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

Forums - Sony - How Sony defeated Sony

Squilliam on 11 March 2009
Rpruett said:
Cidien said:

 

I'm not ignoring those facts.  The ps3 may do very well in the future.  The fact is, it's not doing very well now.  The 360 has many more software sales when compared with the ps3 and the ps3 loses a lot of its exclusives because devs know they just can't make that much money releasing only on the ps3.  >< My grammar is crap right now, sorry.  I got called in to work at 4 am and i'm hella tired atm.  This last hour or so is the only slow time i've had since.  =/

 

Does the 360 have 'that many' more software sales when compared to the PS3?   It seems to me that they are pretty solid when you consider the extra 8 million or whatever amount of people the 360 has relatively.   

And while I wouldn't say the PS3 is doing wonderful right now..The PS3 is really not doing that bad.  Considering it remains 200$ higher than it's primary competitor (Which it just outsold the 360 last week WW).   

 

We already know that when the PS3 narrows that price gap with the 360 it outsells it weekly/monthly.  Price is still the biggest factor holding the PS3 back.

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 



Tease.

Around the Network
Cidien on 11 March 2009

I guess I don't honestly know anymore without doing some research, and I just don't care enough anymore to do it.  It used to be a pretty big gap.  Something like 3-2 even when taking into account the installed ps3 base.  That's a pretty big difference, even if it doesn't sound like it.  I don't have links anymore so take that number as a guess pulled from my memory.  o_0 Scary.  If anyone wants to spend some time tracking down up-to-date numbers that would be interesting to look at.  I'd bet money M$ still has a pretty big lead in software sales though.  As I said before, a lot of people bought a ps3 without any intention of using it as a gaming system.  That's probably why there's such a big gap.

On a related note, the last time I saw people polled 17% of ps3 owners didn't even know the ps3 was a bluray player.  o_0 



Rpruett on 11 March 2009
Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
Cidien said:

 

I'm not ignoring those facts.  The ps3 may do very well in the future.  The fact is, it's not doing very well now.  The 360 has many more software sales when compared with the ps3 and the ps3 loses a lot of its exclusives because devs know they just can't make that much money releasing only on the ps3.  >< My grammar is crap right now, sorry.  I got called in to work at 4 am and i'm hella tired atm.  This last hour or so is the only slow time i've had since.  =/

 

Does the 360 have 'that many' more software sales when compared to the PS3?   It seems to me that they are pretty solid when you consider the extra 8 million or whatever amount of people the 360 has relatively.   

And while I wouldn't say the PS3 is doing wonderful right now..The PS3 is really not doing that bad.  Considering it remains 200$ higher than it's primary competitor (Which it just outsold the 360 last week WW).   

 

We already know that when the PS3 narrows that price gap with the 360 it outsells it weekly/monthly.  Price is still the biggest factor holding the PS3 back.

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Regardless of how this generation ends up. (Whether PS3 takes 2nd or 3rd place),  One thing is for sure.  Sony is not out of this game, not by a long shot. Nintendo has hung around for quite sometime. (N64/Gamecube) both of which were 'failures' under the same definition that the PS3 has been defined as one. 

If anything, the game just got a lot more interesting.  Microsoft has proven themselves capable after this generation (After the abortion that was the original Xbox).  Nintendo has pulled out of the darkness of the past two generations of mediocre selling consoles. 

The next generation will be even more interesting than this one currently.  With three viable competitors and three brands that now have proven track records of success.



Diablerie on 11 March 2009
Cidien said:

Only on page 4 so I appologize if this has been said already.  At work and I gotta get back to work soon so again I appologize.

Anyways, something nobody has brought up to that point is software sales.  So many of you fanboys are claiming the ps3 is outselling the 360.  Yes, it often does.  And how many games do those people buy?  Many, many people buy ps3's primarily as a blu-ray player.  They might buy one or two games, but it's fairly rare for many consumers who buy a ps3.  The 360, on the other hand, is a pure gaming machine.  I can't imagine ANYONE is buying one to use as a dvd player, and the software sales show it.

