Quantcast
360 to out future-proof the ps3?

Forums - Sales Discussion - 360 to out future-proof the ps3?

360 to out future-proof the ps3?

True 121 31.19%
 
False 267 68.81%
 
Total:388

I don't think it will, After all, the PS3 is a more powerful piece of hard ware. The only issue I see is that, when the nextbox comes out, will the PS3 have the advantage over it. I don't think so. Sony really screwed themselves this gen in the gaming dept. (and for the benefit of those sad little fanboys, I will clarify)Sony really made up for the gaming dept loss with Bluray. I think If MS plays their hand right, and come out with the Nextbox before Sony is ready to release their next gen model, Sony could be forced to retire the PS3 earlier than they planned. at this point, the 360 being future proof is not in MS's best interest imo.



"with great power, comes great responsibility."

Around the Network
Tony_Stark said:

I don't think it will, After all, the PS3 is a more powerful piece of hard ware. The only issue I see is that, when the nextbox comes out, will the PS3 have the advantage over it. I don't think so. Sony really screwed themselves this gen in the gaming dept. (and for the benefit of those sad little fanboys, I will clarify)Sony really made up for the gaming dept loss with Bluray. I think If MS plays their hand right, and come out with the Nextbox before Sony is ready to release their next gen model, Sony could be forced to retire the PS3 earlier than they planned. at this point, the 360 being future proof is not in MS's best interest imo.



I think if this gen has taught me anything is that better specs don't mean a better console and deffinatly don't mean better appeal to consumers. The Wii has sold as much as it has sold while not even being HD, the people who bought it didn't buy it for that. Personally i prefer my PS3's library of games but i don't see any real difference between them and the 360 games. There are games on both which have outstanding graphics and games which have average graphics. Digital Foundry would tell you that most multi-platform games tend to run better on 360, especially Rockstar games.

In my opinion the cost of Blu-Ray players now being so low has actually hurt potential PS3 sales and if anything has made the console less future proof. You can buy a player now for £50 in the UK. A far cry from the days when you had to pay £300 for the PS3 to play films. This means people interested in watching films no longer have to go the expensive route and buy a console.

Streaming technology is obviously the future. It has already revolutionised some industries such as music. And it is now doing the same with renting films.

So really while the 360 and PS3 are connected to the internet and can both offer the ability to stream media they are both as future proof as each other. Neither has any advantage over the other, especially not in a consumer sense.

MS just launched a new add on which will add many years to the life of the 360. They will be in no hurry to enter the next gen. We still got at least a good 3 years or so i bet before we see anything from either Sony or Microsoft. My money will be on Nintendo bringing out a new console before both of them. 



welshbloke said:

OK you seem to be missing the point somewhat so for one final time I will try and explain the situation as it was back then. The consumer did not choose Blu Ray Sony did, they decided that to play games on the Playstation you would need a Blu Ray disc. The consumer did not make this decision it was Sony's based on there requirements and needs.

HD DVD was in fact the only paltform selling players in any number. The PS3 was a console that could also play HD content via Blu Ray discs. It was the companies providing content that decided ultimately what platform to have and it was Warner Brothers eventual climb down.

Lastly the HD DVD disc itself was capable of having one side DVD and one side HD DVD. This meant 1 disc not two and towards the end it was common for disc to contain both formats. It may be that some discs today come with a DVD inside the box but this is not the norm, I would suggest that this was the direction HD DVD was heading and so it probably would of become the norm and would of allowed the easier migration of content to HD. HD DVD was also normally cheaper than Blu Ray.

So now that I have laboured the point the consumer did not choose Blu Ray the content providers did.

Sony did kill off HD DVD but I will not droan on about that you should just look up the history and who was in what camp and what allegiances they had to Sony and you should find that out for yourself.

Again, you seem to be blinded by either your dislike of Blu-ray and/or your love of HD-DVD.  Consumers made the choice, not Sony.  Just like consumers chose VHS over Sony's Betamax, it's the same for all format wars.  It doesn't matter what Sony chose to put out there in the market, without consumer support it would have failed.  Like I said, no one had to buy its players or the PS3.  They could have bought HD-DVD players and the 360.  Yes, some movie studios supported Blu-ray, but HD-DVD had its supporters, too (MS, Intel, Warner, Universal, Paramount).  And if Blu-ray had failed, its supporters would have moved over to HD-DVD.  However, consumers ultimately backed Blu-ray over HD-DVD.  So, really, it's one of those situations where you just need to get used to it.



everybody that thinks the kinect is a life spanner for the x360 is stupid ass hell..dont know you that MC knows kinects is huge soo they will make soo many more kinect games than REAL!!!! games.

 

ass of move..i'm hapy it flopped sony knows we dont  want it.. and  that why their pumping out big AAA games.. and ofcourse also smaller games..

 

and with exclusive i mean console ex.. a game that it on pc and x360 is not exclusive.



Click on our website: 

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

The website wholesale various fashion shoes, such as Nike, Jordan, prada, also includes the jeans, shirt, bags, hats and decoration. All these products are our free transport, prices are competitive, we can also accept paypal j, after the payment within short time, can ship.

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30

Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $15

New era cap $12

Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $20

accept paypal and free shipping

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com

http://www.etradinglife.com



Around the Network

few more months before kinect effect wears out then ps3 will be back on track to overtake xbox world wide.



hiroko said:

everybody that thinks the kinect is a life spanner for the x360 is stupid ass hell..dont know you that MC knows kinects is huge soo they will make soo many more kinect games than REAL!!!! games.

 

ass of move..i'm hapy it flopped sony knows we dont  want it.. and  that why their pumping out big AAA games.. and ofcourse also smaller games..

 

and with exclusive i mean console ex.. a game that it on pc and x360 is not exclusive.

