Wishing Failure for Competing Consoles Only Damages Yourself

With the birthdate(s) of the next generation drawing near, the rumor mongering and the hate and anger between fanbases of competing consoles has reached alarming levels. Sony fans would like to see Microsoft file for bankruptcy. Microsoft fans wish nothing more than a meteor dropping on Sony’s headquarters. Nintendo fans just want to see the world (besides Kyoto) burn.

Looking at the comment section of any gaming site under any post that even remotely touches the topic of consoles is depressing, with levels of vitriol and hate that are simply unbecoming of a hobby that should be all about fun.

The most (tragically) ironic factor in all this squabbling, insulting and misinformation, is that the average fanboy doesn’t even realize that by wishing failure (or worse) on competing consoles, not only he makes himself look like an idiot foaming at the mouth, but he also pledges for a situation in which he’d receive a much worse experience with his own favorite console.

If there is one iron-clad concept in any commercial and technological endeavor, it’s that competition is the mother of evolution. When companies compete fiercely against each other and try to continuously one-up each other while wrestling for market share, they do so by improving and polishing the quality of their service like a diamond, adding as many features as possible, and shaving down prices as much as their finances allow. All of that is advantageous, first and foremost, for their own users.


Guess what has propelled some of the most groundbreaking technological advancements of mankind’s history? Most definitely not peaceful times in which researchers can take their time to spend taxpayer money on experimenting on the bathroom habits of their hamsters. While tragic, war times always pushed humanity to overachieve, propelling technology to advance much faster and more efficiently despite the disruption caused by the conflict itself.

The same concept applies on a much smaller scale to the console war.

Basically every time this industry has been in a situation of monopoly, the party that was in a position of power ended up slowing down their evolution, sitting on their laurels and making large mistakes in the following generations, resulting  in a degradation of the experience for their own fans.

After years of domination Nintendo felt too secure to consider the innovation of the CD. They decided to stick to cartridges, which not only severely limited what they could accomplish with their games, but was one of the most relevant causes of them getting a sound spanking from Sony and the first PlayStation.

Looking at more recent times the PS2’s overwhelming domination prompted Sony to think of their customers as walking moneybags, launching the PS3 at a mind boggling price and with an overly complex architecture that hindered it for several years.


After the success of the DS, Nintendo launched the 3DS at an unwarranted price, supported only by the 3D gimmick, and the flattering sales of the Wii prompted Kyoto’s console manufacturer to release the Wii U without games to support it, and we all know the results of that.

On the other hand crisis prompted evolution and progress, and situations in which a console manufacturer was put in the position of the underdog, pretty much always led to an improvement of the experience for its users on the long run.

Just look at the upcoming launch of PS4 and Xbox One. Pitched competition is pushing both Sony and Microsoft to give us more and more, announcing new features and perks almost daily, in order to try and gain our vote of confidence.

Ultimately without healthy competition, the evolution of your favorite console would slow down, prices wouldn’t go down as fast, first party developers wouldn’t make as much an effort to juice every little drop of power to one-up the first party games running on other consoles, and the manufacturer wouldn’t feel the need to pack as many features into the product and to constantly update it with more.


You’d end up paying more for less. That’s the inevitable effect of monopoly, and that’s why real gamers don’t wish failure for consoles that happen not to be their favorite. They know that the existence and success of these competing products pushes their favorite to greater achievements, and those greater achievements are good first and foremost for them and for gaming in general.

I’ll leave you with the words of SCE Worldwide Studios President Shuhei Yoshida:

I’m not saying that the PS4 is losing at the moment, but the Xbox 360 was very strong in North America. That’s why we’re working there with the mindset “we are the challengers.” I think that when you have a strong rival, it’s good for the market as a whole. We want to do our best so that we won’t be defeated.

The man in the same position at Microsoft, Phil Spencer, feels pretty much the same:

I love it. If you think back a couple of years, there were questions about whether big shows like this were meaningful and about where the business was going. I think about E3 this year as one of the most exciting I’ve been too, and 300,000 people will come through here! It’s good for the industry that there’s such high awareness – and competition is good for gamers.

Fierce competition is indeed good for gamers, whatever their console of choice is. If you want your favorite console to be the best it can be, then the first thing you should hope for is the existence of worthy rivals.

Join the Discussion

  • ragingmerifes

    Although when the PS2 was monopolizing, its library was supreme, but I guess it was more of an exception.
    And I want even the Ouya to succeed, but it’s good to crack one joke or another sometimes. 😀

  • quinten488

    Xbox One will do well just not as well as PS4, Sony will win because of their variety of exclusive games and the $400 price point. X1 just won’t be able to match up to the amount of exclusives that the PS4 will have.

    • Michael Clanton

      this comment is whats wrong with fanboys…everything here is based on your personal likes, personal opinion, and not fact. pathetic way to ruin a good article. Exclusives are only important to the base who buys them, which is why not one sony exclusive breaks records like halo…which still holds records for sales when it comes to console exclusives.

      • Jamie Higgins

        i wouldn’t really say he was a bad fanboy, the ps4 price was a valid point and i think he is juts basing the exclusives on the massive difference in exclusives this generation. so it is still a pretty valid point because if sony repeat this then playstation gamers have a very wide variety of games to choose from while microsoft will just have a few high profile exclusives like halo

      • quinten488

        True, Halo broke records and that because M$ has put out less and less exclusive games each year for the 360. Last year was just Halo 4 this year was just Gears Judgement. When there are no other exclusives releasing everyone just focuses on the one that is.

  • TheExile285 ♜

    If I could upvote articles, I’d upvote this one like a hundred times

    • Axe99

      +1 – healthy competition FTW 🙂

  • Gamerrr


  • foureyes oni

    i merely wish for the ps4 to massively succeed. With nintendo coming in second and xbox one in third place. Come on nintendo get in the game!!!

    • Michael Clanton

      fanboy nr2, you are wishing for a company to fail…based on what you want, this is why gamers are never taken seriously.

      • smashbrolink

        Being in third place isn’t a failure if their sales are still huge.
        You’re seeing only what you want to see instead of what’s actually being said.

        • Maurice Wilburn

          Seeing how bad Wii U’s sales are right now coming in third behind them is practically a death sentence. If there is a huge boom in Wii U sales and that’s a big if, then 3rd wouldn’t be so bad.

          • foureyes oni

            hey it could happen all nintendo needs to do is release an awesome zelda and metroid within like 6 months of each other and bam wii u comeback.

          • smashbrolink

            No, it’s not.
            Not only do they have enough money in back stock to keep them self-sufficient until 2075[or somewhere thereabouts], they’re still making profits despite not matching the Wii’s success.
            Then there’s their booming success with their handheld division and the fact that the Wii U sold very well during its first four months on the market.

            No, Nintendo’s not on a death road.
            People want to make it out like that, that’s all.
            And by “people”, I mean “Nintendo Console hating scum”.[not directed at you, btw]

          • Maurice Wilburn

            Nintendo’s profits are due to the success of the 3DS, the Wii U sales on the other hand have taken a toll on Nintendo’s profits. Nintendo as a whole isn’t on a death road but the Wii U system itself seems to be. I don’t hate Nintendo I like a few of their titles I even intend on getting 3DS, and maybe a Wii U some time after buying an Xbox One, but as it stands down being behind Nintendo in sales looks like a horrible place to be in.

