Over the last twelve years, Sony has sold around 154 million PlayStation 2 consoles, making it the best-selling devoted gaming machine in history. Nintendo is the only company that’s come close to toppling the PS2, selling just over 151 million Nintendo DSs in the past eight years. The current crop of home consoles, all of them growing long in the tooth at between seven and six years old, doesn’t even come close. Nintendo has sold around 95 million Wiis, Microsoft around 67 million Xbox 360s, and Sony around 62 million PlayStation 3s. The age of the devoted gaming console may not be over, but its zenith is past and the next round of machines will continue the trend according to one analyst.
Wii U, Sony’s Orbis, and Microsoft’s Xbox Durango will not match even their predecessors in total sales.
Speaking with Gamasutra on Monday, Piper Jaffray analysts Michael Olson and Andrew Connor said that they expect the next round of consoles to underperform by a wide margin compared to existing boxes. How much? Over its first fourteen months on shelves, the “disappoiting” hardware specifications of Wii U will cause that device to sell just 35% of the volume of the Wii over the same period in 2006-’07. Sony’s PlayStation 4, or Orbis as some rumors suggest, expected in 2013 will sell just 50% over the same comparative period. The Xbox 720, sometimes called Durango, will sell just 55% of the Xbox 360’s volume over the first fourteen months when it releases they project in 2014.
Why? The same things leeching console software sales already: Mobile games and social games. “We believer console gaming will continue to be a time-share donor to social networks, mobile games, and tablets. We therefore favor companies with increasing exposure to social/mobile gaming, including Zynga and EA.”
Whether big publishers like EA and Zynga retain their financial power in the coming years remains to be seen, but considering the downward trend in physical game and game machine sales since 2008, it’s hard to argue the analysts’ point. Console and retail game sales have shrunk dramatically ever year since the recession, and new machines won’t reignite the market. It’s not that people aren’t spending on games or playing them, it’s that they are increasingly paying for them in small doses on handheld devices and PCs.
Wii U, Orbis, and Durango won’t sell as well as Wii, PlayStation 3, or Xbox 360. It’s almost impossible. Whether they will or not isn’t the question that players, game makers, and businesses need to ask at this point though. The real question: What will be the universal device that people play and buy games on? Will it be smart TVs that are cross compatible with tablets and smart phones? Will Apple become the dominant manufacturer of gaming platforms? Will Valve make its rumored and then denies Steam Box?
Only time will tell. Luckily players are patient people.
I love the mobile gaming argument. I also love how everyone who uses the argument sticks to the same fallacy “It’s accepted that mobile gaming will take over the industry, so it will.” Circular logic an argument does not make. There’s no reason to believe that mobile gaming is currently affecting the industry at all. We’re in the middle of a recession and close to the end of the current console generation. Both of those factors could easily account for a decrease in console game sales long before mobile gaming ever enters the picture. Furthermore, mobile gaming isn’t anywhere near as lucrative as the console/PC gaming market currently. Yes, it does make money. However, it’s still well below the mainstream gaming market. I’m sure casuals will enjoy their mobile games, but there’s a ton of people who want a more engaging gaming experience. Those people aren’t going to suddenly drop off the face of the earth. Mobile gaming and console gaming are two very different demographics. They have very little to do with each other which is why developers make completely different games for either platform. This argument is overdone and founded on illogical notions. I’m so tired of it already. Console gaming isn’t going anywhere. Deal with it.
There’s one huge glaring problem with this argument: Developers actually sold more consoles overall than they did last generation. Sure, Sony definitely sold less PS3s than they did PS2s, but the PS3 is still a commercial success, and when you compare the number of Wiis to the number of Game Cubes that sold and likewise the 360 to the number of XBoxes that sold you quickly notice that this generation was actually better for the video game industry overall than last generation. That doesn’t include DLC, Netflix, online subscription plans, and everything else that makes console developers extra money this generation. People seem to forget that Sony was the only console manufacturer that did well last generation. The PS2 may have sold 154 million units, but the Game Cube only sold 21.74 million and the XBox only sold 24 million. That’s 199.74 million consoles total. If you look at the current generation the Wii has sold 95.85 million, followed by the 360 with 67.2 million, and the PS3 at 63.9 million. That’s a grand total of 226.95 million. This generation isn’t over yet either. So while it looks all doom and gloom when you just look at PS2 compared to PS3, if you actually look at the numbers in context you just realize that every developer has a decent portion of the market share this gen, instead of one manufacturer dominating. That’s actually really good for the industry. Not bad. So if the trend continues then next gen the consoles will sell even better than they are this generation (which there’s no reason to believe the trend won’t continue). How can a market analyst not understand simple math? It’s your job, do a little research.
also it’s like if the real console games are reaching a critical mass. they are getting too big and too complex to manage and cost too much to make. a lot of good games which have sold an impressive number of copies still could not make a profit (Bulletstore, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, etc).
