Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Wii Businesses

Wii Outsells 360, PS3 Worldwide 491

Posted by Zonk
from the top-dog-has-a-waggle dept.
Wowzer writes "Despite confusing consoles produced, shipped or sold reports, the Nintendo Wii is now the best-selling system worldwide. Its sales exceed that of the Xbox 360 despite Microsoft's console having a year-long head start. And it's way ahead of the PS3. From the article: 'Sales figures from each console's launch date through the end of July (and the end of August in Japan) were added up, with the Wii just barely edging out the 360: 9 million for the Wii, 8.9 million for the 360, and 3.7 million for the PlayStation 3.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wii Outsells 360, PS3 Worldwide

Comments Filter:
  • Sooooo... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Duffy13 (1135411) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @02:58PM (#20592535)
    Is anyone actually surprised here?
  • by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:06PM (#20592637) Homepage Journal
    One thing that has shocked me about the Wii is how it can still be perpetually out of stock 10 months after being released. At this point Nintendo doesn't have any excuse, they need to ramp production up and they need to do it 6 months ago. I have a co-worker who is looking to get one and he's actually being told to stand in line outside of the store on shipment day still, and this was after calling just about every retailer in the area looking for one. Even weirder is when you look online and all of the available consoles are marked up over the retail price. That is crazy for a console that has been out on the market for as long as the Wii has.
  • Re:Just barly (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CmmdrKeen (1037120) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:18PM (#20592857)
    You're missing the point. The Xbox 360 has had a significant advantage time-wise over both the PS3 and the Wii. Nintendo, in about 10 months, has caught the 360 which has been on the market a full year longer. Not only that, but just do a comparison at your local store. When was the last time you saw a Wii sitting on a shelf anywhere? Sales of the Wii show no signs of letting up any time soon. So in short, Nintendo is murdering their competition.
  • by Pojut (1027544) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:20PM (#20592903) Homepage
    I know my opinion isn't really worth any more than the next guy's opinion, but I do own all three 7th-gen consoles so I suppose that gives me a bit more "hands on" experience with them...by far, out of the three my 360 gets the most playtime. To me, it has the most comfortable controller, the best overall "feel", and, again, in my opinion, the best games.

    Many games on the 360 eventually came out or simultaneously came out for the PS3...just for grins, if I bought the game for one console, I would rent it for the other...you know, just to compare the two. In all honesty, I would rather play those multi-system games on the 360. It's not just the controller (although that does have something to do with it) but it's just how it "feels"...I can't really describe it any better than that. Not to mention graphically with multi-system releases, I find the 360 looks SLIGHTLY better than it's PS3 counterpart.

    That said, all three consoles are fantastic fun and I highly recommend people get all three if they can afford it...the Wii60 combo is the best bet if you can't afford all three, but the PS3 is no slouch either. While it does lack a good selection of exclusives for the moment, that will change down the line (and I liked Lair, so there!) Ratchet and Clank, Metal Gear, God of War 3, etc.

    That said, the 360 has it's own lineup of exclusives coming for it (some also coming to PC)...Fable 2, GoW 2, Mass Effect, Too Human, etc.

    The Wii has some awesome games coming to it as well...Mario Galaxy, the new Mario Kart and Smash Bros, etc.

    If I HAD to choose a favourite this gen for me, it would definately be the 360...but in all honesty, all three of them are worth your hard earned dollars.

    Play as many games on as many different systems as you can.
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by LithiumX (717017) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:25PM (#20592995)
    Innovation is good but not universally good.

    I got one for my niece and nephew, and they love it. Even my parents (approaching their 60's) can understand it better than they could understand a PS2. People in nursing homes are finding they love it. Small children can use it, and it still has appeal for the 10-40 crowd. That's the core of it's sales - it has a far wider range of appeal.

    However, it's graphics capabilities are not as advanced, and games for it have trouble comparing to their counterparts on other systems. The controls are an excellent idea, but could be much better designed (for instance, NOW is the time to resurrect the Power Glove). Other consoles can and will follow suit (unless Nintendo is able to file suit - difficult considering previous art).

    The Wii is doing well because Nintendo always does well, even when they're not on top. Not only do they do well, but they do well without being the most technically advanced - because they pursue a wider market, rather than competing more heavily in a single one (such as the recent widespread dedication to hard core gamers, which turned out to be a mistake as HCG's were the most vocal, but not the most profitable).

    Games are like movies. The slightly improved same-old-same-old will usually make more money than the truly innovative, just as the best movies usually never become blockbusters, and the apparent fact that you can make artistically great music, or you can make wildly popular music, but you can very rarely ever do both.

