Metallicube said:

Yes, I honestly do. PS3 simply does not have many games that appeal to a wide audience. You could price the PS3 for $50, but if the games don't appeal to many people, it simply will not do well.

yes the PS3 doesn't have many games for wide audeince but do you ever think why that is?

it is because it was expensive and people didn't buy it so the develops didn't make anything for it

if it was $249 and people bought it then developers would have made games for it like the PS2

Lol ok pal, I have been gaming since probably before you were even concieved. I bet you weren't even alive for the NES days. Keep believing the BS propaganda the industry spews out.

SO YOU THINK YOU BEING OLD MAKES YOU HARDCORE............................lmao

Hardcore and casual terms are bs because they are vague terms and the meaning of them constantly changes. Madden and GTA, Mario Bros, Zelda, and Tetris were all once considered "casual."

no they aren't,you just don't understand them

MADDEN is considered casual as it just takes irs popularity from sports.

GTA isn't considered that casual,its just like COD where hardcores boguht MW1 but thwen it got popular the casuals came in for MW2

ZELDA isn't considered anywhere near casual

TETRIS agin is casual

I personally think if there is any type of game that could be considered "casual", it's those extremely linear games that focus more on cut scenes than gameplay, like FFXIII, Uncharted, MGS, Heavy Rain, etc..

they are hardcore games as they are followed by a specific crowd and they keep a certain specific gameplay

And they haven't been doing that now? What do you call Mario Galaxy, Monster Hunter Tri, Zelda TP, Metroid Prime 3, Smash Bros Brawl, Donkey Kong Country, Kirby, Goldeneye, Fire Emblem, NSMB Wii, RE4, Mario Kart Wii, Wario Land, and a slew of others?

yes but how much imporvement has itt got from the GC days.

i was talking about it having the upgrade overall not just franchises with old graphics and physics come back

Again, you're just wrong, and I'm quite frankly dumbfounded that you actually believe this. PS3 may have gotten a bit more sales with a $249 price tag, but it's GAMES that sell consoles,

actually you got it wrong

as if PS3 was $249 it wouldn't have got a bit more sales but alot more and then like in the PS2 days

all devs would be solely developing on one platform and it would have all kinds of games

because the PS3 was expensive and the userbase was low,the devs went to develop on multiple platform and so PS3 didn't get alot of games

and PS3 simply does not have games that appeal to the expanded audience, just an ever shrinking niche of core gamers. 

yes but do you know why it doesn't

cause devs only develop for console with a bigger userbase

why do you think most of the games were coming to PS2,cause its userbase was overshadowing other and devs didn't need to develop on multiple platform to earn money but they have to do that now

What do you think I mean? Gamers who use to game but no longer do, because modern games do not appeal to them.

the oldschool gamers that played arcade games with simple things didn't leave because the neew games were more complex but because new consoles were expensive and not popular like PAC MAN

do you really think if PS3,360 were user as ARCADE and popular those old gamers woldn't play it

And believe me, there are tons of them out there. This is what a game like NSMB Wii appeals to.

NSMB Wii appeals to all the hardcore Nintendo fans that have been buying N64 and GC,don't bullshit

Where do you think the 15 million sales are coming from for this game? Casual gamers? I have beaten the game and it can get EXTREMELY hard, way too hard for many "casual" gamers.

no cause NSMB wII WAS ALSO A CORE GAME.i never said its just casual.

Yes I do, but clearly you don't. Price and brand name are very minor factors, yet you somehow think they are the MAJOR factors..

price and brand are minor factors.........................lmao

then can you explain me why 360 is just 5m units ahead of PS3 with a far cheaper console and similar games?-cause PS3 had a bigger brand

PS3's price IS close to Wii. And regardless as to whether or not Xbox had a bring brand name, it is still very similar to the PS3, so my point stands.

how the fuck does your point stand?

you are saying price and brand does matter even when you can see that 360 being similar didn't sell much more than PS3

you are comparing 360 with a small brand with Wii and you say you prove your point-you are very confused

and how is PS3 price very close to Wii????????-don't you ever think what you comment here,PS3 with a damaged brand,higher price is just selling lower than Wii

Because most old people, little girls, and soccer moms would probably rather play Wii Sports or Wii Fit

most of those people wouldn't even know Wii if it didn't get attention and wasn't popular

PS3 being expensive brought attention to the Wii

Wii was the thing to get and COOL which the people you mentioned above run behind

So which is it? Is it because the Wii is the "cool" thing to get, or because it is cheaper than PS3? Your lack of consistancy is throwing me off.. Nobody just runs out and spends $200-$250 just because something is "cool." There are obviously games on it that appeal to those people, games the PS3 does not have.

