PS4 vs Wii – VGChartz Gap Charts – July 2016 Update - Sales
by William D'Angelo , posted on 02 September 2016 / 46,715 Views
The VGChartz Gap charts are updated monthly and each article focuses on a different gap chart. The charts include comparisons between the 7th generation and 8th generation platforms, as well as comparisons within the 8th generation. All sales are worldwide, unless otherwise stated.
PlayStation 4 Vs. Wii Global:
Gap change in latest month: 214,572 – Wii
Gap change over last 12 months: 3,489,560 - Wii
Total Lead: 8,242,368 – Wii
PlayStation 4 Total Sales: 42,956,249
Wii Total Sales: 51,263,005
July 2016 is the 33rd month that the PlayStation 4 has been available for. During the latest month the gap grew in favor of the Wii when compared with the Wii’s 33rd month on sale. The gap increased by 214,572 units in the last month and 3.49 million units in the last 12 months. In the first 33 months, the Wii currently leads by 8.24 million units.
The gap has been growing by a much smaller margin in the last six months. It grew by 715,998 units in the last six months, while the gap had previously grown by over 500,000 units in some months and by nearly one million units in a couple months.
Both consoles launched in November. The Wii launched in November 2006, while the PlayStation 4 launched in November 2013. The PlayStation 4 has sold 42.96 million units in its first 32 months, while the Wii sold 51.26 million units during the same timeframe.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays and tutorials. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
At this point, it's abundantly clear that the PS4 won't be making up any ground this year. From August to the end of 09, the Wii sold a bit over 13 million. From August to the end of 2015, PS4 sold about 11 milion. PS4 sales have been more or less flat YOY, so the PS4 should fall behind about 1.5 to 2 million units.
There are some caveats though. VR could potentially boost sales, but the price tag makes it seem more like something that will appeal to the existing market. It will definitely earn some sales, but on the other side, you have the Neo. If the Neo is announced in September, then it can't be good for holiday sales. There's also the fact that Microsoft will have a more powerful XBox One out. Barring a price cut, it's possible for the Wii to end the year 2.5-3 million ahead. Anywhere between 10-12 million total.
What happens after that is kind of hard to say. It seems that Sony and MS may be trying to replace the hardware cycle with a series of upgrades, which would make it hard t determine where PS4 sales end. Let's assume though that Neo is the last revision.
PS4 sales are a bit more stable than Wii's were. It seems pretty safe to assume that PS4 sales will hover within 2 million or so of 15 million. The Wii sold about 17 million in 2010, so we probably won't see much movement in 2010 vs 2017. A one million unit shift one way or the other at most (more likely in favor of the Wii) but nothing significant.
That means the Wii will enter 2011 with about a 12 million unit lead. Afterwards, the Wii would sell about another 18 million. So that means that to catch the Wii, the PS4 has to sell about 30 million units from 2018 on.
If the PS4 sales patterns are similar to the PS3's, then it should reach that. From the start of its fifth full year on, the PS3 has sold about 35 million, and it's about the end of its selling life. That would leave the PS4 with about a five million lead.
The difference is that the PS3 had a very slow start and the PS4 had a faster start. Maybe this just means that the PS4 is better and will sell better though its life, but I kind of think that it means PS4 sales will reach saturation quicker. Especially considering the potential for disruptive technology, and the fact that the PS4 is less advanced than the PS3 was, I feel like the end of its sales life will be weaker.
To sum it up, it should be close. With Neo/Scorpio/NX, and an overall change in the market, it's hard to say what will happen. I'd give the slight edge to the Wii, but I'm a Nintendo fan, so make of that what you will. If PS4 can sell 18 million or more units next year, then we can call the race in PS4's favor. If it sells less than 15, then the Wii will most likely take it.
I don't know why, but paragraphs only seem to work in replies, so I'll repost to make it easier to read.
At this point, it's abundantly clear that the PS4 won't be making up any ground this year. From August to the end of 09, the Wii sold a bit over 13 million. From August to the end of 2015, PS4 sold about 11 milion. PS4 sales have been more or less flat YOY, so the PS4 should fall behind about 1.5 to 2 million units.
