I've noticed quite a few people around this forum that state adamantly that the PS3 will "win the console war". These opinions most often seem to be based on the playstation brand's past successes. But the PS3 is a fundamentally different animal than it's predecessor. And there are also many outside forces which paint a dramatically different picture for this console generation. So I'd like to lay out my case as to why I don't think the PS3 will be anywhere near as succesfull as the PS2. The issues I see consist of price, format, timing and competition. Ok, price is the easy one. The PS3 isn't priced in the same ballpark as the PS2. It's priced in the range of the 3DO... Then there's price cuts. It'll be a while before the PS3 can cut it's price, but by all acounts the 360 and Wii could see price cuts tomorrow if they wanted to, which pretty much means that any PS3 price cut will be handily matched by the competiton. Format - The PS2 saw huge success by incorporating a DVD player, which at that point had already taken off. the PS3 is being used to push Blu-ray into the market. Blu ray is not DVD. It only matters if you have a high def tv and it's in a format war with HD-DVD. Now this might be a smart move for Sony Corp as a whole, but it's one that sacrifices one department (gaming) to assist another (video). Either way, having a blu-ray player just doesn't have the same advantage as having a DVD did for it's predecessor. Timing - the PS2 came out a year before it's competition, so even though it was the least powerful system, it had sufficient time to get a decent library of games and develepor attention before it's competition arrived. That advantage now goes to the 360, a system that saw massive shortages and a weak catalogue at launch, but was able to pick up steam just in time for the holiday season. While the PS3 and Wii arrived virtually simultaneously, asside from Europe. Competition - The PS2 had largely weak competition. The Dreamcast, despite initial sales, died the moment Sony said "We'll have the PS2 next year". Gamecube continued Nintendo's trend of losing third party support, while also seeing weak entries into it's flagship titles, and the Xbox, while doing well for a first endeavour, was hampered by it's timing, and a limited variety of games. The PS3 has much more competent competition. The 360 has garnered a lot of attention with it's comprehensive live services, and has used it's head start to get a good (though still somewhat limited in variety) catalogue of games, with many more big titles coming. The 360 has also managed to significantly chip away at Playstation exclusivity, landing Grand Theft Auto, Assassins Creed, RE 5, guitar hero and possibly numerous others. Then there's the Wii. While the Gamecube was Nintendo's worst selling non Virtual Boy system ever, the Wii's sales are so far matched only by...well... the PS2. And regardless of what you might think of the new direction the Wii is going in, you have to admit that it's garnering huge attention, both in the consumer and developer world. Sales remain constricted only by supply, and developers who never really cared about Nintendo that much are actually getting really excited about the system. The low price doesn't hurt either. So with the playing field between the PS3 and 360 being far more level, and the Wii proving to be a gaming phenomenon in and of itself, it's hard to see the focus lying entirely on the PS3. Finally, I'd like to mention the all important game argument. Many people say, but in a few years the PS3 will have all the amazing games so it will succeed. But this is circular logic. It's the PS brand's success that turned into the platform of choice for most third party developers, but with all these negative circumstances surrounding it in this gen, it's highly unlikely that it will garner the same level of consumer/developer support. It'll have some amazing games to be sure, but most systems have some amazing games... Well that just about wraps up my ramble. I hope this doesn't come off as too fanboyish, because I'm not trying to say that the PS3 is by any means a bad system. I just think that looking at it objectively, it's illogical to say that it'll be successful as it's predecessors, as it has very few of the advantages it's previous iterations did.

well for 2007 I like the PS3 games. The new one announced for PS3 in 2008 looks WICKED. Possibly... yeah right. the Wii will do better in 2008. And if you think the 360 is going to takeoff on it's 3rd or 4th year... ... yeah right. Software is everything. Bluray is why the PS3 games will all be on 1 disc. DVD is why the 360's games are on 3. :)

One game is on 3 DVDs. The only "need" for blu-ray on video game systems is devs wanting POS FMV movies instead of in-game graphics (think Final Fantasy 7)

Nah. I disagree. 1.25MB is more than enough... so they said in 84. 650MB is INSANE. You'd never need more than 100! So they said when the CD first came out in about 93. 9.4GB is good enough. When everything went DVD in 2000. Why would you EVER need more than 1.25MB?

