PS3 sales

[Arwin]

If PS3 launched alongside XB360 at the same price without BR or standard HDD, Microsoft would get hammered. There was just no messing with the Playstation brand at the time.

Look this kind of discussion is just really meaningless. You could just as well have had 360 launch with HD-DVD included and a standard HDD, while Sony stuck with no HDD and a basic DVD player. Then who knows Squeenix and Konami decide to go with the HD-DVD format carrier.

If both Sony and Microsoft have a long breath, then Sony will win in the end, just as Amiga and C64 beat their Atari counterparts eventually, even though the Amiga especially was way more expensive than the Atari ST. After a while they managed to bring the prices into a competitive range, and then the extra power of the Amiga started to count. The PS3 and 360 aren't nearly that far apart, and the race hasn't nearly run its course.

But competition is a lot more fierrce this generation, and that shows in all sorts of ways. Nevertheless, when the PS3 gets some of its bigger game franchises out, things will change. And incidentally I just checked out bestbuy, and they're sold out again.

From the looks of it, Blu-Ray has a very good shot at beating HD DVD, and this will have an impact on the PS3. And eventually the PS3 will get more and more visible games out that show what BluRay can do for games. This year is not the year of the mainstream buyer.

The 360 did good, but it's doing just the same as the original Xbox still, so let's not get too carried away. The Wii is doing absolutely great, but it's not in the same market that the PS3 is in right now. The PS3 will hit that market later, but it will get there for sure.

The 360 is doing well, but I think anyone who thinks that the race hasn't just started is getting carried away. Christmas 2007 is the first important measuring point of the respective consoles' success. By 2008, we will have a much clearer picture yet.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

One extra year of PS2 sales (and software sales are quite low nowadays!) is nothing compared to loosing half of your market share.

I think they're aware of this and the PS3 wasn't late because of choice - they planned a spring 2006 launch, but had to give it up, probably quite some time before that. But they obviously wanted to get on the market closer to the Xbox, it's just that the system was too complex to get it available on time.

 

[one]

I think they're aware of this and the PS3 wasn't late because of choice - they planned a spring 2006 launch, but had to give it up, probably quite some time before that. But they obviously wanted to get on the market closer to the Xbox, it's just that the system was too complex to get it available on time.

Spring 2006 was another matter (Blu-ray and RSX bugs). But I repeat 2005 launch with DVD was just unreal.

 

[dobwal]

Look this kind of discussion is just really meaningless. You could just as well have had 360 launch with HD-DVD included and a standard HDD, while Sony stuck with no HDD and a basic DVD player. Then who knows Squeenix and Konami decide to go with the HD-DVD format carrier.

If both Sony and Microsoft have a long breath, then Sony will win in the end, just as Amiga and C64 beat their Atari counterparts eventually, even though the Amiga especially was way more expensive than the Atari ST. After a while they managed to bring the prices into a competitive range, and then the extra power of the Amiga started to count. The PS3 and 360 aren't nearly that far apart, and the race hasn't nearly run its course.

But competition is a lot more fierrce this generation, and that shows in all sorts of ways. Nevertheless, when the PS3 gets some of its bigger game franchises out, things will change. And incidentally I just checked out bestbuy, and they're sold out again.

From the looks of it, Blu-Ray has a very good shot at beating HD DVD, and this will have an impact on the PS3. And eventually the PS3 will get more and more visible games out that show what BluRay can do for games. This year is not the year of the mainstream buyer.

The 360 did good, but it's doing just the same as the original Xbox still, so let's not get too carried away. The Wii is doing absolutely great, but it's not in the same market that the PS3 is in right now. The PS3 will hit that market later, but it will get there for sure.

The 360 is doing well, but I think anyone who thinks that the race hasn't just started is getting carried away. Christmas 2007 is the first important measuring point of the respective consoles' success. By 2008, we will have a much clearer picture yet.

Christmas 2007? We won't have to wait that long. Monthly sales over the next year will provide a clearer picture.

