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

Forums - Sales - The race for 2nd place, Is i worth it?

XanderZane on 22 August 2008
HappySqurriel said:

Realistically, the only position that is actually meaningful in the market is the market leader ... and even that is fairly meaningless. The important factors to these companies are the absolute performance of their console, the portion of the market they captured, and the relative performance compared to their previous console.

 

True. Even if Microsoft comes in third they still have capture a huge portion of the market shares that Sony once owned with the PS2. They also will surpass the sales of the original XBox. Those two things alone are more important then whether they finish 2nd or 3rd. The fact that Microsoft was a newcomer and really wasn't expected to make much of a dent in the gaming industry (like the 3DO, Atari Jaguar, Colecovision, SNK Neo-Geo, etc), what they've accomplished so far is pretty incredible. They basically took over SEGA's spot and proved to the gaming world that they could compete against the big boys.



__________________________________________

'gaming till I'm gone'

Around the Network
tastyshovelware on 22 August 2008

nintendo was 3rd place last gen and look what happened to them....



flames_of on 22 August 2008
tastyshovelware said:
nintendo was 3rd place last gen and look what happened to them....

That's true...
Why settle for first when you can have third place!
:) 



flames_of - "I think you're confusing Bush with Chuck Norris."

 Wii: 80-85 Million end of 2009 (1.1.09)

Baddman on 22 August 2008
Sullla said:
No, it's completely meaningless who comes in second. The only people who care about this are Internet fanboys. In order for second place to matter, there would have to be a huge dropoff between second and third place, enough so that the third place platform would no longer be receiving multiplatform third-party titles. But that will never happen this generation, because:

1) 360 and PS3 sell at virtually indistiguishable levels (+/- 10% of one another)
2) 360/PS3 must share their game libraries to recoup development cost of HD games.

As a result, the two platforms have something like 80-90% of the same games, sell at pretty much the same rate, and are bought by the same demographics. The whole "competition" is pointless. The winner derives absolutely no advantage whatsoever. The XBox "winning" over the Gamecube had no bearing at all on this generation's Wii/360 fracas. At this point, either company spending itself into the red to "win" second place is mind-bogglingly stupid.

I've said this many times before: the 360/PS3 "war" is the biggest farce in gaming history.

 

QFT!



Obliterator1700 on 22 August 2008

Maybe, I will answer this question when the race is finished...See you guys at the finish line.



Around the Network
deathgod33 on 22 August 2008

theres no trophy for being first place either, if you make money than thats all that matters. lucky for ninty they will win 1st and make heaps of money. sony can just lower the price to 250 or less and they will guaranteed to be 1st place, but they will lose a lot of money, it isnt worth it.



 

 

 

 

kjj4t9rdad on 22 August 2008

If any of you think M$ is making a profit off the 360, you are an idiot. They might have been able to cut production cost to below the retail price, however, the "ring of death" has cost M$ over a BILLION dollars in additional warranty coverage (that number is from M$). Not to mention the many other problems the 360 STILL has.

Sony will continue to close the sales gap and will surpass the 360 by a relatively large margin.

By the way, everyone should stop including the Wii as a next gen console. It is a PS2 with fancy controllers and is not capable of HD. What is next gen about that?

As far as the # of games available, are you kidding me? How many crappy games do you need. There are plenty of great games available. I don't need 100 sh*tty games for every 1 good one.



Billy D on 22 August 2008

The Wii is not competing with PS3 or Xbrick please fix me. It has more titles in common with PS2 and Gamecube.

Wii is actually competing with PS2 for king of last gen game systems and may eventually sell as many systems as the PS2.



Xen on 22 August 2008
kjj4t9rdad said:
If any of you think M$ is making a profit off the 360, you are an idiot. They might have been able to cut production cost to below the retail price, however, the "ring of death" has cost M$ over a BILLION dollars in additional warranty coverage (that number is from M$). Not to mention the many other problems the 360 STILL has.

Sony will continue to close the sales gap and will surpass the 360 by a relatively large margin.

By the way, everyone should stop including the Wii as a next gen console. It is a PS2 with fancy controllers and is not capable of HD. What is next gen about that?

As far as the # of games available, are you kidding me? How many crappy games do you need. There are plenty of great games available. I don't need 100 sh*tty games for every 1 good one.

It's next gen in its fancy controls.

 



Str8knox on 22 August 2008

Last 2 posters won't last in the forum long.