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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Xbox 360 Vs. Playstation 3 2012 - *February* Update

sales2099 on 01 January 2012
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
Statistical tie!

I dont think anybody expected 360 to evaporate PS3s hard work catching up, while at the same time keeping relevant despite PS3s 2011 exclusives!


Not very relevant from a gamer's perspective.  As long as Microsoft primarily caters to the masses and the casuals/non-gamers (shooters and Kinect), it's no surprise that sales have risen as they have during the most hyped shopping time of the year.  From a sales and investor's perspective, the Xbox 360 sales nubers are relevant.  You target the biggest audience, you garnish the biggest sales.  But too bad they did not invest their resources in more 1st/2nd party games such as platformers, action adventures, and survival horror.  If they did and these titles were of considerable quality, the Xbox 360 would become more relevant as a hardcore gaming console.  In fact, the PS3 is more relevant and its sales are more impressive because Sony continues to cater to the gamers by their 2011 exclusives.

360 was very relevant from a gamers perspective. 

You do realize that 90% of 360's and PS3 library is the same. And when you see great multiplats like Assassins Creed, Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Bulletstorm, Frontline, Brink.....I could go on.......sell much better on 360. MS naturally has every reason to invest into kinect cause they allready have the core gamers on their side. MS's exclusives, while fewer in number, have more real world relevance then PS3 more numerous, yet culturally irrelevant by comparison, exclusives. 

On the internet most of us have the "exclusive complex". You also hear "exclusive whore" or "exclusive nuts". They really don't make a difference unless the people care about them. Flagship wise, Sony has GOW, Uncharted, and GT. The rest don't have public brand recognition. Really, in the end, gamers go for the multiplats as again they are the bulk of the library. 

And to me, given PS2 domination last gen, no amount of how good PS3 is selling can be considered "impressive".


Doesn't matter.  For instance, Dark Souls and Skyrim are both on the PS3 and Xbox 360 both are action Western style RPG's, but Dark Souls sold far better on the PS3 while Skyrim sold far better on the Xbox 360.  It's the target audience of the console and the mentality of the buyers.  Both PS3 and Xbox 360 sales are impressive.  But Sony continues to cater primarily to the core and hardcore games while Microsoft continues to primarily cater to the casual/non-gamers when you look at their exclusive content.  As a hardcore gamer, the PS3 is far more relevant because of Sony's offerings plus 3rd party offerings as opposed to the Xbox 360 because of who they are catering to.  And again, the 90% figure you tout also mean very little in the real wotld when all consoles have their more than fair share of shovelware.

So you think PS3 caters to you more as a core gamer, thats fine and all. But dont confuse your opinion with those of the masses. You really see where the core gamers go judging on the sales of our most big name multiplats. PS3 has multiplats selling in its favor......but far more are simply preferred on 360. 

360 is the core gamers console of choice as it is the emerging mass market console as well. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network
Areym on 02 January 2012
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
Statistical tie!

I dont think anybody expected 360 to evaporate PS3s hard work catching up, while at the same time keeping relevant despite PS3s 2011 exclusives!


Not very relevant from a gamer's perspective.  As long as Microsoft primarily caters to the masses and the casuals/non-gamers (shooters and Kinect), it's no surprise that sales have risen as they have during the most hyped shopping time of the year.  From a sales and investor's perspective, the Xbox 360 sales nubers are relevant.  You target the biggest audience, you garnish the biggest sales.  But too bad they did not invest their resources in more 1st/2nd party games such as platformers, action adventures, and survival horror.  If they did and these titles were of considerable quality, the Xbox 360 would become more relevant as a hardcore gaming console.  In fact, the PS3 is more relevant and its sales are more impressive because Sony continues to cater to the gamers by their 2011 exclusives.

360 was very relevant from a gamers perspective. 

You do realize that 90% of 360's and PS3 library is the same. And when you see great multiplats like Assassins Creed, Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Bulletstorm, Frontline, Brink.....I could go on.......sell much better on 360. MS naturally has every reason to invest into kinect cause they allready have the core gamers on their side. MS's exclusives, while fewer in number, have more real world relevance then PS3 more numerous, yet culturally irrelevant by comparison, exclusives. 

On the internet most of us have the "exclusive complex". You also hear "exclusive whore" or "exclusive nuts". They really don't make a difference unless the people care about them. Flagship wise, Sony has GOW, Uncharted, and GT. The rest don't have public brand recognition. Really, in the end, gamers go for the multiplats as again they are the bulk of the library. 

And to me, given PS2 domination last gen, no amount of how good PS3 is selling can be considered "impressive".


