NPD February 2009

[fearsomepirate]

But that's what I'm saying. If people who own Wii + other system will generally not use the Wii for the same sort of games they play on the other systems, that's equivalent to saying that the Wii userbase isn't interested in that sort of game.

If a game is based on such tired ideas that its only selling point is graphics, or it's a cross-platform title that has simply been waggle-ized for Wii, then sure, there's no reason to buy it on Wii. If a particular genre has gotten so stale that graphics are the first concern of its customers, then it will fail on Wii. Now, High Voltage has really talked up the weapons, the story, and the controls. They're trying to produce a stand-out, quality FPS. Now, if the FPS genre is so played out that there's no way they could make the game interesting enough to be worth playing without impressive graphics, it's not worth buying. If they do something intrinsically interesting, unique, and engaging, though, it will be worth buying even if you own every console.

Of course, if VGChartz' claim that COD:WaW has sold 1m units on Wii is true, then there are enough Wii-only gamers that it doesn't matter.

 

[pc999]

To put in perspective, if Conduit was a 360/PS3 and not a Wii game with the same level of graphics it has now would most care about its upcoming release? Conduit's attraction lies that it provides a game for a genre not heavily represent on the Wii with visuals beyond whats typically found on the Wii. However, its still a notch below whats found on the 360/PS3 and other than motion control its failed to show that it offers anything above whats found on the HD consoles. If Im a Wii only owner I might be attracted to Conduit but if I own both a Wii and a HD console showing me a bunch of Conduit videos and pics would be a little underwhelming.

Althought it is normal that we (here) listen more about gfx/AI and the such, it seems they had put a lot of effort in many areas, plus a lot of creative things in weapons/itens, scenes etc...

That is what is lacking in most games, most of them looks like expansions (even on Wii) lately gfx even improve litle (GoW2, R2, Fear2...).

I thought that Wii could have been on good platform for creative games but only now seems to be some creative games (the Conduit, SH, Madworld...), I hope it keeps going.

That or we end it XNA and other online games for creativity (see World of Goo).

 

[Akumajou]

Not to got off topic but hey pc999 I really love that sig/quote of yours by nAo.

But yeah the Conduit will depend on how it will appeal to the gamer as well as how technical the game will be.

If its really true and the Wii graphic libraries have matured to allow alot more lower level access to the hardware this alone may enhance the way the final game looks and plays even if in the end it is no where near the HD consoles because it does not have to, it just has to be efficient at making the game work.

I wager that the game has a great chance of looking leagues better than the best that XBox 1 was able to put out and as such it may generate alot of word of mouth among Wii owners but if SEGA somehow messes this up by rushing the game out for a holiday release where they cannot afford to "patch things up" it may ruin the game altogether and its sales.

PS: I own a 1987 Toyota Supra Turbo Targa 7M-GTE, and used to own a 84 Conquest and 85 Starion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMkQbQWzOqY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY99hfJBAF4&feature=related

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I didn't redefine "core game," you did (actually, you still don't have a definition).

Just to make things easier for you since you appear not to be able to follow replies... This is what I was originally replying to.

Yes, I do not want the Wii to win, it will be the worst outcome for core gamers, as MS and Sony will go after the casual pie next-gen and the previous twenty + years of gaming tradition will likely be eschewed (or diminished) as a result.

However a Wii victory, looks inevitable. As some think though, it's possible that the Wii exists in a different market and so does not directly compete with the 360/PS3.

In which he has seperated "core" gamers as those who prefer the types of games you generally see on PS3/X360. While he has defined Wii gamers as those that are more "casual" gamers.

And the games that tend to sell well on each platform tends to back that up. Show me consistent non-Wii centric games that "regularly" appear in the NPD top 20 that also appear on the PS3/X360. Then feel free to also show PS3/X360 type games that "regularly" appear in the NPD top 20.

If that's too biased, we can also use system top 10/20 as it shold be far easier for games on Wii to chart in the NPD top 20 due to having a userbase twice as large as X360/PS3 combined.

Sure you'll have a more casual type game like Viva Pinata pop up on the NPD top 20, but it generally doesn't last and it generally isn't followed by other games of the type. Likewise something like LBP on the PS3 which disappeared off the chart very quickly.

Likewise on Wii, I believe COD charted briefly, and then just as quickly dropped off.

And what's with the rant about decapitations and shotguns? Honestly is that what you're using to delineate what is or isn't a "hardcore" game? Really?

