He sounds quite optimistic for Wii. Interesting Interview coming from what I would consider one of the most business savvy developers in the industry.
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=66077&page=1
EA Interview "Challenge Everything"
- Thread starter TheChefO
- Start date
He sounds quite optimistic for Wii. Interesting Interview coming from what I would consider one of the most business savvy developers in the industry.
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=66077&page=1
That's just the thing. Having one console maker dominate a third time around can only mean bad things for publishers like EA. It means they can't have thier way becuase they don't have the leverage. Evening out the playing field works to the video game makers advantage. they way the market was split before was too lop sided.
I think it's kind of a shame not all publishers around the world see it this way (I guess more specifically in japan) , since it in the end it benefits the consumer with choice and increases the opportunity to make money from multiple platforms.
I think it's kind of a shame not all publishers around the world see it this way (I guess more specifically in japan) , since it in the end it benefits the consumer with choice and increases the opportunity to make money from multiple platforms.
Powderkeg said:
Yes - he is pointing out that if they get 20% this gen that is a huge improvement over where they stood last gen. Consider all the factors:
1) They're launch period is the same as gc
2) They're launching at roughly the same price or possibly more
3) They're hardware (tech wise) is substantially inferior to their competition
4) The name of the system is very questionable (minor but still...)
With these issues being what they are if they gain marketshare this gen that would be triumphant. EA feels this is probable though. They feel Wii will get 20% and possibly even 33%. In fact, he also mentioned depending on exactly how well it does and how many people buy Wii as a secondary system because it is so different from 360 or ps3, they may come out on top all together.
I'd consider him optimistic for Wii.
I thought that interview as a whole was quite refreshing. Usually people in interviews, especially ones at that level of a large business, are very vague and you don't get much from it. I really hate when the person being interviewed skirts the issue and moves onto something else, but all the answers seemed pretty on topic and fair.
Nice to see he understands the benefit of competition too. A lot of people criticise EA for killing the industry and buying all the good IP up, but to see someone acknowledge that competition from the likes of T2 and Ubi is a good thing is...well a good thing
Agree about the 20% for Wii being a sign of optimism though, considering that Xbox and GC shared fairly evenly about 30% of the market last time round, 20% would be an improvement, even more so considering the different approach Nintendo have taken this time that may or may not pay off.
Nice to see he understands the benefit of competition too. A lot of people criticise EA for killing the industry and buying all the good IP up, but to see someone acknowledge that competition from the likes of T2 and Ubi is a good thing is...well a good thing
Agree about the 20% for Wii being a sign of optimism though, considering that Xbox and GC shared fairly evenly about 30% of the market last time round, 20% would be an improvement, even more so considering the different approach Nintendo have taken this time that may or may not pay off.
TheChefO said:
Gamecube made up around 14% of console sales IIRC. Even if we assume that replacement PS2s were a negligible part of the 100+ million sales, is a 6 point increase really all that huge of an improvement? Xbox moving from a 17% share to a 40% share would be huge.
Also...
1) Launching in November isn't a bad thing.
2) I don't see how that's a bad thing. It's more feature-rich than GC was. GC was some silicon with a very vanilla controller. Wii has BC, virtual console, WiFi, a unique controller, and on-board storage. A console is more than shader ALUs, you know. It's not like buying a new video card for your PC. $199 is a good price compared to $339 for X360+mem card or $499 for PS3. $249 is pushing it, I think. I hope Nintendo learned from GB Micro not to overprice hardware.
Also, you forgot one more thing: Wii has tons more positive hype going for it than Gamecube did. Gamecube had the reputation of "It's a purple lunchbox that probably isn't any more powerful than a PS2, has a library mostly of games that are also on PS2, and definitely nowhere near as powerful as the a-MAZ-ing Xbox." And then, later on, they added "And it will never, ever go online" to Gamecube's antihype train. Wii has gotten very, very little negative press. The only negative buzz it's gotten has been "The graphics aren't as good as X360 or PS3," but that's been tempered with "Yeah, but that's what we've pretty much been hearing." Now that'll crash and burn if the launch titles end up sucking and the online support is neglected by most developers. But right now, things are looking more positive than anyone rational expected just at last year's E3.
fearsomepirate said:
1) Launching a year after 360 as GC launched a year after ps2 is what I was refering to. This is basicaly the same so there is no reason to expect a marketshare gain from this is what my point was.
