Japanese Wii sales rain on PS3 parade
Sony console outsold 4:1
Nintendo's Wii continues to dominate the Japanese games console biz, outselling Sony's PlayStation 3 by a factor of four to one over the past six months.
According to Japanese games magazine publisher Enterbrain, Nintendo sold 1.6m Wiis in its home market between the beginning of April up until the end of September. Sony shifted 385,492 PS3s in the same period.
The Reuters newsagency, quoting Enterbrains numbers, didn't provide an equivalent figure for Microsoft's Xbox 360. However, past reports have put the software giant's Japanese sales at 122,565 for the first half of 2007.
Last month, it emerged that Nintendo had shipped more than 9m Wiis around the world since the console's introduction in December 2006, compared to 8.9m 360s - even though the Microsoft machine has been available to buy for a whole year longer than the Wii.
At the time, PS3 sales to date were estimated at 3.7m, less than half the Xbox 360's score.
Just another point
@ Anonymous Vulture: "People who think that huge amount of great PS3 games that use its hardware to its full potential are just around the corner are in for a major disappointment -- there are more 360s than PS3s around so third party will concentrate on making them for 360 first and porting them to PS3 later, and none will bother with extra cores in any significant way."
Any third party serious about cross-platform concurrent development (such as EA for example), will have teams dedicated to each console, working alongside the modellers and artists. It almost becomes a competition between platforms, even though the content of the games can't change much for obvious reasons, there will always be "we're running this framerate, this native resolution" arguments etc. Look at Burnout Revenge on the PS2 compared to the original Burnout, it looks like it's running on a different console, that's the advantage of having a team eeking out the performance over a product lifecycle. For the first year or so of the PS3's life, it has seen more than it's fair share of "let's port this successful game to PS3 as quickly as possible to cash in", but that's not how third parties go about releasing cross-platform games when both platforms are available from the start of development.
Having said all that, my original point still stands, that games such as Oblivion, Rainbow 6 Vegas, Fight Night Round 3 and Half-Life 2 are running perfectly well on PS3 hardware without using the SPE's, at least not in any fundamental way, and that games which do come to use them will be the ones which begin to show the possibilities.
RE: Just a point
> I see this a lot, and I was surprised to learn (as you will be too I'm sure), that for example Rainbow 6 Vegas was ported from 360 to PS3, and only makes use of the PS3 3.2GHz dual-core GPE, and doesn't even touch the 6 developer-available 3.2GHz SPEs
And this will happen again and again. Many "gamers" are way to cool to pay any attention to history, even gaming history, so cannot spot a history repeating itself even when it happens just a decade later.
Same thing happen with Sega Saturn -- although more powerful than PS1 only Sega's own games used both processors; most other games used the same engine for PS1 and Saturn so used only one of the Saturn's two processors. End results was that most games looked worse on Saturn.
People who think that huge amount of great PS3 games that use its hardware to its full potential are just around the corner are in for a major disappointment -- there are more 360s than PS3s around so third party will concentrate on making them for 360 first and porting them to PS3 later, and none will bother with extra cores in any significant way. PS3 is going to end up the same way that Saturn did -- a clutch of fantastic first party titles with most of the rest just inferior ports from weaker 360.
Live in the Real World
Firstly, I own all three consoles (and used to own a PSP before I sold it as there ARE NO DECENT GAMES) and I am unbiased on this subject. Let's face facts, the Wii is cheaper than its competitors, easier and cheaper to produce games for and has outsold all of them many times over. Nintendo is NOT competing in the same space as Sony and MS, it is dominating that space to a point where companies producing games exclusively for MS and Sony are massively going to lose out and struggle to survive in the long term on a purely numbers basis. Anybody who argues this point is speculating, simple as; they are not living in the real world. The Wii has a buzz about it which has been picked up by the mainstream.
Nintendo, an already extremely cash-rich company, is making profit on every unit and game which they sell, unlike the massive losses of its competitors in console production costs and *cough* reliability issues (I've had 3 of the offending console). The graphics aren't as good, but they are serviceable and I've never had a reason to complain when playing the games, as they are more involving and to me this is the whole point.
The 3rd party games on Wii sell badly because with only a couple of exceptions, they are dull and lifeless ports. resident Evil 4 sells well. Not all consumers are stupid. Only the 1st party Nintendo games get the backing of adverts, sponsorship tie-ins etc and this helps them outsell the others. As will be shown by the upcoming 1st party titles, the games do not have to be partymegaminimix type games to succeed, and Nintendo's commitment to real (not necessarily hardcore) gamers stands firm.
I played Halo 3 last night, and got bored of it after an hour. Graphics: underwhelming, Gears.O.W. is far better in both geometry and artwork. Music:great. Gameplay, unwieldy and stuck in the past although as good as the last generation's Halo 2, very uninvolving. Plot: derivative and unoriginal, see Aliens, Starship Troopers, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek with many lines of script being pilfered and whole plot lines/set-pieces 'paid homage to'. I don't play multiplayer over the net, I don't know anyone else that does either. Whenever i played online i've not really enjoyed the experience. Net result. plenty of hype, average game. I've had more fun playing Katamari...
The PS3 is built like a tank, is all well and good as a BD player, and for the odd game until you get one and realise that there are actually 1 or two games worth getting and not alot on the horizon which I might want. This is because the games cost so darn much to make! Worse is that Xbox games often have better/more features/graphics in practice (not in potential) than the PS3. Is it really useable as a media hub for the average person? Nope. Far too complicated to configure. Is it really worth spending all that money on for anybody right now?? Really? No it is not (sole exception is to use as a value- added BD player). If mine wasn't a freebie then i certainly wouldn't have bought one. Anybody out there who really does want one, needs to stop and ask why exactly you're buying one right now. Don't assume that the previous generation's performance will reoccur, Nintendo is back in control this generation and both of its competitors are painfully aware of this salient fact. Its not a fad or a trend, the Wii is a platform which has now reached critical mass in the public consciousness like the Gameboy before it, and those who are unhappy about this, for whatever reason, sorry but I told you so.
I dont normally post in the Wii Vs PS3 comments but...
...I feel compelled to stick my oar in having read the same arguments from both sides repeatedly.
Shocked as I'm sure you will be to learn, everything in my house does not revolve around what is going on with the television.
So, when I do play a game, I want it to be fun and easy to use.
I've got a PS2 and I love it and have loads of games for it, some of them PS1 games. I dont care what the graphics are like as long as the game play is good and its interesting.
I've got a Wii for the same reason. Its fun and different.
I'm not going to buy a PS3 for many years to come, because all the fabulous extras that the PS3 fanboys witter on about dont mean anything to me. I dont care if its the best media center / console around because I dont want a media center / console. I just want some fun.
Thats why the Wii is outselling the PS3. It appeals to more people.
My mum just bought one for herself and she's 60.
She doesn't like the PS2 because its too much like hard work for her.
I know serious gamers love the PS3 but some of us have other things to do and want something more accessible.
It's the HD that's the problem
I've got a Wii. I bought it because it was only £179, my daughter wanted one (ahem) and because it'll work fine on my non-HD plasma TV.
I haven't bought a PS3 because it's £425 and needs HD. Ok, it might work in SD but what's the point in that? So my purchase of a PS3 will have to wait until I buy a nice new 1080p TV. And even then I'm still not paying £425 for it - too much! When it drops to under £300 I'd consider it. When it drops to £200 or £250 my wife might consider it :-)
I really want one (more than I wanted a Wii), but I suspect a lot of people are in the same situation as me,