By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony: Xbox 720 and Wii 2 will beat PS4 to market

thismeintiel on 09 July 2010
puffy said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Mummelmann said:

If so, Sony are more stupid that I thought. Here I was, thinking that perhaps this gen had taught them something.


how did this gen taught them anything about releasing late??????


lol, how, you ask?

Let me explain, please. Hear me out.

Last generation the Playstation brand was achieving new heights. The other consoles were piss drops in the bucket tha was the PS2. MS was just entering into the market, and Nintendo was seemingly on its way out of the home console busness.

Then MS decided to release its next console a year before the PS3.

Because of this, it garnered a lot of 3rd party supporters who were working on their console and only their console, because developers like to work on state of the art shit. They are techies after all and they like new stuff. They jumped on board.

Now the Playstation brand is at an all time low. Their consoles respectively are dead last, and  both have only relatively recently garnered widespread respect from the gaming community as valid core consoles. The PS3 particularly, was a running joke for its first 1.5 years on the market. The brand has turned from solid gold leading the videogame industry to a 3rd place brand in a 3 man race.

They permanently lost their dominance over America, and they will never get that back. For the forseeable future, they will stay third there. That happens to also be the location where most of the big money multiplats are produced, and the spot that most people worldwide target first for revenue.

THIS upcoming generation, they don't have the advantage of a superior brand, instead they have the gimp of an inferior brand in North America at least. If they launch late again, the brand name won't help them stage a late game face save like it's done this generation.

It would be vastly stupid not to at least lend some creedence to the theory that launching early helps, because it obviously does. That is a main reason it's been so doom and gloom for the PSP over the 3DS fiasco. The 3DS is supremely awesome, and it's getting a huge unfettered foothold in the next gen handheld market. There is no competition, and getting to the game late in busniess is not good.

Sony needs to realize the next gen does not start when they say it does. They need to react to competition, instead of expecting to win no matter what, and maybe they wouldn't always be losing to everyone lately, like Nintendo, Microsoft,  and Samsung.

That's kind of ridiculous.. To say Sony can never gain dominance in a region ever again? Here in Australia, the GameCube sold something ridiculous like less than 10% of the PS2 and yet Nintendo is now the dominant force once again. Nintendo didn't have the advantage of a superior brand either you know.

How about the thing that people seem to forget time and time again? PS3 and Wii both launched at the same time. Both Wii and PS3 were a year late. One became the market leader and one lost most of it's marketshare. Clearly being a year late has absolutely no effect on it's own. 

I still believe Nintendo are going to rape the others next gen but your arguments are weak.

Exactly right.  What hurt PS3 early on was its large entry price and few quality launch games, not a later launch.  All of Sony's consoles have come out later than at least one competitor.  And luckily, the last couple of years they have been able to change their situation and are doing a lot better.  I don't think they will make that mistake again next gen. 

Though, I do disagree with your Nintendo rapage comment.  Next gen, Sony is going to come in guns blazing.  Better graphics, lower entry price than this gen, quality line-up, and HD TV's and Blu-ray will have gained even more market share by then.   So, I think there's going to be a very interesting battle next gen.  Can't wait. 



 

Around the Network
eggs2see on 09 July 2010
andremop said:
Reach said:

Xbox 720 sounds really stupid... lol


In a certain way Playstation 4 is not that good also.

It's like movies, after the big 3 it looks not as cool. I don't think it'll be called that.


Heard of this little Apple device called the iPhone 4?  Electronics arn't like movies at all, they build on the name, the brand of "Playstation", if sony feels that name is still strong then they will keep the name, if they feel it's name has been damaged too much by the ps3 or they wish to take a different approch with there next console they will change it.



snfr on 09 July 2010
WilliamWatts said:
makingmusic476 said:

But honestly, launching late isn't that bad of an idea, so long as you have the power and lineup to back it up. Look at the ps2 and Dreamcast.

The issue with the ps3 was that it came a year after the 360 and was categorically inferior to the 360 in almost every way at launch. Weak network, no in-game XMB, weak first party line up (thanks to Sony focusing on ps2/psp), multiplats that looked better on 360, all for a much higher price. All it had going for it was Blu-ray and far off games like MGS4.

If they can launch a year late with an obvious hardware advantage, a strong first party launch line up (Uncharted and Killzone within the first half a year, for example), and multiplats that are obviously superior on their platform, I think they could pull it off. The refinement of Cell and Blu-ray should allow them to create a powerful successor to the ps3 without the crazy overhead they suffered from last time, leading to a cheaper initial product.

