Whoa. The price drop was announced somewhere around July 8/9. As the article indicates, these are June numbers.

are these monthly sales figures worldwide? any note on why PS2 sales remain high?

The PS3 will be selling 150,000 consoles from now until Christmas... thats my bet. Along with that I am willing ot bet the PS3 will surge in sales in the next year based on it coming lineup of titles.

I personally don't own a PS3 currently but am shooting myself in the foot because I decided to buy a crap 360.

The increase in sales of PS3 in June is not attributable to the announcement of the price reduction in July, because obviously that hadn't occured yet...

Of course, it's always possible that the June PS3 buyers had both the power of premonition AND a masochistic streak ("Hmmm... my superpower tells me that in a few weeks, Sony will announce that I can buy this console for $100 less. Therefore I must buy one now.").
Anyway, look for a rewrite any moment, and if past flubs by the author are any indication, no mention of the original error as would be the norm in "journalism".

I expect some changes from the status quo in September thru the holiday season. Halo 3 is going to boost 360, and GTA will boost both PS3 and 360...then there's Mass Effect....etc etc etc. I think the hard and fast lines will be drawn this holiday season.

lineup is still extremely week on this console, and almost everything coming out for 360 and ps3 looks better on the xbox 360. so far from what ive seen in e3 the only thing that ps3 has so far that looks great is killzone 2, however even this is downplayed by a poor decision on the part of the developer to go for a metal gray and rust motif. if ps3 starts getting games that are worth something, that I cant play on another system. sony definitely has the money to get a great game lineup if they wanted to instead of expecting ps3 owners to make do with crappy games. all I know is that so far the ps3 is the worse game/console purchasing decision I have ever made. A console is only worth as much as its games and right now its worth jack squat.

Sony climes PS3 sales have risen 153% since they announced the temporary price cut. So just guessing here it looks like they will most likely sell 150,000 units /- 10,000 in July. That still puts it under the 360 current monthly sales. Me not favoring any console still doesn't believe ps3 will ever be higher the #3 (I own a wii and 360 ATM and plan to add a PS3 in the future). Just to expensive for most people to consider.

how can anyone call it next gen? the motion sensing is innovative but the games r plain silly and hav crappy graphics. and i'm damn sure nintendo fanboys wud disagree

IMO, the battle has already been lost by Sony. They waited too long to release PS3, had no good titles available, and made it too expensive. Meanwhile, Nintendo is throttling availability of Wii to ensure elevated demand. XBox has the great online play and the head-start in release and # of games going for it. PS3 is dead already - Blue Ray won't save it.

Mario Party 8 (426,000), Wii Play (293,000), Pokemon Diamond (288,000), and Pokemon Pearl (214,000).

These games are for children. The wii is for children. Thats the reason it sells so well. The price isnt bad, low enough that parents will buy it for their kids, unlike the 360 or ps3 which is more of an investment.

And i agree that its far from next gen. The wii should be sitting on the same shelf as the Fisher Price Spelling Laptop at Toys'R'Us. The fact that fans try to justify that it is better than all the other systems by saying that it sells so well is completely moot.

This system only proves one thing. If you are the lowest priced system and you gear your games towards children, you are bound to win any console war.

I wish blendtech made a blender large enough to stuff this POS into.

You answered your own question. It's innovative because of the motion sensing, but also because the games make good use of the motion sensing. I for one firmly believe that high def graphics and theatre quality sound cannot save a game that is not fun to play. I also think that crappy graphics and terrible sound have a hard time bringing down a game that's fun to play. Fun factor should be the biggest factor when playing a game. If it's not fun then why are you playing it?

Oh, and if I wanted to play a high def game, I'll play one on my PC. I'm no Nintendo fanboy, but I'm a gamer and I have kids. I don't own a console yet (my kids are too young) but rest assured that if/when I ever get one, I'll get the most kid-friendly one, which at the moment is the Wii. I can play my violent games on my PC when my kids are asleep.

