Sony: MS failed to capitalize on headstart

[Zeus]

Microsoft's global marketing director, Albert Penello, recently told us all why the PS3 sucked, so Sony have returned the favor. SCEA's Scott Steinberg has said that Microsoft has failed to capitalize on its one year head start on the PS3 and that they failed to "reach beyond the core first person shooter player". “In the years ahead our games will begin to distance themselves from other next-gen games, our games being first-party exclusives." he said.


“In three years certain systems will look pretty long in the tooth graphically if not look like they’re extremely dated.” Later he says, “Wii is on a different trajectory completely and I’m not exactly sure what that will look like in two or three years time. The technology that’s under that hood is so different from ours and I think the jury is still out.”

What I really want are the specific projections of when PS3 will cross the Xbox 360 line.

“In the years ahead our games will begin to distance themselves from other next-gen games, our games being first-party exclusives. As our teams work on third generation software, you’ll see games begin to tip the scale at thirty gigs, forty gigs, fifty gigs. You can’t possibly fit that on HD-DVD unless you want to do the old floppy disk swaps of years past.

“So that immersion quality will also begin to distance itself from our competition. We’ve got 2,300 people in our development core, building great content. That focus and dedication is unparalleled with any other first party company. Our first-party games will lead the way.

“So in soft qualitative terms there will be a big distance created by PS3 from the other two platforms in two or three years. I think most analysts, the Michael Pachters of this world, have curved the PS3 business to create distance in ’08 and ’09 so two, three years out, I think most pundits have pointed to the PS3 as starting to create, separate itself from the other two.”

Is there a chart on the wall in his office where the PlayStation 3 crosses the Xbox 360 install base line?

“Well no, but we do look at how closely 360 is indexed off of Xbox and for the good chunk of 2007 it was fairly close to where Xbox was year to year.

“The time that they had to create huge distance and build a massive install base before the PS3 could really take root; that opportunity is over and there’s no real capitalization of it. They had a great crescendo moment with Halo and it helped catapult them into a pretty strong position towards the back end of last year, but they were still within a stone’s throw of where they were with the original Xbox.

“To me that speaks of a failure to broaden their reach beyond the core first person shooter player who was in their back pocket for Xbox. The question for us is ‘are they really going after the PS2 demographic? Are they stealing share from us?’ And the answer is no.”

It is clearly an article of faith at Sony that the PS2 hordes are just waiting for the right moment to assert their dedication to The Brand, and join the party. “The PlayStation fan continues to be loyal to the PlayStation brand. We see huge overlap on PS3 ownership and PSP ownership and PS2 ownership. So we continue to put in the bank millions of PS2 owners who are ripe for upgrading to PS3 at the right point in time.

“That’s the secret weapon, that’s what goes unreported. It’s this 41 million universe of PS2 owners that will be targeted very, very soon to upgrade to a PS3 Blu-ray machine."


News Source: <a href="http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9429&Itemid=2&limit=1&limitstart=2" target=_blank">next-gen</a> via <a href="http://play.tm/story/16579" target=_blank">play.tm</a>

[yourM0M1]

i do agree M$ failed on the headstart but at the same rate the market just wasnt there yet, ppl were still buying ps2's and the original xbox could have had some life in it....the last sentence of this whole quote explains it all "upgrade to a PS3 Blu-ray machine" .....why the f*ck would he not call it a PS3 CONSOLE?? and the right moment all the ps2 owners are waiting for is "A PRICE DROP" then some A+ exclusive's.....we will also see with GTAIV how things go

[daps83777]

well microsoft still has more consoles sold than sony, so not sure why this guy is running his mouth. sony hasn't even kept up with the wii that was launched within what a week of the PS3. and the wii is beating the PS3 worse than the 360. sony is going to go back to where they where when the PS3 launched if they don't tie everyone's tongues back down, since the defeat of hd-dvd sony executives are turning back into the arrogant idiots that lead to most of the PS3's problems because of bad press in the first place which really hurt the initial sales.

[Tarv]

NO KIDDING! MS should have been diverse and capitalize in their first year just like SONY did with the PS3! I mean look at all the diverse and unique games the PS3 came out with in the first year! NO BRAINER!

[Fe_man2000]

In 3 years there will be a new xbox I suspect - and I am not promoting or knocking the idea but I think that the 7-10 year life cycle that sony is proposing will be met by a 5-7 year one by MS .

so 2010-2011 new xbox - new hardware always nice and shiny and of course much more powful than the current gen just due to time moving on.

Sony PS4 2013 = xbox has 2 years lead time this time.

This would be my approach - it did wonders for the PS2 and just seems a good idea - also I think most people are ok buying a new console every 4-5 years - god knows you cant keep a good PC that long and they cost much more. Theres a big market out there and long term plans are worth investing in - sony make good consoles but they move slowly.

