getting worried

[n8n8baby]

I love my PS3, but my patience it starting to run thin. Like the OP, I am getting worried that I picked the wrong "team". I did it before with the Sega Saturn. And Sega Dreamcast. I haven't even been played my PS3 in a while because I'm waiting for the Madden 08 that was ALREADY released on 360.

If you can't find games to play on a Saturn or a Dreamcast, then you got way bigger problems than "picking the right team." :P

[FoxHoundADAM]

I'm so torn right now. I have $350 of trade in credit at Gamerush I was building up to buy a PS3 but now that I'm really thinking about it I think I probably won't ull the trigger now. I have a 360 and a Wii and honestly I don't play those enough as it is. I think If I buy a PS3 it will just be a pretty looking box in my entertainment center.

I kinda want to play MGS4 and LittleBigPlanet but other than that I think I'll play my 360 WAY more just by achievement points alone.

I suppose in short it isn't the cost that is keeping me from buying a PS3 but reather a lack or any true compelling reason to get one. At this point in my life my time is worth mroe than my money and I just don't see me getting a PS3 now.

[dmaul1114]

I think dallow's point is that you have had dozens of post that are reiterations of the same idea over and over again: the PS3 is expensive.


Because people keep making the same dumbass counter arguments that it will sell at high prices once more games are out. It will sell more, but it's not going to challenge the Wii and 360 without severe price drops. It's not like the AAA games are going to stop coming out on those consoles as soon as the PS3 starts getting some more exclusives worth playing/buying the console for.



Yes, the PS3 has a high MSRP. Yes, the Wii and 360 are selling well compared to the PS3. But, given that the PS3 is on track to sell 11 million by March of 2008, given sales trends (which is 2-3 months earlier than the 360 did after its release), isn't it remarkably premature to revel in eulogizing, over and over and over and over, a system that *is* selling?


I've said throughout that the PS3 isn't dead. Just that it seems unlikely to challenge for the lead, and hard pressed to get even in 2nd place. Again, 360 and Wii sales aren't slowing down, and aren't likely to as they'll see price drops and expanding game libraries as well.

It's not eulogizing. I couldn't care less personally how many units of any console are sold. They're all just over priced hunks of plastic that play games. I have no loyalty to any of them.

But damn if it isn't fun riling up people pathetic enough to get upset over what someone says about their choice of overpriced hunk of plastic.

[dmaul1114]

Everyone has the damn things because they got them like 2 years ago. It's so early in the cycle that, by definition, only the early adopters have them. If you ask me, 360 games pretty much appeal to the core gamer, and not to many others. After Halo 3's hype dies down a bit, I really do expect the 360's sales to start reaching a critical mass and pretty much petering out. Can you think of any big, _MASS MARKET_ games coming for 360 now that Halo is out? Neither can I.

I really don't care who "wins"...competition is very good for all of us gamers, in that the prices drop quicker and the games get better :)


Casual gamers will by a console for stuff like Madden, Guitar Hero, GTAIV, etc. which is multiplatform.

Many probably haven't bought a 360 or PS3 yet because of price. And it seems likely the 360 will get in their price sweet spot sooner than the PS3 will.

I know it's belaboring the price issue--but really that's the key to this gen's console war, and the key to sony's current downfall from being the market domination. Any video game business thread like this is going to spin circles on this price issue.

It is the main issue in the console war. All have their own good exclusives out or announced, so price is the main factor. Not to mention it affects future exclusives by shaping the market share through the first couple years of the war.

[Thomas96]

But damn if it isn't fun riling up people pathetic enough to get upset over what someone says about their choice of overpriced hunk of plastic.


- Wii is overpriced piece of crap, [even at 249.99] that basically nickle and dime people to death with high priced controllers, and controllers that require batteries, batteries batteries. and to top it off, its getting ports of PS2 and DS games with Nintendo being the only one providing fresh IPs for the damn thing.

whewww.. that felt good!

[Limegreen]

Never has it gone through my mind to get a ps3 because of the price !

[dmaul1114]

- Wii is overpriced piece of crap, [even at 249.99] that basically nickle and dime people to death with high priced controllers, and controllers that require batteries, batteries batteries. and to top it off, its getting ports of PS2 and DS games with Nintendo being the only one providing fresh IPs for the damn thing.

whewww.. that felt good!

I own one, and couldn't agree with you more. It's been a gigantic let down for me thus far. Zelda and Metroid have been great, and Super Paper Mario was ok, but nothing else has been worth playing at all to me.

And Nintendo has driven me nuts with stuff like half assed online play, no HD, not being able to use the SD card for anything other than back ups and non-gaming crap (mp3s and photos), the controller prices etc.

[n8n8baby]

Casual gamers will by a console for stuff like Madden, Guitar Hero, GTAIV, etc. which is multiplatform.

Many probably haven't bought a 360 or PS3 yet because of price. And it seems likely the 360 will get in their price sweet spot sooner than the PS3 will.

I know it's belaboring the price issue--but really that's the key to this gen's console war, and the key to sony's current downfall from being the market domination. Any video game business thread like this is going to spin circles on this price issue.

It is the main issue in the console war. All have their own good exclusives out or announced, so price is the main factor. Not to mention it affects future exclusives by shaping the market share through the first couple years of the war.

Fair point, but it's a very US-centric point of view. What machine(s) are the Japanese mass market games coming for? I would say the DS and, to a lesser extent, the Wii. What machine(s) are the Japanese core gamer-type games coming for? Either PS3 or PS3/360. Do people really make a decision based on price when the prices are, say, $199 and $149? If they did, the Gamecube probably would've fared a lot better.

OK I'm officially done with this thread :)

[dmaul1114]

Fair point, but it's a very US-centric point of view. What machine(s) are the Japanese mass market games coming for? I would say the DS and, to a lesser extent, the Wii. What machine(s) are the Japanese core gamer-type games coming for? Either PS3 or PS3/360. Do people really make a decision based on price when the prices are, say, $199 and $149? If they did, the Gamecube probably would've fared a lot better.

OK I'm officially done with this thread :)


Not sure about the latter, with stuff like DQIX--arguably the biggest core series in Japan--going to the DS.

And you're right price doesn't matter much when it's $199 vs. $149. It matters when it's $599 vs $349 vs $249.

The factor when buying a console (for non fanboys who just buy out of loyalty) is a combination of price and games. When the price gap is this wide, it has more weight. If it's closer, the games have a chance to win people over despite the higher price.

Right now the PS3 has been struggling due both to having a much higher price and to having a weak lineup of exclusives thus far.

If they want to get back in it they need to keep their price within $50 of the 360 AND get the big exclusives (namely MGS4 and FFXIII) out ASAP.

[Corvin]

I don't know if you remember but the 2 games that were for PS3 around launch were NBA 2k7 and Madden 07, both of which got slightly higher review scores than their 360 counterpart.

Not true. No game that I'm aware of on both platforms has ever scored higher on the PS3. I think Oblivion comes the closest, but the 360 still edges it out by a point on both gamerankings and metacritic.

Here are your two games:

NBA 2K7 on gamerankings: (http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/itemsearch.asp)
Xbox 360 - 84.9%
PS3 - 81.3%

NBA 2K7 on metacritic: (http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sort=relevance&termType=all&ts=nba+2k7&ty=0&x=0&y=0)
Xbox 360 - 84
PS3 - 80

Madden 07 on gamerankings: (http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/itemsearch.asp)
Xbox 360 - 80.7%
PS3 - 77.9%

Madden 07 on metacritic: (http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sb=0&tfs=all&ts=madden+07&ty=0&x=0&y=0)
Xbox 360 - 80
PS3 - 76

[freakyzeeky]

I honestly bought the PS3 for FFXIII and most of Sony's first paty games... Not really a fan of FPS, and the 360 seems to have a torrent of those games on their system.

[spydey]

While I enjoy my PS3, if I had to choose one it would be the 360. Overall I believe it's a better system.

[Brad Bishop]

It's not like price hasn't been an issue in the past.

(going way back here):
Mattel's Intellivision was released at $299. That's in 1980 dollars.

It was 2x the price of the Atari 2600. I think the 2600 was $150 at the time (originally released at $199, I believe).

It never became a leader over the 2600 by numbers sold but it did pretty well on it's own. People bought it, though, because there were new/interesting/good looking (mainly sports) games for it.

I'm just saying there's a little more to it than, "No one will buy it except for the super rich because it's too expensive." If the games come out for it, people will buy it, even if it is expensive, to play the games. As people buy it and time passes the price will drop. Even people who don't have a lot of extra cash laying around will pick it up if they see value in it (the games).

There's just more to it than, "It's priced too high!"

[dmaul1114]

There's just more to it than, "It's priced too high!"

In the long run. Most definitely as prices will drop and games will be released.

But priced high is pretty much the story of it lagging in 3rd place now and not racing to the lead like the PS1 and PS2.

And it is the story of why it has no real chance to be the number 1 seller when this gen is said and done do to the whole the price has dug this first year.

It's not doom and gloom. It will pick up, sell better, get some great games and be a solid console for 100% sure.

It just won't be the top seller or have the most exclusives like it's predecessor.

But it's still a very worthwhile console, and will have some killer games down the road.

If I had to offer a prediction, by the end of this generation it will finish just a tad behind the 360 in sales, with both lagging a good deal behind the Wii which is just an unstoppable phenomenon worldwide for whatever reason.

[mykevermin]

Because people keep making the same dumbass counter arguments that it will sell at high prices once more games are out. It will sell more, but it's not going to challenge the Wii and 360 without severe price drops. It's not like the AAA games are going to stop coming out on those consoles as soon as the PS3 starts getting some more exclusives worth playing/buying the console for.

Skimming over the past few pages, I don't see people making that argument. I see people justifying the gamble (dallow's phrase) that Sony took incorporating BR into the system; I see folks discussing cable boxes and analog/digital signals, I see a late night revelry of stupidity (in which I am proud to have taken part).

I don't see your straw men. Well, I see the ones you're *making,* but not the arguments being made by other people as you claim. I see absurd comments like "it's not going to challenge the Wii and 360 without severe price drops." Well, of course it isn't, first and foremost; second, you say this as if the PS3 will remain $500 for the lifespan of the console, which if, of course, absurd and untrue. The price will drop, the price may drop to $400 for Christmastime (there are ample rumors and lack of Sony denial that seem to corroborate that)...so what's your point about price again? It ain't static, darlin'. It never was intended to be.

As for exclusives...

...

...

sigh. You know what? I give up with y'all "PS3 has no games worth playing" people. You're guided by this delusional idea that ignores that PS3 has dozens of multiplatform games that we all play (it's not all about exclusives); you're guided by the delusional idea that there are zero exclusive titles coming out (forget Heavenly Sword/Eye of Judgment/Ratchet and Clank/Uncharted/Unreal Tournament III/Haze/Folklore/Hot Shots Golf, all coming before November, give or take 1 or 2).

So many "PS3 has no games" arguers seem to stand on a pedestal that says "PS3 doesn't have GoW/Halo/Bioshock!!!" Ok, that's true, and those are three incredible games. But, they are three incredible games of the same genre, and they are really just three games. The 360 has a number of very good exclusives, but I'm quite frankly tired of this self-blinding and willfully ignorant "PS3 has no games" bullshit.

I'm going to go enjoy a bout of Tekken Online; you may have VF5 on the 360 as an exclusive, but...y'know, it was out on PS3 first, so that makes it not a game. So...yeah.

I've said throughout that the PS3 isn't dead. Just that it seems unlikely to challenge for the lead, and hard pressed to get even in 2nd place. Again, 360 and Wii sales aren't slowing down, and aren't likely to as they'll see price drops and expanding game libraries as well.

Man, I really wish that Sony would plan on dropping the price of the PS3 and expanding their game libraries. But, since they must not be doing any of those, ever, in the future, guess I'm just fucked, then.

It's not eulogizing. I couldn't care less personally how many units of any console are sold. They're all just over priced hunks of plastic that play games. I have no loyalty to any of them.

But damn if it isn't fun riling up people pathetic enough to get upset over what someone says about their choice of overpriced hunk of plastic.

If that's how you get your kicks, hombre, that's how you get your kicks. It's disappointing and makes me lose faith in humanity, but, hey, it's still how you get your kicks.

[dmaul1114]

Skimming over the past few pages, I don't see people making that argument.

Was talking about posts like this saying it can get right back in the race despite being priced too high to sell to families of 4 etc. (i.e. casual gamers who were the bread and butter of the PS1 and PS2's success).

I'm not talking about the folks who look at the $100 PS/2 and it's a stretch for their budget. I'm talking about the gamers who, given the situation of the 'must play' game, will spend gobs of money to be able to play that game.

It used to happen more frequently on the PCs than consoles but I can't say it's happened recently anywhere. I just remember guys buying new PCs or upgrading their current ones (spending hundreds on a video card, for example) just so that they met the specs for some latest/hot game. I think those folks, given some 'must have' game, would spend the bucks. Maybe not the audience of cheap-ass gamer, but those hard-core types are pretty numerous. I think they've also been starving for a good / original game.

For the family of 4 working through their budget each month to make sure there's food on the table - the PS3 isn't for them.


As for exclusives...

sigh. You know what? I give up with y'all "PS3 has no games worth playing" people. You're guided by this delusional idea that ignores that PS3 has dozens of multiplatform games that we all play (it's not all about exclusives);

Man, I really wish that Sony would plan on dropping the price of the PS3 and expanding their game libraries. But, since they must not be doing any of those, ever, in the future, guess I'm just fucked, then.


1. It's is only exclusives when deciding which of 2 consoles two buy. Mutliplatform games I can get on either the 360 or PS3 so it's the exclusives (and price difference) that will determine which I buy when I decide to get a 2nd console this gen. Even moreso when every multiplatform game thus far has been reviewed higher on the 360--see Corvin's post and check the game ranking sites for yourself.

2. See my post above. I said sony isn't dead, they'll drop price and get some killer system seller exclusives out. IMO it will just be too late for them to have any chance of catching Nintendo, and probably too late to totally catch up to MS. Though they should come close to catching MS by this gens end.



If that's how you get your kicks, hombre, that's how you get your kicks. It's disappointing and makes me lose faith in humanity, but, hey, it's still how you get your kicks.

Have to get through my days at my boring, but well paying, desk job some how. :D

I lose faith in humanity everytime I set foot in a game store or log onto a gaming forum, just can't resist the urge toss some flamebate at the fanboy losers every now and then. That's about the only contribution low lifes can make to normal members of society.

Still can't fathom why people get so riled up over some random asshole on the internet's (like myself) opinion of their game playing hunk of plastic and the company that makes us. Just completely dumbfounding to me. They all exist to charge us more than stuff should cost to line their own pockets.

[elmyra]

My point on the first was just that the switchover won't help sell HDTVs, since not many people (even poor) use solely over the air. Most people have cable--even the super poor as most counties require the cable company to offer some super cheap package of 20 or so channels (it's around $15 where I live).

As for the latter, again, I was off but that just furthers that the switch will have little effect on HDTV sales.

Adoption is going slow. It's speeding up, but doesn't change the fact that HD DVD and BR launched way to soon to be successful in selling to anyone other than the videophile nerds.
Ah, in my zeal to correct your errors, I missed the whold point of your argument. ;) I agree that the digital switch will do little to speed adoption of HDTV, and that it's going slow. The latest numbers (http://www.avrev.com/news/0107/11.hdtv_research.shtml) I've seen were from the beginning of this year, and they showed that only 17% of US households had HDTVs; many of the current sales are coming from wealthier households buying more than one HDTV (for the bedroom, etc).

Most people I know are clueless about HD or don't really care; I know a few who just finally got DVD players in the last year. Video game enthusiasts tend to forget that they're in the minority in terms of electronics spending habits. Most people just want to watch TV and an occasional movie at home.

[dmaul1114]

Most people I know are clueless about HD or don't really care; I know a few who just finally got DVD players in the last year. Video game enthusiasts tend to forget that they're in the minority in terms of electronics spending habits. Most people just want to watch TV and an occasional movie at home.

Yep. I't's not just gamers, but internet boards in general are going to skew toward tech savy early adopter types. If someone is online and posting on the internet, they're going to be more electronically inclined than joe six pack in the trailer park, and just regular folks in general.

Hell several people I know that have bought HDTV's recently just bought them as they wanted a big TV and all big TVs are HD sets. And most of these folks don't have any HD programming, just watching regular cable streteched to 16x9! :bomb:

I try to sell them on paying the fricking $7 a month to Comcast for an HD box, but have had little luck getting them to budge. They just don't care about pic quality, just wanted a big picture.

Sure they'll come around eventually, one did after watching some football in HD on my 50" sony a couple weeks ago.

But it is a frustratingly slow adoption process for those of us who have made the leap. So few channels available in HD right now. :(

[elmyra]

But, given that the PS3 is on track to sell 11 million by March of 2008
Seriously? I hadn't heard that. I'm not disputing your numbers, since I haven't really followed the projections, but that's a million or so a month for the next six months. That sounds like a lot.

[dmaul1114]

Yeah, that's a very high projection--and in an industry where console sales projections are more often overshoots rather than underestimates. Seem to see a lot more stories (Wii and DS aside) about Sony and MS lowering profit estimates when fiscal years are ending, rather than reporting greater than expected profits.

They always talk a big game to get stock investors on board.

[The Mana Knight]

I honestly bought the PS3 for FFXIII and most of Sony's first paty games... Not really a fan of FPS, and the 360 seems to have a torrent of those games on their system.Yeah, that was my reason for buying it.