          • Rinslowe

            There’s no death sentence for the Wii U. This is just wishful thinking on your part.
            The stats shows a system that has struggled to sell consistently in a time when first party titles were not present.
            WW HD, Pikmin 3 have already shown it is possible to stimulate new sales and Mario 3D World is building a lot of positive interest in all regions.
            Hype and diehard fans is what sells a new system at launch, which the Wii U managed roughly 3.2 million worldwide sales in record time. Where Nintendo faltered was in critical titles releasing regularly from then until now. To summarise, it’s games that allow a platform to sell consistently. Solve that issue and the situation changes accordingly…

          • Maurice Wilburn

            Why do people have to get so defensive about the Wii U? There is no wishful thinking on my part the simple fact is the Wii U sales have been poor, can they get better? Maybe, but as of right now they are not doing well. Nintendo games are mainly for nostalgic die hard fans, but they can’t depend on the die hard fans to keep them alive forever. They need 3rd party support if they don’t won’t to end up being destroyed in sales.

          • Rinslowe

            Not that defensive, seeing as though no-one else is going to say it, you should really check my post again… Could you argue that being more informative on the details is a better than say; “Seeing how bad Wii U’s sales are right now coming in third behind them is practically a death sentence”?

            Leading from there to then state what you actually meant was sales are really bad, is kind of a back track from what I can see.

            But look, no overly defensive stance here. Again read the post again and tell me was it really that defensive?

          • Seth H.

            It’s because he gets really defensive about the Xbox. Funny thing is, he doesn’t seem to realize it because he slips bits of fanboy rhetoric into comments that seem unbiased but really aren’t. If foureyes oni had wished the PS4 in last place, He probably wouldn’t have had an issue with it, or at least not as much of one.

            anyway, I think that eventually that wish will be partly granted, when you think about it, anyone who is buying a PS4 or an XB1 are getting the same library of games, with a handful of exclusives here or there. If you buy both, you are getting the same games for double the price. The only logical choice for a second console is the Wii U

          • Maurice Wilburn

            Stalker much?

          • Seth H.

            Don’t flatter yourself, I’m following the recent comments on the right, just like you are.

          • Maurice Wilburn

            I glanced over your comment after reading the article, I’m now replying back to responses I’m getting.

          • Seth H.

            does that really make any difference?

          • Maurice Wilburn

            The difference is I’m not actively following your comments.

          • Seth H.

            I wasn’t following you either, I just replied to something I saw in the recent comments. But fine, I’m not going to reply to you anymore. You love the Xbox, good for you. But I gotta tell ya, you are very narrow minded. I’ve read a few of your comments tonight and everything you say twist the truth around to make it seem as if MS is the only company who has ever innovated anything.

          • Maurice Wilburn

            I don’t know what gives you that idea, but whatever goodnight.

          • Rinslowe

            Actually I to chose to have a Wii U as second “console” to my PC which provides an actual next gen experience while being able to enjoy every major AAA multiplat now and in the future.
            To me PS4 and Xbox 1 only become relevant when the price is right and a decent library of exclusive must have titles are available, so in about 24 months… Then I’ll be looking at those two consoles. It’s just a matter of timing.

          • Seth H.

            Yeah, I’m a PC gamer too but I’ve always had a Playstation and a Nintendo console. This will be the first time I’ve ever bought one at launch. I’m holding off on the Wii U for the moment, Will probably get one when a Zelda or a Metroid get released. Then there’s that mysterious “new 1st party franchise” they announced not too long ago

          • Rinslowe

            I’m an everyone fan you could say, if the Wii U really is my “second” console then it’s joined by PS3 and 360… I bought the 360 at launch and then upgraded to a slim a while back. Had the PS3 for about 2 years, bought cheap as chips and about ten games so well worth the money spent.
            I think people do spend too much time debating which console is better but really this is just a matter of economics.
            I’m looking forward to the time when I can get a PS4 cheap and a whole load of games, just sit down and find out what all the fuss has been about. 😉
            Till then PC will keep me up to date with online multiplayer, bleeding egde graphics etc… While Wii U quietly surprises…

            Was the game you mentioned X from Monolith Soft?, If yes then I honestly think Nitnendo needs to grant some developer freedom and allow them to make some updates, screenshots, info snippets and interviews… People will maintain a healthy interest on it if they take the steps to keep it current, IMO.

          • Seth H.

            I don’t know, I just saw a snippet about a new franchise, it didn’t say anything more than that and I haven’t heard anything more about it since.
            Monolith? Haven’t heard from them in a while, didn’t know they were still in business. Loved the old No One Lives Forever series (they need to give Cate Archer a new game). AVP and Tron 2.0 were pretty good too.
            But I’m thinking that the game I read about was a 1st party game.

          • Rinslowe

            Here’s a link to the Neogaf forum where people have been discussing the game.


            If it is the same one then you could check out some gameplay footage from youtube…

            Monolith Soft have been busy from the success of Xenoblade Chronicles making a successor on Wii U. Looks fantastic and would likely be every bit a masterpiece as chronicles was on Wii…

          • Seth H.

            Oh yeah, that does look pretty good. Different Monolith though Company I was thinking of got bought out by Time/Warner then shuttered 🙁
            They made that old Matrix Online, no recovering from that mess

          • Seth H.
          • Rinslowe

            Ok, yeah it’s not the same one, but sounds like you could just be interested in X in any case. Check out the link I sent to you if you want, the gaf crowd are pretty informative most times…

          • NeoTechni

            With the caveat that pc will get very few aaa games…

          • Maurice Wilburn

            No backtracking. My response goes along with my initial statement. Sales of the Wii U have been poor no matter how you look at it starting off strong and slumping to around 160,00 units for over the course of 3 months is bad. To come in third behind them with sales moving at the rate they are would be terrible, or a “death sentence.” as I stated, I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear, but your declaration that my statement was simply wishful thinking sounds defensive.

          • Rinslowe

            I was referring to this;

            “”Seeing how bad Wii U’s sales are right now coming in third behind them is practically a death sentence”

            No-one is refuting the sales situation, again re-read my original post in reply to you and see that for the fact it is…
            I simply mentioned the reasons as to why, there was such a sales issue. That is more informative than just sales are “really bad” surely.

            Wishful thinking in comparison to “death sentence” is defensive? If you want to throw around comments look at your own first and foremost. And yes I believe hiding behind broad facts when masking specific comments like; “death sentence” is a form of back tracking.

            Care to explain in more detail what was the “actual” meaning you wanted to communicate when you mentioned “death sentence”?

          • Maurice Wilburn

            II’m sorry if I wasn’t crystal clear in my first statement, even after re-reading I don’t know what exactly is the cause of your confusion is. If I had know it would be necessary to provide further information I would have done so the first time around, but “the broad fact” as you put it I think serves its purpose. If you were not defending the sales situation I don’t know why you would remark my statement as “wishful thinking.”

          • Rinslowe

            I never had any confusion. I refuted the statement of “death sentence” but not the Wii U sales issue. I then went on to state why there is such an issue not just to say that there is one. And how it would be relatively simple for Nintendo to at least begin reversing the problem.
            Again I had no confusion, I simply disagreed with the specific comment that “death sentence” was a relevant or suitable description of the Wii U’s current or future state.
            Most people agree to the reasons why sales have been an issue and most people can also attest to the change in sales since Pikmin 3 in Sep has been consistently improving. By how much is not important. What is important is that Nintendo continues to release critical first party system sellers to maintain the expected momentum.
            At some point the install base will be back to a level where third parties see a reason to return to the platform, but this can only happen if Nintendo remains consistent with their first party releases building the install base. Pikmin 3 started the rise, followed by WW HD and to a small degree W101, now they need to follow through with SM3DW, Donkey Kong TF, Smash, Kart and X including Bayonetta 2 and sales will continue to rise.
            Going not on what if’s but the last three months sales indicates that what I have just explained is more in line with what is happening now and what will continue to happen.

