+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 1, 2007 Subscriber² Share Posted December 1, 2007 With the holiday shopping season about to be in full swing, we sit down with the big three console makers, get their thoughts on their 2007 year, why consumers should want their respective console this year, plans for after the new year and much more.We wrap up our series with an interview with Sony’s senior vice president of marketing, Peter Dille. While Sony may be in third place in the console horse race, behind Nintendo and Microsoft, don’t count it out yet. As Dille is quick to point out, the PlayStation 3 is holding its own when it comes to core features and exclusive titles. While Microsoft grabbed headlines after grabbing previously exclusive PS3 titles like Assassin’s Creed and Virtua Fighter 5, you’re still only going to be playing games like Heavenly Sword, Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune and Ratchet & Clank Future on Sony’s machine. We talked with Dille about exclusivity, the embattled Blu-ray format and the company’s plans for 2008. Note: We originally intended this story to run Nov. 21, and after several delays and false starts, we finally got our questions answered. We apologize for the tardiness, Sony fans. Source: http://n4g.com/News-89390.aspx Read the interview: http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200....1332.28201.htm Pretty standardly answered interview :/ Some interesting points though... 40% of the market still goes to Sony according to Dille. We know that's definitely not from PS3, but PS2, PSP & PS3 together. GI: What kind of benchmarks would you use to determine whether this holiday season is a successful one?Dille: First and foremost, we want to ensure that our consumers are getting a full entertainment offering, not only from PlayStation 3, but also from PS2 and the newly designed PSP. PlayStation platforms make up more than 40% of the market and all three of our platforms have very compelling software and wider entertainment offerings, so any true benchmark will be ensuring our customers are satisfied and that we are continually pushing the content envelope. Discussion on BC... and still strong support for PS2. GI: When the PlayStation 3 launched, its backwards-compatibility support with the first two PlayStations was a major selling point. What led to the change in strategy?Dille: All of our research indicates that backwards compatibility was a secondary feature for consumers. Price, on the other hand, was of primary importance. And because any consumer who has a PS2 software library also has a PS2, we felt it was important to cost reduce the system. But, unlike our competitors who have abandoned their previous consoles, we continue to actively support PS2. In fact more than 160 titles will be released for the platform this fiscal year, and we introduced a new sku, the ceramic white SingStar bundle. And if playing you PS2 games on your PS3 is still your preference we do offer PS3 models that support backwards compatibility. The rest is pretty standard marketing/praise. If you ask me it won't be 10 years till the next PS, but it will be like how it has been in previous generations... New console comes out, old one still gets games/support. The PS2 is in what, it's 7th/8th year just now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicholas-c Veteran Posted December 1, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 1, 2007 i guess they are keeping PS2 users there, if the games they want are coming out for PS2 then why upgrade.... (they might not be good games... but none the less) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 1, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 1, 2007 i guess they are keeping PS2 users there, if the games they want are coming out for PS2 then why upgrade.... (they might not be good games... but none the less) I'm still waiting on Yakuza 2 which recentely got confirmed for a EU/USA release! :woot: Came out in Japan a year or two ago. First one was a great adult orientated action/rpg title. Also the yearly installments of Fifa/Pro Evo/Madden ect are still coming out on the PS2. Obviously there is no more GOW, FF titles hitting PS2, but there still is some good/decent titles to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gfunk4life Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 let me say this madden 2008 came on the xbox and gamecube does that mean their still alive? no. unless AAA title come out for console then its dead. i didn't buy any xbox games after the xbox360 came out. Even if i didn't get it until last year. I'm not trying to take anything away from the PS2, its still selling strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Source: http://n4g.com/News-89390.aspxRead the interview: http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200....1332.28201.htm Pretty standardly answered interview :/ Some interesting points though... 