There are some caveats though. VR could potentially boost sales, but the price tag makes it seem more like something that will appeal to the existing market. It will definitely earn some sales, but on the other side, you have the Neo. If the Neo is announced in September, then it can't be good for holiday sales. There's also the fact that Microsoft will have a more powerful XBox One out. Barring a price cut, it's possible for the Wii to end the year 2.5-3 million ahead. Anywhere between 10-12 million total.
What happens after that is kind of hard to say. It seems that Sony and MS may be trying to replace the hardware cycle with a series of upgrades, which would make it hard t determine where PS4 sales end. Let's assume though that Neo is the last revision. PS4 sales are a bit more stable than Wii's were. It seems pretty safe to assume that PS4 sales will hover within 2 million or so of 15 million. The Wii sold about 17 million in 2010, so we probably won't see much movement in 2010 vs 2017. A one million unit shift one way or the other at most (more likely in favor of the Wii) but nothing significant. That means the Wii will enter 2011 with about a 12 million unit lead. Afterwards, the Wii would sell about another 18 million.
So that means that to catch the Wii, the PS4 has to sell about 30 million units from 2018 on. If the PS4 sales patterns are similar to the PS3's, then it should reach that. From the start of its fifth full year on, the PS3 has sold about 35 million, and it's about the end of its selling life. That would leave the PS4 with about a five million lead. The difference is that the PS3 had a very slow start and the PS4 had a faster start. Maybe this just means that the PS4 is better and will sell better though its life, but I kind of think that it means PS4 sales will reach saturation quicker. Especially considering the potential for disruptive technology, and the fact that the PS4 is less advanced than the PS3 was, I feel like the end of its sales life will be weaker.
To sum it up, it should be close. With Neo/Scorpio/NX, and an overall change in the market, it's hard to say what will happen. I'd give the slight edge to the Wii, but I'm a Nintendo fan, so make of that what you will. If PS4 can sell 18 million or more units next year, then we can call the race in PS4's favor. If it sells less than 15, then the Wii will most likely take it.
The power of the PS4 is that it's not a fad. These are also bold statements to make right before industry-changing additions to the PlayStation family come out. Cheaper PS4, premium PS4, and PSVR are all big things, and at least two are definitely not fads like the Wii was.
The real differences will show themselves two years from now, when the PS4 is still selling and (aligned launch) sales of the Wii plummet.
The PS4 and its long sales legs will sell over 100+ million systems.
It's gonna beat Wii, easily. People forget that Playstation consoles have some serious legs.
And it's ahead to both ps1 and ps2.
just to point out- something like the PS2 had insanely strong long legs compared to any of the other Sony systems or any system ever. The PS4 will come nowhere near the PS2
Yupp, and the gap will grow for the next year as well. But then the Wii will drop like a rock and the PS4 will keep on going.
I doubt the performance the Wii put up in it's first few years will ever be beat. It was insane how well the system did.
And with the new consoles coming soon the gap will keep growing. Wii was a true beast.
Wow, I remember people actually predicting PS4 will outsell PS2. It's quite obvious this won't happen. And yes, the Wii will drop like a rock but not anytime soon. PS is already refreshing with a slim line. It'll beat the Wii, probably, but it won't be as quick as some expect.
When did the wii sales dropped? 4th year?
Also a 250ps4 slim can beat the wii mark my words
Well, yeah... if you're willing to take a big loss on hardware you can pretty much guarantee sales. But, Sony would be losing a lot of money on that.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by when Wii sales dropped. Wii sales peaked in 2008, so any year after that is technically a drop. Sales were 21 million in 2009, 17 million in 2010, and 11 million in 2011. The mythical "like a rock" drop people keep talking about never really happens. Sales do drop to about 5 million in 2012, but that's after the Wii U releases.
You mentioned sales dropping about 5 million in 2012 with the caviet that was after the Wii U
sorry accidentally hit enter , meant to continue with the year before it dropped 6 million.
Yeah, but I wouldn't consider that as "dropping like a rock" as people keep putting it.
The drop you're talking about is 33% or so in one year. From 2008-2009, PSP sales were down 30%. From 2009-2010, DS sales were down 25%. From 2011 to 2012, the 360 was down 22%. The Wii's drop isn't that much different than that experienced by other hardware at some point or another.
