Slashdot Mirror
Wii Is the New US Console Leader
stoolpigeon writes with this snippet from an AFP story carried by Google: "Nintendo said Thursday that its globally popular Wii has become the top-selling video game console in the United States, a crown coveted by rivals Microsoft and Sony. Market-tracking firm NPD Group reports that 666,000 Wii consoles were sold in the United States in June, raising the total sales count in the country to nearly 10.9 million units." I'd rather play board games than video games, but the Wii Fit makes one of these tempting anyhow.
This, combined with the popularity of the Nintendo DS, should be proof enough that normal people want to play games, not brag about their system's capabilities.
I'm not trying to troll, not at all--I own a Wii and no other current-generation consoles.
But where's the games! The Wii has so much potential, with its unique controller, and yet, I find so few games interested in playing.
I don't care about top-notch graphics. If I want that, I'll play my PC. What I do want are actual quality games instead of more shovelware. Where are they?
I wonder how many of these sales are due to people playing Wii Sports alone? I'm rather underwhelmed at the Wii's selection...
Oh, andoOnline gaming especially is important to me, and they really dropped the ball on Super Smash Bros. Brawl--the online is terrible, something reminiscent of 56k gaming, almost, just with better graphics. I haven't played the Wii's iteration of Mario Kart, which I probably should rent, but I have a feeling it's not much better (although, feel free to enlighten me on this).
How to get a Wii
1) Call local electronics retailer and obtain "truck days"
2) Call every "truck day" and inquire about availability
3) SPEED to store upon conformation of arrival
Took me two months, but persistence pays off
The June sales for the PS3 are likely due to the release of MGS4, and the MGS4/PS3 bundle. A similar effect occurred after Halo 3's release (with regards to the 360).
So you've got a PS3 and a Wii. What was the problem again?
I'd rather play board games than video games, but the Wii Fit makes one of these tempting anyhow.
Since when are these things mutually exclusive? You can have both, play both, and enjoy both. There are even video games based on board games and board games based on video games. Computer solitaire is popular because there are many options and rulesets that expand the games for veteran players; and for casual players, you don't have to find your deck of cards or shuffle them or pick them up, it's pretty much all automatic. You can even minimize the window and walk away a lot more easily and effectively than asking everyone to mind those cards on the table. Online board games let you find a partner right away, which allows you more opportunities to enjoy your favorite games. When board games start coming out on paper that uses electronic ink, the distinction between video games and board games will pretty much disappear.
Twinstiq, game news
Nintendo is brilliant for turning their backs on the gamers that supported them for decades and designing games for grandma.
They owe no loyalty to anyone. They're a company and they exist to make money. As it stands, they're doing that. Also, I'd say it's not really that they've turned their backs -- the games aren't much different from the goofy stuff from the N64 or GC days. They just lost a lot of third party support after the GC took such a beating by the PS2, and haven't regained that. Their inhouse games -- Mario, Zelda, Metroid -- are still good. (Actually, I liked this generation Zelda *more* than I liked any since the SNES.)
They're also brilliant for releasing a "next gen" console with last gen hardware specs for 250.
Yeah, how *dare* they not be just like their competitors and offer something different and affordable.
And it works great because grandma and grandpa have no clue about how graphics or processing power can improve their gaming experience.
Yeah because games *sucked* until this generation. Just out of curiosity -- how old are you? Anyone who has been a Nintendo fan "for decades" remembers 8-bit shit graphics.
Means they make raw profit on every machine sold
They don't have a choice. They're not part of a massive conglomerate that can subsidize their gaming unit until it comes out of the red -- they have to make money on hardware sales.
Hell, even of the more regular gamers I know, they have wii's for two games only. Mario and Smash.
Metroid, Zelda, Mario Kart? Basically the other three in the five series' that have been Nintendo staples (and some of the only games worth playing that were exclusive to Nintendo) since the N64 days? (Okay, so no Metroid then... but the other four, yes.)