          • NeoTechni

            Pikmin didnt boost sales though. Yes coming in third woukd be a death sentence for wiiu. Devs are going to stop supporting it once the cross-generation dev stops

          • Rinslowe

            You have been proven wrong already. Again, if you want to substantiate your claims on Pikmin 3 here’s your chance…

            And “death sentence” said by two people doesn’t make it true. It most certainly remains a “false” statement. And opinion only…

            Wii U North American sales results for Aug:
            Pikmin 3 basic stats:

            Pikmin 3 also managed to move over 11,000 Wii U units in Japan first week of release whereas the overall sales was 22,000 in that week up from 8,000 units the week before, therefore even in Japan where Pikmin 3 received only a modest reception compared to global stats it boosted Wii U unit sales by roughly 60% in first week sales.
            According to the charts it has been consistently tapering off globally which indicates it absolutely stimulated Wii U sales from release until today.

          • punkchobit

            “You have been proven wrong already.”

            No I haven’t. You have though.


            “And “death sentence” said by two people doesn’t make it true”

            Wii U is the only PowerPC based console, if it doesn’t get enough sales to warrant dedicated development (and lets face it, it’s not. Devs are abandoning left/right/center) how will it get games? If you develop for x86x64, that covers PC, XBOXone and PS4. 3 birds for one stone. Wii U would one significantly weaker bird and also takes a whole stone. You really think being in third won’t affect sales more than it already has? Cause Wii U is being considered third place for the PS3/360 generation (as it should be, since it’s as powerful as them at best) by devs NOW. The problem will only get worse when you cant port games to it.

            It’s not opinion. It’s a prediction.

            “According to the charts it has been consistently tapering off globally which indicates it absolutely stimulated Wii U sales from release until today.”

            You basically said: The sales are dropping! That proves this is good! No, sales dropping proves his point…

          • Rinslowe

            “No I haven’t. You have though.”


            Seems this is in conflict…


            “Wii U is the only PowerPC based console, if it doesn’t get enough sales to warrant dedicated development”

            Dev’s a are familiar enough with this already, if the sales continue to rise. So does the install base. The greater the install base the more third parties will warm to the system. Regardless of internal architectures. With AAA support showing now and in coming months; Arkham Origins, AC4, Watchdogs, COD Ghosts, this only further proves the point being made…

            “You basically said: The sales are dropping! That proves this is good! No, sales dropping proves his point…”

            I basically showed how Pikmin 3 improved sales in another region not just stateside since it’s release until today. It is a natural part of the process for a game to taper off after 3 months of release. There is a very specific difference between tapering off and ceasing to be consistent… The case is that although the initial sales are slowing for Pikmin 3 having been on the market for a few good months now it continues to sell…
            In summary Pikmin 3 is sold in more regions than just the US, I have provided proof that Pikmin 3 boosted sales in the US which contradicts your link and furthered that by indicating sales influence in Japan also. Remember there is also the UK, Europe and Oceania not listed.
            Pikmin 3 again, absolutely boosted Wii U unit sales.

            So how about we move on to WW HD’s supposed “1 week only” sales boost?

          • punkchobit

            “Seems this is in conflict..”

            Are you ignoring the bit about how they said it didnt affect sales one bit?

            “Dev’s a are familiar enough with this already”

            It’s not about familiarity. Re-read what I said. It’s about, if you dev for x86, that covers THREE platforms. Wii U is the ONLY PowerPC console (once cross-generational development stops) meaning it takes an equal amount of dev resources/money for 1/3 the benefit. That’s going to affect it

            “In summary Pikmin 3 is sold in more regions than just the US”

            Devs have to look at the US though, they won’t ignore it like you have.

            “So how about we move on to WW HD’s supposed “1 week only” sales boost?”



            It dropped to 10th place the week after it launched, its now at 16th and falling. The boost was temporary, and gone.

          • Rinslowe

            Sorry, but on-one is ignoring anything, I noticed your link and provided this one…

            I also clearly stated the reasons why having a different architecture will not have as much effect as you imply. But at the end of the day, this is simply your opinion and my opinion in a conflict of interest. Lets allow time to prove either one as fact…

            One link of WWHD charts (not stats) does not disprove WWHD as a system seller. It does not show WWHD only stimulating sales for 1 week which was the claim. It only moves the goal post and rather ineffectively…
            See here a better idea of how WWHD has and continues to assist with Wii U unit sales;

            week1; North America only –


            week2: North America only –

            week4: UK only –

            Notice that your link shows only software sales specifically in the UK and this is not representative in any way to unit sales and does not account for global sales of either software or hardware…

          • punkchobit

            “I also clearly stated the reasons why having a different architecture will not have as much effect as you imply”

            But it will. You can’t claim the fact that development for Wii U will cost 3 times as much won’t affect anything.

            “One link of WWHD charts (not stats) does not disprove WWHD as a system seller”

            It was a system seller, for one week.

            “It does not show WWHD only stimulating sales for 1 week which was the claim”

            Actually it does, since sales of the game dropped off after 1 week.

          • Rinslowe

            “But it will. You can’t claim the fact that development for Wii U will cost 3 times as much won’t affect anything.”

            This has now become a contest of opinion, again let us allow time to prove either view as fact. It won’t be done here…

            “t was a system seller, for one week.

            “It does not show WWHD only stimulating sales for 1 week which was the claim”

            Actually it does, since sales of the game dropped off after 1 week.”

            I can only assume you are purposefully twisting the information to suit your agenda as the links I have provided have shown sales of Wii U units associated with WW HD sales directly up to a period of 4 weeks since release covering North America and the UK. Remember this does not cover greater Europe and Oceania which will again influence those figures.
            Your link showed only software sales and only for the UK.
            A system seller is a game which sells units… The Wii U is a global product. Your link does nothing to disprove the WW HD did indeed stimulate positive Wii U sales and still is… This is fact.

          • Seth H.

            your dedication is impressive, but when do you sleep?

          • Rinslowe

            I don’t…
            I’m stuck in an airport in HK for another 6 hours…

          • Seth H.

            eww! that sucks

          • punkchobit

            “This has now become a contest of opinion”

            Actually it’s not. It already is affecting wii u development. It’s not opinion at this point. It’s not opinion to say wii u costing 3 times more to dev for will affect it. It’s idiocy to claim it won’t.

            “I can only assume you are purposefully twisting the information to suit your agenda”

            Then I have to assume you’re doing the same, since I’ve seen it reported over and over again that Zelda only had 1 week of good sales. This is fact.

            “The Wii U is a global product.”

            You argued a post ago about ignoring part of the world, now you’re trying to say I can’t do that? You can’t have it both ways.

            Here’s another:




            Face it. It’s not affecting sales globally. You’re reaching for straws.

            I own a wii u, but if this is the effort nintendo is putting into it, I’d rather see it fail. They don’t deserve success.

          • Rinslowe

            ” I’d rather see it fail.”

            This is what happens when people take your comments out of context…

            And yes it is now just a contest of opinion…

          • punkchobit

            “And yes it is now just a contest of opinion…”

            More of your opinion disagreeing with reality.

            “This is what happens when people take your comments out of context…”

            If that’s how you want to debate this, then by all means. But people can see my original post, so it has no affect.