Aside from that, the 11 million units it sold was still in line with what its rivals were selling. The PS3 and XBox 360 peaked at 13.8 and 14.7 respectively. So, even at its pre Wii U low point, the Wii was still in the same ballpark as its competitors. Wii sales weren't anything that could be considered "bad" until 2012 when Nintendo essentially pulled the plug.
The Wii's sales pattern was actually fairly typical. It started out much faster, and it faded about a year earlier. That's just what happens with market saturation, and considering the successor released earlier. The numbers are there, so people could decide from themselves, but I don't think the drop the Wii had was anything that abnormal.
It needs to beat the Wii to beat the PS2 right?
Yes, though the Wii was really fast selling during its first years, in long run it was not able to outsell neither the PS2 nor the PS1.
In terms of competition, not really, PC gaming wasn't quite as big, they didn't have iPhones and tablets competing for spots on the Christmas list. Even a basic laptop was really pricey.
From other consoles, the Gamecube was doing really poorly. Microsoft had just launched the XBox, and that was their first system so it was slow.
The conditions were really perfect. It'd be hard to replicate that succes.. Only way is maybe if they could really do well in markets like China, but that presents its own issues.
And with the new consoles coming soon the gap will keep growing. Wii was a true beast.
I think that they will count Neo as a PS4 just like they do with all the Nintendo 3DS's versions.
LOL @ Microsoft's FIRST system selling slow. Remember the PS1, Sony's FIRST system??? It ended up being the greatest selling console of all-time, right out of the gate. So tell me, why couldn't Microsoft do the same?
Because it's not easy to do. Duh. It's hard to have your first foray be a runaway success, especially when you have a successful line like the Playstation. If you're going to come right in and become hugely successful, you basically need your opponent to stumble and fall on their face like Atari did before the NES, or like Nintendo did with the N64.
It's possible, but not likely, and not really something people should expect.
Depends on how long Sony will keep pushing the PS4/Neo before going full PS Now. Full PS Now, if they make it succeed (think Netflix), will probably make them more money in the long run.
The world isn't ready yet. The lag would be too big.
Sadly, no. These tired arguments have been trotted out time and time again, although this is one of the more silly and biased presentations.
What do you mean by "pander"? Do you mean, marketed towards? Are games like call of duty pandering to a certain audience? I mean, GTA and COD fans weren't always the backbone of the industry. Was there something "pandering" about targeting them?
And what do you mean by "inflated" sales? There's this bizarre implication that Nintendo somehow has illegitimate sales. The Wii sold what it sold. The only way any industry ever grows is by reaching outside of its current base. That's what the Nintendo did, the DS, the Playstation, the Playstation 2, and so on.
When you loaded terms like that, it shows that there is some sort of bias involved. It comes down to this weird notion that gaming can only appeal to a certain crowd, and that nobody outside that crowd shouldn't have games made for them. And that sales made outside of whatever the individual considers "true" gamers somehow don't count or are detrimental. It's a strange kind of logic...
-
Pander: " to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable". That's what the word means. It has an inherently negative connotation, and it's an inappropriate usage that shows bias.
-
It seems like losing sales from one generation is only a sign of inflated sales in this one circumstance. That's quite odd. With the other systems you looked for alternate explanations before jumping to that conclusion.
With that in mind, here are some other explanations.
First and foremost, the Wii U kind of sucked, especially when appealing to casual gamers. Nintendo provided no major new casual franchises, and entries to its major casual franchises (Wii Sports/Wii Fit) were not sequels, but revisions offering little in the way of new content. The main selling point of the Wii, motion controls, was deemphasized. The other selling point, local multiplayer, was damaged by a confusing setup. The entire marketing campaign was jumbled and confusing with many people not sure whether the WIi U was a new system or an add on. Few games utilized the system's selling point in a meaningful capacity.
If you're going to look for other factors in other situations, but gloss over the many obvious faults of the Wii U which could better explain the drop in sales, then that's bias.
"Also, I never used the word "true". I never said casual gamers aren't gamers, so maybe not put words in other's mouths just because it fits the narrative you're trying to create?"
