Slashdot Mirror
Wii 'Popularity Bubble' to Burst?
A combination of industry and developer observations has prompted Tech.co.uk to wonder if the Wii's overwhelming popularity is due to end sometime soon. This is based on a report from Japanese business newspaper The Nikkei, which published an article recently entitled 'Software Houses Miscalculate Audience, Demand For Wii'. "The report goes on to discuss the likelihood that many Wiis are gathering dust in owners' cupboards, citing one software house president as saying, 'People bought it out of curiosity, and it's likely a lot of them haven't used it.' Given that September saw Wii sales fall sharply in Japan for the second consecutive month, it seems reasonable to speculate that the bubble inflated by the novelty factor is starting to deflate, but writing Nintendo off at any stage is a perilous course to steer." Is this just worrying, or is there validity to this?
With all the heavy hitters that Wii has lined up in the next few months, one can only conclude that this article is BS. I bet these are the same 'analysts' who predicted that Nintendo would remain a distant third last year at about this time. They were wrong then and they're wrong now.
In the months leading up to the release of Halo 3, XBox 360s dropped and dropped in monthly sales.
In the months leading up to the release of [Super Mario Galaxy], [Wiis] dropped and dropped in monthly sales.
Not to say the Wii's popularity isn't dropping, I just think it's too early to draw a definitive conclusion here.
Bored and worried about saving for Christmas, would be more correct. While I'm still excited about the wii, I'm also sitting around waiting for the new mario Galaxy game to be released. I finished beating Zelda, never was too fond of 1st person shooters (Metroid Prime) and so am left with a small gap until the holiday season allows my game spending budget to pick up another game or two. Since I only buy a few games a year, I don't take changes. When Brawl and Galaxy come out, I'll buy. Since Nintendo has cultivated a mostly Non-hardcore gamer market, the majority of their customers are only going to buy the AAA titles because that's what they hear about in the media. Most of those will be released in the coming months.
There's a couple things at work for the Wii here I think. First off, the supply of games has been a bit slow, likely due to miscalculations by lots of developers not expecting the Wii to take off the way it did. But on the other hand, the PS3 doesn't have a huge flood of games either, and it more hype than I'd ever seen. It's still early in the lives of both consoles.
Second, Nintendo's "casual gamer" idea seems to really be happening, and the usage patterns of a "casual" hobbiest(is that a word?) are irregular and can leave a console sitting idle. My tennis racket has been sitting untouched in the garage for a couple years, but that doesn't mean that I don't like tennis or that tennis isn't popular. It means that I don't have time to play tennis anymore.
And third, sort of connected to the casual gamer deal, a good number of the games that are out are geared towards more casual and social play, so it's difficult for a hardcore gamer to sit down and spend entire days playing it.
From the point of view of a traditional hardcore gamer, those three things might look pretty discouraging for the Wii. But what Nintendo has discovered is that to have a successful console, it's not really necessary to give that sort of gamer everything they want. A couple months of sales fluctuations to not make a trend, and it seems silly to try and figure that sort of stuff out right now, when the big christmas season is right around the corner.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
First time I played Zelda TP I couldn't stop thinking how much it was like Metroid Prime except in third person...
That's really the only difference other then story between them. Weapon upgrades, new items to access new locations you couldn't get to before, beat a big boss to get new items/power ups. I know lots of anti-FPS people that love Metriod Prime because it's more of a platformer then a shooter.
And constantly shooting at things is a terrible argument, ever play Xevious? That wasn't first person
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
"February != the Christmas season."
/.'s html formatting is so much different than php forum formatting...)
Smash Bros wasn't the only anticipated game release this Q4 though
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_Galaxy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil:_The_Umbrella_Chronicles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guitar_Hero_III:_Legends_of_Rock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LEGO_Star_Wars:_The_Complete_Saga
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_Emblem:_Radiant_Dawn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Squad
(Ugh...
There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
Hope it does mean more availability. Three of my work colleagues have been hunting for one to no avail. Oh yeah: That's an attorney (male, 45 y.o.), an accountant (mid-30's, female) and an IT guy (mid-20's hardcore gamer).
This little box has a lot of broad appeal. Mine? No dust. Had it since January and still play it 4 or 5 hours a week, but only because I don't have more time. Beat Zelda, finished Paper Mario, almost done with RE4. Metroid is next. Also, I keep coming back to Tiger Woods. But my wife and I honestly get the most replay value out of bowling, billiards and tennis. I'll admit there aren't too many other titles out there I'm itching to play at the moment, but I've got such value out of the ones I've picked (with IGN's help) that I am happy to wait for the pipeline to get going.
Others have said it, I'll concur: graphics be damned. If the games make you smile, people will line up for them.
Insert witty comment *here*. I'm fresh out of wit...
This is the problem with purists: endless classifications that serve no real purpose except to exclude. Classifications do this automatically -- of course -- and some are valid -- of course! -- but when it comes down to an absurd pissing contest about who can be the most pure on a particular subject, you have to ask if there isn't something wrong.
I see this in music all the time. You get "purists" who believe that it's somehow helpful to have jazz fusion and Indo-jazz fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion fuzz-pop. The same with games. Is it a first person shooter? I don't know; is it in the first person, and do you spend a lot of time shooting? The answer to this question seems pretty straight-forward.
Of course now some purist purist is going to come along and tell me why it's important that purists constantly and consciously engage in follicle division, and why there are seven kinds of purists, and this is their genus, et cetera. You know what? We're not 19th century scientists any more. Not everything needs a rigorous classification system.
What is is all that is. Isn't that obvious?
I know I personally really wanted a Wii when it first came out. I attempted to find one for a few months after (3 or so) and when it was still 4-5 months later and there were still none on the shelf, I simply just lost interest. It's one thing to hold back a bit to create demand, it's entirely another to not make sales because you can't meet demand (or you don't want to meet demand to give the illusion of excessive demand). I recently checked at a local store the other day in Toronto (almost a year since it was released) and they still don't have any on the shelf. Pretty lame if you ask me, they definitely lost at least one sale there with me...