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

Forums - Sales - PS3 exclusive sales... whats the deal?

S.T.A.G.E. on 02 March 2009
Pristine20 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Pristine20 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Soul_tech10 said:
simple, the ps3 userbase is too small. if 100 million ps2 owners have still not bought a ps3 its obvious why software sales are like that. The only question is: Why does the 360 have better software sales with the HW of both the ps3 and 360 itself amost the same?

 

 Because a higher percentage of the Xbox 360's users actually buy games and purchase premium from Xbox Live. The majority of PS3 users don't play videogames judging from PSN sales and game sales. the sales could be spread out amongst various genres, but that still doesn't explain why they don't have over 6 M sold at all for an exclusive. Xbox had over 8 M copies of Halo 3 by the time they were at 20 M.

Halo is just one of thse series that breaks through the mold because it probably has sold over 30% of the whole xbox line.. I don't think even the ps2 had something like this. You have to understand that ps3 is really ps2 with a much lower userbase. If you judge it that way, you'd realize that it performing decently software-wise

 

 

 Actually dude...the 360 resembles the PS2 more than the PS3. Thats the essence of why I purchased it. Just think about it for a moment and get back to me. The PS3 resembles the Xbox last gen. Trust me on this.

No it doesn't. 360 has higher attach ratios than ps2. It doesn't resemble the ps2 in any way. It may have acquired some ps2 IP's but remember that the ps2 never had a decent FPS save for killzone which many thought was mediocre. It had JRPGs popping out left and right not one every now and then. I know it's the library you're thinking about when making this comparison thats why I'm going on that tangent. Ps2 had  a huge casual "fillerbase". 360 has next to no casuals. They're not the same at all.

However, my comparison was based on attach ratios which is really the underlying subject of this thread. If you look carefully, ps3 has even performed better than ps2 with some IPs. Ps3s casuals are the blu-ray only section.

 

If you're speaking about attach ratios the PS2 still wins over the PS3. Third party games carried the torch with Kingdom Hearts, MGS and GTA. First party included GT and Crash bandicoot with the highest 1st party sales which nearly hit 10 million for GT3: A-Spec.

PS2: Affordable system, standard DVD, larger library, lesser graphics capabilities, ok online

Xbox 360: Affordable system, standard DVD, larger library, lesser graphics capabilities, great online

Xbox: More powerful multimedia experience, less games, more expensive, better graphics, great online

PS3: More powerful multimedia experience, less games, more expensive, better graphics, good online.

I could go on and on about this. This is really a brick wall topic friend.

 

 



Around the Network
Pristine20 on 02 March 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Pristine20 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Pristine20 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Soul_tech10 said:
simple, the ps3 userbase is too small. if 100 million ps2 owners have still not bought a ps3 its obvious why software sales are like that. The only question is: Why does the 360 have better software sales with the HW of both the ps3 and 360 itself amost the same?

 

 Because a higher percentage of the Xbox 360's users actually buy games and purchase premium from Xbox Live. The majority of PS3 users don't play videogames judging from PSN sales and game sales. the sales could be spread out amongst various genres, but that still doesn't explain why they don't have over 6 M sold at all for an exclusive. Xbox had over 8 M copies of Halo 3 by the time they were at 20 M.

Halo is just one of thse series that breaks through the mold because it probably has sold over 30% of the whole xbox line.. I don't think even the ps2 had something like this. You have to understand that ps3 is really ps2 with a much lower userbase. If you judge it that way, you'd realize that it performing decently software-wise

 

 

 Actually dude...the 360 resembles the PS2 more than the PS3. Thats the essence of why I purchased it. Just think about it for a moment and get back to me. The PS3 resembles the Xbox last gen. Trust me on this.

No it doesn't. 360 has higher attach ratios than ps2. It doesn't resemble the ps2 in any way. It may have acquired some ps2 IP's but remember that the ps2 never had a decent FPS save for killzone which many thought was mediocre. It had JRPGs popping out left and right not one every now and then. I know it's the library you're thinking about when making this comparison thats why I'm going on that tangent. Ps2 had  a huge casual "fillerbase". 360 has next to no casuals. They're not the same at all.

However, my comparison was based on attach ratios which is really the underlying subject of this thread. If you look carefully, ps3 has even performed better than ps2 with some IPs. Ps3s casuals are the blu-ray only section.

