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

Forums - Sales - PS3 likely to overtake Xbox360 in u.k.

libellule on 30 September 2010
Mr Puggsly said:
libellule said:


But they also know those 360 people are very Gears or Halo or CoD biased (not EA games). While PS3 is lacking a "king exclusive" meaning people will tend to buy more multiplateform games (see FIFA).
libellule said:


But they also know those 360 people are very Gears or Halo or CoD biased (not EA games). While PS3 is lacking a "king exclusive" meaning people will tend to buy more multiplateform games (see FIFA).

The Battlefield series has performed much better on the 360.

Dragon Age has performed much better on the 360.

Mass Effect would sell better on the 360 even as a day one multiplat. We both know the 360 generally dominates WRPG sales.

EA's football games perform better on the 360.

Left 4 Dead was only published by EA, but that's a 3rd party series that also did very well but is not included in the games you mentioned.

There are quite a few other EA games that that performed better on the 360. Basically, this bias you say 360 fans have for CoD, Gears, and Halo is bullshit.

The PS3 is better at selling some genres than the 360 and vice versa. Simple as that.

you can put away L4D and ME because they show nothing since they are no multiplat

For the others game, I KNOW they perform better on 360
BUT, I doubt they reflect the ratio PS3/360 userbase
So, relatively to the userbase, the PS3 games are selling better ....

http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=FIFA
I may be wrong but looking at these chartz, FIFA PS3 is even outselling the 360 version
same go for PES (no need to check)
same go for SFIV
http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=street fighter&publisher=&console=&genre=&minSales=0&results=50&sort=Total

I admit you got a point on Dragon Age ...



Time to Work !

Around the Network
libellule on 30 September 2010
theonewhoisme said:
goddog said:
libellule said:
johnglen said:
libellule said:
Seece said:

rofl. Never. PS3 hasn't beaten it once there in yearly sales, and barely tops 1 mill there a year.

EA have been arse licking Sony a lot lately, I don't know why. Maybe it's because Microsoft is firmly in bed with Activision .. but then it doesn't sound like Activision love Microsoft that much, just their money!

EA is making tonne of money because of the good PS3 softwares sales

good multiplateform software sales du to the lack of hacking and the less "upgrade/remplacement hardware purchase" because of the RRoD

FIFA is a good example ....

EA has also been making tons of money because of the good xbox360 software sales for years now, so what's your point ??

 

The rest is bullshit (the blahblah blah when it comes to the 360's userbase) when the attach ratio of the 360 is by far the highest this generation, a fact that destroys all the amateurish propaganda.

well, I m sure they are making tonne of money on the 360. They are making more money on 360, let's be clearer.
But they also know those 360 people are very Gears or Halo or CoD biased (not EA games). While PS3 is lacking a "king exclusive" meaning people will tend to buy more multiplateform games (see FIFA).

At the end, multiplateform sales tend to favor PS3 compared to the "official" console user base ratio. That is why EA is loving the PS3.

And, at this question : WHY PS3 software sales on multiplateform games do not follow the userbase ratio PS3/360 ?

- there is no piracy on PS3, there are plenty on 360
- I m GUESSING the 360 userbase is "virtually" slightly inflated because of people buying more than one whatever it is because the old one was broken or because the 360 is cheaper so u can buy several for your children. I doubt many people have 2 PS3s and I doubt people bought many PS3s because their first died by RRoD ...

Also, about the attach rate you are mentionning, since this rate include the 360 exclusive or no EA games (that EA, obviously, dont give a fucking shit) AND since this attach rate is biased because it is calculated WITHOUT taking in count the fact that the 360 was released 1 year before the PS3 (from what I know), I tend to consider it is not an interesting parameter IMHO

wouldn't an extra year on market make the 360s attach rate go down with more used games being available?

vie heard of piracy on the 360, though only through threads, is it really a big problem?  I know molding exists as i knew a few people who modded consoles to cheat at cod… and i stopped knowing them for that kind of shady shit. they generally had two to three consoles.  but it seems as if that would be such a small community with in  xbox.

ill admit i plan on replacing my launch box with a new unit id like to get hdmi on my console with optical out, and not have to use a special cable.  will significantly clear up the clutter. but i cant imagine thats  more the a few % at most who are willing to do that.


