Analyst Predicts Xbox 360 Domination Until 2009 |
Ó
The next-gen console war continues to heat up... At least as much heat as a battle between two not-yet- released consoles and a relatively new console can generate. Analyst Jason Anderson from the International Development Group states that he believes MicrosoftÂ’s Xbox 360 will be the number one console until 2009, at which point SonyÂ’s PlayStation 3 will take over.
So, fanboys, here are his predictions. Anderson said by the end of 2007, the Xbox 360 will have sold 10.6 million consoles, PS3 6.8 million, and 3.5 million Nintendo Wii consoles.
In 2008, Xbox 360 will be at 15 million, PS3 will have 13.5 million, and 6.5 million for the Wii.
By 2009, he foresees Sony's PS3 taking the lead.
Of course, Anderson doesn't explain what his calculations are based on, and many would argue other factors could easily skew these numbers. Still, it's an interesting read though.
Via Gamasutra
35 Jumps PSP homebrew - MHUSPEED v3
25 Jumps Sony helping fix Bayonetta for PS3?
21 Jumps PSP homebrew - MacroFire v3.0.12
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
I believe though...sony could win sooner. If key games come out...DMC, MGS, FF, and original titles that made the ps2 so popular(even for me...and i'm anti-sony) then sony may take the lead...
i have to agree with this. i think Xbox 360 will have the lead for awhile then the ps3 will catch up but its gonna take awhile
he's not a fanboy...he is saying that the 360 will lead until the ps3's prices come down and more people will buy it...you are the one being a fanboy...BTW u misspelled sales...and *****
Yeah, I also see the Xbox ahead for a while. 2009 (3 years) seems pretty reasonable in my opinon. One, ps3 has to catch up to the sales Xbox360 already has under its belt since it was released earlier and two, 3 years gives it some time for price drops, maybe somewhere over a hundred bucks so it may be a bit more affordable.
Its all going to Wii this time around.
wow..predicitons like that are about as lame as asumtions...do people really think that nintendo is just releacing a consul to make people happy or just to say they have one on the market? F*** no. they want money and they have already taken the steeps to enshure their money...with sony i see 3 things: graphics price and few good games...while with nintendo i see II things: games and people. i would rather rely on people to support my consil than graphics..i say good luck to sony
These Analysts are all the same. They look at a chart of numbers and make a quess. In this case it seems more based upon the SNES doing well then later the Playstation. This isnt going to happen again. The PS3 will either do well in the first year and a half or it wont. The industry is moving so fast these days and developers dont choose sides based on technology, they choose for the money.
And this time around I dont think the Wii will do as poorly as the Gamecube. Again this guy looks at a bunch of numbers and quesses that the Wii will do poorly because of the Gamecube and falling sales before. Developers and consumers seem a lot more interested in the Nintendo system this time around.
Currently I'm noticing some real nervous developers and Publishers. They notice the anti hype of the PS3 and notice how far the 360 is going after only being released for less than a year. Then the Wii being by far the biggest hit at E3. I have also noticed acouple companies jump out and say thier game is in fact not a PS3 exclusive but also for the 360. This is what leads me to believe the Publishers and Developers are getting worried about the PS3.
So in the end I would say, knowing that my guess is purely a guess:
The 360 will probably do extremely well, the PS3 will do better in Japan but not so well in North America and Europe. The Wii will be one of those systems you have to "wait and find out". Since it comes before the PS3 that will also give it that much more of an advantage.
Personally I love the 360 so far and the new games comming look excellent. The Wii will also be on my desk because I have always been a huge Nintendo fan since the early days of NES. And I dont think the PS3 is worth the amount they are selling. I wouldnt buy one for the Blu-ray because personally I just dont care. And I wouldnt buy a crappier model either.
i think the wii will take the cake, i think in a year the wii will be 1st and 2-3 yrs the ps3 will be 2nd and 360 last, btw i prefer ps3 anyday cuz i hav a ps2
So far the comments left here seem to follow the same understanding. It did poor in the past, so it must do the same in the future. Dont look to the past, its only for fixing mistakes.
His prediction could work, as well as any other predictions, but I believe there may not be a loser in this war at all. It may actually be the closest console war ever seen by gamers.
Am I?
Sony said previously that they will have more then 1 million units at launch.
They also dont factor in the amount of PS2s people will be trading in to purchase a PS3. This analysis is way off.
Everyone knows the peak of the XBox360 sales and come and gone. And even if they were to sell at the same rate they are now, they wont reach 10 million by the end of 2007.
Microsoft plans to manufacture 10 million but selling them is completely different.
Xbox360 appeals to the gamer audience. It has little appeal as an entertainment center because it cant do it without spending as much as a PS3 yet still have less features.
Whats 100 bucks more? 400 premium system vs 500 basic PS3? Which system wins? PS3 hands down in terms of features.
People are looking for futureproof products. Why do people spend several hundred dollars on new cell phones that they want to keep for a few years. Why do people spend several hundred more on new models TVs then buy a cheaper yet older model?
By the end of 2007, I predict that the PS3 will have sold more then the Xbox360. Why? Not only gamers will purchase the system but anyone looking for a new generation of home entertainment.
Even if you dont use the system to play games, it has a load of features that can be used. Internet browser can be used to surf, download videos, pictures, music. thats something the Xbox360 cant do because your restricted to whats on the Live market. Its already proven that the PS3 can play HD Videos from the HDD. If they allow custom applications, just about everything that runs on linux can be ported to the PS3.
Sony mentioned that once they get production up to speed, they can manufacture 1 million units a month. This analysis Jason looks at previous sales data. But for the PS3 that no longer applies because the appeal of the PS3 is no longer focused on the gaming industry, its going to be a full blown entertainment system. If people are willing to spend thousands on a TV, Speakers, and a reciever, why not spend 500-600 bucks on "one" electronic that will cover everything you possibly need at the couch.
He could be on the right track, but there are still too many unknowns involved.
PS3's high price tag will drive many to the 360, which will garner extra third party support for Microsoft. The 360 should then continue to sell well. It won't struggle against the PS3 until they eventually both become competitively priced. Sony will then take over once again.
The big wildcard involved is the Wii. I predict that this will be a massive success. It will outdo everything in it's path in Japan, and compete fairly evenly in U.S. + Europe etc.
It may still be too difficult to announce a winner of the Next-Gen console war, even in 2009.
Your right, the Wii is the wild card I do believe that it willl be successful no matter what. I, myself, am pretty interested in it. But heres the thing, the Wii is cheap, and is more of a party, everyone plays oriented system. No doubt it will sell, and even if you have a Xbox360 or ps3 you'll probably eventually own one (or know someone that does).
