Analysts Predict Consoles Sales Peak Reached 100
Thanks to Yahoo News for reprinting the press release regarding financial analysts' predictions that the current videogame console cycle has peaked. According to a spokesman for U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray, "We believe spring 2003 marked the midpoint of the current video game cycle", suggesting 2003 "will be the peak year for unit sales of current generation hardware." This may mean leaner times before the next generation of console hardware debuts, predicted by Piper Jaffray for "autumn 2006", and meanwhile, the company is forecasting "...that 22.3 million hardware units will be sold in North America in 2003, a modest increase from 21.1 million units in 2002 and will subsequently decline in 2004 to sales of 20.3 million units as the installed base of video game hardware becomes saturated."
1991 (Score:3, Funny)
Re:1991 (Score:1)
Re:1991 (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:1991 (Score:2)
Chris Mattern
Re:1991 (Score:2)
^_^
Re:1991 (Score:1)
I wish they'ld remake the Enix games that never got to America, like Star Ocean and Terranigma. Oh well.
Re:1991 (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure Star Ocean came out here too in Australia.
Don't get the wrong impression from my post that was get more RPGs than you do though, we missed out on Xenosaga, Lunar 1 + 2, Valkrie Profile, Thous
Re:1991 (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:4, Informative)
Sigh. We've been through this many times. Consoles offer different thing than computer games: less online play for the most part, less download mods, and less customization in general, but bigger screens, a different and in some ways much more varied selection of quality games, good standard controls for many games (less so for FPS and RTS) and a pretty much iron clad guarantee that the game will work. The cost is comparable or possibly much less than the cost of keeping a PC up to date w/ video cards and what not.
And despite stuff like the N-Gage and random barely-better-than-homebrew systems coming out, roughly speaking, this generation is defined by consoles released on or before the end of 2001.
(PS2 2000, Xbox, GC 2001, GBA 2001, maybe DC 1999) Every other console has been a day late and a dollar short.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
With crappy resolution. Plus, the screen can't usefully occupy more than 100% of your retinas. Most people sit very close to their PCs.
I'm not so sure. If you insist on staying bleeding edge, sure, but how many PC games insist on it? If I'm willing to put up with 640x480@60Hz (same as TV), I can go years between upgrades.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2)
With crappy resolution. Plus, the screen can't usefully occupy more than 100% of your retinas. Most people sit very close to their PCs.
Actually, I prefer the lower resolutions. When I see, say, Halo on a highend rig at Microcenter, I'm struck by how fake it looks, because the polygons are so crisply edged. Lower rez TV actually has a nice blurring effect.
And size is size; I wouldn't want my friends to gather round the couch facing something the size of my PC's screen.
I'm not so su
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Fair enough. I don't do that sort of thing too often, so that didn't occur to me.
I'll also agree with the blurring you mention, though sometimes the fuzziness gives me a headache.
In general, I don't have a preference one way or the other. On a lot of PC games, I can't see how one could get by without the keyboard (I don't recall if PS2's have a keyboard you can get; by that point, I might as well buy t
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2)
I'll also agree with the blurring you mention, though sometimes the fuzziness gives me a headache.
Huh. Well, one of my main game buddies usually declines FPS on consoles, it might be the framerate....but I think it's just the framerates that emerge when its doing 4 way split screen, he does ok w/ 2 player co-op Halo (which might be a more powerful system anyway) and whole screen games I think, like Metroid.
It seems funny to me to think of a keyboard as a controller...it see
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
As for bugs, I rarely see any. Enter the Matrix was a terrible game, badly rushed and a horrible waste of money. Same with Tomb Raider Agel of Darkness,
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
when FF7 came out for PC, i bought it, installed it, played for 5 minutes and threw it out. Then i went and bough the PS version of it and enjoyed it. Final Fantasy was not meant to be played w/ a KB and Mouse
as well, a few weeks ago i played a PC Demo of Midnight Club 2, i walked away disgusted by the control scheme, while i loved the controls on my PS2.
at the same time, i can't stand Halo on my X-Box, and i can't stand most other FPSs because i ne
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
hmm when did they release a patch so that FFVII would work with an nVidia card? (It was, after all, a Glide-based game).