    The Wii was a great concept, and if they don't blow it they could dominate - but it will be difficult to maintain that unless they upgrade their hardware as well.
  • Re:Rewind 2 years (Score:5, Interesting)

    by meringuoid (568297) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:31PM (#20593145)
    Who saw this coming? Be honest!

    When I heard the idea - an overclocked Gamecube with a novelty control system involving waving one's hands around - I thought Nintendo were doomed. One U-Force was bad enough.
    When I heard details of the novelty control system, I thought it ridiculous for about two minutes, then began thinking it through a little. Several words came through my mind... 'bat, racket, gunsight... fucking lightsaber...' - I thought Nintendo might have something big on their hands, especially given what the DS was doing by then.
    When I heard about the name, I though Nintendo were doomed.
    When I was queueing outside the store on a damn cold night playing wireless Mario Kart with the other fanboys (all of us there to get our hands on Twilight Princess) and we saw the demo installation through the big window, and we saw how many passers-by were stopping to see what all the fuss was about and seeing the guys inside bowling... I thought Nintendo might have something very big.
    When I saw how many of my utterly non-gamer relatives simply would not put down Wii Tennis... wow.

  • by CorSci81 (1007499) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @03:38PM (#20593301) Journal

    Your post nicely sums up much of what I originally wanted to say, except for one nitpick.

    Conversely, if the PS3 can build some decent momentum as its prices drop, it could overtake Microsoft overall with core gamers. If this does happen, it will happen very late in this console cycle (no earlier than say, 2010). And if it does do so, it will not overtake the 360 in the US.

    As much as Sony and its supporters want to say the console race is a marathon, it isn't. Currently Sony has a console priced out of the range of the mass market and their sales numbers just aren't improving. At their current installed base and the cost of developing for the PS3 no sane developer is going to touch it. Most of what's coming out seems to be games already in progress where the developer has decided to write it off as a loss and/or port it to 360 as well to recoup some of the development costs. That or Sony has given them enough money to basically pay for the game to be developed for them. Unless sales figures change quickly the PS3 will be living off of ports of 360 games or what they can pay to have developed. I honestly don't see the PS3 beating the 360 outside of Japan where it's already in the lead.

    From what I recall, the 360 is possibly still ahead of the Wii in North America (given the Japanese sales numbers it pretty much has to be). It may be a few more months to a year before Nintendo completely captures all of the markets not accounting their supply limitations during the holiday season and the release of Halo 3, which makes it possibly even longer. I really can imagine at least the 360 and Wii both being viable platforms for nearly the entire lifetime of this generation of consoles. The only real competition between these two is game sales where their market shares intersect. The PS3 and 360 however are in a much more direct competition, and currently the 360 is outselling the PS3 worldwide.

  • by scot4875 (542869) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @04:04PM (#20593837) Homepage
    Giving up a mod point to post, but...

    I would say that right now, Nintendo is #1 over all, but only #2 with respect to hard core gamers. ... If the Wii is ever going to get a grip on the core segment of the console market, they have to do it within the next year.

    I've said this before. I'll say it again. Fuck the 'hardcore' gamers. Let them have their 'superior' games on other platforms. I've been playing video games since Pong, I've finished more games than most of these 'hardcore' gamers have played. I've beaten the original Super Mario Brothers on a single life without warping. I've finished Battletoads. I've finished Einhander. I've finished Perfect Dark on Perfect Agent difficulty. I'm as experienced as they come in terms of video games.

    You know what? Increasingly, I think that 'hardcore' gamer just means "a gamer who wants better graphics, more channels of audio, and the same old gameplay." What games are so damn hardcore on the XBox 360? Halo 3? Gears of War? What makes them so damn hardcore? I've played first person shooters, I've played 3rd person shooters. I want something *new*. I'm perfectly happy with my Wii Sports and Wii Play as far as providing something new to try. I've enjoyed Metroid Prime 3, but that's primarily because Super Metroid is my all-time favorite game -- it doesn't bring anything *that* new to the table over MP or Echoes, just some extra polish and enhanced controls.

    You know what the nicest thing about the Wii is? I can actually play games like Wii Sports or Raving Rabbids with non-gamer friends when they come over, and they can do well at them. In FPS, RTS, or fighting games, it's not even entertaining to play against my friends, because I just wipe the floor with them. While that might appeal to some people, I'm not in it for bragging rights, I'm in it for a challenge. It's also not entertaining to play against asshat 14-year-olds online.

    So fuck the hardcore demographic. They're going to have to accept the fact that they have become a niche audience, and accept what games come their way. Who knows? Maybe hardcore gamers will one day be like movie buffs, known for being familiar with lots of obscure but great games. As it is now, a movie fan analogous to what we think of as a hardcore gamer would watch nothing but Michael Bay films and gush about how awesome they are, and how everyone else sucks for enjoying The Life Aquatic.