The way I see it, the Wii is on its own category. The Xbox360 and PS3 are in theirs and its a war between those two. These two aim for not only the casual gamers but the hardcore ones also. So in the long run its a matter of Wii and either PS3 or Xbox360 that is left. The Wii, even if it sells millions more than either of the two is not a direct threat to the other systems because it is in its own category.
360 hasn't even sold 4million yet. Lets just say that they get lucky and sell 6million before the PS3 comes out. Is it really going to take that long for the PS3 and Wii to catch up? Is the Wii really going to do that bad in sales?
ANALIZE THIS JANRUARY 2007 AND I BET WE CAN MAKE MORE SENCE.
These people need to stop wasting their time with stupid predictions and wait untile the damn consoles come out... Xbox 360 is the only one out so it's the best plain and simple
we all know that the 360 and the PS3 will come down in price, but the rate of which the 360 lowers in price will be greater than the rate of the PS3's price lowering. Since there is a Blue-Ray drive in the PS3, the PS3 will remain expensive for a long time, by the time the platinum version comes down to $400, the 360's will be at $200, and the Wii at $100
I didn't read the article. Just the headline. I'm going to go out on a limb and say, no, no it won't. If anything the Nintendo Wii with it's suprisingly innovative peripherals, low prices, and built in web browsing capabilities via Opera will grab the market over the next decade. The Xbox360 while capable of producing impress images simply isn't built to withstand the future of games. Too much focus was placed on bringing a multimedia entertainment system to the market rather than delivering the video gaming experience. I'm not selling Microsoft short, just being realistic.
(For anyone who would dare be immmature enough to label me a fanboy, I would prefer the PS3 but due to the pricing and the fact that it has yet to hit the shelves I have excluded it from this brief rant)
dude...nobody KNOWS wats gonna happen in the next gen wars, this guy is talkin out of his ars....hes a 360 fan boy, and in a week some other fool is goin to say the ps3 is going to come out on top in 2006...a ps3 fanboy...same goes for the wii fanboys...all we know is wat has happend before...sony has been on top for ages now...and it wasnt because of the hardware...it was all about the games...nintendo 64 was a better machine than the ps1 (no loading and all) but it lost out to it cuz of games like FF VII and resident evil, dreamcast is still better than the ps2 but it wouldnt keep up because ps2 had great games like gta and GT..now the ps3 is the strongest console ever...however....it may not have the games....so..WHO KNOWS WATS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!...my pick.....sega saturn return!
26....you own an xbox 1.5...it plays THIS gen media...dvd9...and if u pay 200or 250 for the hd player...ull only be able to play movies on it...it wont play hddvd games which means the games are gonna be super limited in terms of memory...no 1080p....and wack ars games...dude...until the ps3 comes out...we wont see wat the lamebox 360 has to offer...ill stick w/ my saturn...
This seems like a pretty decent assumption. But we really won't know who wins for sure, until 5-6 years pass. And, if somebody says that a console will win because they have it, well, that's just ignorance, oh and fanboyism.
thats horrible logic and talk, bad fanboy bad
I hope hes right. I am not going to be buying a ps3 or wii anytime soon...
By the way things are goin for the xbox 360 (In Sales), its kinda hard to predict that xbox will be winner. The Wii will be strong in the beggining but I'll fade in time.
The comments are always the worst kind of speculation - fanboy speculation.
The guy can be right. By 2009, people might realize what a useless piece of ***** 360 is when over 80 percent of them brick.
CANT SPELL!!! hahahaha! delete me again, QJ
all i hear from sony boys is ZOMG pS will pwn cuz the disks hold more and wtf lamebox how creative what about gaystation....
...dude...dont be a dic.k......people can have an opinion on consoles without being fools!...just because they have blind faith in one or another doesnt make them fools...your just closed minded....claiming you know somethin...like who is gonna win...is equally closed minded...
"you own an xbox 1.5...it plays THIS gen media...dvd9..."
And there I was thinking content matters more than the media.
So which HD-DVD or Blu-ray PC game are you playing at present? Do future PC games like Crysis and Spore appear to be hampered by DVD (yes, I know they're installed onto the HDD, but still...)? And wasn't one of the best games last gen released on the Gamecube on two mini-DVD discs (1.5GB each)? That game being RE4!
Technologies are the ingredients, but gameplay is the CAKE with graphics and sound as the icing on the cake. ;)
Anyway, this prediction sounds reasonable to me, but like all predictions, we'll just have to wait and see if it's correct.
now.. im sorry.. but i fail to believe that ps3 will sell that much more then the wii when the ps3 price is 2 1/2 times as expensive seeing that the DSL is already closing in on the 3 million unit point in less then a year
as it is possible that the 360 will dominate for a while.. the small count of the wii is not realistic considering the hype that surrounds it and the general negitivity that surrounds the ps3..
but only time will tell
"all i hear from sony boys is ZOMG pS will pwn cuz the disks hold more and wtf lamebox how creative what about gaystation...."
And that comment make's you no different. :|
dude...you have no idea wat ur talking about...if anything im a hater...not a fanboy...and dude...wats w/ the cake analogy?....its simple....every new console has brought w/ it new media format....snes..cart...ps1...cd....ps2/ xbox...dvd...the "new" xbox runs the same media as the old one...does that sound next gen to you? and if u do want to run next gen MOVIES...you gotta cough up an extra 200(at least) bucks....(which would make the 360 price seem...a lot closer to the ps3)the games that were first on the ps2 were on cd roms...and even then they had a bunch of filler dummy files...now...both ps2 and xbox games pack the dvd roms to the max...w/ some exeptions of course...so ya...for now...dvds are fine...but wat about in 2 years?....i guess ur lookin forward to the xbox 720...
this analyst doesntknow jack ***** about the games industry. Hes totally missed thefact that the ps3 has no competition in japan and those gamers have been waiting 6 years to upgrade thier console...price is not a factor. also , his reidiculous forcast for the wii showsthat hes probbaly biased owards mircrosoft..aybe this is more microsofts underhanded PRstuff
He can't really say that Xbox 360 will be in the lead until PS3 in 2009 because we're nowhere near that yet.
Wii's going to sell 4 mil by the end of 06
"dude...you have no idea wat ur talking about...if anything im a hater...not a fanboy"
A hater and with fanboy comments like "XBox 1.5" and "lamebox 360"!
You're a fanboy.
"every new console has brought w/ it new media format....snes..cart...ps1...cd....ps2/ xbox...dvd..."
