GameCube Nearly Doubles Market Share in US

[Saint of Killers]

I fail to see why many of you are so stubbornly persistent in your viewpoint that this thing will fail.

They don't want to see their beloved Nintendo forced to go third party, which will happen when Sony takes the handheld market from them.

[burgundy]

I must have missed the part where Nintendo's console-making status was putting food on my table.

I'm reading a lot about "the casual gamer" here. As far as I can tell, the casual gamer doesn't give a shit about handhelds, whether they're from Nintendo, Sony or Old Navy. The casual gamer drinks beer with his friends and plays 007 and Madden and GTA. They don't sit on the train agonizing over Fire Emblem.

People who post on videogame message boards play GBA. Kids play GBA. Casual gamers don't.

So not only does the PSP have to overcome 12 years of Game Boy, and a lower price point, and the fact that no matter how good the graphics look, they will still look like shit compared to what you can get at home, it also has to rewrite the entire concept of a gaming handheld. Sony did it once (to a much lesser degree) with the PSX. But to be so sure that Sony can overcome much steeper odds this time around is just silly.

[Captain Vegetable]

There's a chance the PSP will dethrone the GBA. There's also a chance that Nintendo's next home console will be #1. Neither one is very good.

Misperception #1: No one has said anything about the PSP taking the market, wholely, from the Game Boy Advance. What we've been saying is that you're a fool for not seeing that it will split the market significantly.

The Game Gear had a ton of hype, had much better features, and had the success of the Genesis to build off of. Didn't matter a damn.

SonofdonCD hit this point rather effectively. To say that the Genesis is in the same league as the PlayStation is hilarious, and demonstrates to me that you really don't know what you're talking about.

Handhelds don't sell for more than $100. No matter what they do. Ask Nokia, they'll back me up.

Uh, yes they do. Game Boy and Game Boy Advance both sold for over one hundred dollars in the begining of their life cycle. Way to choke on your own words.

The PS2 sold on hype, but it also sold on Madden. It also sold because, like the PSX before it, it found a hole in the market.

Wrong, and wrong. Do you seriously think that had Madden not been available, or had it missed this alleged "hole" that it have been worse off? Nope. You're no market anaylist, burg, and as much as I like you, you're still just plain wrong.

The assumption that the strength of the PS2 brand will automatically carry over into a totally different sector of the market is far from proven.

You are also wrong here. PlayStation is a transient brand name. It isn't the "PS2 brand," it's the "PlayStation" brand. And with as much mind share as it has, they could slap this name on a "jar of pickeled cat turds" and still sell at least one.

Not to mention that it is proven that brand names carry over into success in other sectors of the same market, if it is, in fact, a successful brand.

Or else the Gamecube would be carrying the market based on the strength of the Game Boy and MS would be winning because of its PC dominance.

You're wrong. You're looking at the markets cock-eyed.

I'm reading a lot about "the casual gamer" here. As far as I can tell, the casual gamer doesn't give a shit about handhelds, whether they're from Nintendo, Sony or Old Navy. The casual gamer drinks beer with his friends and plays 007 and Madden and GTA. They don't sit on the train agonizing over Fire Emblem.

People who post on videogame message boards play GBA. Kids play GBA. Casual gamers don't.

Wow. The fact that you can speak this with conviction and force it off as "truth" is astounding. You deserve an Oscar . . . but it's not really acting if you believe it, so never mind.

Ever do any market research, burg? I'm will to wager you haven't.

So not only does the PSP have to overcome 12 years of Game Boy, and a lower price point, and the fact that no matter how good the graphics look, they will still look like shit compared to what you can get at home, it also has to rewrite the entire concept of a gaming handheld. Sony did it once (to a much lesser degree) with the PSX. But to be so sure that Sony can overcome much steeper odds this time around is just silly.

Your narrow minded view of the situation is not unlike Nintendo's. You'll both be very supprised come the PSP's debut.

[epmode]

cv, that last post is super pompous, what with all the edumacation garbage. it's very reminicent of your 1337 videogame developer phase. please stop, because i generally enjoy your posts.

and before you say anything, i think the psp has a very good shot at surviving the gba onslaught.

[Captain Vegetable]

Did I have a "1337 videogame developer phase?"

OK, I'll stop. Yes, my posts were a bit (read: totally) pompous, and for that I apologise.

I wasn't trying to insinuate that people who hold your view are entirely uneducated. It's my bad for even bringing education into it. I really shouldn't have, and I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

What I should have done was indicate that you're not looking at the situation through entirely unclouded eyes, and then I should have moved to correct that, or at least made an attempt at it.

I know you were never in contention about the fact that the PSP will sell. You were simply stateing that you don't think the PSP will muscle out the Game Boy Advance, and that's a fair estimation, as it has yet to be seen. But none of us proponents of the PSP has ever made such a claim. We've never said anything that would lead anyone to believe we think it'll kill the GBA (whether or not we actually do), but certain someones seem convinced that that's just what we did.