Doesn't matter.  For instance, Dark Souls and Skyrim are both on the PS3 and Xbox 360 both are action Western style RPG's, but Dark Souls sold far better on the PS3 while Skyrim sold far better on the Xbox 360.  It's the target audience of the console and the mentality of the buyers.  Both PS3 and Xbox 360 sales are impressive.  But Sony continues to cater primarily to the core and hardcore games while Microsoft continues to primarily cater to the casual/non-gamers when you look at their exclusive content.  As a hardcore gamer, the PS3 is far more relevant because of Sony's offerings plus 3rd party offerings as opposed to the Xbox 360 because of who they are catering to.  And again, the 90% figure you tout also mean very little in the real wotld when all consoles have their more than fair share of shovelware.

So you think PS3 caters to you more as a core gamer, thats fine and all. But dont confuse your opinion with those of the masses. You really see where the core gamers go judging on the sales of our most big name multiplats. PS3 has multiplats selling in its favor......but far more are simply preferred on 360. 

360 is the core gamers console of choice as it is the emerging mass market console as well. 


I have a problem with that statement cause when you say "360 is the core games console of choice", the first imagine in my mind is FPS. That's all I can think of and I'm sure there is more to core gaming than locking in 100 hours on MW3. I assume however, that you are talking sales wise since multiplatform games sell better on the 360 (skyrim, bulletstorm, etc)

OffT:I don't know, I think MW3 just ruined the concept of core gaming FOR ME. I don't play FPSs aside from resistance (not even the online) so my gamer friends and I usually get into debates about true core gaming. Weirdly enough, most MW players understand my dislike of the game.

OnT: This debate is silly. That is all.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

sales2099 on 02 January 2012
Areym said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
Statistical tie!

I dont think anybody expected 360 to evaporate PS3s hard work catching up, while at the same time keeping relevant despite PS3s 2011 exclusives!


Not very relevant from a gamer's perspective.  As long as Microsoft primarily caters to the masses and the casuals/non-gamers (shooters and Kinect), it's no surprise that sales have risen as they have during the most hyped shopping time of the year.  From a sales and investor's perspective, the Xbox 360 sales nubers are relevant.  You target the biggest audience, you garnish the biggest sales.  But too bad they did not invest their resources in more 1st/2nd party games such as platformers, action adventures, and survival horror.  If they did and these titles were of considerable quality, the Xbox 360 would become more relevant as a hardcore gaming console.  In fact, the PS3 is more relevant and its sales are more impressive because Sony continues to cater to the gamers by their 2011 exclusives.

360 was very relevant from a gamers perspective. 

You do realize that 90% of 360's and PS3 library is the same. And when you see great multiplats like Assassins Creed, Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Bulletstorm, Frontline, Brink.....I could go on.......sell much better on 360. MS naturally has every reason to invest into kinect cause they allready have the core gamers on their side. MS's exclusives, while fewer in number, have more real world relevance then PS3 more numerous, yet culturally irrelevant by comparison, exclusives. 

On the internet most of us have the "exclusive complex". You also hear "exclusive whore" or "exclusive nuts". They really don't make a difference unless the people care about them. Flagship wise, Sony has GOW, Uncharted, and GT. The rest don't have public brand recognition. Really, in the end, gamers go for the multiplats as again they are the bulk of the library. 

And to me, given PS2 domination last gen, no amount of how good PS3 is selling can be considered "impressive".


Doesn't matter.  For instance, Dark Souls and Skyrim are both on the PS3 and Xbox 360 both are action Western style RPG's, but Dark Souls sold far better on the PS3 while Skyrim sold far better on the Xbox 360.  It's the target audience of the console and the mentality of the buyers.  Both PS3 and Xbox 360 sales are impressive.  But Sony continues to cater primarily to the core and hardcore games while Microsoft continues to primarily cater to the casual/non-gamers when you look at their exclusive content.  As a hardcore gamer, the PS3 is far more relevant because of Sony's offerings plus 3rd party offerings as opposed to the Xbox 360 because of who they are catering to.  And again, the 90% figure you tout also mean very little in the real wotld when all consoles have their more than fair share of shovelware.

So you think PS3 caters to you more as a core gamer, thats fine and all. But dont confuse your opinion with those of the masses. You really see where the core gamers go judging on the sales of our most big name multiplats. PS3 has multiplats selling in its favor......but far more are simply preferred on 360. 

360 is the core gamers console of choice as it is the emerging mass market console as well. 