2) Again same as gc or worse - no reason to expect marketshare gain.
Combine those two factors along with a suspect name and a machine that is much lower spec than their competition and it spells marketshare contraction, not growth. Now factor in industry sentiment this gen vs last which you spoke of and which is brought up in this interview and you see a very positive trend for Wii. In spite of all the negatives Wii has going against it, the fact that most predict it to do well - better than GC and in fact possibly twice the marketshare GC had, it is quite remarkable and optimistic.
I'm all for them getting 33% marketshare and I'm happy to see EA feels the same way. Hopefully they put their money where their mouth is and support this puppy.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
fearsomepirate said:
Yeah.
What he said.
I can't believe anybody can read that interview and come away with anything other than the shock that the Xbox is going to gain another 23% of the market, more than double their market presence from a year ago.
Instead, the Wii gaining an additional 6% of the market is a big deal?
Whaaa? The story here is 1) The Xbox going form 17% to 40% and the 2) The PS going from 75% to 40%.
The profit margins on the PS3 would have to be HUGE for Sony to live with losing 35% of the market.
RancidLunchmeat said:
To me that's a given. Look at the market last gen vs this gen and you see that isn't a stretch but quite expected.
If ps3 were launched a year (and a half) ahead of 360 for $300 I'd say they havea great chance of walking away with the same marketshare they had with ps2. But things are obviously very different this gen for 360 v ps3. Sony is charging a lot more and tossing a lot more into the box and launching a year after 360. Obviously Sony has a lot of gamers on their side who will buy ps3 after pleasant experiences with ps2/1 and they have great marketing so with this saving grace I expect this gen to equate to a relative split between them.
In my opinion having EA confirm this stance internally in this interview while refreshing from an honesty point of view, I don't find it quite as surprising as his positive outlook for Wii.
While from a dramatic change point of view, yes it is quite stunning to think how much marketshare Sony will lose and how much MS will gain but this is to be expected from their relative trading of places in their actions this gen.
To think that Nintendo COULD take first this gen with a slight bump in HW and an innovative controller while going up against the relative monsters of ps3/360 is amazing to me.
TheChefO said:
Except that when the PS2 launched, there was no sense of "waiting for ___ to drop." It was simply "OMG OMG PS2 OMG OMG!!!!!" The Xbox was still pretty much a rumor, and a lot of people seemed to neither know nor care that Nintendo had another console in the works. No one was saying "Oh man, I'm going to hold off buying a PS2 so that I can play Bloodwake and Luigi's Mansion!" By the time Cube and Xbox dropped, PS2 was already seen as the definitive console in the marketplace. X360 simply does not enjoy that status. Buzz about PS3 and Wii remained high before and after the X360 launch, and each system has some upcoming franchises that people are excited about. In fact, the only thing hurting PS3 is Sony. MS has barely had any impact of their own on PS3 buzz.
No one's basing expectations of gain on price tag alone.
...and ignoring everything else it has going for it (you know, such as the marked improvement the Nintendo brand name has experienced in the last few months). If you list only the negatives of anything, failure and doom is imminent. Let's talk about PS3:
1. It's freaking expensive.
2. It's as big as a house.
3. It's really not some huge processing beast compared to the 360.
4. It's pretty much just "raw potential."
Based on this, I predict that the PS3 will lose all kinds of marketshare and only sell 14 units. How on earth will a stupidly high price tag and a physical profile resembling a juvenile rhinocerous help it sell anything?
