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

Forums - Sales - Sony did with PS3 what history told it not to do.

shigsy on 16 May 2009
jellyfishprince said:
i think the upcoming demand for the wii will be unprecisdented this holiday season and it will carry though 2010 u dont have to insult me

It wasn't an insult, but a genuine question

 

*unprecedented*

*through*

 



Around the Network
richardhutnik on 16 May 2009
KBG29 said:
They simlpy made the best console possible at the time, charged an extreamly fair price, and the consumers failed from there. Now I will not completly lay the blame on the public, because I know Sony messed up in one area. 

Console makers who aren't leading in the marketplace, and fanboys of those consoles blame consumers for not picking their system of choice.

If the consumers don't come, it is COMPLETELY your fault as a company for either not marketing properly, or not understanding what customers want (or both).

 

 



outlawauron on 17 May 2009

But, jellyfishprince. You didn't answer me.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Majin-Tenshinhan on 17 May 2009
outlawauron said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
outlawauron said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
outlawauron said:
Dark_Rulez89 said:
account2099 said:

N64 was more powerful then PS1. PS1 won.

Xbox was more powerful then PS2. PS2 won.

History has shown that the most powerful tech doesnt win because it usually leads to a higher price point. Sony was smart to make decent but not the best tech so it was mass market friendly and not as costly as optimizing for the more powerful consoles.

Now Sony seemingly spits in histories face with PS3. They make the most powerful tech and therefore have the highest asking price. To make it worse they came out a year after 360. I dont understand why Sony didnt stick to their winning formula.

My guess they thought the Bluray war was more important then video game market share, I dont know......

By your logic the Wii has this gen in the bag...Good to know

I think by everyone's logic, the Wii has this gen in the bag. (and for about a year now too)

@ Majin

I'm interested to see what he has to possibly back that up.

As am I. Though my guess is he'll just stop replying.

And it looks like you're right.

Do I get a cookie? :)

Take it and prosper.

<3



Falcon095 on 17 May 2009
CrazzyMan said:
PS3 is only 2 years on the market. Well, actually 2,5.
PS3 launched at 599$.

IF it would have launch price like 399$, and by now 299$, PS3 wouldn`t have problems with outselling x360 or selling on par with Wii.

After 2,5 years we have AMAZING looking games on PS3 like:

Uncharted
Motorstorm:PR
Killzone 2
LittleBigPlanet
inFAMOUS
Gran Turismo 5P
Naruto: UNS
Ratchet & Clank
Valkyria Chronicles
Metal Gear Solid 4

And incoming:

Uncharted 2
God Of War 3
Heavy Rain
Final Fantasy XIII
Ratchet & Clank:CiT

All THIS thnx to more powerful CPU and GPU.

More important thing, PS3 is only 2,5 years on the market, THIS GEN still has like 3-4 years to go.
And with having so MANY engines created, just imagine how many games will come to PS3 in next 2x 2 years(i mean every 2 years(atleast) a game on same improved engine).
Now, it`s only a matter of time, when PS3 gets a 299$ price, after that, there will be nothing left to hate or troll on PS3. =)
PS3 FTW!

 

And it wouldn't have problems for making Sony bankrupt! Imagination FTW!

 



||Tag courtesy of fkusumot - "Heaven is like a Nintendo theme park!"||Join the Medal of Honor: Heroes 2 American League HERE!||

Around the Network
jellyfishprince on 17 May 2009
outlawauron said:
jellyfishprince said:
i agree n64 almost had ps2 graphics but it was hindered by the cartridge (grrr! lol) i think it was a great deal if nintendo release the cd add-on planned it would have been nintendomination

Are you kidding?