So, for third party developers, it's still better to make titles for a PS3 or 360.
Yeah, ignoring the leader by miles -- great strategy. They should make PSP games, too, and not DS games -- right? So what if it wins?
The reason the Wii isn't doing well with third party? They lost a lot of support over the previous two generations -- their fault, given the way they behaved toward developers in the past -- and nobody had anything big planned for the Wii. Then it took off and developers are either pushing out crap or working on something decent, or quietly praying the other two catch up.
free market
I am so sick and tired of hearing that as if it was supposed to be the solution to all problems. first Nintendo has "ramped up" production more than you could demand of them, getting the whole supply chain to "ramp up" production is not easy. Second the free market is handling the demand, becuse of free market you can find them on ebay for twice as much. And in america there may be a shortage becuse of the dollar's low value but nothing is stopping you from importing from EU.
preview button, my computer does't have any preview button
So... what saved it was games that were available on other consoles first?
The Wii is a platform with so much potential and its all just being squandered away.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
The hardcore gamers will decide? Let me break it to you, there are a lot more people out there who are looking at gaming because of the Wii than there are hardcore gamers. The console wars will soon be swung by these people. True "hardcore" gamers don't play on a console anyway, that's what PCs are for.
-- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
One of the underlieing assumptions of the Invisible Hand is that a rise in price will immediately bring production up to a new equilibrium. Of course, this is really an abstraction that makes the thought experiment work; in the real world, Nintendo can't immediately increase production to meet increased demand, because it takes time to build new manufacturing facilities. It's also not worthwhile to invest in new facilities to serve a short-term spike. Big investments like that have to pay off for the long haul. Since it was expected that the Wii would start making demand last spring, it wasn't worth too much effort to increase manufacturing rates. (I suspect WiiFit created a new demand spike which threw off that prediction.)
So if they can't meet demand, the Invisible Hand says they should increase the cost. This pads their profit margin, allowing them to reinvest into building facilities to build more Wiis, and then sell later at a cheaper price when manufacturing ramps up. This is also the best strategy for retailers (even if they were a monopoly), since it pads their margins just as much. So why hasn't this happened?
Nintendo has a long term need to maintain its brand image. If it sold the Wii at $300 or more (which is where the eBay price suggests the equilibrium price is at), it would be competing around the same price point as the XBox 360. Since the Wii is (let's face it) less powerful than the 360, many would perceive this as evil price gouging. At launch, the 360 was already considered too expensive (though many considered it cheep when the PS3's price was announced). Brand perception may be more important than a short term profit increase.
Not a typewriter
I can't tell if you are joking or are serious, but since there are people who actually think the way you do, I will respond to your points for their sake and hope you aren't too offended if this was just sarcasm.
What I wonder is why the free market isn't able to meet Wii console demand. Under the normal conditions the price would rise to reduce the demand until there are some units sitting on the shelves because they are too expensive, after which the manufacturer would increase the supply and lower the prices while still keeping supply-demand in equillibrium.
There are numerous examples of products throughout the years that were both cheap and sold out. The reason the companys making them didn't raise the prices as you descibe is because this would create ill will with their customer base and likely cost them in the long run. This isn't to say however that the free market doesn't respond as you describe its just not Nintendo or the retailers who have binding agreements with Nintendo that are letting the market find the price - its places like ebay; anyone who wants a wii could have one immediately if they are willing to pay the current going rate on auction sites.
Since none of this is happening, I suspect the monopolist manufacturer manipulates the prices and supply such that there is an artificial shortage
While Nintendo has a "monopoly" on manufacturing wii's, its makes as much sense to call it a monopoly as it would to call Apple a monopoly for being the only one making Macs; they both are products in a larger marketplace, and customers have plenty of other choices.
either to 1) undercut the competitors by keeping the prices too low,
All evidence is that Nintendo is the only game manufacturer unwilling to sell hardware at a loss. This is completely contradictory to your statement. Further it is not illegal or unethical to sell a product that everyone knows has cheaper components (than its competitors) for a cheaper price.