They can't afford to launch late next generation because they are third. With this generation they could have come in at any time and people/developers would have waited for them. This isn't the case anymore, if they come in late then they risk seeing Nintendo / Microsoft / Both developing a massive lead which they will not be able to overtake. Consider the 3DS lineup of games, is there any reason why Nintendo could not repeat that feat with the successor to the Wii?

Why do people still think that a company cares about how they finish in the console war? Sony doesn't even give a damn shit about that. They want to sell consoles, that's it. If they finish with 65 million ps3 units sold and MS finishes with 68, they wouldn't care that they are third, because they sold a lot.

The most important thing about the second part is the third party support. Third partys would be stupid not to develope for a platform that already has a strong userbase. And performance isn't the deciding factor, but Wii2 and Xbox720 won't be far superior in performance.



2012 - Top 3 [so far]

                                                                             #1                                       #2                                      #3

      

WilliamWatts on 09 July 2010
toMsons7551 said:
WilliamWatts said:
toMsons7551 said:

Who cares, the next system by MS, nor Sony will come before 2012, that's two years to go at the LEAST.

By this time PS3 will be leading the HD sales chart and Microsoft will be pushed to push out new technology so they don't fall back. I believe MS cannot afford to go second, Sony can as they are the dominant gaming brand. Wii doesn't impact either market, as Sony and MS really don't expect to get the casual gamers to their system. Sony more so doesn't care, as they sold more than 120M PS2's and they know how many people will eventually pick up a PS3. MS has been watching 360 sales go downhill, and watch the PS3's just climb year by year. If anyone feels the heat first to abandon their previous system, it will surely be Microsoft.

Two things:

1. Nintendo is the dominant gaming brand by a considerable margin at the moment.

2. How has MS been watching sales go downhill when the Xbox 360 is -1% year over year and will peak into positive territory within the next few weeks?


1. Nintendo is for casual gamers, no one cares about them. They don't impact anything in the HD wars. All the Wii is moms buying a bad system for their kids cause it's "safe" and "clean". Even with so many systems sold, their Software sales suffer. Enough about no-one-cares-Nintendo.

2. In 2008, the 360 sold just up of 11 million units. In 2009 they are down by 800,000 units sold. This year they are following the same trend (patern) even with the 360S release and the 200/250 buck price drop of the old model. These are the models that are confirmed to pick up 360 sales, not the 360S like people claimed earlier on.

In 2008, PS3 sold upward of 9.7 million units, and grew to over 12.5 million units. A number the 360 has never reached, especially now in its decline. PS3 is up from their numbers last year to this point, the 360 is down. All the numbers suggest this, it's ignorant to be a fanboy and ignore the fact that MS only holds interest in the States because of their earlier hardware release. Americans got comfy with the system of choice, the world moves to superior hardware, and Sony is the hardware world leader without contest.

In 2008, when MS reached 11 M sold units, this doesn't compare to Sony's 2008 year numbers (9.7 M). MS comparison comes to 7.8 M units to Sony's 9.7 M in the same time period. Sony has outsold Microsoft every year from release, including this years lead of 1 million units. It's true that MS might peak the loss this year for a small period due to old 360 model price drops, but than they will drop off in price when it's most important to sell well, at Christmas time. Sony can finish this year easily with 2-3 M units sold more than MS, than only be down 2 M units total which will be overtaken the next year without question. So how is MS going down? Check the damn numbers and facts instead of being a fanboy and making them up.


PS: Don't even try to tell me about Kinect/Natal, it's already said that 4/100 people are even interested in Kinect. Kinects and Move's respective audience is irrelivant right now, and Move is actually the safe bet. We all can at least admit this part. Price of Kinect and Move need to go way down, or it will be like they don't even exist.

1. Only if you put your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalalalalalala"

2. http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/story/80751/2010-year-on-year-sales-and-market-share-update-to-june-26th/

No, its 29,000 down as at June 27.

The rest? Not worth my time.



deskpro2k3 on 09 July 2010

The next gen starts when Sony says so. :P



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5
Around the Network
WilliamWatts on 09 July 2010
snfr said:
WilliamWatts said:

They can't afford to launch late next generation because they are third. With this generation they could have come in at any time and people/developers would have waited for them. This isn't the case anymore, if they come in late then they risk seeing Nintendo / Microsoft / Both developing a massive lead which they will not be able to overtake. Consider the 3DS lineup of games, is there any reason why Nintendo could not repeat that feat with the successor to the Wii?

Why do people still think that a company cares about how they finish in the console war? Sony doesn't even give a damn shit about that. They want to sell consoles, that's it. If they finish with 65 million ps3 units sold and MS finishes with 68, they wouldn't care that they are third, because they sold a lot.

