Is the PS3 still a Rare item or is no one interested

[quote name='mykevermin']Actually, if you care to examine the sales numbers icruise posted, you'd see that they sold just around 185,000 PS3 units in Japan in November, and since the sales figures at the end of December were just around 385,000 for the year, that's not exactly "picking up," as you said. But, again, forgive me for providing numbers. I'm just a fanboy with data. I forgot you have the power of *KOTAKU*. :roll:



Sales fall after christmas? Well, slap my ass and call me silly, but you're a regular god-damn Nostradamus, aren't you?


Here's where things get interesting. Remember, of course, that *I'm* the one being accused of being a fanboy here, because I dare defend the indefensible PS3, a product only a fool would own (according to objective and detailed analysis taken from *KOTAKU*, right?).

The *ONLY* fact you're playing with above is Microsoft's switch from the current chip to a 65nm one, and that a release is forthcoming. *EVERYTHING* else you're dealing with is a carefully scripted scenario of "what ifs," while there is no evidence to suggest any of this will happen. Well, I did that five months ago with the Cincinnati Bengals, and they sure aren't making the Super Bowl.

The point is, aside from the switch to a smaller chip, everything you have suggested is mere speculation on your part. Moreover, it ignores key PS3 releases in coming months, it assumes that Sony will fail to support and update the PS3 to alleviate some of the issues people legitimately have with it, and plays into this idea of a performance that just goes to cleanly in Microsoft's favor and against Sony's. Moreover, it also ignores that Japan refuses to buy the 360. Blue Dragon has increased overall sales of the 360 almost 30% for the year, in just the last few weeks. It will take a great deal, however, and far more than a smaller chip and a lower price to entice Japanese consumers. That, of course, is the reality you choose to ignore in favor of playing out your Rube Goldberg equation of how things are going to work. There are really only two competing consoles for the next several years in Japan, and you'd be dead wrong to think that the PS3 won't be one of them. But, of course, we wouldn't want you to be inconsistent, would we?

The price drop didn't mean squat in Japan; if you want a fucking blog post, Kotaku the mighty had an article a year ago about how stores couldn't sell 360 systems for far less than retail. The price drop already happened in Japan, and it meant nothing. You can import a Core 360 with Blue Dragon (so you have the added cost of a new game as well as import markup) for the same price as a brand new Core 360 costs in the US: $299 (http://www.ncsxshop.com/cgi-bin/shop/64S-00078.html)

Moreover, that smaller chip, quieter and cooler 360? Please do remind me when that was initially planned to be released again? I could use some prompting. 'ppreciate it.

Look, I welcome a price drop on the 360. I think it would be fantastic. That way, we can begin to discuss how overpriced the Wii is, since it would be $50 more than a core 360. ;)

Sorry to clutter your logic up with more numbers and facts. Maybe you can dig up something at the Drudge Report to hurl back at me? Something about Nancy Pelosi, perhaps?


Well, to be fair, MS started the "two-tier console" trend, and set a precedent where people buying the low-end would find that they eventually *HAD* to upgrade to do everything they wanted with the system. That's not the case with the PS3, but it appears to be quite evident that the "lower price = less than" conclusion holds fast for the PS3, as few people realize they can buy a 20GB PS3, upgrade the HDD for under $100 if they *need* the space (y'don't, yet), and the wifi and memory card readers are overrated, as is the chrome finish. I say this as a 60GB owner, full disclosure.

Guin, you's thinkin' like I'm thinkin'. It's good to see some reason in here, without any of my smarminess.[/quote]

hahahahahahaa

havent you figured it out yet? IM PUSHING YOUR FANBOY BUTTONS!

im gunna do a rundown anyway just to push some more :p

- youre right sales werent picking up PRODUCTION WAS. so increased production and sales remaining the same. what does that tell you?

- sales after xmas going down in the US is normal (but dont forget they would go down for the 360 as well. and i predicted a RATIO). also very few japanese celebrate xmas besides as a novelty.

- MS's move to 65nm (which yes they have decided to put off *im going to take a guess and say its because they saw the NPD sales of the 360 vs the ps3 & the ps3s attach rate. figured hey we can put this off another 6 months save some money {building fabs fast costs $$$$$$ an avg fab is a billion, a 65nm fab.. just ask intel} & make some more money in sales in the process*) it's what happens w/ all semiconductors if you pay attention to the market :p new fab, price reduction.

- you can expect a wii price drop as well. Nintendo's actually made money on every 1 of the Wiis; and quite a fair sum. MS is breaking even on the 360s now & PS3 is in the hole roughly $200-220/unit according to analysts.


p.s. ha-ha :booty:

this is fun:bouncy:
 
[quote name='icruise']This is where Sony screwed up the most, in my opinion (aside from the supply issues). If they had come out with only the 20GB of PS3 at $500, I don't think the sticker shock would have been nearly as bad.[/quote]

You're forgetting why this occured: HDMI. Originally Sony was going to make that the $100 distinction, but felt the backlash and put it in both models making the difference between the two consoles negligible.
 
[quote name='propeller_head']- youre right sales werent picking up PRODUCTION WAS. so increased production and sales remaining the same. what does that tell you?[/quote]

prove it. This is pure speculation, and nothing you can support.

sales after xmas going down in the US is normal (but dont forget they would go down for the 360 as well. and i predicted a RATIO). also very few japanese celebrate xmas besides as a novelty
Click to expand...
Your lack of knowledge of christmas in Japan is equal to your general lack of knowledge.

Moreover, prediction=speculation. One thing you failed to address in this post, and actually enhanced, was that you're making nothing but assumptions. You had one fact on your side, but as we'll see in a moment, you managed to fuck up the one good thing you had going.

- MS's move to 65nm (which yes they have decided to put off *im going to take a guess and say its because they saw the NPD sales of the 360 vs the ps3 & the ps3s attach rate. figured hey we can put this off another 6 months save some money {building fabs fast costs $$$$$$ an avg fab is a billion, a 65nm fab.. just ask intel} & make some more money in sales in the process*) it's what happens w/ all semiconductors if you pay attention to the market :p new fab, price reduction.
Click to expand...

So, because it costs Microsoft an immense amount of money to produce a new processor, they delayed the release several months. Yet, despite this massive cost incurred, this will come coupled with a price *cut*? Explain that to me, please. Moreover, you justify the delay based on the cost of the facility and development, yet fail to realize that, if the chip is truly cheaper to produce, they want it on store shelves as soon as possible. If they can sell you a cheaper-for-them-to-make 360 for $300/400, why would they purposely avoid that?

You're right about one thing; you are pushing my buttons. You're making me dizzy with your tautological arguments. The new chip is so expensive to make that its release was delayed, yet when it is released, it will be so cost effective that they can drop the price of it.

Jesus.

- you can expect a wii price drop as well. Nintendo's actually made money on every 1 of the Wiis; and quite a fair sum. MS is breaking even on the 360s now & PS3 is in the hole roughly $200-220/unit according to analysts.
Click to expand...
Now a Wii price drop is pure speculation, yet again. You had one fact on your side, and blew that all to hell. All you're left with are speculations that, while some may come true (and I expect some of them to), are built on this far-out-of-reality premise that is scripted to suit your individual preferences, and don't handle reality very well.
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']You're forgetting why this occured: HDMI. Originally Sony was going to make that the $100 distinction, but felt the backlash and put it in both models making the difference between the two consoles negligible.[/QUOTE]
True, but irrelevant to my point, which is that they should have kept the pricing as close to their competition as possible. They were either overestimating the power of the Playstation brand or the attraction that Blu-ray would have for people. I still think the PS3 is going to come out on top, and I totally agree that any speculation about the future of the PS3 or of Sony itself based on this launch is ludicrous. But still there are a lot of things they could have done differently to make the launch less of a perceived failure.

[quote name='mykevermin']
Your lack of knowledge of christmas in Japan is equal to your general lack of knowledge. [/QUOTE]
Well, actually he's mostly right on that one point. People in Japan do not celebrate Christmas in the same way as they might in the US. It's either for kids, or as a romantic holiday for young couples, but few people are going to be buying or receiving a PS3 for Christmas in Japan. It would be like getting a PS3 for Valentine's Day or Halloween. The point being that you can't expect a sales spike around Christmas time in the same way that you might in the US.
 
You realize that you guys aren't busy discussing how awesome the Wii is

but discussing the PS3, its sales, its future

That alone indicates where the system is headed, people will talk about it, people will always be paying attention to it

And in the end, people WILL buy it. Every error that gets fixed, every big game that's released, gets someone to buy a PS3.

