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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS3 vs 360 top sellers

Edit: Sorry wrong thread!

 

Looking at my avatar, you'll notice the Amiga boingball.

Before Commodore took over Amiga Corp in January 1984, the Amiga team write a small demo to demonstrate what the Amiga was capable of, this became known as the Amiga Boingball, an unofficial Amiga logo which demonstrated its ahead of its time capabilities.

For me it represents true innovations, envisioning things with an eye on the future (the Amiga team implemented ideas about a decade ahead of them being implemented on Mac/PC and some of its long lost features are still left to be desired), etc. That's why I drew my personal logo with a Rising Phoenix bringing back innovation in a stale market.

Amiga Boing Ball from 1984:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-ga41edXw3A



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network
epinefridis said:
On topic.
It is silly for someone to say that STILL PS3 has no games. It has, but it is a matter of taste. And my taste leans clearly at the 360 side. 100%
But, there are some undeniable facts.
The 1,5 year headstart is fake. Europe never really bothered (except England) for the 360 launch, so the 1st holiday was almost non existent for 360. Still the supply issues (you remember them, don't you) cost MS nearly six months. I remember the irony in OXM charts "the game is brilliant, go and get it, IF you can find a 360 to play it" And this sarcasm is on June 2006 issue!
There are plenty of PS3 games in this least, that were solutions of desperation and lack of games. And you know that.
And as for attach rate, I wonder, most of the times you are pretty well informed. Don't you know that attach rate falls as the hardware numbers go up (and piracy too)?

 

I wouldn't read that as meaning the time lead is fake.  To me that means that MS squandered their head start in some countries just as some analysts have been arguing.

MS wanted to launch early and if there were supply issues, poor uptake or poor marketing that's their issue.

As for attach rates this is a wasted argument.  Due to differing libraries, etc. looking at averages just doesn't make sense.  360 clearly sells SW and HW well in US and a number of English speaking countries.  PS3 has effectively sewn up the non-English countries for the moment and is catching up at different rates in each English speaking territories (in some cases very slowly) and despite poor performance in Japan next to Wii is miles ahead of 360 there.

But that's all immaterial.  There are two camps here and neither is going to shift no matter what data points are bandied about.  360 fans are sure the console has better attach rates and sells more SW while PS3 fans are sure that the head start and misconceptions on comparing data mask the fact that PS3 attach rate and SW is comparable.

As for developers I seriously doubt they simply look at recent sales and attach rate.  Any business is looking to make money but the steering of a good business requires a lot more than looking at a few simple metrics as some replies seem to be implying.

With the rise in WW sales potential for the videogame industry and a vast difference in cost to deliver different types of games, divisions in approach and focus are appearing and as with other industries the criteria for success will become more complex, moving away from simple sales plus a few performance metrics to a more complex web of factors to juggle.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

360 has a better game library, and the PS3 is starting to build their own comparable one.