Newsweek, with a little help, takes on Wii as 'GameCube 1.5'

[DuckThor Evil]

Well it's not like they don't understand, they don't WANT to bother with understanding a thing which should just work like a TV set or your regular stereo. Press a button, it runs, play and have fun, turn off, finished.

I've yet to see anyone wonder about how his TV works or what the underlying tech looks like. And Nintendo's goal was to create a simple toy for the whole family and not a new shiny geek-toy for the daddy like the PS3.

Ultimately that is the same goal that MS and Sony have/had, they were just too distracted by the technical side and missed the opportunity to place their products in the "home appliance" category properly. And they destroyed the opportunity themselves by bragging too much about the latest features instead of trying to sell a toy (which it is, in the end). They both scared the audience away by having a console which is too complex and too geeky and PC-like IMO. Actually most people were scared away from the XBox just by knowing it comes from MS, at least here in Europe. Most of us hate MS (their politics as a company) with passion here.

Most of you anyways.

Nintendo's goal was to create a machine that has insane profit margins, margins that nobody had seen before and hope that people don't care about the last gen tech which made these margins possible, not only are they making money from every unit sold, but also being able to make their games as cheaply as possible and sell them with again insane profit margins. And it turned out to be a goldmine for them, even if the Wii fades away sooner than the competition, which I believe will happen. There is nothing too complex about X360 it's a nice product and PS3 is also a great product, it just needs a bit more time to reach more acceptable price level, which it will. You are just parroting Nintendo's marketing speeches.

 

[borowki]

Considering all developing markets and Nintendos expansion of the game playing demographics, 300 million by 2016 does not sound far-fetched to me.

There's little evidence that the Wii is expanding the market (outside of, perhaps, Japan). Buyers are by and large those who have owned a console previously. As mentioned in the other thread though, emerging markets are going to account for a much larger share this generation. China alone can easily swallow up 50 mil.

 

[Zaphod]

I don't understand why anyone here would realistically attempt to content with the idea that the Wii's current success isn't almost entirely driven by it's price?

Seriously? I suggest looking up some rudimentary economics texts. Price alone determine virtually nothing, your value proposition does. At a given perceived value (this might differ from person to person or demographic to demographic) you get a set of potential customers at a given price. Current Wii sales seems to indicate that they're far from exhausting supply at their launch pricing, so it's a fair assessment that many of their achieved sales would also have been possible at an even higher price point. A low price doesn't generate value. If you have none, you can't even give your stuff away for free.

Edit: To put it short, I believe that the Wii is expanding the market to a degree that, for a significant portion of their current customers, any value comparison to the brawnier two cousins are void.

This kind of statement generally doesn't sit well with me.

The topic of the thread interests me, and I'd love to see our "discussion surrounding the Wii will rapidly progress to even deeper questions" and to get some input regarding such issues. The article, IMO, started with a flawed set of postulations in that regard. When staff members for the umpeenth time throw out the dismissive Wii 'contingent' or 'proponents' card without being more concrete, I don't see anything wrong with qualifying my statements.

 

[Arwin]

There's little evidence that the Wii is expanding the market (outside of, perhaps, Japan). Buyers are by and large those who have owned a console previously. As mentioned in the other thread though, emerging markets are going to account for a much larger share this generation. China alone can easily swallow up 50 mil.

Maybe. But the few people I have met who own a Wii over here are in fact people who never owned a console before. The only one that at least was a gamer in some other form, on PC, sold his again already as he didn't like it, thought it was too low spec, and saw an interesting opportunity back then to actually sell it for a profit.

 

[Carl B]

There's little evidence that the Wii is expanding the market (outside of, perhaps, Japan). Buyers are by and large those who have owned a console previously. As mentioned in the other thread though, emerging markets are going to account for a much larger share this generation. China alone can easily swallow up 50 mil.

The media is rife with examples of the Wii making its way into new areas, such as retirement homes. IMO the Wii has been doing very well in ending up in the hands of non-traditional gamers.

 

[archangelmorph]

Seriously? I suggest looking up some rudimentary economics texts. Price alone determine virtually nothing, your value proposition does. At a given perceived value (this might differ from person to person or demographic to demographic) you get a set of potential customers at a given price. Current Wii sales seems to indicate that they're far from exhausting supply at their launch pricing, so it's a fair assessment that many of their achieved sales would also have been possible at an even higher price point. A low price doesn't generate value. If you have none, you can't even give your stuff away for free.