Plus the PS3 has one huge advantage...

You don't hear people saying "Oh, yeah, the Wii's great, I'm waiting until this game comes out to get one"

but you do hear people saying that about the PS3...some people waiting for DMC...or FF...or MGS..or fighting games, or what not.

So if you really believe that the Wii's going to be on top of the PS3 for its lifecycle, you seriously need to realize what you're saying..and how utterly wrong it is.

Of course, if you happen to believe that about the Wii, then you probably believe the Wii will cut it two years from now..
 
[quote name='mykevermin']prove it. This is pure speculation, and nothing you can support.


Your lack of knowledge of christmas in Japan is equal to your general lack of knowledge.

Moreover, prediction=speculation. One thing you failed to address in this post, and actually enhanced, was that you're making nothing but assumptions. You had one fact on your side, but as we'll see in a moment, you managed to fuck up the one good thing you had going.



So, because it costs Microsoft an immense amount of money to produce a new processor, they delayed the release several months. Yet, despite this massive cost incurred, this will come coupled with a price *cut*? Explain that to me, please. Moreover, you justify the delay based on the cost of the facility and development, yet fail to realize that, if the chip is truly cheaper to produce, they want it on store shelves as soon as possible. If they can sell you a cheaper-for-them-to-make 360 for $300/400, why would they purposely avoid that?

You're right about one thing; you are pushing my buttons. You're making me dizzy with your tautological arguments. The new chip is so expensive to make that its release was delayed, yet when it is released, it will be so cost effective that they can drop the price of it.

Jesus.


Now a Wii price drop is pure speculation, yet again. You had one fact on your side, and blew that all to hell. All you're left with are speculations that, while some may come true (and I expect some of them to), are built on this far-out-of-reality premise that is scripted to suit your individual preferences, and don't handle reality very well.[/quote]
prove it? are you retarded? sony publicly said they were having produciton problems. and they publicly said they fixed them and production drastically increased. pay attention.

christmas in japan = decorations in malls. thats xmas in japan. sorry to burst your bubble. whens the last time you were in Akihabara during xmas?:roll:

no prediction and speculation are different words.

prediction is closer to prognostication

speculation is more like conjectural thought

like i said. superglue this conversation to the back of your brain. cause when it happens i want you realize the fanboy you are. only by accepting your disease can you begin to cure it :rofl: oh and dont forget the little voice in your head gloating and making you feel like an idiot:bomb:

- its not a new core. its the same core; just smaller. yes they delayed it, becuase building FAST costs MORE $$$$$ than building sloooww. also yes it will come w/ a price cut because the chips are CHEAPER to make. (it's the fab that costs $$$$) and they will have the fab for at least 4-5 more yearly cycles. so the cost of building it is offset in the long run. (you know kind of how sony's trying to offset their huge losses w/ blu-ray, cell, & ps3 royalties?) yes, this is what the world affectionately refers to as Business.:applause: also, i should warn you about taking our lords name in vain. HE WILL STRIKE YOU DOWN!! PAT ROBERTSON SAYS SO!

- as for the wii price drop. wait and see. it doesnt take nostradamus to predict the obvious. Wii touts itself as the budget alternative of the masses w/ ingenuity that appeals to non-gamers too. the very fact that theyve been making huge profits from the very first 1 sold means that they CAN drop the price whenever they feel the need to. ooooooo. wait for it, wait for it. BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRNEED!!!!!

\\:D/:hot::rofl::wave::beer::argue::boxing::joystick:
 
[quote name='sarausagi']You realize that you guys aren't busy discussing how awesome the Wii is

but discussing the PS3, its sales, its future

That alone indicates where the system is headed, people will talk about it, people will always be paying attention to it

And in the end, people WILL buy it. Every error that gets fixed, every big game that's released, gets someone to buy a PS3.

Plus the PS3 has one huge advantage...

You don't hear people saying "Oh, yeah, the Wii's great, I'm waiting until this game comes out to get one"

but you do hear people saying that about the PS3...some people waiting for DMC...or FF...or MGS..or fighting games, or what not.

So if you really believe that the Wii's going to be on top of the PS3 for its lifecycle, you seriously need to realize what you're saying..and how utterly wrong it is.

Of course, if you happen to believe that about the Wii, then you probably believe the Wii will cut it two years from now..[/QUOTE]

Hate to break your fanboy bubble but talking about a system and throwing down 5 or $600 on it are two totally different things. Most of the stuff on the PS3 is negative anyway.

You're also wrong about people not talking about specific games on the Wii. Take off the Sony rose colored glasses and look around.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']..

You don't hear people saying "Oh, yeah, the Wii's great, I'm waiting until this game comes out to get one"

[/QUOTE] hahaha. dude. It's more like "Do you have wii? I want one right now! gimme gimme gimme!"
 
[quote name='propeller_head']prove it? are you retarded? sony publicly said they were having produciton problems. and they publicly said they fixed them and production drastically increased. pay attention.[/quote]
So, in the absence of data, you rely on what Sony PR says?

christmas in japan = decorations in malls. thats xmas in japan. sorry to burst your bubble. whens the last time you were in Akihabara during xmas?:roll:
Click to expand...
given how icruise phrased it, you're right here, and only here. It's ultimately irrelevant to the matter at hand, and I can at least be satisfied that *I* can admit when I argued incorrectly. That's one of us.

no prediction and speculation are different words.

prediction is closer to prognostication

speculation is more like conjectural thought
Click to expand...

You're arguing semantics, my darling. Predictions are based on data, something you seem to be scared to death of. Did you make your impressive "prediction" based on some photographs from kotaku, or were you using OLS regressions to examine the trends of system sales? Someone so deathly afraid of numbers shouldn't bandy about the word "prediction" so mightily.

like i said. superglue this conversation to the back of your brain. cause when it happens i want you realize the fanboy you are. only by accepting your disease can you begin to cure it :rofl: oh and dont forget the little voice in your head gloating and making you feel like an idiot:bomb:
Click to expand...
Please explain to me how I am a fanboy. Because I disagree with you? If I'm a fanboy of anything on this world, it's pointing out that you have no concept of argument or concession.

- its not a new core. its the same core; just smaller. yes they delayed it, becuase building FAST costs MORE $$$$$ than building sloooww. also yes it will come w/ a price cut because the chips are CHEAPER to make. (it's the fab that costs $$$$) and they will have the fab for at least 4-5 more yearly cycles. so the cost of building it is offset in the long run. (you know kind of how sony's trying to offset their huge losses w/ blu-ray, cell, & ps3 royalties?) yes, this is what the world affectionately refers to as Business.:applause: also, i should warn you about taking our lords name in vain. HE WILL STRIKE YOU DOWN!! PAT ROBERTSON SAYS SO!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the 090-level economics lesson. I understand that R&D and overhead are included in the price of hardware. What you've failed to explain, however, is your far-beyond-fuzzy logic that I pointed out in the previous thread. Is it cheaper to build slowly when the costs can be recouped faster by having it on the market? Maybe. Is it cheaper to "build the factory slow"? Perhaps, though I'm not sure how.

Moreover, if, as you claim, these plants cost $1B (or can cost that much), then it's foolish to suggest, whether they come out now, or six months from now, that an immediate price drop will be coupled with it (and, beyond that, that it will be a respective 33% and 25% slash in prices). Today or June, Microsoft still needs to make up the cost of building that plant.

- as for the wii price drop. wait and see. it doesnt take nostradamus to predict the obvious. Wii touts itself as the budget alternative of the masses w/ ingenuity that appeals to non-gamers too. the very fact that theyve been making huge profits from the very first 1 sold means that they CAN drop the price whenever they feel the need to. ooooooo. wait for it, wait for it.
Click to expand...

Now, you see, you've been making all these arguments, and fail to realize what I'm even saying. Let me be very clear. I'm not saying the 360 price won't drop. I'm not saying the Wii won't drop.

I am saying, however, that you have absolutely nothing in your arsenal, aside from pure, unadulterated speculation, founded in absolutely no provable or verifiable information whatsoever, to prove your point.

Could the 360 price drop? Very well could. Could the Wii? Very well could. Could the PS3? Very well could. Is it more reasonable or likely for one company over another? Indeed it is.

In the end, you're trying to assure me that these points of your are gospel truth, but they're just bullet points that you have faith in, no different from God or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that you claim will happen. You're so convinced of it being the truth that you can't fathom that you're just expecting these things to happen, and that it's just the script you wrote for Sony's demise. You have no better idea what the next year will be like that I do, toots.

That's all I'm saying; not that you're incorrect, but, rather, just making shit up. There's a significant difference there I hope you can appreciate.