It might extend it by a year but thats about it, I agree ps3 is more future proof 



Hyruken said:
Tony_Stark said:

I don't think it will, After all, the PS3 is a more powerful piece of hard ware. The only issue I see is that, when the nextbox comes out, will the PS3 have the advantage over it. I don't think so. Sony really screwed themselves this gen in the gaming dept. (and for the benefit of those sad little fanboys, I will clarify)Sony really made up for the gaming dept loss with Bluray. I think If MS plays their hand right, and come out with the Nextbox before Sony is ready to release their next gen model, Sony could be forced to retire the PS3 earlier than they planned. at this point, the 360 being future proof is not in MS's best interest imo.



I think if this gen has taught me anything is that better specs don't mean a better console and deffinatly don't mean better appeal to consumers. The Wii has sold as much as it has sold while not even being HD, the people who bought it didn't buy it for that. Personally i prefer my PS3's library of games but i don't see any real difference between them and the 360 games. There are games on both which have outstanding graphics and games which have average graphics. Digital Foundry would tell you that most multi-platform games tend to run better on 360, especially Rockstar games.

In my opinion the cost of Blu-Ray players now being so low has actually hurt potential PS3 sales and if anything has made the console less future proof. You can buy a player now for £50 in the UK. A far cry from the days when you had to pay £300 for the PS3 to play films. This means people interested in watching films no longer have to go the expensive route and buy a console.

Streaming technology is obviously the future. It has already revolutionised some industries such as music. And it is now doing the same with renting films.

So really while the 360 and PS3 are connected to the internet and can both offer the ability to stream media they are both as future proof as each other. Neither has any advantage over the other, especially not in a consumer sense.

MS just launched a new add on which will add many years to the life of the 360. They will be in no hurry to enter the next gen. We still got at least a good 3 years or so i bet before we see anything from either Sony or Microsoft. My money will be on Nintendo bringing out a new console before both of them. 


I was speaking of future proof in terms of hardware, which, like it or not, is a big part of longevity. I realize the Wii is a last gen piece, but the way it was implimented was brilliant, neither Sony, nor MS are poised to do that, even with Move and Kinect.

 

I agree with you on the bluray sales, but make no mistake, Sony DID win out on the whole bluray deal, although they had to sacrifice their gaming dept. to do so.

Yes, streaming is the future, but once again, technology moves so quickly that it won't be long before the PS3 and Xbox 360 cannot keep up with the games devs want to make, and consumers want to buy. Imo Streaming is a moot point when talking about technological advancement.

Yes MS did add Kinect, and Sony added move, but that will add what, two or three years unto the life of both consoles. that still has no affect on my origional point, which was, the 360 has much to gain by not being as future proof as the PS3. As for Nintendo, they are so far ahead at this point, they can pretty much do whatever they want.



"with great power, comes great responsibility."

thismeintiel said:
welshbloke said:

OK you seem to be missing the point somewhat so for one final time I will try and explain the situation as it was back then. The consumer did not choose Blu Ray Sony did, they decided that to play games on the Playstation you would need a Blu Ray disc. The consumer did not make this decision it was Sony's based on there requirements and needs.

HD DVD was in fact the only paltform selling players in any number. The PS3 was a console that could also play HD content via Blu Ray discs. It was the companies providing content that decided ultimately what platform to have and it was Warner Brothers eventual climb down.

Lastly the HD DVD disc itself was capable of having one side DVD and one side HD DVD. This meant 1 disc not two and towards the end it was common for disc to contain both formats. It may be that some discs today come with a DVD inside the box but this is not the norm, I would suggest that this was the direction HD DVD was heading and so it probably would of become the norm and would of allowed the easier migration of content to HD. HD DVD was also normally cheaper than Blu Ray.

So now that I have laboured the point the consumer did not choose Blu Ray the content providers did.

Sony did kill off HD DVD but I will not droan on about that you should just look up the history and who was in what camp and what allegiances they had to Sony and you should find that out for yourself.

Again, you seem to be blinded by either your dislike of Blu-ray and/or your love of HD-DVD.  Consumers made the choice, not Sony.  Just like consumers chose VHS over Sony's Betamax, it's the same for all format wars.  It doesn't matter what Sony chose to put out there in the market, without consumer support it would have failed.  Like I said, no one had to buy its players or the PS3.  They could have bought HD-DVD players and the 360.  Yes, some movie studios supported Blu-ray, but HD-DVD had its supporters, too (MS, Intel, Warner, Universal, Paramount).  And if Blu-ray had failed, its supporters would have moved over to HD-DVD.  However, consumers ultimately backed Blu-ray over HD-DVD.  So, really, it's one of those situations where you just need to get used to it.

As I said I have expended myself on this topic so I will not carry on the discussion any further as it seems pointless. I think I gave some good reasons why the consumer did not make the choice I do not see any argument you are putting forth that suggests that it was the consumer and not the movie publishers who decided this format.



W.L.B.B. Member, Portsmouth Branch.

(Welsh(Folk) Living Beyond Borders)

Winner of the 2010 VGC Holiday sales prediction thread with an Average 1.6% accuracy rating. I am indeed awesome.

Kinect as seen by PS3 owners ...if you can pick at it   ...post it ... Did I mention the 360 was black and Shinny? Keeping Sigs obscure since 2007, Passed by the Sig police 5July10.
welshbloke said:

As I said I have expended myself on this topic so I will not carry on the discussion any further as it seems pointless. I think I gave some good reasons why the consumer did not make the choice I do not see any argument you are putting forth that suggests that it was the consumer and not the movie publishers who decided this format.


The fact Sony pushed blu ray through the PS3 surely helped them winning the format war. Im sure Thismeintel doesnt argue with that. But in the end, whatever company do and how they push their technology, its always the consumers that decide.