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

Forums - Sony - The PS3 has already caught up to and passed the 360 sales!

MadeInDK on 19 August 2010
Icyedge said:
MadeInDK said:

Sony had lost everything..

Who had thought that the ps3, only will do the same as x-box 360..

On top of that.. Nintendo are back... stronger than ever..

 

 

Anyone could have tought that, with a much more expensive console, low HDTV/blu ray penetration and different architecture, this was obvious. They were and still are aiming on the long run. The simple fact the next mass format is blu ray is already a win for them. They didnt lost everything at all.

Ok You and me know the true gaming system, but remember, in 2005, almost all people thought that nintendo and wii was out of the race.  And now nintendo making so many money,, so we see a monster 3ds.. and short time after (latest e3 2011) they willshow the new nintendo... mayby altso the new x-box.. and they are not waiting for sony to make a profit on the ps3... 

I said it before... Mayby ps3, are the last from sony.. (offcourse the playstation brand gets annother chance) but i'm not sure, it will be sony alone... mayby a apple/sony or a Google/sony....



Around the Network
kaneada on 19 August 2010
Garnett said:

I guess VGChartz is wrong then, does ioi know that he is wrong? how much longer will the PS3 continue to outsell the 360?

 

Wait a minute... the 360 still has a 5 million lead, and its outselling the PS3 for the last month or so? Weird...

 

The real world doesnt count like this.

Actually the more interesting fact to be observered her is, despite the spike in 360 sales, there seems to be no impact on the current sales of the ps3 while the spike of sales continues to deteriorate week over week for M$. If we want to argue market trend, the PS3 spiked and capped out week over week sales that were much higher than before the price cut and has held them stable since. My question is will the same trend hold true for 360 after the rush has ended.



-- Nothing is nicer than seeing your PS3 on an HDTV through an HDMI cable for the first time.

Icyedge on 19 August 2010
Spectrumglr said:
  • Entry level BR players cost 99$ right now (see samsung bdp1580)...you don't have to wait that PS3 slashes its price to 199$ (price point that will be reached at least 1 year from now, more likely 2 years). BTW when ps3 will be 199$ there will be Br players for 50$.
  • a company thinks the other way round: if i get the same sales at higher price point i don't see the reason to cut my profits. Also PS3 became profitable recently: i don't think you can go to the share holeder meeting and in the wake of crysis say "let's cut our profits!". So you can cut profits but you should be forced to do so: you don't cut your profits just to recover a gap becaouse you like to see VGChartz home page with the red bar at the same height of the green one.
  • i said that 3D is not a factor...but i also added that in case it became important in the near future there's no thing like "ps3 is 3d ready and x360 is not": they're both capable. it's not a selling point that ps3 can play against x360.

    • to me MS will support x360 as long as Sony will support PS3.

    I said that they have more room to entice new customers by lowering the price than their competitors. Not that they should do it right now. Just that by itself, justify the possibility of staying longer on the market than 360. If they have the same popularity, more expensive technology will usually stay longer on the market than less expensive one, that shouldnt be a surprise to anyone. Maybe MS will support 360 as long, thats not the point, all im saying is at the moment theres more factors pointing to Sony having sufficient financial advantages to support PS3 longer.

    If 360 continuously outsell PS3 month after month by 300K-400K after liquidation/revision while staying at the same price point I wouldnt do the same analyse... Instead of you that the analyse is and will stay "to me MS will support x360 as long as Sony will support PS3." whatever happen.



    Teo on 20 August 2010
    tuscaniman said:
    Teo said:

    The PS3 will be in the market at least 2 full years after the 360 is discontinued.

    The next xbox will be able to play all 360 games and MS will follow their footsteps and kill off the 360.

    Well then you can say goodbye to Sony in the console business if they think the PS3 will compete with the next gen consoles for 2 years if even at all. And no MS will not kill off the 360 when the new one is complete. The 360 will be around just as long as the PS3 will. In case you didn't notice it is outselling the PS3.

    Who said a PS4 will not be in the market as well?

    The facts are still there, Sony will support the PS3 longer than MS will.