 

[Mintmaster]

Look this kind of discussion is just really meaningless. You could just as well have had 360 launch with HD-DVD included and a standard HDD, while Sony stuck with no HDD and a basic DVD player. Then who knows Squeenix and Konami decide to go with the HD-DVD format carrier.

Yeah, and Microsoft would have been raped in terms of sales. And there's no way in hell they'd change platforms. Sony would then have their fan base and more marketshare. Disc space is irrelevant for a decision of that magnitude.

If both Sony and Microsoft have a long breath, then Sony will win in the end, just as Amiga and C64 beat their Atari counterparts eventually, even though the Amiga especially was way more expensive than the Atari ST.

First of all, comparing XB360 vs. PS3 to Amiga vs. Atari is ridiculous. Not only are we talking about something ages ago when the technological landscape was completely different, but consoles were a niche market compared to today.

The 360 did good, but it's doing just the same as the original Xbox still, so let's not get too carried away.

I think that's a pretty big understatement when all things are considered. You're right that we have to wait a few more months to get more sales data, but XB360 vs. PS3 is looking completely different form XB vs. PS2, even ignoring units sold before the PS3 launch.

 

[PARANOiA]

The 360 did good, but it's doing just the same as the original Xbox still, so let's not get too carried away. The Wii is doing absolutely great, but it's not in the same market that the PS3 is in right now. The PS3 will hit that market later, but it will get there for sure.

When did the Xbox1 have a 10million console lead over the PS2?

The Wii is definitely in a different market. One that is selling, and meeting targets, unlike the PS3. Let's be honest.

 

[-tkf-]

I think Microsoft would do well to sell 100,000 external HD-DVD drives by the end of this year, actually. Toshiba hasn't sold that many HD-DVD players in the US yet, and the blue diode issue would only be worse for Toshiba with Sony having pre-empted so much of the production (the opposite of your suggestion).

Most importantly, I just don't see that many XBox360 fans picking it up, when it can't contribute anything to game playing, and when they could get a component HD-DVD player for only a few hundred more.

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/Xbox-360-HD-DVD-add-on-reaches-92000-sales-in-US.html

Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on reaches 92,000 sales in US

I like how a simple article about HD-DVD sales can turn into a "Sony forced Blu-Ray on it´s users", microsofts PR is working!

This means that while the consoles effectively brought about 7 times more Blu-ray players into consumer homes than HD DVD, those who buy the HD DVD add on do so to play HD DVD movies, while PS3 buyers end up with a Blu-ray player even if they bought their console to just play games on.

Of the Xbox 360 HD DVD drives sold in the US, 42,000 units were sold in November, followed by 50,000 units sold in December. However, with the Xbox 360 console itself selling 4.5 million units in the US, the total amount of HD DVD add-on sales just accounts for over 2% of Xbox 360 owners. On the other hand, this shows that about 98% of Xbox 360 owners don't see the need to get HD DVD movie playback despite Sony ensuring that all of its PS3 owners get the option of playing Blu-ray movies.

 

[Acert93]

Do you guys actually think of making money or just increasing the transient market share in the so-called "HD" market while bleeding money like nothing? SCE has every reason to continue the support for the PS2 hardware which is more profitable than PS3 for a while. If they had released a new console with DVD in 2005 it would have destroyed the PS2 hardware sales while having absolutely nothing to differentiate itself from Xbox 360 and still with the software development difficulty with Cell and only a few launch titles, plus no PS network. If you think it sells just because of the brand name, that's unreal. And I bet you would keep calling bullshit on E3 2005 video in that case

Actually, I think the reverse would apply: How would the Xbox 360 differential itself from the PS3?

I totally agree with Mintmaster and Laa-Yosh, and have argued such for a while. If Sony co-launched with the 360 and was within $50 they already win. They would have sold more units at launch. Just look at 2006 -- the PS3 is very thin on exclusives, and even thinner on compelling content. Yet there was an initial very high demand at $500-$600. And that demand was in the face of an Xbox 360 that was MUCH cheaper and with a much larger library consisting of many highly rated games as well as quite a few bargin bin games.