[daps83777]

In 3 years there will be a new xbox I suspect - and I am not promoting or knocking the idea but I think that the 7-10 year life cycle that sony is proposing will be met by a 5-7 year one by MS .

so 2010-2011 new xbox - new hardware always nice and shiny and of course much more powful than the current gen just due to time moving on.

Sony PS4 2013 = xbox has 2 years lead time this time.

This would be my approach - it did wonders for the PS2 and just seems a good idea - also I think most people are ok buying a new console every 4-5 years - god knows you cant keep a good PC that long and they cost much more. Theres a big market out there and long term plans are worth investing in - sony make good consoles but they move slowly.

the thing is i think that sony is just spouting the 10 year plan, i think they said something similiar for the PS2. the PS2 is barely in its 7 year right now and things are finally starting to slow down for it. sony typically leaves there console on the market even after the new consoles come out, giving the product line a longer life. but i think we will still see the regular 4-6 year life cycle for consoles this gen. and if sony gave any console a two year head start they might as well say they are fine with coming in at last place, because after two years it would mean that the console that had been out for two years would be replaced in 3 years etc. sony would be playing catch up forever and eventually would fall way out of pace especially if they hit even one snag where the console had to be delayed a year like the PS3 was.

[pCeSlAyEr]

NO KIDDING! MS should have been diverse and capitalize in their first year just like SONY did with the PS3! I mean look at all the diverse and unique games the PS3 came out with in the first year! NO BRAINER!

I can't tell if your joking or not... lol



also I agree with yourMOM1

[Evolution]

the thing is i think that sony is just spouting the 10 year plan, i think they said something similiar for the PS2. the PS2 is barely in its 7 year right now and things are finally starting to slow down for it. sony typically leaves there console on the market even after the new consoles come out, giving the product line a longer life. but i think we will still see the regular 4-6 year life cycle for consoles this gen. and if sony gave any console a two year head start they might as well say they are fine with coming in at last place, because after two years it would mean that the console that had been out for two years would be replaced in 3 years etc. sony would be playing catch up forever and eventually would fall way out of pace especially if they hit even one snag where the console had to be delayed a year like the PS3 was.

Thats dead on. I would be utterly amazed if Sony are not involved in serious R&D for the PS4 right now. It would be madness and corporate suicide if they didnt have a counter to the next gen Xbox on the drawing board.

The next release is MS's biggie, because historically it takes MS 3 cycles to get things right and we will see how much they have learned at the 2010 E3 if not sooner if the 360 starts to lose a lot of ground to the PS3.

[alkalinetrio]

2 year start wouldn't mean anything except a similair repeat of this generation again. Yes the 360 had a year head start but it means nothing and was still being outsold by the PS2. Who to say in another 4 years time if MS did release another console, that the PS3 will still outsell that in the first year or two. Microsofts strategy should not be see how quick they can get a console out, but to take time and get a quality machine out thats more reliable and able to stand the test of time longer.

[GT-RRR]

2 year start wouldn't mean anything except a similair repeat of this generation again. Yes the 360 had a year head start but it means nothing and was still being outsold by the PS2. Who to say in another 4 years time if MS did release another console, that the PS3 will still outsell that in the first year or two. Microsofts strategy should not be see how quick they can get a console out, but to take time and get a quality machine out thats more reliable and able to stand the test of time longer.
Agreed.

white

[daps83777]

2 year start wouldn't mean anything except a similair repeat of this generation again. Yes the 360 had a year head start but it means nothing and was still being outsold by the PS2. Who to say in another 4 years time if MS did release another console, that the PS3 will still outsell that in the first year or two. Microsofts strategy should not be see how quick they can get a console out, but to take time and get a quality machine out thats more reliable and able to stand the test of time longer.

really, so you think if microsoft released a new console with graphics that blew everyone away that the PS3 could outsell it for 2 years with no new console from sony? sony has already shown they can be beat, because the wii is kicking there butt. giving microsoft a two year lead for another console would kill sony. microsoft had never really ever done anything like a console before, sony had pc divisions and what not before, making computers and other devices. microsoft has just started getting into hardware type of things. they are learning, and learning from every mistake, even if they have to learn the hard way. microsoft can only really get stronger as far as consoles go. no video game company has stayed on top forver, look at nintendo, and sega was very competitive with them and they don't even make consoles anymore. just because it says sony doesn't mean they can't fall to the back, and making mistakes because of arrogance have already shown that they hurt sony. sitting back and giving a company a next gen console for two years would be a horrible move. and because sony already gave up a year they will have to really work to not fall behind.

[Fe_man2000]

I disagree sort of - I dont think I want the same games machine for 5+ years - new tech doesnt make good games but it helps them look nicer and also hopefully fixes anything that was wrong last generation. On the other hand you cant have a new machine every 3 years say thats too short. Of course MS and Sony are both working on there next gen - they would have been doing it from day one of the launch of the current crop but its a time/profit thing - and sony are 12 months behind so this gen would have to be 2 years short for them to get a console out 1 year before MS - if you follow me. Where as MS can have a 4-5 years on the 360 and possibly still release before Sony - its not all down to who gets there first but it is a factor - to be honest if there were more PS3 games out we probally would all have one as well as the 360.