These analysts are complete idiots. Lets do some real analyzing shall we?
(sales are in Millions)
Generation 4:
Sega: 28.5
SNES: 49
Neo Geo: 1
TurboGraphix: 10
Total: 88.5 million
Gen 5:
PSone: 104
N64: 33
Saturn: 9.5
3do: 2
Total: 148.5
Gen 6:
PS2: 153
Xbox: 24
GC: 22
Dreamcast: 10
Total: 209
Gen 7:
PS3: 63
Xbox 360: 65
Wii: 95
Total: 223
Ok so now we have worldwide sales totals for the last 4 generations. And lo and behold each and every year the total console sales have RISEN. Analysts are completely moronic. How could they have not seen this? IMO these guys should all be fired. The console market isnt going anywhere.
Agreed. I was about to post that same math. These guys are idiots.
Kudos! I didn’t even need to get to the end of this article to come to the realization that whomever has Analyzed this topic is/are moronic. Consoles sales in-total are up. The only reason the PS2 sold as many as it did is because it really as the most solid platform of that generation. The other platforms were DOA for the most part. Not to mention the PS2 was supported for the entire 10 year life cycle. As promised! It was still selling huge numbers AFTER the launch of the current gen of consoles.
Even with that the current generation consoles sold very well. Another actor for “lowered” individual console sales is that there are three major consoles and they are all selling equally well. The Wii has arguably done significantly better in terms of console sales but they all have done well. The same can’t really be said for past generations. This article is retarded but one must consider its source. I was totally expecting to see Michael Pachter’s name attached to it somewhere.
You’re analyzing the wrong part of your math. If you look at the percentage increase in total sales per year, you will see a clear decline. Such a decline that it wouldn’t be surprising to see zero growth for the next generation and negative growth for the one following it.
Not saying the article is absolutely correct but they’re on to something and so would you be if you looked at your own numbers more closely.
I would like to see them really finish using the full potential of the ps3 system first of all as companies are still finding that they can do a lot more with graphics on the ps3 and it maybe the same for the xbox 360 not sure on that as I am a Sony fan. However they meaning Sony may have already put a nail in their coffin if the rumors prove to be true about them tying the games to your account, rendering it impossible for you to purchase used games in the next generation system, a move that I would consider to be very threatening to them as it would hurt retailers like gamestop as well as gamefly, think about it you would have to buy a game and then pay to use the full portion of the game by purchasing a online code from psn. I think that it would seriously damage them, if you want to make money fine charge everyone for a online account like xbox does and that would be fine, I mean you can not really argue about 50 dollars for a year subscription and that would help to make up some cost but to attach the games to a account in order to actually access the full content that would just be wrong. I also think that they should tie it together by making the systems reverse compatible because face it who wants a bunch of different systems just laying around not being used but if it will save the cost of the system then I guess people will be willing to forgo the reverse compatibility part. I know that I hate buying a system just to later have a far better system come out, why not just offer the bigger data packages right up front instead of making us wait but there once again it is just a strategy to get people into buying more systems, its a endless game that keeps on going around and around in the end lol.
They wont sell well for a number of reasons, lets get started,
1. Because they are getting to expensive for some people, I dont like the fact of paying half, of a whole pay check on a new system.
2. The games for the systems are getting expensive, where in the good old days they used to be 20.00, and some people dont like to spend an increadible amound of money on just a game for the system.
3. Some game industries, such as Sony do not know how to put a new game on the market the right way, I mean look at the PS Vita, its a no for one failure.
4. They have made too many of the systems as it is, instead of staying with the old ones, they make new ones just about 4 years after there previous generations of the game systems, it would be more understandible if they made a new system every 7 years, but they make it way to fast as it is at this point.
Furthermore, they sould slow down on their production, instead of moving at such a fast rate, or they will never do as well as their previous generious of systems.
WHAT are you smoking? There were NEVER “good old days” when games “used to be $20.” Brand new games have hovered around the $50 apiece mark since the Atari 2600 in the 1970′s. With that said, I agree that $60 is too high of an intro point and should be dropped.
The systems are expensive, yes, but I don’t think that will be a trend we’ll see repeated. I don’t believe there will be another $600 console launch in the coming generation.