Yeah, because every soccer mom was clamoring to play MGS, Uncharted, GTA4, COD, and Heavy Rain.. but once they found the Wii cheaper, they decided to go for that instead... Do you hear yourself?

you really think PS3 wouldnt'thave more casual games like PS2 and just GTA,HEAVY RAIN,COD.

why the hell do you think PS2 had casual games cause it was cheap and GTA,HEAVY,COD types games were not the only ones on it

also the soccer MOMs you talk about would have never bought a Wii if it wasn't popular and so known about if PS3 had overshadowed it

Again, brand name means very little in the grand scheme of things. I think consoles like the N64, PS3, and Wii prove that.

how does PS3 prove that,cause its srill selling alot with damaged brand name,higher price and few games 

and for N64,they didn't have that good a brand name like PS2 with their previous console and SONY nabbed all the games

Wii also doesn't prove it as it only came up because PS3 was high priced

Ok, so basically you're saying that Sony PURPOSELY conceded 1st place just to push blu ray? Lol ok... You really have no idea what you are talking about.. What are you, 8 years old?

they didn't purposely conceded it but they knew they will as people wouldn't buy it with that high a price.

you THINK SONY just inserted blu-ray for PS3 without the royalties in mind?....................lol

Price has VERY LITTLE to do with Wii's success. Anyone who even remotely knows their gaming history knows this. It is clear to me now, if you aren't 8 years old, you are simply in denial.

again price had alot to do with Wii AND PS3 being expensive

would it be at the same position at $499 NO IT WOULD BE

Things change, buddy.. Gaming tastes change.

they change but with time,just not sudden

Even the mighty Roman Empire eventually fell. Sony became too focused on cutting edge technology and cinematic gameplay, which is why their sales dwindled.

so you think SONY put blu-ray cause they were obsessed with it?............................lol

They were overshooting the market, and losing fans.

how the fuck were they overshoot the market?

If brand name was so important, the Playstation brand never would have become market leader, because Nintendo was already leading with SNES.

Nintendo was leading with SNES but their brand was already down when PS1,N64 launched.the SNES was failing unlike the PS2 which continued

and SNES brand was nowhere near the PS2 brand

Again, you have no idea what your talking about, so this doesn't deserve any more of a response. Brand name has NOTHING to do with it.

Brand name has NOTHING to do with it...............................LOL

if it doesn't then why do think people keep buying PC's and not MAC's

Bandname: Nintendo gots the brand name on the N64 era, console was not too muc oveprice if i remember well but not hit as the Playstation with no brand name to support it... Seems this factor his not enough to provide big success.

SNES brand name of Nintendo had been falling whereas PS2 was not and continued.they also chnages their name which PS3 continued.also SONY nabbed all the game so N64 didn't have any left.Wii didn't nad any games

The PS3 would have kill the Wii at 249$, this we will never knows as sony has gone all out for this console.

we already know that,we are discussing what could have happened

Maybe it would have put the PS3 already ahead of the Xbox360.

you "Maybe" in that sentence just proves that you know nothing

it was guaranteed if PS3 released at $249 then 360 would be dead

But for the wii it's not given because the appeal is much more different. How many consoles eyepet has sold? how much for wii sport and wii fit?

again you don't understand.EYEPET would have sold more console with PS3$249 but it didn't as PS3 was expensive and also the brand name got dmaged since 2006

Also now that their price are closer, the wii still outselling the PS3 WW.

but the price is still $100 aprat

and again you aren't taking in account that PS brand has been damaged and fewer games have been produced thatn what would have been produced if PS3 was $29 from start

For the projector idea, i told my point, it allows all the player to have similar experience because they can have same display!

but the same display experiece doesn't enhance gaming

An analogy will be the 3DS that allows out of the box everyone to experience 3D, it's not the same for the PS3 3D update because not everyone have a 3D compatible TV.

but 3DS also has a small screen.3DS is alrite for portable but not for movies,full games,sports,etc

Last for the 3D circuit, yes, one video circuit can provide 3D, but 2 will be better (on PC, if you want high and effect, it's better to get crossfire or SLI cards, so each image are rendered on the same time on the different circuit. No waiting time for one eye).

you don't have to wait if one circuit can take load of two image rendering

Solid Snake, you obviously know absolutely NOTHING about how the games industry or how business practices like disruption and blue ocean work.

yeah right.you know alot,going your way you could just launch a company go against GIANTS with a new product and be a billionaire

You have shown your true colors as an uninformed Sony fanboy who is simply trying to undermine the success of the Wii by saying

i told you not to call names before

and how the hell am i trying to undermine Wii???????????