[VidgamesgivemeA_D_D]

I'm all for getting expenses out of the way as soon as possible but buying a PS3 right now for FFXIII? I'd say you'd be lucky to be playing it in 2008 more like 09. That seems to be planning way ahead geez.

I may break down and buy a PS3 and MGS 4 with my tax return, the timing should work about right assuming MGS 4 does hit around March.

[Kfoster1979]

Yep. I't's not just gamers, but internet boards in general are going to skew toward tech savy early adopter types. I'm someone is online and posting on the internet, they're going to be more electronically inclined than joe six pack in the trailer park, and just regular folks in general.

Hell several people I know that have bought HDTV's recently just bought them as they wanted a big TV and all big TVs are HD sets. And most of these folks don't have any HD programming, just watching regular cable streteched to 16x9! :bomb:

I try to sell them on paying the fricking $7 a month to Comcast for an HD box, but have had little luck getting them to budge. They just don't care about pic quality, just wanted a big picture.

Sure they'll come around eventually, one did after watching some football in HD on my 50" sony a couple weeks ago.

But it is a frustratingly slow adoption process for those of us who have made the leap. So few channels available in HD right now. :(

I can't agree more!!!

[Corvin]

Seriously? I hadn't heard that. I'm not disputing your numbers, since I haven't really followed the projections, but that's a million or so a month for the next six months. That sounds like a lot.

:lol: I didn't think of that. Come on, that's totally reasonable to go from 100k a month to 1 million. That's only a 10x a month increase.

Lest us not forget, like MS, Sony uses shipped numbers so they very well could 'ship' that many by March, much like MS made their 10 million number back in May.

[pbates86]

Not true. No game that I'm aware of on both platforms has ever scored higher on the PS3. I think Oblivion comes the closest, but the 360 still edges it out by a point on both gamerankings and metacritic.

Here are your two games:

NBA 2K7 on gamerankings: (http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/itemsearch.asp)
Xbox 360 - 84.9%
PS3 - 81.3%

NBA 2K7 on metacritic: (http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sort=relevance&termType=all&ts=nba+2k7&ty=0&x=0&y=0)
Xbox 360 - 84
PS3 - 80

Madden 07 on gamerankings: (http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/itemsearch.asp)
Xbox 360 - 80.7%
PS3 - 77.9%

Madden 07 on metacritic: (http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sb=0&tfs=all&ts=madden+07&ty=0&x=0&y=0)
Xbox 360 - 80
PS3 - 76

Well I only look at ign for my reviews and on PS3 NBA 2K7 had a score of 8.5 and the 360 version had a score of 8.3 As far as Madden goes, yes, Madden 07 on 360 did score higher but only the PS3 version of Madden 07 had gang tackling.

[Corvin]

Well I only look at ign for my reviews and on PS3 NBA 2K7 had a score of 8.5 and the 360 version had a score of 8.3 As far as Madden goes, yes, Madden 07 on 360 did score higher but only the PS3 version of Madden 07 had gang tackling.

Fair enough. Just note that you took one sites scores and made a broad generalization that turned out to be false. ;)

[dmaul1114]

:lol: I didn't think of that. Come on, that's totally reasonable to go from 100k a month to 1 million. That's only a 10x a month increase.

Lest us not forget, like MS, Sony uses shipped numbers so they very well could 'ship' that many by March, much like MS made their 10 million number back in May.


Yep. And weren't the orginally spouting off plans to sell/ship 10 million by the end of 2006? And then pushed that back to May and still had to used shipped units rather than sold to save face?

You can't put any stock in any of the companies projections. That's just PR talking heads trying to sound good for investors.

[pbates86]

If you can't find games to play on a Saturn or a Dreamcast, then you got way bigger problems than "picking the right team." :P

Well my issue with those systems weren't that there weren't any good games, it was that they stopped making them! They STILL make games for the PS2 and the last Dreamcast game was made when? I'm worried that the same might happen to PS3. The 360 is a year older, and because of that has a larger library. Once the PS3 gets another year under its belt, it will hopefully have a significantly larger library. My problem with sony is that they are still rolling in the dough from the PS2 and haven't gone full focus on the PS3. Can you imagine if God of War II was a PS3 exclusive? Or even a game like Guitar Hero II? I personally thing that would have helped the PS3 a great deal.

Sidenote: I just got done downloading the NBA 2K8 demo of PSN. The same demo that was on live LAST week. Nothing to really say there except that it pisses me off.

[millrat1030]

I don't think the 360 or the PS3 either one are going to sell like the PS2. And speaking of the PS2 didn't it take a little over a year for it to get momentum? I just can't see how people are acting like Sony is done. The 360 and the PS3 will both co-exist well behind the Wii. Which I have to say surprises the hell out of me. Am I the only one who thought the big N was crazy when I first heard of the Wii? My wife just bought one recently and she loves it, and I have to admit it can be fun. I just still don't think it's serious gaming, and that's probably the reason it selling like hot cakes. My problem with the Wii is the mediocre games we'll get for the PS3 and 360 because developers are seeing $$$ on the Wii. I own all three and I have to admit I spend more time with the PS3, but it's more for the BR movies and the media streaming. I personally think both the 360 and PS3 are lacking titles right now. I don't like FPS, so I'm screwed with the 360. I recently played Heavenly and Lair both decent, but the first games I've really played on the PS3 since Motorstorm.

[dmaul1114]

The PS2 took a while to get momentum for sure. But it had no competition. The Dreacast was never a serious threat, and it came out a year before the X-box and GC were there to challenge them.

Buy being a year late to the show, the PS3 doesn't have as much luxury have this slow start as it was laredy in the hole due to MS's year head start this time. And that's only be complicated by Nintendo coming out of no where and outselling the hell out of both MS and Sony.

And again, they're certainly not dead. And your right that neither the 360 or PS3 will do PS2 like numbers. That's why people are down on Sony, they flat ruled the last two gens, and the fanboys expected them to do the same this time. Now they have no chance at that kind of domination, and it has both the fanboys and Sony haters riled up.

The PS3 will do fine, challenge MS for second plase, and Nintendo will win the sales race, but not by nearly the margin that the PS2 did.

[Corvin]

It's still too early to declare the Wii the winner either. If anything, the Wii will slow down, the PS3 will pick up momentum while the 360 will be the workhorse and just chug along at a decent pace. It will be a three way tie. :)

[VidgamesgivemeA_D_D]

At the end of this gen I'm thinking Wii will have about 40% market share, MS slightly beating Sony maybe 33% to 27%. No company will be starving. But I'm honestly wondering if there will be a Playstation 4. Sony is only sticking around to promote blu-ray, They're losing buckets of money off video games and unless they have something new to promote by then I'm not sure they have a reason to stick around just to lose a ton more money. And I'm not saying this like S0ny is t3h d00med like MS or Nintendo will kick them out of industry like some believe/wish, but I mean they may leave on their own.

[mykevermin]

They're losing buckets of money off video games

No.

Their games division (prior to PS3) was keeping the rest of the company afloat, being the only profitable division. At the moment, they're taking losses because of the PS3, but keeping in mind the money coming in from still-strong PS2 sales (a console they've been profiting off of for years, and and continue to profit off of), as well as PSP (also profitable), not to mention strong software sales for those two systems.

If the PS3 does well (which it will), they'll turn a profit there, too (eventually). Their biggest gamble is this: will the PS3 start doing well soon enough to secure Blu-Ray's future as the high-def video format? If so, they'll suddenly have two HUGE sources of income/profit: software/hardware and video sales (instead of just the former).

[FoxHoundADAM]

At the end of this gen I'm thinking Wii will have about 40% market share, MS slightly beating Sony maybe 33% to 27%. No company will be starving. But I'm honestly wondering if there will be a Playstation 4. Sony is only sticking around to promote blu-ray, They're losing buckets of money off video games and unless they have something new to promote by then I'm not sure they have a reason to stick around just to lose a ton more money. And I'm not saying this like S0ny is t3h d00med like MS or Nintendo will kick them out of industry like some believe/wish, but I mean they may leave on their own.I agree with you. And the only reason Sony will even be that close to the 360 is because of Microsofts inability to woo Japansese gamers.

It just seams that Sony really underestimated how much a $600 system would really drive away consumers. Although it is somewhat remarkable they have done this well at that price. But even when they lower the price they have just lost so much momentum that I can't ever seeing them being the top selling hardware of this generation. Heck it's hard to see them in second.

[dmaul1114]

It's still too early to declare the Wii the winner either. If anything, the Wii will slow down, the PS3 will pick up momentum while the 360 will be the workhorse and just chug along at a decent pace. It will be a three way tie. :)


See, I just have a hard time imagning it slowing down anytime soon. It's been selling like hot cakes despite having a shit game library.

I'd have to imagine it will just keep on rolling for the foreseeable future as stuff like Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros move consoles (along with Wii sports) this holiday season, Mario Kart next year, Wii Fit next year for the casuals etc.

And I don't particularly like it, as it's not good when the market leader is the lowest powered console. You end up with big multiplatform games being developed for the lowest common denominator--and thus they never look as good as they could when they get ported over to the more powerful systems. Was a problem last gen with stuff being developed for the PS2 then just ported over, lots of sloppy ports on the X-box and GC, and even the good multiplatform games like PoP etc. didn't look nearly as good as the top exclusives on the X-box or GC.

So, I hope your right and it does end up being more of a tie. But with them selling like hot cakes with a weak game library, no HD graphics, worthless online support etc. etc., I have a hard time imagining them slowing down.

[dmaul1114]

Their biggest gamble is this: will the PS3 start doing well soon enough to secure Blu-Ray's future as the high-def video format? If so, they'll suddenly have two HUGE sources of income/profit: software/hardware and video sales (instead of just the former).

My prediction is that will bite them. The market just wasn't ready for HD disc formats. HDTV penetration is still too low, they aren't able to price the discs remotely competitive with DVDs right now etc.

They should have waited until the PS4 when HDTV has had another 5 years to catch on, and then put BR in that if they had to.

But in all actuality, they should have just realized that every proprietary format they've ever introduced had either failed or been a niche thing used only in their devices in the end, and just not gotten in the HD disc market to begin with. Though I do think BR has a better chance of eventually catching on than did Betamax, Minidiscs, Memory Sticks, etc.

[InuFaye]

The wii is gonna slow down. Its a fad just like beanie babies were. The PS name is so strong that it will sell the system. The xbox is gonna slow down and just be known as the thing you play halo on. Seriously if it was not for Halo 1 and 2. Xbox would have died ALONG time ago.

[dmaul1114]

The wii is gonna slow down. Its a fad just like beanie babies were. The PS name is so strong that it will sell the system. The xbox is gonna slow down and just be known as the thing you play halo on. Seriously if it was not for Halo 1 and 2. Xbox would have died ALONG time ago.

People said the same thing about the DS, and it's still the top selling platform.

PS name hasn't helped it much thus far. It is a factor and when prices fall it will help it sell some.

Stuff about MS is just biased fanboy nonsense. Of course Halo was the big reason for their success, but now they are an established console platform, and have a lot of great games (including exclusives) and are definitely here to stay.

[InuFaye]

Im not sure if you have seen but recently ds and wii sales have been slowing down in Japan. Last week the ds only sold like 40k units and the wii sold pretty badly also. I think people are finally starting to realize that the wii is gonna be another gamecube.

Also the DS was never a Fad the way the Wii is.

The xbox would have failed if it was not for the halo series. Halo was not a big reason for the success it was the reson they HAD the success. The xbox 1 was the halo/team ninja box and looks like its gonna be the same way this generation.
IAMRITE.

[Dr Mario Kart]

You are right about the xbox1, but they mightve still stuck it out anyway. They're a stubborn bunch you know.

So how are the Wii's competitors doing in Japan, by the way?

[Corvin]

The wii is gonna slow down. Its a fad just like beanie babies were. The PS name is so strong that it will sell the system. The xbox is gonna slow down and just be known as the thing you play halo on. Seriously if it was not for Halo 1 and 2. Xbox would have died ALONG time ago.

That's about as naive as it comes.

How many million sellers has there been on the 360? Halo, Crackdown, Lost Planet, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Bioshock, Madden, Gears of War... all of which are from mostly different genres and turned into AAA titles, which also blows the hole in the MS is only good for shooters and racers theory. How many million sellers on the PS3? Resistance? Motorstorm? Neither of which garnered AAA status. That's a pretty weak stance to take. That stance being, ignoring the entire 360 lineup. The majority of which also comprises the PS3 lineup.

I also disagree with the bit about the Playstation brand being more powerful than the Wii. Not too long ago, Nintendo was synonymous with gaming. People are just as aware of Nintendo as they ever were and it could be argued that their brand is now stronger than Sony's, or at least as strong as these days.

One thing I would bet on, the PS4 will be scaled back, and the $600 console will have gone the way of the dodo.

[dmaul1114]

The xbox would have failed if it was not for the halo series. Halo was not a big reason for the success it was the reson they HAD the success. The xbox 1 was the halo/team ninja box and looks like its gonna be the same way this generation.
IAMRITE.

Sure, Halo made it a success. But the 360 is not just the halo playing machine. They're risen above that with stuff like Gears, Crackdown, Dead Rising, Bioshock, and on down the line.

Wii sales fluctuate weekk to week by availability. Some weeks there are very few shipped to stores to be sold, so you can't really look at ups and downs yet. And you can sure it will sell crazy this holiday season with Mario and Smash Bros coming.

DS will pick up again soon with Zelda and the holidays.

Don't be such a blind sony loyalist.

[dmaul1114]

One thing I would bet on, the PS4 will be scaled back, and the $600 console will have gone the way of the dodo.

One can hope that all console makers learned that lesson, and that you are right here.

[Corvin]

Im not sure if you have seen but recently ds and wii sales have been slowing down in Japan. Last week the ds only sold like 40k units and the wii sold pretty badly also. I think people are finally starting to realize that the wii is gonna be another gamecube.

Also the DS was never a Fad the way the Wii is.

The xbox would have failed if it was not for the halo series. Halo was not a big reason for the success it was the reson they HAD the success. The xbox 1 was the halo/team ninja box and looks like its gonna be the same way this generation.
IAMRITE.

Or a cooler head prevails over the fanboy fantasies and realizes that Christmas is around the corner and people might be scaling back on large purchases. Give it until November, there will be a surge of sales for both the Wii and DS. Or like dmaul said, sales also depend on availability which seems to fluctuate quite a bit with Nintendo products.

Also you have to face it, if it weren't for the original Xbox Live, Sony's PSN would be even more archaic than it is now. Just because you can't see past Halo doesn't mean MS didn't actually accomplish something, most of which have been ripped and imitated in a pale fashion. Competition is good.



Don't be such a blind sony loyalist.

Amen to that. :lol:

[InuFaye]

That's about as naive as it comes.

How many million sellers has there been on the 360? Halo, Crackdown, Lost Planet, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Bioshock, Madden, Gears of War... all of which are from mostly different genres and turned into AAA titles, which also blows the hole in the MS is only good for shooters and racers theory. How many million sellers on the PS3? Resistance? Motorstorm? Neither of which garnered AAA status. That's a pretty weak stance to take. That stance being, ignoring the entire 360 lineup. The majority of which also comprises the PS3 lineup.

I also disagree with the bit about the Playstation brand being more powerful than the Wii. Not too long ago, Nintendo was synonymous with gaming. People are just as aware of Nintendo as they ever were and it could be argued that their brand is now stronger than Sony's, or at least as strong as these days.

One thing I would bet on, the PS4 will be scaled back, and the $600 console will have gone the way of the dodo.

Did I say Xbox 360? NO. I said XBOX. Which refers to the first one. Without Halo for the first xbox its pretty fair to assume that it would have died and microsoft would never have made the other ones. For the best sellers Please There is no way that Lost Planet and Dead Rising sold a million copies. Crackdown only sold because of the halo 3 beta. Bioshock is getting close to a milllion copies. Madden? Are you serious? Its available on every system under the sun. Oblivion ,Gears , and lost planet are superior on the PC. The 360 will remain the box for the western games.

The Playstation brand is so much stronger then you think it is. Nintendo used to be synomous with games back in early 90's but the playstation destroyed nintendo for the past decade. Now that a Nintendo system is finally selling you think the wii name is known everywhere.

[InuFaye]

Or a cooler head prevails over the fanboy fantasies and realizes that Christmas is around the corner and people might be scaling back on large purchases. Give it until November, there will be a surge of sales for both the Wii and DS. Or like dmaul said, sales also depend on availability which seems to fluctuate quite a bit with Nintendo products.

Also you have to face it, if it weren't for the original Xbox Live, Sony's PSN would be even more archaic than it is now. Just because you can't see past Halo doesn't mean MS didn't actually accomplish something, most of which have been ripped and imitated in a pale fashion. Competition is good.



Amen to that. :lol:

I never onced compared Live to PSN in this discussion. Live is and will be for along time light years behind pc online games. PC gamers have had online for the better part of 15 years. You console gamers finally get a good taste of it and now you act like microsoft invented online play! Please I remeber back in the day on my 486 windows 3.1 machine using my modem to call my friends house and play doom connected to each other.

[rajchakrabarti]

hey whatever gots the games and is fun.... thats all i need.

and currently the xbox is doing that for me. but with mgs4 ... . ps3 will defintly get a boost.. but how much ?... im not sold on the ps3 just yet.

[InuFaye]

Don't be such a blind sony loyalist.

Who ever said I was a sony loyalist? They have their own share of problems. I only stand up for them because it seems like everyone is down on them now just because the ps3 is taking its time. People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.

Also Ima PC snob.

[Dr Mario Kart]

People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.


I think people are fully aware of this. However, they seem to be also aware that it has very little effect on the current situation (See: NES->SNES->N64).