If the Playstation brand is worthless, then Sony has already lost. Past generations have proven that tit-for-tat technical superiority don't automatically equate to market leadership (especially when it costs more to exploit), and Sony has spotted MS 8M in sales, a 12 month lead, hundred(s) of dollars in platform cost differences, and a 150 game library with dozens of defacto exclusives. Most damning for Sony's strategy is the 360 is the lead sku for many upcoming games.

Sony launching in 2005 changes the entire landscape: Sony starts off with the marketshare lead from Day 1, the PS3 becomes the lead SKU on many titles and the architectural challenges of porting SPE code result in more PS3 exclusives than now exist (and can be justified by the PS3 marketshare lead), Sony has the larger library of games with notable contributions from developers in NA, Europe and Japan, and so forth. And the nice thing is that Sony can even float above the 360 in price by a nice $50 premium. People won't bat an eye because it is clear the PS3 is the market leader and is THE brand.

Of course it is clear Sony never planned on 2005 (regardless of what they may have said), and I don't even think 2006 was originally the goal. Just look at their 2006 software lineup. And imagine them shipping in Spring 2006, or even worse, Fall 2005. The roadmap Sony showed for their dev kits, as well as things like emulation, show that Sony hsa been in a huge rush.

I have to agree with Laa-Yosh, hoping for the PS2 to carry you along while opening the door for competition is not good. A $500 PS3 doesn't compete with a $129 PS2, and the PS2 has a long life ahead of it. Many people don't early adopt and many nations do not have the financial resources to have large populations that can afford a $500 console. But I think, imo, it is pretty clear Sony was very much caught off gaurd by MS's 2005 move. I think that, and a slew of delays (e.g. how long did we get beat over the head by some of you that Sony would be the first with 65nm production parts and this was the goal for Cell?)

Spring 2006 was another matter (Blu-ray and RSX bugs). But I repeat 2005 launch with DVD was just unreal.

Interestingly, it was you who quoted Sony as saying they could have launched in 2005 if they had wanted to

If I were Sony I would have gone with a Cell/RSX/DVD platform in 2005. That would have required more forethought and planning for that date (e.g. contracting NV sooner; getting game development going in 2004 for next gen), but I have a hard time believing Sony wouldn't be crushing MS right now if they had done so.

I don't quite grasp how, in the gaming market, that BluRay as a feature/selling point will offset all the concessions to MS and Nintendo and generate 100M PS3 sales by the end of 2011. And that should be the goal/expectation because I have no doubt that a PS3 launched in 2005 with competitive pricing (i.e. dropping BDR and the HDD as manditory; lean on Cell/RSX and the PS brand and strong dev ties and market presence) would have MS yelping in pain.

 

[pakotlar]

When did the Xbox1 have a 10million console lead over the PS2?

The Wii is definitely in a different market. One that is selling, and meeting targets, unlike the PS3. Let's be honest.

Yeah i'm not agreeing with arwin's last string of posts either. Xbox360 is a completely different system than xbox was in the timeframe were talking about. Consider that xbox360 launched off an already mature online infrastructure, with way more first and 2nd parties, more 3rd party support, and came out 2 years earlier relative to xbox1.

edit: btw ot, but I just rented lost planet. its waiting for me on my other monitor input. 3:34 am, 24" widescreen CRT, 5.1 surround sound with a 10" bass an inch from my leg. oh baby, i gotta go.

 

[rabidrabbit]

On the other hand, this shows that about 98% of Xbox 360 owners don't see the need to get HD DVD movie playback despite Sony ensuring that all of its PS3 owners get the option of playing Blu-ray movies.

This could also be interpreted as "This shows that about 98% of Xbox 360 owners are uncertain of the need to get HD DVD movie playback, because Sony's ensuring that all of its PS3 owners get the option of playing Blu-ray movies, which might well mean HD-DVD won't survive as the next standard"

 

[London Geezer]

I'm sorry, but has the Euro launch date been announced? It was meant to be announced last week...?