I do know that it has been frequently mentioned by ioi and the source that the first year of xbox software sales are  not as well recorded researched as following years for all consoles especial in europe, this could lead to a change in those ratios up or down as well. its a shame publishers do not realize old data say from 5 years prior so we could make more accurate tracking for these things. I feel it would help the industry overall.

anyway,…. sorry for the ramble … the first points the only real one

Not it means everyone has an extra year to buy games for it, attach rate means how many games the person owns after averaging it out, 360s being out a year more means people had a whole extra year to buy games for it 

Also worth mentioning it's only like .6 or .7 higher on 360 then ps3, so not even significant to start with

thx for your 2 points



Time to Work !

Hus on 30 September 2010

All that need to be done is GT5 on Top Gear 

probably will appear on the show and turn the market. 



theonewhoisme on 30 September 2010
mundus6 said:

Err? If there is 1 country in the world other than USA it wont beat 360 its UK. I really don't see how PS3 could beat 360 in UK when it selling worse and every game sells like 3 times as much on 360 than PS3.

More like 1.5 with shooters and .8 with most other game genres



theonewhoisme on 30 September 2010
rf40928 said:
mundus6 said:
rf40928 said:
SpartenOmega117 said:
rf40928 said:
SpartenOmega117 said:

I dont think xbox 360 will have a lead of 6 million by the end of this year. GT5 will sell consoles im sure. And sony has to be dumb not to bundle it with consoles. I think 360 will end up having a lead of maybe 4.5-5.5 million by the end of this year. And 5 million difference is not much anyways. Lets face it 360 came out a year earlier so it is natural for it to be ahead throughout this gen. The wii is a special case because well it was cheaper and was the "cool" thing to buy.

 

oh wait im going off topic. Anyways it might be possible. Blu ray sales are increasing every year. The ps3 price is decreasing every 1-2 years. Ps3 so far has the best line up for 2011. I dont think the 360 will even come close to the number of quality games ps3 will have next year. All those games might actually sell a bunch of consoles. Imagine the PS3 going $200-$250 next year too! Either way people who don't own a ps3 will be missing out. Luckily i own both 360/ps3 :)

Well the PS3 will be dead sooner then most think. I give it two years tops..Sony is rumored to be burning the midnight oil hoping to get their Next Gen PS4 out alittle before MS's Next Gen console this time.. So i love all the speculation by too-blindly-loyal Sony fans that somehow someway everyone in the world is going to change their mind and go buy a PS3 just because (insert reason here) .. Yeah you're right PS3 is getting cheaper, problem is Xbox 360 is getting cheaper too.. Blu-ray is selling decent, but going by sales trends - it will never outsell DVD players or have the market share that DVD had in its peak ? Why ?? Its a different world.. Digital downloads are taking over, the optical business model is changing.. Someone important in the indistry recently said if customers have to choose between convience and better quality, they'll go with CONVIENCE.  I order 720P movies all the time on cable.. people use redbox and all sorts of media outlets that didnt exist back in DVD's hay-day.. the Music industry just 4 years ago still sold most music on disc.. but not anymore.. now downloads have overtaken media.. Is media dead - not by a long shot- but this is a trend that only a fool would ignore.. Most cable internet providers are only increasing ( you're seeing doubling and tripling ) download speeds over the next few years.. which means no waiting.. GT will likely sell millions, but it wont be anywhere near PS3's #1 seller COD MW2 ( 8.1 million units sold lifetime ) and it'll be NOWHERE near the console pushing Halo Reach ( that did 4.1 million in only FIVE days )


I understand but to some people quality is actually more important than convenience. I think blu ray will sell along side with digital media. The net xbox for sure will have a blu ray drive too. Anyways im not a a blind sony fan. Im not even a microsoft fan. However im supporting sony a little bit more this gen because imo they released a better quality product just like last gen i supported microsoft with the original xbox. Either way o own both ps3/xbox so it doesn't matter in the end of the day.