40% of the market still goes to Sony according to Dille. We know that's definitely not from PS3, but PS2, PSP & PS3 together. Discussion on BC... and still strong support for PS2. The rest is pretty standard marketing/praise. If you ask me it won't be 10 years till the next PS, but it will be like how it has been in previous generations... New console comes out, old one still gets games/support. The PS2 is in what, it's 7th/8th year just now? Just wanted to comment on that PS2 statements he makes. It's absolutely absurd to even discuss it. Of course they will support it, because it's the ONLY thing that makes money for them. PS2 support on PS3 40gb is non-existant, so I think we should ask him how exactly do they support that again? Also, 10 years? Talk about consumers getting the stiffer. Pretty much everybody in the industry is saying we will most likely see next gen consoles in about next 3-4 years. Sony keeps saying 10 years because that's how long it's going to take them to recoupe around 6 billion dollars in losses accrued on PS3 and Blu-Ray. Just had to make that comment. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 Just wanted to comment on that PS2 statements he makes. It's absolutely absurd to even discuss it. Of course they will support it, because it's the ONLY thing that makes money for them. PS2 support on PS3 40gb is non-existant, so I think we should ask him how exactly do they support that again?Also, 10 years? Talk about consumers getting the stiffer. Pretty much everybody in the industry is saying we will most likely see next gen consoles in about next 3-4 years. Sony keeps saying 10 years because that's how long it's going to take them to recoupe around 6 billion dollars in losses accrued on PS3 and Blu-Ray. Just had to make that comment. Carry on. The PS2 wouldn't sell and would be pointless to support if it wasn't successful (amazing games library), didn't still have games coming out and most importantly if no one was buying it. And Boz, not everyone can afford next-gen consoles the year they come out, or even the years after they come out. If you diss a company for supporting an older product after their next installment is out I just don't know.... I think it's (Y) the PS2 is still getting support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Teej Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 That's all very well, but say in a years time I have a Playstation 3, I'm happy with it, etc. Then, the PS2 I'm playing my PS2 games on dies. What happens then? I have to buy another PS2, which might not be in circulation by then. Or, my PS2 goes on for another 3 or 4 years and THEN it dies. What then? PS2s won't be in circulation then for sure. It means I'd have to purposely use an emulator JUST to play my PS2 games. Yes, it's a perfect work around, but why should I have to jump to unofficial (and slightly illegal) methods just to play some PS2 games, hmm? It's madness. It's not like Sony would have to start from scratch, they've even done emulation for the EE, they'd just have to get it done for the GS, too. When PS2s start to finally fade away next year, they can start an advertisement strategy, inviting faifthful PS2 users to make the jump to PS3 where they can enjoy all of their great PS2 games in high definition. Cutting down cost by eliminating BC is a bad move, I really hope they carry on with a dual SKU. Also, 10 years? Talk about consumers getting the stiffer. Pretty much everybody in the industry is saying we will most likely see next gen consoles in about next 3-4 years. They are? They're pretty bloody foolish then, in my opinion. Next Gen games take a while to recuperate money and the hardware certainly does. Plus, I don't know if you have noticed, but hardware evolution in terms of processing power is slowing down, they're moving to more cores. With the 360 having 3 and the PS3 (very basically) having 3, while most games only supporting 2 cores on the PC, I feel no need to rush the next generation. It's going to take a fair while for 4 cores to be the standard in PC games, so the 360 and PS3 will do fine. The only hardware upgrade I see coming in 3 years is Wii, and even then, I don't forsee any new console. I just see a hardware scalar to output high definition resolutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 That's all very well, but say in a years time I have a Playstation 3, I'm happy with it, etc. Then, the PS2 I'm playing my PS2 games on dies. What happens then? I have to buy another PS2, which might not be in circulation by then. Or, my PS2 goes on for another 3 or 4 years and THEN it dies. What then? PS2s won't be in circulation then for sure. It means I'd have to purposely use an emulator JUST to play my PS2 games.Yes, it's a perfect work around, but why should I have to jump to unofficial (and slightly illegal) methods just to play some PS2 games, hmm? It's madness. It's not like Sony would have to start from scratch, they've even done emulation for the EE, they'd just have to get it done for the GS, too. When PS2s start to finally fade away next year, they can start an advertisement strategy, inviting faifthful PS2 users to make the jump to PS3 where they can enjoy all of their great PS2 games in high definition. Cutting down cost by eliminating BC is a bad move, I really hope they carry on with a dual SKU. I pulled my modded PS1 out the loft the other week and it still worked :laugh: Had that since early 97 I believe. But yeah, fingers crossed a dual core option carries on for people worried about BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 The PS2 wouldn't sell and would be pointless to support if it wasn't successful (amazing games library), didn't still have games coming out and most importantly if no one was buying it.And Boz, not everyone can afford next-gen consoles the year