As far as format is concerned DVD was eventually used for games and no one complained. The DC did fine with thier GD roms and yet somehow no one had to mention whether or not DVD's would have been a benefit for devs. What is happening this generation is gamers dictacting what devs should and shouldn't do. And that they do not need so much space. And then people call sony arrogant. Timing and competition? Either the DC was competition or it wasn't. The sales died off after the PS2's release and Dev support waned. Does it matter this generation? Nope. The #60 and the PS3 seem to be geared for a similar position this time around. Both systems will get love by third party devs but in the end it will be fans that determine which console will have the most support. And as far as game titles are concerned the PS3 already has a pretty awesome lineup and quite a few exclusives that there are scant details on. The PS3 is not hurting for support and is going to get very compelling titles from now untill well into 2008. None of the games listed were really labled as exclusives before ( I think I have mentioned this before) and quite a few 360 supposed exclusives went multiplatform as well. That would put them on level playing ground and leave it to successful franchises to battle it out. If it was up to internal devs then sony would win that battle hands down. The previous success of the PS line has enabled its lineup to look as good as it does which means the PS3 garnered support before it hit the ground. Without even proving itself gamess that needs years of development were on thier way and here we come to today. http://ps3.ign.com/index/release.html Just in case anyone is curious at the amount of titles announced for the PS3.

I realize that games will eventually utilize space on the Blu-ray disc. Now the difference that makes in terms of development costs and third party support I can't say. But my point about the DVD vs. Blu ray was that the DVD media format was a main driving force for console sales in and of itself. Blu-ray sure hasn't had that effect yet, and with a format war and the necessity of having a high def TV to enjoy it, it seems unlikely that it will have the same effect for quite some time. The DC is a tricky one to peg in the console generations, but I'm going to say that it didn''t really compete as the DC really wasn't killed by the PS2 so much as it was killed by anticipation of the PS2. As for the second part, your exactly right. Like I said, I'm not saying the PS3 will fail, but that it won't have nearly the success as it's predecessor, and with the 360 getting more love, and already having a year head start, it's going to eat into the PS brand sales. I wasn't saying that those games were once PS3 exclusives. I said that they were once PS brand exclusive series. the Grand Theft Auto games were PS2's biggest sellers. And while they eventually found their way to the Xbox, their timed exclusivity was pretty big. Now the next game won't be a reason to buy a playstation like the last three were. Ditto goes for those other games I mentioned and many others. And much like the Grand Theft Auto games were timed exclusives, the same goes for many of the 360 games you speak of. Games like Fight night, Saints row and Oblivion were important 360 games. as PS3 games they'll just be considered as ports. You're right there. There are a lot of announced PS3 games, but this level of support was based mostly on assumptions of continued brand success. And so far the PS3's sales have done nothing to suggest it will maintain that level of sales. Infact since launch, I'd say the only system to see dramatically increased support for exclusive games is the Wii. Most new announcements for the PS3 are also going to the 360. Once again, I'm not trying to say that the system will crash and burn, only that it won't be anywhere near 100 million in sales. You can agree with that can't you?

Seriously, did multi-disc games on the PS1 destroy your gaming experience? Or how about multi-disc games on the DC, GC and PS2?

I agree with the most stof says, but I think one problem is that we are discusing from different view points. Let me explain, for me 60 million sold consols for PS3 is a failure, 60 million sold Wii or Xbox360 is a succes. Reason: Sony: Playstation 1 and 2 has been the powerhouse for gaiming, it has one of the best brands in the gaiming world. With two consols in a row with over 100 million sold sony can't win they can only lose. Nintendo: The once number one at home, so big that playing tv-games = playing Nintendo, since then three new consols has been made and each have sold less then the big NES. We have: NES > SNES > N64 > GameCube. Simple as it is for Nintendo to reach 30 million sold Wii is a huge succes compared to the Cube they have stopped the fall, and increased their number of users. Microsoft: For me microsoft needs to show that they can make some money, last gen ended with more than 4 billion loss. Show profit and you have won.

Bravo Stof, excellent post. I couldn't agree more. Robjoh, if the PS3 gets to 60 million consoles sold, I'd consider that a success. With all that has happened, it was a given that the PS3 would market share. 60 million maybe enough to hold on to first place the way this generation is going.

probarbly true that the can win the game anyway. But I mean we are speaking of almost 50% drop in user base if the reach only 60 million sold units.