    Just because its selling it does not mean anything, they killed the xbox which was a huge source of income.



    TauKappaNASA on 20 August 2010
    Spectrumglr said:
    TauKappaNASA said:
    Spectrumglr said:
    raygun said:

    I love all the posts saying 'when will PS3 catch up to 360?' Imagine 2 cars in a 4 lap car race, and the 360 car gets a 1 lap head start. People are saying the 360 is ahead? Right! Well, to even things out, lets factor in that extra 'lap' of sales, 5.9 million xbox360's in it's first year. You can either minus that from the total 360 sales (42 m) or add it to the PS3 sales (36.6m) to nullify that head start, either way PS3 is ahead, 36m for 360 vs 36.6m for PS3, or 42m 360 vs 42.6m PS3. When a race has staggered starting of the contestants, you don't look at who's nearest the finish line, but their distance/time for the race so far. 

    let's put apart for a moment your flawed logic...and let's concentrate on pure math.

    Let's start by saying that the week before the Ps3 launch the x360 WW total was about 5.3M (and not 5.9)...now the gap is about 5.4M: let's add it to actual PS3 WW total..and you know what? PS3 is still behind. (= your math needs a refresh as your logic)


    Its not that his logic isn't sound. Data can be interpreted in many ways. I agree that the "important" measure is what they are currently at right now. But to the people saying the logic is flawed. In 2013ish (give or take) when 360 is gone and the ps3 is still going strong for a year or two (give or take) will the same people change their logic saying 360 quit while they were ahead and was the rightful leader at the exact moment they quit but not a year or 2 down the road?


    again i don't understand why people continue to state that Ps3 will last longer..there's no reason for a company to quit a project as long as it's succesful and on the other side there's no reason to proloungue the life of something that fails to reach its objective by a long shot.

    Ms and Sony don't have to do something because the people here expect them to do so:

    • if MS quits x360 this won't happen because of a "five-years-plan" (like it was set in stone from the beginning of time) but simply  because x360 is no more profitable.
    • if Sony prolongue the life of the PS3 to 12 years this won't be because of a supposed "12-years-plan" but because the PS3 is still profitable

    as of now there'se no single reason for MS to quit x360 before Sony quits its PS3...surrender to this fact.

    The Blu-Ray alone makes the PS3 more "future proof." That is the only reason why I think it will last longer. As someone previously stated, if Move or Kinect somehow become the "It" things then everything will change anyway.



    Hide your kids, hide your wife

    Around the Network
    Spectrumglr on 20 August 2010
    TauKappaNASA said:
    Spectrumglr said:
    TauKappaNASA said:
    Spectrumglr said:
    raygun said:

    I love all the posts saying 'when will PS3 catch up to 360?' Imagine 2 cars in a 4 lap car race, and the 360 car gets a 1 lap head start. People are saying the 360 is ahead? Right! Well, to even things out, lets factor in that extra 'lap' of sales, 5.9 million xbox360's in it's first year. You can either minus that from the total 360 sales (42 m) or add it to the PS3 sales (36.6m) to nullify that head start, either way PS3 is ahead, 36m for 360 vs 36.6m for PS3, or 42m 360 vs 42.6m PS3. When a race has staggered starting of the contestants, you don't look at who's nearest the finish line, but their distance/time for the race so far. 

    let's put apart for a moment your flawed logic...and let's concentrate on pure math.

    Let's start by saying that the week before the Ps3 launch the x360 WW total was about 5.3M (and not 5.9)...now the gap is about 5.4M: let's add it to actual PS3 WW total..and you know what? PS3 is still behind. (= your math needs a refresh as your logic)


    Its not that his logic isn't sound. Data can be interpreted in many ways. I agree that the "important" measure is what they are currently at right now. But to the people saying the logic is flawed. In 2013ish (give or take) when 360 is gone and the ps3 is still going strong for a year or two (give or take) will the same people change their logic saying 360 quit while they were ahead and was the rightful leader at the exact moment they quit but not a year or 2 down the road?


    again i don't understand why people continue to state that Ps3 will last longer..there's no reason for a company to quit a project as long as it's succesful and on the other side there's no reason to proloungue the life of something that fails to reach its objective by a long shot.