[FoneFreak]

I HATE THIS, first it was that clown phil harrison and now it this new joker. why dont they stop talking shite. the ps3 has been out for over a year now and that hasn't done much??? the 360 has done much more then the ps3 and even has alot more games (so far). Now even fony say that 2008 is going to be ps3's year (ie 2007 WASNT ps3's year!!!) so I hope there MDs whould stop all this bullshit and give us something we really want - GAMES!!!

[danight]

Oh please.... if sony doesn't do something major they will not catch up or bypass the xbox 360 until this gen is almost over. Xbox 360 is looking at a price drop that will put it at $199.00!!!!! Thats considered to be the golden price and consumer friendly price. Sony has already said you wont see any blu-ray player around the 200 mark this year. So the means the ps3 will still remain the most expensive.
The xbox 360 still has a better attachment rate and 3rd party devs are still making a killing on the xbox 360. Sony is talking out their butt again. Yes blu-ray could help them sell some unit as people want a cheap blu-ray player. But those people wont be buying games and are movie buffs. Sony still hasnt delivered the games from E3 2 years ago they promised and now they are bragging about new future games :eek:. Dangle that carrat sony!!

The best thing ps3 has going for it is the fact that hd-dvd went under. Outside of that there isnt many bright spots.
Please dont tell me this guy said disk swap like its a bad thing? For the love of god. Blu-ray added install times! WTF! something that should never be in console games. Id rather swap a disk then have to wait 30 mins just to play the disk for the first time. I can swap a disk in 5 secs, but 30 min install time is crazy. If i wanna do that ill get a pc game.

I do like they way he dodged the wii though. The wii whooped sonys butt and sony has no plan b on how to stop it.
As far as xbox 360 ps3 in 2 years will probably have stolen most of lives features (not a bad thing. as live is far superior to psn) home will have came out. Hopefully that will be a big hit. A maybe MGS4 will be the first ps3 heavy hitter game that actually justifies buying a ps3.

But sony looses money still on every single ps3 sold. There is no 10 year plan. ps4 will come out and sony will kill ps3 because its a money pit. Or ps3 will be left as the cheap blu-ray player. But sony can only promise so much change in so many years, before this gen starts to wind down. If sony is gonna make a impact they need to do it now. because right now the ps3 is more like the orig xbox and is on course to die the same way. As a money pit.

[Patango]

Have to agree, MS have missed their "killer app", which IMHO is XBMC or something with at least this level of functionality.

The 360's media functionality is a cruel joke, and that's why I won't buy one!

[LeGioN1202]

well microsoft still has more consoles sold than sony, so not sure why this guy is running his mouth. sony hasn't even kept up with the wii that was launched within what a week of the PS3. and the wii is beating the PS3 worse than the 360. sony is going to go back to where they where when the PS3 launched if they don't tie everyone's tongues back down, since the defeat of hd-dvd sony executives are turning back into the arrogant idiots that lead to most of the PS3's problems because of bad press in the first place which really hurt the initial sales.

Who cares if they sold more? They have been out for 1 year longer and only have a 6.5 million or so lead. What are you trying to get at?

Fact is that XBox360 has been outsold WW by the PS3 for 14 straight weeks now. Try twisting that any way you want.


As for Sony saying they did not appeal beyond the first person shooter fanbase, I must disagree, the fact that the 360 has the best RPG lineup with games like LO, ME and Blue Dragon was enough to finally pursuade me to buy one, even if the hardware scares the hell out of me while I play.

They have a few more worth my money as well. Although beyond the RPG lineup and a few shooters like Bioshock, majority of my playing will still be the PS3 as it will have the much deeper RPG lineup and wider variety of overall high quality games and genres. I won't even pay for Gold LIVE beyond this 1 month free trial I have. 400+ MS points to rent a movie for 24 hours? Jeez, I get DVD rentals for $1 (24 hours) at my local Stop and Shop as they have Red Box. Can I use the Live Video Marketplace without Gold?

[totaleclipse_05]

Oh please.... if sony doesn't do something major they will not catch up or bypass the xbox 360 until this gen is almost over. Xbox 360 is looking at a price drop that will put it at $199.00!!!!! Thats considered to be the golden price and consumer friendly price. Sony has already said you wont see any blu-ray player around the 200 mark this year. So the means the ps3 will still remain the most expensive.
The xbox 360 still has a better attachment rate and 3rd party devs are still making a killing on the xbox 360. Sony is talking out their butt again. Yes blu-ray could help them sell some unit as people want a cheap blu-ray player. But those people wont be buying games and are movie buffs. Sony still hasnt delivered the games from E3 2 years ago they promised and now they are bragging about new future games :eek:. Dangle that carrat sony!!