            I would rather see Wii U fail IF nintendo is going to keep half-assing everything. Online in particular. I’d much rather see them stop sitting on their hands and fix it though. But I want nintendo to earn their success, not bribe people like they did with the 3ds, thus condemning it to eternal half-assing

          • Rinslowe

            “More of your opinion disagreeing with reality.”

            I would rather let time prove which opinion is reality…

          • punkchobit

            “I would rather let time prove which opinion is reality…”

            Time already has. Developers are already abandoning Wii U.
            Just today another game was announced as canceled for it.
            You can’t call it opinion after it already happened…

          • Seth H.

            Now would be a good time to sell then….hey, I’ll give you $50!

          • Rinslowe

            “Time already has.”
            I disagree…

            Therefore this has broken down to nothing more than a contest of opion. And a failed attempt at proving Wii U sales figures were not influenced by Pikmin 3 and WW HD (this one for more than 1 week and in any other area than Japan)

            If this is all you have left; a merry go round of opinions then I’ll let you continue on your own…

          • punkchobit

            “Therefore this has broken down to nothing more than a contest of opion”

            pretending developers haven’t abandoned the Wii u doesn’t make my claim they have, an opinion. It makes you delusional. Your delusions don’t help the Wii U.

            “And a failed attempt at proving Wii U sales figures were not influenced by Pikmin 3 and WW HD”

            The links I posted said otherwise. At best, you’ve got 1 out of 3 regions slightly affected temporarily, and already gone. You think that’s good enough for devs to come back? One left today. Go call them.

          • Rinslowe

            The links you provided were software sales, they do not show any unit sales which is the topic. Neither do those links show anything accept a decline in “software sales” in any other region other than Japan. Trying to prove a decline on a global product while citing the worst performer ie; Japan, is what can be classified as delusional.
            How can you completely ignore the links I provided showing a 30%, 200% and 685% increase in unit sales (not just software sales) over a 1 month period in the two largest Wii U markets? This also qualifies as delusional.
            Quite simply put, you have attempted to make an argument while being poorly prepared to back that argument up with substantiated results. You have provided “only” Japan software sales figures which shows a decline in ‘Japan ONLY’. It does not show any other truth unlike the links provided to you proving the effect on sales in the largest markets.
            Now you claim that sales are no longer affected by either of these titles? So kindly substantiate that with evidence in both Japan and the rest of the world.

            Otherwise there’s nothing more you can add in terms of factual content, only opinion…

          • Rinslowe


            Your first link showed this; Japan only and week one sales 30,000 software units consisting of 6000 unit sales. (the terms unimpressive is an opinion by the author)
            The second link; again mentions only Japan (which does not in any way discredit the links I provided to you showing effect of US and UK regions)
            The third link; once more the exact same information as the previous two links showing no progression over time and dealing only with Japan.

            Everybody knows Japan was the worst region when considering the effects of WW HD’s assist with Wii U unit sales. Just check my links again if you need a refresher in how the game did in other areas.
            Lastly 6000 unit sales is 6000 units over and above what was sold without WWHD. At the very beginning I mentioned the amount was not important (although the actual figures globally are of course higher than what you have provided for Japan only), the important factor is that Nintendo continues with the forward momentum afforded by the help of Pikmin 3 and WWHD in future Wii U unit sales by continuing to release such first party content.
            If you only mean’t WWHD stimulated unit sales in Japan only then you would still be wrong as the amount does not discredit the fact. And when taking the information into account of how it fared in other regions then you are doubly wrong.

          • DarthBraxis

            Come on people. this is exactly what the article is talking about. You are arguing over something that dons’t even matter in the long run. No the wii u isn’t doing the best right now, but as of right now it is still in the lead seeing as how the other consoles haven’t even launched. All I’m saying is that this kinda thing where you take up half a page of posts arguing over what console you want to “win” or “lose” it makes us all look bad.

          • Seth H.

            Why is it so important to you to discredit the Wii U? Nintendo is a strong brand and the 3DS is still the #1 selling handheld. Nintendo’s strength has always been in 1st party games. All they have to do wait till a Zelda, Mario, or Metroid (and hey! Bayonetta 2!) revitalizes the sales. 3DS sales will carry them till then, after all, Nintendo actually turn a profit on each sale, they don’t operate in the red like MS & Sony

          • punkchobit

            Why is it so important for you to believe a lie?

            “Nintendo actually turn a profit on each sale”

            Not indicative of quality. How much a company makes does not affect how much fun I have. Although, statistically speaking, it tends to be inversely proportional to both quality and how much fun I have on a system. Not that correlation = causation.

          • Seth H.

            I don’t care to argue with you, Rinslowe is more than your match, even with jetlag.

            I don’t buy into any lies, I use my own judgement. Nintendo has always held it’s own based on the success of it’s handhelds. Better games are coming for the Wii U. Time will tell.

            besides, how much fun you have is subjective and in no way indicates quality.

          • punkchobit

            “Better games are coming for the Wii U”

            I can only hope as a wii U owner. But currently I’m only looking forward to X.

            “I don’t buy into any lies”

            Then you won’t see what I’m doing as attempting to discredit it, merely correct misconceptions.

            “how much fun you have is subjective and in no way indicates quality.”

            How much fun I have is directly related to quality, despite fun being subjective. Quality is also subjective

          • Seth H.

            Hmm, sounds to me like you wasted your money if you have such little faith in it. Ebay can correct that problem for you

          • punkchobit

            I bought it for the gimmick of the controller, in hopes Konami would make Silent Scope for it. Come on, the thing is perfect for an arcade-perfect port. They’d have to be stupid not to. And I’m a Zelda fan, and I’m glad Nintendo is forced to drop the motion control crap. Though WWHD lacked invert y so I can’t even play it…

          • NeoTechni

            Pikmin didnt stimulate sales
            Wwhd only did for about a week…

          • Rinslowe

            Care to prove that? Pikmin 3 absolutely stimulated sales check the stats… And as I said it doesn’t matter by how much… Amazing you see only what you wanted to. What matters is that Nintendo maintains that forward momentum. That is what is beginning to reverse the damage done by lack of critical titles, which evidently is the reason behind poor overall sales…

          • NeoTechni

            Dont tell others to do what you didnt
            I did check the stats, amazing you saw only what you wanted to

          • Rinslowe

            Your stats are not only incorrect which I have provided another link for in a previous reply, but it covers only the US. As does the link I provided.
            At the point I asked you to substantiate, was the point I provided proof.

            So now that Pikmin 3 has been proven to boost sales.
            Care to now substantiate WW HD’s “only 1 week” sales claim?

      • foureyes oni

        i don’t want the xbox one to fail i just want the ps4 and wii u to make a comeback. Of course i’m probably pushing it with the wii u but i can dream right.

  • Ty

    Thank you for this article. I stand with TheExile285 in saying I would upvote this a hundred times. I’ve seen so much hate from all 4 sides actually (PC gamers are the 4th, in case you’re wondering) that I am sometimes ashamed and embarrassed to even be a gamer, let alone studying to be a game developer. It’s ridiculous how bad the fanboyism has gotten in the last several years, it’s almost scary; hell, it’s even getting dangerous anymore. Fans are seriously hurting or killing each other over their disagreements of consoles or games anymore. I just wish that would end, not the competing companies. Companies competing is a win/win situation for the consumer and companies, period. But gamers don’t need to hurt or kill someone else over that competition. It’s just a machine for entertainment purposes.