Hell, if SONY realized that fact even, they mightve made the PS3 more like the 1 and 2

[dmaul1114]

People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.


I definitely played the PS1 and PS2 the most the past two gens. But I don't give a shit that people are down to them.

I have zero loyalty to any of these overpriced hunks of plastic or the greedy companies that make them.

Sony brought all this on themselves, they could have stayed on top and again had the best console in terms of game support if they'd stuck with what got them on top--reasonably priced gaming machines that most anyone could afford to buy (or be willing to buy) right from day 1.

[dmaul1114]

Did I say Xbox 360? NO. I said XBOX. Which refers to the first one.


We know. And that has not bearing on the PS3 or 360, which is the topic of this thread. So we're telling you to pull your head out of your ass, and talk about stuff relative to the PS3s chances of competing with the 360 and Wii.

The fact that Halo made the original X-box has no bearing on this gens race. All that matters now is that the PS3 has been too expensive, came out a year too late, and has had to few games to make a strong challenge to the 360 or Wii yet.

Oh, and for good measure--PC GAMING SUCKS. That's the only platform I have any bias against. Hate keyboard part of controls, hate playing on a monitor (not dorky enough to put a PC in the living room and hook up to the TV) and most of all I can't stand sitting at a PC at home for hours to play a game after sitting at one all day at work. :p

[Apossum]

Who ever said I was a sony loyalist? They have their own share of problems. I only stand up for them because it seems like everyone is down on them now just because the ps3 is taking its time. People dont realize that they have had the best console for the past two generations.

Also Ima PC snob.



I'm really wondering if it's just taking its time or if it really isn't going to take off. It's no doubt that they had the best console of the last two gens, but the problems at Sony are very obvious-- the whole shake up in management, passing of PS3 debt to the Insurance division, and the demotion (i.e. fired in Japan) of Kutaragi all reveal that.

[InuFaye]

I definitely played the PS1 and PS2 the most the past two gens. But I don't give a shit that people are down to them.

I have zero loyalty to any of these overpriced hunks of plastic or the greedy companies that make them.

Sony brought all this on themselves, they could have stayed on top and again had the best console in terms of game support if they'd stuck with what got them on top--reasonably priced gaming machines that most anyone could afford to buy (or be willing to buy) right from day 1.


Because Companies want to make money on products they instantly become greedy. :roll:

Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.

[dmaul1114]

Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.

Not really. I like to play games. But I was much happier when Consoles were all $199-299 at launch, and all $199 or less 12-18 months in, vs this generation with $250-$600 launch prices, and price drops being small and slow to come thus far (at least with 360 which has been out almost 2 years and only dropped $50).

That's getting pricey for me, given that games are not my top hobby anymore.

[InuFaye]

We know. And that has not bearing on the PS3 or 360, which is the topic of this thread. So we're telling you to pull your head out of your ass, and talk about stuff relative to the PS3s chances of competing with the 360 and Wii.

The fact that Halo made the original X-box has no bearing on this gens race. All that matters now is that the PS3 has been too expensive, came out a year too late, and has had to few games to make a strong challenge to the 360 or Wii yet.

Oh, and for good measure--PC GAMING SUCKS. That's the only platform I have any bias against. Hate keyboard part of controls, hate playing on a monitor (not dorky enough to put a PC in the living room and hook up to the TV) and most of all I can't stand sitting at a PC at home for hours to play a game after sitting at one all day at work. :p

PC gaming is better then console gaming in every way shape and form. Its a fact. Keyboard and Mouse give you more precise controls then what you could ever get on a console. Monitors also have much higher refresh rates and resolutions then what your TV does. PC is just better in every way. And because you cant stand to look at a monitor because you looked at one at work all day is not a fair knock against PC gaming.

[Dr Mario Kart]

PC gaming?...Alright. I'll bite.

4 player IN PERSON multiplayer games.

[dmaul1114]

Different strokes for different folks man. I hate the keyboard, will take my 50" HDTV over my 17" monitor (again, not dorky enough to every put a PC in the living room), etc. etc.

Not to mention that I don't care much for FPS, RTS, Sim games, or point and click adventure and pretty much every other genre the consoles do as well or better than PCs.

So it just has no appeal to me, combined with the fact that I just hate sitting at a computer period.

And plus, if I liked PC games I'd have something in common with losers like you, and I just can't have that can I? ;)

[InuFaye]

PC gaming?...Alright. I'll bite.

4 player IN PERSON multiplayer games.

LAN parties.

[dmaul1114]

LAN parties.

Too much hassle, and requires running in a big enough circle of dorks who are willing to drag their computers around.

[Dr Mario Kart]

haha. LAN Parties. Thats adorable.

[InuFaye]

So you think you are so cool calling us dorks? You are just as big a dork as we are. Your username is for darth maul from star wars. You are arguing on a site for cheap video games and you know about them. You my friend are also that much of a dork. Plus Lan Parties arent as hard as you think they are. Plus I guess you guys never heard of controllers that you "could" plug into the computer and get multiplayer.

[Halo05]

PC gaming is better then console gaming in every way shape and form. Its a fact. Keyboard and Mouse give you more precise controls then what you could ever get on a console. Monitors also have much higher refresh rates and resolutions then what your TV does. PC is just better in every way. And because you cant stand to look at a monitor because you looked at one at work all day is not a fair knock against PC gaming.

Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.

[dmaul1114]

So you think you are so cool calling us dorks? You are just as big a dork as we are. Your username is for darth maul from star wars. You are arguing on a site for cheap video games and you know about them. You my friend are also that much of a dork.

Oh, I never deny my dorkiness. :D I just still toss it out there as losers like you actually CARE what some other random loser, asshole on the internet has to stay about you and it's fun to watch the lame retorts start flying. :D

Ok, Ok. It was fun while it lasted. But enough riling up the PC gamer trolling on a console forum area.

Lets get back to the PS3 discussion...

[Corvin]

I never onced compared Live to PSN in this discussion. Live is and will be for along time light years behind pc online games. PC gamers have had online for the better part of 15 years. You console gamers finally get a good taste of it and now you act like microsoft invented online play! Please I remeber back in the day on my 486 windows 3.1 machine using my modem to call my friends house and play doom connected to each other.

:wall: Who's talking about PC gaming? You said outside of Halo MS was pretty much worthless last gen and would have folded. I brought up Live as a counterpoint. Online gaming with a console was archaic up until Live and I firmly believe without MS it still would be.

As for the million sellers, I'd pull up some stats but for some reason going to VGChartz games page is getting flagged for malware on my system. Not worth taking a risk of that for some silly internet debate. :) Maybe later when I can get on my Mac.

[InuFaye]

Where are the fighting games on PC?
MUGEN anyone?
Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?
GTR2. Better then GT. CONFIRMED.
How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?
DMC4 is coming to PC. It looks leagues better then where ng2 is now.
How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?
Its on PC.
Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?
Steam
Where are the platform games on PC?
There are ports.
Where are the JRPGs on PC?
The Japanese dont buy pcs for gaming.
Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?
All the others have been on PC its just a matter of time.

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.

Edited your post with my input.

[VidgamesgivemeA_D_D]

I'm not gonna bash pc gaming or pc gamers but I also don't play pc games. Just not for me. I do however occasionally play PC games that get ported to consoles. I've just always been a console gamer and I'm satisfied with that. Each to his own.

[Apossum]

I'm not going to weigh in on PC vs. Consoles, they both have strengths and weaknesses, but I thought I would take a stab at this any way while I'm sitting here eating. I also like a good questionnaire :lol:


Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.

1. Everything but Tekken 4, 5, DR, DoA 3+4, and SC 2+3. Maybe I'm missing a few...little known fact-- you can play all the DC games on PC as well. They aren't 100% perfect yet though they are close.

2. I dunno

3. if you find a way, pm me

4. http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/data/932592.html

5. Steam and I think Xfire has something like that. Steam is great!

6. Psychonauts is there, and emulators

7. Emulators

8. Yeah. and if not, emulators (in the year 20XX)

[Chacrana]

Where are the fighting games on PC?

Where are the Gran Turismo-esque racing games on PC?

How can I play Ninja Gaiden Sigma and/or 2 on PC?

How can I play Marvel Ultimate Alliance on PC?

Where's the unified multiplayer that allows me to know what friends of mine are online and what they're doing?

Where are the platform games on PC?

Where are the JRPGs on PC?

Will I be able to play GTA4 on PC?

...anyhow, your facts leave much to be desired.

I'll answer these questions too, despite that I'm very well aware that there's strengths and weaknesses for consoles and PCs.

1) They aren't there... cept for Melty Blood Rev. B.

2) GTR 2 for sims, a buncha other stuff for non-sims.

3) :(

4) Buy it, play it.

5) It's coming... says MS. But then, they did make XBL what it is today, so hopefully they're really going to deliver.

6) I can't imagine wanting platform games on PC...

7) Given the state of JRPGs today, I can't imagine wanting many of these either. And this is coming from somebody who fucking loves RPGs. Though I'd like Persona 3 on PC...

8) Prolly. Since you could play literally every other GTA on the PC prior to 4.

So yeah, there's a lotta stuff that's only on consoles... but at the same time, it works both ways... there's a lot of PC games that aren't on consoles, and not just MMOs (which are boring.) Lots of the stuff on the PC is multiplatform fare, and it's 99% of the time much better looking than any console counterpart could hope to be. The PC really feels like a 360 with far more good games and better graphics. And if you really need a gamepad for stuff, then you can just hook one up or use the 360 controller.

[Chacrana]

Edited your post with my input.

Interesting you bring up the whole Japanese don't develop for PCs thing. Actually, that's the one issue with PC games... US devs typically can't design a game worth shit, so it'd be nice if we got more Jap games where design was actually a factor. Though we are getting DMC 4 on the PC and Lost Planet came out in June, so perhaps we'll see something of a turning point. Mebbe.

[Halo05]

I never took issue with the fact that PCs have advantages, I took issue with InuFaye (complete with NG II signature thing) claiming that PCs can do everything that consoles do better than consoles.

It's not that way, it's really never been that way. The entire matter comes down to what you enjoy playing. I had no idea that MUA came out on PC, it simply popped into my head because I finally got it for 360 today but I think my other points stand pretty well on their own.

I've been using emulators for over ten years now and in the same way that you can't knock PCs for people spending all day on them at work and thus, not wanting to play games on them at home, you can't blame the Sega Genesis for eventually being emulated. Plus emulation is a legally grey area that many people are perfectly reasonable to want to avoid.

GTR2 looks incredible but it's all touring/race cars. If you want to race around in a stock 1989 Skyline GT-R, it's not the game for you. Like JRPGs? (I don't really but there are some who live and breathe them), PCs won't help you.

Anyhow, I hope my point is made.

[IAmTheCheapestGamer]

Because Companies want to make money on products they instantly become greedy. :roll:

Since you wanted to call them over priced hunks of plastic you obviously dont have any loyalty to gaming.

No, but because companies have DOUBLED the price of their crap from last gen to current, while adding in alot of extra bullshit many don't want. And as far as loyalty to gaming is concerned, I typically wait till the systems are $150 or less anyway, so I WILL own a 360 and PS3, but probably not till the PS4 and Xbox720 are out for a while already.

Maybe by then MS will have fixed their hardware issues and Sony will have finally realized that they charged too much this gen for too many added functions that I'm sure they'll take out one by one in an in vain attempt to reduce price and sway consumers to grab a PS3.

Not everyone wants all the bells and whistles of the PS3, I just wish Sony would've taken that into consideration before releasing the PS3.

Oh and as far as loyalty does go, I go for the system with the best value and PRICE for my liking. I started gaming on the Atari 2600, moved to the Sega Genesis and didn't buy another console till the Playstation was $149, so I'm not loyal to any company, since all they want is my money in the first place.

[Chacrana]

Anyhow, I hope my point is made.

Yeah, it is. I was just answering to be contrary. Because I'm a dick :lol:

[dmaul1114]

Interesting you bring up the whole Japanese don't develop for PCs thing. Actually, that's the one issue with PC games... US devs typically can't design a game worth shit, so it'd be nice if we got more Jap games where design was actually a factor. Though we are getting DMC 4 on the PC and Lost Planet came out in June, so perhaps we'll see something of a turning point. Mebbe.

Yep, that's big for me. A console without strong japanese developer support is useless to me--and that's a big part of why I haven't got into PC gaming as well.

Western developers have gotten better in recent years, but still, if I put together a list of my 20 all time favorite games, probably 18 would be Japanese developed.

[Apossum]

I never took issue with the fact that PCs have advantages, I took issue with InuFaye (complete with NG II signature thing) claiming that PCs can do everything that consoles do better than consoles.




He is technically correct, performance wise. All the current gen games that have PC counterparts that I have played are all much better, imo. but consoles have those pesky exclusives, a better, more varied base of developers, and a lot more current releases in a wider amount of genres (barring the emulators.)

[Corvin]

He is technically correct, performance wise. All the current gen games that have PC counterparts that I have played are all much better, imo. but consoles have those pesky exclusives, a better, more varied base of developers, and a lot more current releases in a wider amount of genres (barring the emulators.)

Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.

[Thomas96]

I wish more PC developers would develop for consoles... heck, it'd be nice to see some games port to the PS3.. and you can still use [edit] mouse and keyboard.

[Apossum]

Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.


damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.

[Chacrana]

Consoles also have that pesky ability to play any damn game from that system you put into them without worrying about specs(ram, video card, computer chips, drivers, security measures, etc). You pop a game into a console and in 15 seconds you are gaming. That is a luxury that the PC can never attain.

As of late, it seems that a game running at a decent frame rate is a luxury that consoles can't attain. I'd much rather take my pesky process of putting in a disc and clicking "yes" a few times to install the game if it means I can enjoy the thing.

[soulvengeance]

damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.
I agree it isn't hard, but most people just want the ability to play, they don't care too much about setting things up. My only issue with pc gaming is that it can get really expensive really quickly if you want a pretty decent rig. I have to say though, for fps's, the keyboard/mouse combo is tough to beat.

[wwe101]

ps3 lost all its exclusives. thats why i went with a 360. they lost the svr series, gta, devil may cry, assasians creed, and some others. why would anyone pay $200 extra when you can play all these same games for a cheaper price? the only real exclusive that the ps3 is left with is mgs (or the only real exclusive worth playing). 360 is gonna win this console war becuase of all its exclusives such as halo, bioshock, gears of war, and some others.

[Vanigan]

Spoken like a true fanboy, saying that something will always be that way just because it happens to be that way now.

Not to mention you're going to lose out on great games for both platforms.

The reality is, the 360 wins this year, hands down, and no argument from me, a rather avid Sony gamer who owns a 360 because I enjoy playing games on both systems.

However, it's only been a year since the PS3 released and it's only now getting some bigger exclusives out the door. In 2008 when both Sony and MS both are pumping out games to try to one up each other, you're just going to miss out on some good gaming.

Meanwhile, I'll get to take my pick of both 360 and PS3 games next year.

Having an irrational loyalty to one corporate entity, or console is just plain immature in light of the fact that those corporations don't care about you. If they did, they wouldn't have sold you faulty hardware, instead they just want your money. When you give up foolish loyalty you can pick and choose good games from both sides, and enjoy them as independant gamers.

For example, I enjoyed Halo 3, but that's not going to stop me from enjoying Uncharted, Killzone 2, MGS4, and FF13 when they come out.

[wwe101]

Spoken like a true fanboy, saying that something will always be that way just because it happens to be that way now.

Not to mention you're going to lose out on great games for both platforms.

The reality is, the 360 wins this year, hands down, and no argument from me, a rather avid Sony gamer who owns a 360 because I enjoy playing games on both systems.

However, it's only been a year since the PS3 released and it's only now getting some bigger exclusives out the door. In 2008 when both Sony and MS both are pumping out games to try to one up each other, you're just going to miss out on some good gaming.

Meanwhile, I'll get to take my pick of both 360 and PS3 games next year.

Having an irrational loyalty to one corporate entity, or console is just plain immature in light of the fact that those corporations don't care about you. If they did, they wouldn't have sold you faulty hardware, instead they just want your money. When you give up foolish loyalty you can pick and choose good games from both sides, and enjoy them as independant gamers.

For example, I enjoyed Halo 3, but that's not going to stop me from enjoying Uncharted, Killzone 2, MGS4, and FF13 when they come out.

someone tell me why sony is trying to hype up kilzone so much? the first one tottally sucked. and do all of those games that you mentioned have a solid release date? for all we know this games could take another 2 years to come out....

[Vanigan]

Uncharted releases November 20th. No solid dates on MGS4, but it's a 2008 title. FF13 is either Q4 2008, or even into 2009. There's also Haze this year too, which despite looking okay at first, the gameplay videos look really good and should hold over FPS fans on the PS3 for a while. Then there's also unnannounced titles, or ones that are laying low. I know of a few such as Heavy Rain. No doubt MS has many games lined up for 2008 too, and I'm glad for it because that just means even more games for me to play alongside my growing PS3 library.

But I can pretty much assume there were plenty of games you factored into buying your 360 that weren't out yet. For example, you probably bought yours about a year ago when Halo 3 still had no release date. In fact, many of the games you mention also had no release date around the time you bought your 360.

The first Killzone was decent, mainly held back by the old PS2 hardware. Killzone Liberation established Guerilla as a company that knows how to make action shooters, even when on a handheld it a very good game.

And, as you can see from the Killzone 2 footage, just watching it and the gameplay footage should tell you why they're hyping Killzone 2, and why Killzone 2 stands on its own pretty well.

So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.