N64 used the same old cartridge format, so it wasn't new (and you can ignore the 64DD btw), and yet cartridge based Mario 64 was one of the best next-gen game upon release (same with Goldeye and Zelda).
Regarding CD, it was released as an add-on for the Atari Jaguar and was also on the 3DO console, BEFORE the Playstation and Saturn. Later, the Dreamcast also used CD. So no, not EVERY console introduced a new media format.
The PS2 was the first console with DVD, the XBox followed, and the GC used the mini-DVD format which offered a third of the space (1.5GB only).
"the "new" xbox runs the same media as the old one...does that sound next gen to you?"
Yes, because I associate next-gen with the games, not the media they're stored on. The 360 is a next-gen console, yes DVD is not a next-gen, but the content on the DVDs for 360 games is certainly next-gen.
"and if u do want to run next gen MOVIES...you gotta cough up an extra 200(at least) bucks...."
The key word here being 'IF'!
If I want to view next-gen movies, I can consider buying an add-on (if I buy a 360 first!), or I could choose to buy a stand-alone HV-DVD or Blu-ray player of my choice in future, when I'm ready to pay for the player, the movies and a TV to do them justice.
"the games that were first on the ps2 were on cd roms...and even then they had a bunch of filler dummy files...now...both ps2 and xbox games pack the dvd roms to the max...w/ some exeptions of course"
No they do not. Every game gamers claim to fill the DVD on PS2 or XBox has proven to be false, i.e. GTA:SA which some claimed filled DVD9, and yet the game is half that size (illegal bit-torrent copies of games online confirm the REAL sizes!).
The ONLY games to fill DVD on PS2 have been a few multi-disc RPGs full of CGI video.
"...so ya...for now...dvds are fine...but wat about in 2 years?....i guess ur lookin forward to the xbox 720..."
Hmmm, first XBox 1.5, now XBox 720, if you're going to make fanboy comments, atleast TRY to be original. ;) Anyway...
Ever heard of multi-disc games? It worked last gen, and it worked the gen before, so why can't it work this gen?
I'm not disputing the benefits offered by Blu-ray's storage capacity, since developers will not need to worry about space or creating multi-disc games. However, claims that DVD is not enough for next-gen games or that a game is not next-gen because it's on DVD is nonsense.
DVD is fine, it's not the best, but fine just the same.
it really pisses me off how big a deal everyone is making over the price: look at it this way, Microsoft and nintendo say "Average Joe" wont go out to best buy and get a 600 dolllar console, but really sony wont be losing that buy because average joe wouldnt have bought an above average product like a ps3 even if it were 2 bucks.why cant people see the potential of this product! a power pc for 600!
I hope they all do well and have a long (6-10 year) life span!!!!!!!
As has been stated before, there will be plenty of hardcore gamers out there to buy up the initial run of PS3s, but then what.
Even with the DMC, MGS, and Final Fantasy's of the world, I can't imagine a casual consumer buying a $600 game system. Most of the games that the casual gamers buy (Sports titles and GTA prime among them) are going to be multi-platform.
If I am that guy and I go into a store to buy a console to play the latest Madden and/or GTA and I see they are available for a $400 console and a $600 console. I pick the $400 console and buy a couple of extra games and/or accessories.
[FLAME SHIELD UP]
With the PS3 pricing and all of the hype about the Wii, I am positive more than 6.5 million are going to sell. You know that at least 10 million Japanese are going to be picking it up with 19 million japanese already owning a DS.
If you walk into a game store and see a console thats 400 bucks ( Xbox360) and the game is also on the the PS3 (500 Version) Which would you buy?
the 500 Version of the PS3 still beats the 400 Version XBox in terms of features, power, and compatability. I think people are stupid and comparing the 300 to the 500 version and the 400 to the 600 version. the 500 Version is the direct competition to the 400 version of the Xbox360. the 600 Version has no competition yet from the Xbox360.
Situation 1
If you own a PS2 and an Xbox then you obviously have a collection of games from those two consoles. You check the Xbox360 Compatability list and less then 1/4th of your Xbox games will work and the other 3/4s wont work. You check all your PS2 games and only a few wont work on the PS3. So which one do you choose? Trade-in is alot bigger then people think.
Situation 2
Your new to gaming and you go into a game store and you see a game you like. You have the money to buy both the Xbox360 or the PS3. You see the 400 version of the Xbox360 and the 500 version of the PS3. You check the features of both systems and notice that the PS3 has tons more features that you would like to use and is a better value for what you get. Do you buy the Xbox360 just to play games or buy the PS3 which has the functions of a basic PC?
If you read the article you will see that it's for North America, and the numbers aren't sales predictions but a prediction of the total number of consoles bought. It's just that QJ makes it out that North America is the only important nation in the world and that what happens there is what happens everywhere.
For situation 1, no one knows how well backward compatibility on the PS3 will work until it is released. Being that they are doing it in software just like the 360, there may be similar issues. Not saying it is a sure thing there will be, just saying nobody can say one way or the other yet.
For situation 2, the "casual" gamer is less likely than the "hardcore" gamer to have the hardware to take advantage of the bigger additional benefits (TV that supports 1080p, and in turn the native res of Blu-Ray movies), so why would they even want to spend an additional $100 for the console.
The "casual" gamer is also likely to already have at least a "basic PC" and would probably not be basing their console buying on that criteria.
Worldwide however I see both the Wii and PS3 passing the 360 by end of 2007. BTW no way 360 reaches 10 mil in the us alone. That's crazy, worldwide is a definite possibility.
PS3 owners will not have a need to purchase 360s as they did with the PS2. Many PS2 owners bought Xboxes because it offered things the PS2 just didn't have. Good FPS games and online play. With that coming to the PS3, having your second console be a 360 just doesn't make much sense at the start at least (Unless you're nuts about halo which I am but I already own one =D ). In contrast the Wii will make a great second console but only to gamers who like to play with groups. Saying that however I see the Wii falling out of flavor by the end of 2008 and the 360 leaving it in the dust by end of 2009. I don't see Nintendo getting rid of that kiddie image and for hardcore gamers the non HD graphics/physics/AI (all the things that make a title next-gen) will get very tiring in the coming years.
I see PS3 really taking off by 2009 at this time the price will be very close to the 360 since the price curve will drop faster with the PS3 due to tech in the machine. I reckon a price of roughly 299-399 for the ps3 and 249 for the 360. The PS3 will have double the 360 numbers by end of 2009. Saying that however I really see MS as a clear second place winner this time around. Easily getting 40-50 million consoles sold worldwide. The Wii should reach 30 mil while the PS3 will surely break the 100 million barrier again but this time I see that happening sooner than with the PS2. People will buy it simply for the HD playing capabilities. Also by 2009 HDTV adoption should reach critical mass and of course video games will take credit for it. I also see the PS2 selling well up to 2009 and should reach 130-140 million PS2s SHIPPED by then.