 

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2008/097/926632_20080407_screen001.jpg




prediction: wii to sell 150million console by end of 2010

GameAnalyser on 17 May 2009
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
GameAnalyser said:

History says that it's not the console specs or techs that determine the success, but the mass-market appeal for S/Ws that it produces, entertaining the consumers. For the last two consecutive gen, it was PS1 and PS2. Xbox was launched a year later than PS2 with better features like even a Hard-drive and superior specs, but it went out to fail miserably. Why? It failed to attract many consumers who were only brand-conscious, whilst PS2 had already established itself with it's decent S/W library, all credited to 3rd party dev-supporters. The Xbox eventually lost hold of 3rd party support and winded up with a LTD of 24 mn gross.

This time, PS3 has come under the scrutiny, involving itself in the format war to hinder Blue-Ray Progress. Altthough it won the war, Blue-Ray has apparently failed to attract the mass for which Sony had to pay the price. But since the media is not meant for HD movies alone, which most of us ignore, it's like the CD-ROM of PS1 allowing higher data storage for games than it's competitors. Although PS3 has failed to attract mass with it's current technology, it can continue to add momentum along with 360 till market saturation is reached. On the other hand, 360's progress was hindered due to the H/W failure rate around 2007. If this hadn't happened, a lot many consumers who were price-value concious would've bought it more, thus accelerating the sales. We need to wait and see which of the 2 consoles, both coming of losses, breath their last this gen.

The Wii has to be ignored, as it's S/W line-up doesn't attract hardcore gamers at all. It's success needs to be discussed out of this context, as it's not capable of delivering what ps3 and 360 are currently doing.This was not the scenario in previous gen, where consoles like GC, PS2 and Xbox were capable of delivering more or less same S/Ws end products.

You do realize that the pS2 had a great numbers of casuals, right? I wouldn't be surprised that of the 145 million maybe 90 - 100 million were casuals. By the logic that you discard the wii, you should also discard the PS2 and PS1 from the previous generations. Didn't they win by mass-appeal?

First you talk about mass-market appeal (where the big majority would be casuals, right?) as the winning factor. And then you say the wii has to be ignored because it mainly attracts casuals, and not hardcore. That makes absolutely no sense.

You can hardly define the mythical 'hardcore' gamer. It's just a matter of opinion. Still you would discard the absolute winner of the current gen, because it does not fit your opinion of a 'real' console. Geez, the wii won. Deal with it.  

The PS360 aren't able to produce what the pc produces. Also irrelevant then? They fall seriously short by what i see on my gaming pc.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, although it goes out of sense here, u shall consider how it was in the previous gen, when all the three consoles particularly GC, Xbox and PS2 were able to deliver the same type of S/Ws. PS2 had casual gamers on it's side. Also taking into account it's previous gen of N64, ps1 and Sega Saturn. I owned PS1, my friend whom I remembered having N64, sold it for ps1!! I used to njoi his N64 before receiving my PS1 as gift. PS1 with games like Crash bandicoot , Tekken,GT, Tomb Raider bombarded off attracting many gamers. As I stayed in the Middle-East, PS brand being so popular there and even now, used to have my intermediate school friends truly njoing PS1. All of them were N64 and Sega Saturn owners, who looked for better games.

In a nutshell, both PS2 and PS1 had delivered stuff entertaining casual gamers and hardcore as well. Now would u expect someone to sell 360/PS3 for Wii? Instead most gamers will look down upon it and might trade it for a cheaper Elite 360 or PS3 after it's price-cut.

And PC is something that can never be defeated by consoles, to which I fully agree however irrelevant it may be.



Cueil on 17 May 2009
haxxiy said:
account2099 said:
dolemit3 said:
I didn't know that N64 was more powerful than PS1, how so?

 

 a 64 bit console vs a 32 bit console? cmon man...............

 

GC, Xbox and Wii are 32-bit consoles 

 

 yeah, but if I'm not mistaken the GPUs were 256bit on the CG and Xbox... it all evens out :p



 
Get your Portable ID!