[Corvin]

There is no way that Lost Planet and Dead Rising sold a million copies. Crackdown only sold because of the halo 3 beta. Bioshock is getting close to a milllion copies. Madden? Are you serious? Its available on every system under the sun. Oblivion ,Gears , and lost planet are superior on the PC. The 360 will remain the box for the western games.
Alright, finally had time to look them up. Courtesy of vgchartz:

Xbox 360 titles:
Lost Planet: 1.4 million
Dead Rising: 1.36 million
Oblivion: 1.99 million
Gears of War: 4.56 million
Bioshock: .75 million

Madden 08: 1 million - this was a huge deal that made headlines. outsold the PS2 & 3 combined. You can't sweep that under the rug when comparing consoles.

Crackdown: 1.36 million - you realize only about 300k were in on the beta right? that means 1 million bought the game just for the game. I'm sure you are just pulling out your own anecdotal numbers out of your ass. It was a solid title that sold really well. There's no denying that. Were there people that bought just for the beta? Sure, but even if all 300k of those did, those that didn't buy for the beta far outnumber those that did.

compared to the top PS3 titles:
Resistance: 1.66 million
Motorstorm: 1.16 million
Lair: .12 million
Heavenly Sword: .08 million
Ninja Gaiden Sigma: .23 million
Madden 08: .4 million
Oblivion: .23 million

You can argue about Gears & Lost Planet being superior on the PC until you are blue in the face. That is a personal preference. Console gamers are a different beast, which is what we are discussing. All these numbers are console sales only. You can go back to pretending all those sales didn't occur. :)

[Thomas96]

Alright, finally had time to look them up. Courtesy of vgchartz:

Xbox 360 titles:
Lost Planet: 1.4 million
Dead Rising: 1.36 million
Oblivion: 1.99 million
Gears of War: 4.56 million
Bioshock: .75 million

Madden 08: 1 million - this was a huge deal that made headlines. outsold the PS2 & 3 combined. You can't sweep that under the rug when comparing consoles.

Crackdown: 1.36 million - you realize only about 300k were in on the beta right? that means 1 million bought the game just for the game. I'm sure you are just pulling out your own anecdotal numbers out of your ass. It was a solid title that sold really well. There's no denying that. Were there people that bought just for the beta? Sure, but even if all 300k of those did, those that didn't buy for the beta far outnumber those that did.

compared to the top PS3 titles:
Resistance: 1.66 million
Motorstorm: 1.16 million
Lair: .12 million
Heavenly Sword: .08 million
Ninja Gaiden Sigma: .23 million
Madden 08: .4 million
Oblivion: .23 million

You can argue about Gears & Lost Planet being superior on the PC until you are blue in the face. That is a personal preference. Console gamers are a different beast, which is what we are discussing. All these numbers are console sales only. You can go back to pretending all those sales didn't occur. :)



PS3 games are selling pretty good. As long as the game is good, then it'll sell. Lair, definitely not going to make a millon with its problems [they should add that patch, HS considered too short, Madden broken game, and Oblivion was already released on 360 - whoever wanted it, already bought and played it.

After this price drop[not price drop, cheaper model, and holiday sales] some ps3 games on that list may get a boost, like HS.. and if Factor 5 were smart, they'd release that patch and have the game re reviewed with a more appropriate control scheme. - controller.

[wwe101]

Uncharted releases November 20th. No solid dates on MGS4, but it's a 2008 title. FF13 is either Q4 2008, or even into 2009. There's also Haze this year too, which despite looking okay at first, the gameplay videos look really good and should hold over FPS fans on the PS3 for a while. Then there's also unnannounced titles, or ones that are laying low. I know of a few such as Heavy Rain. No doubt MS has many games lined up for 2008 too, and I'm glad for it because that just means even more games for me to play alongside my growing PS3 library.

But I can pretty much assume there were plenty of games you factored into buying your 360 that weren't out yet. For example, you probably bought yours about a year ago when Halo 3 still had no release date. In fact, many of the games you mention also had no release date around the time you bought your 360.

The first Killzone was decent, mainly held back by the old PS2 hardware. Killzone Liberation established Guerilla as a company that knows how to make action shooters, even when on a handheld it a very good game.

And, as you can see from the Killzone 2 footage, just watching it and the gameplay footage should tell you why they're hyping Killzone 2, and why Killzone 2 stands on its own pretty well.

So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.

since you own a ps3 now of course your going to try and make it sound so good and great. but everyone knows the truth about it...... i would rather buy a 2nd 360 instead of a ps3. so have fun play lair...

[Apossum]

I agree it isn't hard, but most people just want the ability to play, they don't care too much about setting things up.

I think this is because they haven't really had a chance to do this at all. but when little things come along-- like upscaling and smoothing on the PS3, or that "unlock framerate" (i.e. disable v-sync) feature in Bioshock, they get a lot of attention.


My only issue with pc gaming is that it can get really expensive really quickly if you want a pretty decent rig. I have to say though, for fps's, the keyboard/mouse combo is tough to beat.

qft. the only way to justify it is to make it your main PC for everything, imo.

[dmaul1114]

damn, didn't want to get sucked into this, but you make it sound like gaming on a PC is rocket science. I'll take the ability to customize the hell out of the way the game looks over the "luxury" of having Halo 3 stuck at 25-30fps with a crap load of lighting effects and shadows I don't care for. Or to fix up whatever aspect of the game is bothering my eyes. Just look at Bioshock-- people went crazy for the "unlock framerate" feature.

It takes a little set up, but it looks and runs the way you want to run it. Just pop in the disc and play.

But again, that's just opinion.

I'd take the former as I have little patience for screwing around with settings, needing patches, worrying about upgrades ore often than every 4-6 years if I want to play the latest games at best settings etc. etc.

PC gaming offers a lot, it's just not for me. I have a hard time finding any positives to it, other than the mouse being superior for aiming in FPS--and that's washed out by me absolutly sucking with the keyboard portion of the controls.

Different strokes for different folks.

[dmaul1114]

So frankly you did nothing to address my counter argument. I'm glad you enjoy playing nothing but games on the 360, but for those who are smart enough to realize that there's good games to be had on both systems we'll be having more fun.

Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console.

So for many, it's just a matter of going with which console has the most exclusives that interest them, and accepting that they'll miss out on some. But of course, that doesn't cover the blind fanboys who argue that one system has nothing worth playing.

For me, I can do Wii and either PS3/360, mainly because I'm pretty confident the Wii will just be used for 2 or 3 first party titles a year, as that looks to be all I'll be interested on it.

There will be games I'll want on both the PS3/360, but no way I'd ever have time to keep up with both anyway, so I'll just have to decide which looks to have the most exclusives I want to play along with which one hits the magic $300 price first. Looking to be 360 now, but I'm a still hesitant as there's not much on the 2008 slate yet for it, and the stupid failure rates.

[dmaul1114]

qft. the only way to justify it is to make it your main PC for everything, imo.

That justification doesn't work for me. My PC just gets used for simple task. E-mail, internet, word processing, ripping mp3s, unloading digital pictures from my camera etc.

Need really no power for that, so no need for an expensive computer with a top notch processor, a ton of ram, nor a good 3D card.

So any added cost for that stuff is all for games--and games I don't enjoy playing as much as I do my consoles.

Just not my cup of tea I guess.

[mykevermin]

Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console.

Oh, bullshit.

EMG ain't exactly "War & Peace," puddin' pop. It's a magazine that's 100 pages, roughly (let's be kind and have a somewhat conservative estimate) 1/3 ads, bringing the readable material down to 67 pages (we'll even take that extra .4 page :lol:). Consider the frequency and size of pictures, and you're down even more.

Seriously. You can read an entire EGM, cover to cover, in under an hour.

"Don't have time." If you want to talk websites, certainly. There are people out there who can't post 50 75-word diatribes discussing how expensive the PS3 is while on the clock each and every day. There are those with priorities, interests, and other things to do.

To say "there's not enough time" is absurd beyond belief. If, OTOH, you want to claim that folks would rather not use the time they have to read about a console they don't own/don't want to own, then I'm prone to agreeing with you. I couldn't tell you a fuckin' thing about the "Phantom," for instance.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: those who claim "PS3 has no games" are those who (1) aren't paying attention to the PS3 in the slightest, and are thus wholly unqualified to speak on whether or not the PS3, in fact, has games, or those (2) who seem to have a vested interest (mostly emotional, in gamers' cases, and occasionally financial) in believing that the PS3 will never have good games, so they feel compelled to lie to themselves and others about the PS3's games.

The #1 point above is like asking people about things they don't know about, and then failing to regard them as an expert on the matter.

"Who is the Prime Minister of the Ukraine?"

"Uhh...I don't know."

...would you regard that person as an expert on Ukrainian politics? Of course not. So why would you believe anyone when they try to claim the PS3 has no games coming out for it, and then can't give you a list of games that are coming out for it (under the impression that the "no games" claim is absurd, and that something at some point will come out for it, no matter how mundane or uninteresting).

It's plain silliness, I tellya.

[dmaul1114]

Oh, bullshit.



Why so hostile?

Games aren't my number 1 hobby, so no, I don't have time to play all the games I'd be interested in on multiple consoles anymore.

Factor that in with working full time, and going to grad school, and my free time is already limited. And even more so for games since social stuff takes precedence, adn then other hobbies like movies, music, learning guitar, hiking etc. are all prioritized above gaming.

As far as having time to post on message boards--sure. I post most of the time for work (yes,unfortunately stuck working on a saturday)--can't play any console games at my desk.

With all that in mind, I probably buy 8-10 games a year tops these days.

So sure, someone can keep up on all the big games if they have a lot of free time and gaming is there number 1 hobby to do in that free time.

But it's a different story for more casual gamers who have very busy lives.

[Dr Mario Kart]

People generally dont throw down the "no games" bit without a qualifer, whether it be "for me" or "worth the entry price".

Usually they dont even do "no games" anyway. I'd like to think "enough games" is more common.

And thats aside from complaints that dont have anything to do with the system in particular, like "I've got my hands full with just the one or two systems that I happened to buy first, for whatever reason or another".

I imagine people who buy EVERY system during a generation are absolutely the smallest possible subset of gamers.

[mykevermin]

Why so hostile?

That's just how I talk. No harm meant.

Games aren't my number 1 hobby, so no, I don't have time to play all the games I'd be interested in on multiple consoles anymore.

You're talking about people in general, not people in your specific predicament. Or, you were talking about that. Please keep your argument consistent; when I claim that people in general do have time to be informed about upcoming games, please don't counter with "well, I don't." That's not gonna fly in grad school, either.

Factor that in with working full time, and going to grad school, and my free time is already limited.

Aww, someone didn't qualify for an assistantship, did they?

That's hostility (an example, at any rate). Not me simply saying "bullshit."

And even more so for games since social stuff takes precedence, adn then other hobbies like movies, music, learning guitar, hiking etc. are all prioritized above gaming.

Good for you. Seriously. But that wasn't your argument. You said "Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console." Semantically, you could argue that you were correct, but if you decide to go there, you render your original argument moot, since any "not everyone" argument could be refuted with but a single counter example.

As far as having time to post on message boards--sure. I post most of the time for work (yes,unfortunately stuck working on a saturday)--can't play any console games at my desk.

So sure, someone can keep up on all the big games if they have a lot of free time and gaming is there number 1 hobby to do in that free time.

But it's a different story for more casual gamers who have very busy lives.

Not necessarily. As I said, reading through an issue of EGM is pretty quick and comprehensive. Now, it may be redundant that EGM is not read by casual gamers? Possibly. But that, again, is not the argument you're making (what you're saying is that it's not possible, whereas that's different from saying it's not likely).

[dallow]

Dmaul likes to take his situation, and apply it to everyone.
Then when you call him out on generalizing, he says he meant just himself.

[dmaul1114]

You're talking about people in general, not people in your specific predicament. Or, you were talking about that. Please keep your argument consistent; when I claim that people in general do have time to be informed about upcoming games, please don't counter with "well, I don't." That's not gonna fly in grad school, either.


My point was that not everyone is a nerdy hardcore gamer. Some just play games 5 hours or less a week--be it by physically not having time, or by just not liking games enough to devote more time to this.

I'm not sure where all this "not being informed" about games and saying there are "no games" crap came from as I didn't address those. I was just responding to the post I quoted saying how people are missing out so much if they don't own multiple consoles. Of course people are missing good games, but not everyone has the time (or is willing to devote the time) to play all the good games across more than one platform anyway.

As for not flying in gradschool, I was top of the class for the master's, and doing about the same in the Ph D in the number 1 ranked program in my field. So I'm flying just fine thank you.



Aww, someone didn't qualify for an assistantship, did they?


Actually, I've been fully funded every year. Now I'm working full time on a grant that I'm a co-PI on that will provide the data for my dissertation as I'm all done with classes and comp exams.



Good for you. Seriously. But that wasn't your argument. You said "Also worth noting that not everyone has the time to keep up with all the good games on more than one console." Semantically, you could argue that you were correct, but if you decide to go there, you render your original argument moot, since any "not everyone" argument could be refuted with but a single counter example.


I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I clarified my original argument above, read that again. It can't be refuted by a single example. "Not everyone" just means that some people don't have the time or interest to keep up with games on multiple systems.

And by "keep up" I mean play all of the good ones. Maybe this is where the confusion set in--I didn't mean keep informed, I meant keep up in playing through all the games that interest them. Not just reading about them in EGM.


Not necessarily. As I said, reading through an issue of EGM is pretty quick and comprehensive. Now, it may be redundant that EGM is not read by casual gamers? Possibly. But that, again, is not the argument you're making (what you're saying is that it's not possible, whereas that's different from saying it's not likely).

And that shows that this was the mistakes. I didn't mean keep up in that manner, genius. It clearly meant keep up in terms of playing through them and not having a hopeless backlog. Maybe you shoud go to grad school and study reading comprehension.

[dmaul1114]

Dmaul likes to take his situation, and apply it to everyone.
Then when you call him out on generalizing, he says he meant just himself.


Nope, lots of people don't have time to play all the A caliber games on multiple systems.

Everyone has time to skim EGM and stay informed, but that's not what I was saying, and I don't see how you retards misread it given the context it was in, and the post that was quoted.

[Chacrana]

Maybe you shoud go to grad school and study reading comprehension.

This isn't my argument and I don't particularly care who wins, but I do find it comedic that you had a typo in this sentence... well, and it's kind of a stupid statement.

[dallow]

I do need to study reading comprehension, don't I?

[dmaul1114]

This isn't my argument and I don't particularly care who wins, but I do find it comedic that you had a typo in this sentence... well, and it's kind of a stupid statement.

Meh, typos happen. I never check anything I post on boards.

[dallow]

Meh, typos happen. I never check anything I post on boards.It's very obvious. Believe you me.

[mykevermin]

:lol: Those who misconstrue me cursing as hostility sure are quick to become hostile themselves, no?

:lol: "myah myah myah, I'm co-PI on my own dissertation project." You might as well tell me that you drive a car *and* use the steering wheel all at the same time.

As for misreading, I suppose I can see the "it's hard to keep up with so many good games." My backlog empathizes with that. But, of course, you could have opted for the clearer and more parsimonious "not everyone has time to PLAY" instead of the much more vague "not everyone has time to KEEP UP." Since we're delving into nitpicking, at any rate.

[dmaul1114]

Meh. I put little thought into my posts, in addition to checking them. :D Plus us academics get paid to be un-parsimonious (if that's even a word) and vague. :D

They're time wasters at work, and more often than not just thrown out there to annoy others. Especially on game boards were people get riled up so easily. :D

And definitely not bragging about being co-pi, as that's standard. Just an explanation for why I'm working full time during grad school--rather than working very little on an assistantship (as I did my first 5 years).

[dmaul1114]

It's very obvious. Believe you me.

No doubt. But I take solace in the fact that my posts are still than the rest of you losers who actually care how you come across to the other nerds on internet boards. ;)

[dallow]

Meh. I put little thought into my posts, in addition to checking them. :D Plus us academics get paid to be un-parsimonious (if that's even a word) and vague. :D

They're time wasters at work, and more often than not just thrown out there to annoy others. Especially on game boards were people get riled up so easily. :DIt's hard to get riled up about games when one owns each system and can play just about anything he wants.
Rather than fret about introductory costs, support, etc.

[dmaul1114]

It's hard to get riled up about games when one owns each system and can play just about anything he wants.
Rather than fret about introductory costs, support, etc.


I know. And you aren't one of the ones that can get riled up over them. :D

I fret about the stuff you say, but still don't get riled up over games. I couldn't care less which console sells more etc.

I just buy what's priced reasonably, and play the games I want to play, and if I miss some great games on the system I don't own, then so be it. I don't have time to PLAY them all anyway. :D

But I don't think there's anything more pathetic than people with some kind of loyalty to one of the companies, and it's just too much fun to rile them up and watch the train wreck that results. Especially when stuck at a computer all day....

[mykevermin]

No doubt. But I take solace in the fact that my posts are still than the rest of you losers who actually care how you come across to the other nerds on internet boards. ;)

are still what, exactly?

Or is this one of those "I see what you did there" moments? (I'm giving you an easy out; go ahead and grab it.)

[dmaul1114]

No, just another example of sloppy typos from not giving a shit what I post or what people think of them. :D

But you can just treat it as a fill in the blank with your choice of words synonymous with things such as better, worthwhile etc. ;)

[Apossum]

No, just another example of sloppy typos from not giving a shit what I post or what people think of them. :D




then don't post.

[dmaul1114]

Nah, too much fun annoying people. :D

And with that, I'm out of the office for the weekend. See you hosers on Monday!

