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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Crunch time for the PS3

FinalEvangelion on 18 November 2007

Yeah. Sega was in the failure run for a long time before they let their console business go. The Dreamcast was a final attempt to bring it together.

If I remember correctly, Sony's TV division was suffering a few years ago with the gaming division bringing them up (Alot of competition from Samsung and Toshiba).

Nintendo luckily had their very strong handheld market, but I do remember alot of doom and gloom news all the time about the Gamecube.



"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."  --Hermann Goering, leading Nazi party member, at the Nuremberg War Crime Trials 

 

Conservatives:  Pushing for a small enough government to be a guest in your living room, or even better - your uterus.

 

Around the Network
Lost tears of Kain on 18 November 2007

yea but the gamecube wasnt costing nintendo billions of dollars =/



                 With regard to Call of Duty 4 having an ultra short single player campaign, I guess it may well have been due to the size limitations of DVD on the XBox 360, one of various limitations multi-platform game designers will have to take into consideration-Mike B   

Proud supporter of all 3 console companys

Proud owner of 360wii and DS/psp              

Game trailers-Halo 3 only dissapointed the people who wanted to be dissapointed.

Bet with Harvey Birdman that Lost Odyssey will sell more then Blue dragon did.
shams on 18 November 2007
leo-j said:
@selnor

The ps3 is still the most expensive system everywhere.

The PS3 will always be the most expensive system (until the following gen of consoles are released).

I can't imagine a situation (other than some special) where it is ever cheaper than the Wii or the 360. And if it was - I'm not sure it would be a good thing :P 

 



Gesta Non Verba

Nocturnal is helping companies get cheaper game ratings in Australia:

Game Assessment website

Wii code: 2263 4706 2910 1099

boilermaker11 on 18 November 2007

For everyone on here that's saying that the PS3 is not comparable to the PS2 or PS1, uhhh, yes it is. Check here:

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS&reg1=All&cons2=PS2&reg2=All&cons3=PS3&reg3=All&weeks=400

PS1 first year sales were much lower....it still won in the end.

PS2 sales are matched....and whoever said the PS2 was an "instant" success is wrong, as shown by these numbers. If the PS2 was the succes right off the bat, as you claimed it to be, then the PS3 is also an "instant" success, even with its' initial $600 price tag.

Also, whoever said that the PS2 released early, had no competition, etc etc....did you forget about the Dreamcast? DC had the market at the time, and as it stands, it was the equivalent to what the 360 is now. Cheaper, more games, etc. And that got destroyed. Also, the complaints that people have with the PS3 were the same for the PS2 (optical drive makes it too expensive, BD for PS3/DVD for PS2, no games, hard to make games on) yet.....look what happened.

I suggest that anyone that doesn't see that there are parallels between the PS1/2/3 to check the numbers I posted above, and read this article....you'll have a laugh, because you'll realize that you are all basically this guy, just 7 years into the future:

http://archive.salon.com/tech/log/2000/10/27/playstation_rant/index.html



Currently playing:

Unreal Tournament 3, Warhawk, Rock Band, Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, DMC2, then 3, and Radiata Stories

"Stop the presses// It's been a while but I'm back in session// And in the past time my flow's matured more than adolescence// It's time to learn a lesson// So get you pen and your pad out, listen close, and take heed to this blessing"

 

The_vagabond7 on 18 November 2007

I'm pretty sure the PS2 numbers are incomplete here, aren't they missing europe numbers or something? Because I'm pretty sure this has come up many times in the past. There should be a disclaimer or something.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Around the Network
Lost tears of Kain on 18 November 2007
boilermaker11 said:
For everyone on here that's saying that the PS3 is not comparable to the PS2 or PS1, uhhh, yes it is. Check here:

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS®1=All&cons2=PS2®2=All&cons3=PS3®3=All&weeks=400

PS1 first year sales were much lower....it still won in the end.

PS2 sales are matched....and whoever said the PS2 was an "instant" success is wrong, as shown by these numbers. If the PS2 was the succes right off the bat, as you claimed it to be, then the PS3 is also an "instant" success, even with its' initial $600 price tag.