Expect major grow in the game industry.
u are comeplete dumbass
This is not like a sporting event where the favorite might fail to take home the cup, Brazil for example. Sony has completely dominated home consoles for the last ten years. Not by small margins but multiples of 4 or 5.
To say the PS3 is the favorite to win the next Gen war is an understatement. Many of you will say "look what happen to Nintendo, they failed to stay ahead of the competition" but besides what many may think Nintendo machines were not as dominating.
SNES: 49 million sold worldwide
Genesis: 35 million sold worldwide
Compare to
PS2 100+ million and still growing at about 1 million units a month growth
Nearest competitor - XBOX: 24 million with near zero growth.
Please don't underestimate Sony's capabilities to main the lead.
Problem with ps3's pricing is that appeals only to the hardcore gamer, or the blu ray shopper. Hardcore gamers only represent a small % of purchases of consoles. All of us here are posting on a videogame blog.. so we would be hardcore gamers. Now imagine 5 of your friends that come over and play your latest and greateset system, but rarely buy one. These are the people who decide the console war.. the casual gamers... this is because they are much greater in number.
PS2 was bought by casual gamers, helping it sell its 100 million or so consoles.
These casual gamers will not spend 600 (650 w/tax) or even 500 (540 w/tax). Its just too much.
I predict that during this generation, the large audience of casual ps2 purchasers will split up: Some will buy a 360, others will buy a Wii.
I don't think the Wii will be as popular as everybody dreams it to be because: SOME PEOPLE WILL NOT LIKE USING THE CONTROLLER - It will be considered the ultimate nerd wand. I think its a great idea though.
I study business and economics, and trust me, these "Analysts" Consider ALOT of things before making their predictions.
Only 35 million game consoles sold in 3 years in a growing industry that has sold over 120 million game consoles in 6 years.
regarding backwards compatability, the PS3 is also shipping with the PS2's emotion engine built into the unit, so it should have 100% compatability with PS2 games.
PS1 games, on the other hand, are being handled through emulation, so i'm not sure what the compatibility rate will be for that. but considering that it should be about 100% compatible with PS2 games, it already comes out on top over the 360's pretty awful backwards compatibility.
in a new consoles early life, backward's compatibility is really important because new software is few and far between, and you want *something* to play on your new console when the four or five launch titles you pick up wear thin. the fact that the X Boxes most loved and revered franchises (like Splinter Cell) weren't compatible out of the box really hurt the overall appeal of the system. i own 60 PS2 games. i'm expecting those 60 to function on my PS3. if 50 of them do. that's cool. if ony 3 or 4 work, i'd be pissed. imagine how furiuos new 360 owners were, when they hooked up their 360's popped in their favorite X Box game (they were done playing the launch titles for the night), and the game wouldn't boot. title after title wasn't compatible.
suddenly, his or her little sister walks in with the X Box version of Barbie Horse Adventures and pops it into the shiny new 360. lo and behold, it boots up perfectly fine and little Susie is whisked off to hitherto unknown territory with Barbie and her horses, while X Box fan sulks in the corner, since he traded in his X Box to pay for his 360.
with the PS3, i shouldn't have to worry about that scenario, at least for PS2 games. as for PS1 games, as long as Castlevania: Symphony of the Night and Silent Hill work, i'm happy.
Some of you commenters are down right ridiculous.
"dvd9 isn't next gen, can't play 1080p" - like any of you actually have 1080p televisions, its a moot point.
i just got a 1080i 60 inch tv like 2 years ago so im not about to go out an buy a 1080p tv.
cable tv won't be higher than 1080i for like 10 years at least, so big *****ing deal with the 1080p.
ps3 isn't going to be a disaster, it will do perfectly fine. but sony's smugness is starting to piss me off. I don't appreciate a company telling me what I do and do not want. I myself will not be getting a ps3 since my roomate is getting one. I already have a 360. Those haters going waaa 360 has no NEXT gen games...obviously you have never played GRAW which is basically the best game ever ( i like it more than halo2).
so fanboys shutup already! im sick of this *****! don't complain about things you will never use! especially that 1080p nonsense! (im willing to be the amount of people with 1080p televisions is less than 1%).
I can make a better prediction. Wii will win there's no doubt I don't know what this *****tard is getting his assumptions /data from but polls show the Wii in a heafty lead. The PS3 is STILL in lead over the 360 but that will likely even out.
"i own 60 PS2 games. i'm expecting those 60 to function on my PS3. if 50 of them do. that's cool. if ony 3 or 4 work, i'd be pissed."
But why? Are you getting rid of your PS2 after you get a PS3?
I do feel the case for BC is overstated at times. It's a great feature to have of course, enabling the gamer to play his old games and next-gen games all on one box, but at the same time, I don't believe most gamers are going to get rid of their old consoles the moment the new console arrives.
So if a PS2 game doesn't work on your PS3, is life really so bad when you have to play it on your old PS2 console instead? ;)
For me, I prefer to use my old consoles to play old games, with next-gen consoles being used to play next-gen games. :)
But with the Wiimote statement, eventually Nintendo will most likely make an alternate controller that will be more simple because people are gonna get tired of the Wiimote.
actually, i *am *getting rid of my PS2 when i get my PS3 (i gave my PS1 to my friend after i got my PS2, because her PS1 was broken), but i'm probably going to give my PS2 to my fiance, so it won't be going far. *however* if she's playing Castlevania: Curse of Darkness on the PS2, and i want to play Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones, it's nice to know i'd be able to just pop it into my PS3, and not have to take the PS2 away from her (probably leading to no sex later).
also, i don't have the room to hook up my NES, SNES, Genesis, DreamCast, Playstation 2, X Box, Gamecube, and PS3 all up at the same time. i like being able to break that down to two or three systems. it's a convenience thing. my apartment and entertainment stand just doesn't have the room to support those 8 systems (ten when i get a 360 and Wii). so yeah, backwards compability is real important to me. back when i got my PS2, i didn't play PS2 games all the time. i'd pop in Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Final Fantasy Tactics, Crono Cross, Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil 2, etc. once more PS2 games out, those games got moved to the backburner, but until more PS3 games come out, backward compatibility do me just fine.
also, some PS1 games (that i haven't played yet) don't work on my slimline PS2. so i'm hoping that that will be rectified on my PS3.
