IDC predicts that existing consoles will have larger installed base than next gen consoles (1 Viewer)

[Kevin Collins]

ABI's analyst Sam Rosen is predicting that believes that total sales of the Xbox One, the PlayStation 4 and the Nintendo Wii U will fail to reach the numbers posted by the current generation of consoles at the five-year mark.

Why? Sam is quoted by an interview with Game Politics "Without solid titles and first-party franchises, platforms will have a difficult time finding traction. Streaming media is not enough when low-cost STBs are readily available."

Sam believes, which I have thought for some time, is that many gamers (this is already occurring) will begin to focus on mobile and social gaming options, which are cheaper and offer more variety.

How many of you are going to buy a next gen console or will you just keep what you have?

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I really don't think that prediction is all that tough to make. Just look at the WiiU vs the Wii sales. How long was it before Nintendo finally could produce enough units per month to keep the Wii on the shelves whereas the WiiU was available off the shelf since day 1?

I think that the PC, especially laptop gaming for portability and pretty powerful graphics chips, will become a dominant force again and maybe (hope beyond hope) that games are written first for the PC and ported to the consoles rather than the other way around. Laptop manufacturers have a chance now to focus on selling low-cost gaming laptops where all the money goes into the graphics chip rather than the current practice of not have 3rd party graphics chips available until the laptop is decked out in everything else like large screen, best CPU, lots of memory, and massive harddrive.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

The heck with Sam Rosen; what does Sam Posten have to say about this???

 

[mattCR]

This seems like a no-duh prediction, but also a decision that doesn't matter. Will the PS4 have 100M+ units installed? I somewhat doubt it. But if it has 40M, would it not still be a monumental success?

That's also the difference; when the PS3 and XBOX came out originally, the majority revenue stream was over full disc games; now it's a mix of disc games, licensing, streaming media, etc.. of which they all get a piece of that.

In other words, I don't know if Sony or MS is as worried about selling as many numbers.

 

[Edwin-S]

Well, in my own case, I've preordered the PS4 which is a first for me. I've never preordered anything before.

 

[Edwin-S]

Social gaming? What's that? Mobile gaming? Like Farmville? That kind of gaming holds zero interest for me. Microtransaction gaming doesn't interest me either. They are the digital version of carnival games, except even when you win you don't get a prize.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

I don't think you can make general statements like they did. The reason adoption of next gen is going to go slowly is because many big next gen titles are current gen, too. Assassin's Creed 4, Watch Dogs, all sports games, and so on will be on 360/PS3/WiiU this fall as well as PS4/XBOne.

In the long term, I think Sony and MS are going to try to make the next console gen even longer than this one, which should help them potentially grow the base. The easiest way to do that is with a good price but MS is already making that tough. Nintendo will have to launch another console in around 4-5 years to keep up.

Also, the Wii U is not selling as well as the Wii for reasons besides the interest in people buying next gen consoles. It's mostly due to poor messaging and lack of exclusive games.

 

[Dave Upton]

Mobile and social gaming are basically pointless in my world, and I've never cared for either. I'm primarily a PC gamer - and I see PC as the dominant platform moving forward - it's growth has been incredible.

That said, install base is kind of a useless argument unless we guarantee the consoles will have the same number of years between generations. Assuming we do see a 7-10 year lifespan on XBOne and PS4 - then I could see them breaking current gen numbers quite easily as countries that previously weren't affluent enough to be customers start to buy in.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I just don't see how Sony/MS can extend the lifespan of the console even longer. The performance of the average PC improves every month as people buy new ones and toss old ones whereas the console remains stagnant from the day it is released. At some point even a cheap laptop has as much if not more gaming power than a console. I guess if game developers keep writing for consoles first as the lowest common denominator so the PCs are under utilized that can extend the life of the consoles but that just makes it easier to justify playing games on a lower powered laptop vs a gamer desktop (at a much higher cost).

Consoles have (or at least did have given what MS wanted to do with the XBOne) the advantage of "the big red button". Most consumers including myself want specialty devices to have a simple "on" button and its ready to do its function quickly and efficiently. I work in the computer field and have used computers since the original affordable home computer, the VIC 20 and they are a pain in the ass but are tolerated because of the wide variety of things they can do. Consumers don't want the complexity of a computer just to watch TV, play games, record shows, etc. This "all-in-one" notion is going the wrong way because every new feature makes the device less reliable and more difficult to use. The more functions and the more computer like consoles or any devices become, the fewer of them will be sold because more and more consumers will just use a computer hooked to the TV as the advantage of the big red button has been greatly diminished or is gone completely.

 

[Edwin-S]

PC gaming dominant? I think people are dreaming in technicolor if they think that will happen. How many PC games do you see for sale in major consumer electronic retailers? I hardly see any. The amount of PC games available at retailers is microscopic compared to console games. Unless they have all migrated to Steam. I haven't tried that service yet. A friend of mine uses it and, judging from comments he has made, he doesn't like it; however, a lot of PC game publishers will not provide discs. You buy a boxed PC game at a retailer and all you get is a steam code for downloading. Frankly, that would piss me off. When I buy a game at a retailer, I want a disc in the box.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

PC gaming dominant? I think people are dreaming in technicolor if they think that will happen. How many PC games do you see for sale in major consumer electronic retailers? I hardly see any. The amount of PC games available at retailers is microscopic compared to console games. Unless they have all migrated to Steam. I haven't tried that service yet. A friend of mine uses it and, judging from comments he has made, he doesn't like it; however, a lot of PC game publishers will not provide discs. You buy a boxed PC game at a retailer and all you get is a steam code for downloading. Frankly, that would piss me off. When I buy a game at a retailer, I want a disc in the box.

But to my analysis that is the key point of the whole "digital download vs physical disc" argument. The reason you see console games at retailers is it is a closed market for a stagnant device (games never get obsolete due to new hardware) with a very small total game selection compared to the PC. This also keeps the price of games at near their original MSRP for their entire life. This is what keeps retailers carrying console games in sizable quantities.

Steam has succeeded because all of these factors do not exist on the PC and why retail doesn't work very well for PC games. There are a ridiculous number of games for the PC so that no retailer could carry anything except the AAA and A titles. However those games have a very short shelf life because in 6 to 12 months they will be replaced by a new set of AAA and A titles that take advantage of the latest in computer hardware. Because of the short shelf life, the price on PC games drops rather quickly and retailers don't want to have to keep changing the price on their stock or waste shelf space with low value items when it could be replaced by high value items. This is the exact situation digital download from a single vendor works best; very large selection that has a large number of consumers but very few individual titles are bought in great number with a constantly changing price and the correlation between internet access and a computer is extremely high. I don't think even Amazon would want to keep up with these price changes and they are constantly changing prices on everything. Steam is not cheaper because of the lack of a "costly" physical box. It is cheaper because PC games become obsolete over time even if they were the greatest game of their time.

The digital download model generally fails everywhere else because at least one of the factors that makes Steam a success doesn't exist. The big ones are the closed market and no built-in obsolescence so there is no price reduction to the consumer for digital download. When the price is the same or nearly the same, people want a physical copy. When a new AAA title comes out, it is just as expensive on Steam for digital download as it would be buying a physical copy at a retailer. Never has any of the theoretical savings of not having a physical copy ever been passed on to the consumer.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Also, the Wii U is not selling as well as the Wii for reasons besides the interest in people buying next gen consoles. It's mostly due to poor messaging and lack of exclusive games.

The Wii U is not selling as well as the Wii because it does not have even the tiniest fraction of the novelty value or appeal to non-traditional gamers that the Wii had.