Slashdot Mirror


Nintendo Claims No.2 Spot, PS2 Sales Down Year-On-Year

jkcity writes "In an interview with Nintendo's Perrin Kaplan on IGN Cube, she claims: 'We basically won 2003 [in the U.S.] and moved ourselves to the number two spot, and Microsoft's Xbox to number three', also noting: 'Year-on-year we were up 68.5% [in December] based on units sold. We sold about 1.1 million GameCubes in December... For the whole year we were up 35%. Our competitors were both in the negative.' But an analyst quoted in an [overly harsh?] BBC News story is less impressed, suggesting the console 'did not do as well as I would have expected'." Elsewhere, a Reuters story notes that PlayStation 2 sales in the U.S. "fell 27 percent to 2.94 million units in November and December from four million units a year earlier", but the console still seems to be outselling the GameCube's increased Xmas volume.

9 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Third Party Helps A Lot by Enrico+Pulatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In addition to the dirt cheap price of the gamecube, third parties are really starting to come around and produce the same titles as for the Xbox and PS2. For me, that was the biggest annonyance of the first year the gamecube was released.

  2. This Panda knows Statistics by Ultra_Panda_Bear · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I bought a Playstation 1 on the first day it was available in the States and it still works without any problems. And your reply to this should be, "Well, your personal experience doesn't prove the reliability of the system."

    Of course, what statistics are you basing your opinion on? The salesmen at EB who try to sell you a warranty and tell you how many are returned? Or the ranting posted on the Internet? Unless you have some hard numbers and can show that, per 1,000 machines, more are defective than the Xbox or Gamecube, you're just spreading FUD.

  3. pr is a fun game by *weasel · · Score: 2, Interesting


    these kinds of press releases are primarily for stockholders, analysts, and 3rd party developers. even though fanboys may love to use this crap for their pissing contests, it isn't aimed at them.

    of course, analysts don't really care about market share won by severely cutting prices. particularly if the increased market share doesn't result in significantly increased software sales. (which is yet to be seen despite the quantity of GC's sold)

    The interesting part though is how console installed base correlation to total software sales tapers off more quickly than hardware sales.

    Every ps2 game released should outsell every GC or xbox title 5 to 1 at least due the sheer size of the installed base. but the monthly numbers haven't shown that to be a trend over the last two years. Just as the monthly numbers haven't shown a significant increase in GC game sales due their new, larger, installed base. It just seems the new price is pulling in people who are only buying 1 or 2 of the already existing superhits (prime, wind waker, sunshine).

    and so long as console makers lose money on each box - analysts by and large won't care about installed base. they only follow 3rd party developer movement and software sales. (nintendo may have been making money on each GC at $200, but it's extremely doubtful they still did at $150, let alone $100).

    so the question is: are third party developers going to throw more titles toward nintendo now that they have a larger installed base? and, will the lower price actually result in significant software sales growth?

    If not, then this article only tries to put up a rosy picture for the shareholders, though it'll have no real effect on the existing trends. ( sony > ms > nintendo )

    --
    // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    1. Re:pr is a fun game by *weasel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I never attacked Nintendo, I was just pointing out that the press release isn't for you and me, it doesn't say anything, and that no considerable changes in the trends have resulted from the increased market-share.

      Yes, Nintendo is well-above 'healthy' as a corporation because of it's complete and utter dominance of the portable market and solid sales of excellent first-party games.

      and the simple fact that Nintendo is losing money on each console (regardless of whether it's a penny or a dollar or a hundred) simply means that the console sales by themselves do not generate profit. Therefore analysts won't care how many of them you sell. My statement is still valid.

      I never said that their increased GC sales were a net negative for the company - I merely said that their increased GC sales haven't been shown to be changing the minds of analysts (who believe the GC is a lame duck system like the Dreamcast was), or third party developers (who've been announcing they're no longer making GC games in no small number).

      I listed Sony > Microsoft > Nintendo purely as the order that the market analysts consider them in, and the order according to 3rd party developer support and 3rd party software sales.

      Try to be a bit less defensive, and stick to what people actually type, instead of responding to what they didn't type.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
  4. Overly critical by DrDoombender · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The article that talks about the Gamecube not doing very is overly critical. They make is sound as if Nintendo is on its last legs, nobody likes them anymore and about to go bankrupt.

    "Does it want to be in the handheld, the kiddie market or compete more externally in the wider market?"

    first and foremost, this part of the article is totally ridiculous. A console can be many many things. In fact, Nintendo has had the opportunity of a lucrative handheld market, while also being a console business. Why do you have to cater to one and only one market? Obviously you don't. I think if anything there are two things that Nintendo is doing wrong. The first is their image, people DO still think of the gamecube as primarily for kids. I do, but I also own the Mature titles. So perhaps their image needs to be dealt with. The other thing is with their lack of cheaper titles. I can play $15 greatest hits PS2 titles and $20 PS2 GH games. While it usually costs around $25-$30 for a GH equivalent on the gamecube. Who cares if the GC is cheaper, the games are often more expensive when it comes to older titles. Perhaps Nintendo should consider making more of their titles around the $20-$25 mark.

    Also in the market, it talks about how the PS2 had a year's headstart over Microsoft and Nintendo. However, the first year the PS2 was out, lots of gamers were dissappointed with the lack of titles. I think having a headstart doesn't necessarily give a company an advantage. Nintendo and Microsoft have some great titles, but yes, I am aware that the PS2 has a huge selection of titles (but is that due to them being Sony, or having a headstart, and could you say the same if we were talking about Nintendo or Microsoft?).

