lol this thread is always getting bumped

NNN2004 said: because they dont have one lol

theres your answer ^

 

Pristine20 said: valen200 said: Pristine20 said: Hawkeye said: People buy HDTVs becuase they need a new TV and HDTV is all that is available. If people mainly cared about HD, 720P HDTVs wouldn't sell.   Why they're selling isn't important. The point is that they're selling period. Most people are resistant to change and would not budge except they had no choice. Then when they change, they realize that it isn't all that bad. Many technological movements are like this. Seriously, many of you are just picking at straws to thow one more bone at the article or the ps3 that it's getting pathetic. Umm, why and how they are selling s very important. A person who wants the sleek look of a flatscreen is a different customer than someone who wants the clearest picture. It is sales 101. They will both have a HDTV, but one is more likely to know how to harness the tv's abilities than the other. A customer who cares about harnessing Hd is more likely to want a 360/ps3/blue-ray/dvd upconverter/etc. than someone who thinks their 20 year old bedroom set is just fine.     In the context of this discussion, they're not. No one cares who is buying the wii because it can fit in their living room space vs those who want to play wii fit. What's relevant to the article is that the wii is the best selling console right now. Please focus on the main topic at hand and don't join others who seem hell bent on nitpicking insignificant portions of the article because it presents an opposite viewpoint of the ps3 than we've become accustomed to reading.

let's see.. first.... I don't remember bringing up the wii and I am not nitpicking. I work in retail.  I sell digital cameras and have spent a great deal of time selling new technology to people who are afraid of it. I also was in electronics and have sold many tvs to peoples for many reasons. To say that there is no physcology in sales, or that overall sales trends are not impacted by buyer rationale is at best uninformed. Period. Having more HD tvs in circulation does not help the ps3 unless people really want blu-ray and 1080p. A point in the article  was that people wanted hd tv and cared about. That is  part of the topic.

 

second... I don't remember weighing in on anything beyond tv sales. deciding what opinion I have or what group I belong to for me when I have not taken a larger stance is perhaps arrogant. I was happy that we sold all of our Wii consoles on black friday. I was very disapointed that the only console we did not sell through was the Ps3.

forevercloud3000 said: misterd said:   I told no one to STFU-  It was the original acticle and poster that was telling Time to STFU - I just mocked them for it. Now you still haven't addressed any major points: 1) Sony has lost 3 billion on the PS3, and looks to lose even more. A: PS1 lost alot too when it was released, PS2 lost even more, PS3 lost even more then them. Sony knew this would happen already, they don't care. Their plan is to recoup on the losses down the line with game sales and then make profit off of the system later down the 10 year life cycle(and yes, I said 10 year life cycle) 2) Sony has dropped from a 70% to 20% market share. A: They are the most exspensive on the market which puts them out of the reach of common consumers within this recession. This is temerary. Casualty of trying to be innovative with their hardware. Will be recouped within 10 year life cycle so who cares. 3) The PS3 still doesn't have a game that looks like it'll reverse their fortune. A: Playstation has never survived off of one game. It has always been the mass bulk of quality that drove the PS franchise to the top. THey are doing the same this gen as well. Refer to IGNs charts on PS3 excels at quality games over quantity as the 360 does. THe PS3 also has more quality games then 360 does. When the PS3's price drops all of this will become much more apparent to the consumer and they will realize what a marvelous thing the PS3 is.Oh yea, 10 year life cycle! 4) The console is now selling less than it did a year ago, is firmly entrenched in third place, and is losing ground each week - slowly to the 360, quickly to the Wii. A: Yea, It started selling less then last year right around the same time the 360 went for a price cut. But no, don't mention that little tid bit for they have nothing to do with each other....right? You explain to me how these facts don't show the PS3 as a major misstep by Sony, and I'll concede that Time was completely off the mark. A: The PS3 issues are simply being massively overblown for different reasons by media and fanboys alike. Here are some facts to throw into the hater machine. PS3 has more quality games then the 360 had each consecutive year in it's life span. PS3 is better made hardware by a mile then the 360 OR Wii is and is truthfully the best deal for a system. PS3 does just about on par with the 360, its main competitor at a much higher price point. The PS3 is/ or at least was gaining on the one year lead the 360 had on it. The PS3 can out last the other two systems with pure staying power, seeing as they have taken the time to add in features and things that later on down the line consumers will definitely be looking at. Lastly, BluRay, check the recent sales on N4G and other sites, it is prevailing. Oh and 10 year life cycle, BELIEVE IT!!!!     PS3 FTW!