    • Spontaneous_Me

      I agree. It’s just sad to see gaming decline into such a state that people are willing to put down others for gaming on something else. Just a few weeks ago I saw a PC gamer make videos calling console gamers “poor”, “mentally retarded”, “autistic”. “socially awkward” and other insults, while referring to PC gamers as the “superior master race” and even photoshopped a disgusting image to degrade console gamers. He even had a Twitter account dedicated to it. It honestly made me just want to quit gaming altogether, seeing that people would go that way just to insult the other player base because of their incredible fanboy insecurities. Like you said, these things sometimes embarrass me to be a gamer.

      It’s a shame to see that some people are unable to mentally engage in a proper gaming conversation with others and instead have to always lash out at the other. I sometimes want to discuss so much about gaming but these fanboy wars spoil everything.

      • Ty

        I’ve seen that person myself on Twitter and decided to report him. Anybody who is taking the time out of their lives to do stuff like that clearly does not have enough to do with their own life, in my opinion. Who cares what console people buy, as long as they enjoy themselves when they play their games. That’s the whole point of gaming. Degrading someone because of their gaming choice is just low and childish. We all have the right to spend our hard-earned money on whatever gaming console(s) we like because we all have different tastes. Like you, I could discuss gaming all day but the fanboys spoil it and take it too far, like you said.

  • KuchikiSentou

    I think we’ve seen that the dominance of the PS2 led to a lot of games.

    We also see the same thing happening with the 3DS.

    Everyone always cites what Sony did AFTER the PS2, without looking at the PS2 era itself. Having a huge market share impacts the library positively.

    NES, PSone, PS2, 3DS, PS3 in Japan.

    All these platforms have staggering market share over their direct competition, and it allows developers to innovate and compete with one another on the same platform, instead of spending resources to get their games on as many platforms as possible in order to maintain political correctness. The cost of porting a game to as many as 5 platforms can be overwhelming and/or damaging to a particular platform. Skyrim on PS3, Burnout Paradise on 360,

    Where the market decides its console of choice, devs can save money and bring out games more often and directly compete with one another instead of suffering a market divide like we have now. Now we have developers taking sides with manufacturers. WB, Ubisoft, Acitivision, EA, Bethesda and leaving some sections of the gaming population under-serviced.

    Now we have gaming consoles being associated with certain types of games etc. http://www.nowgamer.com/news/2010800/xbox_has_more_of_a_shooter_culture_than_playstation.html
    Now it’s all politics in the industry.

    I can’t agree. I believe in a 90% market share of one console over the other. The impact of this on the gaming library can only be tremendous.

    • Giuseppe Nelva

      We’ve seen the dominance of the PS2 lead to the PS3 and its botched launch (by Sony’s own admission).

      On the other hand the botched launch of the PS3 and the pitched competition of the last generation led to the PS4, which seems to be positioned to achieve much greater things.

      The short term is much less relevant than long term evolution.

      • KuchikiSentou

        I think that ultimately having more quality games to play – which a dominant console ensures – should be the priority, not some hypothetical “long term evolution”.

        The future is now, as they say. Long term evolution of having more and more consoles in the same space can’t do much good to the industry. Surely there has to be a level of competition that is “enough” i.e. if other companies in the console space had competitive shares of the market.

        If there is some arbitrary distinction as to how many competing platforms there should be, why can’t there be just one, which ensures that game developers can make the best games in less time? Long term is uncertain. And the reason for the “rising cost of game development” can be attributed to some extent to having to make the best game across 5 platforms. A divisive market can’t be of help to developers in this regard.

        I think the dominant consoles, the libraries they produced, the experiences created speak for itself. It’s just a plain unavoidable fact.

        This much-touted hubris talk is easily separated from the sheer amount of content a dominant console provides. 3DS and PS2 are much recent examples. Mikami-san is not an idiot. What informs a gamer to choose between 2 eerily, sillily (my word) identical consoles. With roughly the same power largely the same features? The things that sway one consumer to one side is usually something petty. [E3 2013 is a prime example of this. Sony didn’t announce anything so particularly ground breaking, but held majority of positive opinion in the popularity polls.]

        The cost of development is simply too heavy. Then we have the political outcome of one console being left out for being different, like Bethesda and EA with WiiU and devs literally taking sides. Kevin Dent for example: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87628981&postcount=1056

        This division only allows for public political discourse a la news stories and flame wars. It benefits everyone BUT gamers. A WiiU gamer is at a glaring disadvantage when it comes to 3rd party 2013 offerings. Why? If we had one dominant console, it would be clear to the consumer where all/most of the games are instead of dealing with the division we have currently.

        • Maurice Wilburn

          PS2 had a very large library games, but only a mere fraction of that library actually reached critical acclaim. Also as you’ve already stated, video game budgets have grown immensely a, it’s no longer like back in the days of the PS2 or NES where you could rely on small team of around 20 people to produce a triple A title. Even with the expense of porting games not factored in we’re not going to see an explosion of games on a singular platform that holds a 90% market share, and really no one is going to play all those games.

          A competitive market pushes console manufacturers to drive down hardware prices, improve on technology, offer better services, and invest in higher quality titles. It’s a matter of quality vs quantity. I understand this creates a division as to what games someone can play, but I think it is more beneficial than damaging to consumers. As a consumer you have to weigh the decision of what you find more important and what games you prefer.

          To your point about the Wii U, developers have been asking for more power out of consoles just as gamers have wanted more power out of consoles. The Wii U simply didn’t have enough power to keep up with the X1 and PS4 to the point that it hinders the ambitions of developers and the fault falls on Nintendo. While that’s sad news for Nintendo with indies being supported by both MS and Sony we’ll be likely to see plenty of quality titles on either console for years to come.

          • KuchikiSentou

            I think critical acclaim is as arbitrary as things come. A game like Beyond 2 Souls is a recent example. I think the game is a magnificent accomplishment in all ramifications, while it’s editor’s choice on some sites and garbage on others. What is the threshold for critical acclaim, especially in these dark days when gamers have strict expectations of what games they want to play and what things and mechanics they want to see. I think critical acclaim is too subjective to factor. I loved 10000Bullets and Enter the Matrix, the industry didn’t. Critical acclaim is a manifestation of hive minds and group think. This has nothing to do with the individual gamer who wants to experience a plethora of ideas instead of narrowing it down to 5-6 different pigeon holes of games like we have right now.

            In addition to the PS2, I cited examples of the 3DS, the PSone and even the Japanese PS3. The critical acclaim of 3DS titles is not of concern to a 3DS owner, but the fact that there are many good games to play. Good games arise out of direct competition with fellow game makers, not platform v platform.

            If we have a situation where a certain type of game is usually more welcome on one platform than (and usually to the detriment of) others, http://www.nowgamer.com/news/2010800/xbox_has_more_of_a_shooter_culture_than_playstation.html I don’t see why this is a good thing. I shouldn’t have to get X console to get X type of game experiences.

            The competition should be between developers, not hardware makers. With little to differentiate 2 competitors, the reasons for falling on one side or the other is arbitrary; this costs people like Mikami money and as we’ve seen, one platform either suffers for it, or is deprived of some features. This is why the best titles of a console are usually exclusive. A singular primary focus for the devs to get the best out of the console; best possible outcome for the consumer. I don’t see why anyone would be against such a thing.

            The devs are clearly picking sides as well as publishers, even indies, it appears. Why should the industry be so divided? If the WiiU is “out” of the competition why can’t the Xbox? If the determinant is power, why not just have the most powerful console be the de facto? The limitation of competitors to 2 consoles is simply capricious.

            The industry should be able to make the decision as to what is standard. If there are similar experiences across 2 similar platforms, what need is there of the other? The only discussion becomes about exclusive content, lead platform and framerates.