they come out, or even the years after they come out. If you diss a company for supporting an older product after their next installment is out I just don't know.... I think it's (Y) the PS2 is still getting support. I'm just sayin'. They wouldn't be so vocal in supporting PS2 if it wasn't a mule they keep surviving on. It is very clear what their intentions were when they cut the PS2 support from PS3. There's no denying there correct? Of course you are right, I'm well aware that no everyone is capable of purchasing a next gen console right away, but let's look at it realistically. Xbox 360 arcade is $279. This is not TOO much money for people to get into next gen gaming. We can expect next year, Xbox 360 price drops even more aggresively as Microsoft have stated they are already very close to starting to make a profit on the console itself. When they get out of the red with Xbox 360 they will definitley lower the price to at least like $199. What was the price for PS2 for the longest time? Yep, $199. So that numbers seems to be the reaching point. Of course Microsoft will still continue to make a killing on more expensive SKUs but the bottom line is that anyone who wants to play Xbox 360 will have a cheap/er option. I'm not dissing Sony for that, I just think that most of their interviews and comments are extremely hypocritical. On one hand THEY are dissing lack of support from Microsoft and others yet they go ahead and completely kill PS2 support in their new console. Microsoft at least still holds compatibility for the software (which btw is the MOST important thing). PS2 or Xbox doesn't need support so much as you do need for software. In every console's lifetime, the consumers mostly spend money on software, unlike console that they buy only once, software is what a HUGE amount money is going to. To go and kill support for those titles on their cheap (affordable) PS3 says a lot about how they do business and how much they care about consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 I'm just sayin'. They wouldn't be so vocal in supporting PS2 if it wasn't a mule they keep surviving on. It is very clear what their intentions were when they cut the PS2 support from PS3. There's no denying there correct? Yeah, reduce costs and save themselves money. Of course they would like people to buy a PS3 40GB and then a PS2, but cmon, be serious, how much market is there for that? The PS2 has sold around 100million units. There will be a small % of people picking up a PS3, that don't already own a PS2. Unlike the 360, where there is a fairly large % of people picking up an Xbox console for the first time. Same with the Wii, a large % of people picking up a Nintendo console for the first time. Those people will have more demand for BC, to play xbox 1 titles and Gamecube titles. ^ That's something I think a lot of people fail to run through their minds before slanting Sony with this decision. And until the 60GB/80GB SKU's run out, or don't get a successor with BC, I fail to agree with the intense criticism the decision has received. As for the rest of your post, fair enough, I don't have much to comment on. I still stand on the PS2 being attractive to buyers and to support from the library, continued support and the fact not everyone jumps to next-gen as quickly as others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 They are? They're pretty bloody foolish then, in my opinion. Next Gen games take a while to recuperate money and the hardware certainly does. Plus, I don't know if you have noticed, but hardware evolution in terms of processing power is slowing down, they're moving to more cores. With the 360 having 3 and the PS3 (very basically) having 3, while most games only supporting 2 cores on the PC, I feel no need to rush the next generation. It's going to take a fair while for 4 cores to be the standard in PC games, so the 360 and PS3 will do fine.The only hardware upgrade I see coming in 3 years is Wii, and even then, I don't forsee any new console. I just see a hardware scalar to output high definition resolutions. Yep they are, but that's not even the point. I've read somewhere that Microsoft will become profitable on Xbox 360 next year (I believe they said Q1 2008), not hard to image cause their console is absolutely killing. Wii has been in positive for a while now. So yes, if Xbox 360 is pretty much being profitable now or very soon, next 3 years is enough for them to recoupe their investment and make a killing. Microsoft has officially stated that 2010 or 2011 they will come out with new console. You can be pretty much rest assured that Nintendo will do the same. So let me ask you, except for Sony why would I stick with PS3 for next decade? Again, the reason they are pushing that is because they are absolutely in horrific financial state. Once PS2 sales completely die out, they will be left with PS3 and by selling only PS3 they will need those 10 years to recoupe billions they lost, it's very logical and simple. So let's say, 2010 comes.. PS3 is $199 for the 80gb version or 320gb version I don't know whatever is at that point, you can buy Xbox 360 for like I don't know $129? and new Xbox 720 comes out and WiiHoo model and they are priced at $250 and $400 and offer such crazy experiences and powerful machines that people will of course want that. Wouldn't you say that this is the most probable scenario we are