    --Jeremy
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by yoyhed (651244) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @04:29PM (#20594319)

    I don't remember playing Gears of War, Resistance Fall of Man, Motostorm [sic], or many other 360/PS3 games on previous consoles.
    And I don't remember having fun after 15 minutes of Motorstorm.
  • by Duffy13 (1135411) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @05:05PM (#20594939)
    Actually I did account for it with PS3s, I just did not know the numbers, and recently I heard the 360s did not sell at a loss, however that may be a recent development. So, to alleviate concern using the links you provided the hardware numbers change too:

    360: $2,042,500,000 (if all Pro) | $1,379,500,000 (if all Core)
    Note: If it's true 360s no longer sell at a loss, this number is higher, as before true value is probably in between. This also does not include recent elite sales either, which may farther skew the numbers either up or down. Plus repair costs, which once more we do not have numbers for.
    PS3: $714,655,000 (if all sold at $500, the cheapest offered)
    Note: And Sony drops back, at more then a 50% loss per unit. Guess they are banking on that 80GB and games to pull them out of the hole. Which is still a possibility even at their current consoles out there. At least they aren't going bankrupt.
    Wii: $2,250,000,000 Note: No change.

    How interesting, the lost revenue due to subsidizing the hardware is:
    360: $1,112,500,000
    PS3: $1,135,345,000
    This has no real bearing since 360 has sold practically 3:1 with PS3, I just find it amusing at his point.

    New Conclusion: 360 is still winning, but not by a lot. It'll be neck and neck for a bit. I'll give Wii the likelihood of pulling ahead in the immediate future, don't know if they can keep it though in the long run, gonna probably come down to games.
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jimicus (737525) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @05:17PM (#20595133)
    Look at it from Nintendo's point of view, though.

    There was no way they could develop a console which could beat Microsoft or Sony on sheer technical brilliance. It never made much sense to even try.

    That meant that they were basically stuck with one of two things:

    1. Continue to focus on the younger market with a rehashed Gamecube.
    2. Broaden the horizons by looking to a target market which didn't actually happen to be that bothered about the latest FPS (exactly the same as the last one but with a slightly bigger gun).

    Looks to me like option 2 was what they went for - and the judgement was spot-on.
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by heinousjay (683506) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @06:24PM (#20596041) Journal
    I'm no fanboy, but I knew it was coming. Nintendo is the only company that consistently pandered to people who wanted a gaming experience. Everyone else shoots for the "cool" factor, trying to rope in trend followers. Nintendo remained focused all throughout their time in games on the one thing that counted - having fun.

    This isn't to say that MS and Sony don't have fun experiences available with their consoles, just that it seems fun comes second for them to being the leader. Sure, competition is good, but it's not the end goal.

    I was always certain Nintendo would find itself back on top. I honestly thought it would be another generation, but hey, bully for them.
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by wanderingknight (1103573) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @06:58PM (#20596447)

    Because of that, I have very little interest in a PS3 - even if it were much cheaper - because I'd be getting the same games that might look slightly better (if they actually upped it for the ps3) but otherwise a very similar system (with no XBox Live).
    Umm, but the main appeal of the PS3 (at least in my eyes) is its repertoire of Japanese games, most of which aren't available for the 360. Let's face it: Japanese games are very, very different to Western games, in a lot of aspects. Those looking for the traditional quirks of Japanese games will probably look towards the PS3 and not towards the 360. I know I will, but mainly because I can't stand most of what guides the Western game market these days.
    Granted, the 360 seems to be licensing quite a few Japanese games when compared to the original Xbox, however, it won't get nearly 5% of the titles the PS3 will have.
  • Re:Sooooo... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by brandonbradley (950049) on Thursday September 13, 2007 @09:48PM (#20598137)
    That hits on the really great thing for the Wii, it allows people to play those older games that they either never got a chance to play in years gone by, or just want to replay. The Virtual Console allows the companies to make new money off of games that have long passed their expected shelf life. All this with from what I am guessing is very little coding needed for it to be usable on the virtual console due to the modular nature of the controllers. The other sleeper aspect that I have personally appreciated is that the Game cube games all play on it as well. Yes, you need a game cube controller (I recommend the Wavebird as it is wireless), and a memory card to save your games, but then there are a awful lot of decent games out there for cheap. For example, I picked up all three Prince of Persia games for around $50. Sure they are old games and the graphics aren't as pretty as the ones on the new consoles, but the game play is really what seems to be the more important factor, and that is where Nintendo really seems to have stolen the show with the Wii.
  • by LKM (227954) on Friday September 14, 2007 @07:11AM (#20601249) Homepage

    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?

Repel them. Repel them. Induce them to relinquish the spheroid. - Indiana University fans' chant for their perennially bad football team

Working...