[Corvin]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: those who claim "PS3 has no games" are those who (1) aren't paying attention to the PS3 in the slightest, and are thus wholly unqualified to speak on whether or not the PS3, in fact, has games, or those (2) who seem to have a vested interest (mostly emotional, in gamers' cases, and occasionally financial) in believing that the PS3 will never have good games, so they feel compelled to lie to themselves and others about the PS3's games.

There is a third group you forget about. 360 owners that either already own a PS3 or are looking to buy one. To that crowd the PS3 has no games... that they haven't already played six months ago. 95% of the PS3 library is on the 360, so no, to them, there are no games.

This is the vocal minority. Only a handful have the budget for both and those that do are hardcore gamers that know the 360 is typically the lead sku and has the better version. That leaves a very small group of exclusives on the PS3 at the moment.

[mykevermin]

I don't see how the PS3 has no games to someone *looking* of buying one. There are very good games out there currently only on the PS3: Ninja Gaiden, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Virtua Fighter 5, Warhawk, Motorstorm...and more coming this fall. I'm not saying everyone should love every one of these games (I can admit I'm one of the few people who thought Lair was pretty fun - then again, I'm probably one of the few people who actually played the game). What I am saying is that, at this moment in time, there are a good number of excellent PS3 titles that are worth playing.

Moreover, they're diverse (FPS, action/adventure, racing, fighting, multiplayer fuck 'em up or whatever Warhawk should be called). When asked to cull the best exclusives for the 360, you can count the non-FPS games on one hand and still be able to pick your nose and give someone the finger all at once. Typically, people point to Halo 3, Bioshock, and Gears of War. All VERY fun games, but all games of the same genre - every now and then they'll mention Dead Rising, which is about the only exclusive that steps outside of the FPS genre.

I'm sure I'm just wasting breath, but I'm merely trying to point out that saying any of the three major consoles has "no games" is a total misnomer at this point, and comes from people who don't know a damned thing about whichever console they're talking about, or go out of their way to ensure that they don't support this or that particular console.

I'm curious about the perception of 360 games being the "better version." By what standards? Achievements? DLC? Disk space? Multiplayer? Frames per second? HD Resolution?

[benjamouth]

I agree with Myke in that saying that the PS3 has no games is crap. From my personal opinion it just doesn't have any games I want to buy it for at the moment.

If the PS3 had a few games exclusive to it like those I bought my first PS2 for I'd be all over one. I got my PS2 late in the day (bought it for GTA: San Andreas) but games like Wipeout, Twisted Metal, Rez, Gran Tourismo were the kinds of titles I couldn't get anywhere else and I just don't think the PS3 has hit that level yet.

But I think you're being very selective Myke about 360 exclusives being mostly FPS's, just from looking at my own collection theres Forza 2, Kameo, Amped 3, Viva Pinata, Ninety Nine Nights, Saints Row, Top Spin 2, Fusion Frenzy 2 (yeah ok :) ), Dead or Alive Xtreme 2 (sigh) etc

Again the PS3 has games, but as a 360 owner looking at what makes me want to buy one, there's not much.


I'm curious about the perception of 360 games being the "better version." By what standards? Achievements? DLC? Disk space? Multiplayer? Frames per second? HD Resolution?

Yeah, pretty much :)

[elmyra]

I don't see how the PS3 has no games to someone *looking* of buying one. There are very good games out there currently only on the PS3: Ninja Gaiden, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Virtua Fighter 5, Warhawk, Motorstorm...and more coming this fall. I'm not saying everyone should love every one of these games (I can admit I'm one of the few people who thought Lair was pretty fun - then again, I'm probably one of the few people who actually played the game). What I am saying is that, at this moment in time, there are a good number of excellent PS3 titles that are worth playing.

Moreover, they're diverse (FPS, action/adventure, racing, fighting, multiplayer fuck 'em up or whatever Warhawk should be called). When asked to cull the best exclusives for the 360, you can count the non-FPS games on one hand and still be able to pick your nose and give someone the finger all at once. Typically, people point to Halo 3, Bioshock, and Gears of War. All VERY fun games, but all games of the same genre - every now and then they'll mention Dead Rising, which is about the only exclusive that steps outside of the FPS genre.
Like Benjamouth, I agree with your basic premise, but the above is just ridiculous. You complained about a fallacious argument in your first paragraph and then did the exact thing you complained about in the next paragraph. Forza 2, Project Gotham Racing 3, Crackdown, Saints Row, Dead or Alive 4, Dead Rising (which you did mention) and Viva Pinata all reviewed well based on Game Rankings (http://www.gamerankings.com/) averages. Most of them also sold very well (only DoA4 and Viva aren't million sellers). None of them are first-person shooters, and they also cover diverse genres. But you certainly were clever about it, pick your nose and give someone the finger, hah!

[Blackout]

It's funny, people get blasted for being a "Sony loyalist" for "defending" PS3 but not when they do it for 360 or Wii :D

[Thomas96]

I don't see how the PS3 has no games to someone *looking* of buying one. There are very good games out there currently only on the PS3: Ninja Gaiden, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Virtua Fighter 5, Warhawk, Motorstorm...and more coming this fall. I'm not saying everyone should love every one of these games (I can admit I'm one of the few people who thought Lair was pretty fun - then again, I'm probably one of the few people who actually played the game). What I am saying is that, at this moment in time, there are a good number of excellent PS3 titles that are worth playing.

Moreover, they're diverse (FPS, action/adventure, racing, fighting, multiplayer fuck 'em up or whatever Warhawk should be called). When asked to cull the best exclusives for the 360, you can count the non-FPS games on one hand and still be able to pick your nose and give someone the finger all at once. Typically, people point to Halo 3, Bioshock, and Gears of War. All VERY fun games, but all games of the same genre - every now and then they'll mention Dead Rising, which is about the only exclusive that steps outside of the FPS genre.

I'm sure I'm just wasting breath, but I'm merely trying to point out that saying any of the three major consoles has "no games" is a total misnomer at this point, and comes from people who don't know a damned thing about whichever console they're talking about, or go out of their way to ensure that they don't support this or that particular console.

I'm curious about the perception of 360 games being the "better version." By what standards? Achievements? DLC? Disk space? Multiplayer? Frames per second? HD Resolution?


PS3 has no game, PS3 is crap, PS3 negativity comes from those who dont' own the system and people who either can't afford, or choose not to spend such a large amount of money to purchase the system. When you can't have something, you bad mouth it.... its just natural human {hater} behavior. The others who believe it, are just following the words of someone else; Or its just their pure choice. High prices breeds negativity. Sony/PS3 was doing well, before that E3 where they announced the "Price." If the PS3 could have started at maybe 399, and 499, then maybe there wouldn't have been so much negativity. But you'll see, as the prices come down, so will that wall of negativity towards the PS3...

[dmaul1114]

PS3 has no game, PS3 is crap, PS3 negativity comes from those who dont' own the system and people who either can't afford, or choose not to spend such a large amount of money to purchase the system. When you can't have something, you bad mouth it....

That's not true, at least not for me.

The 360 has been more than I'm willing to pay at $400 and now $350, especially with the failure rate. Yet there are several exclusvie games I want to play on it, and will likely by one when it's $300 or less.

With the PS3, there's just nothing I really want to play yet among the exclusive games. Resistance I played at my buddies, it's ok, but I'm not big into FPS. Pretty much only buy the AAA games like Halo, Bioshock etc. in that genre. Motorstorm looks, great, but I don't like racing games. Lair looks great, but the controls sound terrible (I hate tilt motion control in racing or flight games on the Wii, so doubt I'd like it here either). I don't play online, so Warhawk is out etc.

But I'd also never say that the PS3 has "no games." It just has no exclusives taht I really want to play right now, much less any to get me to buy the system. It will get more games down the line, and will start to get exclusives I want. And maybe I'll think more seriously of picking one up when the price falls some more and the game line up expands. And you're right, the negativity will lessen then. That's common sense. The negativity is because it was priced so absurdly high and the AAA games have been slow to come for a lot of people.

So, it's not envy, etc., at least with me. Again, I don't have any loyalty or hatred for any of these overpriced hunks of plastic. I just go where the games are, and where prices are right. I don't waste much (if anytime) defending any one console, or bashing the ones I don't have.

I just like to talk games, and I call em like I see em, and just state my personal opinions on consoles and their game libaries.

But their are plenty of fanboys out there who defend their console of choice to the death, and bash the hell out of the others just because they can't afford (or choose not to pay) for the them, so your point has some validity for sure.

Just don't overgeneralize it to assume that everyone who can't find any games they want to play on the PS3/enough games worth buying the system for is soem biased, bitter, jealous hater.

[elmyra]

But you'll see, as the prices come down, so will that wall of negativity towards the PS3...
Yeah, the PS3 gets a lot of grief because right now the number of good games is kind of low and the console is fairly expensive. It's dumb to think it'll always be that way, though. I suspect that by the holidays in 2008, there'll be a PS3 model available for under $400, and the game library will certainly be a lot better by then.

[Thomas96]

That's not true, at least not for me.

The 360 has been more than I'm willing to pay at $400 and now $350, especially with the failure rate. Yet there are several exclusvie games I want to play on it, and will likely by one when it's $300 or less.

With the PS3, there's just nothing I really want to play yet among the exclusive games. Resistance I played at my buddies, it's ok, but I'm not big into FPS. Pretty much only buy the AAA games like Halo, Bioshock etc. in that genre. Motorstorm looks, great, but I don't like racing games. Lair looks great, but the controls sound terrible (I hate tilt motion control in racing or flight games on the Wii, so doubt I'd like it here either). I don't play online, so Warhawk is out etc.

But I'd also never say that the PS3 has "no games." It just has no exclusives taht I really want to play right now, much less any to get me to buy the system. It will get more games down the line, and will start to get exclusives I want. And maybe I'll think more seriously of picking one up when the price falls some more and the game line up expands. And you're right, the negativity will lessen then. That's common sense. The negativity is because it was priced so absurdly high and the AAA games have been slow to come for a lot of people.

So, it's not envy, etc., at least with me. Again, I don't have any loyalty or hatred for any of these overpriced hunks of plastic. I just go where the games are, and where prices are right. I don't waste much (if anytime) defending any one console, or bashing the ones I don't have.

I just like to talk games, and I call em like I see em, and just state my personal opinions on consoles and their game libaries.

But their are plenty of fanboys out there who defend their console of choice to the death, and bash the hell out of the others just because they can't afford (or choose not to pay) for the them, so your point has some validity for sure.

Just don't overgeneralize it to assume that everyone who can't find any games they want to play on the PS3/enough games worth buying the system for is soem biased, bitter, jealous hater.



I wasn't trying to overgeneralize... I know that there are some people who simply choose the 360 over the PS3, and that's fine. I'm just like you, you have a 360 that you enjoy and that's your choice and that's fine. Whereas, I have a PS3 [and 360] and that's my choice. I got ps3 cause that's what I enjoy, thats my primary system, and the 360, is my secondary. For you it could be vice versa.. and its all good.

But... there is a PS3 hater population out there.. [along with Wii haters, and 360 haters]

[FoxHoundADAM]

I used to be a Sony diehard (PS1, PS2 and PSP) but I've really became a 360 lover as of late. I'll be getting a PS3 in time but I really enjoy my 360 and given the choice I'm sure I'll alway chose a 360 verision of a game of the PS3 counter part. Reason being, all my friends have a 360 and none have a PS3, and really I just feal like the 360 is more of a social envirmoent. At any time I can get a game invite from anyone or just simply chat while playing completely different games. While I origionally didn't thinkg this was a big deal I have really grown to love it.

[wwe101]

lets face it. the only thing that can stop the ps3 from completly failing is to drop the price to atleast $399, lose that blu ray format and stick an HD drive in there so developers can make the games faster (they are having some trouble putting the games on the blu rays). ohh and one more thing, A HUGE ASS LIST OF EXCLUSIVES. wait let me rephrase that, A HUGE ASS LIST OF GOOD EXCLUSIVES.:lol:

[elmyra]

lets face it. the only thing that can stop the ps3 from completly failing is to drop the price to atleast $399, lose that blu ray format and stick an HD drive in there so developers can make the games faster (they are having some trouble putting the games on the blu rays). ohh and one more thing, A HUGE ASS LIST OF EXCLUSIVES. wait let me rephrase that, A HUGE ASS LIST OF GOOD EXCLUSIVES.:lol:

:-s

[dmaul1114]

Blu ray is going no where. They just need to get price down to $400 as rumored, and down to $300 as soon as possible after that, get the AAA exclusives out and they'll be fine. Probably won't get back on top, but sales will pick up, they'll make money and finish this generation strong, and hopefully they'll have learned there lesson and launch the PS4 at $300-400 and make a strong push to get back on top.

[mykevermin]

Like Benjamouth, I agree with your basic premise, but the above is just ridiculous. You complained about a fallacious argument in your first paragraph and then did the exact thing you complained about in the next paragraph. Forza 2, Project Gotham Racing 3, Crackdown, Saints Row, Dead or Alive 4, Dead Rising (which you did mention) and Viva Pinata all reviewed well based on Game Rankings (http://www.gamerankings.com/) averages. Most of them also sold very well (only DoA4 and Viva aren't million sellers). None of them are first-person shooters, and they also cover diverse genres. But you certainly were clever about it, pick your nose and give someone the finger, hah!

I know that the 360 has a lot of good exclusive games (I don't do racers so much, but that and DOA4 aside, I own the games listed above). I think I was merely pointing out that when asked to name the 360's biggest (the "AAA," if you will) titles that give it an advantage over other consoles, Halo, Bioshock, and GoW are the most frequently mentioned. The system IS FPS heavy (but that may also be the direction the industry is heading, I suppose, as neither the Wii or PS3 are starved for them, either).

It's a weak argument (christ I'm hungover today and not really in the mood to discuss this ad nauseum as I typically would), but those other exclusive games are not, by themselves, system sellers. I think that's what separates the three FPS club: people DID buy new consoles for Halo 3, they surely will for GoW2, and...well, the jury's out on Bioshock, but a lack of multiplayer ain't going to do it any good as a system seller. The other games above, however, aren't going to cause a spike or surge in new system sales, IMO. Somebody (in this thread?) pointed out that 360s seem to die off at a much more noticeable and prominent rate when big games come out - GHII, GoW, Halo 3 - and that it's likely not because of bad discs/"killer" games, but, rather, that more people are playing their console more frequently (and that the seemingly higher death rate is an artifact of more people using their consoles).

...where was I? Oh. Perhaps Forza is a system seller by itself, but I don't see DOA, Viva Pinata, or Saints Row as pushing consoles out the door. They are useful, though...if you notice some of the more refined "PS3 has no games" arguers, you'll see that they're willing to drop $400/500 for a console when it has a number of games worth playing, rather than 2 or 3 they *might* play. So the list as you have it is a solid library, but individually, they're not "blockbusters."

lets face it. the only thing that can stop the ps3 from completly failing is to drop the price to atleast $399, lose that blu ray format and stick an HD drive in there so developers can make the games faster (they are having some trouble putting the games on the blu rays). ohh and one more thing, A HUGE ASS LIST OF EXCLUSIVES. wait let me rephrase that, A HUGE ASS LIST OF GOOD EXCLUSIVES.:lol:

Don't drink and surf. Take an advil, go to bed, wake up, and then surf.

[dmaul1114]

you'll see that they're willing to drop $400/500 for a console when it has a number of games worth playing, rather than 2 or 3 they *might* play. So the list as you have it is a solid library, but individually, they're not "blockbusters."


That's certainly a fair way to put it.

For me to buy a console, especially at the 360 and PS3 prices, it needs to have a good 4-5+ personal must haves AND a decent library of "might play" type games.

I've not bought a 360 yet, as there really aren't 4-5 absolute must plays that I haven't already played through at my buddy's place on his 360. Just really 2-3 must haves and a lot of "might plays" right now, and that's not worth the $350 price tag. Hit $300, and have stuff like Mass Effect out, and I'll be much more tempted.

With the PS3, threre are 0 absolute must plays for me right now, and just a couple of "might plays" so it's just not in the picture right now. Though that will change in 2008 when more games come out and prices fall.

[mykevermin]

If you're an RPG gamer, you might as well tell this generation of consoles to go to hell for 12 months, and get settled with a DS or PSP. I'm amazed that we've only had Oblivion and Blue Dragon so far (the former being dramatically nontraditional, the latter being pretty paint-by-numbers).

[dmaul1114]

If you're an RPG gamer, you might as well tell this generation of consoles to go to hell for 12 months, and get settled with a DS or PSP. I'm amazed that we've only had Oblivion and Blue Dragon so far (the former being dramatically nontraditional, the latter being pretty paint-by-numbers).

Yep. Amazingly few RPGs thus far. Probably due to the 360 not selling so well in Japan--though another poster in another thread (or maybe earlier in this, can't remember) pointed out that there were 10 or so strategy RPGs for 360 in Japan that will just never make it over) and PS3 not selling that well yet (and being early in it's life to have many long RPGs developed for it yet since they take a long time to produce).

Not much skin off my nose. I love RPGs, but just can't really get through them very often these days--5 or so hours a week for gaming after work and other hobbies/commitments makes it tough to play through 40+ hour games. Still like to try to do one a year or so when I have some vacation or something and can power through one.

DS is where it's at period so far this gen for me. Have played that a ton more than my Wii, and there have been more personal must buy games on it for me that I could find on the Wii, 360 and PS3 combined.

[elmyra]

I know that the 360 has a lot of good exclusive games (I don't do racers so much, but that and DOA4 aside, I own the games listed above). I think I was merely pointing out that when asked to name the 360's biggest (the "AAA," if you will) titles that give it an advantage over other consoles, Halo, Bioshock, and GoW are the most frequently mentioned. The system IS FPS heavy (but that may also be the direction the industry is heading, I suppose, as neither the Wii or PS3 are starved for them, either).