looking at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 Yep they are, but that's not even the point. I've read somewhere that Microsoft will become profitable on Xbox 360 next year (I believe they said Q1 2008), not hard to image cause their console is absolutely killing. Wii has been in positive for a while now. So yes, if Xbox 360 is pretty much being profitable now or very soon, next 3 years is enough for them to recoupe their investment and make a killing. Microsoft has officially stated that 2010 or 2011 they will come out with new console. You can be pretty much rest assured that Nintendo will do the same.So let me ask you, except for Sony why would I stick with PS3 for next decade? Again, the reason they are pushing that is because they are absolutely in horrific financial state. Once PS2 sales completely die out, they will be left with PS3 and by selling only PS3 they will need those 10 years to recoupe billions they lost, it's very logical and simple. So let's say, 2010 comes.. PS3 is $199 for the 80gb version or 320gb version I don't know whatever is at that point, you can buy Xbox 360 for like I don't know $129? and new Xbox 720 comes out and WiiHoo model and they are priced at $250 and $400 and offer such crazy experiences and powerful machines that people will of course want that. Wouldn't you say that this is the most probable scenario we are looking at? Don't forget Sony have three products in the market. PSP PS2 PS3 I'm sure they will be making a profit on PSP's sold, just the same as PS2's sold. Also I don't see MS jumping to a new Xbox as quickly as 2010. If they do, to me that's an indication of failure, just like the quick jump to 360 over the Xbox 1. No new consoles will be out till 2012/2013 if you ask me, unless it's a Wii revision. There isn't much that could be added to our console's just now to require a succeder as quickly. We have online play, storage capacity, feature rich media enhancements, support for HD media formats, upcoming PlayTV for Sony, ect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Here read this interesting interview. This guy has A LOT of information. http://vgchartz.com/news/news.php?id=608 http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertainment/g...true&page=1 and a few other sources too.. they all agree that Xbox 720 or whatever will be called will come out late 2010 or 2011. Obviously they will not quit Xbox 360 as it will help them make a killing and compete with PS3 in those 10 years. Seems like a good strategy to me. This way they will have a constant advantage in technology. There's a reason why that dude from Infinity Ward says similar things about when next gen consoles are coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 Here read this interesting interview. This guy has A LOT of information.http://vgchartz.com/news/news.php?id=608 http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertainment/g...true&page=1 and a few other sources too.. they all agree that Xbox 720 or whatever will be called will come out late 2010 or 2011. Obviously they will not quit Xbox 360 as it will help them make a killing and compete with PS3 in those 10 years. Seems like a good strategy to me. This way they will have a constant advantage in technology. There's a reason why that dude from Infinity Ward says similar things about when next gen consoles are coming. Fair enough, I'll have a read. But I still feel there isn't much that can be advanced on by 2010/2011 apart from slicker graphics. Unless MS plan to integrate an HD media format into their Xbox, whether that be to support moves/give more disc space capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Fair enough, I'll have a read.But I still feel there isn't much that can be advanced on by 2010/2011 apart from slicker graphics. Unless MS plan to integrate an HD media format into their Xbox, whether that be to support moves/give more disc space capacity. Well I don't know what will happen, but I know 2 things for sure. Microsoft is EXTREMELY good in business. They may not know how to design an appealing product stylewise like Apple or even Sony, but they sure know business, strategy and software. I will dare to quote a microsoft person, but I completely agree with what this guy says. Microsoft XNA propels us ahead of Sony in the next-generation games race because the future of gaming is in software, not hardware. At GDC you are seeing some of the early possibilities of what the future will bring. Everything that comes to Windows and Xbox in the years to come is only going to get better and better in our never-ending quest to meet customer expectations and bridge the gap with developer realities. What he is point out that hardware is really not an issue, what's most important is that software aspect, interaction, social aspect, games, developers.. Microsoft has been known since the beginning to work FOR developers. That's where that comes that crazy ass Balmer and his "DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS" scary scene where he screams it. I think that by 2011 we will see such an improvement in Xbox live that it will absolutely have no competition. Let's not forget, this is Microsoft we are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 If you ask me it won't be 10 years till the next PS, but it will be like how it has been in previous generations... I don't think that's what