CrazzyMan said: @HappySqurriel, Look at it this way ... The PS3 has 14 third party games over 500,000 units sold, 26 third party games over 250,000 units sold, and 47 third party games over 125,000 units sold. With 9 mln. PS3 sold. The Wii has 19 third party games over 500,000 units sold, 33 third party game over 250,000 units sold and 65 third party games over 125,000 units sold. With 20 mln. Wii sold. In comparison to the PS3, the Wii has dramatically lower development costs so it requires less units sold to break even and a Wii game will be more profitable off of the same number of units sold. How much "better" are third party games doing on the PS3? With 20 mln. consoles THE sales NUMBER should be TWICE MORE on Wii. BUT it`s NOT.

Why should they be exactly twice? Third party developers have released far more high quality sequels to major franchises with massive marketing budgets on the PS3 than they have on the Wii; at the same time Nintendo has released more first party  high quality sequels to major franchises with massive marketing budgets than Sony has. Now unless you think that Red Steel should outsell Resistance: Fall of Man, High School Musical: Sing It should outsell Uncharted, Smarty Pants should outsell Heavenly Sword, and Happy Feet should outsell Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction I don't think you can make the argument that third party Wii games should be selling at twice their current level.

 

i think ps3 will end up with somethin between nes and gba sales. there's too many great competitors now then it was before. you know gamecube was great gaming system and i love nintendo for making everytime a really great console, xbox and dreamcast were a good consoles too but ps2 was nothin to compared then. now it's different, we've got something unstopable like wii and there is no chance for ps3 being the next ps2 of this generation. actually only wii will sell more than 100mln and i think even more than ps2(maybe 140-155mln)

Soriku said: Honestly, why you guys still argue with CrazzyMan is beyond me.

That is the only intelligent thing you have ever posted in any thread ever. Congratulations!

It's interesting that you should say that.  Did you notice the little note next to a lot of the titles that said [2008 title]?  I did.  In fact, I counted them.  There are 21.  TWENTY-ONE. 

What makes you think that ANOTHER NINETEEN will also come in 2008 -- what makes you think that TWICE AS MANY as that list currently has confirmed will be out this year?  Other than pure opinion or blind faith, that is. 

I have to go to work now.  I might do more of these later. 

rotfl on that list there are titles for psn and normal games, you really want to get owned by future virtual console and wiiware titles plus all the exclusive wii games? how many of these games on that ps3 list will be like fart in the face(i mean how many of them will end up just like lair or any other next-gen-piece-of-total-crap-from-the-crap-world game)?

@CrazzyMan: You make no sense at all, you just ignore all the facts people point out. Then you make assumptions without them being based on facts, considering PS3, while ignoring that the same assumptions can be made about 360 and Wii.

Now, look at it, PS2 had 2 of the biggest IP:s last gen; GT and GTA. First one is first party and the second 3rd party. GTA4 going multiplatform was a big loss to Sony. Losing MH3 to Wii was also a big loss in Japan. There are quite a few PS3 exclusives what are likely to go multiplatform and few IP:s that has the "Sony label", which are going to be Wii exclusives. As long as people expect them to go to PS3, it doesn't hurt, but as soon as some are announced as multiplat or another consoles exclusive, it is going to hurt.
A lot of the gamers are going to jump ship, despite the fact that some of their favorite games don't come to the platform they've chosen. It just happens all the time. Besides, for a lot of people some certain sequel don't offer anything new, since they already have the earlier game. Of course, certain games do help the platforms sales, but it's the same with all the platforms.

PS3 benefits from BD (although this far it has only hurt PS3) until BD has been established in the market.

Like i said earlier, the brand recognition goes beyond brand, people who think they are buying PS3:s, may buy Wii or 360 just because "Playstation" stands "games console" to them. "The Playstation with the Halo" or "the Playstation with the fun sports game".