Stefan.De.Machtige on 17 May 2009
GameAnalyser said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
GameAnalyser said:

History says that it's not the console specs or techs that determine the success, but the mass-market appeal for S/Ws that it produces, entertaining the consumers. For the last two consecutive gen, it was PS1 and PS2. Xbox was launched a year later than PS2 with better features like even a Hard-drive and superior specs, but it went out to fail miserably. Why? It failed to attract many consumers who were only brand-conscious, whilst PS2 had already established itself with it's decent S/W library, all credited to 3rd party dev-supporters. The Xbox eventually lost hold of 3rd party support and winded up with a LTD of 24 mn gross.

This time, PS3 has come under the scrutiny, involving itself in the format war to hinder Blue-Ray Progress. Altthough it won the war, Blue-Ray has apparently failed to attract the mass for which Sony had to pay the price. But since the media is not meant for HD movies alone, which most of us ignore, it's like the CD-ROM of PS1 allowing higher data storage for games than it's competitors. Although PS3 has failed to attract mass with it's current technology, it can continue to add momentum along with 360 till market saturation is reached. On the other hand, 360's progress was hindered due to the H/W failure rate around 2007. If this hadn't happened, a lot many consumers who were price-value concious would've bought it more, thus accelerating the sales. We need to wait and see which of the 2 consoles, both coming of losses, breath their last this gen.

The Wii has to be ignored, as it's S/W line-up doesn't attract hardcore gamers at all. It's success needs to be discussed out of this context, as it's not capable of delivering what ps3 and 360 are currently doing.This was not the scenario in previous gen, where consoles like GC, PS2 and Xbox were capable of delivering more or less same S/Ws end products.

You do realize that the pS2 had a great numbers of casuals, right? I wouldn't be surprised that of the 145 million maybe 90 - 100 million were casuals. By the logic that you discard the wii, you should also discard the PS2 and PS1 from the previous generations. Didn't they win by mass-appeal?

First you talk about mass-market appeal (where the big majority would be casuals, right?) as the winning factor. And then you say the wii has to be ignored because it mainly attracts casuals, and not hardcore. That makes absolutely no sense.

You can hardly define the mythical 'hardcore' gamer. It's just a matter of opinion. Still you would discard the absolute winner of the current gen, because it does not fit your opinion of a 'real' console. Geez, the wii won. Deal with it.  

The PS360 aren't able to produce what the pc produces. Also irrelevant then? They fall seriously short by what i see on my gaming pc.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, although it goes out of sense here, u shall consider how it was in the previous gen, when all the three consoles particularly GC, Xbox and PS2 were able to deliver the same type of S/Ws. PS2 had casual gamers on it's side. Also taking into account it's previous gen of N64, ps1 and Sega Saturn. I owned PS1, my friend whom I remembered having N64, sold it for ps1!! I used to njoi his N64 before receiving my PS1 as gift. PS1 with games like Crash bandicoot , Tekken,GT, Tomb Raider bombarded off attracting many gamers. As I stayed in the Middle-East, PS brand being so popular there and even now, used to have my intermediate school friends truly njoing PS1. All of them were N64 and Sega Saturn owners, who looked for better games.

In a nutshell, both PS2 and PS1 had delivered stuff entertaining casual gamers and hardcore as well. Now would u expect someone to sell 360/PS3 for Wii? Instead most gamers will look down upon it and might trade it for a cheaper Elite 360 or PS3 after it's price-cut.

And PC is something that can never be defeated by consoles, to which I fully agree however irrelevant it may be.

 

The difference you make between casual and hardcoire is imaginary. look at Nintendo's ip's. They are the perfect example of a casua and hardcore mix. Easy to get in too, hard to master the whole game. Like finding all the stars in SMG = hardcore. I read the comment on many newssite about the coming E3 and Nintendo's show. There i see that they want a new zelda, mario or starfox. I would be amazed that any of these people are casuals. Casuals don't read gamenews on the net. Harcore is more or less defined by a gamer who spends more time to completing extra challenges or different playthroughs. It doens't matter what the game it is.