FFVIII had a patch that made it work, but the movies played upside down (and when characters were in the scene they were often
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
I bought my PS2 for $75 a year ago. It will continue to play brand-new popular games until 2006 when the PS3 comes out. That's 4 years of gaming vs. the 6 months to a year of a video card twice the price. Not counting keeping up with the rest of the hardware and the headaches that come with analyzing system requirements. It's just cheaper and easier to get a console.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Was your PS2 new or used? I can get used video cards for the cash I carry in my pockets. Plus, as I mentioned above, you don't have to stay bleeding edge to play current games.
Apples to apples, it's largely a wash.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
As for not having to stay on the bleeding edge to play games, that's true: But to be able to play brand-new games on 3yr old hardware at a decent frame rate for more than a few minutes before your machine locks up or crashes is frankly not all that likely. 5yr old hardware? Forget it.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
I'll see your "codswallop" and raise you a "piffle". My current hardware is as follows:
Star Wars: Galaxies is the first game I've encountered that doesn't run at a decent frame rate (btw, TVs run at 60Hz, so that's what I assume you consider "decent"). It runs dog slow (usually <20fps), but it doesn't lock up or crash.
Again, I assert that the money peop
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
I think that must be the case. Of course, since I use Linux most of the time, it's rare that I install anything on my Windows partition (except games, obviously). I suspect the fact that it's nearly empty is why I run into so few problems. No Office, no ISP software, no spyware, yada yada. Of course, Galaxies proves that I'm going to have to break down and upgrade soon anyway.
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Okay, sounds reasonable, but... if you're waiting a year or two to buy the console, you're automatically foregoing the "new" games by default. The end outcome is the same as not upgrading PC hardware and sticking with StarCraft for another year.
(I guess it's not a point in my favor if I said I'd only be inclined to play two of those four games you listed, eh?)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
But console games have a used market, unlike PC, and so I can buy them later, for cheaper. Alright, that defeats the point of new, but whatever.
(And no, that's not a point in your favor. Ok, if you ignore the fact that I covered up my logic hole with a "whatever", you can have your point.)
=)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Actually, I'll just concede the whole thing on the basis of the used game market. I was just talking with a coworker a few days ago on this very problem. We both buy far more PC games than we have time to play, just on the theory that we'll get around to it "some day". Obviously, it's a sucking waste of money to buy games new if they'll be in the discount bin by the time we get around to installing them. Half the time, though, games we like (or assume we'll like) are commercial flops, so they're in the
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
I game on a Mac laptop. Since it's a laptop, I can't upgrade anything on it. So that costs me nothing! Since it's a Mac, all the games come out 3-6 months later than on a PC, so that extends the amount of time before it can't run the newest games! Plus, having already waited 6 months, it's easy to just wait another 3 till the game is marked down. So I save there too!
So all this time I thought I was being difficult, I was really just being
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Anyways, that was $75 for a whole system, not just a video card. I can get video cards for 5 or 10 bucks too, but then I'm limited to Puzzle Master 4. And now I don't have to read tiny system requirements boxes, just look for the big words that say "Playstation 2". Besides, who wants to hunch over a tiny computer screen when they can lie down on the couch to play games?
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Point taken. My point was that people always compare the cost of an old system to a new video card. It's just not fair.
I guess I carry more cash than you. ;-) Seriously, my GeForce 2 is quite nice, and didn't cost much at all.
Good poin
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
I compared the old system to a new card because the old system can play all the new video games of this console generation (usually lasts about 5 years), whereas, no matter how nice your pretty GeForce2 is, it just won't play all the new games until 2006. By the way, how much did it cost you?
I don't know what sorts of games you play, but the ones I get are rarely sedate enough to allow me to lie
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
I don't recall off-hand, but I think the GeForce 2 was $40. My Voodoo3 up and died suddenly, and not surprisingly, replacements are hard to come by. I didn't want to wait, so I didn't bother comparison shopping (having an out-dated motherboard limited my choices severely).
I, too, insisted on getting away from TV, and getting a PS2 helped. I hadn't touched it in months, but finally got True Crime here a few days ago. Part of my problem is that my TV is smaller than my monitor. Perhaps that colors my op
Voodoo (Score:1)
Re:Voodoo (Score:1)
Bought. As in once.