    I do agree however that Nintendo should not be underestimated. They don't have the resource of Sony or Microsoft, but they do have experience. I think that they will be around for along time.

    The only other problem I have, is that at this point I see no reason for Nintendo to make a next gen console. The GC still has alot of potential left in it, and it seems absurd to make gamers buy a new console, and new games for it. Also, it might be good to see what Sony, and Microsoft come out with so they can top those consoles. All the while, continuing to increase the number of the titles for the GC. On the otherhand, it makes perfect sense that the PS2 be phased out to the PS3 since the PS2 is seeing its age.

    In any case, don't count Nintendo out just because they don't have the buy power of Sony and Microsoft. Money doesn't bring success, talent does.

    1. Re:Overly critical by cgenman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You forgot one.

      "If you ask me if they are still going to be in the console business in 2008, I would say no," he said

      Interesting theory, and would be accurate if mindshare equaled success, but in the larger business world, you have to make money to stay afloat. If the XBox continues to hemmorage money indefinitely, Microsoft will cut it. If Sony's games division lost lots of money (ha ha), Sony would eventually cut it. If NEC's TurboDuo was still profitable, it would still be around. Nintendo is making money, by all accounts in quantity, and would be ludicrous to get out of the business that has served it so well for... Four generations of hardware.

      Furthermore, with Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony all buying chips from IBM and ATI, development costs can be kept in line. Nintendo, having developed more gaming systems than all of their rivals combined (and having taught Sony how to build theirs), is in a pretty good position to create something amazing on a realistic budget. They do need to stop hiring case designers from Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, but overall they are in a good position to make good hardware. Remember, the GameCube is comparable in power to the XBox at a significantly lower price, and unlike Sony their designers have spent their time creating the next generation of system, rather than revising the old one so that it doesn't break every 6 months.

      The market might be ripe for another console in 2 - 3 years, but we're getting to the point of diminished returns. With actual collision detection and *gasp* 64 colors, the Genesis was a significant jump over the NES in terms of graphics and gameplay. The PS1 jumped beyond that to actual, though extremely blocky, 3D, and unlimited CD storage. The PS2 smoothed out those hard edges into tasty NURBS and boosted storage again to DVD, while making gameplay far more fluid. And the next generation of consoles? You can always keep boosting draw distance, pushing poly performance, and making the world more persistent, but are those enough? The only things that I could see as compelling enough for an upgrade would be a return to VR (there's finally the power, you know), or a really good Havoc based physics co-processor. Even then it would be a tough sell.

      Well see. We always do.

  5. A Gamecube Christmas by Prien715 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Statistics about sales are all well and good, but sometimes they don't paint a realistic picture. I got a 'cube for X-mas with no memory card, so I attempted to find one.

    My first stop was my local Walmart. Despite the large volume of games for PS2 and X-Box, the gamecube shelf was completely bare, not a single game was left. Needless to say, they didn't have any memory cards.

    I went to my local mall and visited every store that carried the cube and found similar situations. I finally stopped at EB Games who had 3rd party cards (the Nintendo brand was sold out).

    If anyone asks why weren't 'cube sales weren't higher in my area, it's pretty simple. No one had any left. I suspect other people in other areas may have similar stories, but at this point, Nintendo beat the sales predictions of every retail chain to the point of clearing their inventory. And that's a good season.

    --
    -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
    1. Re:A Gamecube Christmas by Gr33nNight · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, the reason Walmart was bare was because they were selling the 'Cube at $80 w/ the free Zelda game! In my town there were lines at 6 am to grab those, and when they sold out, they shipped more in ASAP! It was in the local paper, totally nuts.

    2. Re:A Gamecube Christmas by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had a similar experience, though, with some better anecdotal evidence to show an increase in sales.

      I didn't buy Super Mario Advance 4 until after Christmas because most of the people shopping for gifts for me knew I wanted it. Besides, the game was everywhere, at every store I went to, and they all had a rather large stock of the game on their shelves (or behind the counter as the case may be). I didn't receive the game as a gift, and started looking for it 2 days after Christmas. I couldn't find it for nearly a week (when I found it at an out-of-the-way WalMart that appeared to have just restocked their game shelves).

      There were a handful of other games I noticed with similar stock problems, and a lot of accessories, most of which had no significant shortages in the past. Of course, determining the demand for them before the Christmas rush is the real issue. Sometimes there's a bit of a lag in the sales of certain items before the Christmas shopping starts, but realistically I doubt anyone was expecting the GC to sell as well as it did, if not in pure numbers than compared to the other two consoles. I didn't see many games sold out this Christmas, but the ones that were are ones that most people could've expected to sell, or, as you said, may have been carried in smaller numbers (.hack//, the whole series of games was sold out at the Best Buy stores in this area), and many of the games I picked up after Christmas were display copies at EB or GameStop (PGR2, Live Subscription Kit, Tactics Ogre GBA).

      Still, SMA4 surprised me the most. Either they expected a lot of early sales, saw very slow initial sales, and then picked up fairly rapidly, or Nintendo couldn't ship what people wanted fast enough. There were more copies of that game sitting on Best Buy's shelves before the holidays than I had ever seen them put up on the shelves before, and after the holidays the only GBA games on those shelves were either crap or extremely niche-market games.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]