The wii has a buzz going, even bigger than the PS2 and PS1. Untill now it has broken almost every salesrecord the PS2 set. It is the wii who's captured the moment. There's no doubt about that. It was lacking the first two years because the 3rd party dev. didn't believe in it at first and then didn't know how to deal with it. But this year you see a far better line-up, even before E3. Look at the new monster hunter exclusive on gt. In the comments there, I read a lot lame phrases like 'lets dust my wii off'. The wii is finally getting the game treatment the marketleader deserves.

With the mindset of equal s/w you would even have to discard the Ds/Dsi against the PSP. While the DS has clearly won without a shadow of a doubt. Your definition of the need of equal s/w for any console is flawed. The wii/ds proved already that by selling that much. You may not like it but the mainstream consumers don't care. They chose their console, 'not equal to PS360' be damned to them. If they don't care, why make the difference. Isn't the consumer/market not the deciding factor on any price and goods?

Another point is this: what did change to the PS and xbox consoles this generation against the previous one? Some better graphics, nothing more. Is that equal to the wii who has expanded the potential audience and introduced a new gaming way? Which the PS4 or xbox720 will use, just watch for it. The wii has changed the gaming platform for the better while the competition did almost nothing. That makes the competition look last generation.

 

 



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.

GameAnalyser on 17 May 2009
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
GameAnalyser said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
GameAnalyser said:

History says that it's not the console specs or techs that determine the success, but the mass-market appeal for S/Ws that it produces, entertaining the consumers. For the last two consecutive gen, it was PS1 and PS2. Xbox was launched a year later than PS2 with better features like even a Hard-drive and superior specs, but it went out to fail miserably. Why? It failed to attract many consumers who were only brand-conscious, whilst PS2 had already established itself with it's decent S/W library, all credited to 3rd party dev-supporters. The Xbox eventually lost hold of 3rd party support and winded up with a LTD of 24 mn gross.

This time, PS3 has come under the scrutiny, involving itself in the format war to hinder Blue-Ray Progress. Altthough it won the war, Blue-Ray has apparently failed to attract the mass for which Sony had to pay the price. But since the media is not meant for HD movies alone, which most of us ignore, it's like the CD-ROM of PS1 allowing higher data storage for games than it's competitors. Although PS3 has failed to attract mass with it's current technology, it can continue to add momentum along with 360 till market saturation is reached. On the other hand, 360's progress was hindered due to the H/W failure rate around 2007. If this hadn't happened, a lot many consumers who were price-value concious would've bought it more, thus accelerating the sales. We need to wait and see which of the 2 consoles, both coming of losses, breath their last this gen.

The Wii has to be ignored, as it's S/W line-up doesn't attract hardcore gamers at all. It's success needs to be discussed out of this context, as it's not capable of delivering what ps3 and 360 are currently doing.This was not the scenario in previous gen, where consoles like GC, PS2 and Xbox were capable of delivering more or less same S/Ws end products.

You do realize that the pS2 had a great numbers of casuals, right? I wouldn't be surprised that of the 145 million maybe 90 - 100 million were casuals. By the logic that you discard the wii, you should also discard the PS2 and PS1 from the previous generations. Didn't they win by mass-appeal?

First you talk about mass-market appeal (where the big majority would be casuals, right?) as the winning factor. And then you say the wii has to be ignored because it mainly attracts casuals, and not hardcore. That makes absolutely no sense.

You can hardly define the mythical 'hardcore' gamer. It's just a matter of opinion. Still you would discard the absolute winner of the current gen, because it does not fit your opinion of a 'real' console. Geez, the wii won. Deal with it.  

