Analysts pick which console will win in 2007 and beyond

by Blake Snow { Jan 26th 2007 at 4:45PM }

Does 2007 have a console daddy? Who will ultimately win the hotly contested console war? To find out, Gamasutra asks the people whose job it is to advise investors on the gaming industry. That's right, the analysts (dah, dah, dahhhhh!). Here are some of their predictions.

Mike Wolf from ABI Research expects the Wii to outperform both the 360 and PS3 this year, but that Nintendo must leverage more than just the Wiimote if it wishes to outlast the other two. Wolf doesn't speak directly on 360 sales, but believes a price drop may be in store, and for sure, a harddrive upgrade in 2007. Regarding the PS3, he all but says Blu-ray was a bad business move, because the technology increased both the retail price and production costs of the PS3, frustrating would-be buyers and potential price cuts in the process.

David Cole of DFC Intelligence believes it's still too early to determine a winner but expects the 360 to outsell the 24 million Xbox 1s. Regarding the PS3, he's optimistic about its long-term potential, but suggests "the PlayStation base may not be as loyal or patient as Sony is counting on."

Lastly, Michael Pachter predicts the Wii will "reign supreme" through 2008, outselling both the 360 and PS3 at 10 million units per year, roughly 20+ million after only two years. But he believes both Microsoft and Sony can make claim as the console winner by 2008-2009. In short, the 360 will chug along selling well throughout its life, while the PS3 will start slow but catch on after Sony wins both the HD movie war and the graphics war by 2009. Basically, he believes they all win.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Myke @ Jan 26th 2007 4:53PM

"Basically, he believes they all win."

Wow, you mean that all three systems will sell enough to make them worthwhile? You mean to say that games will STILL come out for all three systems regardless of who "wins"? You mean that the fact that adoption rate has nothing to do with a console's profitability for a company? You mean to say that all of the systems will have great exclusive titles, shoddy 3rd party releases, diamonds in the rough AND quality game droughts that will eventually pass when more games come out? ARE YOU SERIOUS????? Wow, are you sure that guy's an analyst? It's hard to tell because he's not just making wild guesses and actually sitting down and looking at the big picture. He deserves some sort of award for NOT being a complete moron.

Magarnacle @ Jan 26th 2007 4:55PM

I am working on my own system that will outsell all three. Look for it this fall.

Not really. I just wanted to post something. Sorry.

What about Crackdown? I did not really like that demo, yet I am still buying the game. I should just send Microsoft a check each month. Cut EB Games out of the middle.

Unit @ Jan 26th 2007 5:00PM

#2"What about Crackdown? I did not really like that demo, yet I am still buying the game."
is it
a. you need a game to play badly
b.deep down inside you do like it
c.a little something called HALO3!!!!omg..thebestever..myeyesbleed...mastercheifiwannhaveyourbabies!!!!!LOLZ!!

Myke @ Jan 26th 2007 5:01PM

Wow, sorry for being such a prick up above, but seriously, that's how things are. The "Fanboy" mentality to live and die by a brand-name is just pointless. Do you think that ANY of the companys making systems sit in a room thinking about how to best please us? No, they don't and thats the truth. THEY ARE A BUSINESS, THEY ARE IN THIS TO MAKE MONEY. Yes, it's a hobby of ours to follow what goes on in the industry but don't buy a system based on PERCIEVED exclusives. If you like a certain series, wait and see and be SURE that it'll come out for the system you're planning on buying. Don't sit back and bash a system because you think it will never have anything you want. You might be eating your words, standing in line with that very system in your hand before you know it. We're all gamers here, we all love our hobby, lets not make fools out of ourselves by sitting back and hanging on every word that these developers and companies say. They are MILLIONAIRES, they could care less what some 21 year old guy like me wants out of his system, they just care about the almighty dollar.

Marty @ Jan 26th 2007 5:02PM

Nice, Myke... it is kind of annoying that most of the other "analysts" claim that one console will reign supreme with 99% of the market share, with the other two splitting the difference, and being horrible, abysmal failures. Still, that doesn't mean to say that neither of the three console makers are invincible... Sega's console division turned belly up over issues they created for themselves , and Nintendo, Sony, and MS could wind up doing the same if they don't play their cards right.

Kane @ Jan 26th 2007 5:04PM

That's sort of in line what I think. Nintendo will have by far the quickest start (there's already evidence of it) thanks to the slightly lower price and more dedicated hardcore fanbase. However, it may hit a wall later on, while 360 sales continue to roll along at a healthy clip, with a sizeable boom period this Christmas for Halo 3.