I am 27 and have played on every console since intelevision. Consoles have always been a higher priced item at launch, but the PS3 alienated me as well as millions of other avid gamers. I can't get enough of the Wii and when I want to put in some hardcore time i got XBOX 360. I was never looking for an entertainment center, I wanted to play games. Perhaps PS3 made the fatal decision, thinking we can lead the market. When in actual fact gamers lead the market and the industry, their choice to sink or swim.

So by the "If you are the lowest priced system and you gear your games towards children, you are bound to win any console war" logic, then shouldn't the GameCube have been the clear winner? And how did the Nintendo64 fare?

Blah blah? You are calling game consoles investments? Why? Do they appreciate in value? What a ridiculous statement.

The gamecube was also lower priced and geared towards children. It didn't win any console wars. So your statements are just ridiculous.

Mario Party 8 (426,000), Wii Play (293,000), Pokemon Diamond (288,000), and Pokemon Pearl (214,000). 7 of the top ten selling games are for the Wii and the Wii sells more than the 360 and PS3 combined.

I am almost 50 and have 4 teenage sons with the youngest being 16, and we have all three systems. Guess what low definition system is played more than the two high definition systems combined.

It is all about having fun, not about resolution or realism. Buying a 360 or a PS3 is like buying a Ferrari. You buy it for the prestige it bestows not because you need to go 190 MPH to the store.

Beautiful analogy there... I myself do happen to be a Nintendo fanboy, although I myself did think of the Gamecube as a piece of crap... We got a Wii the day it came out, and it's a blast... Anyone we have over to give it a shot loves it, in fact we hardly ever even need to change out the Wii Sports game that it came with...

Nintendo nailed it with the Wii by making the games immersive... I've spent too much time in my life sitting on my ass with a controller that ensures only my thumbs are moving for the next 2 hours...

As far as "next gen" goes, that's all semantic, it depends on your definition of next gen... If by next gen you mean literally the next generation of gaming, I would say the Wii wins hands down by creating the only platform that breaks the mold on traditional gaming and actually evolves to the next level... If you mean jampacked with components that will almost certainly never realize their full potential by the time the next "next gen" consoles hit the market, well then yeah, PS3 would take the cake...

Velveeta has it right in that "next gen" is just a marketing term. The console makers wanted you to buy another piece of equipment so that they could have you re-purchase games you already owned except with higher definition textures.

The Wii's lineup is primarily selling to kids, yes. Right now the folks at Sony and Microsoft are stunned that they somehow convinced themselves that the 15 to 35 demographic was the one with all the money when it was obviously (in hindsight) the 5 to 14 age range that is moving all the $50 games. Guess what types of games you're likely to see for the 360 and PS3 this time next year?

The more next gen games come out on the PS3 the higher the sales will ultimately be. The xbox360 curve is always a decreasing one, it has reached its peak. Its sales peak and design of games has gone as far as it can go with graphics. The PS3 is barely getting started. I will wait another year for my PS3 , maybe 2 more years.

The Wii has stumbled upon something that the gaming industry needed to wake up on. Its not the graphics its not the sound, nor the game title. Its the game's fun, ability to customize, story, player involvement and ease of use that win out in the end.

Just look at one Playstation and X box top game lines. GTA and Halo respectively. Both games place player right in the middle of huge epic and deep story. You customize the way you go though the game and they are fun to play. There graphics are not revolutionary nor is the sound. Its the game that wins.

Thats something Nintendo knows well and puts into many of there games. Its this new way of thinking that has the wii at the lead. Not to mention the revolutionary way to play the games.

ok, so maybe most of the WII games are "kiddy games". but.... if I had young kids I sure as hell wouldn't be letting them play Scarface, and I would also be rather dubious about getting them resident evil 4. Now... if Manhunt 2 ever surfaces, I don't think many parents will buy that for their children either.
Kiddy games are great anyway... have a few mates over, have a few beers, play some warioware... goodtimes!