Thank God you can at least give a cogent argument, something the original critic simply failed to do.

As I said earlier, then repeated, I wouldn't describe the PS3 as a flop. However, as a business decision, it was a bad one, badly executed, and it is hard to deny that it has hurt Sony far more than they had planned. There is no indication that they were planning on XBox-type deficit with the PS brand - if they had, they would have given the heads up so this wouldn't look as bad as it does (MS did let it be known early on that they were prepared to lose a fortune to get the XBox established).

Let's also be fair in acknowleging that while Time blows the issue out of proportion, that's what news always does. No one sells magazines with headlines like "PS3 not doing terribly well, but all things considered it could be much worse."

 As for the 10 year cycle, we'll see how that plays. At this rate, by the time the PS3 hits its 5th year, Nintendo will be able to launch a PS3 level Wii2 for a lot less money than the PS3 debuted, which tells me that Sony lept a generation to far with the PS3. They should have done a more consumer friendly console with fewer bells and whistles. The real question though is whether Sony can push the PS3 for 10 years. They could do it with the PS1 and PS2 because they were the most successful of their generation.  By the time the console is widely affordable ($200), the competition will be ginning up excitement for their next consoles, and the PS3 risks being left in the shadows.

And while the recession can be blamed on this years sales, it can't be used for the first year,which was abyssmal. Every gamer I know of laughed when Sony announced the $600 tag, and were insulted by comments like "its underpriced". Their ego got the better of them, and we'll see whether they can fix the damage with the PS4.

And why did they need to mention the 360 price cut? Is it somehow more comforting to know that your sales are being hurt because consumers are defecting to the competition?

Lastly, I'll grant the library has come together nicely this year. Unfortunately I remember when Nintendo tried winning the console war with "quality over quantity" and the PS1 cleaned its clock. The problem is the quality will inevitably follow the leading console, as developers chase the biggest user base. If Sony has the smallest base, and is unwilling to pay for exclusives, then it will have trouble drawing the critical third party support it needs. It will have to try to make up the difference with first and second party exclusives, which, again, failed for Nintendo.

PS - I have a BR player and a good number of titles, so I believe in the viability of the format to collectors like me. I am not yet convinced it will gain DVD level acceptance, and definately skeptical of the PS3's ability to act as the primary gateway to the format.

@ misterd

Thank you for aknowledging my argument, as many would just try to brush it aside without confronting it :).

A: Just because we have seen this type of misleading media attention before does not mean we should just accept it or condone it in any way. It is an appalling detriment to society and we should be trying to end it not feed into it.

B: There is no way the Wii can release a system that will be better then the PS3 at a lower price point, that is logically impossible. The wii's main draw in is it's very low price. I must say though now that the Wii has drawn in the crowd, a new crowd just wants it becuase it seems to be the it thing. I am still a firm believer that the Wii is a FAD, you dont have to agree with me. The system in no way deserves the gleeful attention it is getting with the least games, least quality, least graphics, least bang for your buck system out right now.

C:We were going through a recession as soon as gas prices started to sky rocket.Its just that the media and government alike have only recently accepted that we indeed are going through another one. And the PS3 did as good as a system at that price point could in the very beginning. And last I checked, The PS3 started to outsell the 360 before last Christmas, BEFORE the price cut, by a good margin. Like I said before, only of recently the PS3 has fallen behind the 360 with it's drastically low pricing sku (Which by the way is a complete rip off on the ignorant consumer).

