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

Forums - Sales - Sony: 70% sales growth YoY for PS3; receives 17 VGA nominations

OurGunzNeverTire on 19 November 2009
Avinash_Tyagi said:
The low production was done because people weren't buying the system in great quantities at $600, so they didn't want to have excess stock.

Developers work with Publsihers who are looking at sales and profits, and if SOny has a small Base and Wii a big base, and no 360 to share ports and multiplats with, then yeah they'd be forecd to make games for the Wii, just because of the fiancial aspect, right now the 360+PS3, is slightly larger than the Wii, so they can justify not developing as much for Wii because multiplats can be spread over a larger combined base.

yeah im sure the low production wasn't due to the console costing 800$ to make at the time. And to crush your other claim, there is not a single ps360 title that have outsold the wii's highest selling games.... the wii has the the most successful fanchises in the histroy of gaming...  acording to sales (there is not a single ps2 title that has out sold the wii top titles and it's the most successful console in histoy) , and yet it (the wii) isn't even thought about amongst the big developers and publishers....... do want me to tell you why..... i mean i already said it but i'll say it again if it wasn't clear you for some reason



Around the Network
Mummelmann on 19 November 2009
OurGunzNeverTire said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
The low production was done because people weren't buying the system in great quantities at $600, so they didn't want to have excess stock.

Developers work with Publsihers who are looking at sales and profits, and if SOny has a small Base and Wii a big base, and no 360 to share ports and multiplats with, then yeah they'd be forecd to make games for the Wii, just because of the fiancial aspect, right now the 360+PS3, is slightly larger than the Wii, so they can justify not developing as much for Wii because multiplats can be spread over a larger combined base.

yeah im sure the low production wasn't due to the console costing 800$ to make at the time. And to crush your other claim, there is not a single ps360 title that have outsold the wii's highest selling games.... the wii has the the most successful fanchises in the histroy of gaming...  acording to sales (there is not a single ps2 title that has out sold the wii top titles and it's the most successful console in histoy) , and yet it (the wii) isn't even thought about amongst the big developers and publishers....... do want me to tell you why..... i mean i already said it but i'll say it again if it wasn't clear you for some reason

Even when counting 3rd party revenue and profits and lifetime hardware sales? I didn't know that, thanks for enlightning us!

PS: I don't think you have to convnince him of anything, he's the biggest Wii fan on the entire site.



Ghazi4 on 19 November 2009

PS3 gogogogogogo FTW baby :D!! lol




Get your Portable ID!

SOLIDSNAKE08 on 19 November 2009

the playstation brand is still very strong, ps3 is the ONLY console that could have launched at such a high price and still make it out alive! it shows that playstation still has the power.



Netyaroze on 20 November 2009

The PS2 startet for 400-500 Dollar in EU. The 3do was a shit console from a company without knowledge about the market. We can speculate how we want. Its senseless because we cant see alternative futures we cant predict the future. You cant do it and I cant do it either. My claims are as likely as yours.

 Most publishers would make games for the PS3 anyway. The PS3 sold even at the high price a couple of million consoles. Why have the publisher started to develope Xbox360 games ? The console sold just 6 mio in one year and still it got plenty of titels. Most developers want powerful hardware the PS3 would be much much bigger then today without the Xbox360. The PS3 was reduced pretty quickly to 399. Nothing would have changed. The PS3 was the 3rd console from the leader the two gens before. Dont you think that the publishers would have produced the games anyway. On the beginning most of the games were for PS3 only and after you could see the success of the Xbox the games went Multiplatform.

The WII has weak hardware thats a reason why it dont controls the market (weakest leader of all times). Why does the WII dont get the most 3rd party games ? The sales from the WII was never influenced from the PS3. I swear to god. 90% of my mates would completly stop gaming (on consoles) if the Wii was the only choice. Dont you get that the HDConsole owners want things which the WII cant deliever ?