Regarding the Wii, Wario Ware and Wii Sports are cool for now, but they absolutely must start using that remote in surprisingly innovative ways by next Christmas, or it runs the risk of being dismissed as a gimmick. Getting some healthy online games in there wouldn't help either, but we know Nintendo can't really be relied on for that. Zelda, Mario, Metroid, et al will drive sales, but they won't get much further than the Gamecube if they don't make every effort to turn the Wiimote into a cultural phenominon.

The PS3 I won't even make any predictions on. They've screwed up so many times I would like counting them out, but never underestimate the stupidity of the general public and its buying habits.

As far as money, obviously Nintendo will make a healthy profit, and at some point this year MS should be looking good as well. For Sony...well...it'll be a while, especially if production problems continue and sales stay flat.

Matt @ Jan 26th 2007 5:04PM

@ Myke

I'm not exactly sure his point is as insightful as you think it is. Last generation Microsoft absorbed billions of dollars in losses in order to enter the market. It has yet to be seen if the market can actually financially support three consoles. However, with all this competition between Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo there is at least one clear winner: the gamers.

unbias voice @ Jan 26th 2007 5:34PM

Just because there was a console that dominated the market last generation (xbox.....just kidding... ps2) why does that mean that ONE console has to dominate this generation???

All of them are appealing. All 3 have pros and cons. All have first party titles people would want. And the fact of the matter is that A LOT of people are going to own more than one. There is room for MICROSOFT, NINTENDO, AND SONY to be in the market. And let's face it... when these companies work hard to compete... it's the consumers that win cause it means better games and better service. I agree... they are ALL winners.

Pedro @ Jan 27th 2007 9:57AM

I like pachter, I really do. But he is totally off on this one. Blu ray isn't going to be that compelling. DVD was a good inclusin in a console because it was the new awesome format you wouln't be able to afford otherwise. Bluray is lazerdisc 2.0. DVD is tooo strong (and it hasn't even completely supplanted VHS yet) and Bluray just requires far too much in order to be even remotely functional, let alone useful.

Kane @ Jan 26th 2007 5:07PM

Me, above: "Getting some healthy online games in there wouldn't help either"

Wouldn't HURT either. Argh.

Huzzah!! @ Jan 26th 2007 7:28PM

That's retarded. Wii will win. Forever. DVD's will win the Format war. Which is what Wii will have. (supposedly)

Matt @ Jan 26th 2007 5:11PM

@ Myke

In regards to your last statement (which, by the way, it's nice to see other rational thinking people on Joystiq). Don't get too discouraged. As long as there is a healthy level of competition in this industry those millionaires care very much about what you want out of a gaming console. They want to know exactly what you want and exactly how much it's worth to you precisely because all they care about is the almighty dollar.

Next-Gen-Gamer @ Jan 26th 2007 5:14PM

"It has yet to be seen if the market can actually financially support three consoles."

Yeah, because we all know we've NEVER seen that before.

Matt @ Jan 26th 2007 5:30PM

@ Next-Gen-Gamer

I'm assuming that's sarcasm, but I'm not exactly sure what period you would be referring to. As I mentioned, last gen the Xbox absorbed billions of dollars of loses and Sega was pushed out of the market. The previous generation we had the PSX, N64 and the Saturn. In which case the Saturn was a miserable failure. Before that we had systems like the Turbo Grafx which entered the market but, again, couldn't stay profitable.

As far as I know, the market has never supported 3 profitable consoles. If you know otherwise, please let us know.

dis_guy @ Jan 26th 2007 5:31PM

As long as there is always a Nintendo console with Nintendo games to sit next to my other console, then I'll be happy.

Mr Khan @ Jan 26th 2007 5:32PM

Video Games is peculiar in that it is one of the few industries that is extremely Brand-name driven

The other 3 would be Computers (both OSes and Computers themselves)i hate Apple, Cars (i hate GM), and Clothing (hate hate hate Old Navy and Nike)

I do agree in that, most likely, none of the consoles this generation will be a spectacular failure (Dreamcast), nor a will be one clearly inferior to the competition (GC vs. Xbox), nor will there be a winner so far removed from the competition (PS2)

Mr Khan @ Jan 26th 2007 5:32PM

yay! I have my name back!

Diman @ Jan 26th 2007 5:37PM

Xbox 360 will have alright 3rd party support, PS3 will have a driving edge with first party and second party, Wii will have cooking mama....I keed, Wii will have a great first party support, a bunch of rehashes, downscaled ports.