Until you can prove anything at all, then I bid you adieu.
 
[quote name='sparklecopy']hahaha. dude. It's more like "Do you have wii? I want one right now! gimme gimme gimme!"[/QUOTE]

What I'm saying is that the people who WANT ONE, want it RIGHT NOW, they're either Nintendo loyalists [gamers] or mainstream consumers who were convinced the minute they saw it or demoed it or played it as someone's house.

There is no one sitting on the fence or waiting for certain games to come out. In other words, the PS3 has shoe in buyers a year or year and a half from now: people who would love to have one but are waiting for a price drop or are waiting for more games or certain games to come out.

In a year and a half, everyone who wants a Wii, will have one. There is no one saying "Oh, I want a Wii, but I'll wait until it is $149 and game X comes out"

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']So, in the absence of data, you rely on what Sony PR says?


given how icruise phrased it, you're right here, and only here. It's ultimately irrelevant to the matter at hand, and I can at least be satisfied that *I* can admit when I argued incorrectly. That's one of us.



You're arguing semantics, my darling. Predictions are based on data, something you seem to be scared to death of. Did you make your impressive "prediction" based on some photographs from kotaku, or were you using OLS regressions to examine the trends of system sales? Someone so deathly afraid of numbers shouldn't bandy about the word "prediction" so mightily.


Please explain to me how I am a fanboy. Because I disagree with you? If I'm a fanboy of anything on this world, it's pointing out that you have no concept of argument or concession.


Thanks for the 090-level economics lesson. I understand that R&D and overhead are included in the price of hardware. What you've failed to explain, however, is your far-beyond-fuzzy logic that I pointed out in the previous thread. Is it cheaper to build slowly when the costs can be recouped faster by having it on the market? Maybe. Is it cheaper to "build the factory slow"? Perhaps, though I'm not sure how.

Moreover, if, as you claim, these plants cost $1B (or can cost that much), then it's foolish to suggest, whether they come out now, or six months from now, that an immediate price drop will be coupled with it (and, beyond that, that it will be a respective 33% and 25% slash in prices). Today or June, Microsoft still needs to make up the cost of building that plant.



Now, you see, you've been making all these arguments, and fail to realize what I'm even saying. Let me be very clear. I'm not saying the 360 price won't drop. I'm not saying the Wii won't drop.

I am saying, however, that you have absolutely nothing in your arsenal, aside from pure, unadulterated speculation, founded in absolutely no provable or verifiable information whatsoever, to prove your point.

Could the 360 price drop? Very well could. Could the Wii? Very well could. Could the PS3? Very well could. Is it more reasonable or likely for one company over another? Indeed it is.

In the end, you're trying to assure me that these points of your are gospel truth, but they're just bullet points that you have faith in, no different from God or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that you claim will happen. You're so convinced of it being the truth that you can't fathom that you're just expecting these things to happen, and that it's just the script you wrote for Sony's demise. You have no better idea what the next year will be like that I do, toots.

That's all I'm saying; not that you're incorrect, but, rather, just making shit up. There's a significant difference there I hope you can appreciate.

Until you can prove anything at all, then I bid you adieu.[/quote]
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
AND SO THE DANCE CONTINUES!! roflmao

- absense of data? what would you have me do, overnight you sony's official internal memos about production #s? get real:whistle2:#

- yes i was right about the xmas, as i am right about EVERYTHING muuHAHahHAHA you will see. youre gunna keep arguing w/ me cause of your pride, but your fanboy pride will be CRUSHED come june. and ill prolly not be on this board anymore, or even remember this convo im having (while intoxicated btw :lol:). but im happy now knowing that you wont be in 6 months :p OOOOHHHH YEEEAAAAA!!

- I'M ARGUING SYMANTICS!?? YOURE THE 1 who brought it up :wave:

- youre a fanboy because i said so. because you argue against simple logic.. because. hmm here's an illustration to help you out
destructoid-dot-com-fanboy-anatomy.jpg


- 090 economics? oh im sorry, where i went to college the dumdum class was called 101:drool: though im glad u can grasp these overly simply concepts. my dog sparky took a whole hour to.. :whistle2:--) why is it cheaper to build the factory slow? ask a contractor. supply/demand

- what part of long run dont you understand? they dont just blow up the plants when they're done w/ them. they contract out to other companies, or use them for other products. w/ an investment that large, its not like buying sticks of gum. you dont buy it and consume it in a day.

- and im saying the Wii will drop. the 360 will drop. and the PS3 will drop. all next year. superglue that to your brain. cause its going to happen. why? because of TRENDS, you know; the thing multi billion $ venture capitalists and hedge fund analysts use to predict future market conditions? the world of business isnt chatoic like youre trying to pass it off as. its carefully planned & coordinated. thats the way the world works.

- ohh and as for sony's demise. i never said that. though i really should just to make you go BaNanAs :bomb:. here's my prediciton. Sony's not going anywhere. Blu-Ray will saturate 2/3 of the HD market. dual format players will become common. every1 will switch to VC-1 cause MPEG-2 sucks (so MS still wins). the 360 will win in sheer numbers before the next gen gets introduced. the PS3 will continue selling after the xbox 720 or whatever the hell thell call it comes out, for another 2 years. sony will release another slim version of it like they did the ps2. the next xbox console will incorporate HD-DVD. the PS4 will still encorporate Blu-Ray but it will use a new mulit-layer 60GB version still touting their capacity blah de blahblahblah. nintendo will come out w/ something on par w/ the 360 & ps3s graphics w/ some even more inventive input. probably some kind of video/motion capture that will put a virtual you inside a game.

the end.

thats the way it plays out. when it happens make sure to kick yourself in the ass and yell "IM A DUMB FANBOY!" 3 times. then do 3 full turns to the left and 3 full turns to the right and put your finger on your nose and your other finger on your head and jump on one leg while reciting the alphabet backwards. only then will you be cured of the disease that is FANBOYISM!:hot::-({|=:beer::pray::360::ps3::wii:O:):bouncy::booty::applause:\\:D/ :whistle2:\"
 
[quote name='sarausagi']What I'm saying is that the people who WANT ONE, want it RIGHT NOW, they're either Nintendo loyalists [gamers] or mainstream consumers who were convinced the minute they saw it or demoed it or played it as someone's house.

There is no one sitting on the fence or waiting for certain games to come out. In other words, the PS3 has shoe in buyers a year or year and a half from now: people who would love to have one but are waiting for a price drop or are waiting for more games or certain games to come out.

In a year and a half, everyone who wants a Wii, will have one. There is no one saying "Oh, I want a Wii, but I'll wait until it is $149 and game X comes out"

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.[/quote]
nope. wii will go down in price to be about the same cost as a standalone dvd player. it will contine to sell to people who never considered themselves gamers. people who never even heard of the wii. people who simply see it at the store and think "that's nifty. i should get one and show it to gladice *typical old lady name*" the Wii is what brings gaming to the masses. it's a bridge. & its whats going to keep nintendo going into their next iteration.

just wait and see. youre going to see games which dont really fit into any established genre pop up for the wii in the coming years.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']What I'm saying is that the people who WANT ONE, want it RIGHT NOW, they're either Nintendo loyalists [gamers] or mainstream consumers who were convinced the minute they saw it or demoed it or played it as someone's house.

There is no one sitting on the fence or waiting for certain games to come out. In other words, the PS3 has shoe in buyers a year or year and a half from now: people who would love to have one but are waiting for a price drop or are waiting for more games or certain games to come out.

In a year and a half, everyone who wants a Wii, will have one. There is no one saying "Oh, I want a Wii, but I'll wait until it is $149 and game X comes out"

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.[/QUOTE]

Heaven forbid, there actually might be enough of a market for all three without needing a loser this generation. (and I think this is the case, even the GameCube didn't do so poorly last generation, profitwise) I just hope I don't have to waste $500 on that crap sony is dishing out to play some games. I want them on 360 and Wii.

It's just foolish to say that you can't have a "thorough, lavish gaming experience" on Wii. Hardware doesn't mean anything. You don't need the bells and whistles and normal maps and blu rays and 512MB of ram to enjoy a videogame. That's just a technology race, and it's how Sony justifies their $500 hardware with Blu-Ray snuck in there. You really should rethink this arguement because it makes you look like an ass, and someone who is only concerned about graphics. Because obviously, "lavish gaming experiences" weren't possible until the PS3 and 360 came along.

