Guest Maase Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 (...)Kim was also unwilling to concede that Nintendo has won this generation's console wars thanks to the success of the Wii: "This generation still has a long way to go. It is way too early to declare a winner there." But he didn't want to discuss what clues he would look for as definitive evidence that someone had won the console war. Neither was he willing to make pronouncements for four or five years into the future. "A few weeks ago, a lot of people thought the Patriots would win the Super Bowl too," he quipped, referring to the shock sports result earlier in the week. As for Microsoft apparently not reaching out to a broader audience beyond hardcore gamers, Kim said that there were multiple facets to competing for that customer. "Let's be honest - when your flagship titles are Halo and Gears of War, most people naturally attribute a brand of M-rated hardcore to your platform," he said. "It does make it more challenging to reach out to a more mainstream customer." He agreed that the Wii was important to the future of the industry because of the way it has broadened the definition of what a gamer is and opened up new opportunities for developers. But even so, Kim said there are other aspects of the Wii business that the industry needs to pay attention to, posing such questions as, "How are they using the console? Are they buying a lot of games? Purchasing a lot of content?"(...) Hum... is he right? You decide A Portuguese Site says that he talked with irony about Wii, saiyng that they will at least give the Europe what she deserves. The full interview can be seen here http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=32873
Kurtle Squad Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Hahaha...Purchasing content? There isn't content to buy....it's generally all games Microsoft. Comparing a business war on human abilities is also stupid. Anyway, Microsoft & Nintendo still have a lot to learn, especially Nintendo.
Shino Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Considering the 360 has about only 3 more years and that the Wii is selling lots of games and VC games, he's completely wrong. I think only the PS3 will rise its sales compared to Wii.
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 To be honest i doubt there will be much in this generation. Nintendo have the hardware sales, but more cash is being splashed on the 360 than the PS3 and Wii combined (or that was true as of about a month ago). The PS3 has a cracking year ahead which will see it's sales rise and as a result it will be pretty much neck-and-neck by the end of this year. This guy isn't critisising the Wii, he's merely saying "will people stop forgetting that it's not all about hardware sales!" and tbh he is right. All 3 companies have different strategies for this generation, Microsoft and Sony were never going to shift as many units as Nintendo because that isn't they're main focus. Does that mean that they have automatically "lost"?
Kurtle Squad Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 They still talking about the 360? Well we still have these to come: Halo Wars Gears of War 2? Call of Duty 5 Call of Duty 6 and maybe Call of Duty 7
Dyson Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 GH4, 5 and 6 Rock Band Fifa 09-12 NFS: Moar Carz! and NFS: BLAZIN ROADS M8 :P
darksnowman Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 This guy isn't critisising the Wii, he's merely saying "will people stop forgetting that it's not all about hardware sales!" and tbh he is right. All 3 companies have different strategies for this generation, Microsoft and Sony were never going to shift as many units as Nintendo because that isn't they're main focus. Does that mean that they have automatically "lost"? I can't help but think that if the Wii was selling less hardware than the other two then it would of course be all doom and gloom towards Nintendo. So yeah, its about the sales. Take a look at the N64 and Gamecube, neither of them sold as well as the consoles they were up against and we immediately deem them as failures and they lost their console wars. So why should it be different now? Its just cos Nintendo are in the lead, isn't it? :wink: Obviously they are right to say that this generation has a long way to go, but you surely can't deny that both Microsoft and Sony are losing to Nintendo?
Kurtle Squad Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 I can't help but think that if the Wii was selling less hardware than the other two then it would of course be all doom and gloom towards Nintendo. So yeah, its about the sales. Obviously they are right to say that this generation has a long way to go, but you surely can't deny that both Microsoft and Sony are losing to Nintendo? Plus; just look at software. Mario Galaxy was barely obtainable after Xmas, and just look at Mario & Sonic.
Hellfire Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 To be honest i doubt there will be much in this generation. Nintendo have the hardware sales, but more cash is being splashed on the 360 than the PS3 and Wii combined (or that was true as of about a month ago). The PS3 has a cracking year ahead which will see it's sales rise and as a result it will be pretty much neck-and-neck by the end of this year. This guy isn't critisising the Wii, he's merely saying "will people stop forgetting that it's not all about hardware sales!" and tbh he is right. All 3 companies have different strategies for this generation, Microsoft and Sony were never going to shift as many units as Nintendo because that isn't they're main focus. Does that mean that they have automatically "lost"? What do you mean by splashing money? Investing? Also, MS and Nintendo are hemorraging money.
