By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
De85 on 29 February 2008
Edit Thread
DMeisterJ said:
madskillz said:
Moneybags said:
Rememer, everyone that buys ps3 for BR is then also a pontential buyer for ps3 games. It's a win win for Sony and not something they really have to worry about.

Look at the demographics and you'll see that the people who are buying the PS3 as a BR player aren't the least bit interested in buying games. Put another way - some folks buy cars to street race - they'll get Evos, or WRXes, or even Infiniti G35s and soup them up to earn some $$$ - however, most folks buy cars and will never, ever race them.

Just because a machine has the capacity to offer the buyers the ability to play video games doesn't mean they will jump over to that. It's a huge gamble for Sony in this regard. If the hardware keeps rising and the software sales stay stagnant, who's winning? Most console makers will admit they make money off the software sold. Even if Sony is selling consoles touted as the best and cheapiest BR player, they will just win one battle - being the go-to BR player. The game platform - shoot, Harrison said they'd sell 5 million consoles without games - was second tier from jump and to think that's gonna change - all I can say is wow. If folks are buying the PS3 without several AAA titles, and just touting is as the best BR player on the market, why should Sony change?

With the delayed launch, it was clear that Sony cared much, much more about BR than gaming (hence why they dropped BC and reduced the number of USB ports to just two ports). Maybe that will change, but with Sony at the helm of a format victory, they'll prove just how much they care about the consumer soon.


It's definelty not that cryptic. The PS2 was the only last gen system to have a DVD player in it (I know the XBOX had one, but not really), anad were PS2 software sales low? No. Blu-Rayi s only the icing on the cake. This is just a case of people wanting to look for every black lining in a silver cloud, because it is impossible to say the words "Sony", and "good" in the same sentence.

Now everyone will say "oh, it's only selling because it's a Blu-Ray player!".

It seems like Sony is damned if they do, and damned if they don't. No matter what they do, it'll be looked at wrong. If Blu-Ray lost, it would have been "Sony wasted all the money and time on Blu-Ray, and now the PS3 is worthless".

Also, I think that you're reading far too much into the lack of b/c in the forty gig. That doesn't mean they're not marketing it as a game console, They took out b/c to drop the price, and the eighty gig still has b/c. You are cherry picking. You act like the eighty gig doesn't even exist.

And sony didn't delay their launch. I think we can all see that Microsoft launced a year early. I mean, has there ever been a console that has had only four years between launches? I mean, if Microsoft didn't launch a year early, care to explain RRoD to me? That's something that would have been done during testing of the console, and MS obviously didn't do that. At least not enough.

And software isn't stagnant... PS3 DMC4 is selling on Par with 360 DMC4. How does that happen with a userbase 6.86 million lower? I'd think that software is just fine.


 The PS2 however, was not cheaper than every other DVD player on the market.  Username2324 said that there are now cheaper Blu-Ray players than the PS3 so current sales are not simply people looking for a cheap blu-ray, (I'm not going to fact check the prices, too lazy) but of the 10+ million already sold I'd bet a that fair share are/were.

 In the way of anecdotal evidence I only know 1, that's right, 1 person with a PS3!  He's not a gamer, his parents only bought it because it was the cheapest blu-ray player on the market.