The concept of Substitution will help sell many 360's this Holiday season. Peter Moore talked about how Xbox 360's being out of stock actually helped sell ps2's.
Somebody walks into game store wanting a new game system this holiday... ps3 will be sold out until march... and 360 will be in stock for 200 cheaper... and about 100 games to choose from, as well as some bargain titles.
I plan to buy a Wii one day.. ill have to play it first
Has Sony confirmed the Emotion Engine will be in the PS3. At last check the only info I could find was that a Japanese Tech Magazine claimed this, but Sony was mum on it.
you could be right about that, but i could have sworn it was in an interview with Kutaragi a few weeks ago. i'll have to look into it, then i'll get back to you.
"actually, i *am *getting rid of my PS2 when i get my PS3"
Ok, so you're one of the minority. ;)
"it's nice to know i'd be able to just pop it into my PS3, and not have to take the PS2 away from her (probably leading to no sex later)"
Ouch.
"also, i don't have the room to hook up my NES, SNES, Genesis, DreamCast, Playstation 2, X Box, Gamecube, and PS3 all up at the same time. i like being able to break that down to two or three systems. it's a convenience thing."
"CONVENIENCE" - That's the word I was waiting for.
That's the thing about BC, it is convenient. That's why I say the importance of BC is overstated. Prior to the PS2, no consoles were BC, it's a new addition and of course it's a welcome addition, but the appeal for next-gen consoles amongst the majority of gamers are the next-gen games, not BC.
For gamers like yourself however, BC offers a convenient way to play your old games and new games all on one console, instead of two (or three).
dude...im sorry you bought an lamebox...i really am...you dont have to take it out on me...u named n64, jaguar, sega saturn, dreamcast...bro....none of those systems where number one...or even close to it, any SUCCESSFUL new system brought w/ it new media, the xbox 1.5 plays this gen media...its simple...its tru...if you dont mind buying a game that comes in 5 dvds ( which is not very cost effective which means look for those games to cost a couple bucks more), then ya....dvds are fine for the next 2 years...but bro...lets be real here...wat were they thinking??????
first off i own a 360 and teh 400 for it is alot and teh above average gamer isn't going to buy the cheap versions of either ps3 or xbox 360 so the 300 adn 500 prices should be ignored in my opinion at least and i dont think the 600 for a ps3 is asking to much for it and i eventually plan on owning one but not at launch unless for some reason i make a lot more money than i think i am so in both cases there is a lot of good features for both i personally owned an xbox (sold it to pay for rest of 360) and still own a ps2 and in fact once a gamecube that i liked but without teh games to back it up i got rid of it when i finally bought an xbox (i know im not teh only one but i just love the halo series) so in reality within the first year of the wii being out i'll probaly own one due to its low price adn my college budget it will fit in wonderfully and that like gamecube there will eb games that everyone can play adn be good enough to make it fun at going back to halo ther comes a time when u cant just take any old friend and get them to play some halo lan at college the games just aren't the same so in the respect the wii i think will be a suprise (well not reall a suprise the features and the price are a hige draw and the fact taht nintendo to me at least is more of teh kid system adn there are plenty of kids out there who love games and parents who grew up playing the nintendo games and if i were a parent i would feel much better if my kid had a wii and that selection of games rather than the ps3 adn xbox 360 games) so on that note all thes consoles will find there place and in the end i dont think sales will really matter as long as good consoles adn good games are made throughout this race and if quality is put out its worth paying for it
I couldn't agree with you more. I second that, pricing does matter. Alot of the hardcore gamers would buy a ps3 even if they announced it was $1000 dollars (right?), because video games for them are more than a hobby. It is their life. In fact, there are some people posting on this site that would buy all 3 systems. How much would that cost including games and peripherals? The fact of the matter is, for people who do play games leisurely, $600 is a lot of money to fork over for a game system. Even the Xbox360 is considered expensive, but probably doable. For a lot of people, their world doesn't revolve around video games like us. To get these certain type of people to buy a video game system, is how you sell 100 million consoles. Hardcore gamers on this website are but a small group of consumers in the bigger picture.
i kinda agree but i feel the wii will do alot better cuz japan is gonna buy a sh*t load and i think its getting way too little credit and is getting really under estimated. and ps3 is ofcoarse gonna kick everyones asses, followed by the wii and the 360 dead last.
No one really knows because the race is going to be so close. Many risks are taking for the Next-gen, anything can happen.
Figboy: I have to agree with you on BC. Sometimes you just want to play old games because you might have forgotten the experience. Its really that important, but its nice addition to some and neccessary to others. Like you said, its nice because of convience.
I think the Wii will be successful because a lot of people that rarely played video games or never played before will find the system intriguing, just by watching someone play, or experiencing it themselves. For hardcore gamers who have grown accustomed to a certain way of controlling games probably not so much. Some hardcore gamers may find it tiring, and would rather sit down for many hours like the way they have been doing it for many years. Except for the occassional hardcore gamer that actually finds swinging a sword more interesting and immersive than pressing a button. What you will see happening is people who rarely ever play games will find the Wii control system very instinctive and intuitive, but many veteran gamers will be frustrated with the controls because they have to unlearn what they have learned after doing it the same way all those years. Many of them will probably give up early on because they don't have the patience to adapt to a new control scheme. If the Nintendo DS is any indication to the future of gaming, there's going to be alot of new and interesting people in the gaming community whether you like it or not.
The way the games have been comin' out i highly doubt it!Gears of War and Prey were both supposed to have come out at launch or christmas of last year,and now we're finally gettin' Prey almost a year later!
that the ps3 is great because it can do stuff that a pc can....I'm not getting why this is so great, Im assuming everyone posting here allready has a computer running a better operating sysytem (Microsoft made) and waaaaaaaaaaay faster, do you know how muchcpu and ram is givin to running linux on the ps3, last ttime I checkes it was somewhere around 333mhz, which can barly run an internet browser.
Your reading skills are not very good it seems. I said and I quote, "I can consider buying an add-on (if I buy a 360 first!)", which should have been sufficient for you to realise that I haven't actually purchased a 360!
As for your change from "every new console" to "any successful new system", lol, that's just typical, when you can't argue, just change the conditions. I guess if I pursue the point further you'll then say "any successful new system beginning with P".
Anyway, I never purchase newly launched consoles (despite being more than able to afford it), preferring instead to wait until the first price drop, since besides a lower cost, the console should be free of launch problems and there will be a larger library of great games to choose from. I'll apply the same to the PS3.