2) to generate hype by the perceived scarcity of the resource: "hey, if these consoles are so popular I gotta get me some" (which counts as false advertizing)
While its not impossible that Nintendo has done this, don't you think its a bit idiotic to accuse Nintendo of purposefully creating shortages in a discussion that began with the title "Wii is the New US Console Leader". (doubly so when that now make the wii the leader in every region)
Monopolists need to be fined or broken up!
Sure, but what does that have to do with Nintendo?
The weak dollar is part of it, but what it really amounts to is that Europeans are willing to pay more for it. Use the current exchange rate and compare the Euro prices to the dollar prices. They are much higher. Europeans who are buying the Wii could buy more American entertainment (measured in nominal currency) than they are getting with the Wii, but they obviously prefer the Wii.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
...and yet, third party developers insist that all Wii owners are 4 year old girls, so they shove games like "Party Chef" down our throats and then complain when no one buys that garbage. Just look at what Electronic Arts has done with their "All Play" series. NCAA football 09 is an absolute abomination with no online play, phony stadiums, and graphics so bad, they make the PS2 version look like the 360! Tecmo Bowl has more advanced gameplay!
Software developers just don't get it... they don't get what casual gaming is about... it's not about kiddie games... it's about games that you don't need to spend weeks of your life playing to get anywhere... that doesn't mean that the games should be lame... quite the opposite, since we play less often, we want our games to be more meaningful and rewarding.
Nintendo gets it... that's why their games sell... everyone else? Not so much!
A couple years ago, E3 was downsized. It's no longer that important anymore. E3 is now basically a little press event, where Nintendo will mostly show and announce casual gaming stuff. The 'real stuff' will be at Tokyo Games Show and other similar shows.
Also, hardcore gamers haven't decided the fate of the console wars anymore since the days of the PSX.
Nintendo is brilliant for turning their backs on the gamers that supported them for decades and designing games for grandma
I'm one of the gamers that supported Nintendo for decades. Guess what? I don't have time to play hardcore games. I don't have an XBox or a 360, don't have a PS3 or a PS2. But I love an hour or two of Mario Kart or Wii Play or Boom Blox with my kids.
And in fact, the game that's had most play in my house this weekend has been Goldeneye, on our N64.
So have Nintendo turned their backs on me? Um, no. They've worked out a way to create and sell new games to me. Have they stolen back from a losing position in the last console generation, to eat Sony's and Microsoft's lunches, by redefining console gaming and finding a new and much larger group of gamers? Yes, in fact. Are you a sad loser who can't deal with the fact that Nintendo have revolutionized gaming by opening it up to this new group, people who would never have bought a console before the Wii? Well, it kind of looks that way.
After the poor show at E3, I'm starting to doubt whether Nintendo can hold on to its lead for much longer.
Nintendo's E3 was pretty poor, but Sony and Microsoft's weren't phenomenal either.
They like to think that it's the casual games selling Wiis, but the AAA titles are what the hardcore gamers want - and it's the hardcore gamers who'll decide the outcome of the console wars.
You can keep telling yourself that. Microsoft know better. How many new casual games did they announce at E3? Singstar, Buzz AND Eyetoy clones I believe they were. They still need to reduce the price before there is any significant casual adoption however.
if we don't end up sliding into another great depression
Bush ran every other company he managed to the ground, I don't know why people thought he could manage an entire country.
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
You are wrong on so many levels.
Legacy: The PC has been around for a very long time with constant upgrades and is still fully backward compatible with even the earliest games.
Library: The PC has the largest library of games compared to any console. If you think there weren't tons of games for PC before the Playstation, you are either very young or just ignorant. In fact some of the best video games ever made were released on the PC in the time before the Playstation. With PC games you can also create or download updates, modifications, total conversions or entire games, many of them for free. Free games or mods on a console? That's just laughable.