"well.. it's only because of SONY that the Wii is successful!!1" seriously, just stop. Do you realize how foolish you sound??

and you right completely rational that brand means nothing and price means nothing..................lol

I can see you are also a brainwashed industry drone,

is that how you talk when you have to way to prove your point?

going on about stupid made up industry talking points like "hardcore" and "casual" gamers,

so english means nothing?

which are NOTHING more than bogus marketing talking points and useless labeling.

yeah jsut bogus marketing that just completely differentiates the all time continuous gamers and the new hop onthe popular gaming thing gamers

You put WAY too much importance on "brand name" and "price",

they are very important

if you don't think that they matter then tell me why is 360 only 5m ahead of PS3.

with hilariously enough,

HAHAHAHA

are probably the LEAST impacting things in a console's sales.

yeah so i can just expect APPLE to break though into gaming NEXT GEN and beat the hell out of SONY,NINTY,MS

ooh i'm scared that my platform won't get enoguh of the big games

If brand name is so important, why did Nintendo's popularity dwindle with the N64?

do you have a memory problem.i think i have told you again and again that SNES was falling when PS1,N64 launches unlike the PS2.AND all games were nabbed by SONY

Why did Sony's popularity dwindle with the PS3?

do u really don't keep up with things going around you

does PS3 at $499 remid you of anything

Do you honestly think people rushed to the PS2 beause "Sony" was imprinted on the console??

not because SONY but because PLAYSTATION 2 follow-up to PLAYSTATION 1 at a low price of $299 and the big games developed by developers seeing a big userbase to make money of

People bought it because it had the best games.

and when do those games get developed when you have a big userbase as devs like to make money just like everyone else in this world and how does that userbase come when the price is low

With the PS3, Sony simply overshot the market.

how??????????????

They made games that appeal to less and less people,

they made games just like they did on PS2,PS1

its just that when a console is cheap and popular than the other casuals and no-hardcores come in

while pouring all their resources and attention into non gaming features like blu-ray.

they did the same with PS2 but that was cheap

Similarly, Nintendo gained MORE success with the Wii because they made more games that appealed to more people,

they did but those people that don't follow games,how the hell would they get to know about it

something like popular,fad,COOL,cheap price and more attention because of PS3 $499 should remind you alot

simple as that.

love how you simply are unaware of things

To say that PS3 being too expensive is the reason for Wii selling 72 million units is not only stupid,it's downright insane.

do you even know the meaning of insane

and if you really think they all bought just because of the motion controls then you are insane

Hell I guess Nintendo should be buying Sony a beer or something, since they are the only reason for the Wii's success by pricing the PS3 so high right? LOL..

HAHAHAHA

i don't think they will buy them a beer though as blu-ray is cheap now and PS4 will be cheaper too so NINTY won't like that

and because SONY gonna get alot of royalties so it was SONY's own motives

Who needs marketing giants like Reggie Fils Amie to bring success to the Wii

marketing giants like Reggie Fils Amie...............................rofl

i know he is a human giant though

when they have SONY to hand them market leader on a silver platter!

they will need next gen when PS4 is cheap though

Well I am done arguing with you because we clearly have polar opposite views of what is going on in the industry, and obviously nothing I say will convince you otherwise. So I think we will have to agree to disagree.

i am not arguing anything here but just discussing how the assets like bran and price matter

You believe that the PS3 costing too much was the reason for Wii's success, while I see the obvious that Disruption and Blue Ocean Strategy are the reasons (which have been cited by Nintendo themselves).