Last point, do you really think that any of the aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, girlfriends, and mothers that bought or recieved a Wii this christmas are going to give two shits about Devil May Cry 5? About a series which they've never heard of and can't control for the life of them? Or are they going to hop on Xbox live and start curb stomping in Gears of War? Or maybe it's all those other fantastic PS3 exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4. But wait, that'd require them to know what MGS1-3 was about to give a crap about that. Well maybe they'd like Halo 3. Oh. Same deal.

Don't pretend like these are people that are going to be so quickly converted to gamers like yourself, with tastes like yourself. The things that sell PS3 and 360 are so much different than what they're interested in. The people who play and love Wii sports would yawn at what we consider "system sellers" so your point is invalid, as is your logic.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Heaven forbid, there actually might be enough of a market for all three without needing a loser this generation. (and I think this is the case, even the GameCube didn't do so poorly last generation, profitwise) I just hope I don't have to waste $500 on that crap sony is dishing out to play some games. I want them on 360 and Wii.

It's just foolish to say that you can't have a "thorough, lavish gaming experience" on Wii. Hardware doesn't mean anything. You don't need the bells and whistles and normal maps and blu rays and 512MB of ram to enjoy a videogame. That's just a technology race, and it's how Sony justifies their $500 hardware with Blu-Ray snuck in there. You really should rethink this arguement because it makes you look like an ass, and someone who is only concerned about graphics. Because obviously, "lavish gaming experiences" weren't possible until the PS3 and 360 came along.

Last point, do you really think that any of the aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, girlfriends, and mothers that bought or recieved a Wii this christmas are going to give two shits about Devil May Cry 5? About a series which they've never heard of and can't control for the life of them? Or are they going to hop on Xbox live and start curb stomping in Gears of War? Or maybe it's all those other fantastic PS3 exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4. But wait, that'd require them to know what MGS1-3 was about to give a crap about that. Well maybe they'd like Halo 3. Oh. Same deal.

Don't pretend like these are people that are going to be so quickly converted to gamers like yourself, with tastes like yourself. The things that sell PS3 and 360 are so much different than what they're interested in. The people who play and love Wii sports would yawn at what we consider "system sellers" so your point is invalid, as is your logic.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying they're the ones on the fence: the grandmothers, aunts, uncles, brothers, and non gamers that bought a Wii for themselves or received one as a gift are already convinced about the Wii: they'll either be very involved with their Wii, or break it out every few weeks/months to have some casual fun.

However, there are actual gamers on the fence about the PS3: actual gamers waiting for a price drop, waiting for the release of certain games, or waiting to see what the system is really capable for doing. These gamers might have a 360, but most are probably happy enough with their PS2 or Xbox, enough to wait out to see which console is really going to have the heavy hitters or be worth the purchase price. These are the gamers that will fuel PS3 numbers about a year from now. I myself have a sealed PS3, I'm just waiting until I'm told I can hook up my dance pad, it can upscale correctly, and I know it can fully replace my PS2.

You're also completely forgetting the second mainstream sector: not the parents or relatives or hip non gaming teens, but the guys who play Madden and Halo every weekend, the girls who play Sims 2 and Dance Dance/Karaoke Revolution almost every other day. This sector might have interest in a Wii and some might buy one, but a year [at the most a year and a half] from now, will be "Aw shit did you see that Madden 08?" or inviting friends over for DDR sessions or arcade games. This sector will own a PS3 simply because the Wii can not and will provide these experiences. Guys won't drop their jaw with Wii Madden 08 visuals, and games like Karaoke Revolution, DDR, will most likely [like they have for the past half decade] stay on Sony consoles..maybe the 360.

As for "thorough, lavish" gaming experience: no, the Wii can't provide it. I'll happily admit I'm wrong if in a year or two there is a massive single player traditional RPG, an online FPS that can be played at a competitive level, a deep complex fighter by a top tier company, a serious non themed racing game, and a challenging rhythm game by Konami or Harmonix. Other wise, the Wii will provide the same thing the Gamecube did, only with a new, fresh control scheme. It's not even about the graphics, the genre and the gameplay itself won't be found on Wii: notice that I mentioned GENRE, not SERIES...
 
[quote name='sarausagi']
In a year and a half, everyone who wants a Wii, will have one. There is no one saying "Oh, I want a Wii, but I'll wait until it is $149 and game X comes out"

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.[/QUOTE]

I've seen *plenty* of CAG's say they will wait for a price drop and/or Super Smash Brothers. The difference is that the Wii has some great games out now (Zelda, Elebits, Rayman) and in the near future (WarioWare, Mario Party, Wii Play, possibly Metroid), whereas the titles people are waiting for on the PS3 (which will no doubt be system sellers) all have nebulous release dates right now. But the Wii has just as many nebulous system sellers that other people might be waiting on (Mario Galaxy, SSBB, Animal Crossing, Mario Kart).

You are probably correct on the second point - however, that is not necessarily good news for Sony. Many of those people may go for Microsoft. I might be among that group (and as a Mac user I've always been anti-MS). I was all set for a PS3 depite the lack of games. I wanted an HD gaming system and was willing to pick it up early and wait for the games (and I could give a rats ass about MGS or some of the others everyone here likes). The reason I wanted the PS3 is I love my PS2 and have never had an Xbox. I like the PS2 for RPG's, mostly. However, it is the HD upscaling issue that killed my PS3 purchase. Now I am waiting and this new cooler/smaller/cheaper Xbox360 has me intrigued - I see people talk about it here all the time but I can find no info on the rest of the Interwebs about it. I guess it makes sense MS would keep this on the down low - don't want people waiting on a system purchase :lol:.

But honestly, I went from a near-certain PS3 purchase within the launch window to 50/50 between MS and Sony. I'm waiting for the next move...
 
[quote name='sarausagi']
but you do hear people saying that about the PS3...some people waiting for DMC...or FF...or MGS..or fighting games, or what not.
[/quote]

That of course assumes those games launch will be PS3 exclusives. If PS3 sales continue to lag behind I wouldn't be suprised to see 360 launches or early ports of MGS and DMC, Konami and Capcom aren't exactly known for thier brand loyalty.
 
[quote name='io']I've seen *plenty* of CAG's say they will wait for a price drop and/or Super Smash Brothers. The difference is that the Wii has some great games out now (Zelda, Elebits, Rayman) and in the near future (WarioWare, Mario Party, Wii Play, possibly Metroid), whereas the titles people are waiting for on the PS3 (which will no doubt be system sellers) all have nebulous release dates right now. But the Wii has just as many nebulous system sellers that other people might be waiting on (Mario Galaxy, SSBB, Animal Crossing, Mario Kart).

You are probably correct on the second point - however, that is not necessarily good news for Sony. Many of those people may go for Microsoft. I might be among that group (and as a Mac user I've always been anti-MS). I was all set for a PS3 depite the lack of games. I wanted an HD gaming system and was willing to pick it up early and wait for the games (and I could give a rats ass about MGS or some of the others everyone here likes). The reason I wanted the PS3 is I love my PS2 and have never had an Xbox. I like the PS2 for RPG's, mostly. However, it is the HD upscaling issue that killed my PS3 purchase. Now I am waiting and this new cooler/smaller/cheaper Xbox360 has me intrigued - I see people talk about it here all the time but I can find no info on the rest of the Interwebs about it. I guess it makes sense MS would keep this on the down low - don't want people waiting on a system purchase :lol:.

But honestly, I went from a near-certain PS3 purchase within the launch window to 50/50 between MS and Sony. I'm waiting for the next move...[/QUOTE]

Well, I got a 360 through the amazon.com deal and I seriously believe if I could go back in time, I would have jumped on the 360 side a long time ago. With the 360, the future is NOW, everything the PS3 is doing or will do, the 360 is doing already. There's dozens of games, not just FPS, and quite honestly, the quality of audio and graphics plus the excellent live service and great hardware are reason enough: fun can be had with a 360 not even owning a game!

As for your first point...I think anyone waiting for Smash or Mario or Kart was already sold day one, even if they didn't buy one or aren't willing to pay ebay mark up or camp out all day. If they saw one at Target unintentionally, they'd probably pick it up. And chances are they are already Gamecube owners...

On the other hand, many stubborn Gamecube owners are finally picking up PS2's, playing dozens and dozens of games they sadly missed out on in their day. There's a good chance these gamers might also say, "Man, I've been missing out, I have to get a PS3 when the price is good and I'm done with the PS2"
 
[quote name='sarausagi']Well, I got a 360 through the amazon.com deal and I seriously believe if I could go back in time, I would have jumped on the 360 side a long time ago. With the 360, the future is NOW, everything the PS3 is doing or will do, the 360 is doing already. There's dozens of games, not just FPS, and quite honestly, the quality of audio and graphics plus the excellent live service and great hardware are reason enough: fun can be had with a 360 not even owning a game!
[/QUOTE]

See, on that side of the equation, I look at the 360 lineup and don't see much that appeals to me. I see Oblivion, maybe Pinata, and a few multi-platform things like Burnout Revenge and Lego Star Wars II that I would have gotten on the 360 instead of the PS2 or GC. I'm also morally opposed to paying a fee for online play ;).