Now let's talk about Xbox 360:
1. It's hot as an oven and as loud as a nagging wife
2. It's got a reputation for breaking
3. It doesn't have any power edge over PS3.
4. Light green on white is an ugly color combination.
5. It launched on pace with the Dreamcast.
6. The only people in Japan who care about it are American immigrants.
Those are terrible selling points! With such a terrible list of features, how could anyone expect the X360 to gain any marketshare for Microsoft this gen? Combined with the natural distrust Linux geeks have for MS products, this spells death at the hands of Wii's juggernaut of doom. I predict that Xbox 360 will cause J Allard to commit hari-kari to preserve his family's honor and end his shame.
Last edited by a moderator:
lol Fearsome - To quote Joe vs the Volcano: "I'm not arguing that with you" x repeat.
I think you're missing my point(s). :smile:
I agree Wii has some things going for it and I look forward to it doing very well.
However
...
1) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by launch timing (y/n?)
2) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by launch pricing (y/n?)
3) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by tech advantage (y/n?)
4) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by "superior" naming (y/n?)
By the above I am not trying to paint a doom and gloom picture and say it will not gain marketshare at all. Merely pointing out that these things are the same as or worse than gc (compared to it's competition). There are some things which are superior to gc such as interface and launch software. Also an indirect advantage is Sony pricing themselves (mostly) out of the market. Another indirect advantage is lower dev costs compared to 360/ps3 (A big plus in this market).
For the record I think Wii will take Japan and I agree with EA in thinking Wii could take 33% marketshare as I posted in my 2010 marketshare poll! I was just pointing out that in spite of some of the shortcomings, the Wii looks poised to do better than GC did and that is remarkable. :smile:
I think you're missing my point(s). :smile:
I agree Wii has some things going for it and I look forward to it doing very well.
However
...1) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by launch timing (y/n?)
2) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by launch pricing (y/n?)
3) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by tech advantage (y/n?)
4) It will not gain marketshare (compared to the other two) by "superior" naming (y/n?)
By the above I am not trying to paint a doom and gloom picture and say it will not gain marketshare at all. Merely pointing out that these things are the same as or worse than gc (compared to it's competition). There are some things which are superior to gc such as interface and launch software. Also an indirect advantage is Sony pricing themselves (mostly) out of the market. Another indirect advantage is lower dev costs compared to 360/ps3 (A big plus in this market).
For the record I think Wii will take Japan and I agree with EA in thinking Wii could take 33% marketshare as I posted in my 2010 marketshare poll! I was just pointing out that in spite of some of the shortcomings, the Wii looks poised to do better than GC did and that is remarkable. :smile:
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually, compared to the competition, it's doing much better on price compared to the GC.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
TheChefO said:
Expected by whom and when?
When was it ever expected that the 360 would double their market penetration this generation and Sony would lose 35%?
This became a 'common' expectation when?
40/40/20 with Nitendo having the 20, and as a result only gaining 6% market share this generation while MS doubles their market share and ties with the industry leader is the more amazing story?
I don't get it.
Company A losing 35% of the market is a big story
Company B gaining 20% of the market is a big story
Company C gaining 6% of the market? Not so interesting to me.
RancidLunchmeat said:
Rancid - Agreed 35% 20% big numbers, big story but did you honestly expect a very different outcome? Surely after the price announcement at e3 you thought the numbers would be something close to even split ms/sony yes? This price disparity along with the launch time flip flopping of Sony/MS had to lead to somewhat of a gain for MS and a loss for ps3 right?
Contrast this with GC (see above) and you see that a lot of what N is doing is the same as GC or less (comparitively). To think that their actions would lead to them potentially equaling MS and Sony in marketshare this gen or possibly leading them is amazing to me. What's even more amazing to me is that an EA executive would be so bold as to put this insight into an interview.
Not to discredit your view as I agree this shift will be huge and a big story, but I think the most surprising thing this gen would be if Wii came out on top. 20% is the bottom range of what he was predicting, but he used the word "momentous" to describe it because when you think about the approach Nintendo is taking with Wii in that they are not launching first, they are not charging less than GC (possibly more), and they are not competing head to head tech wise, and yet they still seem poised to gain marketshare it is "momentous". To then take it one step further and say "they could be number one this gen" and well, color me impressed if they do.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
TheChefO said:
I don't see how those statements mesh with your discussions with fearsome in this thread, at all.