Multiplayer: The PC had networked multiplayer games long before any console did and provided the basis for all network code and gameplay used in games today. While console gamers were still taking turns playing Super Mario or Sonic the Hedgehog, PC gamers were playing Doom and Descent together.
Sound: The PC introduced digital sound and FM synthesis to gaming. While console gamers were listening to the simplistic triangle wave music and beeping sounds, the PC had much richer sounding FM synth and speech.
Graphics: The PC has always been in the lead here and was responsible for introducing photorealistic graphics and 3D video games. While consoles could display a mere 16 colours simultaneously, PC gamers regularly played games using 256 or thousands of colours.
Controls: The PC has had a lot more options for game controllers than any console. Keyboards, mice, joysticks, gamepads, flight sticks/yokes, racing wheels and many other unique controllers. While consoles only offered a digital gamepad, the PC had analogue joysticks for precision movements long before they became popular on consoles.
The PC isn't just a gaming platform, it's a gaming platform and much more.
Nope. Not weird. Life in the U.S. has been a nightmare under this regime. It's totally natural to express this.
Granted, it's tangential to the story, but parent was referring to the current economic crisis. And, yes, you can "blame-Bush" for this grand laissez-faire experiment.
So if they can't meet demand, the Invisible Hand says they should increase the cost. This pads their profit margin, allowing them to reinvest into building facilities to build more Wiis, and then sell later at a cheaper price when manufacturing ramps up. This is also the best strategy for retailers (even if they were a monopoly), since it pads their margins just as much. So why hasn't this happened?
Also, another thing that would damage it's image is the fact that no video game console has ever seen an increase in price by the company making it. It would be absolutely unprecedented (at least since the age of the original NES, as i didn't check further back), and Nintendo fanboys would be howling in anger about it.
It would build a whole lot of goodwill from the customers, provide an incentive for them to shop there instead of a competitor, and might even give them a bit of leverage to get more shipments from Nintendo if the can say we have a waiting list of X customers. And even if they can't, as a customer if I was looking for one and I go to a store that says 'No we have no stock. You can come by next shipment and try your luck', and then go to a different store that says 'No we have no stock, but we can put you on a list and you will get one in X weeks', I wouldn't be coming back to the first store, even if there was a possibility of getting one earlier.
The Wii doing well reminds me of how the C64 came into the game with vastly inferior hardware that "anyone could use" at a lower price point. I believe they sold more than any other machine at that time (maybe even now).
Have a few fun games, make it easy enough to use, make it cheap enough and people will buy it. Those old school Tiger LED games like "soccer" and whatever else where you can't tell what's going on and random crap lights up would be a huge seller if any of the games were actually playable.
You've put it well. I would like to add: this isn't A Corner in Wheat for heaven's sake. Nintendo has to meet the demand for new Wii systems, not the free market. There is no free market for Wiis. There is Nintendo, Nintendo's factories and the stores that carry Wiis. For the monopoly statement to have any weight at all, we'd have to be talking about a commodity.
The OP seems to expect Nintendo to:
1. Sell units at a loss, forcing everyone else out of the market
2. Create artificial shortage to drive prices up, and then
3. Keep charging the same price
Which is dumb, even for a conspiracy theory posted on Slashdot. In fact, it's so dumb that I'm going to have to assume it's actually true.
The rumour is that Nintendo are reluctant to ship stuff to the US 'cos they don't want to get paid in USD.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
No, it says the can sell it for more, not that they should.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
The fact that in the US the units are NTSC and in Europe the units are PAL would stop you. Not because any TV/Receiver can't handle both signals, but because having a PAL system makes it mandatory to either crack it (chip) or to import PAL titles at 45-70 Euros a pop henceforth.
Not many Americans would like to dance to that tune, now would they?
nothing is stopping you from importing from EU.
Other than the fact that Wii (NTSC U/C) consoles aren't sold in EU? Unlike PLAYSTATION 3, Wii games are region locked.