By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Retrasado said:
coolestguyever said:
Smashed said:
jerseyboy609 said:
its kind of funny because a lot of people over there want a ps3, but cant buy one because the $200 360 vs $400 PS3 is making people tap out lol

 

PS3 is doing amazing for it's price. 

I agree fully. $400 is what a console should launch at, not be at 2 years later. It's doing just fine with its high price tag.

 

actually, it's not doing so hot. It's down by 53k from last year this week in Others, while the 360 is up by 178k. That is not good for Sony, especially considering they're already behind MS.

Sony has to make the ultimate decision here and there will be no turning back from it. Do they cut the price and go for broke? or do they try to cut their losses and accept third place? Not a pleasant situation to be in. If I were them though, I'd go with the latter option and wait for the next gen. (Hey, if Nintendo can pull off a third-place-to-****ing-first...)

 

They would literally be going for broke if they cut prices now. With the reports of them being cash strapped and needing to find a way to be profittable now things don't look good. I'm afraid the only option they will have is your second one. This will be a very humbling experience for them.

 



Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

-TheRealMafoo

Around the Network

@Retrasado

I have always found that the framework of natural selection is a fantastic concept for understanding seemingly unrelated things. In such a frame work Nintendo would be the generalist somewhat like the rat. A rat is simplistic both in design in nature. A rat will eat anything. Will occupy any niche available to it. Finally it wastes nothing. This is why you find rats everywhere, and no matter how you try your not going to ever get rid of them.

Sony in the natural selection model would be an alpha predator such as a lion. The lion is a particular eater. It only wants to eat red meat. The lion will predate only areas to its advantage, and if it is forced to predate in areas not to its advantage it suffers greatly. The lion is a lean mean waster of resources. It kills eats the choice parts, and then moves on until it is hungry. It wastes massive amounts of energy in hunting difficult prey.

The one thing that nature teaches us is this. Generalists survive and specialists like the alpha predator are in line for extinction. They may be at the top, but they have a hard time with adversity. They cannot change while the generalists have no need to change.

Nintendo could survive under foot. The company made money on everything it sold, and was hardly wasteful. Nintendo is simply not particular as to how they get what they need. That is why they can come up with radical strategies they are independent of having to perform in a certain fashion.

Sony is not Nintendo it is simply not designed to function in any role outside of an alpha predator. The company must be on top dominating to make a living. They have dozens of game studios to maintain. Their model is built around waste. Then they have the entire issue of being reliant upon reputation.

You take Sony out of the alpha position, and their strategy falls completely apart, and you may say well they need to change their strategy. Well that is easier said then done it is very difficult to imagine Sony putting their gaming division on a starvation diet. Not with the fact that the division is used to scavenging off of its brethren steeling as it were their pots of gold. Sony needs to gut the entire division, and I have seen no demonstration by Sony that they understand this.



Dodece said:
@Retrasado

I have always found that the framework of natural selection is a fantastic concept for understanding seemingly unrelated things. In such a frame work Nintendo would be the generalist somewhat like the rat. A rat is simplistic both in design in nature. A rat will eat anything. Will occupy any niche available to it. Finally it wastes nothing. This is why you find rats everywhere, and no matter how you try your not going to ever get rid of them.

Sony in the natural selection model would be an alpha predator such as a lion. The lion is a particular eater. It only wants to eat red meat. The lion will predate only areas to its advantage, and if it is forced to predate in areas not to its advantage it suffers greatly. The lion is a lean mean waster of resources. It kills eats the choice parts, and then moves on until it is hungry. It wastes massive amounts of energy in hunting difficult prey.

The one thing that nature teaches us is this. Generalists survive and specialists like the alpha predator are in line for extinction. They may be at the top, but they have a hard time with adversity. They cannot change while the generalists have no need to change.

Nintendo could survive under foot. The company made money on everything it sold, and was hardly wasteful. Nintendo is simply not particular as to how they get what they need. That is why they can come up with radical strategies they are independent of having to perform in a certain fashion.

Sony is not Nintendo it is simply not designed to function in any role outside of an alpha predator. The company must be on top dominating to make a living. They have dozens of game studios to maintain. Their model is built around waste. Then they have the entire issue of being reliant upon reputation.

You take Sony out of the alpha position, and their strategy falls completely apart, and you may say well they need to change their strategy. Well that is easier said then done it is very difficult to imagine Sony putting their gaming division on a starvation diet. Not with the fact that the division is used to scavenging off of its brethren steeling as it were their pots of gold. Sony needs to gut the entire division, and I have seen no demonstration by Sony that they understand this.

 

This is a brilliant and well written analysis. More thoughtful and thought provoking postings like this could certainly raise the quality and interest of these discussions. It’s a pleasant change from what sometimes seems like bickering children when the fanboys are in full voice.

 

 



Maynard_Tool said:
Damn nintendo is killing everything.

X360 is great.

Sony.... well, is just being sony lately.

 

Are you refering to the PS3? or all the Sony consoles together (PS3, PS2, PSP)?



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Forgot PS2 numbers.

PS2: 140,343, not bad



Around the Network

look!! ps3 is last in the chart:P



jerseyboy609 said:
its kind of funny because a lot of people over there want a ps3, but cant buy one because the $200 360 vs $400 PS3 is making people tap out lol

people are buying 400$ ipods. If they wanted a ps3 that badly they would have found a way to afford it .

interestingly, sales are generally way up on last year. The PS3 just slightly lower by about 700 units or so.
http://vgchartz.com/hwcomps.php?cons1=Wii&reg1=Total+Other&cons2=PS3&reg2=Total+Other&cons3=X360&reg3=Total+Other&start=39418&end=39789



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Beautiful numbers!

Wii is dominating!
360 is strong

PS3... it's sad.



     

My Gaming Setup

X360 is hardly overtracked. Boss of Microsoft France said they were proud to say that they are at ~22.000 per week thanks to the price cut, and they have past the 800.000 mark (shipped). So, it might be around 730k in France, but VGC has it at 1077k.

So, it's overtracked by more than 300k only in France...

The numbers ARE wrong. Why no adjustments ? VGC is losing credibility.

http://www.gamekult.com/articles/A00000723343/



End of '09 predictions :

Playstation 3 : 36M
Xbox 360 : 38M
Wii : 71M