he means. The PS3 will DIE in 10 years, but a new PS4 will be out already. That 10 years thing has already been told a couple of months ago though, but these parts of articles were obviously not in the discussion because... well they didn't exist :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Teej Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Yep they are, but that's not even the point. I've read somewhere that Microsoft will become profitable on Xbox 360 next year (I believe they said Q1 2008), not hard to image cause their console is absolutely killing. Wii has been in positive for a while now. So yes, if Xbox 360 is pretty much being profitable now or very soon, next 3 years is enough for them to recoupe their investment and make a killing. Microsoft has officially stated that 2010 or 2011 they will come out with new console. You can be pretty much rest assured that Nintendo will do the same. Yes, but who wants to make a product *just* so they can break even? They'll probably start seriously gathering together their next-gen console in 2010, ready for an autumn 2011 launch. However, I don't rule out a 2012 spring launch. Fact of the matter is, the only reason they launched so early is because the XBOX was just a test subject, and didn't have any plans to try and keep it around after their true console, the 360, launched. XBOX sold a miserable 23 million consoles (which even by the PS3s standards is pretty laughable) and it was a financial failure. So let me ask you, except for Sony why would I stick with PS3 for next decade? Again, the reason they are pushing that is because they are absolutely in horrific financial state. Once PS2 sales completely die out, they will be left with PS3 and by selling only PS3 they will need those 10 years to recoupe billions they lost, it's very logical and simple. You don't know how well the PS3 is going to do, it could turn out to be another PS2 by 2011 (well, maybe not sales wise, but in terms of popularity at least) and pretty much every Playstation has lasted around 10 years, it's just the way it is. PS3 will be a very cheap Blu-Ray, HD DVR, Digital Media Player and Games Console all in one, and will probably be around $150, maybe even $99 by 2011, which makes it for a very attractive price. Besides, as previously stated, they still have the PSP to keep them afloat. Not only that, but they'll eventually start a PS2 download service, so their retro catalogue will provide them with profit. It shouldn't be too hard for them, really. So let's say, 2010 comes.. PS3 is $199 for the 80gb version or 320gb version I don't know whatever is at that point, you can buy Xbox 360 for like I don't know $129? and new Xbox 720 comes out and WiiHoo model and they are priced at $250 and $400 and offer such crazy experiences and powerful machines that people will of course want that. Wouldn't you say that this is the most probable scenario we are looking at? The same people who play their PS2s even though the insanely awesome next-gen consoles are out. People love what they're used to, and if they have 5-6 years worth of games and not a lot of titles out for these next-gen machines, there's a very good chance they're just going to look away until the year after. Besides, there is going to be a PS4 in the market the same time there's a Wii 2 and an XBOX 720 (roughly), it's just the PS3 won't leave the market just because there's new kids on the block ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Veteran Posted December 2, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 2, 2007 let me say this madden 2008 came on the xbox and gamecube does that mean their still alive? no. unless AAA title come out for console then its dead. i didn't buy any xbox games after the xbox360 came out. Even if i didn't get it until last year.I'm not trying to take anything away from the PS2, its still selling strong. I thought Madden was one of the few EA titles that was still worth it? Doesn't that count as a AAA title? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trong Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Cutting down cost by eliminating BC is a bad move, I really hope they carry on with a dual SKU.They are? They're pretty bloody foolish then, in my opinion. Next Gen games take a while to recuperate money and the hardware certainly does. Plus, I don't know if you have noticed, but hardware evolution in terms of processing power is slowing down, they're moving to more cores. With the 360 having 3 and the PS3 (very basically) having 3, while most games only supporting 2 cores on the PC, I feel no need to rush the next generation. It's going to take a fair while for 4 cores to be the standard in PC games, so the 360 and PS3 will do fine. Just FYI, the first fully quad core supported game, Alan Wake, is coming out next year. The demo for it was running on a quad core showing it's utilization of the cores almost 1 year ago. Technology moves a lot faster than you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soniqstylz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Just FYI, the first fully quad core supported game, Alan Wake, is coming out next year. The demo for it was running on a quad core showing it's utilization of the cores almost 1 year ago. Technology moves a lot faster than you think. So, that's one game out of the thousand or so PC titles that will be out next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 (edited) Fact of the matter is, the only reason they launched so early is because the XBOX was just a test subject, and didn't have any plans to try and keep it around after their true console, the 360, launched. XBOX sold a miserable 23 million consoles (which even by the PS3s standards is pretty laughable) and it was a financial failure. Okay, I'm just a bit baffled when you say that Xbox was somehow a failure (a completely new console that was competing heavily with PS2 even though PS2 was on the market for almost 3 years at that point), YET Xbox sold a QUARTER of overall sales of PS2. 