By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
teigaga said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
the_dengle said:
007BondAgent said:
sony needs to be the first one out this time.

Unless they can reveal, market, manufacture, and ship consoles to stores within the next 8 days -- and don't forget the launch line-up -- I don't think it's gonna happen.

Honestly, I think Sony could benefit from being the last console out. The PS3 launched too early if anything, and they shouldn't repeat that mistake.


Sony needs to be the first one out. They were the last ones out last time and it did not serve them well.

Again I'm sure its $600 price tag and the luke-warm reception to almost all its exclusives were mostly to blame.

Exactly.

Releasing third worked out just fine for Sony.  Even with a horrible launch, the PS3 has still sold at a much higher sales rate than the 360.  Imagine if it had launched at an acceptable price and with a solid library.  Had that been the case, I think it's safe to say that it would have out-sold the 360 by an even larger margin during that time.  It's all the other mistakes Sony has made that have been to blame, not the timing of the PS3 launch.

Microsoft is the one that needs to release first if they want brand growth.  Despite spending the most money this generation on marketing and acquiring 3rd party exclusives, and releasing with a headstart of a full year, the 360 has the lowest sales rate, the smallest installed base (perhaps RRoD is to blame there), and is the weakest brand globally.  If they don't launch early, or with some serious innovations (very possible), they might end up struggling with market share.

Not that it would necessarily be a big deal except to fanboys, who only seem to see placement in total units sold as having any meaning at all, which is silly.  It's very possible all the consoles will be quite close in sales and shares and all of them successful.  If this generation has shown anything, it's that there is room for three consoles on the market.