I have a problem with that statement cause when you say "360 is the core games console of choice", the first imagine in my mind is FPS. That's all I can think of and I'm sure there is more to core gaming than locking in 100 hours on MW3. I assume however, that you are talking sales wise since multiplatform games sell better on the 360 (skyrim, bulletstorm, etc)

OffT:I don't know, I think MW3 just ruined the concept of core gaming FOR ME. I don't play FPSs aside from resistance (not even the online) so my gamer friends and I usually get into debates about true core gaming. Weirdly enough, most MW players understand my dislike of the game.

OnT: This debate is silly. That is all.

Now I see. You have no concept of what the majority of gamers play. So therefore your input is limited. This is evident by your statement about not playing FPS, which is a red flag in itself since its the most popular genre in gaming. Secondly is your admission to playing resistance when it is regarded as a degraded franchise not worth the time and money of the average gamer. I dont make these rules, I just looked at Resistance sales after part 1. 

360 is the core gamers console this gen. Not only by the sales of the most popular 3rd party multiplats but also like you said it is home to the biggest genre in gaming: FPS. 

You can have a problem with that, but it doesnt change a thing. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

thetonestarr on 02 January 2012

FPS players =/= core gamers.



 SW-5120-1900-6153

Areym on 02 January 2012
sales2099 said:
Areym said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
LivingMetal said:
sales2099 said:
Statistical tie!

I dont think anybody expected 360 to evaporate PS3s hard work catching up, while at the same time keeping relevant despite PS3s 2011 exclusives!


Not very relevant from a gamer's perspective.  As long as Microsoft primarily caters to the masses and the casuals/non-gamers (shooters and Kinect), it's no surprise that sales have risen as they have during the most hyped shopping time of the year.  From a sales and investor's perspective, the Xbox 360 sales nubers are relevant.  You target the biggest audience, you garnish the biggest sales.  But too bad they did not invest their resources in more 1st/2nd party games such as platformers, action adventures, and survival horror.  If they did and these titles were of considerable quality, the Xbox 360 would become more relevant as a hardcore gaming console.  In fact, the PS3 is more relevant and its sales are more impressive because Sony continues to cater to the gamers by their 2011 exclusives.

360 was very relevant from a gamers perspective. 

You do realize that 90% of 360's and PS3 library is the same. And when you see great multiplats like Assassins Creed, Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Bulletstorm, Frontline, Brink.....I could go on.......sell much better on 360. MS naturally has every reason to invest into kinect cause they allready have the core gamers on their side. MS's exclusives, while fewer in number, have more real world relevance then PS3 more numerous, yet culturally irrelevant by comparison, exclusives. 

On the internet most of us have the "exclusive complex". You also hear "exclusive whore" or "exclusive nuts". They really don't make a difference unless the people care about them. Flagship wise, Sony has GOW, Uncharted, and GT. The rest don't have public brand recognition. Really, in the end, gamers go for the multiplats as again they are the bulk of the library. 

And to me, given PS2 domination last gen, no amount of how good PS3 is selling can be considered "impressive".


Doesn't matter.  For instance, Dark Souls and Skyrim are both on the PS3 and Xbox 360 both are action Western style RPG's, but Dark Souls sold far better on the PS3 while Skyrim sold far better on the Xbox 360.  It's the target audience of the console and the mentality of the buyers.  Both PS3 and Xbox 360 sales are impressive.  But Sony continues to cater primarily to the core and hardcore games while Microsoft continues to primarily cater to the casual/non-gamers when you look at their exclusive content.  As a hardcore gamer, the PS3 is far more relevant because of Sony's offerings plus 3rd party offerings as opposed to the Xbox 360 because of who they are catering to.  And again, the 90% figure you tout also mean very little in the real wotld when all consoles have their more than fair share of shovelware.

So you think PS3 caters to you more as a core gamer, thats fine and all. But dont confuse your opinion with those of the masses. You really see where the core gamers go judging on the sales of our most big name multiplats. PS3 has multiplats selling in its favor......but far more are simply preferred on 360. 

360 is the core gamers console of choice as it is the emerging mass market console as well. 


I have a problem with that statement cause when you say "360 is the core games console of choice", the first imagine in my mind is FPS. That's all I can think of and I'm sure there is more to core gaming than locking in 100 hours on MW3. I assume however, that you are talking sales wise since multiplatform games sell better on the 360 (skyrim, bulletstorm, etc)

OffT:I don't know, I think MW3 just ruined the concept of core gaming FOR ME. I don't play FPSs aside from resistance (not even the online) so my gamer friends and I usually get into debates about true core gaming. Weirdly enough, most MW players understand my dislike of the game.

OnT: This debate is silly. That is all.

Now I see. You have no concept of what the majority of gamers play. So therefore your input is limited. This is evident by your statement about not playing FPS, which is a red flag in itself since its the most popular genre in gaming. Secondly is your admission to playing resistance when it is regarded as a degraded franchise not worth the time and money of the average gamer. I dont make these rules, I just looked at Resistance sales after part 1. 

360 is the core gamers console this gen. Not only by the sales of the most popular 3rd party multiplats but also like you said it is home to the biggest genre in gaming: FPS. 

You can have a problem with that, but it doesnt change a thing. 

ok



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

Around the Network
JimmyDanger on 02 January 2012

Core gamers buy 15 + newly released (less than 2 months old) titles (full games, not minis/arcade) a year. I'm sure most of us here buy more - but in marketing terms (y'know when you fill out one of those "how many games a month you buy surveys?) core is the top %35 - the 1+ game a month (and above) people.

That is what is meant by the "core" of the market. Sales. When talk goes of "pitching to the core" - it's these higher volume consumer gamers that effectively control the market. Irrelevant of genre. Although with so many FPS's released, there'd be a high crossover of FPS/Core gamers - though I doubt every single core gamer buys ONLY FPS. Hell if someone only buys Mario Kart6 & 7 , SMG1 & 2, New SMB, DKCR, OOT 3ds, We Dance 1, 2 and 3, LOZ TP, LOZ SS, Madden12, NFS, FIFA 12 and NHL 12 on Wii (in one year - all new) - they're "core".(I'm assuming none of these titles are budget/platinum/classic yet and actually come out on Wii - I could well be wrong - just trying to use an example of what some people call "casual" games). Often a "casual" gamer may buy one of these titles every 3 months or so - and that makes the buyer/gamer "casual" - not the games they buy.

In plainspeak - in the example of say - a coffee shop - the core market are the people who buy 3 + coffees a week. The weekly/fortnightly drop ins are "casual".
There's the debate of what makes a "core" game - and that's pretty irrelevant. A new game at retail is a new game. While we can talk of their "appeal to the core" - to actually call one game "core" and another "casual" (unless it's budget priced/small downloadable/Free To Play - eg. Zynga, Angry Birds, Uno)is purely subjective.

There's always open the debate of what a "hardcore" gamer is - and sure some guy who plays Mario 64 every day of the year and can speed run Metroid 1 in 45 minutes is undoubtedly "hardcore" - but if he's not contributing to the "new games" industry - he's not "core" from a marketing/demographic perspective, as he's not bolstering the core of the market.

OnTopic - How did we get off topic? ...um.. People - they buy stuff. I'm surprised at just how much they bought this year!



NotStan on 02 January 2012

Wow so 360 is now a casual's console? Lolk.

Some users just make me laugh out loud.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

JimmyDanger on 02 January 2012

There are "casuals" amongst the userbase of all 3 consoles.

A "casual" is just someone who buys few full price games a year. Read above.

This whole mythical notion of the "core" gamer being someone who must play only FPS - and a casual plays only Angry Birds is false. There are casuals who buy 2 - 3 JRPGs a year and put a few hours in each week. There are casuals who buy Dark Souls and play it for 2 weeks in the holidays. There are core gamers who go out and buy 3 new games and play Stickman BMX on the bus. There is no elite - just attach rates.

Once again - read above.



Alby_da_Wolf on 02 January 2012

FPS and dance games have become the hamburgers and fries of gaming. We never called the latter core, can we still call so the former?



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


brendude13 on 02 January 2012
thetonestarr said:
FPS players =/= core gamers.

Exactly what I was thinking.

NotStan said:
Wow so 360 is now a casual's console? Lolk.

Some users just make me laugh out loud.

Care to quote whoever said "360 is a casual's console"?

I don't think it's a casual's console, but I do think a significant part of its userbase are casual gamers, mainly because the top comment I quoted. I would say that both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 have the same amount of "core" gamers, but the Xbox 360 has more casual gamers than the PS3, whereas the PS3 has more multimedia and home cinema enthusiasts.

You are misinterpreting the word "casual". A "casual" gamer isn't just somebody who buys games that make you dance infront of the TV, a "casual" gamer is somebody who doesn't play games frequently, only buys popular or well advertised games (like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed and Dance Central) or someone who doesn't have much knowledge about gaming. You can't just label someone a casual gamer anyway, it's a lot more complicated than that.

The Xbox 360 is the most popular console for people who just wants to play an hour or two of Call of Duty or Gears of War at the weekend, people I consider to be casual gamers.

 

EDIT: Just realised, what the hell does this have to do with sales?