Jeff @ Jan 26th 2007 5:42PM

"Yeah, because we all know we've NEVER seen that before."

We actually have *four* consoles going at the moment: the PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, and PS2. Which one of the four is selling best? The PS2.

Nobody knows how long that will last. But that's the situation at the moment.

As for whether we've ever seen three viable home consoles, we really haven't. A two horse race is about all the industry will support. In the previous generation, the PS2 sold around 110 million units (and counting), the Xbox 24 million and the GameCube 22 million. The Xbox lost approximately $5 billion - a number that would put lesser companies out of business in about five seconds flat. In market share terms, the PS2 had about 65% with MS and Nintendo splitting the rest.

The generation before was similar: around 105 million PS1's to 30 million or so N64's and 10 million Sega Saturns and 10 million Dreamcasts. (the DC really straddled two generations.) This put Sega out of the hardware business. You could probably throw the 3DO and CDi in this gen, neither of which cracked 5 million units, and we never heard from either company behind those systems again in the game industry. (Well, Panasonic did the Q for Nintendo.)

Before that, you had the SNES and Genesis battling it out with about 46 million SNES's and 35 million Genesi sold - one of the few races that was close, and it turned at the end. The Atari Jaguar was a distant third, with less than 3 million consoles sold. Atari exited the hardware business, and in fact sold all its assets soon after.

Previous to that, the NES/SMS battle - which was not even close. Atari was an also-ran with the 7800.

Then you start to go back to the pre-crash days of Atari, Mattel and Coleco. At one time, all three were battling, with the 5200, Intellivision and Coleco Vision on the market simultaneously. Two of those companies were driven out of the console business entirely. The last (Atari) took a temporary break before trying again with the 7800.

In no case have there been three successful systems by any objective measure. The previous gen to this one may have been the closest, but I don't see how $5 billion in losses and about 1/6 the total market share can really be termed a "success". (At least Nintendo was profitable, despite their small market share.) If that was Sega or any other game company, they'd have been thumped out of the market within a year of that drubbing. MS obviously has huge cash reserves, so they can afford it - but so far their entry in the game industry could be considered charitable at best.

Will we call the Xbox 360 a "success" of it does the same or similar sorts of numbers, just because MS decides to keep plugging away at it? Will MS? Will analysts? What about the PS3, which has to be a big money-loser for Sony at this point and clearly seems to not be selling at the (probably unrealistic) rate they had predicted? What about the Wii, which is now entering the now-standard Nintendo post-launch game drought that really never ends?

There are always winners and losers and there will be this time too. The only question is who wins and who loses. There will not be three successful home consoles.

GoonieGooGoo @ Jan 26th 2007 5:43PM

Competition breeds quality......CAPITALISM AT ITS FINEST!!

Let 'Em Fight.....I'll buy the games. I already do.

Heck....every generation has its Paperweight system (last gen being my GAMECUBE)....current next/current gen being right now my PS3......good thing it plays movies and NETFLIX rents Blu-Ray.

Sensai @ Jan 26th 2007 6:43PM

Myke wins. From the very get-go, Myke wins. I don't even understand why you people are still talking about this anymore, jeeze.

Evan @ Jan 26th 2007 6:49PM

I doubt Michael Pachter's claim that superior graphics will be a significant factor leading to the PS3's victory. Graphics have never before been a deciding factor in a console generation.

I also doubt it'll be possible for PS3 sales pick up several years down the road. That has only happened twice - the Genesis and PS1 - but in both those cases those systems came out before their major competition. Sales historically peak the second Christmas that all systems are on the market, which means Christmas 2007.

gregory mitchell @ Jan 27th 2007 7:29PM

Ummm Mike Not speaking fanboyism.....I personnally DO believe MSFT cares about its gamers....remember that BIG ASS controller for xbox1.....Not many console makers would actually completely change the controller in the middle of its cycle (and No sony added analog sticks whereas the contoller s didnt add anything it just remodeled it)

And the same goes for the 360 I mean how many disk read errors did you guys get....and then how many boxes did sony ship to you to shio back to them for free. As a matter of fact sony never owned up to disk read errors being a major problem.....MSFT on the other hand extended its regular warranty to a year up from 3months...The broswer wasnt the greatest but so many features have been added in a year that you simply just cant say that someone over isnt listening.....and for the record only 360 owners know what im talking about.......