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 I can't help but think that if the Wii was selling less hardware than the other two then it would of course be all doom and gloom towards Nintendo. So yeah, its about the sales. Take a look at the N64 and Gamecube, neither of them sold as well as the consoles they were up against and we immediately deem them as failures and they lost their console wars. So why should it be different now? Its just cos Nintendo are in the lead, isn't it? :wink: Obviously they are right to say that this generation has a long way to go, but you surely can't deny that both Microsoft and Sony are losing to Nintendo? The rules of the game have changed. In the past hardware sales have been a good indication of a consoles overall performance. This just isn't true for the current generation. You could argue that the Wii having the highest hardware sales puts it in the lead. At the same time you could argue that the 360 is winning, more money was spent on Xbox 360 hardware and software in 2007 than both the PS3 and Wii combined. You could also predict that this year will see the PS3 take the lead. The next gen DVD war is over, the PS3 is the best value Blu-Ray player around, it's priced very agressively and has an amazing year of software ahead. Basically it's an open game at the moment. Which ones is winning is down to how you measure success. What do you mean by splashing money? Investing?Also, MS and Nintendo are hemorraging money. There was a story going round just after Xmas that said more consumer money had been spent on Xbox 360 hardware and software in the US than both the other consoles combined (in 2007). This was backed up by claims that the 360 had the most successful year of any console ever in Europe. It was just Japan where they lost. Badly. (i probably should have been a bit clearer on which territories i was refering to) Not really a huge surprise considering the attatch rate is stupidly high and has risen a lot in the past 12 months. They've also got something like $25 Million per year coming in from Live memberships.
Shino Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Seriously man, you sound like a fanboy. Now that Nintendo is "winning" people come up with new ways to turn it around. The rules still stand, more user base more people to sell stuff too. What is "money spent on Xbox Hardware"? HD-DVD drives? And I doubt Xbox360 sells more software than does two combined for the simple fact that it doesn't exists in Japan.
Hellfire Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Well, more expensive console, more expensive games and higher attach rate, yeah it makes sense that more money is being spent, but they only started getting slight profit very recently, ever since they launched 360 it was just a huge money bleed. Still, this hardly matters, what matters is that everyone can play the games they like, who cares who wins or loses money.
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Seriously man, you sound like a fanboy. Now that Nintendo is "winning" people come up with new ways to turn it around. The rules still stand, more user base more people to sell stuff too. What is "money spent on Xbox Hardware"? HD-DVD drives? And I doubt Xbox360 sells more software than does two combined for the simple fact that it doesn't exists in Japan. I actually couldn't care less who is winning, im merely trying to point out the stupidity in the "more hardware sales = win" mentality. And how do i sound like a fanboy? Im saying that Nintendo aren't necessarily winning. It's a close thing. It could be the Wii, it could be the 360. By the end of this year it could even be the PS3! If you want to call me a fanboy of all 3 consoles then go ahead, otherwise zip it
darksnowman Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Yeah, it sounds a bit like sour grapes to me as well. We could use anything to show what console is winning- just look at the Wii, pretty much within its first year the complete DKC trilogy has been made available on the VC. Now, to me, this puts the Wii in an instant win position. But that isn't gonna be looked back on by people as what drove the Wii's success, know what I mean? People will look back and see which console sold most over all as the deciding factor. Like, the Playstation massacred the N64, we know that, but we can still look back on the N64 as having had a great selection of quality games despite it not selling quite so well. Equally, the same will be said after this generation- lets say the Wii goes on to sell like hotcakes, but Xbox Live will still be recognised as a success... but no ones gonna say, oh people payed alot to use play online on their 360's, so Microsoft win! If Xbox Live (or Bluray and whatever) was so great, then the consoles would be snapped up at the same rate as the Wii.
Hellfire Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 If there's anything that means winning to the companies is money. In which case, Nintendo is clearly winning. But, like I said, doesn't matter.