 

If you're speaking about attach ratios the PS2 still wins over the PS3. Third party games carried the torch with Kingdom Hearts, MGS and GTA. First party included GT and Crash bandicoot with the highest 1st party sales which nearly hit 10 million for GT3: A-Spec.

PS2: Affordable system, standard DVD, larger library, lesser graphics capabilities, ok online

Xbox 360: Affordable system, standard DVD, larger library, lesser graphics capabilities, great online

Xbox: More powerful multimedia experience, less games, more expensive, better graphics, great online

PS3: More powerful multimedia experience, less games, more expensive, better graphics, good online.

I could go on and on about this. This is really a brick wall topic friend.

 

 

What? mgs3 sold 4 mil at an 80 + mil userbase vs MGs4 selling 3mil at a 15 mil userbase. How on earth is it possible that ps2 had higher attach ratios? if you really believe that, I guess it's realy a brick wall. Your idea of "lesser graphical capabilities" is really subjective. Xbox was more tchnologically advanced than ps2 last gen. This gen, it's not obvious. Sony devs spending blood, sweat and tears to make something look good proves nothing only that sony's first party work really hard. Didn't the guy who actually made the chips for both consoles say that they were equal?

360 also has a multimedia offering. 360 and ps3 are similar to themselves save for blu-ray costs and neither is like the ps2. If the 360 was really like the ps2, it's sales won't look like they do now and the wii won't have come shooting by. Some would even argue that the wii is the new ps2 which is wrong as well.  You cherry-picked the few similarities and ignored the vast differences like the ones that I mentioned previously like they are non-existent. It's obvious that we'll never agree so I'll give it a rest.

 



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

tombi123 on 02 March 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Christhor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
tombi123 said:

So only 5-6M PS3 owners buy games for it...

 

I'd say yes to that.

 

 

Is that so? Then GTAIV must have the best attach rate for any game ever, 100%!

 

This makes no sense. Read our convo properly.

 

 

 No he is right. If there are only 5-6M people buying games for their PS3, like you said, then GTA4 has a 100% attach rate amongst those 'gamers'.

In reality 99-100% of PS3 owners buy games for their PS3. People using PS3's purely for Blu-Ray are in the vast minority. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 02 March 2009
tombi123 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Christhor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
tombi123 said:

So only 5-6M PS3 owners buy games for it...

 

I'd say yes to that.

 

 

Is that so? Then GTAIV must have the best attach rate for any game ever, 100%!

 

This makes no sense. Read our convo properly.

 

 

 No he is right. If there are only 5-6M people buying games for their PS3, like you said, then GTA4 has a 100% attach rate amongst those 'gamers'.

In reality 99-100% of PS3 owners buy games for their PS3. People using PS3's purely for Blu-Ray are in the vast minority. 

 

If that is true, then I wouldnt want to see the attach rate for the 360 or the Wii as they would be well beyond 100%. Attach rates then must follow titles exponentially according to respective console/per brand. I don't speak attach rate-ese, but i'm catching on. Just keep talking to me about it. As soon as I understand it completely i'll continue with the convo.

 



HALOOOOOOOO on 03 March 2009

I don't know. But in terms of marketing, I see games for PS3 on TV way more than games for the 360, with the exception of Gears 2. For Halo 3, the only commercial I saw was the Monday Night Football one. You know, "Starry Something" or whatever the hell it's called. I've also seen no Killzone 2 commercials. I saw plenty of Resistance 2 though.



Around the Network
ViolentPhlegm on 04 March 2009

@S.T.A.G.E.: Um... You apparently don't understand what attach rate means at all. Simply put, it's the number of software sales per system sold. Every time a game is sold, attach rate goes up; everytime a system is sold, it goes down.

You can't always make assumptions about the systems' demographics based on attach rate. For example, say that you and I are the only two owners of videogame system "XBogus3". If I own two games for the system and you own zero, then the attach rate is 1 but only half of the user base consists of gamers. On the other hand, if we both own one game then the attach rate is still 1 but the entire user base consists of gamers.

Your belief that only a quarter of PS3 owners are gamers is simply absurd. You questioned why it is that no PS3 game has sold to even a quarter of the user base but don't seem to realize that it is extraordinary (and not necessarily indicative of a healthy console) to have a single game sell that well. No game sold that universally on PS2. VGChartz has the top-selling PS2 game as GTA:SA which sold almost 18 million copies worldwide. Fantastic sales, right? Well it sold to about 15% of the console's lifetime base. Over 100 million PS2 owners didn't buy it. Those people must not have been gamers, right?