And when did this become about hardcore vs. non-hardcore. True I may have used hardcore as a means of describing a sub-group within the general X360/PS3 user base, but that doesn't mean the X360/PS3 userbase is all hardcore gamers. Either way, the game demographic of what generally sells on Wii vs. Everything else is just "generally" different.

If I suddenly start seeing a flood of fitness and party games on X360/PS3 and they actually chart consistently on NPD top 20, I'll start to change my mind.

If I suddenly start seeing a flood of fighters/3rd person shooters/1st person shooters/RTS/mature RPGs/etc. on Wii and they actually start to chart consistently on NPD top 20, I'll start to change my mind.

Until that happens, I'll hold to my opinion. And apparently one that's shared by quite a few Devs.

Regards,
SB

 

[obonicus]

When you look at the isolated sales of either restaurants, you will see that the Wii sell mostly pizza and the 360/PS3 mostly burgers, but it will say almost nothing about the typical taste of the consumers if a relatively high number of people live near Wiis and 360/PS3s restaurants that are located next door to each other.

Sure, but again, if people who own both consoles leave the Wii as the 'casual-only' console, that is equivalent to saying that Wii owners don't have a taste for hardcore games, especially if this extends to quality games that don't have equivalents on other consoles.

 

[fearsomepirate]

In which he has seperated "core" gamers as those who prefer the types of games you generally see on PS3/X360. While he has defined Wii gamers as those that are more "casual" gamers.

Well, don't encourage him! "Core" does not mean "violent." Period. And yes, a lot of Nintendo's core customers--people who live and die by the next iterations of Super Smash Brothers and Mario Kart--are unhappy with Wii.

And the games that tend to sell well on each platform tends to back that up. Show me consistent non-Wii centric games that "regularly" appear in the NPD top 20 that also appear on the PS3/X360.

I'm not sure what this has to do with what "core" means. The "core market" actually includes a lot of casual gamers. Or did you think that everyone who's played games over the past 30 years is as obsessed with them as we are?

Sure you'll have a more casual type game like Viva Pinata pop up on the NPD top 20,

Viva Pinata isn't a "casual game." There's not really any such thing. By the way, kids are part of the core video game market, and have been since its inception.

Likewise something like LBP on the PS3 which disappeared off the chart very quickly.

LBP isn't a "casual game," either. You apparently confuse "doesn't have violence" with "casual game." By the way, most games disappear of the charts very quickly. Few games chart for more than a month.

And what's with the rant about decapitations and shotguns? Honestly is that what you're using to delineate what is or isn't a "hardcore" game? Really?

I don't delineate anything as a "hardcore game," because I think "hardcore game" is a meaningless, useless term. The only purpose it serves is as a metric of how intelligently someone understands the market--if someone refers to something as a "hardcore game" or "hardcore gamer" in a non-ironic way, it is a sure sign that his opinions should not be taken seriously. Anyway, if you look at the way people use it, it means little more than "Either has violence or is Mega Man IX." That's why I am making fun of the term by constantly referring to shotguns, decapitations, zombies, and magic fireballs, because apparently, lacking these makes something a "casual game." Unless it's Mega Man IX.

And when did this become about hardcore vs. non-hardcore.

Wait, are you trying to pin this on me now? I'm not the one who insisted that Mario Kart isn't one of Nintendo's core franchises, as though Nintendo invented it last year. As I proved to you, the Mario Kart franchise is almost two decades old.

If I suddenly start seeing a flood of fitness and party games on X360/PS3 and they actually chart consistently on NPD top 20, I'll start to change my mind.

Change your mind about what? I'm not even sure what you're talking about anymore. I simply pointed out that most people are using the term "core" completely incorrectly. This is not a matter of opinion. This is the way the term is used in marketing literature that directly influences Nintendo, and what Nintendo's reps mean when they say it. As I said, a lot of gamers who think they know things think that "core" means what they mean by "hardcore." Some of them, like vanquish, have stopped using "hardcore" because the word makes you sound like a barking moonbat, but "core" simply is not an equivalent term. "Core" and "hardcore" have as much in common as "applesauce" and "Batman." They got the word "core" from Nintendo, and now they're abusing it.

If I suddenly start seeing a flood of fighters/3rd person shooters/1st person shooters/RTS/mature RPGs/etc. on Wii

And you wonder why I think people just use "hardcore game" as a slang term for "violent game."