The best thing ps3 has going for it is the fact that hd-dvd went under. Outside of that there isnt many bright spots.
Please dont tell me this guy said disk swap like its a bad thing? For the love of god. Blu-ray added install times! WTF! something that should never be in console games. Id rather swap a disk then have to wait 30 mins just to play the disk for the first time. I can swap a disk in 5 secs, but 30 min install time is crazy. If i wanna do that ill get a pc game.

I do like they way he dodged the wii though. The wii whooped sonys butt and sony has no plan b on how to stop it.
As far as xbox 360 ps3 in 2 years will probably have stolen most of lives features (not a bad thing. as live is far superior to psn) home will have came out. Hopefully that will be a big hit. A maybe MGS4 will be the first ps3 heavy hitter game that actually justifies buying a ps3.

But sony looses money still on every single ps3 sold. There is no 10 year plan. ps4 will come out and sony will kill ps3 because its a money pit. Or ps3 will be left as the cheap blu-ray player. But sony can only promise so much change in so many years, before this gen starts to wind down. If sony is gonna make a impact they need to do it now. because right now the ps3 is more like the orig xbox and is on course to die the same way. As a money pit.

Sony isn't losing money on PS3's anymore. They are gaining it back. That's why they haven't lowered the price again, they need to make some money first.

I doubt the Wii will do as good as it has been in the next coming years. It's a fad and without any good 3rd party games for it, that will be it's demise as no developers will want to waste their time.

They can lower the 360 price all they want, but if they don't fix their problems with the console, you won't see me buying one. 3 guys I know with 360's have had to send theirs back in because of RROD and disc drive problems. And what's up with the not being able to move the 360 if it is on because it will scratch the disc up? I work at a video rental store and it's amazing to see how many discs come back with a perfect ring etched in the game discs because of someone nudging their 360 when it's reading a disc. I almost ruined my cousin's forza disc because I tilted the 360 to see which way the USB controller cable had to be plugged in.

[Blazeking]

Oh please.... if sony doesn't do something major they will not catch up or bypass the xbox 360 until this gen is almost over. Xbox 360 is looking at a price drop that will put it at $199.00!!!!! Thats considered to be the golden price and consumer friendly price. Sony has already said you wont see any blu-ray player around the 200 mark this year. So the means the ps3 will still remain the most expensive.
The xbox 360 still has a better attachment rate and 3rd party devs are still making a killing on the xbox 360. Sony is talking out their butt again. Yes blu-ray could help them sell some unit as people want a cheap blu-ray player. But those people wont be buying games and are movie buffs. Sony still hasnt delivered the games from E3 2 years ago they promised and now they are bragging about new future games :eek:. Dangle that carrat sony!!

The best thing ps3 has going for it is the fact that hd-dvd went under. Outside of that there isnt many bright spots.
Please dont tell me this guy said disk swap like its a bad thing? For the love of god. Blu-ray added install times! WTF! something that should never be in console games. Id rather swap a disk then have to wait 30 mins just to play the disk for the first time. I can swap a disk in 5 secs, but 30 min install time is crazy. If i wanna do that ill get a pc game.

I do like they way he dodged the wii though. The wii whooped sonys butt and sony has no plan b on how to stop it.
As far as xbox 360 ps3 in 2 years will probably have stolen most of lives features (not a bad thing. as live is far superior to psn) home will have came out. Hopefully that will be a big hit. A maybe MGS4 will be the first ps3 heavy hitter game that actually justifies buying a ps3.

But sony looses money still on every single ps3 sold. There is no 10 year plan. ps4 will come out and sony will kill ps3 because its a money pit. Or ps3 will be left as the cheap blu-ray player. But sony can only promise so much change in so many years, before this gen starts to wind down. If sony is gonna make a impact they need to do it now. because right now the ps3 is more like the orig xbox and is on course to die the same way. As a money pit.

Still you jibber jabber about PS3 when you don't have one. You talk about load times but you have no system or games to prove it to yourself how the install times are. I own 5 games, NONE made me wait 30 mins to install. You like electronics that are made cheaply? That's what happens when prices are dropped, cheaper materials are used during manufacturing. I will take mine expensive and reliable over cheap and error-prone anyday. I work for what I want. P.S. You think a company that has been around for over 10 years is going to be easliy beaten by a newer company like MS gaming Div, you have smoked too much weed. You can't discount EXPERIENCE IN THE FEILD.
Sony is too big to be killed by another gaming console, Playstation is their gaming div.

Xbox(Gaming company) sales make Sony (worldwide electronics manufacturer) fold= nah. Next time use the "playstation" name instead of the whole company

You refuse to acknowledge we are in the future NOW. You would like swapping disc. For me swapping discs is like buying a 40GB HDD and
being cheap and buying ANOTHER 40GB and saying "I don't mind swapping" when I can just go and get a 500GB HDD and never have to worrying about switching HDD for more space again anytime soon. It's people like you that make me hate the effects the 360 produces. You're so damn paranoid. My cousin has both 360 and ps3 but doesn't do this crap.