Right after saying...
"You, on the otherhand, simply went on the defense. For what reason, I don't know; maybe you're one of those strange Nintendo fans that forced themself to stop being a core gamer so that Nintendo games targeted you again, or maybe you're just a contrarion, looking for an argument."
Yes... we wouldn't want to be putting words into other people's mouths in an attempt to create a narrative, now would we? On a completely unrelated note, have you met my good friend Kettle?
-
Lol. My definition was from Merriam Webster. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pander. Don't see how usage fits either of your definitions either, unless you felt Nintendo is big pimping.
It's negative because you're trying to make something that is fundamentally neutral (selling to a different audience) into something negative. Even your definition mentions "exploiting weaknesses" which is obviously absurd in this situation.
2.Uhhhh... yeah. We know the Wii - Wii U sales declined. The question is why.
I'm not sure what the Wii's flaws have to do with anything, and it again speaks to your bias. You cite dual analog as a negative, which indicates that you only think one kind of gaming is the right kind of gaming. I assure you from watching people walk into walls for 5 minutes at a time in Halo that there are people who prefer games without dual analog. There are people who enjoy waggle controls, regardless of what you may think. You're again trying to frame fundamentally neutral things as negative to make your case. We're talking about sales, not your personal preferences.
As for the rest of your "counter", why would playing Wii games matter in the slightest? If your argument is that people who already OWNED a Wii didn't buy the Wii U, why would backwards compatibility matter to them? Should they have paid 300 dollars to buy a new system to play their old games? Few new games utilized the Wii-mote's motion functionality.
Apparently... we should look for other mitigating factors as to why PS3 sales were down from PS2, or the PSP to Vita, and so on. But... with the Wii U anything besides the explanation you arbitrarily decided is an excuse. Would you like to tell me that the Gamepad was a great idea that was well implemented? Would you care to tell me about all of the great casual games that should have convinced Wii owners to upgrade? Would you like to tell me that the Wii U was a well marketed device? Explain why none of these factors should be taken into account in explaining the Wii U's sales.
"You're the one making statements, I'm simply making multiple assumptions aloud."
This may seem strange... but would you mind giving me your home address? You see, my hypocrisy detector just exploded (I assume yours broke long ago with a statement like that), and I had to get it replaced. I don't think I should be responsible for that bill, and I would appreciate restitution.
-
Lol. The definition was from Merriam Webster. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pander
Using a negative term shows clear bias, because this isn't a positive or a negative thing. It's just sales. You're trying to turn it into something negative through biased use of language.
-
Yeah... I know the Wii U sales were down from the Wii. That's not being debated. The question is why. When looking at the PS2-PS3, PSP-Vita, DS-3DS and so on, you seem to want to take a lot of factors into account. When talking about the Wii, you just decided on one, and are ignoring everything else.
Your "counter" about the Wii flaws shows your bias once again. The flaws I listed in regards to the Wii U are relevant because they explain why someone who bought a Wii might not want a Wii U. If I bought a Wii because I loved motion controls, and the Wii U doesn't feature that, then that's a reason not to buy it.
The point of the flaws you listed seem to be "well I don't like that". You may prefer dual analog controls, but that really has nothing to do with anything. A lot of people preferred the Wii-mote (btw the Wii offered dual analog in the same capacity as Wii U offers motion control). A lot of people liked waggle controls, whether you did or not. We're talking about sales, not your likes and dislikes. This is another example f your bias. You're taking fundamentally neutral things and trying to make them a negative.
Why would the Wii U being able to play Wii games matter in the slightest? We're talking about why Wii owners didn't buy a Wii U. Why would being able to play Wii games matter to people who OWNED a Wii?
Why are these just "excuses"? Excusing what from what? These are potential reasons why the Wii U failed that should be considered. Would you like to tell me that the Gamepad was a great and well excecuted concept? Can you point out all of the great casual games that fans should have upgraded for? Are you going to try and tell me that the Wii U concept was not at all confusing to consumers? Why shouldn't we take these factors into account?
"You're the one making statements, I'm simply making multiple assumptions aloud."
