PS3 surpassing Xbox 360 countdown: Let the end finally begin.

[Michael-5]

pezus said:

Michael-5 said:

WebMasterFlex said:

I live in France, everybody buys PS3 for games. Nobody cares about the bluray thing. And that's because of the bluray that the PS3 was expensive. So the guy who say "but but but because of the blu-ray", because of the bluray the machine was too expensive at first. If PS3 was less expensive it would be higher...

You realize that PS3 is the same price as an X-Box 360 right now right? If it had no blu-ray, a lot of PS3 exclusive games (like MGS4) would not have stayed exclusive because then they would have designed the game for a smaller storage medium, thus making it possible to play on 360.

Plus, I don't think the price of PS3 would be any different with or without blu-ray. It's only cutting into Sony's profits.

You can't ignore the fact that many early PS3's were bought as cheap blu-ray players. If they were bought solely for games, then PS3's tie ratio (software sold per hardware sold) would be just as high as 360's, but it's not. In fact PS3's tie ratio is lower then XB's, PS2's, 360's, GCN's, and PS1's, and only just above Wii's (Which laregly sold to a more casual crowd).

Wrong. 

360 sales are way more skewed towards NA and UK which already buy more games per console than other regions where PS3 sells considerably better than 360.

PS3 tie ratio in USA: 11.2

360 tie ratio in USA: 10.7

PS3 actually has a better tie ratio there, but because of the much larger 360 userbase there the average WW tie ratio is higher on 360.

So people in Japan bought PS3 for Blu-Ray then?

binary solo said:

Not only that, but we're talking about a global tie ratio difference of only 1.2 games per console. So the average 360 owner has 10 games (rounded up) and the average PS3 owner has 9 games (rounded up). The difference is largely irrelevant. If PS3 tie ratio was 6 then you could level a claim that lots of PS3 were bought just for the Blu-ray.

And now that we are into digital sales in earnest for full AAA games as well as arcade titles tie ratio nbased only on disc sales has become completely irrelevant as a pissing contest thing. It's only ongoing value is in wondering about the ongoing viability of specialist video game retailers.

A tie ratio between 9.9 and 8.7 is a huge difference. A tie ratio difference of only 0.8 lower and PS3's tie ratio would be the same as Sega Dreamcasts. A tie ratio of 1.1 greater for the 360, and the 360 would have the highest tie ratio.

Also I only claim that many PS3's were bought for Blu-Ray and that's 100% true. Maybe it's only 2-3 million, but it's something. A lot of people also bought a 2nd 360 as a replacement console, we can't ignore the original 360's fail rate (This would make the true 360 tie ratio higher though, which makes the Blu-Ray arguement more prevalent).

WebMasterFlex said:

What I realize is that when PS3 came out, everybody was shitting on it, the hate was on, 600€, they lost a lot of people at this moment. And this was because of Bluray. If it wasn't came out with a Bluray it would have a different story, less expensive, more sell. So no you won't make me think that the Bluray thing was a bonus. Right now it is. At first not at all sorry.

I dunno, I would argue that at first Blu-Ray was much more of a bonus then it is now. I think nowadays most people have moved away from physical medium movies to Netflicks.