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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony's Back, Baby!

madskillz said:

I really, really believe a lot of folks are buying it thinking they can play their PS2 games. I can't wait to see a class-action lawsuit on the matter.

In what way? It's not like Sony was coy about the 40GB not having backwards compatibility.



Around the Network
FJ-Warez said:

Once again, the answer was no because we did not take in account the new models, price cuts, bundles, etc...

And again, selling the same as the 360, but with some price cuts, the introduction of new models, movies bundles, etc, is not well, great, or anything like that, is just the same as the XBOX, which by the way is not great by any mesures too...

 Ask yourself:

¿how much Sony has do for the sales of the PS3 in the first year?

¿how much MS did for the sales of the 360 in the first year? 


Sony has done a lot to fix their strategic mistakes in the PS3's 1st year.

Xbox360 had an easy 1st year with almost no competition, but it costs MS 1.15 billion for launching the product prematurely.

Can you imagine if Sony or Nintendo sell something unreliable like that in US?  Pack your backpack and go back to your homeland!

I am really impressed by US consumers' patience towards Xbox360's hardware failure issue.



It (PS3's market share) might hit 30%, but definently not more. ~ Neo

Flaming (Calling another user (any user) a fanboy is flaming.) ~ Machina-AX

madskillz said:
I really, really believe a lot of folks are buying it thinking they can play their PS2 games. I can't wait to see a class-action lawsuit on the matter.

You don't have to believe me - ask potential customers about the PS3 and why they want it and see what they say. Folks will buy it for their children because they asked. They will walk into a Gamestop and head for the cheap PS2 games and be sadly mistaken.

You worry too much.  They don't have the case.

It prints very clearly on 40GB PS3's box:

IMPORTANT  Playstation 2 format software titles do not perform on this system.

It is very hard to miss. 

 



It (PS3's market share) might hit 30%, but definently not more. ~ Neo

Flaming (Calling another user (any user) a fanboy is flaming.) ~ Machina-AX

madskillz said:
I was talking to a few men - in their 40s and 50s about video games (I am the video game blogger for the newspaper). They were all goo-gooing over my DS Lite and we started talking about the PS3. I told one of the gents that he should buy a 40gb PS3 if he wants to watch movies - but not play PS2 games. And just like clockwork, he was like 'But I thought all PS3s could play PS2 games?' And once again, he proved what I know folks are thinking. They *assume* every PS3 can play PS2 games. And with the PS brand, you can *trust* it.

I really, really believe a lot of folks are buying it thinking they can play their PS2 games. I can't wait to see a class-action lawsuit on the matter.

You don't have to believe me - ask potential customers about the PS3 and why they want it and see what they say. Folks will buy it for their children because they asked. They will walk into a Gamestop and head for the cheap PS2 games and be sadly mistaken.



Wow, one person tells you "I thought the 40 gig plays PS2 games?" and you assume that everyone thinks the same way. To be honest, as harsh as it may be, I think that you are full of shit, and I don't see how anyone can take you seriously.

What's in it for you if Sony and the PS3 finish in third this gen? Will you have a joygasm knowing that your Wii and 360 finished first and second respectively? Seriously why do you care about how Sony performs this gen. If Sony failed, what great would it do to the gaming market as a whole?

This "Console War" produced two thing that everyone likes, price cuts and great games. The same applies to the HD war as well. Competition is the best thing for the customers on both the gaming and HD market, and I think everyone can agree with that.



Didja get that thing I sentcha?

end said:
ps3 is already a failure, even if it goes to number 1 at the end of this generation.

ps2 just dominated so much and ps3 is still last over a year span.
 
 
Best quote ive heard so far, in fact let me put it in my sig.

 



end said: ps3 is already a failure, even if it goes to number 1 at the end of this generation.

NYANKS said: And please, if Nintendo can recover from the mind blowing pwnage dealt to it by Sony over the last ten years, I think Sony will be fine.

The Church of Freeman

All in all your just another brick in the wall.

Around the Network
Peter Potamus said:
madskillz said:
I was talking to a few men - in their 40s and 50s about video games (I am the video game blogger for the newspaper). They were all goo-gooing over my DS Lite and we started talking about the PS3. I told one of the gents that he should buy a 40gb PS3 if he wants to watch movies - but not play PS2 games. And just like clockwork, he was like 'But I thought all PS3s could play PS2 games?' And once again, he proved what I know folks are thinking. They *assume* every PS3 can play PS2 games. And with the PS brand, you can *trust* it.

I really, really believe a lot of folks are buying it thinking they can play their PS2 games. I can't wait to see a class-action lawsuit on the matter.

You don't have to believe me - ask potential customers about the PS3 and why they want it and see what they say. Folks will buy it for their children because they asked. They will walk into a Gamestop and head for the cheap PS2 games and be sadly mistaken.



Wow, one person tells you "I thought the 40 gig plays PS2 games?" and you assume that everyone thinks the same way. To be honest, as harsh as it may be, I think that you are full of shit, and I don't see how anyone can take you seriously.

What's in it for you if Sony and the PS3 finish in third this gen? Will you have a joygasm knowing that your Wii and 360 finished first and second respectively? Seriously why do you care about how Sony performs this gen. If Sony failed, what great would it do to the gaming market as a whole?

This "Console War" produced two thing that everyone likes, price cuts and great games. The same applies to the HD war as well. Competition is the best thing for the customers on both the gaming and HD market, and I think everyone can agree with that.


It's not just one person. The average Joe that doesn't frequent forums or read game magazines don't know the depth of video game information that we do. Not everyone is as informed as the average forum goer.



^Darc

I work at a Gamestop in Ohio and we always tell a consumer who wants to buy a 40 gig PS3 that it does not play PS2 games. It may not be the same at other retailers but we always inform a customer about all merchandise and it clearly says it on the back of the box.

If you buy a PS3 to play PS2 games you bought it for the wrong reason.



I'll take the case!!!

StarcraftManiac said:
PS-She said:
Mummelmann said:
I'm happy about this, but that doesn't seen to be the overall tone in here...

People seem to be unhappy that Sony is doing well. 


That's the big point... PS3 ain't doin (as) well (as it should).

The funny thing is, u can actually gain marketshare (%wise) whilst the other company is still widening the gap (Wii sold ~200k units more this week Ww, whilst being in short supply but still lost ground %-wise cuzz it was at a ratio of 6-4-4 (Wii-PS3-X360) = Wii loses marketshare but widens the gap with it's competitors.

According to many of the forum members predictions here its really surpassing expectations ;). People didnt even see it getting past 5 million. Yeah, its doing fine.

 



Nintendo & Sony supporter:

 Consoles: Wii & PS3.

Onimusha12 said:
If you asked us that before the $400 version of the PS3 was announced, we would have not believed it, but since most of us were aware of the $400 version and the desire for Blu-Ray players these holidays, most aren't that surprised.

What a bunch of crap.  There's no way that anyone with a neuron count this side of 0 thought Sony would keep the $500/$600 prices after MS cut the price of the 360 a couple months ago.



phil said:
Onimusha12 said:
If you asked us that before the $400 version of the PS3 was announced, we would have not believed it, but since most of us were aware of the $400 version and the desire for Blu-Ray players these holidays, most aren't that surprised.

What a bunch of crap.  There's no way that anyone with a neuron count this side of 0 thought Sony would keep the $500/$600 prices after MS cut the price of the 360 a couple months ago.


Considering many saw the MS cut as a response to Sony's there was no real reason to think there would be a second price cut. It's easy to say something is obvious after the fact, but I think we can assume from your rather rash response, your understanding is that of sensationalism not logic.