Not to discredit your view as I agree this shift will be huge and a big story, but I think the most surprising thing this gen would be if Wii came out on top. 20% is the bottom range of what he was predicting, but he used the word "momentous" to describe it because when you think about the approach Nintendo is taking with Wii in that they are not launching first, they are not charging less than GC (possibly more), and they are not competing head to head tech wise, and yet they still seem poised to gain marketshare it is "momentous". To then take it one step further and say "they could be number one this gen" and well, color me impressed if they do.
I interpret his statements to read as follows: a 6% increase for N would be momentous because it would then become a more viable platform for third party development. The possibility that they could 'be number one' when is a pipe dream, a fantasy, liken to him saying 'Aliens could arrive tomorrow'. Otherwise, he wouldn't be stressing 40/40/20 and he wouldn't be referring to a 6% market increase as momentous.
How do you get from 20% to first? 30/30/40? In that case, Sony would lose 45% markshare, MS would gain 10%, and N would gain 24%.
In that case, the two biggest stories would be Sony losing 45% of the market, and Nintendo gaining 24% of the market.
But guess what? Even in that case, MS is still gaining more market share in scenario 2 as in scenario 1, and in scenario 2 N isn't gaining significant more market share than MS did in Scenario 1... the only difference is that Sony is losing even more.
So even in hypothetical situation #2 (where N comes in first), I still don't see N as the biggest story (Sony losing market share is), and I don't see how MS getting 40% of the market and tying with the market leader in hypothetical situation #1 is any less of a big deal.
In essence: just because the wii's potential market share was the focus of the quote, it doesn't mean that's the most importance thing that was said.
Last edited by a moderator:
TheChefO said:
Compared to who or what? The GC was a graphically competitive piece of hardware with all the extras stripped out so it could be sold at a budget price and a kiddie image. The Wii is lots of cool features with extremely cheap silicon at the heart, which is going to make it affordable, yet a bit more expensive than if it were simply a few chips and a controller the way Gamecube was. And to top things off, they're going to launch right with or just before the strongest incoming player (which is not Microsoft) instead of spinning their wheels for a year or more.
To be like Gamecube, they'd be launching in 2008 with a machine only slightly more powerful than PS3 with no Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, still no online, few or no unique 3rd-party titles, and an MSRP of $399.
I don't expect it to come in 1st. I expect it to do a lot better than Gamecube did, though.
fearsomepirate said:
Again - for the record - I expect a 33% split - in line with this I expect Wii to do very well.
However I disagree with "To be like Gamecube, they'd be launching in 2008 with a machine only slightly more powerful than PS3 with no Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, still no online, few or no unique 3rd-party titles, and an MSRP of $399."
There are three main players from the past five years and for the foreseeable future:
MS
Sony
Nintendo
Last gen:
Sony launched first followed by MS and N in the following year.
This gen:
MS launched first followed by Sony and N in the following year.
Now of those major players, who changed where? Sony is now in year two, Ms is now in year 1 (flip-flopped) and N is in the same boat they were last gen (no gain).
Price wise:
Last gen:
Sony launched at $300 followed by MS at $300 and N at $200.
This gen:
MS Launched at $300-400 followed by Sony at $500-600 and N at $200-250.
MS is charging the same for the base unit, Sony is charging 66% more than ps2 and N is charging the same or $50 more than GC (no gain).
Tech wise:
Last gen:
ps2<GC<XBOX
This gen:
Wii<
60<ps3MS is launching close to ps3 at the top of this gen followed loosely by Wii. Wii is not as graphically competitive this gen as gc was last gen, unless one is limited to edtv resolutuion which in this case should be a close race. (no gain)
The gains that Wii will have over GC this gen will be based on the Innovative interface, and other factors which are more the competition screwing up like lower dev costs, lower game costs, lower system cost (ps3), which will lead to larger games library, larger userbase, larger games library etc.
Similar threads
- Poll