Sony, yes, continues to make some really dumb mistakes. Which is a total shame–Vita is a nice device.
But no, they haven’t made too many systems, and no, they aren’t making new ones “just 4 years” after the previous generation. When Wii U launches, Wii will be 6 years old. When PS4 and Xbox 420 launch, those systems will be 7-8 years old.
Your argument is factually inaccurate and its flaws proceed from there.
First of all, let me get started, Look at how many X-Boxes have been made in the amount of time, and games used to cost 20.00 dollars, some of them still do, such as Rayman, and look at the PSP Go, they make the vita about 2 of 3 years after it because it was an obious fail, you are right in some areas, but are also wrong my friend, let me assure you. Furthmore, you must have some grasp of what I am even talking about before you reply, and the new systems ate moving fast, such as the handheld area. The Dsi, Dsi Xl, and the 3DS came out pretty close dont you think. YOUR ARGUMENT HAS FLAWS, AND GET SOME REAL FACTS PLEASE.
The PSP go was a part of the PSP family, Sony made the PSPgo to make much more portable where you didn’t have to carry around UMD’s. Since the PSPgo is part of the PSP family, it doesn’t make it the PSP 2. The PS Vita is the true PSP 2. The PSP is 6 years old. The PSPgo did fail and they stopped making it. That’s the only thing you’re correct about in your PSP,PSPgo, PS Vita argument. PSP is 6 years old therefore Sony makes consoles 6-7 years apart and therefore, You sir, are indeed incorrect in your argument. and I laugh how you tell jasongw to get some real facts when you need to get some real facts.
It still effects if people will buy the next gameing generation, expecially if it didnt sell very well.
1. What? With inflation, the 360 and Wii were around what you’d pay for old systems. PS3 was overpriced.
2. LOL, 20 dollars? Cartridge games used to be 60-70 dollars. I don’t know what planet you’re from.
3. No argument.
4. Every 4 years? 360 came out in 2005 and Wii/PS3 came out in 2006. 5 years is the minimum for consoles. That’s how it was for every system EXCEPT the current ones.
How old are you? 12?
First of all, very little game were 20.00 in the old days, some of which that didnt sell good at the start, and there still are today, such as rayman. Also the PSP Go and the PS Vita came out about 2 or 3 years after it was made, the DSi, DSi XL, and the 3DS came out outragesouly close, my “Good Man”, and furthermore, you might as well have gotten some of your facts out of a garbage can MR. “AWSOMELAWSOME” and look at all of the X-Boxes that came out, taht had better memory and processing, and what are you like 10 years, “LOL”
Again, you go on saying the PSPgo is the PSP 2. The PSPgo is a part of the PSP family. The true PSP 2 is the PS Vita. Stop saying people are 10, 12, etc. years old cause by the looks of your false info you sound like you’re 8 years old. Also, you and I both know Nintendo doesn’t do very well these days which is why they release new consoles so close. Your name is really stupid too. 8 year old you are indeed. Sony releases new consoles in a 6-7 year period.
It still effects if the next generation will sell good or not, and the PS Go was a fail.
Im not implying that the ps2 is the PsP go, and I asked that if you were 10. Please read my summery the right way, and stop implying stuff.
coming from the guy who spells Xbox, X-boxes haha
After reading your post I can only assume the majority of your gaming experience comes from playing Angry Birds on your moms iPhone. Cartridges for the original consoles used to cost 80-100 bucks at release. The NEO-GEO system in the 90′s ran around 600 buck and it’s games were 150-200 bucks a pop. Does the industry need to change, yep. By the way SONY is not a game industry, they are a company that has a gaming division. The term industry refers to sum of all gaming companies. Also, the console industry is slowed down. That’s why consoles release on average 5-6 years apart as opposed to the PC industry that updates it’s hardware every 6-12 months.
On a final note the numbers released for the PS2 are over 12 years, including a price drop to 99$ towards the end of it’s cycle. I’m sure if you sold the current systems for that long with that same pricing structure you would see similar figures.
