MS Expects to Sell 3M Xboxes within first 90 days

Johnny Awesome said:
While I'm on a roll:

The big battle will come during holiday '07 in the US, where we'll have MGS4 + Killzone + GT4 vs. Halo 3 + Fable 2 + Forza 2.

That was fun. :)
Click to expand...


I think a much more interesting show down would be:

MGS4 + Killzone + Granturismo 4 vs. Halo 3 + Ninja Gaiden 2 + Lost Odyssee/Too Human

Man would that holiday season ROCK :cool:
 
Lololol...based on this gen alone only GT in those holydays only GT would be able to compete with Halo3.

And Ps3 won't start pulling away on a worldWide Basis that easilly, and call me a fool But Revolution is going to take Japan with it.
 
on topic: It seems microsoft is setting themselves up for a "better than expected" performance for the next 90 days. 3 million is just too conservative. Grow some balls and just say 5 million. Which is something I think they can pull off as long as supply is steady.

Off topic: I think you guys are confused, it's Gran turismo 5 that will be out for the PS3. I already have Gran Turismo 4 thank you very much. ;)

Currently I think it's refered to as Vision GT. Just to end the confusion. :)

BTW, also slated for the PS3 and highly anticipated:
Final Fantasy 13, I don't know when this will be released but I think it's a PS3 exclusive.
Devil May Cry 4
God of War 2, this is purely speculation but considered a safe bet.

I think FF13 will be the competitor of the Lost Odyssey release. i foresee some impressive titles in the coming 2 years. :D
 
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.

That's the deciding factor here.

Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
 
Bill said:
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.

That's the deciding factor here.

Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
Click to expand...

Power only influences the hardcore gamer. In the grand scheme of things the PS3 could still be technically inferior and still come out the winner (in terms of sales(take a look at the current gen)). It's all about the games, hence the reason why people brought out the titles in the thread.
 
Bill said:
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.

That's the deciding factor here.

Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
Click to expand...

Power makes no difference.


There is one, and only one truth in the console wars. The system with the most games wins.

Launch time doesn't matter, power doesn't matter, advertising doesn't matter, established franchises don't matter......

It's all about the games.


And that has held true every generation since the Atari 2600.
 
Hardknock said:
I think a much more interesting show down would be:

MGS4 + Killzone + Granturismo 4 vs. Halo 3 + Ninja Gaiden 2 + Lost Odyssee/Too Human

Man would that holiday season ROCK :cool:
Click to expand...

no it wouldn't cause i couldn't buy all of them (though i didn't like the first kill zone and too human doesn't interest me )
 
Bill said:
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.

That's the deciding factor here.

Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
Click to expand...
We'll know what? Which fanpersons have yelled the right combination of words?

Power is secondary and won't be accurately measured for at least 2 years. By that time, the PC will make any difference negligible. Look for games to buy. That is what makes the difference.
 
Powderkeg said:
Power makes no difference.


There is one, and only one truth in the console wars. The system with the most games wins.

Launch time doesn't matter, power doesn't matter, advertising doesn't matter, established franchises don't matter......

It's all about the games.


And that has held true every generation since the Atari 2600.
Click to expand...

If that was true, no one would move off their initial platform.

Another way to put it... more games at what stage in the machine's life? A year? A month? The end of it? Dreamcast had more games than PS2 six months the PS2 launch but lost.
 
PARANOiA said:
If that was true, no one would move off their initial platform.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely true. Look it up.

Another way to put it... more games at what stage in the machine's life? A year? A month? The end of it? Dreamcast had more games than PS2 six months the PS2 launch but lost.
Click to expand...

The end of the generation.

The #1 system each generation had the most games at the end of that generation.

Systems have ended in the #1 spot by launching earlier than their competition, later than their competition, with less power, more power, including extra features, as a game-only system, coming from no where or following up to an industry leading system.

In the end, it really is all about the games. They don't even have to be the best games, just the most.
 
Powderkeg said:
It's absolutely true. Look it up.

The end of the generation.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with you now, but your clarification makes your point purely rhetorical.

Why? The most successful system has the most games at the end of the generation, but the devs had to make the decision during the generation.

Eg, I have a machine A with 10 games, and machine B has 5 games. However, everyone loves machine B for other factors, and it sells ten times as many machines as machine A. Developers will make more new games for machine B, so at the end of the generation, machine B will have more games.

So I agree, at the end of this generation, the higher selling machine will be the one with more games. However, the Xbox360 will have more games at end of 2006 (excluding backwards compatability of course) but this in no way means it will win, and your point ends up being circular and meaningless.
 
you'd be kidding yourself if you claim it didn't come down to a combination of things .

The question is how important are they ?


In the end i think price (hardware and software) and game library are the biggest factors . However franchises , name brands and advertising all play a part in it .
 
I agree with Powderkeg. I don't think raw power is going to make a difference.

I just recently played the COD2 demo at an XB360 kiosk. I guess the things that struck me the most were twofold: how much better the graphics looked than Xbox, and how much the visual gap between consoles and PC has closed.

I think it's clear PCs will always have the visual edge, but the XB360 impressed me. Even if it turns out to be the least powerful of the three (XB360, PS3, and PC), it looks like it'll set a pretty high bar graphically. And if the hardware/dev tools make it easier for PC devs to port games to it, then it's definitely a win-win situation for gamers.
 
The most powerful console always wins.

SNES>Genesis.

Playstation>Saturn and N64

Xbox>PS2 and Gamecube (in 2004 in USA sales, anyway)

Amd the number one complaint of Xbox360 games on this forum? About graphics. "It looks like an Xbox game". That is 90% of the negative comments if not more.
Also, many people claim PS2 is more powerful than Xbox, sooo...which is it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Every generation has at least one system that was mocked for being underpowered. Turbografx, Saturn, Dreamcast. If not power, then the perception of power plays a role into sales, along with as games, hype, timing, etc.

In the next generetion, if the 360 can at least hang with the PS3 in terms of graphics, we might see parity not seen since the Genesis vs. SNES, which is really good for everybody.
 
Bill said:
The most powerful console always wins.

SNES>Genesis. wrong the neogeo was more powerfull

Playstation>Saturn and N64Na the n64 was more powerfull

Xbox>PS2 and Gamecube (in 2004 in USA sales, anyway) way to ignore the fact that the ps2 has sold 60-70million more units than the xbox world wide. Power means nothing and it has been proven many times before

Amd the number one complaint of Xbox360 games on this forum? About graphics. "It looks like an Xbox game". That is 90% of the negative comments if not more.
Also, many people claim PS2 is more powerful than Xbox, sooo...which is it?
Click to expand...

I also believe the master system was more powerfull than the nes and that didn't help it .
 
The Neo Geo was not backed by a big enough company. Although with decently priced games, it might still have won now that I think about it LOL. but really 200 dollar games, forget the system price, made it unreasonable.

N64 I dont think was more powerful than PSX.

PS2 won on the strength of Japan and headstart. Still, Xbox made strong inroads, won 2004 in NA, and soundly defeated the GC which was cheaper and had far more games at the beginning +Nintendo support.
 
You said the most powerfull console wins each gen.

Now you are saying it needs backing and proper pricing .

You change your claims


And yes the n64 was moer powerfull than the psone .


The ps2 also won the generation . Xbox made inroads i guess but it still lost .

So we have 3 generations in which the most powerfull console did not win

HOnestly if you want to troll about sony winning and giving a reason why its forgone conclusion its not going to happen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shifty Geezer
MS not to reach 3 million in 90 days Target
5 6 7
Replies
126
Views
12K
Sis
S
M
The startup that saved ATI
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
zurich
Z
Back
Top