, pre-Wii. The Wii was a massive step up with the audience they wanted to gett. The 360/PS3 core and the gaming media though they sucked before and still thought so afterwards.

I totally think most tech companies would jump at 5 years of profits in exchange for leaving their core market for dead, yes. I mean, the AMD golden age was shorter than that. Speculation, though.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:24 am

I'm pretty convinced by your arguments Game_boy. They seem well thought out and backed up by evidence.

Remembering how poorly the Gamecube fared compared to the N64, I'm sure that Nintendo was desperate to try something new. I was very surprised by how much of a departure the Wii U was from the tried and true strategy of the Wii. Unlike Wii's, which were everywhere, I don't know anyone that has a Wii U (this is not entirely true, I do know someone that has a Wii U, but has never taken it out of the box) and I've personally never played one.
kumori
Gerbil Team Leader
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:11 am

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:38 am

Not surprised at all.

The key audience for the Wii (casual gamers) didn't care for the Wii U. Why get the same thing but with an expensive dedicated table device? It doesn't make any sense. The Wii is easily one of the most successful gaming consoles in history. Only the PS2 and the original NES met greater commercial success. The Wii U's biggest competitor is its predecessor not the upcoming PS4/Xbox One.
Ivy Bridge i5-3570K@4.0Ghz, Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H, 2x4GiB of PC-12800, EVGA 660Ti, Corsair CX-600 and Fractal Refined R4 (W). Kentsfield Q6600@3Ghz, HD 4850 2x2GiB PC2-6400, Gigabyte EP45-DS4P, OCZ Modstream 700W, and PC-7B.
Krogoth
Maximum Gerbil
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 4439
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 3:20 pm
Location: somewhere on Core Prime

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 4:52 am

Game_boy wrote:Software is the only thing that sells systems.


What about Apple Computer, Inc. in the 1990's? :wink: :lol: :P
Sheep Rustlers in the sky! <S> Slapt | <S> FUI | Air Warrior II/III
FireGryphon
Darth Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 7348
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 7:53 pm
Location: the abyss into which you gaze

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 6:34 am

They do have a decent first party lineup coming for Nintendo game likers. I think it will be difficult being only 100 dollars less than the PS4, perhaps in addition to those games it needs another price cut.

The 3DS sold like **** initially but those two things helped it tremendously. Although it's harder with the U, as they were taking a loss on it from the start, whereas the 3DS had some price fat to shave.
tipoo
Gerbil
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:43 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:48 am

tipoo wrote:They do have a decent first party lineup coming for Nintendo game likers. I think it will be difficult being only 100 dollars less than the PS4, perhaps in addition to those games it needs another price cut.


Compared to the Gamecube, they're missing Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, F-Zero, Paper Mario, Animal Crossing, Luigi's Mansion and Smash Bros

Assuming they get all of that soon enough to matter (for example, Zelda is 2015 or later and I doubt some of those will even come), they'd be in the SAME position as the Gamecube. That is, third place, low sales and being called a failure.

How do you propose that they get PAST the Gamecube with their game library?

PRICE HISTORY

Gamecube launch - $199
6 months after launch - $149
2 years after launch - $99

Wii U launch - $349
1 year after launch - $299

They have a LONG way to go to match $99, never mind beat it to sell higher.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:34 am

Nintendo will be fine. The Gamecube was a "failure," but it had some great games that people loved, and it guaranteed the release of the Wii, which also had some good games.

Personally, I think the initial rankings of the consoles will be PS4 > XBOne > WiiU, but in long-term survivability, it looks more like WiiU > XBOne > PS4, and that's because I feel like some of the strong supporters of "core" consoles circa 2005/6 have migrated to the PC, and this generation of "core" consoles has shifted even more into PC space, prompting a response from Valve. If gamers continue to migrate to the PC environment and if Steam Machines are successful, consoles are going to need other selling features to move consoles. The new Kinect has a lot of good functionality, and Nintendo has made use of its conosoles' "gimmicks" for some time.

The WiiU might not be a financial success, but I think it has a more survivable model in the long term.
Damage wrote:Don't try to game the requirements by posting everywhere, guys, or I'll nuke you from space.

-Probably the best Damage quote ever.
superjawes
Graphmaster Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:53 am

Game_boy wrote:
Chrispy_ wrote:Yeah, the Wii was a fun novelty


Which is also the 2nd highest selling console of all time for hardware and software, and by FAR the most profitable. I don't understand this narrative that it was a fad. It was a legitimately strong business for five years.



2nd? PS2, DS, Gameboy and PS1 have all sold more than Wii even if you exclude handhelds it's 3rd.
Ushio01
Gerbil
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:54 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:56 pm

If you subtract an estimated 26m Wiis that were sold to non-gamers for Wii-fit alone (and likely never bought any other game for the Wii) then you have around 75m sales which puts it below the PS3, XB360 and makes it the worst-selling console of that generation.