Re:Voodoo (Score:2)
Re:Voodoo (Score:1)
On the other hand, I don't know anyone that wanted a Voodoo 5, since nVidia had taken over the market before the thing finally came out.
Personally, the only hardware gifts I've ever given have been hand-me-downs, and those people tended to appreciate it more because my old hardware was a significant upgrade to their old hardware, and since they kept hardw
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:1)
you don't get out much do you? sure they offer LESS games on the mac, but usually it's the better ones... try www.macgamefiles.com [macgamefiles.com] and apple's game updates section [apple.com]
admittedly, I have a mac and several consoles dating back to the 80's, but I'm just that kind of guy.
Smurfs!!! (Score:1)
Smurfs for Atari 2600 is a sweet game.
Re:Smurfs!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Smurfs!!! (Score:2)
Re:Not a fan, but . . . (Score:2)
- Many console games aren't released for PC. Ever seen Zelda, Mario Kart, SSBM, or Viewtiful Joe on the PC? The list of excellent games that will never see the PC is huge.
- Because consoles are much easier. Buy game, put disk in, play. No patching, no updating drivers.
- Quality control is (mostly) better on console games. Look at the mess even big budget PC games like BF1942 are before the fifth patch or so.
- Consoles are cheap. 80UKP for a gamecube for example - that's less than my PC's processor
Leaner times? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really. Even the companies that don't lose money on their console sales aren't making a whole lot. Game sales are what is important, and the larger installed base should help those.
Re:Leaner times? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Leaner times? (Score:1)
And with those kinds of numbers, there's still plenty of room for movement in the market share of the three consoles. If Sony's sales drop by 2-3 million and the other 2 consoles pick up a portion of the 2 million left then there could be plenty of room for the Cube to take #2 in total sales, for instance. 4th quarter sales of PS2s are expected to be down 2 million anyway, and their shipments have been down ~40%, so it's very likely that PS2 sales could slip by a
Re:Leaner times? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I think more a problem toward the end of a console's life cycle is the amount of good quality older games available at budget prices, and the quick pricing-down of new titles because there's such a glut on the market. But this is probably separate of install-base.
Re:Leaner times? (Score:2)
I don't think that's a problem at all. A game released in 2004 will have a larger potential audience than a game released in 2002 would. It doesn't have to only sell to someone who bought a console the same year.
Perhaps it's a problem because people with older consoles tend to buy
Re:Leaner times? (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe it's because we have THREE top-notch consoles now, instead of two? The console companies are splitting three ways right now, moreso now that Xbox sales have tapered off and GCN sales have jumped a lot recently. Compare to three years ago, when it was just Nintendo and Sony with Sega as a failing and distant third.
And finally, emulation andn classic games are really good now. I play a lot of classic games on PSX that I pick up in bargain bins, as well as emulated SNES/NES games. They're cheap, they're good, and I can play some of them on my GBA, others on my PS2. Contrast this to SNES/early PSX era, when emulation was still young and most people didn't have broadband.
I'd really like for the market to bear 3 console vendors, but I'm afraid someone will get driven out or be forced into a niche (hello, Nintendo!). I'd be happy to buy into that niche if it were Nintendo.
Re:Leaner times? (Score:2)
Why? Do you mean in the Atari 2600-E.T. sense of too many games for the userbase? If so, remember there's over 60 million PS2's out there. Even given a 50% failure rate that leaves a worldwide userbase of over 30 million consoles.
And since others keep mentioning it, Sony should be making money on each PS2 by now. Last informed report had them p
Is there any particular reason to listen to this? (Score:3, Insightful)
10% decline? (Score:3, Interesting)
--trb
Afterglow (Score:4, Funny)
The major console companies all had a post-peak cigarette today. Nintendo was quoted as saying, "Hold me."
Unfortunatly, the lovefest came to a quick end when Sony and Microsoft got into a fight over who would have to sleep in the wet spot.
Some NextGen speculation... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Some NextGen speculation... (Score:1)
MS buying out Nintendo of America, dropping the X-box, and selling a Nintendo-branded (or Nintendo-variant) console?
