The Wii's attach rate is higher than the PS3's, and comparable to the 360 at this point in its life. I own about a dozen Wii games, and three PS3 games. The Wii's games library could be better, but it's definitely not as bad as people make it out to be.
Before E3 06, I was expecting Nintendo to do slightly better than with the Cube. I was hoping that they could achieve 20-30% of the market, but I didn't really expect it.
After E3 06, I was starting to think that Nintendo might just win this generation, i.e. outsell the other two manufacturers. But I never thought it would be a success of this magnitude.
Penny Arcade thinks the site is a joke (here's the comic), and I tend to agree. While I've seen some truly idiotic crap from fans of a particular console manufacturer, this is beyond everything I've ever seen before. It can't be real. The writer is either bat-shit insane, or joking. Occam's razor suggests that explanation 2 is probably true:-)
Do you seriously think the millions of people who bought Halo 2 don't find it fun at all?
No. I do, however, think that Halo's main success reason is not that it's a fun game (and I don't deny this - it clearly is a fun game; in fact, I used to play its predecessors, the Marathon games, when I was in the target audience age group), but that it appeals to people who want to compete. It appeals to adolescent boys' urge to measure their strength against their peers. I think many people play games like Halo mainly to prove their skills.
I believe games like Halo are mainly played to improve the rank in the leaderboard, not do have fun. Otherwise, why would people care so much aber Gamerscores and Achievements and what not?
"Fun" is relative, period. A lot of people are having "fun" on their PS2. More than on all the other current-gen consoles combined, by far. So, what's been "long-forgotten" again?
GP is right. Look at the box of a Philips Videopac (Magnavox Odyssey in the US, I think). It shows a family having fun while playing games on a TV. Go a few years forward. What's on the box of the Turbografx? Graphics from a shooter. Between the SNES and the PS2, graphics have been the main selling point for consoles. Console X can push Y trillion triangles at Z FPS. Look at the ads for the consoles. Do they emphasize fun? No, they emphasize technology.
Now look at the ads for the Wii. It's just people having fun. We've come full circle: Technology isn't so important anymore. Fun is. Technology is the PS3 and 360's selling point. Fun is the Wii's selling point. That's why the Wii is selling better.
Oh, one other point about Prime 3: This is a totally different game from the first two titles, and obviously a totally different game from the 2D games. The first two Primes were adventure games. The third is much more of an FPS.
I know a LOT of people who bought a Wii without having a clue about ANY games on it
I do not believe that this is true. I would bet that they at least knew about Wii Sports. Which is the system seller on the Wii. Games absolutely sell consoles, and the Wii is proof.
Anyway, 360 also has Oblivion and Bioshock. Mind you, these games are also like a million times better than anything on Wii except Zelda
That's nice, but I'd rather play Mario Party 8 and Wii Sports than Oblivion. Most of the time, I don't play games alone, but when friends are over. So "a million times better" may be true for you, but sales seem to indicate that a lot of people feel differently.
I do own a PS3, and Warhawk is an awesome multiplayer title, but all in all, the Wii is the best console (as in: has the best selection of games - like "a million times better") if you play local multiplayer games.
Wii games look awesome on my HD beamer using component cables. Yeah, not as good as PS3 games by far, but definitely not "like crap." In fact, playing stuff like Sonic is an astonishing experience even to people who own 360s or PS3s.
Actually, Nintendo is targetting a very large group of people will their games, not only children. See stuff like Wii Fitness. That's not something for children. Bowling? Children aren't generally into bowling.
The company targetting the narrowest audience is Microsoft: They're basically targetting the 12-17 hardcore (online FPS/car racer) market. Their attempts to break out of this market with stuff like Viva Piñata has failed so far.
Sony is in a better position to challenge Nintendo. Sony hat least has franchises like Singstar, which do target a wider market.
What's most astonishing is how well the NES/SNES era games have held up compared to the PS1 games. I own both a Wii and a PS3, and I've bought a ton of VC games on the Wii, and quite a few PS1 games on the PSN Store. Frankly, most PS1 games are unplayable by today's standards. The only one I play regularly is Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, and guess what: That game is 2D.
Other PS1 games I've bought - which I used to love - I wasn't able to endure for more than a few minutes. Cool Boarders used to be one of my favorite PS1 games. I have no idea what I was thinking back then: I think it must be one of the worst games I've played in my entire life. Even true PS1 classics like Wipeout just don't hold up anymore.
