yup i agree with you that is a easy way to find out if any system failed or not....but u shouldnt say that in a sony discussion....thats why u were banned!!!

Well it failed according to Sony's expectations. While I regret to say I do not have the source, Sony had to reduce their sales predictions for the PSP at least twice. The system also had a decrease in holiday sales this last year. And that's not very common in a successful system. But then again, Sony was probably expecting it to be just like the first playstation... just portable.

According to gameinformer (same topic) the psp is not a failure, really if you look at past handhelds nintendo came out at top and is still coming out on top, but the competting handhelds never managed to take this much market share, to me the psp isnt any where near being a failure.

The PSP is DEFINITELY a qualified success.

It certainly didn't beat the DS, but then, the DS is currently an unstoppable juggernaut.

I believe that the PSP has succeeded by carving out a completely unique place in the market. It's part gaming machine, part movie player, part multimedia device, and part homebrew kit, a combination I believe to be unmatched except by the PC. [edit: ...and perhaps, interestingly enough, the PS3.]

I have a friend in my hometown. He bought a PSP soon after launch. He bought a couple games, but hasn't played most of them in many months. He got a couple secondhand UMD movies, but again -- didn't catch his interest. What he's used it for the most is putting pictures and short home videos on it, and mp3s to listen to.

For my friend, the PSP is more like an Ipod that can also play games.

That, I believe, is why the PSP's software sales lag so far behind what might be expected given its robust hardware sales. But it is very much a success -- just not the success Sony wanted it to be.

I'd say as far as market penetration, it's a great success.

As far as Sony's expectations (that it would completely blow away the DS, as they loved to brag) it's a failure.

As far as software attach rate and software sales, it's a dismal failure.

Overall? It's a mediocre success, and it's impressive it has survived in the market with a phenomenon like the DS.

hardware sales: success
compared to DS: failure
meet expectation of Sony: failed

I think the psp has potential. Like PS3, it's early beyond its time, packed with all sort of goodies. Sony expected that everyone would drool all over it and buy one. But the price point weren't appealing to mass market.
IMO, UMD is a failure. Flash memory was advancing so fast, there weren't really a reason not to use it for handheld. UMD not only add weight and size to the psp, it also eats battery for breakfast. It should have been built to be compatible with flash memory and allows firmware upgrade to support bigger flash memory as they become available to the masses.
Homebrew is also a problem. Sony knew/know homebrew is extremely popular for psp, but they kept updating their firmware trying to block out homebrew every version, and continue to do so even they kept failing. Why not just embrace it?
psp is also more appealing as a media device than gaming.
The size and weight, IMO, isn't compact enough to be truly portable.
And the need to buy extra case to protect the psp adds to the size, making it even less portable.

But with all the negatives listed, it still is a very nice machine.

Gosh, maybe the company competing against them would care? I know Microsoft for SURE would care (Just like NINTENDO cares about the PSP). The PSP was on track to match the DS sales, until December 2005 when the market share split substantially. Do you think Nintendo cares if Sony profits from Sony's games?

Nintendo sees ANY game revenue Sony gets as revenue Nintendo DID NOT get. Sony revenue = Nintendo loss. It's that simple. People have a limited amount of money to spend on games, and 22 million people decided to buy a PSP instead of a DS and an extra game.

So do the math. 22 million PSPs plus however many millions of games they sold, times how much everything costs, and that is the sum of the money that Nintendo was not able to get. You think Nintendo cares if they lose $1 billion potential revenue? WHO WOULDN'T??

Would Microsoft care if people were getting an OS from another company, that is comparable to their own OS, and 20-30% of the computers were using it? Of course they would.

Not necessarily. A percentage of those 22 million could have purchased both portables. 

Definately a success. It was fast out of the gate, then slow, then steady. It is not at the level of the DS obviously, and the DS may end up winning the handheld war but Sony has proven itself a player in the handheld market now and for the future.

Actually that's not what Nintendo sees at all. In fact, what Nintendo cares about, and what they have always cared about, is pure profit. There is a very valid argument that the PSP's existence (it's price comparisons and game library comparisons) has BOOSTED Nintendo's DS sales FAR past what it would have been if Sony hadn't been around. Think about it this way: Do you think Nintendo liked it better when there was just GBA around and they had 30 million sales at this point, or now when the have the DS vs the PSP and have 44 million units sold at this point (a 1/3 plus profit increase in system sales, and a HUGE profit jump in software sales). Of COURSE they prefer the scenario where they are making signifficantly more money.

So, I'm not arguing that the PSP was at least (somewhat) of a success, but to believe it harmed Nintendo at all is ludicrous.