I loved the PS2, but product wise alot of Sony fans blindly trusted Sony.  In fact 360 has more powerful hardware.. Sony RSX GPU does only 250 million triangles a second versus 360's Xenos GPU which does 500 million triangles !  One reason many Sony exclusives jumped ship was not only because of profit margins ( less PS3 owners mean less profit from game development time then for Xbox 360 ) .. but also because 360 is much easier to program for.. Developers making games for PS3 have to work longer and harder to tap the power to make a game of similar quality to XB 360.. in other words it takes alot of optimizations on the PS3 ( like spe accelleration ) versus on the Xbox 360 they dont have to do anything special to get the same result.. 

Central Processing Unit (CPU) performance.
* The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell.
* Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) performance
* The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU.
* Memory System Bandwidth
* The memory system bandwidth in Xbox 360 exceeds the PS3's by five times

Read more: http://www.guruht.com/2008/03/ps3-vs-xbox360-gpu-performance.html#ixzz10rXXUYI6

Here's some reading you might find interesting in PS3 versus Xbox 360 hardware: ( the anadtech stuff is more in depth

 http://www.guruht.com/2008/03/ps3-vs-xbox360-gpu-performance.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1719/13
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1719/4


Triangles per second is not everything with a console. Its true however that overall 360 is actually a better hardware. But because of the complexity of the Cell, you can if you put down the time actually achieve remarkable resaults. 360 is generally better and easier to program for though i give it that much. But if say we where to let the best developers make the most optimized PS3 games and then make the most optimized 360 game, i think that PS3 version would actully be a bit better. None of this is relevant though, as a PC from 2006 beats both consoles hard. And Wii and is kicking everybodies ass and its a GC with a new controller.

Triangles are not everything ?  Evidentally you must be a Sony PR guy, because anyone making games will tell you when you comes to 'Graphics' and 'Picture quality' .. how many triangles can be pushed are darn near EVERYTHING !  Triangles are one reason why the Wii's graphics are far inferior to either console of this Generation...When you buy a graphics card today for your pc you're looking for one with the highest triangle pushing ability. End of story..

In all honestly the Sony Cell processor is better for things not suited to gaming.. Why the japanese chose it s more pure arrogance that everyone would use their optimizations and of course want to take alot more time making a game for them when the same thing could be done on the 360 is much less time.. Beleive it or not, its the truth.. PS2 was a good product and we probably remember it better because at the time it came along in the perfect storm.. It had a 1.5 year headstart on its only competition ( the under powered game cube ) and MS didnt decide to launch their 1st console till nearly two years after the PS2 launched..

The cell is just as suited to gaming as the 360s architecture, the only difference is the 360s architecture has had over a decade for the software to be refined (I believe ps1 was the first to use it if not pcs) for the application of gaming, and now that the ps3s dev software is catching up the ps3s exclusives are blowing the 360s out of the water from an exclusive standpoint and alot of improvement can still be made as for pure processing power ps3 is able to do 218 Gflops 360 can only do 115 http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-opinion/37621-update-how-many-flops-are-in-game-consoles



Around the Network
A203D on 30 September 2010
Alby_da_Wolf said:

About this gen ending early: every competitor, Ninty, MS and Sony, due to the awkward, jumping up and down, almost unpredictable sales patterns risks heavy drawbacks either from releasing next gen early or late, so the PC could benefit from their harsh fight and troubles and make a huge comeback.

 

Yes, you guessed it right, consoles are D0MED!!!   