Gonna restate another thing that's been said before.  Fanboys like the guy with the alucard avatar are doing their damndest to ignore it.  The 360 has a year head start.  It's sold a lot more consoles than the ps3 has and that's really hurting sony.  A lot.  It doesn't matter if sony is outselling the 360.  It's not gonna surpass the 360's overall sales for a long time, if it does at all.  That's what matters.  Overall sales.  You can try to say otherwise, but you're wrong.  There's no other way of looking at it in the business world.  If you think otherwise, you obviously have never had anything to do with any kind of business management in your life.  Is sony dead?  No.  But saying they're just fine, or that they're actually beating M$ is just delusional stupidity.

The name's *pumps shotgun* Horace . . . I mean Diablerie, it's Diablerie.

I can't help but see your post as a response (personal attack anyone?) to my post.  My point wasn't to bring up software sales.  I love Sony, but I've never considered myself a "fanboy".  In my opinion a "fanboy" likes to bash the competition (microsoft), I've never done that and never will.  I'll buy a 360 someday for a couple of games that I want.  And I won't feel like I betrayed Sony when I do it.  I would never call my previous posts "fanboyism" as I am just stating the facts mam.

As for your second paragraph, I know the 360 has had a year head start, that's what I've been saying all along.  I realize that almost everyone only looks at overall sales.  And that's why almost everyone forgets about that extra year. I never said that Sony was beating Microsoft but there year over year console sales are doing better (at the moment).  Year three isn't over for Sony, maybe they won't catch up for year three, maybe year 2 was a nice peak but nothing more.  We just got to wait and see.  And once again, Sony is . . . Doing Okay.   Also, I'm sure myself and the others who think that Sony is fine, don't appreciate being called "delusional" and "stupid".

 

 



Squilliam on 11 March 2009
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Regardless of how this generation ends up. (Whether PS3 takes 2nd or 3rd place),  One thing is for sure.  Sony is not out of this game, not by a long shot. Nintendo has hung around for quite sometime. (N64/Gamecube) both of which were 'failures' under the same definition that the PS3 has been defined as one. 

If anything, the game just got a lot more interesting.  Microsoft has proven themselves capable after this generation (After the abortion that was the original Xbox).  Nintendo has pulled out of the darkness of the past two generations of mediocre selling consoles. 

The next generation will be even more interesting than this one currently.  With three viable competitors and three brands that now have proven track records of success.

Sony was out of the game, they had to lose billions to get to the position they are in now where their console in only just reaching the edge of viability. Had they not been willing to lose so much money there wouldn't be much of a Playstation 3 left. Nintendo on the other hand never lost money on their console division, so if they could be considered relative failures thats fine but they were never absolute failures like the PS3 is now.

 



Tease.

Around the Network
Rpruett on 11 March 2009
Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Regardless of how this generation ends up. (Whether PS3 takes 2nd or 3rd place),  One thing is for sure.  Sony is not out of this game, not by a long shot. Nintendo has hung around for quite sometime. (N64/Gamecube) both of which were 'failures' under the same definition that the PS3 has been defined as one. 

If anything, the game just got a lot more interesting.  Microsoft has proven themselves capable after this generation (After the abortion that was the original Xbox).  Nintendo has pulled out of the darkness of the past two generations of mediocre selling consoles. 

The next generation will be even more interesting than this one currently.  With three viable competitors and three brands that now have proven track records of success.

Sony was out of the game, they had to lose billions to get to the position they are in now where their console in only just reaching the edge of viability. Had they not been willing to lose so much money there wouldn't be much of a Playstation 3 left. Nintendo on the other hand never lost money on their console division, so if they could be considered relative failures thats fine but they were never absolute failures like the PS3 is now.

 

How many Billions did Microsoft lose on the original Xbox?  How many Billions did it cost Microsoft to repair their RROD filled image? Would they be in the same position right now if they hadn't of done that?   Doubtful.   And are you counting Nintendo's handhelds into your factoring? 

The PS3 is going to surpass Gamecube and original Xbox in terms of sales probably by the end of this year.  (If that's an absolute failure)...What can I say.    /rolleyes

 

Like I said,  you could consider the PS3 a relative failure.  Certainly not an absolute failure like Sega Saturn for example.