More interestingly, the N64 games seem to be faring somewhat better. The Zelda games, Starfox or Mario Kart are still a lot of fun to play... Comparing F-Zero 64 to Wipeout is an eye-opening experience. I think Sony must have put us under some kind of spell back then. Otherwise, I have no explanation for why we used to think these games were competing on the same level.
You're probably thinking of Warcraft 2. But, as somebody else has said, other RTS were available before them. That is not to say that Warcraft wasn't revolutionary, though.
That would be okay for non-public places; I don't particularly want my living room to be featured in a shooter. But the game plays where it plays, which is a real place, and the church is open to the public, so why the hell should the church in the game not look like the real church?
The first two on my mind were Gateway and Dell. I'm pretty sure Dell used to only sell through their online store; but I'm not sure they still do that. Gateway used to have their own stores, but I think they also sold through other retailers at the same time.
Apple always did that. In fact, when they started out, they had neither an online store nor their own stores, so they only sold through third-party retailers.
I have no idea how it is intended to work. I've never tried to cheat Apple. I told them what happened, they fixed it.
As far as Nintendo is concerned, over here where I live, some other company handles importing and support of Nintendo's hardware, and they're pretty crappy:-(
In fact, in recent years Apple has disallowed third-party sales of new Apple systems for various reasons, including the price fluctuations that occur.
(...)
The only way to purchase a new Mac computer is through Apple Online or an Apple Store...
WTF are you talking about? Where I live, we have dozens of Apple resellers. No Apple store, though. Even normal electronics stores and some upscale grociery stores sell Apple systems. New ones, by the way.
That actually comes from experience of going to an Apple store in London and also knowing someone who runs a shop and therefore the price of obtaining these things from the manufacturer.
So you're saying that you think the markup on Apple's products is high because you know somebody who runs an Apple shop who told you that he has high margins on Apple's products? The term "pants on fire" comes to mind, considering that resellers have been complaining about the low margins on Apple's products for years.
Apple does usually have margins in the 20-35% area, but the resellers don't see anything like this, and Apple's margins are so high because Apple generally doesn't pay for software (such as Windows). In fact, Apple's products aren't really more expensive than comparable products from companies like Creative or Dell.
I just wanted to add to your praise of AppleCare. It's more of an insurance than a guarantee, really. I broke a PowerBook taking it apart (don't ask). Called them on the last day of my AppleCare year. They fixed it for free, and also replaced the slightly scratched bezel.
My friend broke the screen of his iBook which he had in a backpack while skateboarding. Free replacement from Apple. My brother broke his iPod in a biking accident. Apple replaced it free of charge. A friend of mine stumbled over a pre-mag-save PowerBook cable and the cable ripped out of the plug. Apple sent me a new charger, no questions asked.
I would tell anyone to extend AppleCare to three years for portable devices. If anything happens, Apple will fix it.
I used to be extremely careful with screens and such, and I always got annoyed when they scratched, but some time ago my mum told me "you know, you buy this stuff to use it, not to look at it," and that helped me get over it:-)
I do have a screen protector on my PSP; not only because of scratches, but also because it is so glossy that it's hard to see anything at all in bright sunlight, and the screen protector has some anti-reflection coating. I also generally use screen protectors for screens which are used with pens, because I have found that dust + pen can lead to really deep, highly visible scratches. Other than that, I don't bother. After all, I buy this stuff to use it, not to look at it:-)
Come on. This is starting to become ridiculous. PA is an equal-opportunity hate site. They complain about everything that sucks, but they also have the balls to say if something is good, even if general consensus disagrees. In all the years of reading them, I've never felt that they are prefer any console or manufacturer.
You can buy an iPod Radio Remote from Apple. As the name implies, it also contains a radio. Doesn't work with the iPhone, though - I guess that's just a question of time, though.
Scratched Screens don't seem to be an issue with the iPhones. I think the early Nanos were pretty bad (I don't know as I cut up a Palm screen protector and put it on my Nano Screen), but the newer metal Nanos seem fine (no scratches on mine, and I just put it in my pocket).
Generally, It would probably be a good idea to use some kind of small case or glove if you value your screens:-)
But is that 25%-35% on retail or retail+10% of the carrier contract?
Apple's hardware sales margins are typically 25%-35%, as per their financial reports. I would guess that applies to the iPhone, too, and whatever additional money they get from AT&T is on top of the hardware margins.
