Quantcast
What's wrong with PS3 owners?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What's wrong with PS3 owners?

Dallinor said:
This has been disscused plenty of times already.

The widely circulated conclusion is that the PS3 install base consists of a set of consumers with a very broad range of tastes. While the 360 install base is more focused, ie. there is a larger 'shooter crowd' in the 360 install base.

The 360 also has a much larger install base in NA, where gamers are more likely to make day-one purchases then their European counterparts.

As for internet hype, a few outspoken posters on a website do not correctly represent the views of the average consumer.

^this. I don't know how many times we have to reiterate the same thing again and again....

 



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Around the Network
Pristine20 said:
Dallinor said:
This has been disscused plenty of times already.

The widely circulated conclusion is that the PS3 install base consists of a set of consumers with a very broad range of tastes. While the 360 install base is more focused, ie. there is a larger 'shooter crowd' in the 360 install base.

The 360 also has a much larger install base in NA, where gamers are more likely to make day-one purchases then their European counterparts.

As for internet hype, a few outspoken posters on a website do not correctly represent the views of the average consumer.

^this. I don't know how many times we have to reiterate the same thing again and again....

 

Generalizing the population of one subset of consumers to a related, but different other subset, without hard facts to support that generalization, is a fallacy of debate...a logic flaw that may support your argument, but honestly makes it no stronger.

IF the top 10 games for the 360 were 90% shooters and 20% shooters for the PS3, maybe you'd have an argument. A 60%-50% split is hardly definitive evidence though, particularly as Killzone 2 will probably be a top 10 PS3 game soon enough.

In fact, a larger install base, by definition lends itself to more diversity, while the smaller one would tend to be more homegeneous, good reasons why the PS2 had such a diverse install base (and the original XBOX had such a "shooter" centric one).

 



It's all my fault. I have a PS3 and I didn't buy those two games but to be fair I never hyped them either.



Signature goes here!

TruckOSaurus said:
It's all my fault. I have a PS3 and I didn't buy those two games but to be fair I never hyped them either.

Alright, we found the source of the problem.  All we have to do is have TruckOSaurus eliminated and all will be better.

 



Vetteman94 said:
TruckOSaurus said:
It's all my fault. I have a PS3 and I didn't buy those two games but to be fair I never hyped them either.

Alright, we found the source of the problem.  All we have to do is have TruckOSaurus eliminated and all will be better.

 

Yeah, I also forgot to mention that I go around Canada hiding all copies of Killzone 2 and LittleBigPlanet under Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire where they'll never be found! *maniacal laugh*

 



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
Euphoria14 said:
Barozi said:

Uncharted has so many shooter elements that it can be categorized as a shooter. Same for GTA and to some degree MGS as well.

Only people who consider that game a "shooter" are the uninformed. Sorry no offense.

Find me a gaming site that has it classfied under "3rd Person Shooter" and not "Action/Adventure".

That's not even discuss worthy.

It's clearly a shooter for me and probably for million others as well.



TRios_Zen said:
Pristine20 said:
Dallinor said:
This has been disscused plenty of times already.

The widely circulated conclusion is that the PS3 install base consists of a set of consumers with a very broad range of tastes. While the 360 install base is more focused, ie. there is a larger 'shooter crowd' in the 360 install base.

The 360 also has a much larger install base in NA, where gamers are more likely to make day-one purchases then their European counterparts.

As for internet hype, a few outspoken posters on a website do not correctly represent the views of the average consumer.

^this. I don't know how many times we have to reiterate the same thing again and again....

 

Generalizing the population of one subset of consumers to a related, but different other subset, without hard facts to support that generalization, is a fallacy of debate...a logic flaw that may support your argument, but honestly makes it no stronger.

IF the top 10 games for the 360 were 90% shooters and 20% shooters for the PS3, maybe you'd have an argument. A 60%-50% split is hardly definitive evidence though, particularly as Killzone 2 will probably be a top 10 PS3 game soon enough.

In fact, a larger install base, by definition lends itself to more diversity, while the smaller one would tend to be more homegeneous, good reasons why the PS2 had such a diverse install base (and the original XBOX had such a "shooter" centric one).

 

Nobody said x360 sells only shooters. We simply said the vast majority of HD shooter fans bought a 360 instead. Considering the reputations of the ps2 and xbox, this isn't surprising. Also, being a shooter fan doesn't mean one doesn't buy games from other genres. Frankly, even a ps3 fan like myself would probably buy my multiplat shooters on 360 if I had one.