Your missing the point that for starters the Wii launched at a price point that was both reasonably cheap for a new console, significantly lower than competing products AND at the top end of the accepted price dictated by mass marmet uptake of hardware in the past..

If you seriously believe the Wii's demand wouldn't be considerably lower had they launched at £350-400 then you're seriously over-estimating the percieved value offered by the platform..

In fact, in terms of value, both the PS3 & the Xbox360 offer far more to the consumer with respect to vast feature sets, media support, broadband and additional services which go far beyond what the Wii currently offers and thus it seems pretty odd to try and imply that somehow the Wii's perceived value is higher than lets say the Xbox360 core SKU just because it has waggle..

Granted had they have gone lower it wouldn't have made a difference, but going higher definitely would..

Price is king.. That's the bottom line..

Edit: To put it short, I believe that the Wii is expanding the market to a degree that, for a significant portion of their current customers, any value comparison to the brawnier two cousins are void.

Why?

You seem to be trying to justify the uniqueness of the platform with this mantra of "it's just so different it can't be compared to anything at all ever, especially when your comparisons make it look bad..!!"

The Wii's expanse of the market at this stage is pretty bloody questionable considering (approx.) 11 million units (Wii) + 10 mill (Xbox) + 3 mill (PS3) sold hardly accounts for the other 80+ million PS2 owners, the GC & Xbox owners either.. Not in any conclusive or definitive way anyways.. When the Wii has sold over 200 mill units then you can come and tell me how the Wii is expanding the market but at the moment all I see is a console that launched with novelty appeal and is currently selling like a PS2 on a 3rd-4th year price point, on a 3rd-4th year price point out the gate..

The topic of the thread interests me, and I'd love to see our "discussion surrounding the Wii will rapidly progress to even deeper questions" and to get some input regarding such issues. The article, IMO, started with a flawed set of postulations in that regard. When staff members for the umpeenth time throw out the dismissive Wii 'contingent' or 'proponents' card without being more concrete, I don't see anything wrong with qualifying my statements.

Well unless you feel such comments are aimed at yourself (in such case maybe you should re-evaluate your own views and assess whether such labels hold merit..) then I don't see why you feel so hell-bent on "defending the honour" of the Wii which, as far as i'm concerned, deserves as much of a hard grilling as every other platform has accumulated around these forums over the past several months for one reason or another (e.g. £425 price tags, tard packs, heavily delayed price cuts, no good games, shoddy ports, rings of death etc...)

 

[Carl B]

Your missing the point that for starters the Wii launched at a price point that was both reasonably cheap for a new console, significantly lower than competing products AND at the top end of the accepted price dictated by mass marmet uptake of hardware in the past..

If you seriously believe the Wii's demand wouldn't be considerably lower had they launched at £350-400 then you're seriously over-estimating the percieved value offered by the platform..

I think what I would say to this is, that it's not best to view it in terms of the Wii becoming unaffordable, but rather... were the 360 for example to start selling for $250 before the Wii launched, would we expect the Wii to be doing any worse? And I don't know... I don't think it would. And that's because IMO there is very much an appeal that goes beyond its price, and IMO it is detached from the marketing as well. I'd say a big portion of the Wii's mindshare success this gen (thus far) has been mainly viral in nature, with heaps of praise from the media and those experiencing the console being the primary driver.

 

[Bohdy]

First of all, it's kind of hard to make out what specific parts you're talking about. So I am going to assume you're talking about the bits and pieces of the specs that were not previously known, here.
I can only assure you, we've checked it. As you will understand, I obviously can't tell you whom we talked with, as we have to guarantee our sources' confidentiality.

I mainly talking about parts such as "Hollywood, the Wii's GPU, also contains the southbridge and a DSP for audio processing. It is based on the GameCube's GPU, Flipper, and has no notable increases in programmability."

It just seems a little bold to say that flat out without any references, even though you clarify a subset of that claim later. Something like "..and though there has been some discussion on this point, our sources in the Wii development community have confirmed that it has no notable increases in programmability." would be a good deal more convincing without sacrificing anyone's anonymity.