Well i have not read the whole thread so i will respond to the OP

No, I don't think the PS3 will hit 100 mil, but it will hit around 40- 50 mil.
But if it does last for ten years like they want it to, And its starts to dominate like so mony people seem to be predicting then its ver possible, i personally doubt it though.

This Gen the Wii is the PS2, the 360 is the Xbox and the PS3 is the GC. And i owned a GC and a PS2last gen so its all good.

CrazzyMan said: @Gnizmo, It did not sell at PS2 levels at $600 for launch, and it won't magically hit that number at a lower point. It will sell more, but not nearly as well as the PS2 did at $150. Back from the future? how do you KNOW THAT? because PS2 had price 149$ only in May 2004 and sold that year - 16 mln. or 2 mln. less then in 2003. And you know why? Because price halfed only after 4 years! PS3 will half it`s price already on second year. THAT will be a HUGE boost to sales. The problem with that is the half price of the PS2 was $150, whereas the half price of the PS3 is roughly $300, high end, $250 low end, which is still at least $100 more than the PS2 was at this time. Also, the GameCube cut it's price in half in two years, and it didn't seem to help it all that much, as far as I can tell. What if scenarios do not hold water in these comparisons. We don't need to know what ithe PS2 or anything else would sell like at those numbers because they were never released at that high of a cost, and for good reason. You can compare the GC and PS2 numbers right? Same principle. Since when MASS MARKET PRICE doesn`t MATTER??? When was mass market price mentioned in there? Then I was right. Some of those games aren't going to make 2008. Most of them are garbage. A list of 40 exclusive games for any system will include a lot of garbage though. You again about Wii games??? This is Sony thread, NOT Wii. I'm pretty sure they were talking about any console. Obviously the PS3 has shit games, just like the Wii and 360 have, and just like the PS2 had. No. Wii can trump it, and 360 can trump it if you are bringing out PSN games with XBLA and VC. In the end, you are DREAMING too much. Matter of opinion, goes both ways. Because what if scenarios don't mean a thing. What if Nintendo and Sony made their system together? Would they be at the top? It doesn't matter. We have to deal with the realities infront of us. The PS3 is more expensive than that and it does have competition. This will hurt its sales. PS2 costed 299$ when GC was launched at 199$, that really hurted PS2 sales. LOL. When console REACH MASS MARKET PRICE, then price difference doesn`t matter ANYMORE. Please save this for when the PS3 hits the $299 today or tomorrow or whenever, and the Wii still smashes it after a few weeks when sales stablize. And the Nintendo brand was stronger than the playstation brand back when the PS1 launched. The Atari brand was stronger than the Nintendo brand back when the NES launched. Brand loyalty isn't all that strong. YET, Sony sold 4 mln. PS3 at 600$ price. IF 4 mln. for 600$ is NOTHING for you.. then. LoL. The GameCube sold 20 million practically on brand alone. That's why the attach rate of their bigger games (Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros) are so high, everyone who bought a GameCube bought it for those games basically. There just weren't enough of them to get sales all that high. I imagine the PS3 will face the same thing. Big titles, FFVIII, GTA4 (not exclusive though), and others that you mentioned, and though people will buy the system for them, not enough people will buy it to really boost the PS3 past the Wii, though it'll help the PS3 vs 360. Yup, they do. SC4, Guitar Hero, Culdcept Saga, Monster Hunter 3, GTA4, etc etc. That`s only 15% of ALL PS sequels. Why get cheaper system with 15% of sequels, when they can get 100%? MH3 is only on Wii, so that means the PS3 only has 95% of PS2 sequals. And  most people will take the system with more of the sequals they want, and only at a price they can afford. Guess which system will never have a game with Mario, or Link in it? LIKE 120 mln. PS2 USERS CARED??? =))))))))) Zelda: OoT didn't save the N64. Mario games didn't save the GameCube. You act like everyone who owned a PS2 owned at least one of the big titles, but I doubt that's the case. Even if every person who bought a big title (FFX, GT3, MGS3, GTA-SA, the top sellers in their franchises) only bought one of those games, you only get 50 million or so, which is only 50% of the PS2 userbase. Now I'd expect maybe 35 - 50% of those 50 million are actually the same people, meaning  there will only be like 25 to 32 million peole to "upgrade" to the sequals. The top titles on the GC sold roughly 27 million total, which is 128% of the userbase. And that's only the Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Metroid, and SSB:M. I could probably include Pikim and Animal Crossing, which would bring it to the same 50% of buyers are the same people across games. Also, if you can say, "people don't care about Mario and Zelda", why doesn't it work the other way around? i.e.: People won't care about FFVIII and GTA4. And dont even say, "Mario and Zelda are overused" because FF is on the 13th game, not to mention the 13 or so spin offs coming in the next year or two. Also, don't misquote me on the "people don't care about Mario and Zelda" because I know you will. @Renar, Ummm... look at number of the games released now. With the hype for develeopers to do PS3, and X360 having a year to have games built for it. PS3 233 games. X360 321. Better. Wii 370. 50% more games than PS3. 321 games in 2 YEARS! PS3 is going to have MORE games in TOTAL then x360 by the end of 2008. Did you miss the Wii? It has twice the games as the PS3 in the same time frame. Also, since the Wii is faster to develope for, more games are coming out for it at a faster pace.