[LeGioN1202]

Sony isn't losing money on PS3's anymore. They are gaining it back. That's why they haven't lowered the price again, they need to make some money first.

I doubt the Wii will do as good as it has been in the next coming years. It's a fad and without any good 3rd party games for it, that will be it's demise as no developers will want to waste their time.

They can lower the 360 price all they want, but if they don't fix their problems with the console, you won't see me buying one. 3 guys I know with 360's have had to send theirs back in because of RROD and disc drive problems. And what's up with the not being able to move the 360 if it is on because it will scratch the disc up? I work at a video rental store and it's amazing to see how many discs come back with a perfect ring etched in the game discs because of someone nudging their 360 when it's reading a disc. I almost ruined my cousin's forza disc because I tilted the 360 to see which way the USB controller cable had to be plugged in.

Bro, I finally bought one and I must say Lost Odyssey is great and Bioshock demo really sucked me in (buying it today), although the future looks boring, just more shooters and a couple decent RPG's. I get scared while playing because I can't hear my PC when I am in front of it, I hear my 360 from about 3 meters away.

The DVD drive is very loud and while playing LO it sounds like it is beating the hell out of itself and I worry not only for the console while I play it (6+ hours a day for the last 3 days) but for the DVD itself. This thing does get hot and I can't get an intercooler because of numerous reports of it getting so hot that the intercooler melts itself to the 360. Which MS will do nothing for, they will pretty much tell you "Oh well, you shouldn't have used an intercooler". Well... it shouldn't fucking heat up like that!!

After LO and Bioshock I most likely won't play this thing much. Yes they can argue all say that it has "SOME" good games now, but the hardware is indeed a piece of **** and frightens you as much as it gives you enjoyment.

Before people start going off against me, I don't give a rats ass if I get a 3 year warranty. My console shouldn't sound like this, specially when DVD drives on PC's and Laptops are quieter and the format has been out for 11 fucking years. Sometimes I think the "standard" is too much for these morons to handle.

Although as I stated before... it does have some good games.

[LeGioN1202]

Still you jibber jabber about PS3 when you don't have one. You talk about load times but you have no system or games to prove it to yourself how the install times are. I own 5 games, NONE made me wait 30 mins to install. You like electronics that are made cheaply? That's what happens when prices are dropped, cheaper materials are used during manufacturing. I will take mine expensive and reliable over cheap and error-prone anyday. I work for what I want. P.S. You think a company that has been around for over 10 years is going to be easliy beaten by a newer company like MS gaming Div, you have smoked too much weed. You can't discount EXPERIENCE IN THE FEILD.
Sony is too big to be killed by another gaming console, Playstation is their gaming div.

Xbox(Gaming company) sales make Sony (worldwide electronics manufacturer) fold= nah. Next time use the "playstation" name instead of the whole company

You refuse to acknowledge we are in the future NOW. You would like swapping disc. For me swapping discs is like buying a 40GB HDD and
being cheap and buying ANOTHER 40GB and saying "I don't mind swapping" when I can just go and get a 500GB HDD and never have to worrying about switching HDD for more space again anytime soon. It's people like you that make me hate the effects the 360 produces. You're so damn paranoid. My cousin has both 360 and ps3 but doesn't do this crap.

LOAD TIMES?!!!! Has he played Lost Odyssey yet? I swear to god, 20 second load times, sometimes more. Only for switching to the next area. Majority of the time is between 10-15 seconds, battles even takes anywhere from 5-10 seconds before you can make your first move.

Please, someone call me out on this. This DVD drive is a fucking joke, 360 owners who get on BD and such should feel stupid, PS3 even reads DVD faster than this thing. Viva Pinata runs pretty good though.

While I am enjoying my purchase thus far, $350 for a Pro is a god damn rip off, specially once you bring it home and realize something that costs $50 more completely blows it out of the water in terms of hardware and very soon, games as well. Then factor in why does a DVD game costs the same as a BD? Then add in that with LIVE, you are basically paying the $50 for the online play, which oddly, has been the part companies gave for free to begin with.

I knew I should have waited for a drop.

**** this, I'm going back to Lost Odyssey. :D

[danight]

Still you jibber jabber about PS3 when you don't have one. You talk about load times but you have no system or games to prove it to yourself how the install times are. I own 5 games, NONE made me wait 30 mins to install. You like electronics that are made cheaply? That's what happens when prices are dropped, cheaper materials are used during manufacturing. I will take mine expensive and reliable over cheap and error-prone anyday. I work for what I want. P.S. You think a company that has been around for over 10 years is going to be easliy beaten by a newer company like MS gaming Div, you have smoked too much weed. You can't discount EXPERIENCE IN THE FEILD.
Sony is too big to be killed by another gaming console, Playstation is their gaming div.