Just my 2cents

 

[Arwin]

I think what I would say to this is, that it's not best to view it in terms of the Wii becoming unaffordable, but rather... were the 360 for example to start selling for $250 before the Wii launched, would we expect the Wii to be doing any worse? And I don't know... I don't think it would. And that's because IMO there is very much an appeal that goes beyond its price, and IMO it is detached from the marketing as well. I'd say a big portion of the Wii's mindshare success this gen (thus far) has been mainly viral in nature, with heaps of praise from the media and those experiencing the console being the primary driver.

Nah, I don't believe that for one second. Had the wii launched for $500, the reception would have been completely different. Perceived value would have been considerably skewed and every bit of slight skepticism towards controls and limited performance increase would have been magnified times ten.

Conversely, if we look at the PS3, if it had sold at $250 from day one every bit of criticism would have been drowned out or overlooked in the amazement of the value of that package, 50% of current PS2 owners would have immediately tried to upgrade, and the PS3 would have been a hard to get item for at least 2 years.

 

[Carl B]

Nah, I don't believe that for one second. Had the wii launched for $500, the reception would have been completely different. Perceived value would have been considerably skewed and every bit of slight skepticism towards controls and limited performance increase would have been magnified times ten.

Agreed, but again my example doesn't raise the price of the Wii, it lowers the price of its competitors.

Conversely, if we look at the PS3, if it had sold at $250 from day one every bit of criticism would have been drowned out or overlooked in the amazement of the value of that package, 50% of current PS2 owners would have immediately tried to upgrade, and the PS3 would have been a hard to get item for at least 2 years.

See but again, that's just the converse of the above: the flaws there are get overlooked the lower the price. The idea that demand for the PS3 would be much much greater if the price was $250 at launch IMO doesn't have much to do with the discussion centering around the Wii having an appeal that goes beyond price and marketing.

 

[archangelmorph]

I think what I would say to this is, that it's not best to view it in terms of the Wii becoming unaffordable, but rather... were the 360 for example to start selling for $250 before the Wii launched, would we expect the Wii to be doing any worse? And I don't know... I don't think it would. And that's because IMO there is very much an appeal that goes beyond its price, and IMO it is detached from the marketing as well. I'd say a big portion of the Wii's mindshare success this gen (thus far) has been mainly viral in nature, with heaps of praise from the media and those experiencing the console being the primary driver.

Interesting points..

I never considered it from that angle..

Sorry Zaphod! I guess price isn't quite king.. (prince maybe..?)

I guess it's also an interesting question to ponder over considering whether a $250 PS3 (having traditionally much greater brand strength and wider market appeal than the more western/FPS-centric Xbox..) would have had any effect on the Wii's current sales rate?

I would speculate that the answer to that could have very well been yes.. Purely due to the success of Sony's PS brand (Pre-PS3), their emerging efforts to provide a broader range of experiences for new consumer markets (Buzz, Eye-Toy, Sing star, Guitar Hero etc..), the PS3's platform strengths & continuations of recognised successful franchises.. However the biggest factor being the market, consumer and press/media mind share towards nintendo pre E3 2006..

 

[Arwin]

Agreed, but again my example doesn't raise the price of the Wii, it lowers the price of its competitors.

See but again, that's just the converse of the above: the flaws there are get overlooked the lower the price. The idea that demand for the PS3 would be much much greater if the price was $250 at launch IMO doesn't have much to do with the discussion centering around the Wii having an appeal that goes beyond price and marketing.

Yes it does, it does exactly that. By saying that the appeal does in fact not go that far beyond price and marketing. Or at least, by indicating that the appeal of the Wii isn't so far beyond price and marketing that people would have payed $500 for it.

I have literally overheard people talking in the shop about how much they wanted the PS3, but that they were going to get a Wii first for now and wait for the PS3 to drop. It makes sense, doesn't it? It's like how I wanted a 1080p TV, but I got a 720p TV for now. Then you wait for the prices of the PS3/1080p TV to drop about 40%. Then you buy your PS3/1080p TV at that point. The 720p / Wii will last you the next two years, and then in about 2 years time you have a Wii, a PS3, a 720p and a 1080p TV, and have spent the same money as you would have if you bought the 1080p TV and PS3 right now.

Where the difference is, is in the people who only buy a Wii, or only buy a PS3. That defines the limit of the appeal that goes beyond price and marketing. Where the Wii expands the market, and it succeeds where the same kind of price and marketing of say the PS3 wouldn't have succeeded, that's where the Wii has something that goes beyond price and marketing. And at least in theory that would be a simplicity and accessibility that other consoles simply don't/can't offer.

