Stats: The video game console wars, one year later

With the holiday shopping season set to start, a full year has passed since the head-to-head competition began between the Microsoft Xbox 360, Nintendo Wii and Sony PlayStation 3 video-game consoles. In terms of sheer demand, the Wii has been the runaway hit. But there are a variety of ways to assess the data.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
The WildAttorney4009d ago

This is all old news, but the graphs are very pretty.

I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that the Xbox 360's success may very well save the PS3 from going the way of the dreamcast. If third party game makers only had the PS3's market to sell to, it would be very difficult for them to make a profit. The cost necessary to create a decent game requires a lot of sales, and the PS3 install base and attach rate would not support that. The Xbox 360, however, has a much bigger install base and an exponentially larger attach rate. This means that developers can make games for the Xbox 360 and, for a cost much smaller than developing for the PS3 alone, port that code to the PS3. But for this, developers would focus almost exclusively on the Wii, where the likelihood of profit would be so much greater.

andy0014008d ago

You are making a whole bunch of assumptions here. Firstly, each and every time a new console is launched the third party and first party games will have less of an audience to sell to. This was the same with PS1, PS2, XBox, Gamecube, Dreamcast, 360, Wii, and PS3. The benefit for third party publishers is that they can publish a game on the old established platform and the newer platform simultaneously, such as Fifa 08 for example being published on PS2 and PS3.

Attachment rates. The recent Assassins Creed launch showed a higher attachment rate to the PS3 than to the 360. You are using the global attachment rate as a measure, yet I believe that the publishers would want to use an attachment rate per game, or per genre. If the 360 has a higher attachment rate for 3d shooters, then the PS3 may have higher attachment rates for 3d Action games and the Wii may have higher attachment rates for party type games.

Costs are relative. It costs less for a publisher to produce a game for all the consoles than for just one. Although the engines my need to be coded seperately, the artwork, design, packaging etc. is virtually the same, and we can see this in action with large publishers like EA. Very rarely will they put out a console exclusive, as they know that profits are made by selling their games to the largest installed base possible, which in the current generation, can be put at roughly 33 million. Perhaps you should look at the annual results for third party publishers in the 360's first year. Due to dropping the Xbox and starting their new install base, profits were down. Now, in its second year, with the Wii and PS3 in the market profits are up. Realistically, it is because the market now has all three console that profits are up, nothing really to do with the 360 specifically. IMHO.

The Killer4009d ago

ps3 tell the end!! there is only 1 place for 1 console on this earth and that is ps3 haaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaa a!!
all those in the wrath of ps3 shall vanish by sony's fist of the east star!!

4009d ago
The Killer4009d ago

only a fool will think like what i wrote!! accept Raoh the conquerer!! :)

about the ps3.. well their are the same but considering the situation ps3 did better!! why?? because it sold almost the same with fierce competition and with (NO games as u xbots keep saying) and with no good online features and with high price!! and yet ps3 is selling the same as did 360 in the first year!!! isnt that a partial win??

Danja4009d ago

not to mention that the PS3 hasn't been on the global market for a year yet..!!

dhammalama4008d ago

You got two disagrees, I guess the PS3 HAS been available on the global market for a full year.


jmare4008d ago (Edited 4008d ago )

Blah, misread the post above, damn sarcasm.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4008d ago
Danja4009d ago (Edited 4008d ago )

MEH....PS3 FTW..!!!

there's actually two other competing consoles on the market..?..

what's a 360 and Wii...??

EDIT:@below....LMAO dude uhh I think you got the wrong guy..haha

PS3 FTW..?? 0_o

greenenvy4009d ago (Edited 4008d ago )

"The PS3 had a much better first year than the Xbox 360"

look fanboy, I know how hard this will be for yo'u to take but just listen closely.....

the ps3 did not have a better first year than 360, it had a worse first year by far.

it had no metal gear solid or must have games its first year.

the 360 had guitar hero 2, splinter cell, battlefield modern combat, tomb raider legend, dead rising, gears of war and of course saints row.

the 360 had a far better year overall & eclipsed sony, because their owners bought about 7 games per system and that's high for first year.

and now much later, bioshock, half life: orange box, rock band and mass effect are all out which are AAA titles. the 360 still has got high momentum there is no contest.

even the likes of eternal sonata sold out for the 360....
so unless you are a fan of only JRPGs or live in japan, there's no way the ps3 had a better first year. xbox360 did much better, end of story

ps3 had uncharted & it undersold its projections by a landslide, under-selling the 360's first year by nearly 90,000 units. all its AAAs like heavenly sword were flops that went in the 60 or below catergory.

also jrpg fans bought lots of copies of enchanted arms, so whether you like that game or not, it was a great showing for 360.

dhammalama4008d ago

And yet the PS3 still sold about the same number of consoles. You're arguing against yourself.

unrealgamer584009d ago

the ps3 had much better games the first year than 360 i think people forget that the first big AAA game was gears of war which cam around the 360s first year

ParaDise_LosT4009d ago

2nd place means 1st loser losers! hahahahahahah
Wii ftw

lol j/k...Im not a wii fanboy, but gosh we need some here O_o

Show all comments (17)