            My wish for this generation is that there is an overwhelming market share. As we’ve seen, content and quality can only be ensured, as we would have a set standard, the best standard by which all gamers would play. Competition among devs will only become more apparent. More unique titles will have the safety net of an undivided installed base in order to enjoy success. Devs won’t waste their resources trying to make the same game run on 5-6 platforms.

            It’s a win for everyone involved. 3DS owners are the happiest because there is never a dearth of content. Games come out quicker and better because there is no pressure to put the same game on other platforms. The installed base allows the game to speak for itself, not the affinity of the platform to the genre as David Goldfarb noted above.

            It’s a winning formula that I hope is replicated with next gen.

          • Maurice Wilburn

            It’s a win for everyone involved except those that didn’t buy the console holding the market share as well as the 1st party game studios that have the funding provided through these companies.

            My point about the PS2 applies to the 3DS as well. Handheld games much like back in the days of PS2 are relatively inexpensive to make, which makes the risk far more affordable. Also, nearly all of the big titles on 3DS are by Nintendo.

            My point about the Wii U wasn’t that it lacked power, but Nintendo failed to work with developers on the development of their console where as both Microsoft and Sony had approached 3rd party publishers.

            Another point I think you missed is hardware would not be as improved if not for console manufacturers trying to one up each other. The PS4 may have not had as much power or been as developer friendly if not for the lesson taught by Microsoft this current generation, or we may have not gotten new tech such as Kinect, or PS4’s touchpad for example.

            You also have to ask why devs and publishers are picking sides. Reason being the incentives offered by the companies. MS moved to allow self-publishing on their platform, removed the fee to update games, providing cheaper dev kits(in the future being free).

            A console manufacturer would not have reason to do many of these things in a world where they had complete ownership of the marketshare.

          • KuchikiSentou

            Again you’re focusing on “big” titles and “critically acclaimed” titles. There is simply no question as to the degree of support the 3DS gets from Bandai Namco, Capcom, Level 5, Spike Chunsoft and so on. The 3DS library is much more robust than its competitors. Further it doesn’t cost them as much money BECAUSE they don’t have to make the same game for 3 different platforms. This is my point.

            I feel like policies and such are extraneous to the primary reason for playing games which is games. It’s now about who has the money to secure exclusive content for which games. I’m being shortchanged if I get Destiny on Xbox for example. The industry has no need for these things.

            Even if devkits are free, there is still the further expenditure of getting these games to multiple platforms by default, which goes to what Mikami was saying. With little to distinguish, why have 2 consoles?

          • Maurice Wilburn

            You can’t just call every game a diamond in the rough, there is such a thing as a bad game. You seem to be operating under the pretense that we all play and enjoy the same games when in truth most only play a mere portion of titles on any given platform. What’s the benefit of having 10000 titles on a platform and you only play 100. For the sake of variety? There is no lack of abundance of titles on either the 360 or PS3 despite them having a fairly equal market share. Also, there are many other factors of that I feel are being ignored one of those things I lightly touched on being developer relations. Who’s to say had the Vita held a greater marketshare both the 3DS would not be supported equally? You also have to look at the differences of how both companies conduct themselves in the handheld market. Looking at the sales the driving force behind 3DS sales was not 3rd party content, but first party content from Nintendo.

            I hate missing out on exclusive content, but I hate missing out on games even more. My preferred console is Xbox One because of their exclusives and it would suck pretty bad if I had to choose between 1st party content as well as 3rd party content because PS4 owns majority marketshare. That situation doesn’t benefit me in the least as I don’t have much love for most of Sony’s 1st party content offerings. I’m not saying things are perfect the way they are now, I think the industry could definitely use improvement, but your perfect world is in truth not so perfect and only benefits the some or the majority, not all.

          • KuchikiSentou

            If you have a preferred console because of its first party offering, a 90% market share of the opposing console does not affect you in the slightest. Nothing stopped Halo and Halo 2 from being successful. Nothing stopped Xbox from having quality games like Project Gotham. Ditto GameCube a la Smash. But to the average consumer, and the developer, the desired platform should be clear. It should be obvious to the dev who wants to take risks to find mitigation in a largely undivided market.

            I find it hard to see past your hyperbole. What I will note is that there were certainly fewer chances taken this generation and the split market is at least to some extent to blame. A “bad game” is a matter of perspective. Not every game is everyone;s cup of tea, but no one should be denied such experiences and devs should not be punished for wanting to try something outside the norms that your version of the ideal suggests.

            If the VITA held the market share the 3DS has currently, the support for the VITA will reflect this both 1st and 3rd party. It’s a mere matter of numbers. As a dev/publisher, I can’t prioritise a platform which doesn’t allow me foreseeable prospect of return.

            The matters of spent resources on the part of dev to get these games to their very best on more platforms has not been addressed, especially when it comes to the PS4/Xbox debate. If, as you said the 3rd parties said, the determinant is power, the more powerful console should have the dominant market share, while the minority will still serve its audience with its first party offerings, and multiplats will then be done by those who truly, genuinely want to undertake the temporal and financial rigours of multiplatform development; not as a matter of arbitrary political fact.

          • Maurice Wilburn

            The opposing console holding a 90% market share very much affects me by 3rd party devs overlooking the console that offers my preferred 1st party content and having to choose to either miss out on an abundance of 3rd party offerings or 1st party content. I don’t know how much blame the “fewer risks” can b placed on the divided market, but their are other much larger factors involved as to why that’s the case such as increased expense of developing games, the greater time needed to develop them, and larger needed teams than back then, but the split market has to go because it is to “some extent the blame” for fewer risks being taken? Don’t you think that sounds a bit radical.

            Look at the sales of multiplatform games during the PS2 generation, games didn’t really sell much better then than they do now. Some current gen multplats have actually sold better than games in the previous generation. The only real change is people have the ease of deciding based on first party content. If making multiplat titles is such a financial strain why not let the developer themselves decide whether or not to release their game on multiplats or merely focus on one? why is it necessary for a 90% marketshare to make the choice for them when sales and quality of the game will remain roughly the same or greater in a divided market?

            Again I never said the determinant is power. The point I was making is console manufacturers must work with developers, which only furthers my point the marketplace should remain competitive.

          • KuchikiSentou

            I feel we’ve made our points to one another; or across shall I say.
            The reason there is competition, the end game is ultimately victory, going to what the article says.
            What point is there to competition without the prospect of victory? Disregarding fanboys, where are there people who play exclusively on one platform? Does the desire for victory automatically negate the opponent’s right to existence? I think not. There is room for a minority in gaming, and this does not hinder anyone as I’ve explained with the original xbox and GameCube consoles. They had successful games, great games as well. It’s just the fear of being oppressed on the internet that drives the liberals to strive for parity. It doesn’t help anyone.

            By your allegiance to Xbox, for example, you’ve ultimately played your card as to who you want to lose [whether you use those words or not, your wallet has done the talking]; we can’t run away from that when everyone, especially Sony and Microsoft, recognises this.
            Sony “lost” North America, Xbox “lost” Europe their release plans reflect this; the respective fans were pleased where applicable. The competition is only detrimental to devs, who have to spend the resources to support both platforms equally. The benefit is to news sites who welcome the discussion of “who won E3” or “who has 1080p/60Hz”. The detriment is to the gamer who is largely torn between 2 similar consoles and can’t truly, clearly decide what the ideal platform is. You can’t have 2 majorities in a democracy; even the gamers who buy 2 consoles eventually leave one to gather dust. This is a raw fact.