I think the Wii has something like that to a certain extent, definitely. Say that people could play with either three, freely, then the Wii would certainly draw some attention, certainly when the machine first came to market. If you would put Wii Tennis up against Sega's Tennis on the 360 or PS3, then most definitely a lot of people are going to want to try Wii Tennis more even than the others, and may end up sticking with that version as their preferred version. That is the core of what the Wii has over the other consoles, irrespective of marketing and pricing, I think (together with the Miis ).

 

[Zaphod]

I don't see why you feel so hell-bent on "defending the honour" of the Wii

I'm not. However, neither am I interested in discussing it by defining it in the context of hypotheticals and of what it's not. To quote myself from earlier in the thread: "What it can't do is of absolutely no interest in the context of the console itself. What should be of interest is what it can do that's different (and how those ideas could be exploited and improved upon by its more powerful brethren)."

You seem to be trying to justify the uniqueness of the platform with this mantra of "it's just so different it can't be compared to anything at all ever, especially when your comparisons make it look bad..!!"

Ah... That's where you misunderstand me. I'm not saying it shouldn't be; by anyone. Just that, to a degree, it isn't; by many. No one has to agree with it nor understand it, just accept that it is. Seriously, the Wii by all intents and purposes shouldn't sell as good as it does. Part of me still fail to comprehend it: "A GC 1.5, that kinda' sucks doesn't it?" Then that part almost gets beaten down by the part that says: "Yeah, yeah... It's not like you play your precious PC games all that much these days, now is it? I still want one!"

which, as far as i'm concerned, deserves as much of a hard grilling as every other platform has accumulated around these forums over the past several months for one reason or another (e.g. £425 price tags, tard packs, heavily delayed price cuts, no good games, shoddy ports, rings of death etc...)

I don't really think we'll garner much fruitful information at all if our attention is focused on 'grilling' the platforms for reasons whatever reason we as individuals don't deem them to be good value. The unfounded extrapolation from me/us --> all seems to run rampant in console discussions. It also goes hand in hand with the equally unfounded expectation that console demand is a null-sum game.

On the sales side, the more pertinent question is how can the manufacturers increase their value proposition, both in general and in the competitive landscape? And right now Nintendo doesn't have to worry about neither of those. However, going forward they might: the market could saturate at the current price, perceived value decrease if diverse & desirable games don't show up, and competitive pressure decrease if competitors narrow the price gap. That's a topic for another thread, though, so if someone starts a "What will the market kook like for the Wii autumn 2009?" thread, that might be fun enough speculation/analysis in itself.

Edit:

I guess it's also an interesting question to ponder over considering whether a $250 PS3 (having traditionally much greater brand strength and wider market appeal than the more western/FPS-centric Xbox..) would have had any effect on the Wii's current sales rate?

Yes, I believe so, obviously. But not to the extent that some do (all else being equal). See null-sum game comment. It's also very, very, hypothetical.

 

[Carl B]

Yes it does, it does exactly that. By saying that the appeal does in fact not go that far beyond price and marketing. Or at least, by indicating that the appeal of the Wii isn't so far beyond price and marketing that people would have payed $500 for it.

I don't know though how you can write this, and then follow it up with this below...

If you would put Wii Tennis up against Sega's Tennis on the 360 or PS3, then most definitely a lot of people are going to want to try Wii Tennis more even than the others, and may end up sticking with that version as their preferred version. That is the core of what the Wii has over the other consoles, irrespective of marketing and pricing, I think (together with the Miis ).

Isn't that the entire crux of the issue though? I think being in Europe maybe you guys don't quite understand the true phenomenon the Wii has become in the United States; it goes beyond price and marketing. I can't help but notice some of the regional correlations between a lot of the opinions in this thread.

It's like this - if the DS and the PSP were the same price, would you think that DS demand would drop off in a significant fashion? It is almost the identical analogue between the DS and the PSP, in terms of both gameplay variation being the primary differentiator for the DS, and the PSP being possessed of what otherwise is superior power, functionality, screen, etc... and truthfully I find it strange that with those that are contemptuous of the Wii, that the DS seems immune to their feelings on price/value. Are these not at the heart of it the same concept; simply one for travel and one for the home?

 

[archangelmorph]

It's also very, very, hypothetical.

But works to emphasize my original point which was that the Wii's current success can't be determined to be completely independant of it's rather low pricing strategy..