So yeah, I think Apple makes money on the iPhones even if people get out of their AT&T contracts early.
Slashdot Mirror
Talk about self-fulfilling prophecies :-)
The Wii's attach rate is higher than the PS3's, and comparable to the 360 at this point in its life. I own about a dozen Wii games, and three PS3 games. The Wii's games library could be better, but it's definitely not as bad as people make it out to be.
Before E3 06, I was expecting Nintendo to do slightly better than with the Cube. I was hoping that they could achieve 20-30% of the market, but I didn't really expect it.
After E3 06, I was starting to think that Nintendo might just win this generation, i.e. outsell the other two manufacturers. But I never thought it would be a success of this magnitude.
Penny Arcade thinks the site is a joke (here's the comic), and I tend to agree. While I've seen some truly idiotic crap from fans of a particular console manufacturer, this is beyond everything I've ever seen before. It can't be real. The writer is either bat-shit insane, or joking. Occam's razor suggests that explanation 2 is probably true :-)
No. I do, however, think that Halo's main success reason is not that it's a fun game (and I don't deny this - it clearly is a fun game; in fact, I used to play its predecessors, the Marathon games, when I was in the target audience age group), but that it appeals to people who want to compete. It appeals to adolescent boys' urge to measure their strength against their peers. I think many people play games like Halo mainly to prove their skills.
I believe games like Halo are mainly played to improve the rank in the leaderboard, not do have fun. Otherwise, why would people care so much aber Gamerscores and Achievements and what not?
GP is right. Look at the box of a Philips Videopac (Magnavox Odyssey in the US, I think). It shows a family having fun while playing games on a TV. Go a few years forward. What's on the box of the Turbografx? Graphics from a shooter. Between the SNES and the PS2, graphics have been the main selling point for consoles. Console X can push Y trillion triangles at Z FPS. Look at the ads for the consoles. Do they emphasize fun? No, they emphasize technology.
Now look at the ads for the Wii. It's just people having fun. We've come full circle: Technology isn't so important anymore. Fun is. Technology is the PS3 and 360's selling point. Fun is the Wii's selling point. That's why the Wii is selling better.
Oh, one other point about Prime 3: This is a totally different game from the first two titles, and obviously a totally different game from the 2D games. The first two Primes were adventure games. The third is much more of an FPS.
I do not believe that this is true. I would bet that they at least knew about Wii Sports. Which is the system seller on the Wii. Games absolutely sell consoles, and the Wii is proof.
That's nice, but I'd rather play Mario Party 8 and Wii Sports than Oblivion. Most of the time, I don't play games alone, but when friends are over. So "a million times better" may be true for you, but sales seem to indicate that a lot of people feel differently.
I do own a PS3, and Warhawk is an awesome multiplayer title, but all in all, the Wii is the best console (as in: has the best selection of games - like "a million times better") if you play local multiplayer games.
Games do sell consoles. The Wii is selling because it has Wii Sports.
Wii games look awesome on my HD beamer using component cables. Yeah, not as good as PS3 games by far, but definitely not "like crap." In fact, playing stuff like Sonic is an astonishing experience even to people who own 360s or PS3s.
So yeah, the graphics are not ugly.
Actually, Nintendo is targetting a very large group of people will their games, not only children. See stuff like Wii Fitness. That's not something for children. Bowling? Children aren't generally into bowling.
The company targetting the narrowest audience is Microsoft: They're basically targetting the 12-17 hardcore (online FPS/car racer) market. Their attempts to break out of this market with stuff like Viva Piñata has failed so far.
Sony is in a better position to challenge Nintendo. Sony hat least has franchises like Singstar, which do target a wider market.
What's most astonishing is how well the NES/SNES era games have held up compared to the PS1 games. I own both a Wii and a PS3, and I've bought a ton of VC games on the Wii, and quite a few PS1 games on the PSN Store. Frankly, most PS1 games are unplayable by today's standards. The only one I play regularly is Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, and guess what: That game is 2D.
Other PS1 games I've bought - which I used to love - I wasn't able to endure for more than a few minutes. Cool Boarders used to be one of my favorite PS1 games. I have no idea what I was thinking back then: I think it must be one of the worst games I've played in my entire life. Even true PS1 classics like Wipeout just don't hold up anymore.