Obviously I hit a nerve calling you a fanboy, but if you don't want to be called a fanboy, then don't act like one. It's as simple as that. :|
Yeah, i sorta agree i am a nintendo fan boy but being resonable the 360 is going to be the victor with the ps3 and wii fircely competing for 2nd place, because of the ps3's huge fan base, and the wii being mere pocket change it could be either.
But i know for sure a wii's gonna like mighty fine next to my 360, to bad theres not enought room for a goerge forman grill ah i mean ps3
a lot of people here are saying that only the hardcore are going to purchase a PS3 at $500, $600. well, *DUH*! of *course* only the hard core are going to buy it! why do you think Sony is only shipping 2 million units worldwide at launch? to appease the hard core masses that want their PS3 *now*!
the PS2, when launched in 2000 was $300. in it's first year, it only sold about 6 to 10 million units. we all know that to date, the PS2 has sold 100 million units and counting. applying, oh, i dunno, *logic*, tells me that the other 90 million PS2s shipped, sold *after* that initial launch year, and in conjunction with subsequent price drops.
using some more of that tasty logic, i surmise that the PS3, in it's first year, will sell about 10 million units. *after* that first year, it will probably undergo a price drop, at which point it will probably sell another 10 mil. in 2009 (it's third year), it will undergo another price drop, and sell another few million units.
i swear, some of you people are acting like the PS2 shipped and sold all 100 million units in it's first day on the market. sheesh. it's a slow rampup. the first few million PS2's had to be priced at $300 because of production costs. once the manufacturing process became more refined over time, they were able to cut manufacturing costs, make some profit off of the $300 PS2s for a while, then, due to competition (remember, the X Box and GC came out a year after the PS2, thus affording the PS2 a *second* year at $300, which it wouldn't have been able to do if the X Box and GC had come out at the same time), they dropped the price to maintain their lead.
with the PS3, i see a price drop happening sooner rather than later because they have come out second (again, but the Dreamcast, while a great system, didn't have enough units on the market by the time the PS2 launched), and the 360 has established itself as a very capable system. since the PS3 is priced so far above the 360, to compete, they will have to drop the price by $100 asap. my guess will be fall 2007. they're already talking about refininf the production process, so it's possible we could see that price drop happen by Christmas 2007. the PSP has already dropped by $50 after it's first year.
anyway, my original point was that this 2006 launch of the PS3 is specifically for the hardcore fans that have been with Sony since 1995. 100 million PS2 fans, subtract 4 million PS3's shipped by years end, still leaves 96 million PS2 fans without their follow up. those people will have to wait, but, chances are, they waited to get their PS2's until the price was cheaper, so nothing has changed, and is expected by Sony.
No Console that was priced at more than 300 have been successful period. PS3 is a great system but the price is too high Sony accuses microsoft of coming out too early they are coming out too early PS3 is coming out one year earlier than it is suppossed to if they came out later it would be $400 - $500 not $500 - $600 they rushed because the Xbox 360 came out and they would have been 2 years late in that case Playstation 3 will lose, but even with the early release Playstation 3 is still going to lose because people are still going to wait for the Playstation 3 price to drop which will be in mid to the end of 2007 which by that time will be too late because Xbox 360 will have a stronghold on the videogame market even in Japan.
you aren't looking at how the gaming market was back when the Neo-Geo and 3DO came out. back then, the market wasn't older than 18. most gamers back then were in the ages of 5 to 18. the parents of those children weren't about to spend $600 or more on a "toy." also remember that the gaming industry only had a user base of aobut 60 million worldwide.
nowadays, video games have a 160 million person installed user base, over half of which are 18-30. those 80 million people aren't relying on mom and dad to purchase video game consoles for them. they can purchase those consoles themselves if they so wish. also taking into account that out of 160 million gamers, 100 million of them are PS2 owners (the PS2, as stated numerous times before, has sold 100 million units, and counting), i don't think Sony has to worry about finding 2 to 4 million PS2 fans who are foaming at the mouth at the prospect of the PS3. just like Nintendo and Microsoft have their rabid fans that will buy every iteration of the GBA or DS, and purchase an X Box just to play Halo, there are even more rabid Sony fans who remember the first time they fired up Metal Gear Solid, or Resident Evil, or Final Fantasy 7. and they bonded themselves with Sony because of the games. it's not Sony's fault that they're number 1.
and i agree that the PS3 would have been around $400, $500 dollars if released next year. you can blame Microsoft for the current $500, $600 price point for the PS3. because the 360 released prematurelyin 2005, Microsoft put Sony in a difficult postion: release the PS3 in 2007, like was originally planned, and risk giving Microsoft *two* holiday seasons in which to cement the lead (Christmas 2005 and Christmas 2006), or release the PS3 in 2006, before the kinks in production were worked out, and thus be forced to charge more for the system, alienating consumers that won't pay the hefty price tag, and stopping MS from dominating.
considering that the Playstation brand has 100 million users across the world, Sony wagered that they could afford to lose a few million to Microsoft by releasing the PS3 in 2006 at $500 and $600. at the most, i expect Sony to lose about 10 million of their initial user base, leaving them with 90 million, still a significant lead. if Microsoft had released the 360 in 2006 instead, Sony would have released the PS3 in 2007, and for much, much less than $600. i see this console war shaping up with Sony in the lead with 70 million units, Microsoft in second with 50 million units, and the Wii in third with about 40 million units.
funny that u "chose" to not counter my argument...seems like u kinda ran out of things to say. look im no fanboy, i buy the best value, and as we have seen...its not always the case that the most powerful (xbox) system is the best value. the worst console came out on top (ps2) but it was the best value. oh and yaz...please dont make claims about me...especially cuz u seem like a smart guy...dont ACT ignorant
"funny that u "chose" to not counter my argument..."
I would normally counter each of your points, but you've already shown this to be a waste of my time.
Look at #43! I decided to reply to EACH of your comments in turn, but in your responce, you chose to reply to just a fraction of the points raised, hence ignoring most of the arguements made. So as I said, it would be a waste of my time.
"look im no fanboy"
By your own words here you are. Fanboys have a love/hate relationship with companies and consoles, and as you've admitted here, you are "a hater". So much so that you even resort to name calling, i.e. XBox 1.5 and lamebox 360 (which is very childish btw). You are NO different than fanboys who refer to the Playstation as the 'Gaystation' or 'PS Poo' or the Gamecube as the 'Lamecube' etc.