Nintenod citing it themselves doesn't make it to be the main reason.they cited many different things in GC,N64 era but that doesn't make them succesfull

and blue ocean strategy works but it doesn't just blow away the other big giants

You believe brand name is everything, I believe it means little.

not everything but a big thing

You believe in the made up terms of "casual" and "hardcore" while I recognize them to be false expressions made up by the industry to pit attempt to categorize and segregate people and make gamers feel superior to other gamers.

i don't feel superior to casual gamers in any sense.

going your way english doesn't mean anything

One of us is obviously waaaay off, and I am willing to wager anything that it is you.

i am a hardcore cause i constantly follow and play games,that is all what hardcore means and that is noway superior to casuals

I am done trying to argue with you because it is like trying to argue with a brick wall.

not a brick wall but what you are saying is that statistics and trends just blow away

and anybody can just breakthough anytime

Your ideas are frighteningly off, but what does it matter to me what you think?

then why have you been replying is the discussion doesn't mean anything to you

that is like saying 'i don't care anything that you say' when you can't prove your point

stop  saying all these lines and if you don't care just leave

It's not like I need to try anymore to ruin your credibility because you did that to yourself when you claimed that PS3 costing $599 was the reason Wii has sold 72 million.

not just that but PS3 costing $599 made fewer people buy it=low userbase,low userbase means few games

on the other side Wii got the attention,the hardcore Ninty fans of GC and N64 era bought it.many other started buying it.games  came in and it was popular so more and more people bought it.

You seem to think that the good games come AFTER the userbase,

the good games come after userbase cause when a new console is launched the software companies project how much it will sell and only then invest for software for that machine.if a game console is $500 and isn't going to sell much then why will they invest in it at the start,they will wait for it.

same way activision is waiting for MOVE,KINECT to add a userbase before investing in it.

why did Wii not get big support at first because companies didn't expect it do do well,but when the userbase grew they said they couldn't ignore the oppotunity available

because of brand loyalty or whatever..

when did i ever say anything about brand loyalties and development of games

But why do these people buy consoles in the first place? Why did you buy your consoles? To play the GAMES on it. So this becomes sorta the chicken and the egg argument.

yes but the games will only come if it has a userbase.

You claim that the userbase brings the games, but really the userbase comes AFTER the slew of quality games.

yes the userbase comes after the quality games but those quality games are also developed on the projection that the userbase will be there.

companies don't make a $50million game if the console is $1000 and nobody will buy it no matter how good the game is

why do you think GTA4 went multiplat cause Rockstar expected low PS3 sales

PS2 didn't even really start taking off until games like GTA3 came out.

PS2 had alot of sales before GTA3.and picking up isn't the point but the point is that if the sales expectatiosn are high then companies invest in that console

Wii sales were in massive decline from 2008 until NSMB Wii came out, then it picked up again.

whatever decline they must be in but even then it had higher sales cause the popularity had reached higher levels

DS launched in 2004, but didn't really start taking off until 2005-2006,

yes cause all the companies were investing in software on PSP and when piracy began they left it.the expectation os software sales wasn't there

when the mega hits like Brain Age, Nintendogs, and Mario Kart hit the platform.

yes software  is a key part but its not all

Sure userbase leads to more dev support, but people buying their consoles is the EFFECT of a strong library, not the CAUSE.

strong library only comes when there is userbase.like so many people boguht the PS2 from the start cause they expectated big games to come

THIS is why I say brand name/price mean little.

again you are wrong.

brand name and price means big and so does software

but you are just saying brand name and price matters little and software is all which isn't true

Because even if you have the cheapest console around, with a strong brand name, and awesome features, people will not buy them unless it has the games to back it up.

people will buy it cause it will have the big name games as SW companies will invest in it

This is not computers or cars or mp3 players, it's videogames. And people will only buy consoles for one purpose, to play games they want on it, brand means nothing to most people.

again you are just stuck on ur own theory and bullshiting.

if brand name means little then why do people buy APPLE products.why do people buy COD over battlefield.

you are simply deep in your own shit

Sony once was arrogant enough to say that 10 million people would buy a PS3 even with no games on it.. they were dead wrong, and they found out the hard way.

sony said that but they didn't expect that.what do you want them to say to their shareholders that we are taking you to hell for a couple of years for a heaven in the future

If brand meant as much as you say, the 140 million PS2 owners would be clamoring for the PS3,

they were if the PS3 was at low price as PS2

which is now only $300.

again you are you stuck in ur own thinking

you don't take the fact that even though PS3 is $299 atm,if has a dmaged brand name.it would have done alot better with $299 in 2006.

you are talking as if the brand is intact as when it was in 2006

But they aren't.. Why is this? Because it doesn't have many games that appeal to a mass market audience. Wii does.

but why did wii have those games cause its userbase got higher