            These dichotomies are erased when the choice is clear. Clear for the gamer, clear for the developer. The developer then exercises pure discretion in making multiplats, after due diligent consideration of time and resources. The people who can’t afford this spend their time to make the best game possible, in less time, without worrying primarily about the 5-10%. The rising cost of development supports a dominant market share of ‘one console’ as a favourable alternative. This is the true meaning of Mikami-dono’s words.

            Mighty #9 is coming to as many as 7 platforms, and we saw the amount of money it had to raise for that to happen. It’s coming in 2015. In a more streamlined market, we would have the game by January and it wouldn’t have required all that money. I think this is a cogent example which covers your cost of development argument.

      • Rinslowe

        I think they are both equally relevant. What the other poster is explaining is what happens when the system sells as good or better than expected and the install base allows competition for developers to thrive within the least amount of cost, effort and fragmentation.
        What you are explaining is not in conflict with this point as it outlines the overarching mechanism to get there…

      • Rocco

        Can you please teach William Usher from Cinema Blend how to write a good article? He absolutely needs your vision, help, and guidance!

  • smashbrolink

    One small correction: “Nintendo fans just want to see the world (besides Kyoto) burn.”
    They just want all of the spec and graphics whores to burn, and to start looking at a game based on its gameplay merits more than the console it’s on.
    I turned multiplatform due to this viewpoint. In fact the majority of Nintendo gamers that I’m acquainted with are multiplatform gamers because they’ve learned the value of spreading out to at least two systems.
    But it’s almost always one Nintendo system and a Playstation or X-Box, as the pairing, now that third parties have so many mutliplat releases on Sony or Microsoft consoles.

    • Michael Clanton

      that may have been true with the wii…. but with the wii u…at what 3.7 million systems sold. Its starting to look like sony or microsoft, or both…and then a wii u for some.

      • smashbrolink

        The install base is low, yeah, but it did better in its first four months than the PS360, and it’s already starting to pick up in sales.

        • NeoTechni

          Itsnot picking up in sales. Its doing worse than gamecube

          • smashbrolink

            Should have said”going to be picking up in sales”.

    • NeoTechni

      Problem, a games merits are almost always dependant on the specs of the console. And i mean processing power which affects gameplay far more than it does graphics.

      • smashbrolink

        If it mattered to the extent that you seem to bee implying, them both the wii and the ps3 would have failed too. The wii u’s innards are powerful enough to create games worth having. Thus, no real problem here, even if it does miss out on some multiplats.

        • punkchobit

          No, cause

          1) sales do not equal quality

          2) PS3 was roughly as powerful as 360. Moreso in many ways.

          3) Wii’s lack of power did cripple games to the point of being utter
          crap. See Dead Rising on Wii versus the 360 one for the absolute perfect example of the claim of how processing power affects gameplay. The Wii one was a joke for that reason. That’s why generation is dictated by processing power

          “The wii u’s innards are powerful enough to create games worth having.”

          That’s a poor argument. Gameboy had enough to create games “worth having”, that doesn’t make it good enough in this day in age.

          • smashbrolink

            The sales came because the consoles got games worth playing. That’s a great indication of quality experiences in the system linups.
            dead rising is a poor example. Look at Mario galaxy and xenoblade chronicles amongst others, they prove the wiis limitations didn’t entirely hold it back.
            Its not a poor argument, its a logical one that isn’t blinded by spec sheets and numbers on graphs. The Wii is not a Gameboy in comparison to the other two systems. The gap isn’t that large and we both know it.
            Finally, meant to say ps2, not ps3. It was also the weakest system of its gen. It sold because it had incredible games that catered to the right crowd at the right time. So did the wii, and so eventually will the wii u.

          • punkchobit

            “dead rising is a poor example.”

            No, it’s the absolute perfect example. The SAME game on different consoles with a large power gap. That tells you the difference of the power gap itself. And the difference was huge.

            Why is it a poor example? Cause it sucked on Wii? Just because it proves my point exactly doesn’t make it a poor example, cause you’re saying everything that proves my point is a poor example. You’re just ignoring whatever data points you don’t like

            “Look at Mario galaxy and xenoblade chronicles amongst others”

            You can’t look at those, cause they aren’t available on other systems, so you can’t measure the effect of having more power. Those are literally, not examples at all.

            In a scientific comparison where you’re trying to measure 1 thing (the difference power makes) you want to keep all the other variables the same. That means the keeping everything but the thing you’re measuring, the same. So the ONLY examples are the games that are on multiple systems. Otherwise you’re just using bad math

            “Its not a poor argument, its a logical one”

            No, it’s not logical. Devs can always do more with more processing power. There is never a point where it’s not worth having more. Give them more, they’ll use more. It’s like how fish expand to fit the environment they live in.

            “that isn’t blinded by spec sheets and numbers on graphs.”

            It’s just blinded by the ignorance of not knowing what goes into game development. Specs matter.

            But PS2’s sales don’t equate to quality. I preferred XBOX because as it is for every generation, the more powerful hardware had better versions of games. Every multiplatform title was superior on XBOX. Better framerates, textures, HD support, more player support both online and offline (having 4 ports built in versus PS2’s 2), transfinite storage capacity for save data (8 GB versus 8 MB memory cards, especially important in timesplitters with the level editor) and vastly superior online. Power makes games better. You’re not blinded by specs when you have example after example that proves this. A true gamer would know it.

          • smashbrolink

            So first you list one of the worst examples of a game on the wii, and because my counterpoint is a pair of absolutely fantastic exclusives, suddenly it doesn’t count? I call bullsh*t. Its not the systems fault that the developer couldn’t create a game that took full advantage of what the wii could do. The did a poorly optimized port, and the wii u is a lot closer to the ps4 and xbone than the wii was to the ps3 and 360.
            The bottom line is that specs do not matter as much as you are making them out to this gen.

          • punkchobit

            “So first you list one of the worst examples of a game on the wii”

            THATS THE POINT. You CANT just ignore the game cause you dont like it, cause then you’re just ignoring ALL data that proves my point.

            “and because my counterpoint is a pair of absolutely fantastic exclusives, suddenly it doesn’t count?”

            No, I already explained why it doesn’t count. Cause they arent available on more powerful systems so you cant measure the difference more processing power would make. That’s the entire point of this discussion! THE DIFFERENCE PROCESSING POWER MAKES! If you can’t measure the difference, they ARENT valid data points.

            Let me put it another way, we are trying to do a comparison. That requires more than 1 data point. Each of the games only available on one system, is only 1 data point. There’s no comparison. You need a game on 2 systems, so you have 2 data points, so you have something to compare. Did you never take ANY science/math class?

            “Its not the systems fault that the developer couldn’t create a game that took full advantage of what the wii could do”

            It’s not the developer’s fault Wii lacks processing power. You can’t take advantage of what isn’t there. The game was built for a system many times more powerful than Wii. You can’t blame the developer for having to sacrifice when they’re given a lot less to work with. You blame the hardware.

            “and the wii u is a lot closer to the ps4 and xbone than the wii was to the ps3 and 360.”

            No, Wii U is a lot closer to PS3/360, than Wii was to PS3/360. Wii U is farther apart from PS4/Xone than PS3/360 is.

            The bottom line is that specs do matter a lot more than you are making them out to be, and always has.

          • smashbrolink

            “THATS THE POINT. You CANT just ignore the game cause you dont like it,
            cause then you’re just ignoring ALL data that proves my point.”

            Why shouldn’t I, when you discounted MY examples based solely upon the fact that my examples were exclusives?
            You’re only looking at the evidence that suits your argument and ignoring everything else that’s GOOD on the system because it’s not a multiplat to do direct comparisons to.