As I said previously, if you don't like being called a fanboy, then you shouldn't act like one. As a gamer, there are no excuses for hating other consoles, there are no excuses for calling consoles by childish names, the only people who you would expect this kind of behaviour from are fanboys. Think about it. :|
"you can blame Microsoft for the current $500, $600 price point for the PS3. because the 360 released prematurelyin 2005, Microsoft put Sony in a difficult postion: release the PS3 in 2007, like was originally planned, and risk giving Microsoft *two* holiday seasons in which to cement the lead"
Sorry, but that is complete rubbish, it really is.
For years, the average gap between console generations has been 5-6 years. Because of this, and the PS2 launching in March 2000 in Japan, the PS2 was expected to launch between March 2005 and March 2006 (again 5-6 years). ALL the predictions over the years was of Sony's next console launching by March 2006 at the LATEST. No-one ever said 2007, not even Sony, since March 2007 would have been 7 years after the PS2 launch!
The 360 launched November 2005, that was 5 years and 8 months after the launch on the PS2, hence premature for the XBox (which was late last gen), but not premature for a next-gen console! Therefore the 360 launched within the time many expected the PS3 will launch, including MS, who planned to have a console ready to launch close to the PS3. If the PS3 has launched as originally planned (Spring 2006), then it would be in keeping with the 5-6 year predictions (give or take a month or so), however as we all know, it is now November 2006, 6 years and 8 months after the PS2.
So no, you can NOT blame MS for the cost of the PS3, all the blame lies with Sony (if blame is even the right word). The PS3 costs as much as it does because of the technology involved, and the PS3 was due to launch THIS year at the latest, not 2007!
I think it not even going to make it after a year when the p23 comes out because everyone is going to forget about the 360 and everyone is going to get the ps3, and like is name the 360 sales is really going to take a turn for the worst they didnt even get the sales they wanted.
actually, Sony did consider the idea of launching the PS3 in 2007, because the PS2 was still going strong sales wise. i can't remember where i read that, but it was probably ign.com, since that's the site i read the most. and if the average console life is 5 to 6 years, why did Microsoft release the 360 in 2005, roughly *3* to *4* years after the original X Box launched? by your definition of a consoles life cycle, the X Box still had another year or two to go before it was time for a new iteration. sounds to me like they launched prematurely.
and i can and do blame Microsoft for the cost of the PS3. the next gen war was begun 1 year too soon. the PS2, X Box, and GC had plenty of life left in them, and definitely the PS2, judging by the high profile titles coming out for the console this year and next year. the fact that the PS3 was pushed back to November shows that Sony wasn't ready to mass produce the thing this year. which is why they're scrambling to get that November launch going asap.
if Sony had waited into spring 2007 (which they've said they had considered doing (again, check the ign archives for the actual articles and quotes), Microsoft would have had the Christmas 2005 season, and the Christmas 2006 season to sell 360s virtually unopposed. not to mention the arrival of the Nintendo Wii. Arrogant as Sony is, even they knew that if they let those two have Christmas 2006, they'd lose too much market share. Sony says a lot of things, and yes, they planned to release the PS3 in March of 2006 in Japan, but realistically, they knew that that wasn't possible. they hadn't even begun production of the individual components needed to create the system. a company that was planning on a March 06 launch would have released knews back in 2005 that production of the key PS3 components were underway. hell, it wasn't until E3 2006, which takes place in *May* that Sony finally revealed the final specs for the system. despite what they've said, they had no plans whatsoever to release the PS3 in March 06.
the life expectancy of game consoles were roughly 5 to 6 years, but that was before gaming technology got as advanced as it is now. Sony had been working on the Cell for nearly 4 years. how long do you think it's going to take to develop the *next* processor? as the technology gets more and more complex, the gestation period of consoles will get longer. from the NES to Genesis, it was roughly 4 years, from the SNES to the PS1, it was roughly 5 years, from the PS1 to the PS2 it was roughly 5 years, from the PS2 to the PS3, it's 6 years. see the trend? Sony spent a lot of money on the Cell processor, more money than they spent on the emotion engine, and they made sure that they created something flexible enough to go beyond the 5-6 year cycle. i doubt we see the PS4 anytime before 2014.
the PS3 was due to launch this year because it had no choice. if Sony had it's way, they would have launched in Spring or Fall 2007, because the PS2 is still kicking ass in the stores. why compete with yourself? in the month of May alone, it sold 250,000 units. i think it sold roughly the same in June, and will continue to sell well into the Christmas season. the Wii's main competition is a $130 PS2, with a library of thousands of games (a lot under $20). hell, even the PS3 had to compete with the PS2, but since there are only 2 million units shipping, and those will be gobbled up by the hardcore Sony fans, it's not really an issue. and unless the 360 offers something this year thats not involving shooting people and blowing ***** up with guns, it's not going to appeal to the part of the market that *doesn't* want to shoot stuff (i know it's hard to believe, but not everyone wants to be a miscellaneous bald guy with tattoos and giant weaponry).
sure, the technology going into the PS3 is expensive. for *2006*. you're telling me that the cost to produce the Cell and Blu Ray wouldn't *drop* by 2007? the reasons why systems cost what they do at launch is because of the production rampup neccessary to create the consoles needed to meet demand. if Sony actually tried to produce 100 million PS3's by years end, they'd go out of business. i guess during their meetings, they figured that 4 million units by years end, and 2 million more by the end of their fiscal year (ending March 2007) at $500 and $600 was an acceptable number, and would allow them to catch up with Microsoft. after March 2007, the ball game really starts. and Sony will play hard. once mass production of the units begin, there will be a marketing blitzkrieg about Blu Ray, a number of high profile titles coming out on PS3 *and* Blu Ray (Spider-Man 3 Blu Ray in fall 2007 anyone?), *and* the price of the unit will drop because they won't have to produce millions of units in such a short ammount of time. they can put out shipments of 500,000 every three months, meeting a slow demand, and lowering production costs. next year is going to be the true beginning of the PS3, not this year. this year is like the advanced screening before the world premiere.
"the PS3 was due to launch this year because it had no choice. if Sony had it's way, they would have launched in Spring or Fall 2007"
Again, that's rubbish. Sorry to be so direct but it really is. At no time in all these years since the PS2 launched, was there any suggestion of Sony's next-gen console having a debut launch in 2007, 7 YEARS after the PS2. No reports, no articles, not even analysis predictions. The only time 2007 would be mentioned is for Europe, on the assumption that the console had already launched in Japan and the US in 2006.
Not only that, MS officially announced their plans for the 360 last year, at a time when PS3 developement was already going ahead, and yet NO developer or anyone has commented on PS3's launch being brought forward from 2007.
After YEARS of developement, all the components were due to be ready on time for Sony to release their next-gen console in Spring 2006. So, with the hardware ready, Sony were going to sit on it for a year until the price was right? Come on!