So the Wii is for kids huh?
Sounds like we have an upset fanboy who is just mad that his system isn't on top right now.
I am 26, I've been gaming since I was 2. For the past 10 years I have proclaimed the PS and PS2 better than their competitors. I was a Sony fan.
But do I have a PS3? No. I'm buying a Wii.
Why? Because I've played one and it has made gaming fun again. I've loved my PS2, but for the past couple of years have felt that gaming has become more of a chore than anything else.
I started playing some games not for the experience, but because I was bored, and once I started playing I wanted to know where the story went. That said, when I got rid of my PS2 there were still several high-profile games I hadn't played. I just didn't care anymore.
My parents don't play games. Neither does my wife. But they actually want to try the Wii. So some of you can comment all day about how much you hate the system you don't even own. I grew up with the game industry, and I remember when games were actually fun to play. It is my opinion that Nintendo has brought us back to that time.

it's the women...the wii has opened up a new market to cater to...none of the ps3/xbox360 games appeal to women...

With the latest release of the consoles, I've become conviced that Nintendo has its head in the right place. The GC/PS2/XB machines more-or-less maxed out what I can get out of my TV. Like many other people, I don't have the disposable income to drop on a high-definition TV, which makes me less likely to pay a premium on either of the other machines. Jumping from 8-Bit to 16-bit was HUGE - we were even able to get some limited facial expressions on the sprites we were controlling! Moving from the SNES to the PS/N64 gave us truely 3D environments for the first time! Now, though?

Nintendo was right that the industry needed to go in a new direction - for most people, the graphics level has pretty much maxed out, and the games industry is no longer playing catch-up with existing display abilities. Instead, they used the technological advances to make something not possible before. Their new controller has the potential to be as revolutionary as the NES controller was - for more than twenty years, new controller designs have improved on the old NES one only by changing the cross pad to a joystick, adding more buttons, and improving the ergonomics of the casing and button layout.

I look forward to seeing how developers use the new controller, beyond the obvious sword-swipes. How about a 3D art/sculpting program? Since the Wii uses standard SD cards as memory cards, graphic artists could even save creations in a usable format. Or why not take the wand further and make a power glove that's actually useful?

I look forward to seeing how all parties involved react over the next few years...

I also think the price point was totally missed here. While I believe Sony did the best they could Microsoft and Sony both overshot the price/age group optimal point. Both of these systems target mostly individuals in their mid teen to say mid twenties (Obviously others also will buy the systems but the games usually include characters in this range and this is the industry accepted target group for these systems). Now young teen have far less influence on their parents buying decisions [and parents have far less influence on them in general ;) ]. Most of these systems will have to be purchased by the end users. This is summer job money [with a little birthday ....ect]. The other half of the target group [young adults] are just experiencing the "fun" of having to pay for everything they need to live and starting to save or purchase for their future [i.e. more interest in status or family]. While some do have a fair amount of disposable income most do not [for most their earnings peak is a decade or more away]. $300 - $500 is an acceptable range for purely non-necessary purchases for these groups with $600 - 1200 for higher end luxuries [game consoles are not considered by most to fall in this group]. I expect higher September sales from the end of summer job /college bound group, how ever I do not expect a huge holiday reversal.

Young children have a huge influence on their parents buying decisions and the parents are generally closer to their earnings peaks [generally couples are having children later]. Now it is true that that their overall expenses are higher but the lower price point and the positive press and generally youth “friendly” game catalogue of Nintendo make this a much easier sell. The evolution of things like the fitness aspect [which seems to be a fortunate after thought on Nintendo’s part] only strengthens this perception in the purchasers mind. Sony and Microsoft hoped the combination HD media application/ game consol idea would help boost sales but prices on stand alones have dropped rapidly, and the format wars do not help [I believe combo stand alones will far outsell either type when they come out]. Also keep in mind people generally do not add the combined price of their entertainment systems so although the bundled units [i.e. PS3] may be the same or cheaper the price of the item at purchase has far more in the decision to buy. Of course this is just my opinion many will disagree...