I also have this viewpoint, because its not logical buisness sense to for Sony or MS to launch new consoles when the're current consoles havent managed to achieve the success of their competitor or previous consoles. and the Wii is siginigficantly underpowered compared to both consoles, so its illogical for either company to even think about increasing the power threshold of their current models, when thats clearly not the deciding factor.

however its unlikely that PCs can accumulate the console market, because of the cost and accessibility differences, consoles are mostly plug and play, PCs require setting up and installing, they are more expensive, they're not considered gaming devices by the general consumer because they have other primary funcitons. with consoles the consumer just buys 1 model that will last the next few years, a PC requires too much maintainence, software protection, updating hardware etc, the list is huge.



Alby_da_Wolf on 30 September 2010
A203D said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:

About this gen ending early: every competitor, Ninty, MS and Sony, due to the awkward, jumping up and down, almost unpredictable sales patterns risks heavy drawbacks either from releasing next gen early or late, so the PC could benefit from their harsh fight and troubles and make a huge comeback.

 

Yes, you guessed it right, consoles are D0MED!!!   

I also have this viewpoint, because its not logical buisness sense to for Sony or MS to launch new consoles when the're current consoles havent managed to achieve the success of their competitor or previous consoles. and the Wii is siginigficantly underpowered compared to both consoles, so its illogical for either company to even think about increasing the power threshold of their current models, when thats clearly not the deciding factor.

however its unlikely that PCs can accumulate the console market, because of the cost and accessibility differences, consoles are mostly plug and play, PCs require setting up and installing, they are more expensive, they're not considered gaming devices by the general consumer because they have other primary funcitons. with consoles the consumer just buys 1 model that will last the next few years, a PC requires too much maintainence, software protection, updating hardware etc, the list is huge.

Yes, I was half joking, but there is a fact, that just like consoles, PC gaming too has overall oscillating sales pattern, and the growing part of its curve often happens when consoles overall curve is in a decreasing phase and vice versa, so it t's quite normal that success and unsuccess of both fields always look amplified by this alternation. And each time doomsayers of either field go ballistic. But actually, both fields have their pros and cons and they are so different that the survival of both consoles and PC gaming is always ensured, as they really cannot replace each other. But let's admit it, the doom and gloom talk is often quite amusing.   



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


Hus on 01 October 2010
Apollian said:

the PS3 has never outsold the 360 in the UK, and it never will!


Just like PS3 would  never out sale Wii in Japan......

you are a month away from seeing PS3 lay a massive ass whoopin on 360 in UK. 



A203D on 01 October 2010
Alby_da_Wolf said:
A203D said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:

About this gen ending early: every competitor, Ninty, MS and Sony, due to the awkward, jumping up and down, almost unpredictable sales patterns risks heavy drawbacks either from releasing next gen early or late, so the PC could benefit from their harsh fight and troubles and make a huge comeback.

 

Yes, you guessed it right, consoles are D0MED!!!   

I also have this viewpoint, because its not logical buisness sense to for Sony or MS to launch new consoles when the're current consoles havent managed to achieve the success of their competitor or previous consoles. and the Wii is siginigficantly underpowered compared to both consoles, so its illogical for either company to even think about increasing the power threshold of their current models, when thats clearly not the deciding factor.

however its unlikely that PCs can accumulate the console market, because of the cost and accessibility differences, consoles are mostly plug and play, PCs require setting up and installing, they are more expensive, they're not considered gaming devices by the general consumer because they have other primary funcitons. with consoles the consumer just buys 1 model that will last the next few years, a PC requires too much maintainence, software protection, updating hardware etc, the list is huge.

Yes, I was half joking, but there is a fact, that just like consoles, PC gaming too has overall oscillating sales pattern, and the growing part of its curve often happens when consoles overall curve is in a decreasing phase and vice versa, so it t's quite normal that success and unsuccess of both fields always look amplified by this alternation. And each time doomsayers of either field go ballistic. But actually, both fields have their pros and cons and they are so different that the survival of both consoles and PC gaming is always ensured, as they really cannot replace each other. But let's admit it, the doom and gloom talk is often quite amusing.   

Yeah, i thought you might have been joking, but i wasnt sure, lol. but the gloom and doom talk does get amusing now and again.



kopstudent89 on 01 October 2010

Who likes EA anyways?!!