It's a weak argument (christ I'm hungover today and not really in the mood to discuss this ad nauseum as I typically would), but those other exclusive games are not, by themselves, system sellers. I think that's what separates the three FPS club: people DID buy new consoles for Halo 3, they surely will for GoW2, and...well, the jury's out on Bioshock, but a lack of multiplayer ain't going to do it any good as a system seller. The other games above, however, aren't going to cause a spike or surge in new system sales, IMO. Somebody (in this thread?) pointed out that 360s seem to die off at a much more noticeable and prominent rate when big games come out - GHII, GoW, Halo 3 - and that it's likely not because of bad discs/"killer" games, but, rather, that more people are playing their console more frequently (and that the seemingly higher death rate is an artifact of more people using their consoles).

...where was I? Oh. Perhaps Forza is a system seller by itself, but I don't see DOA, Viva Pinata, or Saints Row as pushing consoles out the door. They are useful, though...if you notice some of the more refined "PS3 has no games" arguers, you'll see that they're willing to drop $400/500 for a console when it has a number of games worth playing, rather than 2 or 3 they *might* play. So the list as you have it is a solid library, but individually, they're not "blockbusters.
Okay, if you want to talk blockbusters, I can agree that the games I listed aren't exactly system sellers (except for Viva Pinata! ;)). But really, I don't see the PS3 games you listed as system sellers or blockbusters, either. The PS3 is obviously going to get them - everyone talks about FFXIII, MGS4, and Gran Turismo 5. But did lots of people really buy a PS3 just because they had to play Heavenly Sword or Virtua Fighter 5? Will lots of people still care about those games in a year or two? None of the games you listed seem to be doing any better than the non-FPS games on the Xbox 360. Only Motorstorm and Resistance have sold really well so far, and still not any better than the second-tier games on the 360. I can agree that it's likely the PS3 will eventually have more genre variety in its blockbusters, when it gets them. There are some great looking non-FPS games coming for the Xbox 360, but I'm skeptical that Fable 2, Mass Effect and such are going to be huge system sellers.

Anyway, I think that all of the consoles are going to have lots of great games in a variety of genres eventually, just like last generation. I'm one of the people waiting for the PS3 to get a critical mass of games that I want to play - but my tastes are a little different, and some of the games I'm waiting for are coming out later. There's really no reason for me to buy now unless I get a fantastic deal (which I might if I can build a little more GameRush credit at less than 50% of face value). That's just me, though.

[Thomas96]

one question that needs to be asked.. can sony at least be number two this holiday season in sales.. [from Nov. through Dec.] with a price drop and the list of games they've got coming out. Honestly, Sony has some decent games ready for the holidays...

[soulvengeance]

one question that needs to be asked.. can sony at least be number two this holiday season in sales.. [from Nov. through Dec.] with a price drop and the list of games they've got coming out. Honestly, Sony has some decent games ready for the holidays...
It's possible, depending on what bundles they are going to offer. I'm sure that MS will offer some type of bundle around the holidays, I would expect that Sony would counter with something.

[Mechafenris]

If you're an RPG gamer, you might as well tell this generation of consoles to go to hell for 12 months, and get settled with a DS or PSP. I'm amazed that we've only had Oblivion and Blue Dragon so far (the former being dramatically nontraditional, the latter being pretty paint-by-numbers).

Surprises the heck out of me too... considering the wealth of possibilities we've only glimpsed with Oblivion. (and Eternal Sonata/Blue Dragon... to a lesser extent the slash'emups.) Sure some people complained there was a bit too much hand-holding on Oblivion (compared to Morrowind), but I liked Oblivion's story better than Morrowind's (I didn't ever play the expansions for it, though...) Oblivion _made_ me want to find out what happened next in the various faction quests, Daedric Shrine quests, and such... Knights of the 9 was sort of cliched, but I dug it nonetheless..)

I'd much rather play an RPG with an involving story over a long period of time than the short-burst shoot everything that moves FPS. (I like FPSes, but they're not a system must-have for me.)

Ah well... in the mean time I've got 48 metric tons of PS2 RPGs to play... (finish? I'm not so sure... heh.)

[dmaul1114]

one question that needs to be asked.. can sony at least be number two this holiday season in sales.. [from Nov. through Dec.] with a price drop and the list of games they've got coming out. Honestly, Sony has some decent games ready for the holidays...

Strongly doubt it. They have some decent games, but not really AAA system sellers.

Wii will win both because it's still selling out everywhere, and will get a big boost from Mario Galaxy and especially Super Smash Bros Brawl.

360 will keep selling well on the strength of Halo 3 and the other big games already out, and the holiday bundles will move more units.

PS3 will see a nice boost with the $400 price and some more games coming out, but will finish a little behind MS.

At least that's my prediction.

[dfo]

Oh, they can be "Number 2" all right. . . . Sorry, couldn't resist.

Seriously, though, unless Nintendo really blows it it's hard to imagine them dropping to third in sales (my kids are MORE excited about the CHEAPER system ... hmm, which should I buy?) So they'd have to overtake the 360, which doesn't seem likely without a killer exclusive game or two.

one question that needs to be asked.. can sony at least be number two this holiday season in sales.. [from Nov. through Dec.] with a price drop and the list of games they've got coming out. Honestly, Sony has some decent games ready for the holidays...

[Thomas96]

with the ps3 price drop, its going to take some sales away from 360 and Wii.. so it comes down to a matter of how many sales can PS3 get. HDTvs are expected to do well... this holiday seasons... BB is banking on it.. so you know with every HDTV sold that's a potential PS3 that could go right alont with it as a pure HD product.

[dmaul1114]

Don't get me wrong, like I said, the price drop will cause a good spike in sales. I just don't think it will be able to outsell the Wii (unless supply is super low) or the 360 with it's 2 game bundle coming.

As for HDTV sales, I wonder how many people buy an HDTV and another $400+ item at the same time? i.e. how many people by an HDTV, and also pick up a 360, or PS3, or standalone HD DVD/blu ray player at the same time?

I would think that would be relatively rare, as an HDTV is a huge expense for most people by itself. And it would seem likely that those with the money to make that kind of double purchase probably bought into HDTV a while back.

But who knows. Just some thoughts off the top of my head.

[Thomas96]

Don't get me wrong, like I said, the price drop will cause a good spike in sales. I just don't think it will be able to outsell the Wii (unless supply is super low) or the 360 with it's 2 game bundle coming.

As for HDTV sales, I wonder how many people buy an HDTV and another $400+ item at the same time? i.e. how many people by an HDTV, and also pick up a 360, or PS3, or standalone HD DVD/blu ray player at the same time?

I would think that would be relatively rare, as an HDTV is a huge expense for most people by itself. And it would seem likely that those with the money to make that kind of double purchase probably bought into HDTV a while back.

But who knows. Just some thoughts off the top of my head.


people have been known to pick up a tv and a home theater set... [which can be around 400 dollars] people break bread during the holidays...

[dmaul1114]

people have been known to pick up a tv and a home theater set... [which can be around 400 dollars] people break bread during the holidays...

That's certainly true. Wonder if more people due that than buy an HD/BR player or a game console?

An HDTV and a surround set up are the two keys to a good home movie/tv/sports/gaming set up, so those should be the first two buys on anyones list.

But I'm sure many are fine with just TV and DVD Player and/or game console. I could never go back to not having surround sound though.

[Thomas96]

That's certainly true. Wonder if more people due that than buy an HD/BR player or a game console?

An HDTV and a surround set up are the two keys to a good home movie/tv/sports/gaming set up, so those should be the first two buys on anyones list.

But I'm sure many are fine with just TV and DVD Player and/or game console. I could never go back to not having surround sound though.


remember, there's been some sales throughout the year, where the PS3/360 was packaged with an HDTV, with one sale the 360 was free. Sony could have a sale, where if you buy a sony tv over 599, then you get a 100 dollar rebate off the PS3, or blu ray player. Or vice versa, if you buy PS3 and HDTV(sony) then you get a rebate off the tv. The point would be just to get people to at least look at a PS3 when they buy an HDTV, or at least look at a Sony HDTV when they buy a PS3. imo it'd be more of a marketing ploy than sale.

[dmaul1114]

That's definitely a good idea marketing wise.

Not sure how many TVs Sony has between $599-1000 though, as the SDTVs are less than that, and most (perhaps all now) of their HDTVS are over $1000 MSRP. Only one I can recall seeing on sale for less than $1,000 was the 46in in the E2000 series, and those aren't being made anymore. So they'd probably have just do it on TV's $999 and up or something, and give more than $100 discount. At $1,000 plus, a $100 discount might not be enough enticement to shell out another $300+ for a PS3 for many.

But any kind of deal would certainly sell some more units.

[The Dord]

PC gaming is better then console gaming in every way shape and form. Its a fact.

Facts =! Opinions
Opinions =! Facts

Sorry, had to call you out on that.

[Vanigan]

Yow, they certainly don't teach logical fallacies in schools these days.

[Apossum]

Yow, they certainly don't teach logical fallacies in schools these days.


one guy making a logical fallacy =! schools not teaching logic these days. :-P jk

[Thomas96]

Have you guys been noticing what's being pushed via the commericals.. HD direct TV, HD Tivo, HDTV, HD cable services, etc... HD is the market that PS3 needs and its here. As HD gets pushed, the need for PS3 will rise.

[Punk_Raven]

Doesn't matter how much they push HD. If the prices don't come down then it won't work.

They also need to have instructions on how to actually get HD when you first turn the TV on as supposedly, most americans don't even have their HDTVs hooked up correctly.

[zman73]

Have you guys been noticing what's being pushed via the commericals.. HD direct TV, HD Tivo, HDTV, HD cable services, etc... HD is the market that PS3 needs and its here. As HD gets pushed, the need for PS3 will rise.

They HAVE to pusk HD with the government stepping in during 09 to take back analog frequencies

... that and people are so dumb about HDTV, they need to be schooled over and over on it

[The Mana Knight]

Doesn't matter how much they push HD. If the prices don't come down then it won't work.

They also need to have instructions on how to actually get HD when you first turn the TV on as supposedly, most americans don't even have their HDTVs hooked up correctly.Lol, most Americans don't even understand how their HDTV works and doesn't even know HD resolutions. It's really sad.

[zman73]

one question that needs to be asked.. can sony at least be number two this holiday season in sales.. [from Nov. through Dec.] with a price drop and the list of games they've got coming out. Honestly, Sony has some decent games ready for the holidays...
As an owner of all 3 consoles... I dont expect Sony to be better than third for a long while... certainly not this holiday... nintendo will overtake the 360 for top console overall in worldwide sales very soon, if it hasnt happened by now. I have no problem with Nintendo winning this round. Sony feels the need to shove some proprietary format down our throats every year.

... and there are so many people (including PS3 owners) who dont give a rats ass about hi def movie formats... myself... well I bought the PS3 primarily for the blu ray, but also have about 15 games for the system as well

[dmaul1114]

Yeah, I don't think pushing HD will drive PS3 sales much. It will help some in the long run, but not enough for them to get out of 3rd place and all likelihood, and certainly not enough to sell over 100 million like they did with the PS2.

It was simply a generation to early to push a high def movie playing gaming machine. Costs were too high for it and HDTV adoption to low at the start of the generation for such a machine to have any chance at PS2 level success.

[Alpha2]

HD is being pushed regardless of what Sony does, but they figure why not be on the cutting edge of the next trend so that they can be granfathered in when the switch finally happens. You dont get rich by waiting for the next big thing and tagging a long, you get rich by jumping into the pool early and risking things.

Sony has said numerous times they arnt in any rush to try an over take a system that already had a year lead when they launched. The wii is an exception because it's half the price of any system availible so OF COURSE it's going to do well in that type of environment. That's like trying to sell SNES against a 3DO and NeoGeo Guess which sold more?!

The PS3 isnt going anywhere, The price drop along with the slow but steady uptake in games is helping to build momentum. Most systems dont really get a good roll going on games until after the first year and the PS3 in the US is still just under a year old.

In the time the 36o has existed it's been outpaced by a system that has virtually nothing more than the same things the PS2 has with a few mediocre exceptions and a fancy controller, the 36o has blown it's load on the best titles it can produce and has nothing really exciting in the pipe, not to mention the difficulty in fitting hidef games on DVD. The PS3 has no where to go but up as the limitations of both competing systems start to show in the next year or two. It'll eventually become the default if you want to do something better console wise.

[Vanigan]

Actually, it has a few very interesting things in a pipe for 2008, but a lot of those are PC ports, I'd rather get them on my PC.

The interesting thing is, the bluray does help developers a bit. And that's not just spouting some company line either. I'm a student animator/3D artist, to produce an art asset that's of the quality needed to go into one of these recent games I've found it takes a lot of space. Then add to that animations, blend shapes, animated textures, then multiply it by the many characters, sets, and props needed for a game. That's a lot of space just for the art. Then on top there's audio in multiple languages, soundtrack, and any other extras they want on the disc.

But, make no mistake about it, one of the key reasons why Sony put the bluray disc on the PS3 is to help push that format over HDDVD, but to say it's done nothing for games is a bit foolish.

Espeically in the future as bigger, or at least more complex games come out as developers learn the hardware, that'll mean even more space used, and compression only goes so far before it starts making load times longer as the system must uncompress data, instead of just streaming it in on the hard drive and disc.

[Thomas96]

As an owner of all 3 consoles... I dont expect Sony to be better than third for a long while... certainly not this holiday... nintendo will overtake the 360 for top console overall in worldwide sales very soon, if it hasnt happened by now. I have no problem with Nintendo winning this round. Sony feels the need to shove some proprietary format down our throats every year.

... and there are so many people (including PS3 owners) who dont give a rats ass about hi def movie formats... myself... well I bought the PS3 primarily for the blu ray, but also have about 15 games for the system as well


people like HiDef, they do give a rats ass about high def products... even if they don't know how to use them. lol Even if 10 years from now Sony comes in third its not like they produced bad product. I don't think anyone with a PS3 can honestly say they don't like it. When making a system, you've got to make it easy for devs to make games for it, and the system can't be too expensive. Sony was too secretive about the PS3 specs for too long and even they're still learning how to use it... and where's the games from Kuturagi and Namco? [the ps3 experts]

[Thomas96]

Strongly doubt it. They have some decent games, but not really AAA system sellers.

Wii will win both because it's still selling out everywhere, and will get a big boost from Mario Galaxy and especially Super Smash Bros Brawl.

360 will keep selling well on the strength of Halo 3 and the other big games already out, and the holiday bundles will move more units.

PS3 will see a nice boost with the $400 price and some more games coming out, but will finish a little behind MS.

At least that's my prediction.

Rachet AAA
UT 3 AAA
and Eye of Judgement - sleeper hit.


Mario and Smash will do well cause their really isn't anything that great on the Wii, that's why those first party games look bigger than they really are. I don't think Galaxy is going to be great, but it'll sell well. But I don't think that smash and galaxy are going to actually 'push' Wii systems. [points to attachment rates] I got a feeling that 360 might not do as well as people think. They are definitely in danger in finishing 3rd.

overall PS3 has the best holiday lineup

[dmaul1114]

overall PS3 has the best holiday lineup

In your opinion of course. Ratchet will be good, but I can take or leave those games, and would take a new Mario over a Ratchet any day of the week.

As for best sellers, the big sellers this x-mas will be Mario Galaxy, Halo 3 (even though it came out in Sept, it will still sell big all fall) and Guitar Hero 3 IMO. Ratchet will sell well, but there aren't enough PS3s out there for it to be in the top 5 if even top 10.

[Vanigan]

Actually, I think Heavenly Sword briefly made it into the top 10 at number 7. Or it could have been a different PS3 game. So the market it still there.

One good thing overall is that all the major 3rd party games are multiplatform and have a PS3 version. Rock Band and Guitar Hero 3 most importantly.

I'm actually not sure of the Holiday lineups. The 3rd party stuff, as above, is pretty even since everything's multiplatform.

So far as I know, the main exclusives left for this year are Eye of Judgment, Ratchet and Clank, GT5 Prologue, Uncharted, Time Crisis 4, and Haze.

Anyone know what MS exclusives they're bringing to the table in these last 3 months? I haven't been following that side much. Halo 3 sales will of course follow into the holiday sales. There's Mass Effect too, but I can't remember what else. There were quite a few though.

[Thomas96]

In your opinion of course. Ratchet will be good, but I can take or leave those games, and would take a new Mario over a Ratchet any day of the week.

As for best sellers, the big sellers this x-mas will be Mario Galaxy, Halo 3 (even though it came out in Sept, it will still sell big all fall) and Guitar Hero 3 IMO. Ratchet will sell well, but there aren't enough PS3s out there for it to be in the top 5 if even top 10.


Halo 3... LOL already outsold by Orange box... [for the week]

The good thing for PS3 this holiday season is that there's going to a nice set of games for it. A Customer for PS3 won't be able to say that the PS3 doesn't have games, cause all the big 3rd party games, will be present on PS3 as well.


PS3

Haze
UT3
Ratchet
Eye of Judgement [sleeper]

[Vanigan]

Actually, the Orange Box only outsold Halo 3 for that week, not in total or first week sales.

So Halo 3 still has way more sales total, but I wonder how strong it'll be over the coming months? Probably will continue constant good sales through 2008.

Okay, so I've looked at the exclusives for the remainder of this month for the 360:
Ace Combat 6? Not sure how exclusive, but we'll just call it permanently exclusive because there's no point in arguing.
Viva Pinata: Party Animals
Mass Effect
America's Army

We can add Halo 3 simply because it's a big, big seller.