 

[rabidrabbit]

I think it was meant to be announced..... TODAY!

 

[Crossbar]

I think it was meant to be announced..... TODAY!

Yes, it was rumoured to be today, but now the rumour says thursday-friday.
http://threespeech.com/blog/?p=260

 

[Arwin]

You may well think that my comparison of the Xbox's sales with the 360's sales isn't meaningful, but you do expect the same of the PS3 versus the PS2. Sure, it does matter that the 360 has a lead over the PS3, but as long as this doesn't affect its sales curve against the Xbox, then it is not having a visible effect. Sure, right now platform support on the 360 is good, but platform support was pretty good on the original Xbox for a while also.

Now I'm not saying that the 360 is in the same position as the original Xbox. Not at all. It certainly benefitted from the success of the original Xbox, especially in the U.S. I am also not saying that the 360 isn't going to do better than the original Xbox, certainly not. But right now, the people who are buying are still by majority the people with a lot of cash who are technological forerunners - they are the people who have a HD tv first, and many of whom will get more than one console. By the time the masses start buying, the Playstation brand is going to start counting for something, and its huge install and fanbase is going to pay off. There is time for the Playstation to establish itself, and when both systems reach the $300-$400 bracket, the Playstation should benefit both from a technological advantage (better physics, sixaxis support, more data for sound and video, and who knows it will even benefit from synergy with the PSP ), from a potential BluRay movie synergy (making a strict separation between BluRay for Games and for Movies), and from the Playstation brand (backward compatibility, 10 years of market dominance, etc.)

Now many of you live in the U.S., where the original Xbox did pretty well. But in Europe, sales of the 360 aren't so hot, and the brand loyalty to the PS2 is probably bigger (reflected in 2:1 sales).

People forget too lightly that even Nintendo didn't lose its market to a competitor in one generation, even if the original PS1 made it look like they did, they still had 60% of the market back then, despite messing up in Europe with the SNES (we got it 3! years late). I think in the U.S., the 360 has a chance to win this generation though, definitely. Japan, not so much. And in Europe, Playstation benefits not only from a stronger fan-base, but already many here perceive that BluRay will be the next generation winner, HD tv sales have really hit it off since the last holiday, and the PS3 will definitely benefit from that synergy. Many people I know will buy a PS3 on the first day of release here.

Things are looking up a little here though for the 360, as yesterday I noticed one small store having four big widescreen TVs all showing 360 commercials. I think they realise they need to go all out now before the PS3 launches here (though they should have started a bit earlier, imho, maybe early december ). The Wii may also pose a problem. If the Wii dominates the next two years, it will actually slow 360 down in a critical period, and postpone an important part of the battle between the PS3 and Wii - although the 360 may actually benefit from that in Japan, where it may gain a bit of overtime.

The most important thing we will learn this generation though, imho, is that there is room for three consoles on this huge market, just as there was enough room for the GameCube, Xbox and PS2, and just as there is enough room for more than one handheld (even if the success lately of the DS eclipses the PSP, it's doing fine, no doubt partly because of the device itself offering a lot of value on its own).

All I'm saying is that its early days, and really it is.

 

[Paul_G]

Yes, it was rumoured to be today, but now the rumour says thursday-friday.
http://threespeech.com/blog/?p=260

Edge are claiming a source that wished to remain nameless has confirmed the date and price as £425 to launch on 23/03/2007.

I personally trust Edge not to gossip and spread rumours, plus it's in keeping with dates and prices already thrown about, so i think it's right

 

[baten]

There is also the issue of security/piracy, which I think will play a major role in this generation.

PS2 is still selling in massive amounts, with slow software sales that are not in line with the huge numer of consoles sold. This is due to the fact that piracy is extremely easy on PS2. You only need a swap magic disk and an average internet conection - no chip, no need to open the console, dont even lose warranty.

PS3 - as far as understand from people here with knowledge in platform security - will be very secure, and there is almost no perspective to duplicate the PS2 scenario in this respect.
360 on the other hand, is easy to pirate (not as easy as PS2 though), games are abundant on torrents or emule.
When (and IF) it will be clear that PS3 is not the platform to play "backup" games, but it will be possible to do this on the 360, what will these people do? Will they stick with PS3 and start buying originals, or will they switch to 360?

 

[ZoinKs!]

I'm skeptical that piracy is a large enough problem on ps2 to cause a drastic difference in sales. tbh, I'm not familiar with that scene but I'm sure a couple other factors also figure in.

For one thing, some portion of new sales are to replace old ps2s that're now out of commission. Those people buy it to play all the games they already have, not so they can get a bunch of new games.

Second, some portion of the previous install base isn't being used anymore. For example, my brother owns a ps2 but rarely plays it anymore and I don't think he bought any new games at all last year.

 

[baten]

I'm skeptical that piracy is a large enough problem on ps2 to cause a drastic difference in sales. tbh, I'm not familiar with that scene but I'm sure a couple other factors also figure in.

For one thing, some portion of new sales are to replace old ps2s that're now out of commission. Those people buy it to play all the games they already have, not so they can get a bunch of new games.

Second, some portion of the previous install base isn't being used anymore. For example, my brother owns a ps2 but rarely plays it anymore and I don't think he bought any new games at all last year.

While this is true (I can account for 4 PS2 myself, one almost dead, one still in unopened box -meant as a gift for someone but changed present at the last minute - and two still working OK, with almost 60 games attached to them, mostly secondhand) it's still not a good reason why games, such as FFXII (Nr 1 in gamefaqs top since quite a while - that means a lot of people a playing it) are not selling as they should. People a playing the games, but they dont buy them ...
Also, secondhand market is also to be taken into equation - many people buy SH, there are quite a lot of good, cheap games to be played.

 

[Kryton]

While this is true (I can account for 4 PS2 myself, one almost dead, one still in unopened box -meant as a gift for someone but changed present at the last minute - and two still working OK, with almost 60 games attached to them, mostly secondhand) it's still not a good reason why games, such as FFXII (Nr 1 in gamefaqs top since quite a while - that means a lot of people a playing it) are not selling as they should. People a playing the games, but they dont buy them ...
Also, secondhand market is also to be taken into equation - many people buy SH, there are quite a lot of good, cheap games to be played.

This only reinforces the concept of initial sales at a loss and recouperation on the games.

What interests me with the 360 is the sheer number of add-ons - no console before has got away with it! Look at things like the Sega MegaDrive/Genesis and DreamCast, the N64 etc. People also seem to be neglecting this when pricing (but no one these days does DCF. People buy now, pay later) and make the comparison that PS3 is crazy money whilst 360 is a bargin forgetting the Live subscription, the HD, the HD-DVD etc. required to get an 'equivalent' piece of kit. No one has done it before this successfully, perhaps because the games demanded certain add-ons, but how long can MS hold off before they require HDs? Billy G seems to think broadband will be the saving grace but most places don't have anything above 8Mbps ADSL (if that).

 

[Rangers]

This only reinforces the concept of initial sales at a loss and recouperation on the games.

What interests me with the 360 is the sheer number of add-ons - no console before has got away with it! Look at things like the Sega MegaDrive/Genesis and DreamCast, the N64 etc. People also seem to be neglecting this when pricing (but no one these days does DCF. People buy now, pay later) and make the comparison that PS3 is crazy money whilst 360 is a bargin forgetting the Live subscription, the HD, the HD-DVD etc. required to get an 'equivalent' piece of kit. No one has done it before this successfully, perhaps because the games demanded certain add-ons, but how long can MS hold off before they require HDs? Billy G seems to think broadband will be the saving grace but most places don't have anything above 8Mbps ADSL (if that).

BTW, you need to understand the nature of add ons to see what makes one successful...the core game functionality cant be affected.

In that case you can make as many add-ons as you want..doesn't matter.

A bad add on is like..Sega CD. Splinters your GAME base. 32x..same thing. You cant do that. But all the 360 add-ons have no effect on the core games..they are just doo-dads..