But I'm a bit of an oddball on CAG - I have less than zero interest in Halo (never even seen it, wouldn't recognize it) and am NOT looking forward to MGS, DMC, GTA, any fighters, most FPSs (except Metroid if you consider that to be one). Like I said, I like the PS2 for RPG's and some of the quirky stuff like Katamari, and a few of the other franchises like Jak and Sly. I've heard recently that there will be Katamari games for all 3 systems this time around. I also think we probably will see some deep RPG's on the Wii if it continues to sell well, particularly in Japan. So, theoretically, from a gameplay/genre standpoint, I could probably live with just the Wii and completely forget about the 360/PS3. HOWEVER, as a computer graphics/imagery type person I'm a bit of a graphics whore, so I'd like to play some pretty games too, thus I will need to get me one of those newfangled systems one of these days ;). I'm hoping for some beautiful, deep, engaging, RPG's on either the PS3 or 360 (and except for maybe Oblivion which I will be able to get on either system, I don't see any yet or even on the horizon).
 
[quote name='io']See, on that side of the equation, I look at the 360 lineup and don't see much that appeals to me. I see Oblivion, maybe Pinata, and a few multi-platform things like Burnout Revenge and Lego Star Wars II that I would have gotten on the 360 instead of the PS2 or GC. I'm also morally opposed to paying a fee for online play ;).

But I'm a bit of an oddball on CAG - I have less than zero interest in Halo (never even seen it, wouldn't recognize it) and am NOT looking forward to MGS, DMC, GTA, any fighters, most FPSs (except Metroid if you consider that to be one). Like I said, I like the PS2 for RPG's and some of the quirky stuff like Katamari, and a few of the other franchises like Jak and Sly. I've heard recently that there will be Katamari games for all 3 systems this time around. I also think we probably will see some deep RPG's on the Wii if it continues to sell well, particularly in Japan. So, theoretically, from a gameplay/genre standpoint, I could probably live with just the Wii and completely forget about the 360/PS3. HOWEVER, as a computer graphics/imagery type person I'm a bit of a graphics whore, so I'd like to play some pretty games too, thus I will need to get me one of those newfangled systems one of these days ;). I'm hoping for some beautiful, deep, engaging, RPG's on either the PS3 or 360 (and except for maybe Oblivion which I will be able to get on either system, I don't see any yet or even on the horizon).[/QUOTE]

Well, I have to be honest: I don't care for MGS, DMC, GTA, either. I have Halo for 360 to see what the hype is about and I am enjoying it but I am not a Halo fanatic at all. Pretty much all I play is fighters, Bemani, and RPG's..though I've been playing some action games [Sonic, Tomb Raider, Kameo, etc] with my new 360

And honest truth, I am deathly afraid this generation will be the worse for RPG's. FF XIII looks to be more of the same formular from XII. Xenosaga is suppposed to be over. I'm hoping the FF VII remake is real. I'd love to see a real Phantasy Star, a real Grandia, a new Lunar, a new Parasite Eve, something new from Tetsuya Takahshi or another Xeno game...

But except Blue Dragon, I haven't heard of any promising next generation RPG's.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']Don't you all know? Sony's in big trouble, at one store the manager said they were giving away 50 PS3's for FREE, and everyone at the store turned, shrugged, and went on with their shopping..one kindly asked the manager if he could return the free PS3 and exchange it for a Wii and 350 dollars store credit. The manager announced it again over the intercom, that there were free PS3's at the customer service deck, and the entire store unanimously shouted "WE DON'T WANT YOUR PIECE OF SHIT 3!"

Another story involves a young child living with a foster family after his parents died in Hurricane Katrina and Rita. A local charity decided to give him a 26 inch flat panel and a PS3 60GB for Christmas. He happily opened the TV but told them they could keep the PS3, even though he's always wanted a video game console, he said he was too intelligent and too cool to accept a PS3 as a gift, because he'd rather save up for a Wii, even it means having to buy it himself! He stuck to his word, he didn't want anything to do with the PS3...rumors spread that the child told a news reporter he'd rather get cancer than a PS3.

Oh, and I heard from a girl at work that she found some PS3's new in box on the curb when she was taking out the garbage...she checked them and saw if the PS3's were in there..and sure enough they were..she shouted to her husband, "hey, there's some PS3s out on the curb..they're brand new, you want me to bring in one or two?" The husband came out with a shotgun angry as hell and unloaded a dozen rounds into the small pile of systems, he grabbed is wife by her arm, saying in the most harsh, vile tone, "I don't want you talking about bringing those fucking Playstations in my fucking house, this is Wii territory, you hear bitch"[/quote]

Haha, sounds like the fairy land most of the CAG members live in. Where Wii is the greatest console ever and Gamecube is still producing great titles!

PS3 will dominate next year. Lets just sit back and laugh at everyone for doubting.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

So, because it costs Microsoft an immense amount of money to produce a new processor, they delayed the release several months. Yet, despite this massive cost incurred, this will come coupled with a price *cut*? Explain that to me, please. Moreover, you justify the delay based on the cost of the facility and development, yet fail to realize that, if the chip is truly cheaper to produce, they want it on store shelves as soon as possible. If they can sell you a cheaper-for-them-to-make 360 for $300/400, why would they purposely avoid that?

[/quote]
I certainly don't want to get in the middle, but....

You're (both, actually) oversimplifying with your interepretation(s), too. Deflecting capital dollars, for a specific, short, term period (like 6 months) isn't about "saving money" or about a "project being too expensive". It's about using the money differently, for that period of time, to either make you more money via investment or other methodology, or to use on another project. It's a cost/benefit analysis. Considering they only delayed the fab by 6 motnhs (which means the costs still hit in the same fiscal year), it's certainly not about trying to save money. What costs 1 billion in January is likely still going to cost 1 billion in June. Given we know that Microsoft isn't exactly "revenue poor", it's not like they would need to pay a higher credit price now than they will 6 months from now due to a low revenue stream or some other financial reason. So saying the delay was simply because of the costs isn't giving the whole picture. They delayed, it seems because they felt they didn't need to move forward quite as quickly as originally planned and saw an opportunity to use the funds for some other purpose in the interim.

In addition, a facility cost is amortized over a MUCH longer period of time, on the balance sheet, than is the immediate cost of chip manufacture. Dropping to a 65nm fab process IS more likely to result in a price drop. Because the amortized cost of the facility, per chip, when added to the cost of the chip production, itself, is, in fact, less than just the current chip production cost...quite a bit less (at least historically, in other devices). That's why companies make the switch.

In addition, I saw an assertion that Microsoft would move forward as quickly as possible because, well, they would want to sell the new fab process at the higher price point. The problem with that is you're assuming that that increased profit would outweigh the profit they garner from using the fab money for whatever alternate purpose they chose to use it for. I'd guess, given what we know about Microsoft's accounting shrewdness, that very obvious point was considered...and yet they still chose the delay. I think that, pretty much, squashes the assumption.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']You realize that you guys aren't busy discussing how awesome the Wii is

but discussing the PS3, its sales, its future

That alone indicates where the system is headed, people will talk about it, people will always be paying attention to it

And in the end, people WILL buy it. Every error that gets fixed, every big game that's released, gets someone to buy a PS3.

Plus the PS3 has one huge advantage...

You don't hear people saying "Oh, yeah, the Wii's great, I'm waiting until this game comes out to get one"

but you do hear people saying that about the PS3...some people waiting for DMC...or FF...or MGS..or fighting games, or what not.

So if you really believe that the Wii's going to be on top of the PS3 for its lifecycle, you seriously need to realize what you're saying..and how utterly wrong it is.

Of course, if you happen to believe that about the Wii, then you probably believe the Wii will cut it two years from now..[/quote]

I have a very different reason why I think the Wii will be successful....Lets see what you all think:

I think the Wii is going to thrive by being everyone's secondary console, and by appealing to a wider mass market. I think that's Nintendo's plan, too...and, thus far, they're executing flawlessly.

You'll have many people with only a 360, and many with only a PS3. But BOTH those camps will buy the Wii (remember, this is just my opinion/thought proces) because it's a) at a much cheaper price point than the "other" next gen console and b) it will offer games and game play mechanics NOT able to be found on the "other" next gen console. It's just, overall, a much more attractive "2nd buy".