Xbox(Gaming company) sales make Sony (worldwide electronics manufacturer) fold= nah. Next time use the "playstation" name instead of the whole company

You refuse to acknowledge we are in the future NOW. You would like swapping disc. For me swapping discs is like buying a 40GB HDD and
being cheap and buying ANOTHER 40GB and saying "I don't mind swapping" when I can just go and get a 500GB HDD and never have to worrying about switching HDD for more space again anytime soon. It's people like you that make me hate the effects the 360 produces. You're so damn paranoid. My cousin has both 360 and ps3 but doesn't do this crap.

Do you think i dont know anyone that does own one and havent spent time on it? I still own my ps2 and its still hooked upto my tv. I still have a ps1 with lcd that i take on trips. I want a ps3 as well, but not right now. Had final fantasy came out like it was suppose to a year ago. Yeah i would have bought a ps3 because its a game i want.
Your examples of hdd are stupid as well. Ohhh just go buy a 500 gig hdd and i wont have to worry about it. Well maybe sony should give me a 500 gig hdd so i dont have to worry about it. I was swapping disks for years and i could care less if i still have to. But if i buy a game and have to install it. It better be a pc game!

As far as sony never being beaten? Fanboy... go look at wii sales. Its over the wii has won! This gen will be over before ps3 could catch the wii. As far as paranoid people. lets look at the ps3 fanboys who have to say rrod ever single thread. or better yet when talking about the best ps3 games are still talking resistance and motorstorm. If not they talk about games that aren't even out yet and have been delayed for over a year. They don't mention the delay was because sony was in third place and the game sales suck, but everyone knows thats what behind some of the delays of major titles. Ps3 fanboys cant even be honest and say "you know i like dmc4 and burnout and cod4" which by all rights are 3 of the ps3`s best games. No they don't mention them because they are also on the xbox 360, like thats some kinda crime that makes the game suck or something. 1 day you'll wake up and see the ps3`s goal was to push the blu-ray format only. Sony whored the playstation name to accomplish that. If sony makes a white 299.00 ps3 with BC added back. Ill probably buy that. By then the 1st party games should be cheap to get used and maybe will justify my purchase. But now i wonder if i might not be better off waiting for ps4 to get a real game console and not a all in 1 dvd player with a playstation name.

[daps83777]

Who cares if they sold more? They have been out for 1 year longer and only have a 6.5 million or so lead. What are you trying to get at?

Fact is that XBox360 has been outsold WW by the PS3 for 14 straight weeks now. Try twisting that any way you want.


if microsoft didn't capitalize on the year head start they wouldn't have a lead on sony at all.

the 360 hasn't had any killer games super recently. the PS3 sales also have gotten small spikes every week from people buying them for blu-ray since hd-dvd started spinning downwards.

there are all sorts of ways to look at things. games that average over a 70% for instance. there are over 160 of them on the 360 and only barely 50 on the PS3. the 360 benefits from having alot of support behind it. they got the intial games from the initial release from devs that supported it from the begining. now those devs are already a long ways into getting other games out, where alot of the PS3 big hitters came out alot more recently.

and so far the PS3 has had no problems with hardware, but that has never been the case in the past. especially there drives, after a few years people starting finding out about the dre on the PS2, it took years before it became a wide known problem.

also at the rate sony has cut the price on the PS3 and if they try to keep up, they are going to have to cut corners if they haven't already.

[Blades]

Problem is, they both kind of missed there mark.

MS had faulty consoles, they came out into the ring swinging, however there was nobody there to swing at. They put in a small ass hard drive and made a console with no hard drive(what were they thinking, the hard drive is what made the 1st gen so appealing in the first place). And instead of sucking it up and saying, "Yea, we goofed, all 360's will have a hard drive for now on." They still insist on the damn memory card and charging $50 bucks for live.

Sony, didn't know what the hell they were putting out. Is is a Blu-Ray player is it a Console or perhaps a Computer or a family entertainment center. And say what you want about BC compatibility, but I believe a lot of people were turned off when Sony took that out of later consoles. (Oh but they can play PS1 games:rolleyes:, big deal. I think we would have rather the Ps2 BC then the PS1). At least MS made an attempt at BC 300+ games, better then none. Sony was so committed to the Blu-ray wars that they lost focus on there PS3 and other divisions(Sony is looking to use Sharp LCD for Sony's own TV's) all because they got a late start. And now because the 2x Blu-ray drive is kind of slow, developers are having to install Gigs worth of game on to its hard drive. Which is not right. I don't care what people say, the Blu-ray seek time is slow when accessing a Blu-ray disc. This goes for Blu-ray stand alone players also. Maybe I'm spoiled with the current DVD-9 technology.