But, that's it. This Holiday the 360 relies on its strong 2007 lineup, which isn't a bad idea. Mass Effect also really helps the system as it's the first big western developed action/RPG.

Meanwhile, for the PS3 as far as I know there's: Eye of Judgment, Ratchet and Clank, GT5 Prologue, Uncharted, Time Crisis 4, and Haze.

While the PS3 has more games releasing around the holidays, there's a lot of there's been problem of PS3 exclusives lacking in certain areas, so people are apprehensive about these new 2007 titles. Not to mention two of the PS3 exclusives rely on peripherals like the Eye Camera and GunCon. However, the market has shown its more open to peripheral based games with Rock Band. I don't expect either game to be big successes, probably sleeper hits that'll have enough player support to get sequels.

I forget which company makes the GunCon, but they really should have invested in a new game to push the guncon, rather than a rehash. Or at least contacted a bunch of other developers and given them free guncons and dev kits so that they could integrate such functionality in their games.

Ratchet and Clank is the most well known, with most buzz around the game saying it's a good sequel, doesn't add too much new, but a worthy addition to the Ratchet and Clank series.

Uncharted, we can't say too much about. It looks good from the videos, and the demo at comic-con I played was good despite control issues. We'll have to see upon its release.

GT5 Prologue is going to get sales, I know there's other racers out there, but GT has always been pretty strong in the racing market, and this will probably continue.

Haze is an unknown, just like Uncharted, it looks pretty good, especially with the confirmed 4 player co-op. The nectar mechanic is interesting, but that's the only unique thing about the setting really. I think at the very least it'll be a very good game to play over the PSN, perhaps replacing resistence. Holding over FPS players until Killzone 2, or some yet unannounced project comes out 2008.

Overall though, this holiday season the whole idea of "ps3 has no games" dies. Between the exclusives, and the many multiplatform games, the PS3 finally has a worthy library.

[torifile]

IMO. Ratchet will sell well, but there aren't enough PS3s out there for it to be in the top 5 if even top 10.
I think this is key. Halo 3 sold 3+ million copies already. There aren't even 3 million PS3s out there.

[dmaul1114]

Actually, I think Heavenly Sword briefly made it into the top 10 at number 7. Or it could have been a different PS3 game. So the market it still there.


I meant top ten for the whole holiday season, not just for release week.

[Thomas96]

Actually, the Orange Box only outsold Halo 3 for that week, not in total or first week sales.

So Halo 3 still has way more sales total, but I wonder how strong it'll be over the coming months? Probably will continue constant good sales through 2008.




That was the point I was trying to make by the fact that orange box has already begun out selling it. [halo 3]

[dmaul1114]

That was the point I was trying to make by the fact that orange box has already begun out selling it. [halo 3]

But Halo 3 will still end up being a top Q4/holiday seller, and keep driving 360 sales, and your early comment was about who would win the holiday season, not one particular week.

[zewone]

LULZ @ anyone who thinks The Orange Box will outsell Halo in total sales.

[Thomas96]

But Halo 3 will still end up being a top Q4/holiday seller, and keep driving 360 sales, and your early comment was about who would win the holiday season, not one particular week.


oh my point in mentioning Halo 3 one week lapse is just to say that during the holiday season it wont be the top selling game. Not during Nov and Dec. Maybe Mario Galaxy[assuming that's still coming out this year, cause its been really low buzz on that game] and lets not forget Mass Effect... there's just too many games and Halo 3 like all games when released lose some of their novelty - same reason why for at leat one week orange box was on top.

torile said that there aren't 3 million ps3s in the US, which is funny and sad at the same time. Even if PS3 has a AAA title for this holiday season, its not like they really have the user base to oust Halo 3, Mario, and the other big titles.
Sony is out of this race 2007 holiday season, they just need to get as many sales as they can muster. Because this year they aren't in a position to win. However they can set themselves up for next year Jan/Feb, and thus for the entire 2008 year.

[Vanigan]

I meant top ten for the whole holiday season, not just for release week.

And my response was addressing your argument that the PS3 didn't have enough consoles out there to generate noteworthy sales. It does have enough consoles out ther to generate noteworthy sales. Now it just needs some good games to sell.

[dmaul1114]

And my response was addressing your argument that the PS3 didn't have enough consoles out there to generate noteworthy sales. It does have enough consoles out ther to generate noteworthy sales. Now it just needs some good games to sell.

It can generate noteworthy sales, just not top 5 (or maybe top 10) for a whole quarter in the US, especially the holiday quarter.

Latest numbers I saw in an article yesterday were 1.9 million PS3s, 4.5 million Wiis and 6.8 Million 360s--was an article about 360 selling well in Sept. with Halo and PS3 sales being "dismal" that month.

So yes, the base is there to have some big sellers. But hard to in a quarter when your installed base is that much smaller than the others as sells will bottom out faster.

[dmaul1114]

oh my point in mentioning Halo 3 one week lapse is just to say that during the holiday season it wont be the top selling game. Not during Nov and Dec. Maybe Mario Galaxy[assuming that's still coming out this year, cause its been really low buzz on that game] and lets not forget Mass Effect... there's just too many games and Halo 3 like all games when released lose some of their novelty - same reason why for at leat one week orange box was on top.


Oh I agree. But it will still be in the top 10, and possibly the top 5, when all uis said and done as it will sell to pretty much everyone who buys a 360 with the new Bundle deal, or gets one for x-mas etc.


torile said that there aren't 3 million ps3s in the US, which is funny and sad at the same time. Even if PS3 has a AAA title for this holiday season, its not like they really have the user base to oust Halo 3, Mario, and the other big titles.
Sony is out of this race 2007 holiday season, they just need to get as many sales as they can muster. Because this year they aren't in a position to win. However they can set themselves up for next year Jan/Feb, and thus for the entire 2008 year.

Exactly what I've been saying all along, including in my post above this one. With 1.9 million in the US right now, they just don't have the base to sell enough games in Q4 to come in higher than third in Q4 hardware or software sales.

They just need to get as many consoles in homes as they can and hope to have a strong 2008.

[Thomas96]

The good thing is that PS3 sales are on par with 360 sales from its first year, but Sony definitely needs to make a hard push this chrismas. The PS3 is a big purchase, and people wait till this part of the year to make those big purchases.

Sony has a cheap system present.. nice set of holiday exclusives, they just need a nice holiday marketing campaign.

How many PS3s does sony need to sale (minimal) to be successful?

[Corvin]

How many PS3s does sony need to sale (minimal) to be successful?

How do you define successful?

1. successful in sales? They need to triple to quadruple their sales each month to just compete with the 360 and Wii, and that is just to maintain their 3rd place status right now. To make it to #2 or even #1 they would have outsell the 360 or Wii every month to even stand a chance at catching up. It could be a while.

2. successful in revenue? They lose on every unit so it will be a long while before this happens.

3. successful in woo-ing third party support back? See #1.

[dmaul1114]

Yeah, I couldn't put a number on it. All I could say is they need to at least come close to tying MS for second fro me to consider it remotely successful.

And I doubt the Sony execs would even consider than a success after dominating the past two gens. By those standards it has no chance at being a success.

[Thomas96]

How do you define successful?

1. successful in sales? They need to triple to quadruple their sales each month to just compete with the 360 and Wii, and that is just to maintain their 3rd place status right now. To make it to #2 or even #1 they would have outsell the 360 or Wii every month to even stand a chance at catching up. It could be a while.

2. successful in revenue? They lose on every unit so it will be a long while before this happens.

3. successful in woo-ing third party support back? See #1.




successful measured by sales of consoles = x and x = how many console does sony need to sale this holiday season. 1 million 2, 3, 4, etc. If Sony can come in 1st or 2nd in consoles sales, then that's definite success, however that's not too likely at this point, however, even at 3 there's at least a minimal amount of sales that they need to make. oh the Wii only has one great holiday title... mario... if price was the main issue, then for this holiday its been solved, so lets see what PS3 can do.

[Corvin]

That's true. If price is truly the defining problem with the PS3 then that argument disappears in a week since the PS3 will now be at the price the 360 was when it launched.

[dmaul1114]

Yeah, if you're talking success for just this holiday season, then 2nd place in console sales would be it (as the Wii is unstoppable).

But I don't see that happening either with the 360 being $50 cheaper with 2 games and stuff like Halo, Bioshock, Mass Effect etc. enticing more people to buy one or ask for one for X-mas.

That's true. If price is truly the defining problem with the PS3 then that argument disappears in a week since the PS3 will now be at the price the 360 was when it launched.

Still not totally true. At $400 it's still $150 more than the Wii, $120 more than the 360 Arcade pack and $50 more than the 360 premium that now comes with two decent games.

Price is less of a barrier now, but it's still a deterrent to buying one coupled with still lacking that absolute 1005 must play AAA system seller type game it's bound to factor into many potential buyers' minds.

[The Mana Knight]

Okay, I'm going to say things you all may not believe I'm saying. I posted this same thing at PSU (where I tend to not be so fanboyish, more so a little more critical of PS3).

I'll admit, I am getting a bit worried myself, although I honestly hope the big step up in advertising helps.

I remember last gen, for the most part, PS2 was the "cool" system to own. Yeah it lacked online, no multi-tap, and IMO was barely a step above PS2 (all it did was add a DVD player, improved the graphics, and had a slightly better controller) and it was insanely popular. At the beginning, Xbox was hated on, where people tried to find faults with Halo (Yes, this was true at one point). GC seemed to be a tad cool near launch, but quickly started to fade after RE remake came to it. Around the Holiday season in 2002 and outwards, it seemed like PS2 and Xbox were the cool consoles, while GC was not. Although people bash the GC a lot (I own one myself and although it wasn't my favorite console, I feel the console deserved more credit than people gave it). So with this generation, it seems like Wii and 360 are the cool consoles to own. Although PS3 might have sold out at launch, things were not exactly looking good because it seemed like the cool thing to do was to buy a PS3 just to Ebay it. And once the pricing came down on ebay and scalpers stopped buying them, it just seemed like the mass market didn't care about a PS3. I dunno if it was lack of advertising or something.

Although many have said themselves, with PS2 still selling well, it shows many have not upgraded and they are still possible PS3 owners (and with PS2 stuff still selling well early this year). Okay, I use to think the exact same thing myself, but I noticed something. I pretty much assumed Guitar Hero III on PS2 would outsell 360, Wii, and PS3 (well, maybe not 360, but at least Wii). Well, PS2 came in 3rd it seems (PS3 selling half of that). That doesn't even equal half of what the 360 version sold. And with Madden and other sports games this year, the 360 version really outsold the PS2 + PS3 version together (I think). And oh course PS2 sales have dropped a bit. Now, if these games were still selling insanely hot on PS2, I would assume people weren't upgrading, but since that doesn't seem to be the case, it seems like many people have upgraded, but just not to a PS3.

Without a doubt IMO, the PS3 is a pretty big upgrade compared to what PS2 was (IMO, bigger than 360 from Xbox and Wii from GC), but it seems to have made little difference. This may be a stupid assumption, but I kind of wonder if PS3 going to the classic black colored console has hurt a little, because the iPod white seems to be the "in color" for electronics (Some may bring up the Elite, but it seems to me the Premium still greatly outsells it). It worries me a little that PS3 doesn't even seem to exists to people (in NA especially). It seems like a Wii and 360 are the only consoles, along with PS2. Sony continues dropping the price and it still barely helps. I'm even getting worried that if PS3 was priced at $200-$300 with several great games, it would still have problems selling.

Please, understand that I'm not trying to say doom and gloom for PS3 (because I absolutely love mine and would love it to do well), the trend I'm seeing really doesn't look good (partially because PS3 is still to release good games and 3rd party games are looking just as good on PS3 now, or most I should say). Things could turn around because they certainly did for the original Xbox (to where it even outsold PS2 in the year 2004 in NA, but was still too far behind). Although, there's no denying this is having a tad effect on me and causing me to greatly consider a Wii (I was going to buy one anyway) and make that my main console (since it's doing well and I do like Japanese type games). At least it seems to be getting 2nd in Japan and most of Europe, so PS3 might still stay my favorite console overall.

[Corvin]

I'm sorry but if anyone buys a $400 console because it's the "cool" system to have, they are a moron. You buy the console with the games you like. Period.

I do have to agree with the new direction with the commercial. A definite improvement that should help.

[Inf^Shini]

OK...tell me what this means for Blu Ray and the PS3 :/

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6182641.html?tag=latestnews;title;1

and

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/09/sonys-stringer-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-battle-a-stalemate/
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/09/1528235

[Vanigan]

Not too difficult to figure out.

The cell didn't turn out as promised, it's still a good chip, but not that much better than the more standard PC-like architectures. Well, at least for now, there's been good results, but the problem is teaching every single game programmer and technical director how to use the new architecture.

So, they moved to offload the development of the cell and manufacturing of the chips for some cash, while focusing their money on getting games for the PS3.

The thing is, I suspect that the HD-DVD group is making some seriously gutsy moves right now. I'm sure they paid paramount and that other studio a whole lot of money to be exclusive. And those cheap HD-DVD players are interesting... You see, I don't recall any reports that said HD-DVD components and manufacturing were that much cheaper. It's likely they farmed out the manufacturing to the lowest cost sweat shops in china and then subsidized the price much like how Sony is subsidizing the PS3. However, unlike the PS3 HD-DVD players cost a lot less so a little subsidizing goes a long way.

I think these two moves were meant to coincide with the holiday season, a big, and likely costly move to get share. No one knows if it'll pay off, but it probably will. However, Bluray was very much winning up until that point, and the HD-DVD group knew it. Sony is buried in the PS3 race, so they can't respond to the price drop as quickly. We'll see something to respond out of the bluray camp, but who knows if it'll be before or after the holidays.

[zewone]

Sony put all their eggs in one basket (the PS3).

They thought it would be a run away success, based on the previous performance of the past two Playstations.

They bet too much on the PS brand name alone and arrogantly made poor business decisions, and it seems now they've finally come to the realization that there is more to be number one, than just a name.

They are now making moves to try and fix their past wrongs, only time will tell if they will pay off.

[Vanigan]

I don't think "all the eggs" is a good metaphor for this one, can't think of the right metaphor though.

But yes, it was clearly arrogance. The system itself wasn't bad, but they clearly didn't do the research nor prepare for the global competition in the way MS did. It was all brand name alone, what with the way their multiplayer, store, and friends system were tacked on. Add to that the higher price and the only reason why the PS3 isn't a complete failure was that they had the money and the will to do what was necessary to get the PS3 successful. It also helped a lot that despite the cost, the PS3 was a very good piece of hardware, meanwhile the 360 suffered greatly from the obviously rushed release of its hardware.

Oh yes, it's more like they were counting their chickens before they hatched.

[The Mana Knight]

Not too difficult to figure out.

The cell didn't turn out as promised, it's still a good chip, but not that much better than the more standard PC-like architectures. Well, at least for now, there's been good results, but the problem is teaching every single game programmer and technical director how to use the new architecture.

So, they moved to offload the development of the cell and manufacturing of the chips for some cash, while focusing their money on getting games for the PS3.

The thing is, I suspect that the HD-DVD group is making some seriously gutsy moves right now. I'm sure they paid paramount and that other studio a whole lot of money to be exclusive. And those cheap HD-DVD players are interesting... You see, I don't recall any reports that said HD-DVD components and manufacturing were that much cheaper. It's likely they farmed out the manufacturing to the lowest cost sweat shops in china and then subsidized the price much like how Sony is subsidizing the PS3. However, unlike the PS3 HD-DVD players cost a lot less so a little subsidizing goes a long way.

I think these two moves were meant to coincide with the holiday season, a big, and likely costly move to get share. No one knows if it'll pay off, but it probably will. However, Bluray was very much winning up until that point, and the HD-DVD group knew it. Sony is buried in the PS3 race, so they can't respond to the price drop as quickly. We'll see something to respond out of the bluray camp, but who knows if it'll be before or after the holidays.We all know MS are the ones behind pushing HD-DVD further. They love to kill off their competition and want to do whatever it takes to kill Sony off. This is one reason I'm highly against supporting MS even if 75% of the games were on their platform. I just don't support their business tactics.

Since Blockbuster is blu-ray exclusive, and blu-ray has exclusive support from Sony, Disney, and 20th Century Fox, they are still in it. IMO, Sony has done most of their job, it's just that the other companies supporting them need to step it up (It seems like Sony is doing most work themselves).

As for the Cell, Sony is still keeping it for the PS3, but they aren't going to use it in various products, which was their previous plan I guess. Most of the reason for the high PS3 tag is because of how expensive the Cell is and it really drained Sony a lot of money.

I also think Sony was planning to release PS3 in 2007/2008, but MS early launch forced them to release earlier than expected.

For the last time, Sony isn't anymore arrogant that MS and Nintendo.

The reason for the current PS Store layout is because there isn't enough RAM (due to the XMB eating up too much currently) to integrate it into the XMB, which is why it's a webpage. Sony isn't a software company and its why they have problems with it (the same reason why MS can't figure out their hardware problems).
I'm sorry but if anyone buys a $400 console because it's the "cool" system to have, they are a moron. You buy the console with the games you like. Period.

I do have to agree with the new direction with the commercial. A definite improvement that should help.I'm being very serious here. Back when I was in H.S., despite PS2 having a pretty terrible lineup of games early on, it was the "cool" thing to buy a PS2, and "not cool" to own a Dreamcast. Later on, it was "cool" to own a PS2 and "not cool" to own an Xbox (eventually changed to GC). Now these days in H.S., it's like every H.S. and college student has to get a 360. Not just because of games, but because it's what everyone owns and it's currently considered "cool". One reason why Sony did so well in the past was because they were considered "cool". I know a decent number of PS2 owners whose console is mostly filled with launch games (and nothing new). They bought it when it was considered "cool" and eventually wore off.