25 million my friend for the period from 2001-2005 is PRETTY DAMN good for a new kid on the block. You say that Xbox was a failure, yet somehow you see PS3 as a success? The console has sold roughly 5-6 million consoles in more then a year? Xbox 360 has sold almost 15 million. And this difference is roughly a year since Xbox 360 came out and PS3 came out. As we already know usually buying capacity from people goes DOWN after a while, not UP. So in order for Sony to just MATCH "the failure" of Xbox in the same time period they will have to sell 5-6 million consoles every year until 2010 to reach about 25-30 million consoles. I don't think this will happen at all. They are already struggling with sales even though they would like everyone to think that sales are a KILLER and don't forget, this is all with HIGHLY discounted model. They really stuck it to us people who paid $600 for our PS3 just beginning of this year. Not meaning to argue really, I'm just confused with your views. Also don't forget that in past month or two, Xbox 360 has again outsold PS3 by margins of 3:1 and 2:1 in consoles. This trend is simply not going away. So to say that PS3 has ANY chances of catching up is kind of confusing. I mean by math it would need to sell like 5:1 non-stop in order to catch up. I just simply think this is IMPOSSIBLE at this point. Edited December 2, 2007 by Boz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 (edited) Okay, I'm just a bit baffled when you say that Xbox was somehow a failure (a completely new console that was competing heavily with PS2 even though PS2 was on the market for almost 3 years at that point), YET Xbox sold a QUARTER of overall sales of PS2. 25 million my friend for the period from 2001-2005 is PRETTY DAMN good for a new kid on the block.You say that Xbox was a failure, yet somehow you see PS3 as a success? The console has sold roughly 5-6 million consoles in more then a year? Xbox 360 has sold almost 15 million. And this difference is roughly a year since Xbox 360 came out and PS3 came out. As we already know usually buying capacity from people goes DOWN after a while, not UP. So in order for Sony to just MATCH "the failure" of Xbox in the same time period they will have to sell 5-6 million consoles every year until 2010 to reach about 25-30 million consoles. I don't think this will happen at all. They are already struggling with sales even though they would like everyone to think that sales are a KILLER and don't forget, this is all with HIGHLY discounted model. They really stuck it to us people who paid $600 for our PS3 just beginning of this year. Not meaning to argue really, I'm just confused with your views. I think what he means was the xbox brand wasn't ready to compete with the market in the state it launched/support it got - clearly evident by the flattening it got by the PS2. The console did bring innovation through Live, and brought us some new gaming franchises but MS wasn't ready to tackle the market in an effective way - They didn't need to overtake Sony, but finish respectfully. Now it's down to personal opinion I suppose, but while I show respect FOR the xbox, I feel it didn't finish respectfuly in the sense of sales at all. It got decimated. That's a fact. I would hinder my bet on most of the sales coming from its home nation America. I know Japan ignored it completely, and as for Europe it probably done "ok". The 360 has been a much better console for MS. A refined entry in the xbox brand. 2nd time they got it right. MS have come from ground zero, to hero in a sense and suprised the gaming world. If you said to us during the lifetime of the xbox and PS2 that MS' next console would be 100x more successful than Sony's people would of laughed. Now it's not a laughing matter, it's a serious thing to speculate on/consider - But that's all it is just now. The gap of sales is what 4~5 million? Not 10-15-20+ million gap that the PS2 had over the xbox. What I would say though Boz, is down to the history Sony have, they are skilled enough to pull things off with the PS brand, and people that say the PS3 will fail miserably are a little ignorant if you ask me. MS proved things can drastically change around with little experience in the console realm. Sony have lots of experience, so I would therefore expect people to be a little more open minded about where the PS3 COULD end up, rather than be as shut minded about failure this early on in the console's lifetime - 1 year in America/Japan, 6~7 months in Europe. But yeah, you have your own brain and train of thought... ultimately you can decide to believe whatever speculation you want until it gets proven right or wrong (Y) All I would say is it's wise to consider everything you can whether that be past trends, or current