 

[dobwal]

Sure, but again, if people who own both consoles leave the Wii as the 'casual-only' console, that is equivalent to saying that Wii owners don't have a taste for hardcore games, especially if this extends to quality games that don't have equivalents on other consoles.

No it is not equivalent. Games show how people use the Wii, it does to show the overall taste of Wii owners.

It works both ways, game sales of the 360/PS3 shows more sales of more traditional based games but there is nothing to say that there aren't significant numbers of PS3/360 owners who own and use thier Wiis to diversify their gaming library and satisfy thier taste for games that aren't your from your typical Gears, MGS, GTA, GT, COD, KZ2 or FF big hype game with high visuals.

There is a lack of knowledge of the market overall, thereby there exist this relatively simplistic view of the market. Every owner = 1 console and hardcore buyers = only buy hardcore games is probably not true in a lot of cases.

We are in the middle of biggest recession in 80 years yet millions of console are being moved every month. If there is a big demand for consoles in general in this enviroment there should be a healthy population of multi console owners. If its isn't a big thing for a casual user to pluck a console off a shelf, then its should be relatively easy for a core gamer to pluck multiple consoles off the shelf.

On the casual versus core gamer note. To me a gamer who buys just a 360 and buys Gears1 & 2, Fable II, Mass Effect, Halo3 and GTA4 is just as casual a gamer as gamer who buys a Wii and buys only its marquee franchises. There is nothing hardcore about the marquee titles on the 360 and PS3. They are the most hyped and most advertised and thereby the most consumed. Gran Turismo is as big of a casual game as Mario Kart in terms of consumption by casual gamers. I'd call someone who owns just about every bad movie tie in game more hardcore then the owner who owns all of the before mentioned games.

In fact its my opinion that the most casual console on the market is the PS3 and not the Wii. A low volume console with a huge userbase of hardcore owners shouldn't have such a low attachment rate. A low volume console with a huge hardcore userbase should be able to more readily support non huge hype and non huge marketing budgeted quality offerings. The PS3 is the polar opposite of what one would expect from a low volume console with alot of hardcore owners. Its userbase provides support for mostly highly hyped and big budget titles. Outside of big name franchise with already huge followings, popular cross platform titles, and a few new big name first party exclusives the PS3 userbase supports little else with enough gusto to make for a healthy library outside of the big name titles.

 

[obonicus]

No it is not equivalent. Games show how people use the Wii, it does to show the overall taste of Wii owners.

It works both ways, game sales of the 360/PS3 shows more sales of more traditional based games but there is nothing to say that there aren't significant numbers of PS3/360 owners who own and use thier Wiis to diversify their gaming library and satisfy thier taste for games that aren't your from your typical Gears, MGS, GTA, GT, COD, KZ2 or FF big hype game with high visuals.

I think we're arguing from different directions, here. From the point of view of a third party trying to succeed on the Wii's userbase, whether the Wii userbase is composed of an expanded audience with no taste for traditional games or whether the Wii userbase is composed of traditional gamers with no desire to play traditional games on the Wii, it amounts to the same thing.

There is a lack of knowledge of the market overall, thereby there exist this relatively simplistic view of the market. Every owner = 1 console and hardcore buyers = only buy hardcore games is probably not true in a lot of cases.

We are in the middle of biggest recession in 80 years yet millions of console are being moved every month. If there is a big demand for consoles in general in this enviroment there should be a healthy population of multi console owners. If its isn't a big thing for a casual user to pluck a console off a shelf, then its should be relatively easy for a core gamer to pluck multiple consoles off the shelf.

That doesn't really add up. It can be easy to pluck multiple consoles, but why would they? You'd have to be convinced enough by exclusives to take the plunge, at the very least. I can barely see the value in doing this and gaming's my primary disposable income sink. You assume they would, I have trouble seeing it. Clearly the NPD numbers I posted earlier were bad, so we don't even have that piece of data either. So we're back to opinions.

In fact its my opinion that the most casual console on the market is the PS3 and not the Wii. A low volume console with a huge userbase of hardcore owners shouldn't have such a low attachment rate. A low volume console with a huge hardcore userbase should be able to more readily support non huge hype and non huge marketing budgeted quality offerings. The PS3 is the polar opposite of what one would expect from a low volume console with alot of hardcore owners. Its userbase provides support for mostly highly hyped and big budget titles. Outside of big name franchise with already huge followings, popular cross platform titles, and a few new big name first party exclusives the PS3 userbase supports little else with enough gusto to make for a healthy library outside of the big name titles.

This has been pointed out several times, but the attach rate for your average PS3 game is the same as with the 360. First party games do underperform relatively to first-party games on the 360, but is that the games' fault or the audience's?

The pattern you're describing you can see more of in Japan -- 360 owners buy games far in excess of their relative install-base, and PS3 also outperforms its own meager install-base.

 

[Akumajou]

In fact its my opinion that the most casual console on the market is the PS3 and not the Wii. A low volume console with a huge userbase of hardcore owners shouldn't have such a low attachment rate. A low volume console with a huge hardcore userbase should be able to more readily support non huge hype and non huge marketing budgeted quality offerings. The PS3 is the polar opposite of what one would expect from a low volume console with alot of hardcore owners. Its userbase provides support for mostly highly hyped and big budget titles. Outside of big name franchise with already huge followings, popular cross platform titles, and a few new big name first party exclusives the PS3 userbase supports little else with enough gusto to make for a healthy library outside of the big name titles.

I believe you are wrong, the PS3 is actually in fact the only true HARDCORE gaming console this gen, why???

Because its first party games are getting critical acclaim but underperforming in terms of sales.

low market penetration because hardcore gamers are not a mainstream majority.

The company is busting its ass making sure its graphic libraries are up to snuff and easy to program for.

and many more reasons but of course appart from Saturn and casual-wannabe Dreamcast, ten years from now (if there are any of us left alive...) there will be people fondly remembering the PS3 for its hardcoredredness and posting voice essays about how much people loved their console and how unjustly it was underhyped...

 

[Cheezdoodles]

NPD is not very accurate because it depends on the affiliated companies providing reports but those not-affiliated will remain unknown unless there is a way to get reports on those numbers

This argument does not hold water.

You can still have very accurate numbers, decpite the fact that NPD only bases their work on a sample. As long as the sample represents the population well enough you can have very very very accurate (what we call in statistics "significant") numbers, even if your sample size is relatively small compared to the population. The fact that NPD doesn't have all the data doesn't really matter, as long as the sample is good enough you can still pinpoint the numbers you need (for the entire population by extrapolating) with a very high accuracy

Their numbers are without doubt, more than accurate enough for any forum discussion, and the fact that so many big businesses contract NPD for this kind of work, suggest that the accuracy is good enough for business decisions aswell.

 

[dobwal]

That doesn't really add up. It can be easy to pluck multiple consoles, but why would they? You'd have to be convinced enough by exclusives to take the plunge, at the very least. I can barely see the value in doing this and gaming's my primary disposable income sink. You assume they would, I have trouble seeing it. Clearly the NPD numbers I posted earlier were bad, so we don't even have that piece of data either. So we're back to opinions.

The Wii provides a totally different experience then either the 360 or PS3 so it makes a perfect complement as it adds a plethora of titles you can't find on the 360 or the PS3. Even owning both a PS3 and 360 has its upside with the PS3 adding a BluRay player and titles such as GoW3, GT5, MGS4 and several other promising titles exclusive to the PS3.

A gamer's ability to own multiple consoles is a matter of disposable income and gaming is no where near the most expensive hobby you can have. Gaming is probably one of the cheaper if not cheapest interactive forms of entertainment.
The cost of entry for the Wii is $250.00 + tax per pop and if so called "casuals" can handle that easily and have the Wii pushing 700k in the US during the slow months. Its hard to imagine that core gamers in general not being invest in multiple consoles.

This has been pointed out several times, but the attach rate for your average PS3 game is the same as with the 360. First party games do underperform relatively to first-party games on the 360, but is that the games' fault or the audience's?

The pattern you're describing you can see more of in Japan -- 360 owners buy games far in excess of their relative install-base, and PS3 also outperforms its own meager install-base.

Your average attach rates are pretty even when you compare your standard cross platform game. However, the 360's cross platforms are often competing against high profile 360 only titles especially during the holidays. Games like COD4/WAW, AC and others had to compete against Gears, Mass Effect, Halo3 and Fable 2 over the last few of holidays. A cross platform title often face much more competition on the 360 then the PS3. The 360 also has a way larger overall attachment rate per user meaning 360 owners are more hungry for games.

Nevertheless, if you want to measure the breadth of the hardcore crowd of any console, you look at how well it supports high quality niche titles not your standard fare cross platform titles.

 

[gokickrocks]

I believe you are wrong, the PS3 is actually in fact the only true HARDCORE gaming console this gen, why???

Because its first party games are getting critical acclaim but underperforming in terms of sales.

low market penetration because hardcore gamers are not a mainstream majority.

The company is busting its ass making sure its graphic libraries are up to snuff and easy to program for.

and many more reasons but of course appart from Saturn and casual-wannabe Dreamcast, ten years from now (if there are any of us left alive...) there will be people fondly remembering the PS3 for its hardcoredredness and posting voice essays about how much people loved their console and how unjustly it was underhyped...

by your definition for hardcore, the gamecube was the hardcore gaming console for last gen...and since people like to proclaim the wii to be 2 duct taped gamecubes, then it is 2x the hardcore gaming console...see what i did there?

in my opinion, hardcore gaming died with the NES, it gave you low health with none of the infinite continues, resuscitating life when you step aside from the action, close proximity check points, and no map/beacon that tells you exactly where to go...it put the HARD in hardcore, but im sure my definition of hardcore may be drastically different from anothers

 

[obonicus]

The Wii provides a totally different experience then either the 360 or PS3 so it makes a perfect complement as it adds a plethora of titles you can't find on the 360 or the PS3. Even owning both a PS3 and 360 has its upside with the PS3 adding a BluRay player and titles such as GoW3, GT5, MGS4 and several other promising titles exclusive to the PS3.

A gamer's ability to own multiple consoles is a matter of disposable income and gaming is no where near the most expensive hobby you can have. Gaming is probably one of the cheaper if not cheapest interactive forms of entertainment.
The cost of entry for the Wii is $250.00 + tax per pop and if so called "casuals" can handle that easily and have the Wii pushing 700k in the US during the slow months. Its hard to imagine that core gamers in general not being invest in multiple consoles.

Like I said, this is all opinion. I have anecdotal evidence (which certainly isn't data) that makes me believe otherwise. Besides my disagreeing about the 'ease' and 'cheapness' of spending $250-$400 to buy a new console to play a handful of exclusives.

Your average attach rates are pretty even when you compare your standard cross platform game. However, the 360's cross platforms are often competing against high profile 360 only titles especially during the holidays. Games like COD4/WAW, AC and others had to compete against Gears, Mass Effect, Halo3 and Fable 2 over the last few of holidays. A cross platform title often face much more competition on the 360 then the PS3. The 360 also has a way larger overall attachment rate per user meaning 360 owners are more hungry for games.

I think your last statement has been debunked in the past; I believe there are numbers that suggest that the 'hunger' for games across all three systems is about the same for the same time period (in fact, I think the Wii beats both HD consoles out slightly).

Nevertheless, if you want to measure the breadth of the hardcore crowd of any console, you look at how well it supports high quality niche titles not your standard fare cross platform titles.

Looking at something like Mirror's Edge, then, which certainly has niche appeal and niche sales. As far as I can tell, it did about equally well on both platforms. JRPGs tank (with exception of LO) on both systems, but they don't even do that well on DS so I'm not sure what that means. What else is there that we can compare? LBP seems to have done better than most Rare games, or at least the Viva Pinatas and B&K.

 

[one]

Why it's increasingly important that there's no DLC in NPD
http://weblogs.variety.com/the_cut_...ngly-important-that-theres-no-dlc-in-npd.html

I've previously written about how important I think DLC is becoming to the Xbox 360 / Playstation 3 business model. To take a recent example, I'm told by a good source (though Rockstar hasn't confirmed) that "Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned" has sold around one million units on Xbox Live. That's over $20 million in gross revenue and would be approximately $14 million for Rockstar, if it hadn't already done a $50 million deal for two DLC chapters with Microsoft.

 

[dobwal]

Like I said, this is all opinion. I have anecdotal evidence (which certainly isn't data) that makes me believe otherwise. Besides my disagreeing about the 'ease' and 'cheapness' of spending $250-$400 to buy a new console to play a handful of exclusives.