The most important thing about the second part is the third party support. Third partys would be stupid not to develope for a platform that already has a strong userbase. And performance isn't the deciding factor, but Wii2 and Xbox720 won't be far superior in performance.

If the PS1 didn't finish first it wouldn't have given the PS2 such a massive lead over all the other consoles in terms of early adoption and early exclusives. By the time the Gamecube and Xbox 1 got to market the battle was already lost. Now consider the 3DS and how people say that before the PSP2 even gets to market its already lost, its the same deal. The Xbox next will definately not dawdle out of the gate like the Xbox 360 did and the Wii will definately get a huge supply of third party attention, exclusive third party attention at that. No third party will want to get left behind on Nintendos next home console, especially if the 3DS does as well as expected.

The instant a next generation console comes out the PS3 is going to be 'old news'. It will damage the sales of the current PS3 and potentially weaken the future PS4 if it isn't on the market in short order and cause some of the userbase which consists of quite a few hardcore gamers and technophiles to consider strongly changing allegience. Even a Wii 2 with rediculous profit margins and a $249 price tag in 2011 could easily outperfom the PS3. Without even trying hard it could have double the memory and bandwidth, double the drive speed, and triple or quadruple the GPU performance.



Ping_ii on 09 July 2010

Just release PS4 with big system pusher lauch titles(GT6) and slap $300 launch price then it's ps2 all over again.



snfr on 09 July 2010
WilliamWatts said:
snfr said:
WilliamWatts said:

They can't afford to launch late next generation because they are third. With this generation they could have come in at any time and people/developers would have waited for them. This isn't the case anymore, if they come in late then they risk seeing Nintendo / Microsoft / Both developing a massive lead which they will not be able to overtake. Consider the 3DS lineup of games, is there any reason why Nintendo could not repeat that feat with the successor to the Wii?

Why do people still think that a company cares about how they finish in the console war? Sony doesn't even give a damn shit about that. They want to sell consoles, that's it. If they finish with 65 million ps3 units sold and MS finishes with 68, they wouldn't care that they are third, because they sold a lot.

The most important thing about the second part is the third party support. Third partys would be stupid not to develope for a platform that already has a strong userbase. And performance isn't the deciding factor, but Wii2 and Xbox720 won't be far superior in performance.

If the PS1 didn't finish first it wouldn't have given the PS2 such a massive lead over all the other consoles in terms of early adoption and early exclusives. By the time the Gamecube and Xbox 1 got to market the battle was already lost. Now consider the 3DS and how people say that before the PSP2 even gets to market its already lost, its the same deal. The Xbox next will definately not dawdle out of the gate like the Xbox 360 did and the Wii will definately get a huge supply of third party attention, exclusive third party attention at that. No third party will want to get left behind on Nintendos next home console, especially if the 3DS does as well as expected.

The instant a next generation console comes out the PS3 is going to be 'old news'. It will damage the sales of the current PS3 and potentially weaken the future PS4 if it isn't on the market in short order and cause some of the userbase which consists of quite a few hardcore gamers and technophiles to consider strongly changing allegience. Even a Wii 2 with rediculous profit margins and a $249 price tag in 2011 could easily outperfom the PS3. Without even trying hard it could have double the memory and bandwidth, double the drive speed, and triple or quadruple the GPU performance.

1. Just because people say it it won't automatically come true. Those people want the PSP2 to fail before it is even announced. They wish that it will fail. And by looking at the Wii you should recognize that 3rd party support isn't everything. Wii is the best selling console although it has the weakest 3rd party support.

2. Third partys won't give too much attention to the Wii or its' successor, simply because they know that Nintendo's own first party games beat third party games easily.

3. Because it's longer on the market than upcoming consoles it doesn't mean that it's 'old news'.  Look a few years back and you'll recognize that the PS2 outsold the PS3 and the Xbox360 in 2007 (look especially at November and December 07), although the 360 was already in its' second year. I know what you think about this: the PS2 was more popular. But why should the PS3 not reach the mass market and sell the shit out of next gen consoles with... let's say... a 149$ price?



2012 - Top 3 [so far]

                                                                             #1                                       #2                                      #3

      

sethnintendo on 09 July 2010

Damn some harsh shit being said about all companies.  This fanboy war is pretty bad in this thread.  I think I'll stick to Nintendo thread from now on......   If you want to talk about copying then lets talk about control stick, rumble pack, motion controls......



M.U.G.E.N on 09 July 2010
sethnintendo said:

Damn some harsh shit being said about all companies.  This fanboy war is pretty bad in this thread.  I think I'll stick to Nintendo thread from now on......   If you want to talk about copying then lets talk about control stick, rumble pack, motion controls......


way to contribute to what your trying to avoid there bud ;)



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!