            “No, I already explained why it doesn’t count. Cause they arent available
            on more powerful systems so you cant measure the difference more
            processing power would make. That’s the entire point of this discussion!
            THE DIFFERENCE PROCESSING POWER MAKES! If you can’t measure the
            difference, they ARENT valid data points.”


            You seem to have this idea stuck in your head that the strongest system will always, without question, have versions of multiplats that will forever make other versions crap in comparison.


            “It’s not the developer’s fault Wii lacks processing power. You can’t
            take advantage of what isn’t there. The game was built for a system many times more powerful than Wii. You can’t blame the developer for having to sacrifice when they’re given a lot less to work with. You blame the hardware.”

            No, you blame the developers for NOT CREATING A GAME THAT FITS THE PLATFORM BETTER.

            You can’t place blame on the system for the developers making a STUPID DEVELOPMENT DECISION.

            They’ve GOT the talent needed to create a game that would have sold well on the Wii.

            They didn’t NEED to try to port the game onto a system they could not optimize the game for.

            But they tried to anyways instead of doing the smart thing by creating an original game.

            And in the Wii U’s case, this is even more true; the developers now have enough power to make games above the level of the PS360, even if they only pull slightly short technically[graphically doesn’t matter as much] in terms of enemies on screen or other such trivial details.

            They’ve got no excuse not to find a way of making a third party port work well, other than laziness or trying to save cash.

            Which leads into my next point:

            “No, Wii U is a lot closer to PS3/360, than Wii was to PS3/360. Wii U is farther apart from PS4/Xone than PS3/360 is.”
            It’s been PROVEN that the Wii U is more capable than the PS3/360.

            And once again, wrong: The bottom line is that specs do NOT prevent creative developers from making incredible experiences.
            It’s been proven time after time after FUC*ING time that the most powerful system is the LEAST likely to win a console war.

            Only fantards actually believe otherwise.

  • Maurice Wilburn

    I just want the Xbox One to be successful. I like the things that MS are doing with the Xbox One such as the Kinect integrated features and their exclusive content offerings, but I’m not going to say that necessarily makes it the better console. I do worry about the Xbox One’s success though due to the slandering by Sony’s fanbase, negative rumors, and misguided beliefs, which is why I’m pretty vocal when it comes to defending MS. I don’t care who makes the most sales just as long as there are enough Xbox Ones sold for 3rd party developers to consider it a viable platform. I don’t care if PS4 games are in native 1080p and the Xbox One games aren’t just as long as they look great and they’re fun.

  • RealityCheck2013

    I can’t stand Microsoft LoL:D The 1st time i heard they were entering the Console gaming world i thought ‘oh god not them’. I don’t mind Nintendo(i got a N64) & SEGA & all the rest but Microsoft i just wish would just go away :-/ + I am a 100% PlayStation Fanboy 😀 but i have no hate for Nintendo. It’s just Microsoft i dislike(& now their Loyal mainly online Fanboys) :-/

  • The Wolf 47

    I don’t know.
    I never liked Microsoft policies of DRM they had on GFWL and Xbox One.

  • Rinslowe

    “Nintendo fans just want to see the world (besides Kyoto) burn”

    This I just couldn’t agree with. Being a poster on many sites, a lot of which for Nintendo news I have found the majority of hardcore Ninty fanboys rarely engage in the same level of anti found with MS or Sony fanboys. Ninty fanboys believe their beloved 3DS’s and Wii U’s are the better choice, I wouldn’t deny that, but not often do they bother in flaming the competition let alone wanting the world to burn…lol

    Even sites like Eurogamer, IGN and other large sites have a Nintendo fan base present which in most cases are level headed individuals…

    • NeoTechni

      Ive seen ninty fanboys engage on the same level as everyone else just as often as everyone else

  • Rocco

    Giuseppe Nelva You are my HERO! Thank you for this article!

  • Rocco


  • Stranger On The Road

    As somebody who owns the consoles of the 3 companies (plus planning to get the next-gen), I keep wondering if I am some sort of a unicorn for treating the 3 companies as supplier who are only after my money! Oh and I have a mid-range gaming PC.

    If you want a real historical fact about a company who stopped improving because it knew that it didn’t need to improve for people to buy their stuff, then look no further than Intel. There was a time where buying a PC meant buying an Intel processor. Intel just kept increasing the margin on their processors without releasing anything new, if my memory serve me correctly, they were taking more than 200% profit margin on re-released processors. This didn’t change until AMD released a new type of architecture that outperformed Intel’s best.

    If it wasn’t for AMD trying to take on Intel and the start of the war between them. We would still be paying an Intel TAX on every PC without getting anything worthwhile. And if the price of the box being over a US$ 1000 isn’t enough, each box would still be power hunger and running very hot.

  • Kagemusha

    I don’t go around wishing other consoles to fail. Or harassing people who prefere another console. That is stupid, immature and a waste of time.
    These competition mantra’s however are just as stupid. I guess that is why the snes and the ps2 will go down as the worst consoles in history. Because of the lack of serious competition.

  • Healthy competition is good…but each company needs to take a beating from time to time..It’s now MS turn because of there terrible decisions, and it’s not one I care to shy away from telling my friends about. They tried to butt-rape us and now when tweets/forums say many gamers are getting PS4 instead, they change policy and all is forgiven? NO, it didn’t happen for Sony and PS3, and it shouldn’t happen for MS. I feel they get away with much more because MS is such a profitable company. They have more than enough money to bulk there first party, but what do they do? Money hat 3rd parties and DLC -_-

    The list is endless on there terrible PR “Go get a 360!” Yes I love competition, Sony losing U.S last gen has produced the awesome PS4. 3DS slow sales in the beginning has made it another amazing portable. But at this point I’d rather see apple or samsung enter the game. There is hardly any huge difference between hardware anymore between PS4/X1, there just splitting up 3rd party games. So While I agree the hate is silly, along with the list wars and insults, I don’t agree everyone in the industry right now is “good” competition.

  • NeoTechni

    Basically every time this industry has been in a situation of monopoly, the party that was in a position of power ended up slowing down their evolution, sitting on their laurels and making large mistakes in the following generations, resulting in a degradation of the experience for their own fans.

    Hence the wiiu

    • Murdi

      Come on that is just bullshit. The nes dominated, so did the snes. The psx dominated, so did the ps2. There are examples in both ways. Also of contenders that faild next time around. It doesn’t mean anything.

      • NeoTechni

        With each system after nes, it sold less and less.
        You realize the paragraph i quoted was from the article, right?

  • Maurice Wilburn
  • Coleman Coldwatah Ware

    I’m a true PS Head. I won’t apologize for it. We are passionate and voice it proudly. I, for one, am not the type to down another system but I do stand behind mines 100%.

  • Not A PC Gamer

    Healthy competition or not. I want MS to crash and burn for trying to denounce the ownership of our disk based games and trying to usher in their Nazi Controlled police state of gaming.

  • Ryumoau

    i agree as far as Sony and Microsoft are concerned, but Nintendo really does need to go away. They offer a console experience that is a generation behind the ps3/360 and they have so many interesting first party properties being wasted on it.
    They should become like Sega and give their games to better hardware.

  • 3rdworldgamer

    this post should be like pinned in dualshockers main page. really makes me wonder why so-called fanboys are like freaky killing monsters with words they type/say in the internet, trying to defend their consoles of choice or just basically bashing the competition. have we forgotten the words respect & humility?