Either way, both consoles will do fine. Both will rise eventually. PS3 is not better than 360, and the 360 is not better than PS3. They have there plus and minuses. I have both systems, I find myself on the 360 more often then the PS3. But the more games that the PS3 comes out with, it can flip flop back and forth between the two systems. Yea, Blu-ray is a plus, however, the Blue Movies IMHO are too expensive and I'll just watch the regular DVD-9's upscaled. Which look almost as good.

Everyone has there opinions, here is mine. I'm just looking forward to some good games.




;

[LeGioN1202]

if microsoft didn't capitalize on the year head start they wouldn't have a lead on sony at all.

the 360 hasn't had any killer games super recently. the PS3 sales also have gotten small spikes every week from people buying them for blu-ray since hd-dvd started spinning downwards.

there are all sorts of ways to look at things. games that average over a 70% for instance. there are over 160 of them on the 360 and only barely 50 on the PS3. the 360 benefits from having alot of support behind it. they got the intial games from the initial release from devs that supported it from the begining. now those devs are already a long ways into getting other games out, where alot of the PS3 big hitters came out alot more recently.

and so far the PS3 has had no problems with hardware, but that has never been the case in the past. especially there drives, after a few years people starting finding out about the dre on the PS2, it took years before it became a wide known problem.

also at the rate sony has cut the price on the PS3 and if they try to keep up, they are going to have to cut corners if they haven't already.

Now what do price cuts have to do with it selling better than the 360? It still costs more. Always has. Didn't PS3 also outsell the 360 Worldwide during the last quarter of 2007? This was before your Blu Ray spikes am I right? If so, then what do your Blu Ray claims have?

So now people are buying it for Blu Ray while at the same time Digital downloads are going to take off?

---Once again, back to Lost Odyssey. :) Good game by the way, if you didn't play it and own a 360.

[daps83777]

Now what do price cuts have to do with it selling better than the 360? It still costs more. Always has. Didn't PS3 also outsell the 360 Worldwide during the last quarter of 2007? This was before your Blu Ray spikes am I right? If so, then what do your Blu Ray claims have?

So now people are buying it for Blu Ray while at the same time Digital downloads are going to take off?

---Once again, back to Lost Odyssey. :) Good game by the way, if you didn't play it and own a 360.

i have seen people in there 60's buying PS3's because of the blu-ray player. its a trojan horse for blu-ray, always was. so you think that if gears of war 2 was released today that the PS3 would still outsell it this month? kind of the point i am trying to make. the last couple of months actual good games have come out on the PS3. and long before hd-dvd actually gave up it starting tumbling downwards, about a month at least. the rumors where all around that it was all but over.

digital downloads do work for somethings. not sure about movies, not sure why you even brought it up. steam does a crap load of sales of games via online sales.

worldwide sales of the 360 are pretty easy to pass because of the lack of any sales in asia for the 360. the 360 can significantly out sell the PS3 in every region but asia and still get knocked out by a small margin. if the 360 sold in japan since launch i truly believe sony would be in big bad trouble.

[hughhowey]

2 year start wouldn't mean anything except a similair repeat of this generation again. Yes the 360 had a year head start but it means nothing and was still being outsold by the PS2. Who to say in another 4 years time if MS did release another console, that the PS3 will still outsell that in the first year or two. Microsofts strategy should not be see how quick they can get a console out, but to take time and get a quality machine out thats more reliable and able to stand the test of time longer.

Exactly. What the fanboys forget is that these companies are in business to MAKE MONEY. They aren't doing it so the fanboys can talk smack.

The profitable phase of the console cycle is the end of the cycle, not the beginning. If MS kept putting out a new console every 4-5 years, dropping the previous console, they will stay in the "Loss" part of the cycle. Sony and Nintendo have their gaming departments set up to make money. MS has to subsidize their gaming via the PC market.

And right now, MS is hurting on a ton of different fronts. They have had almost nothing but bad news for two years.

[daps83777]

Exactly. What the fanboys forget is that these companies are in business to MAKE MONEY. They aren't doing it so the fanboys can talk smack.

The profitable phase of the console cycle is the end of the cycle, not the beginning. If MS kept putting out a new console every 4-5 years, dropping the previous console, they will stay in the "Loss" part of the cycle. Sony and Nintendo have their gaming departments set up to make money. MS has to subsidize their gaming via the PC market.

And right now, MS is hurting on a ton of different fronts. They have had almost nothing but bad news for two years.

i believe for the first time ever that the xbox division has become profitable for microsoft. sony lost more money per console than anyone. sony this time around was not set up to make money. if it wasn't for the psp and PS2 still selling well, it would have hurt them bad. microsoft is learning from all their mistakes.

nintendo was the only company that set themselves up to be profitable, mainly because they have to. all they do is make games and gaming systems. microsoft can throw all sorts of money at the gaming division, and i'm sure sony as a whole would try and bail out the playstation division if things ever got bad. nintendo doesn't have that advantage, which is why they try and make a profit on everything since day 1 of its launch.