Sure, there will be MANY of US (on CAG) who will buy all 3. But I think the majority of gamers will buy one "HD next gen console"....and the Wii.

In addition, from all accounts, the Wii is luring back many "old school" gamers. It's also pulling in non-traditional demographics to gaming.

I think, in all honestly, the Wii has a solid shot at being #2, both in sales and in terms of "perception", behind whoever manages to duke it out between Sony and MS. It may even manage to be #1 (I think that's unlikely, though) simply because Sony and MS will split their very similar target demo, while the Wii will garner support from that entire group.

It's going to be an interesting "ride" over the next year or so.....that's for sure.
 
[quote name='propeller_head']

- its not a new core. its the same core; just smaller. yes they delayed it, becuase building FAST costs MORE $$$$$ than building sloooww. also yes it will come w/ a price cut because the chips are CHEAPER to make. (it's the fab that costs $$$$) and they will have the fab for at least 4-5 more yearly cycles. so the cost of building it is offset in the long run. (you know kind of how sony's trying to offset their huge losses w/ blu-ray, cell, & ps3 royalties?) yes, this is what the world affectionately refers to as Business.:applause: also, i should warn you about taking our lords name in vain. HE WILL STRIKE YOU DOWN!! PAT ROBERTSON SAYS SO!

\\:D/:hot::rofl::wave::beer::argue::boxing::joystick:[/quote]

Well, you beat me to it....but I hadn't read it before I replied.
 
[quote name='pilferk']I certainly don't want to get in the middle, but....

You're (both, actually) oversimplifying with your interepretation(s), too. Deflecting capital dollars, for a specific, short, term period (like 6 months) isn't about "saving money" or about a "project being too expensive". It's about using the money differently, for that period of time, to either make you more money via investment or other methodology, or to use on another project. It's a cost/benefit analysis. Considering they only delayed the fab by 6 motnhs (which means the costs still hit in the same fiscal year), it's certainly not about trying to save money. What costs 1 billion in January is likely still going to cost 1 billion in June. Given we know that Microsoft isn't exactly "revenue poor", it's not like they would need to pay a higher credit price now than they will 6 months from now due to a low revenue stream or some other financial reason. So saying the delay was simply because of the costs isn't giving the whole picture. They delayed, it seems because they felt they didn't need to move forward quite as quickly as originally planned and saw an opportunity to use the funds for some other purpose in the interim.

In addition, a facility cost is amortized over a MUCH longer period of time, on the balance sheet, than is the immediate cost of chip manufacture. Dropping to a 65nm fab process IS more likely to result in a price drop. Because the amortized cost of the facility, per chip, when added to the cost of the chip production, itself, is, in fact, less than just the current chip production cost...quite a bit less (at least historically, in other devices). That's why companies make the switch.

In addition, I saw an assertion that Microsoft would move forward as quickly as possible because, well, they would want to sell the new fab process at the higher price point. The problem with that is you're assuming that that increased profit would outweigh the profit they garner from using the fab money for whatever alternate purpose they chose to use it for. I'd guess, given what we know about Microsoft's accounting shrewdness, that very obvious point was considered...and yet they still chose the delay. I think that, pretty much, squashes the assumption.[/QUOTE]

Very sophisticated. I appreciate the comments.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

Thanks for the 090-level economics lesson. I understand that R&D and overhead are included in the price of hardware. What you've failed to explain, however, is your far-beyond-fuzzy logic that I pointed out in the previous thread. Is it cheaper to build slowly when the costs can be recouped faster by having it on the market? Maybe. Is it cheaper to "build the factory slow"? Perhaps, though I'm not sure how.

Moreover, if, as you claim, these plants cost $1B (or can cost that much), then it's foolish to suggest, whether they come out now, or six months from now, that an immediate price drop will be coupled with it (and, beyond that, that it will be a respective 33% and 25% slash in prices). Today or June, Microsoft still needs to make up the cost of building that plant.
[/quote]
Sorry, butting in again:

"Is it chaper to build slowly when costs can be recouped faster by having it on the market?"

MS is not simply the xbox company....there's lots of irons in the fire, there, obviously. I'm SURE they weighed precisely this question when making the decision. Given the conclusion they came to, I think we can safely say that the answer is yes. Because the difference in cost could be used in another project or tool to create a higher profit margin with that money than the sum they would make by getting the product to market faster.

As for the price drop theory....it does stand to reason, given they have been out for a year, that in order to entice the next level of the mainstream buyer, they're going to need to drop their price. That has been, in every electronic device's life cycle, they way to increase sales and get mass market penetration. It would give them a larger audience to peddle their "blades" to, as well (using the razor/razor blade analogy).

"Today, or June, Microsoft needs to make up the costs of that plant"

Try "by 2010 or 2011, Microsoft needs to make up the costs on that plant". Again, facilities are usually amortized over a relatively long period of time, not just one fiscal year. You may PAY for it in one chunk, but I doubt Microsoft is crazy enough to foot the bill out of pocket, rather than using cheap credit to pay for it....there's simply no reason for them to do so.

Edit: In this game, the Wii may acutually be in the best shape. I think a 360 price drop, this year, is almost a foregone conclusion (I'm thinking $100) I think, given the Wii is actually MAKING money, they'll be able to (and will) follow with a price drop (probably $50..which will still have them making money even if current manufacturing costs hold through), just to differentiate itself from the 360. All that reasoning is sound.

Now...with the PS3...all bets are off. I can see arguments from both sides on this one. But the most compelling is Sony's own balance sheet. They are hurting, badly. And it's no secret that their boardroom was hedging, heavily, on the PS3...not as a saviour, but certainly as one log on the raft to keep them afloat. The question is...how much can they actually do, beyond what they've already done. They're losing money per console, which isn't helping their balance sheet right now BUT they're hoping to make money on the "blades". Just how many razors do they need to sell, is the question. Obviously, I don't know the answer, now what analysis Sony has done on the subject. But I wonder if they could absorb the losses of a price drop, possibly selling more razors, or not.

Again, it's going to be an intersting year if you're at all interested in the business side of things.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.[/quote]

Well, I don't know.

I'd take Zelda:TWP over every PS3 game currently out, including Resistance. Not to say Resistance isn't a great game. I've played it. It is. But I'd consider Zelda:TWP a more "thorough, lavish gaming experience". I mean, it might not be prettier, that's true.

And there are other games in the pipeline for the Wii that look VERY good too, just as there are for the PS3 (MGS4, FFXIII, Silent Hill 5, RE 5, etc), and for the 360.

I think gamers will find something to sample on every system.

But the non-traditional gamers that the wii is pulling in? I don't think they'll care about 90% of them. Not Metroid. Not SMG. Not MGS4. They want more content like Wii Sports. And that's something I'm not sure the 360 or the PS3 will provide. They may, if the Wii gets enough market share, start trying....but development cycles aren't short, and it sure doesn't look like they have the content in the pipelines ready for release any time soon.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']

As for "thorough, lavish" gaming experience: no, the Wii can't provide it. I'll happily admit I'm wrong if in a year or two there is a massive single player traditional RPG, an online FPS that can be played at a competitive level, a deep complex fighter by a top tier company, a serious non themed racing game, and a challenging rhythm game by Konami or Harmonix. Other wise, the Wii will provide the same thing the Gamecube did, only with a new, fresh control scheme. It's not even about the graphics, the genre and the gameplay itself won't be found on Wii: notice that I mentioned GENRE, not SERIES...[/quote]

In your opinion, of course.

Let my try to allay your concerns, a bit.

Zelda is a pretty massive game. Sure, it's an ADVENTURE RPG, but it sure shows some promise.

It's not a true, coop or competitive FPS...that's true...but Elebits shows the mechanics are there. I think, given that, it's just a matter of time.

Deep complex fighter? SSB:Brawl looks pretty good.

Non-themed racing game? I'm assuming you mean something on the level of Gran Tourismo? You might be disappointed there. Maybe not...we've seen the wii remote DOES lend itself well to driving...but I haven't heard of anything in development that looks promising.

The rhythm game? Does Guitar Hero 2 count? Or does it need to be in DDR style?
 
