slimeattack said:
Onyxmeth said:
slimeattack said:
dtewi said:
Aahh! So much delusion! Need help!
slimeattack said:
Everyone is forgetting that the brand name is strong throughout the casual gamers, and Sony has yet to court them (they ARE planning to do it in a year or two). I can give you many casuals that are planning to upgrade to the PS3 once there are more games and the price is lower. |
Your anecdotal experience is worthless.
Here is a post of Sky Render's that destroys your post.
"An important note for those who try to argue that "brand name" will help the PS3: brand is the lowest factor on the consumer-side factors of demand. For those who don't know, there are five basic factors of demand in the classic economic model (suitability, price, demographic, product type, and competition). However, consumer-side and supplier-side demand have specific factors, with very little overlap. These factors are:
Consumer-side (in order of priority):
* Suitability
* Price
* Brand
Supplier-side (in order of priority):
* Product Type
* Demographic
* Competition
* Price
In a perfectly competitive market, suitability is a non-factor for consumers, as all products are equal. However, consoles are not a perfectly competitive market, as evidenced by the fact that one console always outsells all others in any given generation of products. The product which does this best suits the needs of the market demographic at large. "At large" being the key term here, as the PS3 does not suit the needs of the demographic at large as well as the Wii does (obviously enough, given the massive discrepancy in sales)."
Obliterator1700 said:
@ The Source: Sometimes trends don't follow. I think it's a little to early to say Wii has anything on the ps2. Just like The Dark Knight and Titanic... |
Sometimes they don't. For example: It is a trend that Sony consoles sell great. The PS3 broke it.
But for some, they are not trends. They are realistic predictions. The Wii has something on the PS2 because it is selling faster than it and has the qualities of a dominant console.
|
Then give me a reason besides brand why the PS3 outsold the 360 holiday season '07 when the 360 had better exclusives, multiplats looked better on 360 and blu-ray didn't win the format war yet.
|
Price-drop.
|
Didn't the 360 also have a comparable price drop? The 40 GB was a stripped down model, not a lower price.
|
You talk about the 40 GB as an informed consumer. Here's what the average joe saw. "Oh wow, this thing used to be $600 and now it's $400 with a bunch of Blu-Ray movies!". Not everyone knows or knew the PS3 40 GB was stripped down. It's not like they advertised that aspect of it.
Secondly the writing was already on the wall for HD-DVD. Blockbuster had gone Blu Ray-only over the Summer and studios were turning their heads towards Sony and Blu Ray. Customers don't need to be very informed to walk into a Blockbuster and hear they'll only be stocking Blu Ray. That is a pretty clear message for many.
As far as I know, the 360 didn't have a comparable price drop during that time. I could be wrong though.
