By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3 performing better than PS1?!

paulrage2 on 07 February 2010

Good news!



Around the Network
Serious_frusting on 07 February 2010

Carl2291 said:
To all the people who said i was wrong.

I fart in you general direction.

We'll call it a draw



Nobody's perfect. I aint nobody!!!

Killzone 2. its not a fps. it a FIRST PERSON WAR SIMULATOR!!!! ..The true PLAYSTATION 3 launch date and market dominations is SEP 1st

gamings_best on 07 February 2010
Falcon095 said:
MikeB said:
Falcon095 said:
MikeB said:
Falcon095 said:
MikeB said:
Falcon095 said:
MikeB said:
jesus kung fu magic said:
MikeB said:
mundus6 said:
Ps3 never been a complete failure not even when it launched for $600. The thing is that Sony really went overboard with PS3, they should just had made a console with similar specs to Xbox 360 and slapped on a Blu-ray drive on there and they would have won this generation hands down (over M$ anyway).

Although a lower specced PS3 would probably have been positive with regard to short term sales, I think it would have been bad regarding console sales in general. It would probably have eaten more into XBox 360 sales and to a lesser extend Wii sales and have resulted in a more juvenile userbase than is currently the case.

But I think from a grand perspective the current specs helps widen the console market as well as the console's long term potential (the 10+ year plan Sony talked about way before the PS3's release). Certainly also scientists and militaries are certainly more happy with the current specifications. From Sony's perspective not only short term sales are of importance, but also what the console provides to help advance the consumer electronics market.

Lower specs means a more juvenile userbase?

Than the ps1 and ps2 userbase were run by juveniles going by your theory.....

Yes, that was clearly more the case for the PS1 and PS2.

Higher specifications and higher entry pricing go hand in hand, thus more expensive devices are much better affordable to people who earn more money. Also making optimal usage of the PS3 requires an upgrade in home electronics like a surround sound setup and HDTV and not all kids are allowed easy internet access by their parents (for online only gaming like the excellent Warhawk or MAG, or excellent online only distributed content like Super Stardust HD or Trine). Most kids seem to have to settle with their parent's yesteryear's SDTV.

Of course the sales damage which would result from this was heavily invested on by Sony, so the PS3 faired much better than for instance the 3DO despite based on the specs the PS3 ought to have been priced higher in comparison. Probably the 3DO had a relative mature gaming audience of early adopters as well compared to for instance the PS1.

Are you saying that Sony did the right thing with the PS3?

For me personally, absolutely. (Not everything, but in general)

For dissapointed kids, probably not.

How is it better than the PS2 or the PS1 for you?

Who would fit in you disappointed kids description? Would Sony investors or people who expected the PS3 to be the PS1 or PS2 fit too?

I was a PC gamer last gen. I love FPS games. Both PS1 and PS2 were weak consoles for that. But in hindsight having bought God of War 1 & 2 for my PS3, I underestimated what could be accomplished with that console, I should have given it more consideration. For me now the PS3 is much better for FPS and TPS gaming than the PC was. I also love well presented story telling like with the Uncharted and God of War series, PC games are usually not that great in this regard. The PS3 being much technically capabable than a PS2 in combination with a HDTV and a good surround audio set and the online and media functionalies are much improved as well.

Well there haven been other consoles that have been doing those stuff that you're mentioning of the PS3, actually most people think that the X360 is the king of shooters and online. So I don't think the PS3 has started anything like that, like you seem to be saying.

You didn't answer me.. Would Sony investors or people who expected the PS3 to be the PS1 or PS2 fit too?

Yes, that's what interested me in the XBox 360 at first, despite I was already far more excited by the PS3's technical specifications. I had a 360 in the past, but for me it left a bad taste for various reasons. I did have fun with games like Kameo though.

I completely skipped the previous gen consoles and I probably will never get a Wii (despite loving Nintendo's rich gaming history).

I am not a Sony investor, but from the grand perspective I think Sony's investment in the platform are very good for the company for the long run. We consumers just benefit when Sony sells the PS3 below actual costs. Investors can worry if they want, but the situation is pretty solid at this point, the division is generating profits and this will very likely improve further in course of time.

 

So what you are saying is that the PS3 is better for shooters than the X360?

So crating a machine that has made them lose bilions and have made them spend the profits of the PS1 and even of the PS2 was good for the company? And what if the PS3 was a disappointing for somebody who loved the PS1 and the PS2?

ps3 is more hardcore with it's shooters, that's really a personal prefrence.

if it benefits them in the long run why not, and it sucks for those people, they got the wii and 360 to surfice though so I don't see the problem



Falcon095 on 07 February 2010
gamings_best said:
Falcon095 said:

So what you are saying is that the PS3 is better for shooters than the X360?

So crating a machine that has made them lose bilions and have made them spend the profits of the PS1 and even of the PS2 was good for the company? And what if the PS3 was a disappointing for somebody who loved the PS1 and the PS2?

1- ps3 is more hardcore with it's shooters, that's really a personal prefrence.

2- if it benefits them in the long run why not,

3- and it sucks for those people, they got the wii and 360 to surfice though so I don't see the problem

What do you mean by "hardcore" and how's the PS3 more harcore with it's shooters?

But how is losing many billions good for them? Unless Sony intentionally spended those billions (which I don't see very likely), I don't see how is that gonna benefit them

How it sucks for those people? I'd say it sucks for Sony because they bought the competition product, and if that's the case then there is a problem because it means that Sony did not do the right thing with the PS3, which was the point that was being discussed



||Tag courtesy of fkusumot - "Heaven is like a Nintendo theme park!"||Join the Medal of Honor: Heroes 2 American League HERE!||

Gilgamesh on 07 February 2010

reading that made my nipples hard



Around the Network
BladeOfGod on 07 February 2010
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

 

Outperformed - Outsold



NJ5 on 07 February 2010
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

 

Outperformed - Outsold

Not for me. Performance implies a sense of achievement and success.

Selling the same amount of consoles in a vastly bigger market, and going from 66% market share to a much smaller market share (23% currently) is not a good performance.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

BladeOfGod on 07 February 2010
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

 

Outperformed - Outsold

Not for me. Performance implies a sense of achievement and success.

Selling the same amount of consoles in a vastly bigger market, and going from 66% market share to a much smaller market share (23%) currently is not a good performance.

 

Oh, i see your using the spinning card. OK then, i'll leave this argument



NJ5 on 07 February 2010
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

 

Outperformed - Outsold

Not for me. Performance implies a sense of achievement and success.

Selling the same amount of consoles in a vastly bigger market, and going from 66% market share to a much smaller market share (23%) currently is not a good performance.

 

Oh, i see your using the spinning card. OK then, i'll leave this argument


I'm spinning things by using a fair and accurate definition of the word "performance"?

OK.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

BladeOfGod on 07 February 2010
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:
NJ5 said:
BladeOfGod said:

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

 

Outperformed - Outsold

Not for me. Performance implies a sense of achievement and success.

Selling the same amount of consoles in a vastly bigger market, and going from 66% market share to a much smaller market share (23%) currently is not a good performance.

 

Oh, i see your using the spinning card. OK then, i'll leave this argument


I'm spinning things by using a fair and accurate definition of the word "performance"?

OK.

 

Aha