Without the Xbox the PS3 would be the market leader. And the WIi would be as bis as it is now. I dont know wheter the Xbox360 people would switch completly to PC gaming or to the PS3 but the ones who wanted WII bought already one. The Wii is not an alternative to the HD Consoles and vice versa. Thats what Nintendo intended to do with the Wii they said this maybe a million times during the WII launch afterwards and before.


You cant proof your theory and I cant proof mine. So every discussion is worthless. In the future I will take to you only if there is proof to back it up. You should go in an Economy class. I think you have absolutely no clue how the market works sorry but read some books.



Around the Network
pterodactyl on 22 November 2009
Avinash_Tyagi said:
Soap_McTavish said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
MikeB said:
MikeB said:
steverhcp02 said:
I could die happy if Sony neevr says the phrase "10 year life cycle" ever again. They only said it because they started so slowly out of the gate they needed to save face.

To be fair and accurate, they first stated this before the PS3 actually launched.

Of course they knew they had a high spec console thus with a high entry pricing compared to rivals.

Quotes from July 2005 (PS3 first launched at the end of 2006, these comments were made well before any of the new consoles launched):

"We're looking at a life cycle of 10 years with the PlayStation 3. We're currently shifting from standard TVs to HD TVs," said Kutaragi.

"I'm aware that with all these technologies, the PS3 can't be offered at a price that's targeted towards households. I think everyone can still buy it if they wanted to," said Kutaragi.

"So we're going to have to do our best (in containing the price)."

So I think it's a bit sad to read such comments from many people (usually from rival console fanboys).

 

ROFL, I can't believe they didn't see the fail in what they were saying

The PS3 is far from a failure.

 

Of course, if you consider a platform with seventeen games over 90 on metacritic, owner of exclusive game of the years for 2 years in a row, with a free online service that is nearly at par with xbox live, a pay service, with just as many if not more stellar games on the horizon, with an excellent 299$ price point offering more for the consumer for their dollar spent than any other console known to man is a failure then I guess it is.

the ps3 is the only console to ever gain such steam after being behind so much. even then, its already outsold the entire lifetimes of the N64 and the gamecube.

PS3 took Sony from First place to third place, they may have gained steam wit the slim, but will more than likely still end up last

In addition they lost a ton of money on the PS3, money they will likely never recoup

So it outsold N64 and GCN, both were consoles that made money, PS3 has not, and likely will not end up making Sony money.

If you don't call financial and marketshare losses a failure then I don't know what you'd define as a failure

This.



killuminiti on 22 November 2009
Avinash_Tyagi said:
^Nope, because without the 360, PS3 would have been launched even higher priced, at the time they didn't consider Nintendo a threat, So Sony sales would have been even worse.

Even at its $600 price tag, Sony wouldn't have benefited much from the absence of a 360 as the price and lack of games at launch would have kept sales down, Wii on the other hand would have sold as it did, as a result, Developers would have had to go to the Wii, because of its sales, because the PS3 base would have been small still and it would have been expensive to develop for, and due to the much smaller install base of the PS3 and no 360 to help share the multiplats, the PS3 would have seen even less support resulting in even fewer sales. So PS3 would probably be even worse off than it is. Having the 360 allowed PS3 to see games even though at its price its sales were terrible, and its expensive to develop for.

But that's not what I was saying, I wasn't saying no MS console, I said no 360, if MS released a different console radically different from the 360, so games from the 360 and PS3 couldn't be shared, a similar thing would have happened, becuase developers would not be able to share multiplats between the PS3 and 360, the PS3 would have seen lower support and sales.

if they 360 didn't exist sony would have lunched the ps3 last year or 2years ago



 

here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay  here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay

killuminiti on 22 November 2009

3rd party games are not as important as they used to be, this gen most 3rd party games are sequels, i think if sony lost half of their 3rd party support and kept activiso, EA and rock*, PS would still provide quality and quantity when it comes to games.



 

here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay  here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay here to stay

leo-j on 22 November 2009

Did mikeB just get banned for calling someone a fanboy?



 

mM