No. SI have a Vita, 360, 3DS, stop assuming stuff.
typo, I mean “I”
Cassib you have as much knowledge of old school systems as a kid being born in the mid 90′s. Consoles have always been expensive. Please check opening prices for the following: Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Genesis, Turbo Grafix 16, Sega Cd, Neo Geo, Sony 3D0. I don’t know what games you were buying but I remember paying 60 to 80 bucks for cartridges considering I played JRPG’s. Yes PC games were anywhere from 25-40 depending on which game/style of gaming you bought, My favorite would’ve been Sierra games but let’s face it they went under for a reason. You’re comparing the DS, however these are upgraded versions it’s still the same design and its handheld. I am not trying to argue that you don’t make any valid points but the above article in itself is ridiculous. I am tired of hearing about Zynga, Mobile and Social Media bs in general. The games itself are crap and a waste of money. Who in their right mind spends 100′s of dollars to obtain zynga coins? Seriously I have been and will always be a gamer and cannot recommend any mobile game over games like, BF3, Assasins Creed, Skyrim, FFVII etc.. In general I like the fact that a console can last almost 10 years, even handheld systems have a good life span. If you’re complaining about it then get off consoles spend some cash and build a PC and continue to upgrade about every 6 months, hell you won’t even have to buy games ever if you know what you’re doing. Anyways this coinversation is over,
I played skyrim, and it is not at all of what people crack it up to be, and the PC isnt all that great.
Skyrim is Awesome! and PC is equally Awesome! I play games on PC and on my consoles. Pc has it’s strengths which includes better graphic fidelity and better access to user generated content. Also no worry on console developers dropping backwards compatibility.
So far much of what you have posted has been uber crap my friend. I am now convinced you are one of the analysts who contributed to the original article.
1. Because they are getting to expensive for some people, I dont like the fact of paying half, of a whole pay check on a new system.
The PS3 was an aberration in pricing due to the early adoption of Blu-ray. The 360 was 299 or 399. The SP1 and PS2 cost 299 when they came out.
2. The games for the systems are getting expensive, where in the good old days they used to be 20.00, and some people dont like to spend an increadible amound of money on just a game for the system. Yes games are more expensive. PS1 games gost about 40 USD. PS2 games cost 50 USD and current gen cost 60 USD. Again not much higher in terms of inflation.
3. Some game industries, such as Sony do not know how to put a new game on the market the right way, I mean look at the PS Vita, its a no for one failure.
So the company that has two of the highest selling consoles in history (PS1 and PS2) don’t know how to put out a game? There is much better competition now-a-days so they have to split up the market. They are lagging behind the 360 by what 2 millions console sales? Even though it cost nearly double at launch!
4. They have made too many of the systems as it is, instead of staying with the old ones, they make new ones just about 4 years after there previous generations of the game systems, it would be more understandible if they made a new system every 7 years, but they make it way to fast as it is at this point.
The PS1 launched in 1994, PS2 2000, PS3 2006. Looks like every six years ATM. Microsoft did release 4 years after the original Xbox but that was because they needed to beat the PS3 to the market and because the original Xbox didn’t do well considering the PS2. Also both the PS1 and PS2 were supported well into ten years and the current gen consoles are getting the same treatment.
Were you one of the analysts cited in the story?
CHEERS to the world of PC gamers. Our systems run all the latest games. AND, we can adjust settings of visual graphics down to similarity of crappy PS3 & XBOX360 games. And run there previous consoles titles on our systems. After all, the games were first developed on a computer… WHOOOOhhhooooooo!!!!
Alienware M18x (hardware Maxed OUT) $3896 with military discount. You guys better get one (shaking my Sonic Finger).!!!
Alienware is crap buddy and good luck on updating that lappy. Should’ve went to cyberpower, or build your own but then again maybe you’re like all the other pc people now think it’s better but know anything about building them. Big deal you can adjust graphics I’ve seen enough videos of people running slow choppy games.
My Asus G73JHA1 laptop cost me under 1700 bucks and it runs ANYTHING put out today either maxed or on high settings at ridiculously high frame rates and I still have room to upgrade the Proc and video card.
Alienware is a rip off which should be obvious, since they were bought out by Dell.
Well no sh-t they won’t sell well. I’ve been saying that sense Day one of the rumors. I just bought a third PS3 do you think I’m going to pay money for a new console that won’t offer much more? Unless it comes with an automatic Espresso maker and a kettlecorn/popcorn maker, and the abillity to install linux then It will be quite some time till I get a PS4.
Well you are right.
Well no shit they won’t sell well. I’ve been saying that sense Day one of the rumors. I just bought a third PS3 do you think I’m going to pay money for a new console that won’t offer much more? Unless it comes with an automatic Espresso maker and a kettlecorn/popcorn maker, and the abillity to install linux then It will be quite some time till I get a PS4.
do people like packaging stupidity and calling it fact, first of all the retail market as a whole has taken a bit drop. this can be seen as one trend, a global rcession, this is a simple thing to understand.
as well as this console sales will decreases this is because the market naturally slows down as the people who have bought the console have gone on to buy the software. as most people who wonted the consle have borught it this is when you get a sale drop off this is a natural trend
the whole thing that with cheap gaming apps will take over the market has no basis in reality, this is a new thing and there is the novelty value, but how many game clones can you play before you get bored. the trends in the console market since the 1970s has seen a rise in every successive generation. and lastly free social network games tend to be played for short periods of time and then most people abandon them.