 

 

 

 



Magnific0 on 11 March 2009

^Hold it right there, the Saturn was VERY successful in Japan to a "certain" degree. The first Xbox was successful NOWHERE.



phinch1 on 11 March 2009

xbox never has and never will be a great success, it will never sell over 100 million consoles even if it added xbox and xbox 360 sales



Squilliam on 11 March 2009
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Regardless of how this generation ends up. (Whether PS3 takes 2nd or 3rd place),  One thing is for sure.  Sony is not out of this game, not by a long shot. Nintendo has hung around for quite sometime. (N64/Gamecube) both of which were 'failures' under the same definition that the PS3 has been defined as one. 

If anything, the game just got a lot more interesting.  Microsoft has proven themselves capable after this generation (After the abortion that was the original Xbox).  Nintendo has pulled out of the darkness of the past two generations of mediocre selling consoles. 

The next generation will be even more interesting than this one currently.  With three viable competitors and three brands that now have proven track records of success.

Sony was out of the game, they had to lose billions to get to the position they are in now where their console in only just reaching the edge of viability. Had they not been willing to lose so much money there wouldn't be much of a Playstation 3 left. Nintendo on the other hand never lost money on their console division, so if they could be considered relative failures thats fine but they were never absolute failures like the PS3 is now.

 

How many Billions did Microsoft lose on the original Xbox?  How many Billions did it cost Microsoft to repair their RROD filled image? Would they be in the same position right now if they hadn't of done that?   Doubtful.   And are you counting Nintendo's handhelds into your factoring? 

The PS3 is going to surpass Gamecube and original Xbox in terms of sales probably by the end of this year.  (If that's an absolute failure)...What can I say.    /rolleyes

 

Like I said,  you could consider the PS3 a relative failure.  Certainly not an absolute failure like Sega Saturn for example.

 

 

 

 

Sony lost market share, brand goodwill, billions of dollars its an absolute failure. Wheres the good point? Its not as bad as before? Relative to how they were they are doing better. In absolute terms the PS3 is a massive failure as a gaming machine.

Microsoft gained market share, brand goodwill and relatively lost less than Sony. See the difference?

Im not counting Nintendo's handhelds, the GC sold plenty of GC software. Furthermore the GC/Xbox 1 didn't have the brand equity of the PS3/PS2 when they launched.

 



Tease.

Dark Chaos on 11 March 2009
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:
Rpruett said:
Squilliam said:

Whatever the PS3 sells, its sales will almost certainly be bad.

Just because you've accepted that the PS3 will not be first, doesn't give anyone the right to actually say they are 'good'. Because every week the PS brand gets weaker and all the good work of the past is slowly getting unrolled by the PS3.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Regardless of how this generation ends up. (Whether PS3 takes 2nd or 3rd place),  One thing is for sure.  Sony is not out of this game, not by a long shot. Nintendo has hung around for quite sometime. (N64/Gamecube) both of which were 'failures' under the same definition that the PS3 has been defined as one. 

If anything, the game just got a lot more interesting.  Microsoft has proven themselves capable after this generation (After the abortion that was the original Xbox).  Nintendo has pulled out of the darkness of the past two generations of mediocre selling consoles. 

The next generation will be even more interesting than this one currently.  With three viable competitors and three brands that now have proven track records of success.

Sony was out of the game, they had to lose billions to get to the position they are in now where their console in only just reaching the edge of viability. Had they not been willing to lose so much money there wouldn't be much of a Playstation 3 left. Nintendo on the other hand never lost money on their console division, so if they could be considered relative failures thats fine but they were never absolute failures like the PS3 is now.

 

How many Billions did Microsoft lose on the original Xbox?  How many Billions did it cost Microsoft to repair their RROD filled image? Would they be in the same position right now if they hadn't of done that?   Doubtful.   And are you counting Nintendo's handhelds into your factoring? 

The PS3 is going to surpass Gamecube and original Xbox in terms of sales probably by the end of this year.  (If that's an absolute failure)...What can I say.    /rolleyes

 

Like I said,  you could consider the PS3 a relative failure.  Certainly not an absolute failure like Sega Saturn for example.

 

 

 

 

MS just entered the console business and entered late. Facing the monster PS2 it didnt do well but it never had any reputation, no game library. NOTHING.

PS3 on the other is a absolute failure.

 

So ur saying if MS suddenly lost their 80% OS market share to 20% and lost money that is not a failure?

OR

If Apple release $600 Nanos and lost money on them. Went from first to 20% that is not a failure??