Three points

1. The controller for the Wii makes it more of a 3.5 generation console. All three companies improved their graphics but only Nintendo improved their controller

2. The absolute dominance of the DS over the PSP shows it is not graphics or extras that sell systems.

3. We have every second and third generation systems. When my 18 year old son brings over all his friends to play games, the one game they always play is Smash Bros. on the Game Cube.

4. A few cold ones and a round of Wii sports has been known to to happen to groups of us hardcore gamers who are nearing 50.

Conclusion: If you were going to create a game, would you write it for a company that has 1 million consoles or for a company that has 10 million consoles. Economics will drive developers to the Wii. You may want to get one of the other boxes, but everyone will enjoy a Wii.

Nintendo makes alot of silly, amusing games. They aren't necessarily kids games. I grew up on games, and as I've gotten older, for whatever reason, I've gotten tired of the typical fps. Though I have to say fps games with the wiimote is a much better interface. I now enjoy games that are less serious, with a sense of humor. Plus, wii sports is an amazing workout. If I Really want graphics, I'll play a pc game.
Though I have to say fps games with the wiimote is a much better interface.

Seriously, I don't even know how it has such stay power, every other game developer would be flamed to death for making the 19th version of THE SAME GAME with the SAME ENEMIES over and over again as featured in every Mario/Metroid/Zelda etc game. The system's graphics are inferior to Ps3/Xbox360 and the ONLY thing it has going for it is waving your arms around like a moron.

It's nice for a while, then I want some depth in my games...

For that I turn to PS3/360 or the trusty PC. If 5 year olds control the game market I think that will spell nothing but retarded doom for adults that actually want to play a serious game, be it Resistance of Man, Civ IV, or Mass Effect.

I have been an avid gamer for 20 years now, I was on my way out of the gaming market. Why? I call it Atari burnout...Every generation seemed, the same to me, sure better graphics and sound, but the same old game. I found myself wandering back into the arcades just to find the feeling again, what made my arcade experience more appealing than my PS2, XBOX, and XBOX360. It was interaction with the onscreen avatars. I now own a Wii, and guess what I am beginning to feel it again right in my own comforts of home. I just sold my XBOX360 and HDTV. Saving my money for the newer 120hz LCD HDTV's with LED lighting. Thank you Nintendo for restoring inovation back into the videogaming market place.

When I was a little kid, my parents would dust off the Pong machine from time to time and watch my brother and I collectively fail to catch the bouncing square. When I was a little older, we got a couple of Ataris and then a NES and we playe PC games off of 5.25 floppy disks from time to time, in high school we got SNES and a virtual boy (talk about headaches), in college I had a N64 and later on I got a PS1, a PS2, an XBox, then an XBox 360 (the 360 doesn't see much use - not been to impressed with the games) and then the Wii and a DS. My point is this: I've been a gamer all of my life and it will take a lot of these whiney little kids another decade or more before they log as many hours on the couch as I have. I've played thousands upon thousands of games over the course of nearly thirty years. I know what I'm talking about.

At first I was annoyed with Nintendo for getting rid of the cool Revolution name and going with something as stupid as "Wii". Then I played the thing. I was blown away. It's just plan fun and the level of immersion you get from actually physically interacting with the game vastly outstrips any fancy smoke and shading that you can get from any graphics engine. Pretty games are nice, but I've played a lot of pretty games that weren't any fun. The very best games are the ones that draw you in, that allow you to escape into the game. A pretty game can help draw you in to some degree; but compared to the immersive power of the Wii remote, pretty graphics don't stand a chance. I would like to see the full graphics might of the PS3 brought to bear on a stupid collection of mini games like Wario Ware Smooth moves and you know what, it would be boring and tiresome, now take the Wii remote and use it in a bunch of stupid mini-games, and you get a really fun game that sucks you in. Also, sure, compared to the 360 and the PS3, the Wii's graphics suck, but three years ago you would have given your left nut to get your PS2 to produce graphic on par with the Wii - it's graphics capabilities are more than adaquate, especially when you are already drawn in by the level of interaction. Pretty graphics and enough high end hardware to heat your house in the winter simply can't compete with an interface that is simply better than a simple gamepad.