And if the original plan was for 2007, then NVidia would not have needed to finish the RSX design so early (way back in Febrary this year), over 1 year before the console was due to launch!
Then there's Blu-ray. Sony have ALWAYS planned to use the PS3 as a means to establish a large base of Blu-ray owners QUICKLY to counter HD-DVD in the format wars. So, how were they going to achieve this by launching the PS3 in 2007, long after the first HD-DVD and Blu-ray players hit the market in 2006? This would give HD-DVD one year to establish itself against the more expensive Blu-ray, giving HD-DVD a head start. The PS3 was meant to counter this by launching around the same time as Blu-ray players.
So PS3's launch has as much to do with the battle for the next-gen DVD format (HD-DVD vs Blu-ray) as it has for consoles. Hence whichever way you look at it, Sony had no intention of launching the PS3 in 2007.
The cost of the PS3 has nothing to do with Microsoft.
"and if the average console life is 5 to 6 years, why did Microsoft release the 360 in 2005, roughly *3* to *4* years after the original X Box launched?"
It was 4 years after, and I explained it already. To quote myself from post #82; "The 360 launched November 2005... hence PREMATURE FOR THE XBOX (which was LATE LAST GEN), but not premature for a next-gen console! ....planned to have a console ready to launch close to the PS3."
"and i can and do blame Microsoft for the cost of the PS3. the next gen war was begun 1 year too soon. the PS2, X Box, and GC had plenty of life left in them"
Planning for next-gen consoles take YEARS Figboy. The hardware and software is scheduled to be ready at a certain time in the future, and everything is set to meet that target. They do not develope the console first and THEN decide when to release it depending on market conditions!
Thanks to the 360, the next-gen console began on time, not early.
I could go on, but not until you provide PROOF that Sony were originally planning to release the PS3 in 2007, despite the battle between Blu-ray and HD-DVD (which I belive is equally important to Sony).
after this i'm done debating the point. my question is do you regularly read magazines devoted to playstation specifically?
if you do, then you may remember that a short time after the PS2 launched, Kaz Hirai or someone in a similar position stated that the PS3 would probably be seen sometime around 2007, 2006 at the earliest.
i wouldn't just spout off these things if they didn't have any basis in fact.
the reason why i say Microsoft had something to do with the PS3's cost (which i thought would be plain by now) is because the PS3 is indeed launching 6 months to a year too early as a direct result of Microsoft launching the 360 in November.
Sony has stated (maybe not a thousand times), that the PS3 wouldn't be ready until 2007. Microsoft saw that as an opportunity to get the upper hand by releasing the 360 a full *two* years before the PS3's expected launch (not confirmed launch, just expected based off of Sony's comments prior to 2005). Sony had to counter by bumping the release of the PS3 to early 2006, cutting into Microsoft's head start. they realized that that just wasn't econnomically or physically feasable, so they moved the Japanese launch to November, when they realised that it must launch in all territories in 2006 or hand over the Next Gen crown to Microsoft.
since the PS3 is releasing *this* year, instead of next year, the cost of Cell and Blu Ray components are more expensive than they would have been, say, in 2007. BECAUSE OF THAT, the PS3 has the hefty price tag. if the console had released in 2007, it probably would have been $50 to $100 less than what it is now.
there. i can't state it any plainer than that.
as for the Blu Ray HD DVD war, HD DVD has failed to take off, prior to it's competition even launching. Sony could launch their Blu Ray players in 2007 and it still wouldn't have an impact on the slow start of HD DVD. if Microsoft had added an HD DVD player to the 360, there would be 3.8 million HDDVD players in peoples homes right now. since they didn't there are only a few thousand HD DVD players sold thus far. when the PS3 launches in November, it will sell out of however many million units Sony manages to ship, thus establishing Blu Ray into those peoples homes. couple that with the fact that Blu Ray has the support of 7 out of the 8 major motion picture studios, along with the Porn Industry, and HD DVD only has the support of 3 of the 8, and Blu Ray clearly has the advantage. Sony didn't have anything to worry about in regards to competition. much like the PS2, there will be a larger library of Blu Ray movies because of the ammount of support it's getting. Sony knows this, so they don't care if Blu Ray gets delayed. come November, the PS3 will be the cheapest Blu Ray player on the market. and those that want a home theatre system with the largest collection of movies will smartly choose Blu Ray (or just stick to standard DVDs, actually).
anyway, i'm done arguing. you don't see my point, and i don't see yours, so i'm walking away.
"Sony has stated (maybe not a thousand times), that the PS3 wouldn't be ready until 2007"
I Look forward to your links for proof of this (links from before the 360 announcement which are not based on speculation or rumour).
"anyway, i'm done arguing. you don't see my point, and i don't see yours, so i'm walking away."
Always a wise when you're wrong. ;)
Goodbye.
"after this i'm done debating the point. my question is do you regularly read magazines devoted to playstation specifically?"
I regularly read magazines for all consoles and have done so for many years, as well as the internet of course.
Sony are the market leader, and I don't believe for one moment that they were forced into launching the PS3 atleast one year earlier than planned (spring 2006) because of the 360. It just doesn't work that way, since there is no way Sony could have brought their software and hardware plans forward by 1 year in response to Microsoft's XBox 360.
But as you said, we'll have to agree to disagree. :|
And twisting this arguement around for a moment. Let's say what you say is true, and the PS3 does cost more because of MS's 360. Why should MS care?
In fact, why should you care?
If the PS3 has arrived earlier than planned because of the 360, then gamers are paying for the privilege of owning the PS3 console EARLY. Afterall, you say without the 360, the PS3 wouldn't arrive until 2007.
If you don't want to pay so much for the console, then you just need to be patient and wait for the first price drop, by which time the PS3 would be available for the price and at the time it was originally due to launch (according to you).
So, is paying more to get the PS3 earlier than expected really a problem? I don't think so.
***** ANDERSON! hes a ***** bag...
MY *****IN ASS!!! XbOX 360 IS BARELY NEX GEN LOLOLOL once ps3 and wii come out its *****ed. my predictions, 360 right over ps3 (cuz its been out longer) and wii will definetely win by a ***** load.
360 is amazing and i think it will stay dominant and the wii with alot of fans excited it will probably sell more than 6.5mill with the release date nov.19.06. but with the ps3 will be last to appear and hoping that this will help them but with the price and the problems with being powerful enough to play hi-def but cant is pretty stupid, and if i remember correctly the gamecube came out after the other 2 systems and it withered away it to almost nothing.in my opinion i think 360 will stay atop the video game ladder then wii with ps3 close behind