Cuja @ Jan 27th 2007 1:18AM

Wii doesn't have legs. Why would Nintendo put out a system with a short life expectancy? Do they believe they can hide this Gamecube second coming behind a controller scheme. I do agree with this forecast that PS3 will pickup when the Wii and PS2 glory days are over in a couple of years. But I see the Xbox 360 picking up sooner on the start of this shifting of sales from last gen to next gen and benefitting the most from it. Who cares about Blueray or HD-DVD when streaming media is the way to go. Now I just wish the 360 would play DivX or mpeg-4 files.

Doomstalk @ Jan 27th 2007 2:36AM

Matt, no the clear winner of this generation is IBM.

Green_Ogre @ Jan 27th 2007 10:57AM

Now, I only own an Xbox 360 and I love it to death, but I'm also realistic. Here's my thoughts on who will win and who will lose this generation.

Wii- Probably will win 2nd as I think the remote will get gimmicky quick unless they find something to really engage it in, like a Star Wars online lightsaber battling game or something.

Xbox 360- Microsoft has really surprised me this time around, doing almost everything right from the start with their early launch, to Gears of War by a 3rd party developer, to IPTV, to movie downloading, and to downloadable games. Microsoft pioneered each this generation, altough I'm sure that each have been tried with past consoles, Microsoft has made them successful. What Microsoft needs to do is get some more first party developers, and what better way to start than with buying out the rather large but awesome Epic Games. One thing that has puzzled me is that most of their 1st party games, have really been by 3rd party developers. I.E. Gears of War, Lost Planet, etc.

PS3- You've been fucking up big time Sony, so I say start firing your executives and anyone who works in game division and hire new people,, like the guys at MS or Nintendo. Hell, at least fire your marketing team as they suck ass. Most of the PS3 commercials creep me out, (do I even need to mention the Baby one?). What you need are Americans or people who know how games should be made and played in charge of your gaming division. No bashing the japanese, but the former father of the PS3 is gone and that's a good start. Change commercials and have more people who love gaming and know how gamers are, in charge of your gaming division and you might make it in the end.

J RoD @ Jan 27th 2007 2:35PM

I think the Wii will take top honors this year. A $250 price tag is indeed speaking to the masses. I have no desire to own one yet, but Nintendo is definitely moving systems fast.

What I would like to see this year is for Sony to actually step up to the plate. I don't see any graphical difference between PS3 and 360 games, and for an extra $200 dollars I should see this as soon as I hook up that system. In fact, where the hell are the games? I don't see any PS3 exclusives in 2007 that seem to justify the $600 price tag. WTF Sony. Get your shit together.

Andrew @ Jan 27th 2007 5:46PM

Isn't Blu Ray snubbing the porn industry? If it is it has already lost the format war.

Dukhat @ Jan 27th 2007 9:40PM

Why doesn't Blake Snow just stop showing his blatant bias and post the article instead of posting his retarded 2nd-grade interpretation of what people said.

I read the same article myself and got a more well-rounded impressions than his moronic, biased summary.

Its hilarious that a heavily editorialized newssite like Joystiq would even link to gamasutra which is one of the few unbiased sources of gaming news out there.

Blake Snow is the WORST poster on this site.

Carl @ Jan 29th 2007 5:38AM

The 3DO pwns all of em. Gex is soooo much better than gears or twilight

anti-idiot @ Mar 11th 2007 2:36PM

The fact that some of you believe the wii will win because of its price, just shows how ignorant you are. The wii is equal in graphics power to an xbox, and before you say "grpahics arent what makes a game goodie" i will say that graphics bring you into a game, they enhance the feeling of reality within the game itself, not to mention it is just an abvious need. The wii is another game cube with a gimmicky controller, that will lose its novelty factor in about a year. There is only so much the bloody wii has to offer, thats why its so f-ing cheap,+ if you cant afford a PS3 or 360, then work and save up for one, why waste 2-300 £/$ on a rubbish system, with only a couple of games worth buying (the obvious ones). I have a 360 and a PS3, in my opinion PS3 has alot more to offer, and feels like a better quality machine, but i think the 360 will just come out on top because of the PS3's rather bad reputation (even though the 360 has had countles problems). Just remember 2-300£/$ is alot to waste, buy the console you think is best. If you can afford a wii, then you can obviously get a part time job, or wait a while to earn that little bit extra and buy the console that will be worth your money. To me, the wii is another GC, with a pathetic controller (just my opinion) but just remember, before you bash a consoles price tag, realise what it is your getting in a cheaper deal.