Quantcast
360 been out a year longer than ps3...

Forums - Sales Discussion - 360 been out a year longer than ps3...

pizzahut451 said:


Ugh...Xbox did post huge losses in its 2 years, go look it up. And no, Sony, did in no way, shape or form lost even remotly close to 5 billion dollars. It was 3.5 - 3.8 billion max. Original Xbox exceeded that.As for SGEA, they did made some horrible desicions before Dreamcast, so its unfair to blame it all on Dreamcast, but the fact remains that SEGA is alone responsible for their failures.

Sony's gaming division indeed lost over $5 billion from 2006 - 2010. The chart in the link you posted shows it. I'm just iffy about the 2011 numbers. Which means PS3 lost well over $5 billion because PS2 and PSP have been profiting thoughout the PS3's life. PS3 could have lost more like $6 - 7 billion.

Sega had problems with Dreamcast right out the door. Some retailers didn't want to support them. Several major developers didn't want to support them (most notably Electronic Arts). The masses were waiting for PS2, Gamecube was on the way, and MS was entertering the industry with billions of dollars to piss away. Sega simply didn't have the resources to compete.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly said:
pizzahut451 said:


Ugh...Xbox did post huge losses in its 2 years, go look it up. And no, Sony, did in no way, shape or form lost even remotly close to 5 billion dollars. It was 3.5 - 3.8 billion max. Original Xbox exceeded that.As for SGEA, they did made some horrible desicions before Dreamcast, so its unfair to blame it all on Dreamcast, but the fact remains that SEGA is alone responsible for their failures.

Sony's gaming division indeed lost over $5 billion from 2006 - 2010. The chart in the link you posted shows it. I'm just iffy about the 2011 numbers. Which means PS3 lost well over $5 billion because PS2 and PSP have been profiting thoughout the PS3's life. PS3 could have lost more like $6 - 7 billion.

Sega had problems with Dreamcast right out the door. Some retailers didn't want to support them. Several major developers didn't want to support them (most notably Electronic Arts). The masses were waiting for PS2, Gamecube was on the way, and MS was entertering the industry with billions of dollars to piss away. Sega simply didn't have the resources to compete.


EDIT: Forget about that chart, i read the thread and all...its very wrong and inacurate, it suggests GC made more money than PS2...yeah. This is a better example used more frequently

http://gamerinvestments.com/video-game-stocks/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sony-nintendo-microsoft-operating-income-chart-fix.jpg

SEGA made lost of mistakes in earlier gen with Saturn, CDx32, lots of dumb accesories, expensive hardware, dfestorying Sonic...Dreamcast was bound to die, considering how much money SEGA lost on Saturn and Genesis



pizzahut451 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
pizzahut451 said:


Ugh...Xbox did post huge losses in its 2 years, go look it up. And no, Sony, did in no way, shape or form lost even remotly close to 5 billion dollars. It was 3.5 - 3.8 billion max. Original Xbox exceeded that.As for SGEA, they did made some horrible desicions before Dreamcast, so its unfair to blame it all on Dreamcast, but the fact remains that SEGA is alone responsible for their failures.

Sony's gaming division indeed lost over $5 billion from 2006 - 2010. The chart in the link you posted shows it. I'm just iffy about the 2011 numbers. Which means PS3 lost well over $5 billion because PS2 and PSP have been profiting thoughout the PS3's life. PS3 could have lost more like $6 - 7 billion.

Sega had problems with Dreamcast right out the door. Some retailers didn't want to support them. Several major developers didn't want to support them (most notably Electronic Arts). The masses were waiting for PS2, Gamecube was on the way, and MS was entertering the industry with billions of dollars to piss away. Sega simply didn't have the resources to compete.


EDIT: Forget about that chart, i read the thread and all...its very wrong and inacurate, it suggests GC made more money than PS2...yeah. This is a better example used more frequently

http://gamerinvestments.com/video-game-stocks/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sony-nintendo-microsoft-operating-income-chart-fix.jpg

SEGA made lost of mistakes in earlier gen with Saturn, CDx32, lots of dumb accesories, expensive hardware, dfestorying Sonic...Dreamcast was bound to die, considering how much money SEGA lost on Saturn and Genesis

Doesn't matter which chart anyone uses here.  In all cases, the info is iffy at best, as both companies report the sales/losses of the particular business unit(which in both cases have multiple different products in them).   So, there is no real set of numbers to prove this out, just guesses based of general numbers.

Bottom line : No One WIll EVER know this either way.



As far as the aligned launches argument:  I think that it is impossible to intelligently compare launches from the PS3 and 360.  Others have said similar, but i will state it my way.   To me, when the 360 launched, there were a lot of people sitting on the sidelines waiting for the PS3 to come out.  Now, when the PS3 did come out, it put a lot more consumers into the marketplace to buy a new console, as the PS2 was now officially out of date.  We will never know what level of advertising and promotional gimmicks might have changed for both consoles had they released at the same time.  Like others have said, how much would the PS3 been selling at in 05'?  If the 360 came out a yr later, could they have lowered the price $50?  Could M$ have upgraded the system somehow if they launched a yr later?  Maybe, the 360 made the general consumer more ready to upgrade consoles by being out a yr before the PS3, thus giving the PS3 a n advantage it's first year? It is a bunch of what if's either way, so why try to compare #'s from different yrs without the context to go with it?  It is truely impossible to compare them accurately.  Sure, you can take the numbers themselves, but comparing them is the same as comparing the first years sales of the Atari 2600 to thePS3 - it is irrellevent.



 

 year and a half in some places ,   basically the ps3 has sold more than xbox360 in less time



Around the Network
monsterone said:

...so if we were to adjust sales for comparable time on the market, which console has sold more? I have been wondering this for a while. seems odd that I havent scene this on the forums before. any info would be great.

Probably because no one was adjusting sales when the PS2 launched a year ahead of the XBox and Gamecube. lol!! You also have to wonder how many 360 would have sold if it didn't have major shortages when it launched.

There's no doubt the PS3 would probably be ahead if it had launched at the same time as the XBox 360. Microsoft knew this which is why they launched a year ahead. Sony did the same thing with the PS2.



__________________________________________

'gaming till I'm gone'

raygun said:

Boring? I think it is relevant, if you had a 100 mile car race and let one of the cars have a 20 mile head start, and then say that car is winning the race. They are probably about even, but who cares, they have both won really, they are both selling well.

The car that arrives first is the winner, even if the other had an outstanding performance.

 



landguy1 said:

As far as the aligned launches argument:  I think that it is impossible to intelligently compare launches from the PS3 and 360.  Others have said similar, but i will state it my way.   To me, when the 360 launched, there were a lot of people sitting on the sidelines waiting for the PS3 to come out.  Now, when the PS3 did come out, it put a lot more consumers into the marketplace to buy a new console, as the PS2 was now officially out of date.  We will never know what level of advertising and promotional gimmicks might have changed for both consoles had they released at the same time.  Like others have said, how much would the PS3 been selling at in 05'?  If the 360 came out a yr later, could they have lowered the price $50?  Could M$ have upgraded the system somehow if they launched a yr later?  Maybe, the 360 made the general consumer more ready to upgrade consoles by being out a yr before the PS3, thus giving the PS3 a n advantage it's first year? It is a bunch of what if's either way, so why try to compare #'s from different yrs without the context to go with it?  It is truely impossible to compare them accurately.  Sure, you can take the numbers themselves, but comparing them is the same as comparing the first years sales of the Atari 2600 to thePS3 - it is irrellevent.

Well that is true, the fact remains that ps3 has sold more in 4 years then the 360 did in it's first 4 years