Burgundy is also not correctly assessing the situation, but he seems to be the worst. Some of the things he's typed, and some of the notions he subscribes to are, quite simply, untrue. But he refuses to see that.

Burg, I'm sorry for coming off as such a jerk. You didn't deserve it.

[burgundy]

Misperception #1: No one has said anything about the PSP taking the market, wholely, from the Game Boy Advance. What we've been saying is that you're a fool for not seeing that it will split the market significantly.

Fair enough. It might not be a total failure but I don't see it putting any more of a dent in the GBA than the Cube is putting in the PS2.

SonofdonCD hit this point rather effectively. To say that the Genesis is in the same league as the PlayStation is hilarious, and demonstrates to me that you really don't know what you're talking about.

At the time the Game Gear released here, Sega was huge, and it had all the hype among a market composed of a much more impressionable age group.

Uh, yes they do. Game Boy and Game Boy Advance both sold for over one hundred dollars in the begining of their life cycle. Way to choke on your own words.

If the Game Boy sold for more than $100, it didn't do so for long, and at any rate, it didn't have any competition. If you ever paid $100 for a GBA, you either imported or got ripped off.

Wrong, and wrong. Do you seriously think that had Madden not been available, or had it missed this alleged "hole" that it have been worse off? Nope. You're no market anaylist, burg, and as much as I like you, you're still just plain wrong.

I'm not seeing the evidence of your market analysis here. The original PlayStation succeeded because Sega and Nintendo dropped the ball. The PS2 succeeded because of hype, because Madden was the game to have, because it played DVDs at a time when DVDs were yet to be a household item, and because it had no competition. Casual gamers didn't give a shit about Sega yet again. Do you seriously think the situation would have been the same if PS2 and Xbox released the same day?

You are also wrong here. PlayStation is a transient brand name. It isn't the "PS2 brand," it's the "PlayStation" brand. And with as much mind share as it has, they could slap this name on a "jar of pickeled cat turds" and still sell at least one.

The "PlayStation" brand hasn't yet sold a damn thing outside of a videogame console that you hook up to your TV. There's no PlayStation cereal, or carpenter pants, or auto detailing. So you have no evidence.[/quote]

Not to mention that it is proven that brand names carry over into success in other sectors of the same market, if it is, in fact, a successful brand.

Sure, if the brand name is the reason for success. Nintendo had a far more dominant brand than PlayStation in the 80s and they could not carry over that success into even the *same* market.

You're wrong. You're looking at the markets cock-eyed.

Explain.

Wow. The fact that you can speak this with conviction and force it off as "truth" is astounding. You deserve an Oscar . . . but it's not really acting if you believe it, so never mind.

Next time I'll shower my posts with IMHOs and s for your benefit.[/quote]

Ever do any market research, burg? I'm will to wager you haven't.

I majored in economics.

Your narrow minded view of the situation is not unlike Nintendo's. You'll both be very supprised come the PSP's debut.

Time, not you, will tell.

Basically, the only reason you seem to think the PSP will succeed is that it's a Playstation product.

[Hero]

PSP will have an ace up its sleeve and a steep hill to climb.

The ace is the 'Playstation' name. Yes, name alone can be incentive to sell a product, and yes, the Playstation monkier is a behemoth the bows to no one.

The hill is the fact that Nintendo completely dominates handhelds. So the challenge is; will Sony's ace be enough to climb the hill? I think it's enough to get up there, to put a dent in Nintendo's works, and pave the way for more competition among handhelds later down the line. Heck, it's already happening; my guess the GBA SP was a knee-jerk reaction to pre-empt Sony, and they're now working on a newer handheld, even though the GBA has been out a few years. Going from over a decade's worth of 'updates' to a single handheld to a few years between total renovations? I think Sony hit some chord there.

Now, the question is - will it be enough?

[burgundy]

I think Nintendo will doom themselves in the handheld market if they move away from the Game Boy name and away from backwards compatibility.

[Saint of Killers]

If TNL existed in 1989:

"No way can Sega take the console market from Nintendo. NES has a huge installed base, and is considerably cheaper with many more games to play than this upstart Genesis. I really don't see how they expect to win such an uphill battle, even with the fancy graphics. And have you seen those ads? It's like Sega is actually trying to sell the thing to people over 12! They'll never succeed against such huge odds."

[Kinopio]

Good thing they don't teach you BUSINESS at law school.

After re-reading most of the PSP threads, something has been made quite clear to me, and why exactly most of you cannot seem to reason intelligently concerning the PSP.

And that observation is . . . (drum roll) . . . You all, for some reason, think that there is no market for the PSP, dispite your obvious undereducation concerning business, forecasting, market share, and mind share. This, if you will allow me to demonstrate, is due to the faulty assigning of irrelevent issues to the situation at hand, or discounting facts and observations that are essential to understanding the situation.

Are people who have different opinons than you always uneducated?

You usually seem chill, but that post does nothing but make you look like a total prick.