If people are ONLY willing to pay 99 cents for a throw-a-way game on a portable and that is all, then that can only mean that gaming is dead. Because eventually, all the 99 cent games are going to be clones and gaming will die. It would be only a matter of time. You can’t provide that much quality for that cheap of a price.
Quality gaming is meant to be played on a big screen and it’s meant for a higher price.
Oh, you mean like the Modern Warfare series?
Trollolo
“Because eventually, all the 99 cent games are going to be clones and gaming will die”.
i.e. Modern Warfare.
the home console market has grown by over 60 Million units this generation. the one before had grown by 50 million. the one before that grew by 50 million and but sadly the Psone era only grew by 40 million on the snes/megadrive era.
I think if anaylists actually analys then maybe they would not look so stupid when someone actually quotes that the market has grown each generation
if they make the new generation of console backwards compatible to the current one then sales wouldn’t be a problem.. but doing that means limiting your self to the new stuff that you can do and will be a bit harder to add some great new stuff. Sony was able to make PS3 backwards compatible (atleast the first gen of PS3′s) to be able to play PS1/PS2 games but not all of em, some just have problems playing on PS3 and some that had problems got fixed w/ updates.
it’s hard to top PS3/Xbox 360 and Wii since they really are strong consoles to begin with (well Xbox is quite obsolete compared to PS3 imo but the big head start on its community helped a LOT on keeping it as the no.1 choice of online console players, but I personally like PS3 compared to xbox… watching blu-ray w/o the need of a separate blu-ray player is a big plus to me).
They editor failed to take into account that the PS2 and DS had next to no rivals and that the ps3, 360, and Wii are all very strong platforms. Which would easily make up the difference in why one single console isn’t dominating like in years past.
I guess people get so caught up in numbers, they fail to look at the obvious. Mobile Gaming will never replace consoles because it’s two entirely different things.
Mobile gaming has done so well because EVERYONE has a mobile phone, not just gamers but EVERYONE. Consoles are for gamers, therefore we should quit comparing the two entirely different industries. Two completely different audiences.
If we’re gonna compare mobile games with console game sales, why not compare Top Fuel Dragster sales to Honda Civic sales? They’re both vehicles, why aren’t we comparing those industries? Because only an idiot would compare those two, get my point?
And in the article you say “Console and retail game sales have shrunk dramatically ever year since the recession, and new machines won’t reignite the market. It’s not that people aren’t spending on games or playing them, it’s that they are increasingly paying for them in small doses on handheld devices and PCs.”
How do you know this for a fact? That’s pure speculation, and a pretty baseless one on top of that. Correlation does not mean causation my friend. Odds are software sales have died down BECAUSE there hasn’t been a new console generation in so long.
Long story short, mobile games are inferior cheap distractions, console games are superior in every way. Mcdonalds won’t put a Steakhouse out of business, and mobile phones won’t put consoles out of business.
Kudos! Well said!
Am I the only one noticing the typos? How sad is this article? I guess I shouldn’t expect anything but this from Digital Trends.
Maybe I’m missing reality, but I’m not seeing people having Apple devices over consoles. Consoles are still strong and the tablet is second or third to it because it’s a home entertainment device; the thing we come home from work to and have a beer and sandwich while playing it on a big screen. Nobody plays street fighter, madden, or call o duty on a tablet or phone. Probably never will.
The reason these new consoles may not sell as much is because of the economy and that people are getting a bit jaded about the 3d/2d format of of video games. The leaps technological leaps between generations are getting smaller as they progress. We’re getting better games…. but not that as good as ps1 to ps2 better. Or SNES to N64 better.
They need to do something more then just play games and deliver media content…
The only thing they could do now is add virtual reality.
They will start to be iterative updates rather than huge leaps that we’ve seen with the current gen. I don’t know, that’s what I’ thinking.
but you need to remember that the first Xbox and GameCube only sold 20 million consoles, so for every current-gen console to be able to sell between 60 to 95 millions means that the industry is even healthier and bigger than ever! And not to mention that the DS sold 150 millions….
If it isn’t 4K or otherwise a compelling option for the money it will cost versus free crap.
“Wii U, Orbis, and Durango won’t sell as well as Wii, PlayStation 3, or Xbox 360. It’s almost impossible. ”
No it isnt in fact it might be quite easy