By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RVDondaPC on 20 October 2009
Edit Thread
Killergran said:

RVDondaPC said:

You do bring up an interesting point about it only applying to a generation and not a specific console. I only find it interesting because I don't remember there being such a similarly featured set of consoles as the PS3 and XBOX360 since maybe the Genesis/Super Nintendo. If we do look at the past it does not apply though, the PS/N64/Saturn consoles started and declined at significantly different time periods and at different rates. The PS's life cycle was almost double that of the other consoles in term of significant sales. And again the XBOX and PS2 both started and declined at different time periods, with the PS2 again more than doubling the life cycle of the competition. But because the 360 and the PS3 are so similar there may be some merit to that point but looking back at history there is no evidence that a generations consoles start and decline at the same rate for all consoles.

Not to ignore your other points, but this is the part I find most interesting.

First a question, is there any console in the past that released a year before the others in its generation that had a shorter lifespan than any other in the same generation? Apart from Dreamcast, that is.

Second, I believe that if you should compare any in those previous generations, it should be the two loser consoles. That is Xbox and Gamecube in particular, as well as N64 and Saturn.  Of course, they actually released at the same time... But comparing the PS2 and PS1 to the others is pointless, they did not in any way follow the same curve. It would also be interesting to compare the NES/Mastersystem and SNES/Mega Drive as well. (I tried to find data for all of this so I could compare, but failed miserably.)

With the PS3/Xbox however, the situation is unique. If you look at the Gap charts, this one from september, you'll see that they follow each other very closely with quick changes when one system has a priceut.

However well one console is selling, the other sells at a comparable rate, with the advantage to the machine that most recently saw a pricecut. Things like games, economy and such seem to have effected the sales of both consoles equally, at least to my untrained eye. That means that so far they have been following the same curve, except for pricemoves. At a comparable price, they so far appear to be following each other.

There is a definite possibility that the latest Sony move was the stalemate breaker and that the PS3 will kick ass from now on, but I am not certain of this at all. I believe that the public view of both consoles is so similar that they almost can be counted as one. When the next generation hits it will have the same effect on both of them, at the same time. They will die off either quickly, or slowly, but they will die off together. In the end, I believe the xbox will have had a lifespan of PS3+1 year.

 

First question... you answered it yourself. You can't make exceptions when making points of "has this ever happened...?" Besides there has only been about 3 generations in which we have enough sales information for and one of those generations is not over yet so that means 1/2 generations thus far has had a console come out a year in advance and die first in a generation. 

Second question... Again why are we making exceptions? Why should we not compare all the consoles? I assume you say this because the 360 and PS3 are behind the Wii. But all we have to do is look to the Dreamcast again to answer your question. However I don't think we could compare either the 360 or the PS3 to the Dreamcast as both consoles are already more successful than the dreamcast. I think it would be more accurate to compare it to the battles of the PS and N64 and to a lesser extent the PS2 and the GC/XBOX. I feel that they have more in common it just so happen that the wii tapped into a market that is generally not a part of the gaming world. 

I do agree with your analysis of the chart. But you are looking at a monthly comparison as opposed to a yearly comparison that I suggested. The reason for this is because of, like you assessed, the sudden jumps in the gap as a result of the price cuts. The 360 makes a big price cut and the gap jumps, then the PS3 makes a price cut and the gap shrinks. If you zoom out your plot points and make them broader it will start to reduce the gap jumps.

The problem with this chart though is you are looking at the gap size and in a bell shaped curve life cycle the gap will generally be the same size once both consoles hit their growth period and the first half of their maturity, assuming both consoles are relatively similar in sales. The switch doesn't occur until the console that started first starts to decline in sales YoY. That wont happen until next year at the earliest and probably not till next year. The issue is when the 360 starts to decline will the PS3 decline as well. Some people seem to think so but I think that would not be the case. The sales gap may be reduced even while the 360 is still growing in sales, but I don't believe the PS3's sales pace will be that significantly more than the 360. It will be until the 360 sales start to level out or decline before the PS3 passes total sales of the 360 in a relatively short period of time.