For all we know the 8 mil+ lead the 360 has on the ps3 could be 90% shooter fans while the rest of it's userbase is diverse. For proof of the ps3 sales prowress, look no further than the RE5 sales on our homepage. Ps3 has a much higher attach ratio. It even has higher attach ratios than the ps2 so I'm simply tired of arguing against this same sentiment over and over...

 



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

i have like 30 retails games.. don't blame meh :p



Check out my game about moles ^

Pristine20 said:
TRios_Zen said:
Pristine20 said:
Dallinor said:
This has been disscused plenty of times already.

The widely circulated conclusion is that the PS3 install base consists of a set of consumers with a very broad range of tastes. While the 360 install base is more focused, ie. there is a larger 'shooter crowd' in the 360 install base.

The 360 also has a much larger install base in NA, where gamers are more likely to make day-one purchases then their European counterparts.

As for internet hype, a few outspoken posters on a website do not correctly represent the views of the average consumer.

^this. I don't know how many times we have to reiterate the same thing again and again....

 

Generalizing the population of one subset of consumers to a related, but different other subset, without hard facts to support that generalization, is a fallacy of debate...a logic flaw that may support your argument, but honestly makes it no stronger.

IF the top 10 games for the 360 were 90% shooters and 20% shooters for the PS3, maybe you'd have an argument. A 60%-50% split is hardly definitive evidence though, particularly as Killzone 2 will probably be a top 10 PS3 game soon enough.

In fact, a larger install base, by definition lends itself to more diversity, while the smaller one would tend to be more homegeneous, good reasons why the PS2 had such a diverse install base (and the original XBOX had such a "shooter" centric one).

 

Nobody said x360 sells only shooters. We simply said the vast majority of HD shooter fans bought a 360 instead. Considering the reputations of the ps2 and xbox, this isn't surprising. Also, being a shooter fan doesn't mean one doesn't buy games from other genres. Frankly, even a ps3 fan like myself would probably buy my multiplat shooters on 360 if I had one.

For all we know the 8 mil+ lead the 360 has on the ps3 could be 90% shooter fans while the rest of it's userbase is diverse. For proof of the ps3 sales prowress, look no further than the RE5 sales on our homepage. Ps3 has a much higher attach ratio. It even has higher attach ratios than the ps2 so I'm simply tired of arguing against this same sentiment over and over...

 

RE5 is a shooter which pretty much makes your entire argument invalid.

 



Xbox Gamertag: BrapRedHarvest PSN ID: Brap123

RedHarvest said:
Pristine20 said:
TRios_Zen said:
Pristine20 said:
Dallinor said:
This has been disscused plenty of times already.

The widely circulated conclusion is that the PS3 install base consists of a set of consumers with a very broad range of tastes. While the 360 install base is more focused, ie. there is a larger 'shooter crowd' in the 360 install base.

The 360 also has a much larger install base in NA, where gamers are more likely to make day-one purchases then their European counterparts.

As for internet hype, a few outspoken posters on a website do not correctly represent the views of the average consumer.

^this. I don't know how many times we have to reiterate the same thing again and again....

 

Generalizing the population of one subset of consumers to a related, but different other subset, without hard facts to support that generalization, is a fallacy of debate...a logic flaw that may support your argument, but honestly makes it no stronger.

IF the top 10 games for the 360 were 90% shooters and 20% shooters for the PS3, maybe you'd have an argument. A 60%-50% split is hardly definitive evidence though, particularly as Killzone 2 will probably be a top 10 PS3 game soon enough.

In fact, a larger install base, by definition lends itself to more diversity, while the smaller one would tend to be more homegeneous, good reasons why the PS2 had such a diverse install base (and the original XBOX had such a "shooter" centric one).

 

Nobody said x360 sells only shooters. We simply said the vast majority of HD shooter fans bought a 360 instead. Considering the reputations of the ps2 and xbox, this isn't surprising. Also, being a shooter fan doesn't mean one doesn't buy games from other genres. Frankly, even a ps3 fan like myself would probably buy my multiplat shooters on 360 if I had one.

For all we know the 8 mil+ lead the 360 has on the ps3 could be 90% shooter fans while the rest of it's userbase is diverse. For proof of the ps3 sales prowress, look no further than the RE5 sales on our homepage. Ps3 has a much higher attach ratio. It even has higher attach ratios than the ps2 so I'm simply tired of arguing against this same sentiment over and over...

 

RE5 is a shooter which pretty much makes your entire argument invalid.

 

There are other games too. Check out the sales of street fighter IV for another recent blockbuster title. Also, RE5 is not a shooter. Have you played it? No shooter on earth controls like that.

 



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler