US sales in

[Wojtas]

Million said:

Wojtas said:

Munkeh111 said:

Wojtas said:
I mean c'mon, even if th PS3 sold only 10 k less than the Wii in others, it's still getting it's butt handed to itself in the other regions, Japan especially. Your arguements that we don't take into account PS3's good week is ased on the fact that overall it still is losing by a pretty darn big amount.

Not to mention that the Wii has had a phenomenal 1st quarter and continues to have a good streak on to the 2nd while the ps3 only now has shown a fang or two.

The PS3 was doomed 3/4 of a year ago, and would not sell even 6m (or so we were told...)

Basically, the PS3's sales have improved massively, and it has beaten the 360 by 700k in the first 3 months of this year, seling about 2.75m, which is massively over what it sold in the equivalent time last year, so that is why the PS3 is doing well

True but let's not forget that the Wii and PS3 are in their second full year cycle and it is only normal for consoles to enjoy higher sales at this time in their life. History proves me right with every more succesful console. The xbox is different as it is on the market that extra one year. Could definitely use a price cut.

The number of years in the market is irrelevant especialy considering various factors which should contribute to the 360 outselling the Wii and PS3.

-Price Point , 1/2 the cost of the PS3 and same price as Wii in the UK.The PS2 wasn't half the price it launched @ after two years , you can't use history as evidence this generation is totaly different.

-The current gen market is still experiencing huge growth in terms of hardware,software etc etc, there's no reason for the XBOX 360's demand to decline below that of the PS3 and Wii unless the 360 has sold to that vast majority of people it would have already.

-If the PS3 launched a year before the 360 , i'm 90% sure the 360 would have been 10-13 millions units behind the PS3 at this point.

Some of your points are strange really. First off the number of years on the market is important as during the first year the "core" is being created, the so called early adopters, which determine  the later  well being of the console.

Price is irrelevent. Substance is vital. If the PS3 had ultra cool games that everyone wanted, they would so much as blink at the Wii and would buy the PS3 even for 800$. The problem is that the PS3 lacked substance and scared people with an abnormally high price for a video console.

I can use past history by looking at past prices. Despite inflation and other economical criteria, you can see that this generation of consoles started off with a nasty surprise. Big price tags. Past successful consoles never cost more than 300$ but the xbox cost around 400$ at the time of t's launch and the ps3 600$. No wonder that there had to be price cuts as told in the point above, there were not too many things to make the typical customer want to buy these pricey machines.

Yes the market is experiencing growth, but you must ask yourself just thanks to whom is this market expanding saleswise? The main drive factor was Nintendo of course followed by in a very big distance by the ps3 and xbox360. The last time o looked in the charts it was Nintendo who for the last 1,5 year had constantly been getting 50% of the hardware and software totals, ON AVERAGE. Meanwhile the other two consoles had to duke it out amongst themselves for the 30 percent as the other 20 usually went to the ps2.

And finally. If Sony launched a year earlier with the ps3 than the xbox, with the same price tag, with the same games and no price cuts (since it wouldn't feel the need to implement them) the outcome might've been far less peachy than you make it out to be. But to be frank, it's just guessing "what if" at this point and totally irrelevent to this discussion.