[zymologist]

My console shouldn't sound like this, specially when DVD drives on PC's and Laptops are quieter and the format has been out for 11 fucking years. Sometimes I think the "standard" is too much for these morons to handle.
I agree it shouldn't sound like that, I have no idea how MS managed to source such stupidly noisy dvd drives from multiple suppliers. I have the benq drive which is apparently the quiet one but it's still stupidly loud. My solution has been to get some really long vga and rca cables and put the 360 in the room behind the tv. wireless pads work fine through the wall but the sound stays out of the room. might be a bit expensive if you're using hdmi though

[msanchez]

Well I agree that ms didn't put as much distance as they should have, but that aside the guy is a moron. I'm all hooray for BD's victory, but please give it a rest already. Yes the ps3 won you the format war, but why don't you reward your loyal supporters by putting a bit more emphasis on games; actually, I shouldn't say like that because it's quite clear, to me at least, that they are working on getting some games out for the system now.

As far as the 10 year cycle thing goes, I don't understand what's so hard to understand about the console being supported for 10 years, and the fact that at no time has anyone from sony said that that means they will not release a new console in 6-7 years, while still supporting the ps3 for another 3-4 years. Also I think that graphically we are reaching a point where no significant improvements will be made for longer periods of time, so I don't see graphics influencing console releases much in the future.

[N1GHTRA1N]

Have to agree, MS have missed their "killer app", which IMHO is XBMC or something with at least this level of functionality.

The 360's media functionality is a cruel joke, and that's why I won't buy one!

What are you talking about? Since they've added support for Divx on the 360 I haven't used my XBMC since.

The 360 media capabilities exceeds the PS3, the only edge PS3 has is Blu-Ray.

[N1GHTRA1N]

I hate how everyone calls the 360 a FPS console. I own 56 Xbox 360 games and less than 1/3rd of them are FPS games. Hell the Xbox 360 has a library that would appeal to any PS2 owner, way more appealing that the PS3 library.

I mean really just look at the JRPGs for example, the PS3 only has one JRPG and that is Enchanted Arms which was on the 360 first. The 360 has Enchanted Arms, Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata and Blue Dragon. The 360 out shines the PS3 in almost every genre of game, 3rd person - check, racing - check, adction/adventure - check, sports - check, RPG - check, RTS - check, arcade games - check, etc..... really the only genres the 360 needs to improve is the casual gamer genre (which Sony is much weaker than MS in), 360 already has Viva Pinata, Katamari, tons of XBLA games, etc. 360 could also use more platformers but the PS3 only has Ratchet and Clank yet so the competiton is still close in that genre too.

If you look at total genre % the PS3 has a much higher percentage of FPS games when compared to the 360.

[Sаtel]

i would feel cooler if the 360 sold less then we would be cool for owning a rare console.

i play my virtualboy on the bus to work and people always stare a me with envy.

[Gamer87]

2 year start wouldn't mean anything except a similair repeat of this generation again. Yes the 360 had a year head start but it means nothing and was still being outsold by the PS2. Who to say in another 4 years time if MS did release another console, that the PS3 will still outsell that in the first year or two. Microsofts strategy should not be see how quick they can get a console out, but to take time and get a quality machine out thats more reliable and able to stand the test of time longer.

Quoted for truth.

Quality versus quantity as well when it comes to games which the PS3 will get for the following years.

I view the 360 as a prototype next-gen console that will eventually die sooner or later as already proven with the Red Ring of Death failure rate.

[aic007]

They can lower the 360 price all they want, but if they don't fix their problems with the console, you won't see me buying one. 3 guys I know with 360's have had to send theirs back in because of RROD and disc drive problems. And what's up with the not being able to move the 360 if it is on because it will scratch the disc up? I work at a video rental store and it's amazing to see how many discs come back with a perfect ring etched in the game discs because of someone nudging their 360 when it's reading a disc. I almost ruined my cousin's forza disc because I tilted the 360 to see which way the USB controller cable had to be plugged in.

Do you have a PC with a DVD drive that has a tray like the 360? why dont you flip the PC from it's upright position to its side while your watching a movie or burning a disc and tell us all what happens.

[Patango]

What are you talking about? Since they've added support for Divx on the 360 I haven't used my XBMC since.

There are many other codecs, most of which are supported by XBMC and virtually none of which are supported by the 360. Not to mention the various flavours of audio codec.

The killer app is the media centre, which is why there are so many XBox's that are still in use running XBMC... the 360's attempt is (as I stated before) a pathetic joke by comparison. That it took them two years, and a kick up the arse by Sony to offer support for DivX on the 360 says it all.

The 360 media capabilities exceeds the PS3, the only edge PS3 has is Blu-Ray.

I didn't mention the PS3, but since you have, XBMC trounces over that aswell, in all regards.

Neither offer anything like the funtionality, connectivity, format support and ease of use of XBMC on the lowly Xbox.

If that's not a missed opportunity, I don't know what is!