[quote name='pilferk']

Now...with the PS3...all bets are off. I can see arguments from both sides on this one. But the most compelling is Sony's own balance sheet. They are hurting, badly. And it's no secret that their boardroom was hedging, heavily, on the PS3...not as a saviour, but certainly as one log on the raft to keep them afloat. The question is...how much can they actually do, beyond what they've already done. They're losing money per console, which isn't helping their balance sheet right now BUT they're hoping to make money on the "blades". Just how many razors do they need to sell, is the question. Obviously, I don't know the answer, now what analysis Sony has done on the subject. But I wonder if they could absorb the losses of a price drop, possibly selling more razors, or not.

Again, it's going to be an intersting year if you're at all interested in the business side of things.[/quote]

I heard the number 10 or so. The ps3 needs to sell 10 games (swords) to break even with the losses of the ps3 per a console. I am sorry I cannot provide a source at this time, but i will try to soon. It may be on digg or joystiq. I think what people did was take the profits for every gamesold, and add those until it adds up to 300ish, which is how much the ps3 is loosing or was loosing when it launched per a console.

This is were blue ray comes in. If the blue ray is connected to the business strategy, hoping people will re-buy their movie collections, then they would need to sell alot less then 10 games, if they also sell movies, and hell we all know people buy alot of movies. So this poises the question. How important is blue ray to the ps3, and if blue ray fails, how badly will that effect the ps3 life? Will that kill the ps3? How bad is Sony now, in terms of market? Could this also heart Sony? Let’s hope they at least break even.
 
I was still kind of wondering if this whole PS3's sitting on store shelves was indeed a mass occurance or whether it was getting overblown. Well, I went out at lunch and all three stores I went to had PS3's just sitting there. GameCrazy...check, Target...couldn't fit any more in the glass case, Best Buy...stacked. Wow.
 
[quote name='White-Wolf']This is were blue ray comes in. If the blue ray is connected to the business strategy, hoping people will re-buy their movie collections, then they would need to sell alot less then 10 games, if they also sell movies, and hell we all know people buy alot of movies. So this poises the question. How important is blue ray to the ps3, and if blue ray fails, how badly will that effect the ps3 life? Will that kill the ps3? How bad is Sony now, in terms of market? Could this also heart Sony? Let’s hope they at least break even.[/QUOTE]
I don't think Blu-ray failing will hurt the PS3 all that much, because by the time it becomes clear that one format or other has won, having a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player included won't be that much of an incentive to buy anymore. (This is just like it was with DVD and the PS2 -- at first it was great to get a DVD player included, but after a couple of years everyone had standalone players.) And even if HD-DVD wins, it doesn't mean that Sony can't continue to produce Blu-ray discs for their games.

On the other hand, if the PS3 fails miserably, Blu-ray could be in big trouble, because Sony is counting on having the PS3 be their biggest installed user base for the first couple of years of the format.
 
[quote name='sarausagi']What I'm saying is that the people who WANT ONE, want it RIGHT NOW, they're either Nintendo loyalists [gamers] or mainstream consumers who were convinced the minute they saw it or demoed it or played it as someone's house.

There is no one sitting on the fence or waiting for certain games to come out. In other words, the PS3 has shoe in buyers a year or year and a half from now: people who would love to have one but are waiting for a price drop or are waiting for more games or certain games to come out.

In a year and a half, everyone who wants a Wii, will have one. There is no one saying "Oh, I want a Wii, but I'll wait until it is $149 and game X comes out"

A year and a half from now, there will even be Wii owners, looking for a more through, lavish gaming experience: they will buy PS3's or 360's. As more and more mainstream consumers stumble on to HD, even "non gamers" and the mass appeal will want a PS3 or an Xbox 360.[/QUOTE]

I know a good 4 or 5 people that are going to get a Wii at a later date that aren't actively looking for an in stock system. Some are waiting for games like Metroid and Smash Brothers and others are waiting until the system is cheaper or when they have more money to spend. Most of these people are 360 owners and I would bet that there are plenty of other 360 owners that are waiting a get to get a Wii since alot of them are still busy with Gears of War and the other holiday releases.

On topic, I don't know anyone personally that wants a PS3. They aren't waiting for certain games or anything, they just don't want one at all.
 
Hit a few stores and found no Wiis though one of the Rhino had just gotten a single 20 GB PS3 in. It had just come in though so it's not like the end of the world for Sony in the east coast Florida Jacksonville-Daytona Beach area by my anecdotal evidence.

Also, sarausagi.... I hate you and your fantastic luck getting one of the $100 Cores.
 
[quote name='icruise']I don't think Blu-ray failing will hurt the PS3 all that much, because by the time it becomes clear that one format or other has won, having a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player included won't be that much of an incentive to buy anymore. (This is just like it was with DVD and the PS2 -- at first it was great to get a DVD player included, but after a couple of years everyone had standalone players.) And even if HD-DVD wins, it doesn't mean that Sony can't continue to produce Blu-ray discs for their games.

On the other hand, if the PS3 fails miserably, Blu-ray could be in big trouble, because Sony is counting on having the PS3 be their biggest installed user base for the first couple of years of the format.[/QUOTE]
who's winning this format war anyway? it seems everyone is content to just own DVD and not upgrade. It's not like HD-DVD is flying off the shelf.
 
[quote name='sparklecopy']who's winning this format war anyway? it seems everyone is content to just own DVD and not upgrade. It's not like HD-DVD is flying off the shelf.[/QUOTE]


No HD-DVD isn't flying off the shelf, but it still has a HUGE lead over BluRay.
 
I went into my local Best Buy and there was a fort of PS3's on the floor. I could've used it for Gears of War cover, there were so many. Several at Walmart also. I still haven't seen a Wii though.
 
[quote name='David85']No HD-DVD isn't flying off the shelf, but it still has a HUGE lead over BluRay.[/QUOTE]
I'd say it's got a surmountable lead. And at the rate bluray and Hd-Dvd is going it's like they are fighting for bronze. The whole point of DVD was collectibility and digital clarity. I've seen some Progressive upconverted DVD's that look almost High definition if you were like 10-20 feet away. I spent years collecting DVD and now they are telling me to upgrade to mpeg2 with artifacts still? I wish SONY had just come out with 1080p 50GB dual layer VC-1 instead of that weak Mpeg2 25GB discs. That would have sold me right then. I remember I flew all the way to HONGKONG to get me a grey market DVD player back in 1996 for 600 bucks. Now, I wouldn't even give Bluray/HD-DVD a second look unless they were ~300 dollars. That's the Beauty of DVD. It gives you patience. With VHS you HAD to get DVD. WIth DVD you can sit and wait, put your feet up, and you don't get the shakes.
 
[quote name='White-Wolf']I heard the number 10 or so. The ps3 needs to sell 10 games (swords) to break even with the losses of the ps3 per a console. I am sorry I cannot provide a source at this time, but i will try to soon. It may be on digg or joystiq. I think what people did was take the profits for every gamesold, and add those until it adds up to 300ish, which is how much the ps3 is loosing or was loosing when it launched per a console.

This is were blue ray comes in. If the blue ray is connected to the business strategy, hoping people will re-buy their movie collections, then they would need to sell alot less then 10 games, if they also sell movies, and hell we all know people buy alot of movies. So this poises the question. How important is blue ray to the ps3, and if blue ray fails, how badly will that effect the ps3 life? Will that kill the ps3? How bad is Sony now, in terms of market? Could this also heart Sony? Let’s hope they at least break even.[/quote]
10 games sounds about right if you consider the lifetime of the system. right now it wouldnt be 10 games per console, but averaged in w/ when theyre actually making profit on them towards the end of it's lifecycle it sounds about right.

imo, blu-ray wont lose. but neither will hd-dvd. blu-way will overwhemingly win for PC storage. which will give it a big advantage when it's finally cracked & people start using their PC's BR drives to "Back up" their movies. despite what sony says about it 'hurting' them. i think it will only encourage BR movie sales.

however, if Sony stays obstinant and continues to support MPEG-2 compressoin for their BR movies, many many people will move to HD-DVD just because VC-1 looks so much better.

so in the end i see the movie market split. but BR winning the PC market.
 
Blue ray also supports vc-1, but your right, the early BR movies supposedly had mpeg2 codec’s instead. I think this may have effected how some people see blue ray, and making them belief that blue ray has inferior video quality, when its really mpeg2 that has inferior quality to codec’s like vc-1 and h.264
 
[quote name='White-Wolf']Blue ray also supports vc-1, but your right, the early BR movies supposedly had mpeg2 codec’s instead. I think this may have effected how some people see blue ray, and making them belief that blue ray has inferior video quality, when its really mpeg2 that has inferior quality to codec’s like vc-1 and h.264[/quote]

i know that, but sony still doesnt support VC-1. only a few studios that are backing both formats are putting out the VC-1 BR discs.

so my point was, if sony doesnt get w/ the times and quit putting their backing into MPEG-2; they arent going to make any friends w/ movie fan consumers.

as a format. they do exactly the same thing. just hold data. it's what kinda data they hold that really matters for movies.

for the pc, BR can hold more data. so unless they totally screw up and try to price gouge theres little way they can lose that battle.
 
