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

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

That's just pointless and wouldn't make any sense whatsoever.



Around the Network
Darth Tigris said:
kowenicki said:
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.


its boring (been discussed a bazillion times)

irrelevant (an install base is an install base)

and bloody easy to work out.....

so why start a thread to ask?

This this this this this and this.

Also it's cherry picking.  After selling over 100 million consoles and dominated the competition for 10 years and 2 generations, the PS3 was supposed to rule all this gen.  People try and spin it all kinds of ways after the fact, but we all know that going back to 2005 and 2006 the common viewpoint was that the 360 was not going to sell anywhere near as much as the PS3 and would be passed in short order.  Yet here were are, into year 5 of the PS3 and it still hasn't happened yet.  So cherry picking little stats like this (as well as making a huge celebration of how close the PS3 is now) just isn't very constructive.


We should really find that thread, when is ps3 going to beat 360. 



 

Darth Tigris said:
kowenicki said:
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.


its boring (been discussed a bazillion times)

irrelevant (an install base is an install base)

and bloody easy to work out.....

so why start a thread to ask?

This this this this this and this.

Also it's cherry picking.  After selling over 100 million consoles and dominated the competition for 10 years and 2 generations, the PS3 was supposed to rule all this gen.  People try and spin it all kinds of ways after the fact, but we all know that going back to 2005 and 2006 the common viewpoint was that the 360 was not going to sell anywhere near as much as the PS3 and would be passed in short order.  Yet here were are, into year 5 of the PS3 and it still hasn't happened yet.  So cherry picking little stats like this (as well as making a huge celebration of how close the PS3 is now) just isn't very constructive.


Actually, your post is cherry picking. PlayStation 3 has outsold Xbox 360 by 1.5 million since its launch and that is a FACT that is ver muhc ignored and hated around here (just like any other fact that puts Sony up) Its you who are doing cherrypicking by saying ''Oh but 6 years ago people thought that... Its irrelevant that PS3 actually did outsold Xbox, what matters is that people thought it would have done that by larger margin 6 yeats ago so really, Xbox is the winner !!! '' You are the only one doing cherry picking. The guy asked how big would the gap be in Xbox didn have a head start, he didnt say ''heh, if PS3 luanched at the same time, it would be in 2nd place in sales !!!!!!11!!!!1!! '' You just assumed that, because you dont like that fact very much



i dont care either way, but seriously??? The 360 had a whole year head start, thats not cherry picking thats the way it is, im not saying that if they released the same time it would have made a difference, I dont have access to some sideways alternate universe, i have no idea. But to sit here and act like that didnt make a difference at all, is BS.  The fact that PS3 is that close is impressive. and the fact that Wii released later and still whipped both of them by a fair margin is even more impressive, you dont see that often



Darth Tigris said:
kowenicki said:
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.


its boring (been discussed a bazillion times)

irrelevant (an install base is an install base)

and bloody easy to work out.....

so why start a thread to ask?

This this this this this and this.

Also it's cherry picking.  After selling over 100 million consoles and dominated the competition for 10 years and 2 generations, the PS3 was supposed to rule all this gen.  People try and spin it all kinds of ways after the fact, but we all know that going back to 2005 and 2006 the common viewpoint was that the 360 was not going to sell anywhere near as much as the PS3 and would be passed in short order.  Yet here were are, into year 5 of the PS3 and it still hasn't happened yet.  So cherry picking little stats like this (as well as making a huge celebration of how close the PS3 is now) just isn't very constructive.

Well said.  Do we compare only what slected info we want and say that the other info doesn'y matter?  Sony decided to launch a year later and much more expensive.  They chose to have Move come out 4 years later..  does that mean that we don't compare their sales of the ps3 to the wii from when the move came out?



Around the Network
NotStan said:
Wagram said:

There is a year difference between the HD consoles and fanboys seem to completely disregard that. On a time from launch basis the PS3 is beating the 360 by a good margin.

Au contraire, it's the fanboys that insist on aligning the launch dates so they can claim that PS3 is the king, boo hoo MS got a year head start, people are cherry picking as if releasing a product earlier is an illegal practice.

Gen started when MS released the 360, so the sales of all the consoles entering that gen count from the beginning. Wii came out later and still managed to whoop the 360.


Believe what you will but the data shows that Sony is in fact winning. However Nintendo is winning all around.