Yeah, I could see that. And I would probably pick one up, too.
Re:Some NextGen speculation... (Score:2)
Re:Some NextGen speculation... (Score:1)
I own the nintendo because nintendo makes games.
When microsoft figures out that when you make games, and make them good, you sell to a dedicated fanbase, who unquestioningly buys them for the 1st party content.
Xbox is having to fight it out with Sony over 3rd party stuff, and thinks themselves content with it's sales. I find the sales to be really poor. When you co
Re:Some NextGen speculation... (Score:1)
The only way consolidated hardware would work for the console industry would be if there was more than one hardware provider. There should be serveral more or less identicle systems that all run the same game software. Otherwise who ever controls the hardware will control prices and we'll end up with 80 dollar games like back when Nintendo was in power. (Although that involved other factors as well.) If two of the big three team up that won't change much in the industy. It would just make the market for gam
Software sells hardware... (Score:2)
The Cross platform releases are what keep hardware sales down, (good) exclusive titles should make console sales go up.
Re:Software sells hardware... (Score:2, Insightful)
GC and XBox could see a spike, but it would probably get swallowed up by the overall decline in PS2 sales. This is talking about the market, after all. Nintendo and MS could easily have a banner year in 2004 while the total consoles sold goes down.
Consolidation is needed for consoles (Score:1)
Re:Consolidation is needed for consoles (Score:2)
While you are at it, you can also play Doom 3 on the Xbox http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/doom3/news_60745 03.html [gamespot.com]
Both of these are in the future, but I believe the releases are going to be very close the to the PC release dates.
An odd report (Score:5, Interesting)
Check Nintendo's recent press releases. I think the PS2 year-to-date sales are down 17%, Xbox 5%, and the GameCube up a few percent or so.
Looks like 2002 might've been the peak, unless something unexpected happens next year to drive up sales.
Spring 2003... (Score:2)
The Gamecube was unloading with Zelda, Metroid Prime, and Mario Sunshine (which wasn't that great, but the name alone sold it)
The PS2 was going insane trying to counter the Xbox's online advantage and cranking out/announcing more games to the Greatest Hits list
The Xbox was... well... being itself.
I'm not surprised that Spring 2003 was a high point in the video game console market, but to say the market will suffer from a decline now is both
Re:halo2 (Score:2)
Halo 2 probably won't even sell 10 million copies. And, most of those copies will be sold to people who already own Halo. Who would probably also own an Xbox already.
Halo 2 might sell Xboxes, but not a ton. A lot of the PC crowd just doesn't understand how a first person shooter can work on a console. Also, they have Halo on the PC, and I guess it wasn't that hot- so not a lot of people are going to feel that left out of the Halo 2
Re:Dunno about that... (Score:1)
Not quite. Yes, 10 million is pushing it, as that is roughly 1 copy for each owner of an XBox, and more than 4 times the number of copies of Halo sold for the XBox, but it's slightly more than half the number of copies of SMB3 for the NES sold, and 1/4th the number of copies of SMB1 for the NES sold. 10 Million would tie with The Sims and SMB2, taking it to anywhere from 7th to
Re:Dunno about that... (Score:2)
That means we might expect that there are 70,000 pre-orders out there.
Orange County is one of the wealthier counties in the country, so possibly the results are skewed.
(Actually, my numbers are meaningless...but I wanted to point out that 700 pre orders really does not translate to 10 million copies sold, or even less likely, 10 million Xboxes sold)
dammit (Score:3, Insightful)
Between owning 3 PCs, an Atari 2600/7800, NES, SNES, Genesis, SegaCD, Dreamcast, a PS, PS2, a Gamecube, and tons and tons of games over the last few years, I can honestly say this hobby is more expensive than a crack addiction...
Re:dammit (Score:1)
Rebuys (Score:2)
Yay! So when... (Score:1)
Some of the best console titles end up being mid - late gen games to the console.
FFVII-IX, Syphon Filter, MGS; Shenmue, surely others I've missed, it seems that truly innovative titles hit a console late in it's development cycle.
This sort of news means only one thing ... (Score:1)