It's pure speculation as to how many wii-fit buyers were non-gamers but I remember reading articles at the time of the Wii-Fit launch that surveyed hundreds of customers and most of them had never bought a games console before, and had no intent to use the Wii for games; They were prepared to buy a Wii exclusively for Wii Fit, because it was cheaper and more fun than hiring a personal trainer.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:36 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:If you subtract an estimated 26m Wiis that were sold to non-gamers for Wii-fit alone (and likely never bought any other game for the Wii) then you have around 75m sales which puts it below the PS3, XB360 and makes it the worst-selling console of that generation.


How about I subtract people who just bought an 360 for CoD?

It's absurd. You can't just do that. Wii Fit customers are valid customers whatever you believe.

It's pure speculation as to how many wii-fit buyers were non-gamers but I remember reading articles at the time of the Wii-Fit launch that surveyed hundreds of customers and most of them had never bought a games console before, and had no intent to use the Wii for games; They were prepared to buy a Wii exclusively for Wii Fit, because it was cheaper and more fun than hiring a personal trainer.


And don't you think they may have been upsold to Wii Fit Plus? or Mario Kart for the grandkids that come round? And even if they didn't, sales are sales and Nintendo made good money on them.

Who honestly cares who "won" the "gen" in the minds of the hardcore though? It's irrelevant to whether the Wii was a success or whether the Wii U will fail or not.
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:04 pm

Yep I agree Wii would have been much more successful then it was if it had HD support......down scaling a hd tv is just wrong.
2600k HT on@4705mhz 8gb Cas9 1600 mem 2x EVGA GTX770 4gb Classified cards in SLI @1320 mhz core and 2003 mhz mem,mounted in CM HAF922 with a TX-850 PSU 2xHTPC's 2xi3 2120 3.3ghz dual core,1xasus LP HD6570 1xHIS hd7750@1150core1325mem,55"PanyVT30
vargis14
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1235
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:03 pm
Location: philly suburbs

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:28 pm

Game_boy wrote:
Chrispy_ wrote:If you subtract an estimated 26m Wiis that were sold to non-gamers for Wii-fit alone (and likely never bought any other game for the Wii) then you have around 75m sales which puts it below the PS3, XB360 and makes it the worst-selling console of that generation.


How about I subtract people who just bought an 360 for CoD?

It's absurd. You can't just do that. Wii Fit customers are valid customers whatever you believe.

It's pure speculation as to how many wii-fit buyers were non-gamers but I remember reading articles at the time of the Wii-Fit launch that surveyed hundreds of customers and most of them had never bought a games console before, and had no intent to use the Wii for games; They were prepared to buy a Wii exclusively for Wii Fit, because it was cheaper and more fun than hiring a personal trainer.


And don't you think they may have been upsold to Wii Fit Plus? or Mario Kart for the grandkids that come round? And even if they didn't, sales are sales and Nintendo made good money on them.

Who honestly cares who "won" the "gen" in the minds of the hardcore though? It's irrelevant to whether the Wii was a success or whether the Wii U will fail or not.


Pretty much, I still have to say that Nintendo was biggest winner out of the previous generation. It was the "darkhorse ensemble" out of the trio. The core crowd was too hung up on "mah resolution" and "mah eye candy". They forgot the biggest reason why normal people get consoles. They want to play "fun" games. Nintendo understood this since the start. EA/Sony were too busy trying outdo each other in the living room being "a HD multimedia device that happens to play games".

The same story is going to happen this round. There aren't going to be as many people getting PS4/Xbox One, since the mainstream crowd sees 360/Xbox One as "its the same thing, why bother?".

It is also why Microsoft is trying to pimp crap out of the "Kinetics 2", they are hinging the Xbox One's success on it since they are also aware that core crowd is going probably opt for PS4 due to its stronger software library and stronger hardware capabilities.
Ivy Bridge i5-3570K@4.0Ghz, Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H, 2x4GiB of PC-12800, EVGA 660Ti, Corsair CX-600 and Fractal Refined R4 (W). Kentsfield Q6600@3Ghz, HD 4850 2x2GiB PC2-6400, Gigabyte EP45-DS4P, OCZ Modstream 700W, and PC-7B.
Krogoth
Maximum Gerbil
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 4439
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 3:20 pm
Location: somewhere on Core Prime

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:44 pm

I'm just pointing out that Wii Fit isn't really a game, and many Wii Fit buyers didn't buy any games at all for their games console.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Nintendo sells -20k Wii Us in Q2

Postposted on Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:00 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:I'm just pointing out that Wii Fit isn't really a game, and many Wii Fit buyers didn't buy any games at all for their games console.


Of course it's a game.

And you don't have any evidence for that. The Wii has a tie ratio (games sold per console) of 8.0 excluding Wii Sports; the PS3 has a tie ratio of 9.3. Where's this huge effect from Wii Fit buyers not buying anything else?
Game_boy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:46 pm


Return to Gaming

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests