Analyst predict Xbox 360 will beat PlayStation 3 - Inq [Archive]

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 19:02

Through to 2008, the analysts predict that the Xbox 360 will shift 19.6 million units whilst the PlayStation 3 will lag behind with 15.5 million units, and Nintendo's Revolution will shift only 5 million units, based on late 2006 releases for both the PS3 and the Revolution.

Analyst: The Xbox 360 will have an early lead over PS3.
Reporter: Wow!

:roll:

With a 6-12mo lead time in product release and, presumably a larger library of game when the PS3 hits the market, all I can say is.... DUH.

Console sale wars are for 5-6 years. Further, a LOT of analysts see the PS3 being ahead at the end--something like 80-100M units to 45-55M units. Once the PS3 has a price drop and the library of games come splashing in the market will shift I am sure.

Remember: The majority of console sales are done at the $200 price point and below. Price points are important. Sony did not hit 90M PS2 sales selling it at $300. They sold a decent amount of units at the higher price, but the low end sales are indeed impressive.

Also, what is this analyst smoking? The PS3 should get 15M sales in JAPAN by 2008! I could be off, but I thought Sony had 30M+ PS2 sales in Japan. And Sony is pretty dominant in Europe also.

Do note that the article, at least the parts QUOTED, don't mention who will be ahead in 2011 ;) The only interesting part from INQ:

Finally the analysts cautioned investors against throwing their money in during the next 12 months which will be rather volatile, though they reiterated their outperform notices on major publishers Electronic Arts, Activision, THQ, and Take-Two Interactive.

wco81

30-Sep-2005, 19:08

Well if it's through 2008, that's 3 full years.

That would imply close to 50/50 even by the end of the decade.

Also, note how low the Nintendo Revolution numbers are. Those look like an implosion in all markets.

Shifty Geezer

30-Sep-2005, 19:12

More Inquirer sensationalist trash. The headline for isn't the least bit backed up by the articles content. IT could read 'XB360 to beat PS3 for sevral months' or what have you. But if PJ were predicting an outright victory the article doesn't mention as much.

And as for investors...MS share prices have remained virtually static for years and given the losses incurred in their gaming division the past years, it'd be a mighty optimistic investor who splashed out on MS shares in the belief the XB360 would get a worthwhile return on their investment.

Geeforcer

30-Sep-2005, 19:16

In related news, I will go out on a limb and predict that Tayota Camry 2006 model will have an early lead on 2007 one. Anyone exposed to this insight now must mail me a check for $257.35.

Magnum PI

30-Sep-2005, 19:17

i guess that's the same kind of analyst who, in december 2002, said the xbox was soon profitable :roll:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2683

why care about this propaganda ?

scooby_dooby

30-Sep-2005, 19:21

Arty

30-Sep-2005, 19:24

^ makes sense if PS3 launches late next year. (like 360 this year)

BTOA

30-Sep-2005, 19:25

These articles about analyst's predictions are ridiculious and are nothing more than hype to grab people's attention. MS is just filling in the hole that was Sega in the gaming console world.

compres

30-Sep-2005, 19:26

i guess that's the same kind of analyst who, in december 2002, said the xbox was soon profitable :roll:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2683

why care about this propaganda ?

Well, IF the ps3 has linux available w/o the need of a hack, I am buying one(screw windows). Otherwise I dont think it has anything special to beat the 360 this generation.

Biggest advantage sony has is their hype and mindshare, lets see how well that holds up this generation.

Right now, looking at these past 2 years, I really wonder how did the ps2 manage to sell so well, I wonder if the close to a year lead in availability is really the key. If so sony's in deep trouble.

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 19:30

First of all these are US sales predictions, They have X360 as the market leader in the USA all the way through 2008.

the analysts predictions were this:

Installed Base

2005 XBOX 360 - 1.1 Million

2006 XBOX 360 - 7.1 Million
2006 PS3 - 1 Million

2007 - XBOX 360 - 14.3 Million
2007 - PS3 - 7 Million

2008 - XBOX 360 - 19.6 Million
2008 - PS3 - 15.6 Million

So they have the X360 gaining a 6million console lead in 2006, after that they have Sony gradually catching up, selling slightly less consoles than MS in 2007, then selling 2.5 million consoles more than MS in 2008. That makes more sense and seems like a rational guess (predictions are just that: someones guess).

I think the US will be close, so I could see something like the above scenario playing out. Although 1M PS3's in the US in Fall 2006? Even if Sony launches in the fall, unless it is really expensive ($450 or up) and/or they have supply limits I cannot fathom Sony ONLY selling 1M units.

I could see them selling 3M units in the US if they hit the write price point and make it available.

Scoob, got a link for the above?

scooby_dooby

30-Sep-2005, 19:32

Here ye be
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1191&Itemid=2&tprq=next-gen%20biz

-NakedZ-

30-Sep-2005, 19:36

Starting with the home hardware, Gikas and Wissink released their sales projections for each system over the next three years. Through 2008, Gikas and Wissink expect Microsoft to sell 19.6 million Xbox 360 units, with the PlayStation 3 and Revolution trailing at 15.5 million and 5 million units, respectively. The estimates for both Sony and Nintendo's consoles are based on late 2006 releases for the systems. But while the PS3 is expected to accelerate quickly and lead all systems with 8.5 million units sold in 2008, the ambitious Revolution is listed as starting slow (500,000 units sold in 2006), and lagging behind its competition with 2 million and 3 million systems moved in 2007 and 2008, respectively.

Link (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/09/29/news_6134710.html)

the INQUIRER: News, reviews, anti-Sony, facts and fictions. Gotta love it!

And as I argue before, a successful Xbox 360 launch doesn't necessarily means an automatic win next-generation. We should see a winner by the end of 2007 or early 2008.

.Z

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 19:38

Biggest advantage sony has is their hype and mindshare, lets see how well that holds up this generation. Lets expand 'mindshare' to 90M happy PS2 customers who are in love with the PS franchises (MGS, GTA, GT, Tekken, etc).

Further, Sony has a really nice ace in the hole called: Dev support. They have more than they know what to do with.

Xbox gained some nice momentum this past year, MS has proven to be a real player in the market, has gotten some nice dev support (especially compared to last gen beginning), and Live is online now (just when broadband penetration is more common than narrowband), etc.

But for every step forward, they take a half step back (half baked E3 showing for example). They have a large launch lineup, but not many killers it seems (at most 4 if PGR3, Oblivion, PDZ, and Kameo live up to their hype + Madden as a mainstream game).

The PS3 is going to be an excellent product (with some great extras like BR for those interested) + a ton of dev support, namely the killer franchises those 90M people love. And devs have been working with CELL/NV40 SLI for a while, so the end result should be some KILLER launch titles.

The US may be close, but world wide I am not sure anything can slow, let alone stop, the Sony tidal wave. MS may make a good showing (I think the 55/90 split of former forcasts sums up my guess) but I don't see Sony making any real mistakes. They wet the mouths and have given devs what they want for the most part (especially in RSX and Cg).

liolio

30-Sep-2005, 19:40

does anybody note the prevision by the same analyst of new gen PSP coming out in mid 06. Laughtable as usual...

scooby_dooby

30-Sep-2005, 19:49

Lets expand 'mindshare' to 90M happy PS2 customers who are in love with the PS franchises (MGS, GTA, GT, Tekken, etc).

Further, Sony has a really nice ace in the hole called: Dev support. They have more than they know what to do with.

Xbox gained some nice momentum this past year, MS has proven to be a real player in the market, has gotten some nice dev support (especially compared to last gen beginning), and Live is online now (just when broadband penetration is more common than narrowband), etc.

But for every step forward, they take a half step back (half baked E3 showing for example). They have a large launch lineup, but not many killers it seems (at most 4 if PGR3, Oblivion, PDZ, and Kameo live up to their hype + Madden as a mainstream game).

The PS3 is going to be an excellent product (with some great extras like BR for those interested) + a ton of dev support, namely the killer franchises those 90M people love. And devs have been working with CELL/NV40 SLI for a while, so the end result should be some KILLER launch titles.

The US may be close, but world wide I am not sure anything can slow, let alone stop, the Sony tidal wave. MS may make a good showing (I think the 55/90 split of former forcasts sums up my guess) but I don't see Sony making any real mistakes. They wet the mouths and have given devs what they want for the most part (especially in RSX and Cg).

Yes, but you also have to consider the period from 2006-2008. That's the period where MS has a dominant market lead, expecially for the first 2 years, that will probably result in the X360 having more games and drawing more 3rd party developers who are looking to cash in on the NA market leader.

So, this will probably be the FIRST time Sony has had the system with LESS support, the first time the competition actually offered more games. Combine that with a potentially lower price-point, and brand loyalty may not be nearly as important as people think.

Nintendo had the most hardcore brand loyalty you can get, but gamers went with the system with the most games. That's always been the PS, but next-gen situations may be reversed.

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 19:52

And as I argue before, a successful Xbox 360 launch doesn't necessarily means an automatic win next-generation. We should see a winner by the end of 2007 or early 2008. The winner will be who

1. Has the most variety of AAA titles to appeal to a wide market of gamers
2. Has the largest library of good games
3. Can hit the important price points quickest--and catch their opponent with their pants down
4. Have sly marketing that portrays a superior image and makes their item "must have" iPod like status

The problem I see with the Xbox 360 is of their big franchises I don't see many that have "name" recognition that Sony seems to have across the board. Halo... and then everything else.

Jade Empire, Forza, PGR, Fable, Banjo, Conker, Kameo, Perfect Dark, Ninja Guiden, Ghost Recon, DoA, MechAssault, and so forth are NICE franchises--some are great AAA games--but they don't have the name or fan following yet.

MS seems incapable of locking up certain exclusives as well. Splinter Cell should have been locked up. Bizarre (PGR) should not have been left to go make multiplatform titles for Sega. Prince of Persia would have been another good title to lock up early.

Glancing over at Sony:

GT, GTA, MGS, Tekken, FF, DMC, ... I am gonna stop there because it is pretty obvious: Note how Sony has all these AAA titles that are known by their abbreviation!

MS's biggest benefit right now is PC ports (and now their Vista future). Doom 3, Half-Life 2, FarCry, etc... that is transfering to the Xbox 360 with Quake 4, Prey, etc... The question is since the PS3 has a NV GPU will Sony start seeing this love. To a degree I think so.

I believe MS has the name brands to make a tough fight in the US. I think they are VERY intune with the US gamer. But worldwide I am not seeing the games that sell systems.

Of course that can change. Halo was new last gen. GTA3, the first popular GTA, was new last gen. MS also has a lot of support this time.

But as they say: Better one in the hand than two in the bush. And for that reason alone I think Sony is the default pick to win in total console sales.

But when it comes to profits, well, Nintendo has shown you can be profitable with a smaller install base. MS's success will be, in many ways, be determined with what they do with the 40-50M customers they do get. Do they make them MS gamers, are they dedicated to the MS franchises, or are they STILL relying on Halo.

Inane_Dork

30-Sep-2005, 19:59

the INQUIRER: News, reviews, anti-Sony, facts and fictions. Gotta love it!

And as I argue before, a successful Xbox 360 launch doesn't necessarily means an automatic win next-generation. We should see a winner by the end of 2007 or early 2008.That's totally true, but you have to agree that any company beating the PS3 for anything close to a year's span is a big shift.

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 20:00

Yes, but you also have to consider the period from 2006-2008. That's the period where MS has a dominant market lead, expecially for the first 2 years, that will probably result in the X360 having more games and drawing more 3rd party developers who are looking to cash in on the NA market leader.

So, this will probably be the FIRST time Sony has had the system with LESS support, the first time the competition actually offered more games. Combine that with a potentially lower price-point, and brand loyalty may not be nearly as important as people think.

Nintendo had the most hardcore brand loyalty you can get, but gamers went with the system with the most games. That's always been the PS, but next-gen situations may be reversed. I think MS will put up a big fight in the US, and with an early lead in the US I think US devs will not shy away from them.

But the great equalizer--beyond all the other points like games people wants (MGS type games)--is this: Japan and Europe. Sony is going to do VERY well there. That means Japanese Devs and European Devs are going to support the PS3, most likely more so than the Xbox 360. And most of those games will be appealing to many PS gamers.

So I don't necessarily see MS walking away with the "game support crown" just because they launch early. I think they are a viable platform and will compete well in the US (I could see a US split) which will means US companies support both. But hard to imagine Japanese Devs all jumping on board.

Btw, if MS wanted to win in the US, or in the least really put Sony behind and shift the attention of millions of gamers to MS: Get a Madden exclusive for Fall 2007.

That would make the 360 the "sporting" platform of choice. I think EA is estimating 6M copies of Madden yearly for the life of the NFL deal. Snagging an NFL exclusive would raise a lot of eyebrows.

I am not sure that is possible OR affordable, but anytime after 2007 would cost waaay to much. (This is why I dislike some of these exclusives, they could be used as serious weapons).

compres

30-Sep-2005, 20:01

Lets expand 'mindshare' to 90M happy PS2 customers who are in love with the PS franchises (MGS, GTA, GT, Tekken, etc).

90 Mill is a bit of inflated number since a lot of the sales have being either slimmer pstwo's and replacement for faulty ps2's, which are a bunch. Just to be fear I dont have exact numbers either.

Further, Sony has a really nice ace in the hole called: Dev support. They have more than they know what to do with.

Xbox gained some nice momentum this past year, MS has proven to be a real player in the market, has gotten some nice dev support (especially compared to last gen beginning), and Live is online now (just when broadband penetration is more common than narrowband), etc.

Dev support can change in one generation, just look at the snes-ps1 transition. I am thinking about the impact of head starts, as the ps1 had a head start, just like the ps2. This is the first time sony is not starting ahead of the pack in sales. lets see how this works out for them.

But for every step forward, they take a half step back (half baked E3 showing for example). They have a large launch lineup, but not many killers it seems (at most 4 if PGR3, Oblivion, PDZ, and Kameo live up to their hype + Madden as a mainstream game).

I prefered MS's e3 to sony's super hype machine at wortk.(Dont get me wrong, I dont like M$, but prerendered stuff on sony's part was cheak as fuck.) If the fanboi's enjoy watching videos thats fine, not me. Realtime for me, or nothing, thanks.

The PS3 is going to be an excellent product (with some great extras like BR for those interested) + a ton of dev support, namely the killer franchises those 90M people love. And devs have been working with CELL/NV40 SLI for a while, so the end result should be some KILLER launch titles.

I agree with it being good an all, but a 90+million units sold this generation is quite difficult. I'm on the wait and see side, again, sony does not have the head start for the first time in their console bussiness.

The US may be close, but world wide I am not sure anything can slow, let alone stop, the Sony tidal wave. MS may make a good showing (I think the 55/90 split of former forcasts sums up my guess) but I don't see Sony making any real mistakes. They wet the mouths and have given devs what they want for the most part (especially in RSX and Cg).

Well, what tidal wave are we talking about? You make it seem that it is nearly impossible to beat sony in this bussiness. I would have said the same about nintendo in the nes/snes era.

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 20:02

That's totally true, but you have to agree that any company beating the PS3 for anything close to a year's span is a big shift. ~20M consoles sold in the first 3 years would be a HUGE milestone for MS. By then they will be dropping to $150ish for year 4 and maybe $100 by year 5 (the years sales really pick up). If they hit 20M by year 3 I will be shocked.

avaya

30-Sep-2005, 20:07

Well, what tidal wave are we talking about? You make it seem that it is nearly impossible to beat sony in this bussiness. I would have said the same about nintendo in the nes/snes era.

The North American market really is the most contestable and should be seen as the only realistic battleground. Everywhere else Sony has something like 70-90% marketshare. Europe is almost like Japan for Sony. These markets would take several generations to break and Japan is probably not possible.

compres

30-Sep-2005, 20:15

The North American market really is the most contestable and should be seen as the only realistic battleground. Everywhere else Sony has something like 70-90% marketshare. Europe is almost like Japan for Sony. These markets would take several generations to break and Japan is probably not possible.

Totally agree, but what was nintendo's market share back in the snes era? Also, what would have been of the n64 had it been released a year before ps1?

Maybe we will never know, but am sure it would have not been the same.

Acert93

30-Sep-2005, 20:18

90 Mill is a bit of inflated number since a lot of the sales have being either slimmer pstwo's and replacement for faulty ps2's, which are a bunch. Just to be fear I dont have exact numbers either. They have sold over 90M -- well over now actually. I have a hard time believing 10M people went out and bought a 2nd PS2 just to get a smaller one.

Yes some PS2s broke, others are not being used, and others have been replaced with new shinier models. But if you do that to the PS2 you MUST do that to the 22M Xbox consoles.

It is just a lot easier to focus on units sold.

Dev support can change in one generation, just look at the snes-ps1 transition. I am thinking about the impact of head starts, as the ps1 had a head start, just like the ps2. This is the first time sony is not starting ahead of the pack in sales. lets see how this works out for them. Sony already has over 100 games in development in Japan. I will assume that the 25 EA games slated for the Xbox 360 are all coming to the PS3. Activision will surely support the PS3.

• MS has more dev support in 2005 than they did in 2000
• MS will have more games available in 2006 when the PS3 launches

MS is also a known quantity now (i.e. Xbox is not just a PC trojan). That said, I don't see Sony's support vaporizing. It is there, it is coming. Don't count out Sony: they will only be behind in sales due to release date. They have better support from JP/EU and have the minds of many gamers.

Sony has a slew of system sellers: GTA, MGS, GT, etc. Having more games is not enough--you need the GOOD games.

I prefered MS's e3 to sony's super hype machine at wortk.(Dont get me wrong, I dont like M$, but prerendered stuff on sony's part was cheak as fuck.) If the fanboi's enjoy watching videos thats fine, not me. Realtime for me, or nothing, thanks. An important factor in evaluating something in terms of a market is to take your OWN opinion out of it. As a hardcore gamer I was not impressed with Sony's show (less I DID want to see a 150minute KZ movie! drooool).

But MS's was very weak. The good PDZ footage was locked up. PGR3 was a no show. GOW did not get the focus it needed. Ruby demo was not shown. A ton of games were a mess--either looking like Xbox ports OR with horrible framerates.

Sony presented a vision that people drooled over. MS made people confused. I liked MS's show--I liked a couple games they showed a LOT. But you cannot deny fan impressions: people got geeked out by the Sony vision.

The power of marketing is important. I think MS has too many monkey's working in the advertising board room.

I agree with it being good an all, but a 90+million units sold this generation is quite difficult. I'm on the wait and see side, again, sony does not have the head start for the first time in their console bussiness. They had the DC last gen, which they squashed, and were head to head with the SS in Japan/US with PS1 (actually, SS launched earlier in the US, my friends brother picked one up not too long after E3).

Yes, MS has a lead, and probably a decent one in the US/EU. But that lead means nothing if NOT capitolized on. What games are gonna sell systems in that lead period? Of MS does not supply a killer title, all Sony needs to do is say KZ and MGS will be available on launch day 2006.

Well, what tidal wave are we talking about? You make it seem that it is nearly impossible to beat sony in this bussiness. I would have said the same about nintendo in the nes/snes era. Nintendo did some stupid things from the perspective in winning the most console sales.

But alas--consoles sales are not everything. Nintendo has stood up well to Sony in console profits with 1/4 the market.

And yes, I don't think I have seen any mistakes from Sony or moves by MS that make me think MS can topple the Sony lead. Dent it? Maybe. Hurt Sony's profits? Yes, I see that. MS grow install base? Yes.

But pass Sony in total console sales? Heh. :lol:

They just don't have the system sellers yet. MS has Halo. Sony has a slew of killer name brand titles.

MS's portfolio is growing and looking better every day, but it is an uphill battle. I would feel more confident in MS if they had a killer advertising platform and message/image. They have had some killer material (Ruby, GOW, PGR3) that I feel they have under exposed and not pushed correctly.

I think MS needs new people to run their console image. Allard being "cool" is nothing. Balmar screaming, "Developers! Developers! Developer!" is waaaay to geeky. They are out of touch I think with what gamers want in an *advertising* sense. I think they make good games, but they are not marketing them.

And in this industry the most important thing is getting games to people. Sony has a way of making devs happy and then getting games from devs to gamers.

MS wont fail this gen, but toppling Sony seems like Mt. Everest.

pc999

30-Sep-2005, 20:24

I would like to know how they had calculate for Rev, but it is analysts so ... :lol:

avaya

30-Sep-2005, 20:25

Totally agree, but what was nintendo's market share back in the snes era? Also, what would have been of the n64 had it been released a year before ps1?

Maybe we will never know, but am sure it would have not been the same.

More dominant for the NES actually. I'm pretty sure NES was the most dominant of all time but don't have the figures at hand.

N64 was actually ahead in sales in Japan for quite a while but somehow Sony managed to turn it around. You'd have to google it to find out everything.

I think for MS to contemplate matching Sony in Europe and elsewhere Sony will have to make some mistakes. Nintendo made crucial errors and could not hold a candle to Sony on the marketing side of things. MS and Sony are even on that front, but you never know.

Shifty Geezer

30-Sep-2005, 20:25

There's an oft seen bar graph of PS sales, showing PS1, PS2 and PSP/PS3 predictions I think. However I've been unable to find it. Can someone post a link?

scooby_dooby

30-Sep-2005, 20:28

Mordecaii

30-Sep-2005, 22:21

That's what others have been pointing out scooby, the US is really the most contested game market with the others leaning rather heavily towards Sony. I agree with Acert's points though, with Sony's brand name and the fact that they do have so many high-profile exclusives I think it will be basically impossible for MS to sell more units worldwide than Sony this upcoming gen. I will be very shocked, however, if MS doesn't sell at least 40-50 million units this time around.

By the way, does anyone have a link to a website that shows the total amount of hardware sold for the consoles including the PSP and DS? I'd prefer the numbers be somewhat recent. :)

Mmmkay

30-Sep-2005, 23:20

RE: the 90 million number, that's worldwide, not US.

According to current market research, PS3 has about 40% in the US, while XBOX is at about 34%, dont have time to find the link right now, but it's much closer in the US than the global sales figures might suggest.

http://www.jsonline.com/bym/tech/news/may05/325771.asp

May numbers will have to do right now because I am feeling lazy...

Anyway, the Xbox has 22.5% of the market share with the PS2 at 60.4%. That will have only grown wider over the months.

So if this 'market research' is talking about active console userbase or something, I would very much like so read it if you could dig it up. Just as an aside though, I did a little analysis on some NPD numbers in June and the 'active' market share I could determine from total software sales looked like this: PS2 51.3%, Xbox 33.7%, GCN 15%.

The data would have more meaning I guess if it had been recorded every month as June was a strong month for Xbox and those numbers may not be indicative of an average split.

Titanio

30-Sep-2005, 23:27

RE: the 90 million number, that's worldwide, not US.

According to current market research, PS3 has about 40% in the US, while XBOX is at about 34%, dont have time to find the link right now, but it's much closer in the US than the global sales figures might suggest.

PS2 was at about ~58.5% in the US as of the end of 2004. Xbox was at ~23.5%, GameCube at ~18%.

I don't have to-date figures, but I could look them up based on NPD I guess.

scooby_dooby

30-Sep-2005, 23:47

I wasn't talking about current consoles installed base, but rather the yearly market share, which I think is more useful in determining "mindshare" of the current consumer.

June NPD numbers reinforce that Xbox success is continuing, while competitive consoles' lifecycles continue to taper off.

Xbox was the only system to see year-over-year unit growth for June in both console hardware and software sales. Xbox console unit sales grew 55 percent while Xbox software units were up 69 percent.
Market share for Xbox has increased 10 points from June 2003 (23 percent) to June 2004 (33 percent) in the United States: this is the eighth consecutive month that Xbox has grown its market share year-over-year.
Xbox continues to lead the industry with a 6.9 software attach rate for June (7.8 with retail bundled games), the highest cumulative attach rate of any console at this point in the lifecycle. Halfway through 2004, Xbox continues to be the only system growing year-over-year, as console sales were up an amazing 45 percent, while PlayStation 2 sales are down 21 percent for the same time period.

http://www.gaming-age.com/news/2004/7/23-46 (i can't find the link I was thinkin of, but this one seems to reference the same numbers. It was 33% XBOX 39% PS2)

We're talking about brand loyalty and mindshare in the US. These numbers paint a much different picture than total installed base (60% sony) which includes sales from 1999 and are completely irrelevent to todays consumer.

If you look at the current market in the US, XBOX is on the rise, PS is on the fall, that speaks to mindshare much more than past saels figures form 6 years ago I'd think.

Titanio

30-Sep-2005, 23:56

I wasn't talking about current consoles installed base, but rather the yearly market share, which I think is more useful in determining "mindshare" of the current consumer.

http://www.gaming-age.com/news/2004/7/23-46 (i can't find the link I was thinkin of, but this one seems to reference the same numbers)

We're talking about brand loyalty and mindshare in the US. These numbers paint a much different picture than total installed base (60% sony) which includes sales from 1999 and are completely irrelevent to todays consumer.

If you look at the current market in the US, XBOX is on the rise, PS is on the fall, that speaks to mindshare much more than past saels figures form 6 years ago I'd think.

Except, looking at June 05 NPD figures, the market split was like this:

PS2: 59.9%
Xbox: 28.3%
GC: 11.8%

Which isn't out of line with the lifetime figures.

edit - earlier disparity was due to comparing ms's june 04 figures with NPD june 05 figures - whoops! but these 05 figures are more recent.

The lifetime figures, by the way, up to and including August 05 are:

PS2: 58.6%
Xbox: 23.8%
GC: 17.6%

2005 figures up to and including August are:

PS2: 60.14%
Xbox: 27.74%
GC: 12.12%

For 2005 to August, Xbox is up compared to lifetime figures, but so is Sony, to a smaller degree. Xbox's gains have not been at Sony's expense, rather Nintendo's.

scooby_dooby

01-Oct-2005, 00:30

the numbers I mentioned are for the entire year, June 2003 - June 2004, not for a single month.

Do you have a link to June 04-June 05 numbers?

MoeStooge

01-Oct-2005, 00:32

... Xbox's gains have not been at Sony's expense, rather Nintendo's...

I would think that most of the Xbox's market share is not at Sony's expense. I bet that a large portion of Xbox owners also own or have purchased the PS2 as well.

Alpha_Spartan

01-Oct-2005, 00:47

It's amazing how many people believe that the Playstation3 is a sure bet to lead next generation. There's no such thing as a sure bet.

bRoNx

01-Oct-2005, 02:49

It's amazing how many people believe that the Playstation3 is a sure bet to lead next generation. There's no such thing as a sure bet.
Not as amazing as those who believe the X360 would lead next gen.

So far, most of the opinions here have been based on current gen figures, market & mindshare based on those figures, and looking at current gen exclusive AAA titles and how they've benefitted it's host hardware. These, at least, are factual statistics, and because of that, these opinions, IMHO, are more credible to me than some analyst judging the future based on launch dates. These are not sure bets, but rather, educated guesstimates based on the current gen., with the above factors thrown into the mix. Personally, ever since the PSP pricing debacle, I'll never listen to an analyst again!;)

dubyateeeff

01-Oct-2005, 03:14

I think MS will put up a big fight in the US, and with an early lead in the US I think US devs will not shy away from them.

But the great equalizer--beyond all the other points like games people wants (MGS type games)--is this: Japan and Europe. Sony is going to do VERY well there. That means Japanese Devs and European Devs are going to support the PS3, most likely more so than the Xbox 360. And most of those games will be appealing to many PS gamers.

Care to expand a bit more on this? To be more specific: why do you think MS will do great in US and not in the EU (except for dev support)? Why the difference? Why dont US-gamers want PS games (MGS, GTA, DMC etc) to the same extent as EU-gamers does? Cant MS put up a big fight in EU as they will do in US? Because it seems to me, winning over EU shouldnt be too hard, it is not like PS3 is developed here.

Acert93

01-Oct-2005, 03:20

Care to expand a bit more on this? To be more specific: why do you think MS will do great in US and not in the EU (except for dev support)? Why the difference? Why dont US-gamers want PS games (MGS, GTA, DMC etc) to the same extent as EU-gamers does? Cant MS put up a big fight in EU as they will do in US? Because it seems to me, winning over EU shouldnt be too hard, it is not like PS3 is developed here. Well there are some big differences between EU gamers and US gamers. e.g. on the surface

EU is big into F1 racing and Soccer, neither of which are important in the US.

In the US we are big in (American) Football and Nascar (yuck!) and, importantly, FPS. Madden does not sell well at all outside NA.

Sony has done a good job in courting and establishing important brands and software in EU. Some EU gamers could elaborate more than I could as I am not from there.

In the US, MS's close ties with PC developers seem to be a big positive, and the titles MS focuses on tend to be made by US devs developers for US customers. Even the new PDZ the British accent of Joanna is dropped.

I think the tendancy is to treat EU as an extension of US tastes. It truly is not--just ask the EU gamers here! There is some overlap, but not as much as we often assume. Sony has done a good job of recognizing how EU is a unique market and needs to be nurtured--and it seems to have paid off handsomely.

expletive

01-Oct-2005, 03:30

Except, looking at June 05 NPD figures, the market split was like this:

PS2: 59.9%
Xbox: 28.3%
GC: 11.8%

What if MS Gained 12% on Sony this generation and the numbers looked like this:

PS3: 47%
360: 40%
Revo 13%

How do you think all the manufacturers would feel about these numbers?

IMHO:

1. Kutaragi would be fired
2. MS would sign for it now
3. Nintendo would be profitable :)

Since pretty much everyone expects MS to gain SOME market share this generation, I think MS gaining 12% is very reasonable. Knowing the advantage they had from the original PSX, this would be catastrophic for Sony imo.

What do you guys think? Are these #s reasonable? How would each company view them if they turned out like this?

J

expletive

01-Oct-2005, 03:31

Well there are some big differences between EU gamers and US gamers. e.g. on the surface

EU is big into F1 racing and Soccer, neither of which are important in the US.

In the US we are big in (American) Football and Nascar (yuck!) and, importantly, FPS. Madden does not sell well at all outside NA.

Sony has done a good job in courting and establishing important brands and software in EU. Some EU gamers could elaborate more than I could as I am not from there.

In the US, MS's close ties with PC developers seem to be a big positive, and the titles MS focuses on tend to be made by US devs developers for US customers. Even the new PDZ the British accent of Joanna is dropped.

I think the tendancy is to treat EU as an extension of US tastes. It truly is not--just ask the EU gamers here! There is some overlap, but not as much as we often assume. Sony has done a good job of recognizing how EU is a unique market and needs to be nurtured--and it seems to have paid off handsomely.

Well EU is getting to 'origen' first so it seems MS has finally caught on! :)

J

Gholbine

01-Oct-2005, 03:34

Can someone explain why The Enquirer is so biased against Sony/Playstation?

liverkick

01-Oct-2005, 03:52

It's amazing how many people believe that the Playstation3 is a sure bet to lead next generation. There's no such thing as a sure bet.

Equally amazing is the consistent focus on MS' apparent momentum without much incisive analysis on how Sony is somehow losing theirs in return. It seems like some people are keen to look for chinks simply because they assume they should be showing up any minute now.

liverkick

01-Oct-2005, 03:52

Can someone explain why The Enquirer is so biased against Sony/Playstation?

Nvidia by proxy?

Acert93

01-Oct-2005, 03:55

Can someone explain why The Enquirer is so biased against Sony/Playstation? Well, the Inquirer is... well... err... hmmm... How do you say this eloquently?

They were founded by the king of all trolls and enjoy stirring the kettle of doom? It really goes in cycles... they hate on everyone... total rumor mongers and wrong 90% of the time. They report ANYTHING they hear.

But they are right sometimes and they LOVE the attention. So meh. Just don't get worked up about it... realize if THEY are saying it and no one else is, 99% chance it is wrong.

Lysander

01-Oct-2005, 04:21

I think MS has too many monkey's working in the advertising board room.
true (the only positive person in MS is P. Moore)

Teasy

01-Oct-2005, 06:00

Revolution will sell only 500,000 from launch right through Christmas? Anyone with a bit of sense would know that's an impossibility, Nintendo fans will buy it in droves on launch as usual.

Inane_Dork

01-Oct-2005, 06:43

Can someone explain why The Enquirer is so biased against Sony/Playstation?Here (http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/8846)'s an interesting insight into the workings of the Inq.
IMO, such people should not have any power as they clearly have no responsibility.

_phil_

01-Oct-2005, 08:42

i don't know how you can claim to predict anything on hardware sales when this hardware market relies mostly on software value.And get paid for that.

Magnum PI

01-Oct-2005, 09:12

as they have a skeleton in the closet, how much faith can you have in their statement ?

http://www.pjfraudinfocenter.com/
http://www.securitiesfraudfyi.com/piper_jaffray.html

it was also the case the case of the bernstein cabinet, the one which claimed xbox to be profitable, december 2002 as they recommended enron (superperformer) weeks before bankruptcy.

i guess this kind of establishment have nothing against some money in exchange of making a statement.

Titanio

01-Oct-2005, 09:56

the numbers I mentioned are for the entire year, June 2003 - June 2004, not for a single month.

I don't think they are, I think they're just looking at June 03 and June 04 in isolation. Their June 04 figures do indeed come out at 33% and June 03 at 23% so..

Do you have a link to June 04-June 05 numbers?

I'd have to look the latter figures up (June04 to June05), but figures for Jan 05 to August 05 are in my first post:

PS2: 60.14%
Xbox: 27.74%
GC: 12.12%

I think it's best to stick to calendar years also, picking arbitrary starting points can skew figures.

What if MS Gained 12% on Sony this generation and the numbers looked like this:

PS3: 47%
360: 40%
Revo 13%

How do you think all the manufacturers would feel about these numbers?

IMHO:

1. Kutaragi would be fired

I think Sony would be doing very well to hold on to virtually half the market in the US next gen. To be honest, though, I think that comes more down to Nintendo.

avaya

01-Oct-2005, 13:14

Sony's stength in the EU and PAL regions as a whole is due to marketing.

As an example Sony are primary sponsors with MasterCard and FoMoCo for the UEFA Champions League - the biggest football club competition in the world. If you watch a CL match every single advertising board in the stadium will for at least 1/4 of a match show a PlayStation2 logo. They get the conscious and subconscious attention of their target audience, 18-34, for ~20mins at a time.

Sony even secured a deal with FIFA for World Cup advertising. Sony also holds the official F1 license. They really are consilidating their position in this market.

At the current rate of growth it would not be surprising to see the EU/PAL market having the most hardware sales next generation.

Microsoft has it's work cut out in Europe. It's by no means easy.

Acert93

01-Oct-2005, 14:38

I'd have to look the latter figures up (June04 to June05), but figures for Jan 05 to August 05 are in my first post:

PS2: 60.14%
Xbox: 27.74%
GC: 12.12%

I think it's best to stick to calendar years also, picking arbitrary starting points can skew figures. Calendar Year and Year-on-Year numbers are relevant sales data in their on respects. Year-on-Year performance includes all sales periods (highs and lows) and demonstrates a momentum factor if compared against a product in the same market. Year-on-Year is a very common method, I don't see the problem with it.

But looking at half-year data is useless. Isolating 6 months total that ignore the holiday season--when the typical business does between 75-90% of sales--can be very misleading and are not comparable to the data extracted from Year-on-Year totals. To put it simply: If most companies put much weight behind the first 6 months of the year they would project dire straights, if not forclosure. That is how bad, and often misleading, that sales period is.

Year-on-Year and Calendar Year, both of which include a holiday season, are well established methods in market analysis. Projections and numbers from the non-holiday season can be misleading. Holiday price cuts, "killer apps" available after September 1st, etc... can significantly shift consumer focus during the most vital sales period.

You can win total sales for the year, even if you are behind for 9 months, just as long as you make a significant win in the last 3 months of the year.

Titanio

01-Oct-2005, 14:45

Calendar Year and Year-on-Year numbers are relevant sales data in their on respects. Year-on-Year performance includes all sales periods (highs and lows) and demonstrates a momentum factor if compared against a product in the same market. Year-on-Year is a very common method, I don't see the problem with it.

I don't disagree, my only problem with it is you then have 12 sets of figures for every year and I ain't going to go compiling those ;) People would then also just pick the figure they like the look of most.

But looking at half-year data is useless. Isolating 6 months total that ignore the holiday season--when the typical business does between 75-90% of sales--can be very misleading and are not comparable to the data extracted from Year-on-Year totals. To put it simply: If most companies put much weight behind the first 6 months of the year they would project dire straights, if not forclosure. That is how bad, and often misleading, that sales period is.

I know, but we only have 05 figures up to August, or at least that's all I have.

I kind of doubt they'll change much through the rest of the year, especially with a $99 PS2 still to come.

expletive

01-Oct-2005, 16:48

I think Sony would be doing very well to hold on to virtually half the market in the US next gen. To be honest, though, I think that comes more down to Nintendo.

I dunno, that would mean Sony would have almost no advantage going into the following generation. Considering where they came from with the PSX, two gens later they would have squandered their entire advantage. To me, that sounds like a total disaster for Sony.

Of course this is just based on analyst predictions, MS actually has to GAIN market share for this to matter.

J

EndR

01-Oct-2005, 19:57

Sony even secured a deal with FIFA for World Cup advertising. Sony also holds the official F1 license. They really are consilidating their position in this market.

At the current rate of growth it would not be surprising to see the EU/PAL market having the most hardware sales next generation.

Microsoft has it's work cut out in Europe. It's by no means easy.

Hmm.. Which World Cup is Sony gonna do some advertising in? Last time I heard, MS was one of the official sponsors of the 2006 world cup in germany.. Xbox and Xbox360 were the "official" consoles...

Marketing-wise.. MS is up there with Sony...

Titanio

01-Oct-2005, 20:04

I dunno, that would mean Sony would have almost no advantage going into the following generation. Considering where they came from with the PSX, two gens later they would have squandered their entire advantage. To me, that sounds like a total disaster for Sony.

It's down to MS and Nintendo, but it's difficult to maintain a very dominant position in a competitive market. There's nothing to say that they'd lose further share the following gen, though, they may consolidate what they have.

Or not. Or they may maintain their current share. Or grow it.

These are just predictions/guesses. I recall analyst predictions coming into this gen that look laughable in hindsight. Yours and mine are probably as good, but I wouldn't venture to guess how things might pan out in the US. Japan and Europe seem easier, and thus to some the US seems more interesting, but to be honest, Europe may be the real story in absolute numbers next-gen, or if not, the gen after that, as it grows.

ihamoitc2005

01-Oct-2005, 21:40

I dunno, that would mean Sony would have almost no advantage going into the following generation. Considering where they came from with the PSX, two gens later they would have squandered their entire advantage. To me, that sounds like a total disaster for Sony.

Of course this is just based on analyst predictions, MS actually has to GAIN market share for this to matter.

J

Analysts have bad history of prediction. Look at internet boom and flop. All analysts were wrong no? Selling first gives big advantage to xbox360 but lack of HD-DVD or Blu-Ray can hurt in long run. Look at GameCube, if DVD compatible, sales would be much better, lower price did not help. Analyst is right that 2007 will be big year for PS3 due to HD era beginning. But analyst's specific numbers is silly attempt to sound like he knows what he talks about and clear evidence that he is making things up. So overall, analyst right about one thing that everyone already knows and everything else he is making up.

avaya

01-Oct-2005, 22:05

Hmm.. Which World Cup is Sony gonna do some advertising in? Last time I heard, MS was one of the official sponsors of the 2006 world cup in germany.. Xbox and Xbox360 were the "official" consoles...

Marketing-wise.. MS is up there with Sony...

After MS took that contract for 2006, Sony signed a deal with FIFA for several tournaments up to 2012 I believe, not totally sure about the end date.

expletive

02-Oct-2005, 00:02

Analysts have bad history of prediction. Look at internet boom and flop. All analysts were wrong no? Selling first gives big advantage to xbox360 but lack of HD-DVD or Blu-Ray can hurt in long run. Look at GameCube, if DVD compatible, sales would be much better, lower price did not help. Analyst is right that 2007 will be big year for PS3 due to HD era beginning. But analyst's specific numbers is silly attempt to sound like he knows what he talks about and clear evidence that he is making things up. So overall, analyst right about one thing that everyone already knows and everything else he is making up.

Let me clarify my question. I'm not trying to predict what WILL happen or agree with analysts. All i was asking was, if they were right, and each console has "X" market share do you think that would be good/bad for each company, sort of a report card on it.

I totally agree analysts are often wrong.

J

ihamoitc2005

03-Oct-2005, 03:23

Let me clarify my question. I'm not trying to predict what WILL happen or agree with analysts. All i was asking was, if they were right, and each console has "X" market share do you think that would be good/bad for each company, sort of a report card on it.

I totally agree analysts are often wrong.

J

I apologize that I did not understand your question.

In such situation as analyst proposes, then it seems Nintendo might have problems. Both Sony and Microsoft will succeed financially. Microsoft will make much profit on games, license, accessories, live and maybe music download while sony makes much profit on games, license, accessories, online, movies, license for blu-ray and maybe even CELL as well as music download. Nintendo will sell hardware at loss like other two companies but has only same number of revenue channels as Microsoft (difference: old games download instead of music download) at best but proposed marketshare not enough to be very profitable if at all. Sony has most revenue channels related to console and hence has most revenue per console but with biggest R&D spending of all companies also has most expense. Overall Sony and MS ok, Nintendo touch and go.

Big disclaimer: what I wrote is based on analyst predicted market share and as usual such predictions are not meaningful, especially in cases where precise looking numbers are provided by analyst.

Shifty Geezer

03-Oct-2005, 09:34

Big disclaimer: what I wrote is based on analyst predicted market share and as usual such predictions are not meaningful, especially in cases where precise looking numbers are provided by analyst.That makes no sense to me. Nintendo have excellent profitability this gen with small market share. Why is that going change? And MS is HUGELY losing money, so even double the share on what they have now (save other factors) they'd only be marginally profitable. Straight guesses on market share doesn't provide much info at all on likely profitability.

SubD

03-Oct-2005, 09:49

Analysts have bad history of prediction.

One only has to go back to the old pre-launch Xbox analyst installed base predictions to see just how worthless they are.

MfA

03-Oct-2005, 10:13

Shifty Geezer

03-Oct-2005, 10:38

IMO brand loyalty is to a large extent an illusion perpetuated by the types who need to justify millions or billions worth of good will on a balance sheet.Nope. Brand loyalty has a considerable benefit. It's to do wth human behavioral psychology and the way people form relations and on the whole prefer to go with something they already know then something different. It takes quite a lot to make people consider switching from a known brand/service/product they have had a postive experience with, or rather a positive mental connection with which may be the result of 'education'.

SubD

03-Oct-2005, 10:56

There are only five groups of people console installed base numbers can come from:

1) PS2 owners
2) GameCube owners
3) Xbox owners
4) Multi-console owners
5) Non-console owners

I have never really looked at the percentage of 4) vs. single console owners, but I assume it is fairly small and is not going to be significantly larger or smaller next gen. So I will ignore that segment.

1) & 2) account for ~90 + ~20 million console owners. There would need to be a reason people in this group to defect to a different console. Exclusive game defections by publishers or some execution failure on Sony or Nintendo's part bad enough to cause current PS2 and GameCube owners to defect to a different console.

5) is the 6 billion or so people who are non-console owners. There would need to be some new and compelling reason for tens of millions of these people to go out and buy a 360 and not a PS3 or Revolution.

3) is the ~20 million current Xbox owners. There seems to be quite a bit of dissatisfaction in this group. Large numbers of very poor looking games. The backward compatibility mess. The 2 sku/harddive not being standard dissatisfaction. And so on.

Some additional console market points:

1) Price does not affect console choice as long as it is in the 50-100 dollar or so range. Consumers will continue to play games on their old console until the price drops to their personal range.

2) Launch timing means nothing as long as the range is in the six month to year range. 300-500 dollars is a huge sum of money for the vast majority of console consumers that they spend only once every five years or so. They will wait for the machine they desire.

3) Exclusive game titles is the single most important factor in console choice.

The 360 gaining marketshare just isn't going to happen. The numbers just don't add up. There just aren't tens of million of new people out of the five groups listed above to make up the claimed marketshare growth so many people are saying is reasonable to expect. The distribution of exclusive game titles remains almost the same as it was last gen. For significant marketshare shift there would need to be a equally significant shift in system selling exclusives. That hasn't happend.

Microsoft and the 360 look like they are in a fight just to maintain their current installed base. I would say they are looking at installed base numbers in the ~15 million range. Current Xbox owners - a fairly significant number of defections from the 'most powerful' crowd + overall console market growth.

MfA

03-Oct-2005, 11:10

Nope. Brand loyalty has a considerable benefit.As I saw someone describe it a while back ... brand loyalty nowadays is more like loyalty to your girlfriend, whereas it used to be like loyalty to your wife.

_phil_

03-Oct-2005, 12:50

As I saw someone describe it a while back ... brand loyalty nowadays is more like loyalty to your girlfriend, whereas it used to be like loyalty to your wife.
you mean ,just a difference of hypocrisy ?

Mordecaii

03-Oct-2005, 12:51

Ok MFA, look at it this way... usually to switch products someone needs to have a reason to. People may not stick with a brand unerringly anymore like they once did, but brand loyalty still does matter.

Uncle

03-Oct-2005, 13:55

After MS took that contract for 2006, Sony signed a deal with FIFA for several tournaments up to 2012 I believe, not totally sure about the end date.

That would get Sony only one World Cup in 2010 though. Next gen PES + advertising at next years World Cup could be huge for MS in Europe.

mckmas8808

03-Oct-2005, 14:00

As I saw someone describe it a while back ... brand loyalty nowadays is more like loyalty to your girlfriend, whereas it used to be like loyalty to your wife.

Hey I like that. I might jack it for another time in the future.

Shifty Geezer

03-Oct-2005, 14:27

That would get Sony only one World Cup in 2010 though. Next gen PES + advertising at next years World Cup could be huge for MS in Europe.Unless the PES and FIFA adverts during halftime advertise availablility for every platform under the sun. I don't think very many people will be buying a console based solely on it's appearance on a billboard. This type of promotional material is more about building up mindset and associations. What WOULD sell the console is an advert of a fantastic looking world cup game and the words 'console x exclusive'. And besides world cup soccer games lack longevity when countries lose interest as their teams are knocked out, whereas league football goes on, and on, and on forever.

Uncle

03-Oct-2005, 14:49

Unless the PES and FIFA adverts during halftime advertise availablility for every platform under the sun.

Yes, but it's likely that X360 will be the only next gen console under the European sun in June when the games start. It's true that the World Cup lacks longetivity, but this will at least tell lots of people that the X360 even exists.

london-boy

03-Oct-2005, 14:53

Yes, but it's likely that X360 will be the only next gen console under the European sun in June when the games start. It's true that the World Cup lacks longetivity, but this will at least tell lots of people that the X360 even exists.

Which reminds me that the 2006 World Cup (the ONLY football event i ever watch) will be on SkyHD! Imagine that! All the world cut in HD! :eek:

If we're lucky (very lucky) we might have PS3 in "spring" 2006 too. Not many of us will actually get our hands on it, but there is a strong possibility that it will be "released" by then. And fully hands-on-able for people like us who don't have a brother working at Sony by xmas 2009.

Shifty Geezer

03-Oct-2005, 14:58

True. A stellar footy game on XB360 might generate some strong uptake of the machine if there's no alternative.

wco81

03-Oct-2005, 17:34

Will the WC still be going on in July?

I have a vacation planned. Can't be any more busier over there than usual in July could it?

Any good non-smoking places in London which would show the games?

london-boy

03-Oct-2005, 17:51

Will the WC still be going on in July?

I have a vacation planned. Can't be any more busier over there than usual in July could it?

Any good non-smoking places in London which would show the games?
Well, pubs will be the first to take advantage of the new SkyHD, so they'll probably be jumping on the opportunity to show nice HD world cup. It will attract even more people. And will make HDTV prices go down too, with all these people wanting a piece of that at home :grin:

But yeah, it should be July.

wco81

03-Oct-2005, 18:10

I don't suppose any of the pubs are non-smoking?

Not likely but then again, if Ireland can ban smoking in pubs, it should be able to happen anywhere. Took a flight from Heathrow to Cork once. As soon as the plane touched down and we got into the terminal, you heard all these lighters flicking on like some heavy metal concert.

Shifty Geezer

03-Oct-2005, 18:35

It's in debate. Some pubs are voluntarily becoming non-smoking. Dunno where you'd find that information though, shot of the usually Googling.

mckmas8808

04-Oct-2005, 16:36

I don't know why I'm posting this here but here you go.

People seem undecided on which of PS3 and Xbox 360 are more powerful. What do you think? Will they be very different machines to design games for?

Dave Perry: The PS3 is ultimately more powerful if you are willing to wait for programmers to master it. It's a bit like Path of Neo... Here we are at the end of the PS2 hardware cycle and suddenly we are the first game with Normal Mapping and we also demonstrated 1,500 Agent Smiths on screen at once. Meaning there's always some more juice to get squeezed out. The Xbox 360 on the other hand is much more comfortable to develop on and I expect to see programmers pushing it harder earlier. So I expect (like in a horse race) to see Xbox take off out the gate, but after a while, the PS3 overtakes. The good news is that there's no loser here, both machines rock.

I can see this as being a possiblity. Guess we'll see in the future. Like he said best thing is there's no loser.