Also, whoever said that the PS2 released early, had no competition, etc etc....did you forget about the Dreamcast? DC had the market at the time, and as it stands, it was the equivalent to what the 360 is now. Cheaper, more games, etc. And that got destroyed. Also, the complaints that people have with the PS3 were the same for the PS2 (optical drive makes it too expensive, BD for PS3/DVD for PS2, no games, hard to make games on) yet.....look what happened.

I suggest that anyone that doesn't see that there are parallels between the PS1/2/3 to check the numbers I posted above, and read this article....you'll have a laugh, because you'll realize that you are all basically this guy, just 7 years into the future:

http://archive.salon.com/tech/log/2000/10/27/playstation_rant/index.html

Things are completely different

Yes ps1 eventually came out in the end, but it didnt have consoles that were taking off or had such a huge lead. At this time in ps1 life it was begining to overcome its competition to take that lead, you now have two consoles that are outselling the ps3 constantly. With one just completely dominating.

Yes you are completely right about the ps2, but you take a look at the ps2, it was now begining to boom in sales, while competition was left behind. RIght now, we have the competition taking off, and the ps3 left behind. I dont see ps3 suddenly taking off and 360 and wii suddenly just lose their sales, its never happened so late in consoles lives.

Dreamcast is nothing like the 360, dreamcast died from lack of support. MS is HUGE, sega couldnt keep the dreamcast up. The technology worked fantastic on the ps2 because:

1. Didnt drive the cost to absolute rediculas, specially for the games it has compared to ps3.

2. DVD was almost universally excepted, right now sony is in a format war. Its specially with no clear winner in site, its a huge risk to put it in. That and it drove costs up considerably more then DVD.

In all ps3 is not doomed, nor is it not selling that well. But if sony is going to take second or 1st in this console war, the time is now, or possibly never. Its not going to fail, its doing pretty decent actually. Just if its going to acheive greatness, the time is now



                 With regard to Call of Duty 4 having an ultra short single player campaign, I guess it may well have been due to the size limitations of DVD on the XBox 360, one of various limitations multi-platform game designers will have to take into consideration-Mike B   

Proud supporter of all 3 console companys

Proud owner of 360wii and DS/psp              

Game trailers-Halo 3 only dissapointed the people who wanted to be dissapointed.

Bet with Harvey Birdman that Lost Odyssey will sell more then Blue dragon did.
boilermaker11 on 19 November 2007

Did you really debunk me? Is it really a fad? Did developers not, at first, complain about the difficulty for programming for PS2? Did the gaming community not try and convince people that the PS2 had no games, and was too expensive when it first came out? How about when the PS1 first came out and used CDs, and most people said that it wasn't necessary, and that cartridges would be just fine? Then when a developer came out and finally said that space matters (Squaresoft, FFVII), everyone hopped on the PS1. Once more, when PS2 triumphed over DC and it's GD-ROM.

All I'm trying to say here is that selling-wise, and consumer opinion-wise, the PS3 is VERY similar to its' predecessors. You can deny it just because the Xbox is here....but then you'd have to deny the competition of the Sega Saturn and the N64 vs. PS1, and DC vs. PS2



Currently playing:

Unreal Tournament 3, Warhawk, Rock Band, Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, DMC2, then 3, and Radiata Stories

"Stop the presses// It's been a while but I'm back in session// And in the past time my flow's matured more than adolescence// It's time to learn a lesson// So get you pen and your pad out, listen close, and take heed to this blessing"

 

celine on 19 November 2007
boilermaker11 said:
Did you really debunk me? Is it really a fad?

 Well not you but your arguments and yes it is a fad



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

shams on 19 November 2007
boilermaker11 said:
Did you really debunk me? Is it really a fad? Did developers not, at first, complain about the difficulty for programming for PS2? Did the gaming community not try and convince people that the PS2 had no games, and was too expensive when it first came out? How about when the PS1 first came out and used CDs, and most people said that it wasn't necessary, and that cartridges would be just fine? Then when a developer came out and finally said that space matters (Squaresoft, FFVII), everyone hopped on the PS1. Once more, when PS2 triumphed over DC and it's GD-ROM.

All I'm trying to say here is that selling-wise, and consumer opinion-wise, the PS3 is VERY similar to its' predecessors. You can deny it just because the Xbox is here....but then you'd have to deny the competition of the Sega Saturn and the N64 vs. PS1, and DC vs. PS2

No, its actually not true at all.

You can argue that the hardware is similar - in that its "cutting edge", difficult to develop for - and requires a considerable amount of investment and engineering. But for starters, the PS3 is already an order of magnitude more complex than the PS2.

The business conditions are completely different. And if you want to ignore them... well, then your argument holds absolutely no gumption.

In short:

 - PS2 had a year headstart on the competition. By the time *any* competition arrived, it was well entrenched, development difficulties were pretty much over, and it had a 10m + headstart. When the competition did arrive, there were TWO contenders - and they were competing with each other directly. This prevented either from being able to take on the PS2 itself. The PS2 also doubled as a DVD player - which was an established movie playback format. No competition, and widely accepted by the public as "a needed device" (upgrading from tapes).

 - PS3 has a year lag on its (main) competition. It launched with little software support, was overly expensive. It was plagued by delays, and launch hardware shortages. It also launched alongside the Wii - which was significantly cheaper, and publicly viewed as much more innovative. This took much of the sting out of the launch campaign, as the PS3 struggles to get publicity.

...

Fact:

 - 1 year after launch, the PS2 was 7-8m AHEAD of the competition.

 - 1 year after launch, the PS3 is 7m BEHIND the 360, and 8m BEHIND the Wii.

(by the end of the holidays, this will grow to 8m behind the 360, and 10-12m behind the Wii)

...

Go ahead - look at that comparison, and tell me the 14-20m unit difference doesn't exist - and has no relevance. 



Gesta Non Verba

Nocturnal is helping companies get cheaper game ratings in Australia:

Game Assessment website

Wii code: 2263 4706 2910 1099

HappySqurriel on 19 November 2007
shams said:
boilermaker11 said:
Did you really debunk me? Is it really a fad? Did developers not, at first, complain about the difficulty for programming for PS2? Did the gaming community not try and convince people that the PS2 had no games, and was too expensive when it first came out? How about when the PS1 first came out and used CDs, and most people said that it wasn't necessary, and that cartridges would be just fine? Then when a developer came out and finally said that space matters (Squaresoft, FFVII), everyone hopped on the PS1. Once more, when PS2 triumphed over DC and it's GD-ROM.

All I'm trying to say here is that selling-wise, and consumer opinion-wise, the PS3 is VERY similar to its' predecessors. You can deny it just because the Xbox is here....but then you'd have to deny the competition of the Sega Saturn and the N64 vs. PS1, and DC vs. PS2

No, its actually not true at all.

You can argue that the hardware is similar - in that its "cutting edge", difficult to develop for - and requires a considerable amount of investment and engineering. But for starters, the PS3 is already an order of magnitude more complex than the PS2.

The business conditions are completely different. And if you want to ignore them... well, then your argument holds absolutely no gumption.

In short:

 - PS2 had a year headstart on the competition. By the time *any* competition arrived, it was well entrenched, development difficulties were pretty much over, and it had a 10m + headstart. When the competition did arrive, there were TWO contenders - and they were competing with each other directly. This prevented either from being able to take on the PS2 itself. The PS2 also doubled as a DVD player - which was an established movie playback format. No competition, and widely accepted by the public as "a needed device" (upgrading from tapes).

 - PS3 has a year lag on its (main) competition. It launched with little software support, was overly expensive. It was plagued by delays, and launch hardware shortages. It also launched alongside the Wii - which was significantly cheaper, and publicly viewed as much more innovative. This took much of the sting out of the launch campaign, as the PS3 struggles to get publicity.

...

Fact:

 - 1 year after launch, the PS2 was 7-8m AHEAD of the competition.

 - 1 year after launch, the PS3 is 7m BEHIND the 360, and 8m BEHIND the Wii.

(by the end of the holidays, this will grow to 8m behind the 360, and 10-12m behind the Wii)

...

Go ahead - look at that comparison, and tell me the 14-20m unit difference doesn't exist - and has no relevance. 

 

It is actually far worse than that ... By the time the Gamecube/XBox were launched the PS2 had a 5.5 Million unit lead in Japan, 5 Million unit lead in North America, and about a 5 Million unit lead in the Other regions. In 2001 (the year the XBox and Gamecube were released) Sony had Grand Theft Auto III, Metal Gear Solid 2, Gran Turismo 3, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy X, and Jak and Daxter released for the holiday season.

The generation was over before the "War" began