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Yeah, it sounds a bit like sour grapes to me as well. We could use anything to show what console is winning- just look at the Wii, pretty much within its first year the complete DKC trilogy has been made available on the VC. Now, to me, this puts the Wii in an instant win position. But that isn't gonna be looked back on by people as what drove the Wii's success, know what I mean? People will look back and see which console sold most over all as the deciding factor. Like, the Playstation massacred the N64, we know that, but we can still look back on the N64 as having had a great selection of quality games despite it not selling quite so well. Equally, the same will be said after this generation- lets say the Wii goes on to sell like hotcakes, but Xbox Live will still be recognised as a success... but no ones gonna say, oh people payed alot to use play online on their 360's, so Microsoft win! If Xbox Live (or Bluray and whatever) was so great, then the consoles would be snapped up at the same rate as the Wii. Either you've gone off at a tangent or misunderstood me completely? On the Playstation vs N64 example, the Playstation beat the N64 in every way. It sold more hardware, more software and made more money for every company involved (Sony, publishers, developers, 3rd party peripheral makers etc). The difference between that and todays example is that there isn't one console selling more hardware AND more software than the others. Theres one console with high hardware sales and one console with high software sales. What im arguing is that the market has changed, it's no longer possible to measure with hardware sales alone.
darksnowman Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 A slight tangent, but I understood what you said rightly m'lad. You were saying that you can't judge who is winning/ will win from the sales cos you can look at other aspects. I'm saying, sure consoles do some things better than others (Xbox Live, Bluray, Wiimote, whatever) and all have their own good and bad points but I'm saying that at the end of the day, everyone will look back and ask which one sold more. You can't go changing the focus from sales just cos Nintendo are leading the sales. :wink:
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 A slight tangent, but I understood what you said rightly m'lad. You were saying that you can't judge who is winning/ will win from the sales cos you can look at other aspects. I'm saying, sure consoles do some things better than others (Xbox Live, Bluray, Wiimote, whatever) and all have their own good and bad points but I'm saying that at the end of the day, everyone will look back and ask which one sold more. You can't go changing the focus from sales just cos Nintendo are leading the sales. :wink: The only aspect i've been talking about is sales. Im not trying to change the focus away from it, im saying that "sales" is a lot broader than just hardware. If Nintendo were outselling the competition in hardware AND equaled them in software i wouldn't argue. Live and Blu-Ray only affect my points if they are increasing the revenue created by that console (im talking revenue across the board here, not just Sony/MS/Ninty). In Live's case it is. In Blu-Ray's case it will.
darksnowman Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Ok, maybe I'm not so sure at all what you're getting at. :p You mean that money from sales of everything should be taken into account? If so, do you know whether that changes the shape of who is the most successful?
Shino Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Besides selling more hardware, it makes huge profit from each unit sold, its games sell insanely well and the VC is pure profit. I can't see how the Wii is losing in anyway, its the best possible situation for Nintendo.
McPhee Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Ok, maybe I'm not so sure at all what you're getting at. :p You mean that money from sales of everything should be taken into account? If so, do you know whether that changes the shape of who is the most successful? Thats what im getting at, yes. And about a month back Microsoft were claiming that they were ahead in that respect in the US and Europe. In fact they were claiming quite a significant lead. Once you factor in Japan though it's going to be a lot closer. Nintendo make they're money from hardware sales. They focus primarily on selling as many units as possible in order to gain as much revenue as possible. Microsoft focus on content, the more content they sell the more money they make. Looking at hardware sales alone doesn't tell you which is the better strategy, it just tells you how many consoles have been sold.
Hellfire Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Microsoft ? Home and Entertainment through 1st Q FY 2007 ended Sept. 30 Sony ? Game division through 1st H FY 2006 ended Sept. 30 Nintendo ? Overall through 1st H FY 2007 ended Sept. 30 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
McPhee Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Sales, Profit, same thing Did you really go to all that effort to prove me wrong? Assuming these are profit figures for Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft's games divisions then they also include R&D costs, advertising costs, profit from other formats etc. So basically they have an unknown relation to the sales of current home consoles. They're useless for gauging the sales created by the current home consoles. Interesting figures though. I can't believe how much money MS lost on the Xbox! I knew it was high, but Billions!?!?!!?
Recommended Posts