@Retrasado: Not really. Anyway, I can work on my debating abilities against steadfast believers for when I run for a government position.

I am almost certain you aren't even reading your own responses at this point because your arguement contradicts itself a couple times. Mass Market price is the killer for the PS3 here. Most people don't want to spend $300 on a gaming console. That is why you cannot compare the two sales just because they happen to be proportionally equivalent. There is still an absolute difference and that is what the consumer will respond to. Sales will go up, but not to PS@ levels when it was $149.



See this is what I mean about not reading your own responses. I could have just put that as my respose to your last post and it would have worked. Mass Market price matters a lot, but that doesn't affect comparisons at all. I can compare two similar products that have a different price range. Welcome to highschool economics.



Because they are not accurate comparisons. With the PS1 you can show that it is possible for a competitor to come from behind with no strogn competition in Japan, but that is not the current case. The Wii is selling very strongly so you would have to have a graph where a stronger competitotr lost to a weaker one after having a huge difference in instal base.

The PS2 arguement is a closer one but again must be restricted severly. Yuo can prove that it might do as well as the PS2 in Europe only, but that says nothing about the rest of the world. So in Europe only you can make a case for it being a success.



I explained this already but you don't read responses so I guess you missed it. It sold 3 million on about 20-30 million PS2s and that is when the sequel came out killing its sales. Further it looked to level off quickly if I remember right meaning it didn't gain a lot from more hardware sales. The attach rate was between 10 and 15%.



Do you know what the generally accepted mass market price is? It ain't $300. It is $200.



I am just going to copy and paste that again to give you another chance to respond to it intelligently. Or you could just make some nonsense up and dodge the point again. Your call.

And the Nintendo brand was stronger than the playstation brand back when the PS1 launched. The Atari brand was stronger than the Nintendo brand back when the NES launched. Brand loyalty isn't all that strong.



They can't get 100% of their sequels on the PS3 though. Two of those games are exclusives. This is not a trend likely to stop. A lot of the smaller cult hits are going to run away from high developent costs because you can't sell that many games with cult hits.



I betcha they did. The best game of every generation (review wise) is always on a Nintendo console exclusively. Most people don't buy two consoles though. I wonder who will have a problem with that this time...



Opinion does not make fact. The 360 GPU can run rings arounf the GPU of the PS3. The controller for the 360 is way better imo, and the games tend to run better on the 360 for multiplatform games. How would you put it. Ah yes. [b[YOU FAIL!!!!!!! =)))))



Making your own levels has been on consoles for ages. I think you could do it on the SNES. Mods might be. That doesn't make it innovative though. It just means it is catchjing up with the times finally.