trends before you set yourself to be certain on an outcome that won't be proven for a considerable time to come. Edited December 2, 2007 by Audioboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNay Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 I'm glad their still supporting PS2 games and making them still, it'll be 8 yrs in March since it came out in Japan. I can see them ending support in 2010 or so. That would make sense given by then the ps3 will be much cheaper then. I wonder if they'll call the next Playstation with a 4, apprently 4 is a bad luck number to the chinese (yes I know Sony is Japanese but still.. lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 I'm just looking forward to the day, where Sony is actually providing me with some, how should i put it ... Fun? I just wanna give Home a whirl ... Ohhh, Closed Beta, release 2008. Oh, GT5 ... Japanese Demo, getting pulled, English demo sometime in 2008. MGS4 in 2007 ... Now wait, 2008. The thing is released, but if you are an Xbox owner, there's nothing "Sony exclusive" to go mad about these days, It's bothering me. I really do like my PS3, the build quality, the design and all the features ( Yes, i don't mind having Blu-ray 'shoved' down my throat ). But making me wait about an extra year for some of the quality features, games & demos to appear is getting on my nerves - every other need is being fulfilled by my Xbox 360. Weekly Store updates Sony? ... How about uploading a Demo as soon as It's available! These little things just annoys the hell out of me, i really wanna fire up the thing and ... What? There's nothing fun to go try! So of course It's gonna live 10 years when you just postpone everything and keep it out of reach, so we can sit around and wait. Then all of sudden the 10 years are up :laugh: Arh well - Probably gonna get shot down with a lot of ridiculous statements, claims and points of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted December 2, 2007 Author Subscriber² Share Posted December 2, 2007 (edited) I'm glad their still supporting PS2 games and making them still, it'll be 8 yrs in March since it came out in Japan.I can see them ending support in 2010 or so. That would make sense given by then the ps3 will be much cheaper then. I wonder if they'll call the next Playstation with a 4, apprently 4 is a bad luck number to the chinese (yes I know Sony is Japanese but still.. lol) Well rumour is MS AREN'T going for the logical 720, so maybe Sony will change things around a bit? :laugh: Who knows, but I place my bet on it just being "4". Anyone wanna run a bet with me? :p I'm just looking forward to the day, where Sony is actually providing me with some, how should i put it ... Fun?I just wanna give Home a whirl ... Ohhh, Closed Beta, release 2008. Oh, GT5 ... Japanese Demo, getting pulled, English demo sometime in 2008. MGS4 in 2007 ... Now wait, 2008. The thing is released, but if you are an Xbox owner, there's nothing "Sony exclusive" to go mad about these days, It's bothering me. I really do like my PS3, the build quality, the design and all the features ( Yes, i don't mind having Blu-ray 'shoved' down my throat ). But making me wait about an extra year for some of the quality features, games & demos to appear is getting on my nerves - every other need is being fulfilled by my Xbox 360. Weekly Store updates Sony? ... How about uploading a Demo as soon as It's available! These little things just annoys the hell out of me, i really wanna fire up the thing and ... What? There's nothing fun to go try! So of course It's gonna live 10 years when you just postpone everything and keep it out of reach, so we can sit around and wait. Then all of sudden the 10 years are up :laugh: Arh well - Probably gonna get shot down with a lot of ridiculous statements, claims and points of view. Not really, the majority of things you've said ARE what is ****ing off PS3 owners - Myself included. It's even worse being in Europe with the store updates :/ Like MS were new to the whole console market with the xbox, Sony are in a sense new to the online realm (PSN). The PS3 launched in an incomplete state, so I know exactly why we are getting these issues. All I can add is I would of bought a PS3 at somepoint anyway, it has many gaming franchises I want to play, and thats what I ultimately do with my games console, play games. The fact I don't need to pay for a subscription makes things better for me in the sense I am not paying for the half assedness so far, and makes me happier to wait for the early launch issues to correct themselves - Which they are and will do. Again I believe you are an ignorant individual to squeeze on the "no games" matter constantly, or the "game delays" issue, ect, ect. Genuine grievances are expected towards those matters, but the constant whinning does grate nerves, especially by those with no interest in the PS brand at all - They are merely using as ammo against those who do use a PS product. These issues will sort themselves out, and if they're offputing for you, the simple matter is to wait to buy. The only thing I'll ever have lost out on is maybe saving myself ?50-100 of waiting a few years to buy a PS3 when it's cheaper/more content rich. I can't do that cause I need technology the minute it's out... bad habit of mine:laugh:: Edited December 2, 2007 by Audioboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts