Leaked: Wii Outselling PS3 in Sony's Third Week

But the PS3 as sold remarkably well in its first few weeks on sale!

Rutabaga - in the eyes of most commentators PS3 has better graphics, Wii is more accessible - why is one beans and one meat? software costs roughly the same on PS3 and Wii.

i've got no axe to grind - Sony rocks - but Sony were shooting at an open goal with the brand equity they built up with ps2 - they have clearly cocked up their whole pricing strategy by aiming the PS3 at rich graphics whores, which the success of handhelds has shown do not account for more than 10% of the gaming population.

Ultimately if Sony cant sort this out and the Wii and 360 end up with a much higher installed bases ultimately developers are going to redeploy their programmers away from PS3 for simple economic reasons. Amazingly the PS3 may end up being the next Sega Saturn/EDO debacle.

Thanks for the comment, Brother Huxley. Here's my response:

As we went live with the story (at 11:30am) no figures (leaked or otherwise) were available for Xbox 360 (or PS2 or Core or GameCube).

We spoke to Chart-Track at director level to to get confirmation or denial of any figures and to ask about other figures. We were met with a no-comment; as was all other media.

The 'leak' from Chart-Track (a respectable and trusted outlet for statistics relating to the videogames industry) headed up the story.

In the story, we ask in paragraph one "How well" the PS3 has been doing not "How badly". If you really wanted to slam us for anti-Sony (or anti-anybody) bias, that phrasing would certainly have been a good place to start.

In the headline we said "Wii Outselling PS3" - so, are we now Nintendo-biased?

In paragraph two, we explained that the Wii outsold the PS3 - we provided some context (PS3 had lots of stock. Wii had limited stock).

In paragraph three, we explain how we contacted Chart-Track at director level and received a "no comment".

In paragraph four we explained that all these figures should be taken with some kind of historical context regarding Week Three sales of all the platforms.



Nope, that's no why. Why is because - as I said - at the time we went live with the story, (hours before anybody else) the 360 figures had not been leaked nor were they available to us officially.



Bravery has nothing to do with this. I am always happy to stand up and deal with any criticism of the stories or features that we run.

If these means mounting a defence, I will. If this means making a correction, I'll do that as well.

In the light of your criticism - which I appreciate, as it means that you're not only reading the stories, but are taking an active interest in them - I can appreciate that the lack of Xbox 360 figures do stand out, but I hope the context I've given supports the fact that there was no deliberate bias intended.

Cheers

Tim

Forget the Beans & the Meat, it was just a crazy metaphor that aimed to ridicule the stupid statement that the Wii had 'pwnd' the PS3 in it's 3rd week of Uk sales in the original article. They neglected to say how many units 360 had shipped in that same week.

If you think sony have scored an open goal, what would you of preferred Sony to of done with the PS3, release an easy cash in repackaged PS2.5 like Nintendo have done with the Wii (Wiimote excluded). I'm making myself have a dig at Nintendo which I don't want to do but if it was up to them we would still have games on a 2Mbit cartridge.

There are now - apparently - figures of 11k 360s sold during the period. Bear in mind that all these figures - apparently - come from Chart-Track.

In answer to your question: No, there are no officially available sales figures across the UK for sales of the 360 from Chart-Track.

We are talking to Chart-Track about this issue, as it appears strange to us that while software figures are indeed available, hardware figures are not.

If your assumption is that SPOnG is ignoring the 360. Think about it, what possible good would it do SPOnG to take sides in a platform war (unless one platform was doing more good for the gamer, or was more newsworthy than the others) or to ignore a platform holder?

Doing so would not encourage nor grow our readership. It would not retain our independence. It would be counter-productive.

Was this statement necessary in the original article though "Wii is 'pwning' PS3 in the UK." Especially now as you admit that you didn't have the sales figures for all the other consoles.

I would say at the moment the PS3 isn't competing with Wii anyway, it's competing with the 360. The performance of those machines are what should be scrutinized.

As I once said in a previous post, about Spong being impartial, you do (Spong) come across as having a Nintendo positive bias and Sony negative bias.

"

Interestingly i believe that Sony has messed up because precisely because of lack of innovation. Maybe i am wrong but as far as i can see all the PS3 offers is a more powerful version of the Ps2/360 _ same experience with a bigger drive, bigger Dvd, and better graphics. Its the equivalent of souping up your Vauxhall Nova GTE to 500 bhp and then telling people its a new car. To my mind Nintendo appears to have worked out what customers want right now (simple games that are fun, low pricing, more interactivity) and tried to genuinely take the console space forward.

Not an admission - as we never claimed that we had the 360 figures in the first place.



On the one hand (cost), I would agree with you. On the other, in the public mind, they are all videogame machines and hence are in competition.

In short, yes, you're right: performance should be scrutinised and this is what we are trying to achieve.



OK. I've been with SPOnG since late last year - and I can assure you that there is no bias whatsoever in terms of platform as a matter of policy from me. If one platform does well (good software spread, innovative systems, good online, decent pricing) then we will report positively on that. The inverse is equally true.

But please, have at us if you do spot bias. Equally, support us when we're doing things right.

As I'm sure you can now see, I'm always happy to speak about what we're up to.

Cheers

Tim

Thanks for taking the time to reply. It seems there is a little bit of uncertainty about the Spong source of the sales figures. As Chart-Track make available the figures in unison, do consider that your source may have passed on to you a filtered list of information! ie intentionally left out the 360 sales figures.

Sometimes meaning can be implied by what you dont say.
In my opinion, the sales of the Wii/360/PS3 should be given together. If it is the case that you don't have the sales figures for one of the consoles, then please tell us.

In response to your article I have read comments in this thread that have said the PS3 was selling less than the Wii and the Xbox 360 because of its higher price... however such comments would not have been made if you had included the 360 figures which sold even less.
Which then raises the question, if the PS3 sold less than the Wii because its more expensive?
Why did the 360 sell less than the more expensive PS3?

apart from that, keep fighting the good fight!

Maybe because its been on the market over a year? Or are the Xbox stats you're talking about week 3 sales too?

Whereas Nintendo have souped up the Nova to 99BHP. I'm not disputing the fact that the Wiimote is innovative, but it could of quite easly been added as an extra peripheral for the Gamecube (admittedly it wouldn't of sold in the numbers the Wii has) but that has been more to do with hype/good press than anything else, something to which Sony are castigated for. Nintendo are the masters of repackaging the same thing over again. I've ended up calling Nintendo again, but I don't believe they are put under anything like the scrutiny Sony are put under.

But it's far easier to criticize/moan than praise ;-)
Thanks for your response however I still think the "pwnd" statement was unnecessary, and out of context. It would be interesting to publish the figures for all consoles, how is the PS2 doing?

Aye - it does. Especially at the kind of people who come up to you and say, "It takes more muscles to frown than it does to smile, you know". GodsDamnItToHellIWantToKillThemAll!



Not a problem at all. We're currently trying to extract figures from Chart-Track - as these are currently the only reliable stats available. It is daft, from my perspective, that hardware figures are not made publicly available.

Nintendo is the only one making money from the consoles. The PS3 and 360 are sold (even on launch date) at a loss in hope to attract people to buy them so they can make the real money on games and software. The PS3 has a 3.2 Ghz cell chip that is even more powerful than most high end PCs. This is the norm in the games industry: build a powerful console that can be milked 4-5 years without the company having to worry about the machine's then seemingly 'outdated' specs (see Moore's Law). In fact, most developers will probably only fully understand the console's architecture and capabilities after a couple of years after its initial release (therefore there are possibilities for improved graphics later on). Nintendo on the other hand, has done something completely different: the Wii is nothing more than a 759Mhz chip (an upgraded GameCube) that has a motion sensing remote, that will probably see no graphical improvements over its entire life period and looks extremely outdated compared with the 360 or PS3. Yet, it is outselling all of them; making a profit from each console sold. Fortune estimates they make roughly $50 on each Wii (slightly more than a sale of a Wii game) but it all adds up, especially when you sell 6 million of them. PS3 and 360 on the other hand would be losing money on the consoles but hope to make profits on games.

The question is now: How many games the average Wii owner will buy during the life time of the Wii?
And: Can the Wii attract and maintain its audience? Or will it be branded as a GameCube with a gimmick controller that was fun for a few months but had no long lasting appeal?

Time will tell.

I'm with Adam on this one. You only have to look at the exodus of developers jumping from PS3 to 360, or turning their once exclusive PS3 titles into dual format ones. Would they be doing this out of biased too, or just worry for their jobs when PS3 hasn't been shifting?

You are wrong Rutabaga, anyone due a good verbal slapping usually get it round here, MS, Sony or Nintendo. If no one does it, I make a point of doing it myself. As much as I like and have grown up on Nintendo product (I do own and enjoy ps2, 360 etc too), if they do something dumb I'm gonna tell them about it. Of late Sony have done a list of things wrong, Lik Sang, PS3 high price, sixaxis, no more Yaroze support (poor in this day and age), mod chips to play imports and their stupid 2D gaming stance, PSP and PSX (in japan), not to mention minidisks. Sony, they are alienating their customers and fans, plain and simple. And you wonder why they get so much crap from me.

Sure, Nintendo could have released Wii with GC way back, however what contradicts your statement is how and when the Wii became reality at Nintendo (wikipedia might help here), read up on it and you'll understand why Wii wasn't done sooner. Influence for Wii was taken from DS, hence why both are similar and miles ahead. When was DS annonuced at E3 and when did DS come out? You're talking 2004-2005, plus both being in development before that.