All we both have is anecdotal evidence. But my belief is born from a market that generates billions upon billions of dollars each year, supports dozens upon dozens of websites and companies who serve only a fraction of the market yet releases a new line of discrete graphics cards every year. I see people affording a $250-$400 console like they afford buying new automobiles. Most of the market can not afford to buy a new automobile straight up with cash. Nevertheless, millions upon millions of new automobiles are sold each year through borrowing. And millions upon millions buy consoles using credit cards. When a generation of consoles span 5-6 years and the high level of support seen in the gaming market in terms of dollars spent, its hard for me to imagine that there is not a rather significant number of users that own multiple consoles.

I think your last statement has been debunked in the past; I believe there are numbers that suggest that the 'hunger' for games across all three systems is about the same for the same time period (in fact, I think the Wii beats both HD consoles out slightly).

Then why aren't overall attachment rates the same and have never tracked equally over time? The 360's overall attachment rate track higher in its first, second and third year versus the PS3. The PS3 has never track at the same rate as the 360. The 360 cracked 5 games per console within its first year, which the PS3 seems to have accomplished within the last year. The last figures I remember for ~5 for the PS3 and Wii (with the Wii ahead) and ~8 for the 360.

The only thing the PS3 has shown is that its userbase takes up your standard fare cross platform titles as well as the 360 userbase. But the consumption of exclusive titles on 360 versus the PS3 are almost polar opposites. Furthermore, the million plus sellers list on the 360 is alot larger the PS3. The last time I remember figures was the 360 with 30+ after ~2 years. I not even sure the PS3 is even near that number as of now.

The PS3 average user consuming games at the same level as a 360 average user is not happening. Looking at small set of cross platform titles is unnecessary when you have more comprehensive numbers that are more indicative of the overall market.

PD:0
Graw
COD2
PGR3
COD3
Gears
Oblivion
Madden 07
TC:R6
Dead Rising
FN3
Viva Pinata
Saints Row

This is a list of 360 games that release within the first 12 months of the 360 release and sold a million copies. If the PS3 users are consuming games at a similar rate show me a similar list from the PS3 from its first year. Or show me a list from the second year that can make up that gap and puts the PS3 on par with the 360 level of software sales during its first two years, which would include 2nd year games such as Halo3, Lost Planet, Madden 08, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Graw 2, Forza 2, AC and COD4.

 

[jonabbey]

The PS3 owner base is split between people who bought the PS3 for games and people who bought the PS3 for Blu-Ray movie playback. I know I own about four times as many Blu-Ray movies as I do PS3 games.

Sony is continuing to invest heavily in producing expensive exclusives for the PS3, and the PS3 is continuing to be seen as a peer to the 360 when companies go to invest in developing a game for the high end.

That's not nearly as good a place for Sony as they enjoyed last generation, but it seems sustainable, and is giving Sony time to improve their services and software, investments which should benefit them in the next generation.

So long as Sony doesn't bleed to death during the process, it's probably not the worst thing for Sony or for Sony fans.

 

[pc999]

I dont see the problem with hard core gamers definition, a hardcore gamer is someone who spend a lot of time (and money? if possible) in gaming and gaming related things (eg here), there isnt an stabilished time table but IMO someone who spends more than 7h/week would be a hardcore gamer no mater if it is playing Postal/GTA or Pong/Sims, then there are those who are less or are more hardcore.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I see people affording a $250-$400 console like they afford buying new automobiles.

New automobiles cost significantly more than $250. $250 is one or two days' pay at a decent job. New automobiles, by contrast, cost on the order of a year's salary.

We are in the middle of biggest recession in 80 years yet millions of console are being moved every month.

Entertainment does well during recessions because it's cheaper than travel.

 

[DrJay24]

This is a list of 360 games that release within the first 12 months of the 360 release and sold a million copies. .

That honeymoon is over, those buy-anything next-gen hardcore gamers (of which I was one) are now more evenly distributed among the three consoles. The bar is also raised for quality, those games are mostly average at best, but anything with excessive bloom and bump-mapping sold well back in 2006-2007.

 

[Zassk]

That honeymoon is over, those buy-anything next-gen hardcore gamers (of which I was one) are now more evenly distributed among the three consoles. The bar is also raised for quality, those games are mostly average at best, but anything with excessive bloom and bump-mapping sold well back in 2006-2007.

There is still a discrepancy. Compare sales of MotorstormR with PGR4 (a retail failure)... Compare GT5P with Forza 2... Compare MGS4 with Gears of War 1... Most PS3 exclusives are still underperforming when compared with much earlier exclusives on the other console. Perhaps the honeymoon will be over soon.