D: It is not the fact that people are defecting. It is that people only have so much money to spend on games. THe 360 was the lowest priced one so people who did not have a system simply chose the cheapest for the right now. This doesn't mean they won't get a PS3 later either. I have seen a much higher number of PS3s sold at my Gamestop of employment of recently. I think many consumers are just waiting out another price cut, that they thought would hit this christmas for the PS3, they thought wrong.

E: Sony knew after the apparent marketing tactics of MS that they would not be able to compete in bidding wars with MS. That would be suicide. Its a waste of money and could be put to better use. That better use is first party development for they, make you immediate money, no middle man, will always be exclusive, and are self reliant. No other company besides Nintendo could come close with such a strong 1st party. If Sony can keep pumping out higher quality exclusives that can only be available on their system(Killzone 2, Heavy Rain, Uncharted, HS, GODIII, MAG, R2, etc) then 3rd party developers will want a piece of the action as well. Each exclusive PS3 game acts like a display of the system's true power, and what it can potentially offer 3rd parties.

I think when sony drops the price the console will sell much better. I think Blu-Ray will help them in the long run but it wont be for a while when prices continue to drop...thats the key...low prices

forevercloud3000 said: @ misterd Thank you for aknowledging my argument, as many would just try to brush it aside without confronting it :). A: Just because we have seen this type of misleading media attention before does not mean we should just accept it or condone it in any way. It is an appalling detriment to society and we should be trying to end it not feed into it. B: There is no way the Wii can release a system that will be better then the PS3 at a lower price point, that is logically impossible. The wii's main draw in is it's very low price. I must say though now that the Wii has drawn in the crowd, a new crowd just wants it becuase it seems to be the it thing. I am still a firm believer that the Wii is a FAD, you dont have to agree with me. The system in no way deserves the gleeful attention it is getting with the least games, least quality, least graphics, least bang for your buck system out right now. C:We were going through a recession as soon as gas prices started to sky rocket.Its just that the media and government alike have only recently accepted that we indeed are going through another one. And the PS3 did as good as a system at that price point could in the very beginning. And last I checked, The PS3 started to outsell the 360 before last Christmas, BEFORE the price cut, by a good margin. Like I said before, only of recently the PS3 has fallen behind the 360 with it's drastically low pricing sku (Which by the way is a complete rip off on the ignorant consumer). D: It is not the fact that people are defecting. It is that people only have so much money to spend on games. THe 360 was the lowest priced one so people who did not have a system simply chose the cheapest for the right now. This doesn't mean they won't get a PS3 later either. I have seen a much higher number of PS3s sold at my Gamestop of employment of recently. I think many consumers are just waiting out another price cut, that they thought would hit this christmas for the PS3, they thought wrong. E: Sony knew after the apparent marketing tactics of MS that they would not be able to compete in bidding wars with MS. That would be suicide. Its a waste of money and could be put to better use. That better use is first party development for they, make you immediate money, no middle man, will always be exclusive, and are self reliant. No other company besides Nintendo could come close with such a strong 1st party. If Sony can keep pumping out higher quality exclusives that can only be available on their system(Killzone 2, Heavy Rain, Uncharted, HS, GODIII, MAG, R2, etc) then 3rd party developers will want a piece of the action as well. Each exclusive PS3 game acts like a display of the system's true power, and what it can potentially offer 3rd parties.

It would be great to live in your world where creative directors artistic-centric visions are top priority in a selecting a platform for their game to land on. Unfortunately commercial profits and greed rule the world and any marginal technical advantage the PS3 offers is negated by the bigger install base and ROI to be had on the 360. This is a business that they're trying to run and development costs this gen have skyrocketed to an unprecendented level and any business decision to be exclusive on the PS3 will be likely viewed as a high-risk gamble.

As of today the PS3 really hasn't shown us much of a technical superiority in any case - blaming the developers or architecture learning curve notwithstanding they haven't shown us why we should pay the extra $200. Therein lies the problem - being more expensive is fine...as long as the added benefits are there in its' primary function, that of playing games. It's increasingly looking like it's twice as dear because of blu-ray only, a secondary function that most people with SDTV are conscious of the fact that they will reap no benefits whatsoever and can therefore not see the added value.

It's really not hard to play 'Devils advocate' to the banner headline question, as this thread has presented a plethora of reasons that justify the media's current stance, none more prudent than the numbers on the home page. Find/Replace 'Hate' with 'Fall from grace'.

 

 

 

 

@ Fumanchu

IMO it already has with exclusive games currently shown to be under development or already released to the public. And that´s also part of the problem, some fanboys (and biased media) are getting upset, many of which having already rooted for the inferior and failed HD DVD format in the past.

I would have happily paid 200 dollars extra for my failed and sold 360 premium, if the console was less failure prone, provided scratch resistant game discs, had its power supply internal, came with less rigid cabling and made less noise during gameplay, provided free basic online gameplay, etc. Would I have known such issues beforehand, I wouldn't have bought the console at all.

Considering the PS3 has a Cell, Blu-Ray player, default harddrive and many other extras I would have easily paid a thousand bucks at launch as well. (edit: let's make that a thousand Euros, as converted I actually did already pay over a thousands dollars at launch )

@Funmanchu

Where has all this money hungering got these companies? These companies saught big cash ins and were left empty handed.

R*'s financial report shows they made little money from GTAIV sales, probably due to the whole exclusive content debacle sucking up so much funds, while majority 360 owners have already returned the game. Now the market is saturated with preowned GTAIVs which R* get no part of, hense no money.

EA says there biggest bread winner was the PS3 and PS2 over the last year, regardless of their Madden 30/60 fps fiasco slash scandal. EA is also seeing that their MP educate is not working out as they are loosing a lot of money from this game spewing mechanic.

Square Enix saw a 70% profit loss from trying to feed into the 360 bandwagon. They have yet to release a game for PS3 regardless of the PS line being where majority of their fanbase lives. Stupid on their part, glad they are having financial issues(that Sony will have to bail them out of....AGAIN, just like Spirits Within)

Yea, the maximizing profits by spreading your games thin instead of working on one console and making it the best quality is definitely working out for these companies...../Sarcasm

And Sony has shown us plenty of what their product can do, it is just some are blinded by fanaticism and bias so they refuse to see(not directed at you). We have seen....
-A Storytelling Masterpiece in MGS4
-Great new action adventure franchise in Uncharted
-Art in motion in beautiful games such as Heavenly Sword and Folklore
-Pure Creativity in Little Big Planet
-Best Graphics this gen PERIOD with MGS4 and UNcharted(soon to be claimed by Killzone 2,GOWIII, Heavy Rain, and Uncharted 2)

And why is it when someone says "the Power of the PS3/Cell" immediately people think graphics. Graphics are important but not everything. PS3 has the graphical prowess to prove it but it has shown us so much more. we have...
-Games that can support huge amounts of people without the server or game loosing stability(Heavenly Sword's 1000 enemies on screen, MAG with 60vs60, and R2 with 30vs30)
-Games animated beautifully, and emulate life to the T such as Heavy Rain, and Uncharted
-New types of game that can further expand our minds and how we think a game should play also with Heavy Rain.

Pristine20 said: Hawkeye said: People buy HDTVs becuase they need a new TV and HDTV is all that is available. If people mainly cared about HD, 720P HDTVs wouldn't sell.   Why they're selling isn't important. The point is that they're selling period. Most people are resistant to change and would not budge except they had no choice. Then when they change, they realize that it isn't all that bad. Many technological movements are like this. Seriously, many of you are just picking at straws to thow one more bone at the article or the ps3 that it's getting pathetic.

You missed the point. The discussion about why people buy HD TVs is in reference to this point in the article

 

"Do you think people are buying HD televisions because they don’t care? Of course not. They want HDtv."

The article itself is saying that the reason HDTVs are selling is important. The author is arguing that people think HD is important. As evidence for this he cites HD TV sales. If people aren't buying HD TVs because they care about HD then his argument falls down.

As someone who recently bought an HD TV, I can honestly say that I only got it because that was all that was available. Having HD doesn't really interest me much, and I am sure that a lot of other people buying HD TVs are in the same situation.