You know what... instead of making fun of this as I originally planned, I'll give you a chance to take a mulligan. Are you going to stand by this statement? Do you honestly not see any problems with this?
-
Lol. It is from Merriam-Webster. It's actually on the same page as the one you gave... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pander?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld Great job on the research, champ.
As for your definitions, I don't see how those would work any better. Are you saying that Nintendo is a pimp, or that they're exploiting the weaknesses of others?
It's not the right word, because it shows the bias that you're expressing yet again. We're not talking about the positives of the Wii's userbase. Cause there are no positives. Or negatives. We're talking about sales. The sales are what they are, and it shows bias when you attach a negative word to something that is fundamentally neutral.
-
Uhhh... yeah. Wii U sales dropped. We know that, the question is why. It seems like for other drops you're willing to look at various factors. And for the Wii to Wii U, it just is what you say it is and that's that.
I don't know what the "flaws" in the Wii you brough up prove, except your bias. I mentioned the things I mentioned because they are relevant to why a Wii owner might not buy a Wii U. If a Wii owner bought a Wii for motion controls, and the Wii U doesn't have many motion controlled games, that's a potential reason they may not stick around.
Bringing up analog controls serves no purpose except to show you don't like analog controls. Some people like dual analog, some people don't. It's not a good thing or a bad thing, it's just a thing. I don't know what it has to do with this conversation. This is about sales, not about your preferences.
You bring up that the Wii U can play Wii games. Which is again, irrelevant. If I own a Wii, I'm not going to spend 300 dollars for a system to play Wii games, am I?
Why are these "excuses"? What am I trying to "excuse"? These are factors that, at least potentially, explain some of the Wii U's failure. Do you want to tell me that the Gamepad was a great idea that was well executed? Would you like to point out all the great casual games that should have encouraged people to upgrade? Would you like to tell me that the market was not at all confused about whether the tablet was an add on or not (I assure you since I worked at an electronics store, there was confusion)? Why shouldn't we consider these factors.
""You're the one making statements, I'm simply making multiple assumptions aloud."""
Wow... you know, instead of mocking this, I'm going to let you take a mulligan. You sure you want to stand by this statement? You sure you wouldn't rather just have that one back?
-
Lol. It is from Merriam-Webster. It's actually on the same page as the one you gave... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pander?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld Great job on the research, champ.
As for your definitions, I don't see how those would work any better. Are you saying that Nintendo is a pimp, or that they're exploiting the weaknesses of others?
It's not the right word, because it shows the bias that you're expressing yet again. We're not talking about the positives of the Wii's userbase. Cause there are no positives. Or negatives. We're talking about sales. The sales are what they are, and it shows bias when you attach a negative word to something that is fundamentally neutral.
-
Uhhh... yeah. Wii U sales dropped. We know that, the question is why. It seems like for other drops you're willing to look at various factors. And for the Wii to Wii U, it just is what you say it is and that's that.
I don't know what the "flaws" in the Wii you brough up prove, except your bias. I mentioned the things I mentioned because they are relevant to why a Wii owner might not buy a Wii U. If a Wii owner bought a Wii for motion controls, and the Wii U doesn't have many motion controlled games, that's a potential reason they may not stick around.
Bringing up analog controls serves no purpose except to show you don't like analog controls. Some people like dual analog, some people don't. It's not a good thing or a bad thing, it's just a thing. I don't know what it has to do with this conversation. This is about sales, not about your preferences.
You bring up that the Wii U can play Wii games. Which is again, irrelevant. If I own a Wii, I'm not going to spend 300 dollars for a system to play Wii games, am I?
Why are these "excuses"? What am I trying to "excuse"? These are factors that, at least potentially, explain some of the Wii U's failure. Do you want to tell me that the Gamepad was a great idea that was well executed? Would you like to point out all the great casual games that should have encouraged people to upgrade? Would you like to tell me that the market was not at all confused about whether the tablet was an add on or not (I assure you since I worked at an electronics store, there was confusion)? Why shouldn't we consider these factors.
""You're the one making statements, I'm simply making multiple assumptions aloud."""
Wow... you know, instead of mocking this, I'm going to let you take a mulligan. You sure you want to stand by this statement? You sure you wouldn't rather just have that one back?