[dmaul1114]

We all know MS are the ones behind pushing HD-DVD further. They love to kill off their competition and want to do whatever it takes to kill Sony off. This is one reason I'm highly against supporting MS even if 75% of the games were on their platform. I just don't support their business tactics.


I'm no fan of MS as a company, not by a long shot but you've got some serious, sony knob slobbering blinders on if you don't think Sony wanted to do the same thing.

The PS1 and PS2 were huge successes and just dominated the industry. They wanted the PS3 to continue to rule the video game industry, to get blu ray players in home so the could rule the HD home movie market, and intoduce Tivo like functions etc. so they could rule the living room.

They're every bit as greedy as MS in those regards, they've just failed miserably so far.

Companies are only in business for the bottom line. One of many reasons why I have no loyalty to any of these companies or their over priced hunks of plastic, and will never understand fanboyism.




And buying a console just because it's cool? Sorry, gaming isn't "cool" period, so I couldn't care less which system is considered "cool" when deciding what to buy. But given that past thread of yours with your list of like 100+ things that make you a nerd, I could see why you'd have an obsession with trying to be cool.

[Mechafenris]

OK...tell me what this means for Blu Ray and the PS3 :/

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6182641.html?tag=latestnews;title;1
and
http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/09/sonys-stringer-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-battle-a-stalemate/
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/09/1528235

1. That means the PS4 isn't guaranteed to be a cell-based system. ;)

2&3. That means Sony (and the HD-DVD folks, though they're not saying yet) are frustrated that the format isn't taking off like the "new" DVD. People are apathetic about the new HD formats and are staying away from them. Who can blame them? As limited as their basic information is (not everyone is willing to spend time scouring the internet for anything more than the superficial stuff anyway), the great unwashed sees waffling between formats from big movie houses like Paramount (and Michael Bay decrying the move claiming Blu-Ray is the ticket) as confusing at best. And within that, they see that if the studios don't know, how are they supposed to pick? So they wait until their smarter geekier neighbor (if they have one) picks a format for them... or worse yet, a best buy or CC goon does.

These are unfounded opinions and conjecture.... (I'm not an analyst... and I'm not an industry insider). Sony's sales are picking up, but they've got lots of ground to cover... Microsoft's still having their cake in the US, losing in Japan, and as for Europe... I get conflicting reports... (not sure what's happening there...)

I am satisfied with my purchase, and I'm not worried that Sony's going to pull a Sega next year... it's a huge company... they aren't going to concede to Microsoft that easily. :)

There's a big repositioning that's happening... things are becoming more and more about portables (look at laptop sales, the explosive market for cell-phones in Japan and places that don't have a craptacular infrastructure dominated by idiots like here in America)... The PSP is enjoying a bigger boost now thanks to new items in the lineup and greater exclusive titles (exclusive to portable... not PS2 ports, I mean.) I've never really had a problem with that aspect, but I'm not a typical user of the PSP, I suppose.

We're going to see the Wii hit critical mass any day now... because like everything else, those who have one will have one... and those who want one will have one as well... and that's not a bad thing for Nintendo, but it'll stop the rampant supply problems they've been having since launch... and sales will start to level off.. that isn't an indication of failure on N's part either. (so keep those cards and letters..)

And as for "cool" factor... the only people addicted to that intangible are being told what to buy anyway... and it's not consoles. ;)

[Thomas96]

Okay, I'm going to say things you all may not believe I'm saying. I posted this same thing at PSU (where I tend to not be so fanboyish, more so a little more critical of PS3).

I'll admit, I am getting a bit worried myself, although I honestly hope the big step up in advertising helps.

I remember last gen, for the most part, PS2 was the "cool" system to own. Yeah it lacked online, no multi-tap, and IMO was barely a step above PS2 (all it did was add a DVD player, improved the graphics, and had a slightly better controller) and it was insanely popular. At the beginning, Xbox was hated on, where people tried to find faults with Halo (Yes, this was true at one point). GC seemed to be a tad cool near launch, but quickly started to fade after RE remake came to it. Around the Holiday season in 2002 and outwards, it seemed like PS2 and Xbox were the cool consoles, while GC was not. Although people bash the GC a lot (I own one myself and although it wasn't my favorite console, I feel the console deserved more credit than people gave it). So with this generation, it seems like Wii and 360 are the cool consoles to own. Although PS3 might have sold out at launch, things were not exactly looking good because it seemed like the cool thing to do was to buy a PS3 just to Ebay it. And once the pricing came down on ebay and scalpers stopped buying them, it just seemed like the mass market didn't care about a PS3. I dunno if it was lack of advertising or something.

Although many have said themselves, with PS2 still selling well, it shows many have not upgraded and they are still possible PS3 owners (and with PS2 stuff still selling well early this year). Okay, I use to think the exact same thing myself, but I noticed something. I pretty much assumed Guitar Hero III on PS2 would outsell 360, Wii, and PS3 (well, maybe not 360, but at least Wii). Well, PS2 came in 3rd it seems (PS3 selling half of that). That doesn't even equal half of what the 360 version sold. And with Madden and other sports games this year, the 360 version really outsold the PS2 + PS3 version together (I think). And oh course PS2 sales have dropped a bit. Now, if these games were still selling insanely hot on PS2, I would assume people weren't upgrading, but since that doesn't seem to be the case, it seems like many people have upgraded, but just not to a PS3.

Without a doubt IMO, the PS3 is a pretty big upgrade compared to what PS2 was (IMO, bigger than 360 from Xbox and Wii from GC), but it seems to have made little difference. This may be a stupid assumption, but I kind of wonder if PS3 going to the classic black colored console has hurt a little, because the iPod white seems to be the "in color" for electronics (Some may bring up the Elite, but it seems to me the Premium still greatly outsells it). It worries me a little that PS3 doesn't even seem to exists to people (in NA especially). It seems like a Wii and 360 are the only consoles, along with PS2. Sony continues dropping the price and it still barely helps. I'm even getting worried that if PS3 was priced at $200-$300 with several great games, it would still have problems selling.

Please, understand that I'm not trying to say doom and gloom for PS3 (because I absolutely love mine and would love it to do well), the trend I'm seeing really doesn't look good (partially because PS3 is still to release good games and 3rd party games are looking just as good on PS3 now, or most I should say). Things could turn around because they certainly did for the original Xbox (to where it even outsold PS2 in the year 2004 in NA, but was still too far behind). Although, there's no denying this is having a tad effect on me and causing me to greatly consider a Wii (I was going to buy one anyway) and make that my main console (since it's doing well and I do like Japanese type games). At least it seems to be getting 2nd in Japan and most of Europe, so PS3 might still stay my favorite console overall.


I see your point and I have to agree with it. Sony was the cool system up until they announced the price at E3... and that immediately turned people off. But its up to Sony to change things around. and so far I'm pleased with what they're doing. Free online, lowered price skus, games. Sony still needs that game that makes people flock to the PS3. MGS4, God of War III, those are games that can bring some customers, and if you can get some customers to the system, then they'll stay because you got all the little extras that people can enjoy - Little Big Planet, Home, Free online, etc.

that lack of games, or no games argument should be thrown out the door, as of last month.

[zewone]

What happened last month that should make the no games argument be thrown out?

I don't own any games for my PS3 and I don't plan on buying any until MGS4.

[Inf^Shini]

Thanks for elaborating guys, I'm getting a bigger picture and understanding what in the world is going on. I tend not to follow this stuff to closely so I'm in the dark half the time >.>

What happened last month that should make the no games argument be thrown out?

I don't own any games for my PS3 and I don't plan on buying any until MGS4.
That argument should be cut down a bit (but I guess not completely void til next year?) by the end of this month with all the releases coming out/have come out.

[Vanigan]

The PS3 is getting a ton of games on November 20th and also in early December, the no games argument is dead as far as I'm concerned and starts a good precident for 2008.

[Corvin]

We all know MS are the ones behind pushing HD-DVD further. They love to kill off their competition and want to do whatever it takes to kill Sony off. This is one reason I'm highly against supporting MS even if 75% of the games were on their platform. I just don't support their business tactics.

:lol: Umm, no. Take off those Sony shades and open your eyes. One, MS only supported HD because Blu-ray uses Java. MS is anti Java. The PC market is their bread and butter, gaming doesn't make them shit and they are merely protecting the market they dominate. That was the reason for going HD over BD.

Two, beyond your first sentence above, the rest is laughable at best. Do you know nothing of the Playstation's past with Nintendo? They released the PS to crush Nintendo due to the way they were treated on their joint CD based platforming venture. It was all about quantity over quality. Much like the Wii, Sony allowed/put out as much software(aka, shit) as they could to crush the N64 library. Sony aren't the saints you think they are, and are merely repeating history themselves.

Third, Sony is the company that shoe-horned BD into their PS3 just to overtake Toshiba and the HD camp. AKA "They love to kill off their competition and want to do whatever it takes to kill [the competition] off." They thought it would be their Trojan horse to push their proprietary format to the masses. How's that for business tactics? They go to their stock holders and say, "BD may not take off by itself, but if we put it into the PS3 and make it sound like it is required for gaming our 100 million customers will eat it up regardless of the cost." How could the stock holders say no?

And before the flames start, I'm an apple guy, and own all 3 consoles this gen. I've got no ties to MS, just trying to enlighten those that have been trapped in Sonyland for so long.

[Mechafenris]

:lol: Umm, no. Take off those Sony shades and open your eyes. One, MS only supported HD because Blu-ray uses Java. MS is anti Java. The PC market is their bread and butter, gaming doesn't make them shit and they are merely protecting the market they dominate. That was the reason for going HD over BD.

Two, beyond your first sentence above, the rest is laughable at best. Do you know nothing of the Playstation's past with Nintendo? They released the PS to crush Nintendo due to the way they were treated on their joint CD based platforming venture. It was all about quantity over quality. Much like the Wii, Sony allowed/put out as much software(aka, shit) as they could to crush the N64 library. Sony aren't the saints you think they are, and are merely repeating history themselves.

Third, Sony is the company that shoe-horned BD into their PS3 just to overtake Toshiba and the HD camp. AKA "They love to kill off their competition and want to do whatever it takes to kill [the competition] off." They thought it would be their Trojan horse to push their proprietary format to the masses. How's that for business tactics? They go to their stock holders and say, "BD may not take off by itself, but if we put it into the PS3 and make it sound like it is required for gaming our 100 million customers will eat it up regardless of the cost." How could the stock holders say no?

And before the flames start, I'm an apple guy, and own all 3 consoles this gen. I've got no ties to MS, just trying to enlighten those that have been trapped in Sonyland for so long.

Very insightful. Distilled down for the cheap seats: Corporations are evil... it's just a different one on top at any given moment... We should not weep for Sony, nor should we believe that nintendo is simply those two funny looking guys in the Yaris on the commercial.

This is a cutthroat industry, and since it's been getting more and more important, we're seeing more overt cutthroat behavior....

I am pretty much platform agnostic, and I won't hesitate to point out the inherent evil in each corporation (even apple... I love Apple products, but their corporate position isn't exactly benign or benevolent.... heck, no company's is.)

Show me a corporation that is honest, cares for its customers, isn't out to take over the world, and is solidly a good corporate citizen and I'll show you one that's out of business. ;)

[dmaul1114]

The PS3 is getting a ton of games on November 20th and also in early December, the no games argument is dead as far as I'm concerned and starts a good precident for 2008.

The "no games" argument was always lame. Now, "no games that interest me" is what people should have been saying as that's subjective.

[mykevermin]

The "no games" argument was always lame. Now, "no games that interest me" is what people should have been saying as that's subjective.

Indeed. If you really can't find a single thing you want to play on the PS3, you're trying too hard.

[Thomas96]

:lol: Umm, no. Take off those Sony shades and open your eyes. One, MS only supported HD because Blu-ray uses Java. MS is anti Java. The PC market is their bread and butter, gaming doesn't make them shit and they are merely protecting the market they dominate. That was the reason for going HD over BD.



I think you're wrong on that account.. MS went with HD DVD not because of something as simple as Java. MS long admitted that they would considered using blu ray it won. As a matter of fact initally I don't think they were going to support either format. Not to say that they ONLY went with HDDVD to spite sony, but I think its naive for anyone on either side of the argument to say that MS considered the fact that Blu ray is Sony's product. If they would have went with Blu ray they'd have a better system, and a better product to compete against Sony.. Blu ray is the one feature that MS don't have, and if HDDVD goes under then you got a bunch of customers who just wasted their money.

[Thomas96]

What happened last month that should make the no games argument be thrown out?

I don't own any games for my PS3 and I don't plan on buying any until MGS4.

you don't plan on buying any NES games [probably] either, but that doesn't mean they aren't available. That's another problem about this whole format war... people get their own options and decisions confused with the status of the market [or rather PS3 market] Just because you're not buying games doesnt mean they're not there.

[torifile]

I'm just bumping this thread to see how PS3 owners are feeling nowadays. (I was searching for "Bioshock" to see if there are any rumors of its release on the PS3, but I digress...)

Personally, I'm feeling better and better about it. No buyer's remorse this time around for me.

[DarkNessBear]

I have always been active in the console wars (been on the PS3 sides) but really listening to 1upYours and Sam Kennedy really made me stop caring about the console wars because he said that it's not really a war. Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft are not going to drop out or fail... so how the hell are we going to know who won?

Nobody even knows who won last generation. Nobody ever talked about it, they just went to the next generation.

All 3 are doing so damn well, it doesn't matter. This aint Sega Saturn vs. PS vs. N64, where one fails completely. And this aint like Bluray vs HDDVD where won has to drop out.

So, I am done.

[Unickuta]

[quote=willardhaven;3391727The 360 is America's system... Joe gamer loves it no matter how many times he has to replace it or send it in to be repaired. Don't worry if you bought the PS3 to play the aforementioned series.[/quote]

No, the 360 is the "hardcore" system. It's not America's system like the PS2 was- at least not yet.

Actually, I never think it will, because it has such limited appeal *cough*shooters*cough*. The Wii is stuck in the past, so it will die out soon, and that leaves a big hole for the PS3, which has broad appeal. The only thing holding it back is the price point.

[Unickuta]

Nobody even knows who won last generation. Nobody ever talked about it, they just went to the next generation.

Actually, the PS2 won handily...notice that there are no more Xboxes and GameCubes in stores?

[Unickuta]

They bet too much on the PS brand name alone and arrogantly made poor business decisions, and it seems now they've finally come to the realization that there is more to be number one, than just a name.

When I think "arrogant," I think Microsoft.

[torifile]

No, the 360 is the "hardcore" system. It's not America's system like the PS2 was- at least not yet.

Actually, I never think it will, because it has such limited appeal *cough*shooters*cough*. The Wii is stuck in the past, so it will die out soon, and that leaves a big hole for the PS3, which has broad appeal. The only thing holding it back is the price point.
The Wii is innovative. The HD thing sorta sucks, but the possibilities are great. I only have a problem with the sensor bar not work right for me and the online friends system blows. Those are both fixable.

[Thomas96]

OMG.. where'd this thread come from.

[Thomas96]

Looking at the situation now... I definitely don't think there's something to worry about in regards to the PS3. I definitely think that the PS3 is worth every penny. The PS3 may not out sell the 360 for a long time, but PS3 owners, know that they're going to get good games, the 360 isn't going to eat up exclusives like in the past. The PS3 isn't a waste of money and I think that's what people want to make sure of. At least I do... I paid 600 dollars for my PS3, and of course I want it to do well.. so that it'll get more support. Its not that I care so much about Sony [although I do enjoy their products] but when you invest money in a PS2, PSP, PS3, etc you want to make sure that your money doesn't go down the drain... [like with those that bought HD-DVD] Overall PS3 doing well... what's there to worry about now?

[DarkNessBear]

Actually, the PS2 won handily...notice that there are no more Xboxes and GameCubes in stores?

Yea, but some can argue that it's because they were just moving on to the next thing, not resigning from the war.

You can argue that. But you cannot argue that HDDVD lost.

I just think in a war, there has to be a clear winner and loser at the end. And how are we suppose to determine that exactly? Sales? Who stays the longest? Who has the best games? But then that just depends on your preference.

I believe the PS2 was the best console of last generation, but there are still a lot of people that hate everything on the PS2 and love everything on the Xbox or GC. (Just look at the debates in the PS3 threads...)

[snowsquirrel]

At the time I originally started this thread, I was concerned the Sony was in big trouble. Blu-Ray only had a marginal lead, and PS3 sales were stagnant. I wasn't expecting Sony to walk away from gaming, but if they had, I wouldn't have been entirely shocked.

How do I feel now? Glad you asked. I really under estimated Europe. Obviously the PS3 was going to sell the most in Japan, and 360 in NA, but Europe became the swing vote. And it looks like the the PS3 will do fine there.

Then the Blu-Ray factor. Until Time-Warner, I really thought HD-DVD had a chance to beat Blu-Ray. The more mature feature set, and lower cost of production. No matter who the winner was, I really thought the war would go on for another year. But the fact that it ended so quick, and conclusively, will likely move a lot of PS3's, though it will drive the attach ratio down initially as people buy the PS3 for Blu-Ray players.

If Sony can string together a bunch of killer exclusives to take advantage of peoples new Blu-Ray players, that would do a lot to change the opinion of people who call it a Blu-Ray player.

Today, I would say, that I will be shocked if PS3 and 360 don't end up having nearly the same amount of sales in the long term. This is a win for the consumer.

~S