    Ms and Sony don't have to do something because the people here expect them to do so:

    • if MS quits x360 this won't happen because of a "five-years-plan" (like it was set in stone from the beginning of time) but simply  because x360 is no more profitable.
    • if Sony prolongue the life of the PS3 to 12 years this won't be because of a supposed "12-years-plan" but because the PS3 is still profitable

    as of now there'se no single reason for MS to quit x360 before Sony quits its PS3...surrender to this fact.

    The Blu-Ray alone makes the PS3 more "future proof." That is the only reason why I think it will last longer. As someone previously stated, if Move or Kinect somehow become the "It" things then everything will change anyway.


    PS3 is not future proof: BR or not if MS or N release a new console in fall 2011 it will be miles ahead in terms of technical specs...and future proof to me should also involve gameplay (as Wii this gen showed): in this field PS3 is not future-proof. With Move they just copied the wii (ok, move is more advanced, but it came 4 years late and has to build up its userbase from ground zero)...while "next gen" consoles will likely explore new grounds as revolutionary gameplay proved to be a winning point this gen: i don't think you can stand the market with the PS3 alone while a new Wii-like console with better tech specs and revolutionary/new gameplay hits the market (Sony almost made the trick this gen but this was because they came from the most successful console of all time...i really don't think they could afford such a competition with the PS3)

     

    Sony surely won't give MS again one year of head start: they came from the most successful console of all time and still this didn't prevent the PS3 from being the 3rd console in terms of sales (that managed to see the green only in its 4th year). Imagine what could happen if they give MS 1 year of advantage while coming from the PS3.

    So sony can decide to prolongue the life of its PS3 even for 12 years...but surely they'll release a new console around the same time MS or N release theirs and then deciding to pull the plug off the ps3 is just a matter of strategy.

    If they do what they did with PS2 they could prolongue its life...but as the results have been far off from the expectations this time Sony could rightfully decide to follow the strategy that Ms took with 360 (quit PS3 quite rapidly). On the other side MS could rightfully decide to change its strategy and continue to support the x360 that is arguably much more successful than the first xbox while launching its successor. What i'm tring to say is that the situation has changed a lot from the last gen so it's prefectly plausible that MS, N and Sony decide to explore new grounds in terms of strategy and nothing is written in stone. What is sure is that nothing is future proof with technological advance: we're playing with stuff that wasn't the state of the art even when it came out (imagine in 2011 or 2012)so trying to argue that console X is future proof is out of this world (by the time a new console comes out PS3 will be like the PS2 against the x360 or the PS3: miles behind).



    2008 year end sales (made in January 2008):

    44.2 M 27.1 M 20.8 M

    TauKappaNASA on 20 August 2010
    Spectrumglr said:
    TauKappaNASA said:
    Spectrumglr said:
    TauKappaNASA said:
    Spectrumglr said:
    raygun said:

    I love all the posts saying 'when will PS3 catch up to 360?' Imagine 2 cars in a 4 lap car race, and the 360 car gets a 1 lap head start. People are saying the 360 is ahead? Right! Well, to even things out, lets factor in that extra 'lap' of sales, 5.9 million xbox360's in it's first year. You can either minus that from the total 360 sales (42 m) or add it to the PS3 sales (36.6m) to nullify that head start, either way PS3 is ahead, 36m for 360 vs 36.6m for PS3, or 42m 360 vs 42.6m PS3. When a race has staggered starting of the contestants, you don't look at who's nearest the finish line, but their distance/time for the race so far. 

    let's put apart for a moment your flawed logic...and let's concentrate on pure math.

