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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Is Sony's PS3 losing the console wars to the Xbox and Wii?

Zlejedi on 18 December 2008
Tyrannical said:
Now is not a good time for slowing PS3 sales.

Several of the big developers are looking at cut backs due to recent losses. With PS3 sales lower and development cycles longer and more expensive, it will probably take the biggest hit from game cancelations. This will only increase the perception that the PS3 is loosing, and will lower sales further.

A potential mid 2009 PS3 price cut and sales turn around might come too late, as publishers are probably waiting for the 2008 holiday numbers to decide what to cancel and what to keep.

 

That would be true if we were talking about exclusive games.

However costs of preparing game as multiplatform are lower than two separate releases while at the same time you are increasing your possible userbase by at least 50% (assuming a lot of people have both)



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

Around the Network
celine on 18 December 2008

No. Console wars don't exist.



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

Zlejedi on 18 December 2008
kowenicki said:
There has always been this contradiction.

arguement 1 "360 is actually more expensive because of the add-ons required"

arguement 2 "360 only sells more because it is so cheap!"

slight contradiction there.

 

Not really both are true depending on how you use it:

If you want just gaming and no net arcade is cheaper.

If you want full package with wi-fi, live and hd total cost of ownership is similar.

If you want full package as above + separate blue ray player then ps3 is seriously cheaper.

 

But typical consumer won't even know about points 2 and 3 as MS is very good at hiding additional costs.

 

 



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

Cueil on 18 December 2008
irstupid said:
Bullet100000 said:

This Gen has taught All three companies something Sony learned even loyal fan turn away at a $600 price tag. Microsoft learned to take time and produce reliable hardware, and for Nintendo finally deciding to go HD to capture more marketshare and not loose third party support.  I think next gen will be the real test for all three companies.

 

hmm that's news to me.  I don't recall a single game that Nintendo has lost from its gamecube library, they have only gained third parties.  Heck only thing that woudl have changed if HD, is that we woudl see some late HD ports with hacked on waggle. 

 

I'm glad that the Wii isn't HD, then we won't have that, but companies have to make a game ground up for Wii instead of just porting a waggle version.  And yes I know they did that for PS2 games for a while, but it dying down now to non existant besides games no one cares about.

"I'm glad my system's graphics look like crap next to it's competitors because that means that I'll never have to suffer through Assassin's Creed or the real version of Dead Rising or Rainbow Six Vegas... I'm so happy"

That's basicly what you're saying... I don't know about you, but that seems kind of retarded

 

 



 
Get your Portable ID!

Cueil on 18 December 2008
Zlejedi said:
kowenicki said:
There has always been this contradiction.

arguement 1 "360 is actually more expensive because of the add-ons required"

arguement 2 "360 only sells more because it is so cheap!"

slight contradiction there.

 

Not really both are true depending on how you use it:

If you want just gaming and no net arcade is cheaper.

If you want full package with wi-fi, live and hd total cost of ownership is similar.

If you want full package as above + separate blue ray player then ps3 is seriously cheaper.

 

But typical consumer won't even know about points 2 and 3 as MS is very good at hiding additional costs.

 

 

 

only one is true... is a car any less a car because it doesn't have 8 way power seats and a moon roof?  No... those are luxuries that are not nessarry... saying that I need a wireless addapter and all this other shit is retarded... for those who want a wireless adapter it is there and for those who don't that is what that RJ45 port is there for.  The system is cheaper don't think tacking on accessories that are optional one one system, but shoved down the mouth's of  people on the other system even matter to anyone except sony fanboys.



 
Get your Portable ID!

Around the Network
Killergran on 18 December 2008
kowenicki said:
There has always been this contradiction.

arguement 1 "360 is actually more expensive because of the add-ons required"

arguement 2 "360 only sells more because it is so cheap!"

slight contradiction there.

No, actually, this is the 'people are stupid and fall for marketing' argument.

It's a valid argument, as long as you think that people are stupid. Because if peopel are stupid, they will not realize that in order to utilize the 360, they need add-ons, and they only go on the initial price.

It's been utilized to great effect since the Wii first launched. Then it was the WiiMote that was a gimmick and Wii only sold because of the price. They didn't realize the games were all crap.

 

If you suppose that people are not stupid, however, the argument falls apart rather quickly. I prefer to think that people are not stupid, that they know at least a bit about what they want and what is the most efficient in satisfying that want. If they buy a console for cheap without all the extras, I assume that's what they actually want. If they buy a console that is expensive but has all the extras, I assume that's what they actually want. And not that they're stupid.

 



This is invisible text!

BengaBenga on 18 December 2008

*Looks at front page*

Yes, pretty much PS3rd.



Sardauk on 18 December 2008

The console war is far from over but Sony is currently loosing it for sure.

If something isn't done to invert the trends, then the rankings will remain the same.

 

I don't believe in some exclusivities raising up the sales of the PS3, onbly a severe price cut...



 

Evan Wells (Uncharted 2): I think the differences that you see between any two games has much more to do with the developer than whether it’s on the Xbox or PS3.

phisheep on 18 December 2008

Just to stir things up a bit - I don't think Sony is losing. Microsoft is.

Sony is beating Xbox 360 at the high end (if you strip out the Arcade sales).

Microsoft is getting heavily beaten in the low-end against Wii.

And all this without a price cut - Sony is doing just fine.



godemperor on 18 December 2008
phisheep said:
Just to stir things up a bit - I don't think Sony is losing. Microsoft is.

Sony is beating Xbox 360 at the high end (if you strip out the Arcade sales).

Microsoft is getting heavily beaten in the low-end against Wii.

And all this without a price cut - Sony is doing just fine.

the problem is that, both MS and nitendo are making money on each sale of their console, unlike sony who is only making money on their 160gb model and loosing money on all the rest.

in the end, nitendoo is making loads of cash, MS is making some while sony is loosing a lot. Sony is definitely in trouble.