The PS360 aren't able to produce what the pc produces. Also irrelevant then? They fall seriously short by what i see on my gaming pc.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, although it goes out of sense here, u shall consider how it was in the previous gen, when all the three consoles particularly GC, Xbox and PS2 were able to deliver the same type of S/Ws. PS2 had casual gamers on it's side. Also taking into account it's previous gen of N64, ps1 and Sega Saturn. I owned PS1, my friend whom I remembered having N64, sold it for ps1!! I used to njoi his N64 before receiving my PS1 as gift. PS1 with games like Crash bandicoot , Tekken,GT, Tomb Raider bombarded off attracting many gamers. As I stayed in the Middle-East, PS brand being so popular there and even now, used to have my intermediate school friends truly njoing PS1. All of them were N64 and Sega Saturn owners, who looked for better games.

In a nutshell, both PS2 and PS1 had delivered stuff entertaining casual gamers and hardcore as well. Now would u expect someone to sell 360/PS3 for Wii? Instead most gamers will look down upon it and might trade it for a cheaper Elite 360 or PS3 after it's price-cut.

And PC is something that can never be defeated by consoles, to which I fully agree however irrelevant it may be.

 

The difference you make between casual and hardcoire is imaginary. look at Nintendo's ip's. They are the perfect example of a casua and hardcore mix. Easy to get in too, hard to master the whole game. Like finding all the stars in SMG = hardcore. I read the comment on many newssite about the coming E3 and Nintendo's show. There i see that they want a new zelda, mario or starfox. I would be amazed that any of these people are casuals. Casuals don't read gamenews on the net. Harcore is more or less defined by a gamer who spends more time to completing extra challenges or different playthroughs. It doens't matter what the game it is.

The wii has a buzz going, even bigger than the PS2 and PS1. Untill now it has broken almost every salesrecord the PS2 set. It is the wii who's captured the moment. There's no doubt about that. It was lacking the first two years because the 3rd party dev. didn't believe in it at first and then didn't know how to deal with it. But this year you see a far better line-up, even before E3. Look at the new monster hunter exclusive on gt. In the comments there, I read a lot lame phrases like 'lets dust my wii off'. The wii is finally getting the game treatment the marketleader deserves.

With the mindset of equal s/w you would even have to discard the Ds/Dsi against the PSP. While the DS has clearly won without a shadow of a doubt. Your definition of the need of equal s/w for any console is flawed. The wii/ds proved already that by selling that much. You may not like it but the mainstream consumers don't care. They chose their console, 'not equal to PS360' be damned to them. If they don't care, why make the difference. Isn't the consumer/market not the deciding factor on any price and goods?

Another point is this: what did change to the PS and xbox consoles this generation against the previous one? Some better graphics, nothing more. Is that equal to the wii who has expanded the potential audience and introduced a new gaming way? Which the PS4 or xbox720 will use, just watch for it. The wii has changed the gaming platform for the better while the competition did almost nothing. That makes the competition look last generation.

 

 

As I didn't want to include the portables in my comment, I didn't mention the DS against PSP. Well DS has done remarkably well, taking the market by storm. Now as it seems, my comments regarding delivering equal S/W is flawed to u , then u're just thinking of how a gaming plaform has been changed for the better, ignoring where's it heading for and other future possibilites. Wii is just depending on the current demographics that has embraced it. A whole lot is attributed to the Western Market. This will effect the consumers and retailers accordingly, who doesn't care about what S/W or H/W class means in the long run.

The third parties have announced even more games on the Wii. Now 360 and PS3 may incorporate the rumoured motion-tech, to create and deliver what Wii's IP's did. If that becomes a reality, then we are to see, how the Wii will compete with two consoles from then on. When? It's not known exactly, though not speculation ridden, it's a possibility. We can realise how tough it would be for Wii, when 3rd parties start opting to develop on other consoles as well. It leaves wide-open chances for ports of Wii's IPs on all consoles equally.

Actually, I don't intend to say Wii to be dusted off, that's pretty lame..one shall keep it, trade it for another or buy a new console as they wish.