More interestingly, the N64 games seem to be faring somewhat better. The Zelda games, Starfox or Mario Kart are still a lot of fun to play... Comparing F-Zero 64 to Wipeout is an eye-opening experience. I think Sony must have put us under some kind of spell back then. Otherwise, I have no explanation for why we used to think these games were competing on the same level.
No.
C&C: 1995.
Warcraft: 1994.
You're probably thinking of Warcraft 2. But, as somebody else has said, other RTS were available before them. That is not to say that Warcraft wasn't revolutionary, though.
That would be okay for non-public places; I don't particularly want my living room to be featured in a shooter. But the game plays where it plays, which is a real place, and the church is open to the public, so why the hell should the church in the game not look like the real church?
The first two on my mind were Gateway and Dell. I'm pretty sure Dell used to only sell through their online store; but I'm not sure they still do that. Gateway used to have their own stores, but I think they also sold through other retailers at the same time.
Apple always did that. In fact, when they started out, they had neither an online store nor their own stores, so they only sold through third-party retailers.
I have no idea how it is intended to work. I've never tried to cheat Apple. I told them what happened, they fixed it.
:-(
As far as Nintendo is concerned, over here where I live, some other company handles importing and support of Nintendo's hardware, and they're pretty crappy
(...)
The only way to purchase a new Mac computer is through Apple Online or an Apple Store...
WTF are you talking about? Where I live, we have dozens of Apple resellers. No Apple store, though. Even normal electronics stores and some upscale grociery stores sell Apple systems. New ones, by the way.
Do you have any sources for your absurd claims?
So you're saying that you think the markup on Apple's products is high because you know somebody who runs an Apple shop who told you that he has high margins on Apple's products? The term "pants on fire" comes to mind, considering that resellers have been complaining about the low margins on Apple's products for years.
Apple does usually have margins in the 20-35% area, but the resellers don't see anything like this, and Apple's margins are so high because Apple generally doesn't pay for software (such as Windows). In fact, Apple's products aren't really more expensive than comparable products from companies like Creative or Dell.
I just wanted to add to your praise of AppleCare. It's more of an insurance than a guarantee, really. I broke a PowerBook taking it apart (don't ask). Called them on the last day of my AppleCare year. They fixed it for free, and also replaced the slightly scratched bezel.
My friend broke the screen of his iBook which he had in a backpack while skateboarding. Free replacement from Apple. My brother broke his iPod in a biking accident. Apple replaced it free of charge. A friend of mine stumbled over a pre-mag-save PowerBook cable and the cable ripped out of the plug. Apple sent me a new charger, no questions asked.
I would tell anyone to extend AppleCare to three years for portable devices. If anything happens, Apple will fix it.
I used to be extremely careful with screens and such, and I always got annoyed when they scratched, but some time ago my mum told me "you know, you buy this stuff to use it, not to look at it," and that helped me get over it :-)
:-)
I do have a screen protector on my PSP; not only because of scratches, but also because it is so glossy that it's hard to see anything at all in bright sunlight, and the screen protector has some anti-reflection coating. I also generally use screen protectors for screens which are used with pens, because I have found that dust + pen can lead to really deep, highly visible scratches. Other than that, I don't bother. After all, I buy this stuff to use it, not to look at it
Come on. This is starting to become ridiculous. PA is an equal-opportunity hate site. They complain about everything that sucks, but they also have the balls to say if something is good, even if general consensus disagrees. In all the years of reading them, I've never felt that they are prefer any console or manufacturer.
Penny Arcade. Next you'll be saying Bill Gates personally drew the comic, huh?
You can buy an iPod Radio Remote from Apple. As the name implies, it also contains a radio. Doesn't work with the iPhone, though - I guess that's just a question of time, though.
:-)
Scratched Screens don't seem to be an issue with the iPhones. I think the early Nanos were pretty bad (I don't know as I cut up a Palm screen protector and put it on my Nano Screen), but the newer metal Nanos seem fine (no scratches on mine, and I just put it in my pocket).
Generally, It would probably be a good idea to use some kind of small case or glove if you value your screens
You would probably want to use the headphone remote to control the iPod when it's in your pocket.
Apple's hardware sales margins are typically 25%-35%, as per their financial reports. I would guess that applies to the iPhone, too, and whatever additional money they get from AT&T is on top of the hardware margins.
So yeah, I think Apple makes money on the iPhones even if people get out of their AT&T contracts early.