    Let's start by saying that the week before the Ps3 launch the x360 WW total was about 5.3M (and not 5.9)...now the gap is about 5.4M: let's add it to actual PS3 WW total..and you know what? PS3 is still behind. (= your math needs a refresh as your logic)


    Its not that his logic isn't sound. Data can be interpreted in many ways. I agree that the "important" measure is what they are currently at right now. But to the people saying the logic is flawed. In 2013ish (give or take) when 360 is gone and the ps3 is still going strong for a year or two (give or take) will the same people change their logic saying 360 quit while they were ahead and was the rightful leader at the exact moment they quit but not a year or 2 down the road?


    again i don't understand why people continue to state that Ps3 will last longer..there's no reason for a company to quit a project as long as it's succesful and on the other side there's no reason to proloungue the life of something that fails to reach its objective by a long shot.

    Ms and Sony don't have to do something because the people here expect them to do so:

    • if MS quits x360 this won't happen because of a "five-years-plan" (like it was set in stone from the beginning of time) but simply  because x360 is no more profitable.
    • if Sony prolongue the life of the PS3 to 12 years this won't be because of a supposed "12-years-plan" but because the PS3 is still profitable

    as of now there'se no single reason for MS to quit x360 before Sony quits its PS3...surrender to this fact.

    The Blu-Ray alone makes the PS3 more "future proof." That is the only reason why I think it will last longer. As someone previously stated, if Move or Kinect somehow become the "It" things then everything will change anyway.


    PS3 is not future proof: BR or not if MS or N release a new console in fall 2011 it will be miles ahead in terms of technical specs...and future proof to me should also involve gameplay (as Wii this gen showed): in this field PS3 is not future-proof. With Move they just copied the wii (ok, move is more advanced, but it came 4 years late and has to build up its userbase from ground zero)...while "next gen" consoles will likely explore new grounds as revolutionary gameplay proved to be a winning point this gen: i don't think you can stand the market with the PS3 alone while a new Wii-like console with better tech specs and revolutionary/new gameplay hits the market (Sony almost made the trick this gen but this was because they came from the most successful console of all time...i really don't think they could afford such a competition with the PS3)

     

    Sony surely won't give MS again one year of head start: they came from the most successful console of all time and still this didn't prevent the PS3 from being the 3rd console in terms of sales (that managed to see the green only in its 4th year). Imagine what could happen if they give MS 1 year of advantage while coming from the PS3.

    So sony can decide to prolongue the life of its PS3 even for 12 years...but surely they'll release a new console around the same time MS or N release theirs and then deciding to pull the plug off the ps3 is just a matter of strategy.

    If they do what they did with PS2 they could prolongue its life...but as the results have been far off from the expectations this time Sony could rightfully decide to follow the strategy that Ms took with 360 (quit PS3 quite rapidly). On the other side MS could rightfully decide to change its strategy and continue to support the x360 that is arguably much more successful than the first xbox while launching its successor. What i'm tring to say is that the situation has changed a lot from the last gen so it's prefectly plausible that MS, N and Sony decide to explore new grounds in terms of strategy and nothing is written in stone. What is sure is that nothing is future proof with technological advance: we're playing with stuff that wasn't the state of the art even when it came out (imagine in 2011 or 2012)so trying to argue that console X is future proof is out of this world (by the time a new console comes out PS3 will be like the PS2 against the x360 or the PS3: miles behind).

    Glad you spent so much time on that....Now look at my statement where I said more future proof...not that it was future proof by definition. You can say somethings better while not saying its the best. I expect a 20 page dissertation in return. Thank you.

    Overall, good points on the strategy comparison and I do understand what you are saying about relatively close release points. Just wanted to clarify that my point wasn't saying who will win next gen, just that I think PS3 will be around longer for one reason or another. The another reason may be simply because Sony wants to stick to their decade of support motto.



    Hide your kids, hide your wife

    unknown_soul89 on 24 August 2010
    tuscaniman said:
    Teo said:

    The PS3 will be in the market at least 2 full years after the 360 is discontinued.

    The next xbox will be able to play all 360 games and MS will follow their footsteps and kill off the 360.

    Well then you can say goodbye to Sony in the console business if they think the PS3 will compete with the next gen consoles for 2 years if even at all. And no MS will not kill off the 360 when the new one is complete. The 360 will be around just as long as the PS3 will. In case you didn't notice it is outselling the PS3.

    barely, 2 months after a new console release did you not notice ps3 outselling 360 for like 6 months in a row?