How far of the opposite is true is not easy to pinned down sure, but enough valid points have been raised to show that the pricing is a pretty significant factor in which ever way you want to spin it..

 

[Arwin]

Agreed. Following the modest financial success of the GameCube, despite ending up lastish in that generation, the goal Nintendo set themselves for this generation (as well as the DS I'm sure) is to continue on the same principe: set up your business model with low investments, early profits, and distinguish yourself from your competition by finding your own market, both in terms of price and in terms of feature set.

Conclusion: success! And good for them.

 

[Geo]

One thing I think is petty cool about Wii is that bit about how little learning curve there is for going from GC development to Wii development. I suspect that's not appreciated enuf as a strength, generally. Given the tighter cost constraints associated with anything having to do with a console, that's pretty brilliant, really. Reinventing the development wheel every time has got to be one of those painful things you'd very much like to avoid as much as possible. MS has tried to a degree to address that by making XB development more PC-like. Nintendo has addressed it by leveraging their existing development expertise forward. Sony, it would appear, is still going with the "no pain/no gain" theory of generational development transition.

 

[archangelmorph]

It's like this - if the DS and the PSP were the same price, would you think that DS demand would drop off in a significant fashion? It is almost the identical analogue between the DS and the PSP, in terms of both gameplay variation being the primary differentiator for the DS, and the PSP being possessed of what otherwise is superior power, functionality, screen, etc... and truthfully I find it strange that with those that are contemptuous of the Wii, that the DS seems immune to their feelings on price/value. Are these not at the heart of it the same concept; simply one for travel and one for the home?

I think "contemptuous" is a bit strong.. I don't think anyones contemptuous of the platform since it's pretty clear that its a great little box with rather wide market appeal... However I think many are skeptical of it's current success being anything more than the product of the right gimmick, at the right price point, at the right time..

& to be honest I don't think the DS or PSP are immune, they just don't really factor into the discussion since it's an entirely separate market with entirely seperate consumer expectations.. nobody is looking for the latest and greatest cuttng-edge gameplay experiences on handhelds for example..

& to be honest I'm pretty sure that the DS sales wouldn't have been affected much by a cheaper PSP price point at launch but this is because of additional factors which would affect this:-

- The DS built itself initially off the brand recognition of itself being a nintendo handheld and following the GBA and GB which have completely dominated that space for years..
- The PSP's target audience was fuzzy and many believed it could draw many PS users into the handheld space (it could have done if the PSP wasn't so flawed by a high price point, low battery life & too many ports & not enough dedicated developer focus..) but ultimately it failed as a viable platform due to it's own inadaquacies (mentioned above...)
- The timing of the PSP to DS launch was poorly executed having the DS hitting the market sooner and giving the consumer base enough time to test, assess, accept and covet the platform way before Sony (the newcomers in he scene) got there..

Timing is another critical issue and without considering this it's pretty hard to make any reasonable assesment of how well a platform could have done had it's other inadaquacies been fixed for launch..

 

[archangelmorph]

One thing I think is petty cool about Wii is that bit about how little learning curve there is for going from GC development to Wii development. I suspect that's not appreciated enuf as a strength, generally. Given the tighter cost constraints associated with anything having to do with a console, that's pretty brilliant, really. Reinventing the development wheel every time has got to be one of those painful things you'd very much like to avoid as much as possible. MS has tried to a degree to address that by making XB development more PC-like, Nintendo has addressed it by leveraging their existing development expertise forward. Sony, it would appear, is still going with the "no pain/no gain" theory of generational development transition.

Problem is there weren't enough GC devs to begin with to really culminate into some kind of relevant pool of experience..

Hence one of the reasons many Wii games at the moment look worse than some of the GC's best..

 

[Zaphod]

How far of the opposite is true is not easy to pinned down sure, but enough valid points have been raised to show that the pricing is a pretty significant factor in which ever way you want to spin it.

The price elasticity of the Wii value proposition is unknown as long it's supply limited, but at this point in time I honestly don't think it would have made much difference to sales whether it had launched at $279 or $199 and everyone who wanted one could get it tomorrow (I find hypotheticals outside this range just for the sake of argument ludicrous).

My original post you responded to was in a comparative perspective, and in that regard I have to invoke Carl B who said it better than me. It really is too expensive by traditional standards and defies all expectations, so It's not price, nor is it spin... it's something... else... Quantum...? OK?