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. 


Although this analogy seem strong on surface, it is flawed.

In a race, there is the rule that both cars must start at the same time.

In terms of consoles, no such rule exists. All that matters here is which strategy sells the most consoles (really we should be talking about profit, but sales tends to mean influence and non-business people tend to hold that in higher regard, so I'm going to ignore profit).

As such, the argument that it is unfair to judge current sales, and not instead sales in a given time period from the point of the latest console launch, falls apart.

As much as I like Sony I have to place most of the blame on them. The Xbox 360 never really took off until the other two consoles launched, so it wasn't a PS2 vs. Gamecube scenario. The problem wasn't that Sony launched a year later (the Wii proved that wasn't much of an issue).

The problem was that the PS3 was(and still is) overpriced, especially considering that the tech didn't produce vastly superior results to the much cheaper Xbox 360, and the console was difficult to develop for, leading to an initial shortage of games.



MS wanted to gain market share from Sony and they got it, but they had to ship broken consoles to achieve it.

In the end, I would say the one who actually won is Sony because they are not only catching up to MS, they are not going to ignore their fanbase in the process(original xbox anyone? RROD anyone? Kinect anyone?), and they are still only $299 price range. AND even then, they are catching up, reducing the gap with each quarter.

You can almost say goodbye to xbox 360 support if it ends up being in the third place. Same thing can't and won't be said about the PS3, because its in 3rd place and its doing mighty good for a 3rd place console. It hasn't even reached $199, when it does you can expect Sony to go above the second position permanent.

Wii is the only system that took real market share from Sony, not MS. 2.88 million difference with a $100 price difference and 1 year headstart....

Tough competition indeed.



mantlepiecek said:

MS wanted to gain market share from Sony and they got it, but they had to ship broken consoles to achieve it.

In the end, I would say the one who actually won is Sony because they are not only catching up to MS, they are not going to ignore their fanbase in the process(original xbox anyone? RROD anyone? Kinect anyone?), and they are still only $299 price range. AND even then, they are catching up, reducing the gap with each quarter.

You can almost say goodbye to xbox 360 support if it ends up being in the third place. Same thing can't and won't be said about the PS3, because its in 3rd place and its doing mighty good for a 3rd place console. It hasn't even reached $199, when it does you can expect Sony to go above the second position permanent.

Wii is the only system that took real market share from Sony, not MS. 2.88 million difference with a $100 price difference and 1 year headstart....

Tough competition indeed.

360 took ALOT of market share from Playstation BRAND... Look at SW sales in US back in 2003 and see them now and you will see that... Madden sold better on Ps2 times and all the others game and now Ps3 is absolutely destroyed over there when it cames to every type of game in US , Cod , MAdden , Fallout etc... MS wetn from 24M to 50M and Counting , the steal consumers from Sony and im one of those , Wii Stole the Casual userbase , MS took alot of CoRe Gamers to their Console and will Call of duty mainly advertised for Xbox Brand Halo and Gears... i cant see that changing anytime soon... But strange things happen... Everything is possible... Serious who thought Wii would be in 1st after gamecube ?? Fuck no one! Everything can change in a single year... in Fact everything can change this year and PSP2 beat the hell out of 3DS.



mantlepiecek said:

MS wanted to gain market share from Sony and they got it, but they had to ship broken consoles to achieve it.

In the end, I would say the one who actually won is Sony because they are not only catching up to MS, they are not going to ignore their fanbase in the process(original xbox anyone? RROD anyone? Kinect anyone?), and they are still only $299 price range. AND even then, they are catching up, reducing the gap with each quarter.

You can almost say goodbye to xbox 360 support if it ends up being in the third place. Same thing can't and won't be said about the PS3, because its in 3rd place and its doing mighty good for a 3rd place console. It hasn't even reached $199, when it does you can expect Sony to go above the second position permanent.

Wii is the only system that took real market share from Sony, not MS. 2.88 million difference with a $100 price difference and 1 year headstart....

Tough competition indeed.

You definitely show your Sony pride!!

Too bad your passion for Sony seems to make your somewhat valid point sound silly.  So, in your world, if the PS3 beats the 360 by 5-10 miilion, there wiil not be any suppport for microsofts consoles in the future?  Just the opposite, it shows the software developers that they shouldn't put so much faith in supporting just one cosole, but all of them.