I agree with Todd that the Revolution name sounded much better at the time, but now "Wii" just kind of makes sense. Anyway I totally think that "next-gen" is just a stupid title, as next-gen could be considered what redefines games, and Wii is the only one that does that.

Wii is most definitely NOT a gimmick. It's been so well wirked into the games, and gives such immersion, that it can't possibly be just a gimmick that they thought would, say, boost sales or something.

Besides, the graphics for the newer games that are coming out (Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and Super Smash Brawl) all have "next-gen" graphics.

First off lets look at where we are writing this... a subsidiary of Tom's Hardware, a shrine to the Personal Computer, the construction thereof and tweaking thereof to make our games run faster, better, more "realistically" at the most fraps possible is it's reason for being.

For those that want truly 'hard-core' game experiences, they build a gaming rig. The cost of which would allow you to buy THREE PS3's at the original price they wanted on launch day. PC games are always built to push the edges of technology, and what you see on the high-def consoles existed on PCs in 2004, and on the Wii it existed in 2002-2003.

Consoles have always had three things going for them: standard and consistent hardware, meaning the games don't come out as working betas that get patched 6 months later; much lower price compared to a new computer; and everything built for TVs and game controllers. But this isn't entirely new. Take a classic like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Try playing it with your keyboard and mouse. Then trying playing it on your PS2 or your Gamecube with analog joysticks and gamepad buttons... You'll probably pick the console version. Or try to get a gamepad for your PC that works... but would you really buy a gamepad to play ONE game?

The Wii developers went for interesting controllers and they went for low power consumption envelopes... and they let someone else develop the processor technology and bear the cost. The trade-off was that the games don't look as cool as say, a game like Company of Heroes or even Half-Life 2 which came out three years ago.

But then again... I'm willing to bet that many of the people that are satisfied Wii customers still have other game platforms or a trusty gaming PC to satisfy their other gaming urges. Perhaps Nintendo is counting on that model of consumer, someone with that doesn't demand that their ONE console be their ONLY source of entertainment software.

The "it's for kids" thing has gone on for years with Nintendo systems, spoken with great anger and vindictiveness... why?

Never mind that there have always been "Mature" rated titles on those same Nintendo systems, but why rain on the parade? First off, just because a game isn't rated "Mature" for "extreme violence' doesn't mean that it's a bad game.

Second, carrying on about games being for kids is idiotic; once upon a time, YOU TOO were a kid that played games. That's how you got here. Are you ashamed of your past?

Third, why not extend that mentality to everything our western culture holds dear. It's like suggesting that playing cards "are for kids". Make a statement like that and you'll get a lot of poker fans angry at you.

Maybe the next thing that's "stupid and for kids" will be... oh, I don't know, lets pick baseball! Baseball, a 'kids' game played by grown men paid multiple millions of dollars a year, watched by millions of people, fueling an entire entertainment (and beer) industry.

Or perhaps we should tell our friends in Europe that football ('soccer' to us) is a game played by kids in playgrounds and therefore adults should ignore it... and we should be bitter about the sales of footballs ('soccer balls'). It's absurd.

What's next? Oh, how about cartoons? Yes, anyone who watches The Simpsons is clearly a fool that likes kids stuff.

I think I'm secure enough in the self-esteem department to proudly proclaim that I like Nintendo games, I like football, I like baseball, I like card games, and I like cartoons. How about you?

x box