[quote name='propeller_head']i know that, but sony still doesnt support VC-1. only a few studios that are backing both formats are putting out the VC-1 BR discs.

so my point was, if sony doesnt get w/ the times and quit putting their backing into MPEG-2; they arent going to make any friends w/ movie fan consumers.

as a format. they do exactly the same thing. just hold data. it's what kinda data they hold that really matters for movies.

for the pc, BR can hold more data. so unless they totally screw up and try to price gouge theres little way they can lose that battle.[/QUOTE]
what the hell is up with that shit? How can you sell a 25Gb disc and not tell anyone and sell a 50GB disc later on? that's a 100% difference in content. It's like selling half a steak. I wonder if we'll ever see the quadruple layer 200 GB discs that was touted. I doubt it. these people are such gangsters. As soon as you switch to s-video, they make you go to component, Now it's HDMI, and i bet in a year it'll be an Optical video and audio cable (which would be the cheapest and most reasonable interface not to mention the least thick as well) and then it'll be Wi-fI reception in a few years after that making all these cables obsolete. arggghhhh!
 
[quote name='whoknows']I'm calling bs on part or all of your story. In what world will an EB worker tell you something is too expensive? You may have seen a PS3, but I highly doubt they told you no one wanted one and its too expensive.[/QUOTE]


I tell people that after they laugh at the fact that we have PS3s. Toysrus is flooded right now. Only sold 2 of ours since tuesday.
 
[quote name='sparklecopy']what the hell is up with that shit? How can you sell a 25Gb disc and not tell anyone and sell a 50GB disc later on? that's a 100% difference in content. It's like selling half a steak. I wonder if we'll ever see the quadruple layer 200 GB discs that was touted. I doubt it. these people are such gangsters. As soon as you switch to s-video, they make you go to component, Now it's HDMI, and i bet in a year it'll be an Optical video and audio cable (which would be the cheapest and most reasonable interface not to mention the least thick as well) and then it'll be Wi-fI reception in a few years after that making all these cables obsolete. arggghhhh![/quote]

It's more a progression of the technology than short changing us. The tech to do a 4 layer disk isn't here yet.

As far as the inputs on TVs... I think we'll be stuck with HDMI for a while, the movie studios like how hard it is to copy via HDMI (for now) -- it's basically not superior in any real tangible way, (unless you have a 50+ inch TV and sit really close, you don't see a tangible difference), its good for copy protection. If/when the image constraint token is implemented, HD content will ONLY be viewable via HDMI, because of the current difficulty in copying the signal.
 
downtown Sacramento, CA at the mall near the ice skating rink, the EB in the mall had a sign advertising PS3s in stock.....while there, no one bought one or seemed to ask about one, but i did hear one, what appeared to be a mother, asking about a Wii, but none were in stock....
 
[quote name='shipwreck']I was still kind of wondering if this whole PS3's sitting on store shelves was indeed a mass occurance or whether it was getting overblown. Well, I went out at lunch and all three stores I went to had PS3's just sitting there. GameCrazy...check, Target...couldn't fit any more in the glass case, Best Buy...stacked. Wow.[/quote]Ditto.

I went out today (finally, I couldn't stand being in the house anymore!) and Toys R Us douglasville had a few PS3s in the case along with about ZERO games they were totally wiped clean over Christmas. The fella working was the same clerk who stood in line with a few of us on their second Wii Pre-Order morning. I asked him how long those PS3s had been there. "Those and the TWELVE out back have been here since last week." Meanwhile they can't keep a Wii in stock and they're still wiped out of nintendo hand-helds.

Traveled to Rome later today, and TRU also had several PS3s. No Wiis.

Went to Cartersville Rhino after that. A customer asked about the PS3s. "We still haven't gotten a second shipment, but I think Walmart next door has a bunch."

I'll be honest, I found that very surprizing.
 
[quote name='BattleChicken']It's more a progression of the technology than short changing us. The tech to do a 4 layer disk isn't here yet.

As far as the inputs on TVs... I think we'll be stuck with HDMI for a while, the movie studios like how hard it is to copy via HDMI (for now) -- it's basically not superior in any real tangible way, (unless you have a 50+ inch TV and sit really close, you don't see a tangible difference), its good for copy protection. If/when the image constraint token is implemented, HD content will ONLY be viewable via HDMI, because of the current difficulty in copying the signal.[/QUOTE] yeah but the whole, "hey don't buy HD-DVD cause it's only got a max of 35GB, Ours has 50GB! oh but we're only giving you 25GB in the beginning." from SONY is pretty ridikulous.
 
[quote name='sparklecopy']yeah but the whole, "hey don't buy HD-DVD cause it's only got a max of 35GB, Ours has 50GB! oh but we're only giving you 25GB in the beginning." from SONY is pretty ridikulous.[/quote]

I can agree with that; I did read on sony's Blu Ray 'fact' web site how it was much better because of the max size; if the predominant version of Blu Ray discs being manufacted is the 25GB, then they are lying, or at least misleading, the customers -- I personally don't know.

I like HD DVD better than Blu Ray due to the extra layer of extranious copy protection, which HD DVD doesn't have.
 
[quote name='BattleChicken']I can agree with that; I did read on sony's Blu Ray 'fact' web site how it was much better because of the max size; if the predominant version of Blu Ray discs being manufacted is the 25GB, then they are lying, or at least misleading, the customers -- I personally don't know.

I like HD DVD better than Blu Ray due to the extra layer of extranious copy protection, which HD DVD doesn't have.[/QUOTE]

a 50GB disc means nothing when they don't even use it to its full extent.
 
[quote name='gizmogc']a 50GB disc means nothing when they don't even use it to its full extent.[/quote]
i would love to have a 50GB recordable disc. i have 100s of DVDs worth of data. i'd like to transfer them over to media as few times as possible. lord knows moving them from CD to DVD took me almost a month. i also like how BR is more resistant to scratching.

i just wish, oh how i wish, sony would give up on MPEG-2 and move to VC-1 already. the color repoduction is so much better & the picture less blocky & it uses less space.

i think the last part is what they're concerned about. they want to be able to say they're using all the space for the movie + extras & that if they didnt have it it wouldnt fit. unfortunately 99% of ppl who will be buying these movies will only see their Ads for it and never hear from a HT enthusiast about the unspoken downside. :cry:
 
[quote name='propeller_head']i know that, but sony still doesnt support VC-1. only a few studios that are backing both formats are putting out the VC-1 BR discs.

so my point was, if sony doesnt get w/ the times and quit putting their backing into MPEG-2; they arent going to make any friends w/ movie fan consumers.

as a format. they do exactly the same thing. just hold data. it's what kinda data they hold that really matters for movies.

for the pc, BR can hold more data. so unless they totally screw up and try to price gouge theres little way they can lose that battle.[/quote]

Thats so funny, I dident know they were still using mpeg2. Oh man.... :error:
 
I just think PS3 is gonna sell slower just because it's the highest priced console out. I have one, and so far enjoying it. I bought one knowing all the other features it was going to provide, but I was surprised that it also came with a multi-card reader and wi-fi capabilites.

Wii would obviously sell better on launch seeing as how it's substantially cheaper than a PS3. Backwords compatibilty and because the Wii has connections for Gamecube Memory cards and Controllers would allow you to get rid of your gamecube, making that convenient. I'd sell my gamecube and grab one when Wii's become readily available. I wasn't expecting them this hard to come by, well, in California anways =/.

Xbox 360 has been out for awhile, so it's only fair they would have the advantage over the 2 new consoles. The fact that the 360 has been out for over a year has given game developers time to get used to programming for the Xbox 360, thus a game like Gears of War =O. I read an article somewhere that ASSUMED Microsoft was planning a release with a second version of the 360 which would include a 65 nm Processor, HDMI outputs, and 120 GB hardrive. I never saved the link to the article, so....sorry >.> The main difference I saw in the xbox 360 compared to PS3 was no HDMI output. It's because of this that I've looked at the HD-DVD attatchment and wondered if it was worth it. Btw, I've played on my cousin's xbox 360, I think its an awesome console, I'll get one when I can.

I'm intriuged about the mpeg-2 and VC-1 codec deal...didn't know about that =O. I'm new to that, so if studios were to switch to VC-1, would it be playable on the PS3?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top