I was thinking of Breach from 2011. A multiplayer shooter with destruction.
That needs to be sent to every aspiring dumbass kid.
According to Jason Schreier, that NYT article was written weeks ago. It’s just coincidence that they published the same week he broke the Anthem story.
I recently stumbled across this chart that came to mind when reading your post:
Ouch, poor Vita. But I think that only proves that the Wii and DS were huge outlier consoles, which we know had poor attach rate. It hints that game sales didn’t increase, but who knows.
As an aside, I would love if one of these charts designers were forced to proofread their charts with glasses that make them color blind.
I can never tell half the colors.
That’s a cool graphic, and I didn’t know what it represents. I supposed it would have been growing, if slowly at this point.
Basically that handheld gaming is dead - primarily replaced by smartphones (although not shown on that infographic).
I am reading “Fundamentals of Data Visualization” by Claus O. Wilke at the moment (to be published with O’Reilly Media, full text available) and it has a great chapter on color use (Ch 19). Among other things, it advocates color scales as default that are optimized for color-vision deficiencies. He also recommends running all figures through color-vision deficiency simulation, to get a sense of what they might look like to others.
Reading this chapter, I was very happy to see such issues covered in modern text books. I am under no illusion that mainstream visualization and design practices will change quickly, but at least the state-of-the-art now offers viable and practical advice on such matters…
What are those numbers? Millions sold each year, or something? I notice there’s a “vertex” in the middle of each year? And how was the Xbox One or PS4 on sale since 2012? Or is that just an artefact of only taking a single sample point each year?
That, and the horrible color selection, don’t make me feel like it’s that accurate. (e.g. by that graph Ps2 has ~50 million sold? Whereas the quote you replied to is saying 92m?)
Note that their “source” is VGChartz, a site whose source for most metrics is “make things up.”
That’s from 2017. Would probably be good to see something more recent on that.
PS2 isn’t even on the chart. It’s pretty clearly sales per year.
What makes you say that? I haven’t come across this site before, so I wouldn’t know anything about their track record.
I don’t follow - the graph covers data up to 2018. Or are you refering to something else?
Somehow this all got more confusing than I anticipated. The figure does not show data for the PS2 at all, so Pod probably misread the labels. The measure displayed is indeed unit sales of video game consoles in million per year.
The figure was put together for a short article on Statista. When you visit the VGchartz website directly (where Statista sourced their data from), you can get more recent data as well as filter the data for specific years and systems (e.g. per year)
Global console hardware sales are probably the most public stats in videogaming, so I wouldn’t think there’s too much reason to doubt the numbers.
VGChartz is actually pretty infamous for guessing and filling in numbers when official sources do not exist. They do get a lot of their stats from publisher’s sales figures in quarterly investment docs, NPD, and analysts like Wedbush, like other news sites, but then they will “estimate” numbers as well to fill out their data.
I meant PS4. I somehow mistyped it by 2 generations. The question of the 50m chart figure Vs 92m quote figure was typed accurately though :)
The graph might be atrocious, but I don’t understand how you read it as 50M. The blue line is very stable at just below 20M for 5 years (2014 to 2018). “Just below” is of course fuzzy, but I’d eyeball it as around 17-18M?
17M*5+5M (for 2013) = 90M, which is about right.