PS2 outselling XBox 360

True but for ps3 you'd have to add in costs of wireless router, bluray movies, broadband internet, lol ... the list goes on. Point is this feature for feature tit for tit is a bit pointless if the features in question are not desired by the consumer.

 

True. But a more clearer point is that there's nothing included in the 360 premium that isn't available via purchase for the 360 Core.

That isn't the case for the two PS3 varieties. That fact alone makes any sort of comparing top model to top model or bottom to top or whatever completely meaningless.

 

Great point as well! This in combination with a general peripheral price correction could do wonders for the general "image" of the 360 core.

 

So you think the base model will be dual component/composite? That would be my guess as well, though Sony would be leaving quite a bit of coin on the table.

What about the premium? Same as base, but with an HDMI cable tossed in?

 

Premium gets a bit trickier as you said - Do they eat the cost of expensive (redundant) cables or make them a seperate purchase? My bet is on the same cables for both. Composite/Component cable and HDMI sold seperately. That would hurt for a $600 system but how many ps3 consumers will have a complete hdmi ready setup?

 

Well I plan to plug my future ps3 to the hdmi port of my HDTV - component is taken by the DVD player at the moment and when I get a 360 it'll either go on the VGA or maybe replace the DVD. But as far as I've heard, even this small Denon player is better than the Xbox so it will probably stay...

Anyway, this setup would allow me to switch between devices without plugging cables. So gimmie HDMI cable with the PS3... that is, after the 2-3 years it takes to reach a reasonable price point

 

Which reminds me, when the hell are TV's going to start coming with multiple HDMI connections? If anyone's supposed to take this connection seriously, we're gonna need more than ONE on the backs of our TV's!

 

mine has two

 

anybody who shells out for a good HDTV this early (like i did )and really wants to play back HD-movies knows better than to use consoles with Blu-ray or hd-dvd drivers instead of real blu-ray\hd-dvd players. Further this is not about what console has the most features. You think the average Joe has any clue about all the different features at all? Hell most people probably don't know what blu-ray even is.

Don't try to argue about this, the average Joe thinks the X360 is ten times faster than my GF7950 SLI rig. They seriously don't have a clue and that is why the PS2 sold so well.

The PS2 sold because Kutagari brilliantly manipulated the press and the average Joe into thinking that the PS2 was a real supercomputer and that we would see photo realistic graphics...

Not because the PS2 was the "better" deal.

 

You are, quite simply, delusional.

Assuming this isn't a joke.

(surely it must be)

 

Oh.. I think part of the reason for the PS2's success was certainly the hype.

The fact that it was following the PS1 didn't hurt any. The fact that it contained a next-generation video player that was already widely adopted didn't hurt any, either.

Lots of reasons for the PS2's success. I think characterizing it solely as a result of marketing hype is going too far. But KK's claims of what the PS2 was supposed to be able to do, certainly didn't hurt any.

Well.. up until now, as you can witness the media backlash against similar claims for the PS3.

 

The ps2 was the right machine at the right time. It came out exactly when mainstreamers were ready to adopt dvd movies. I don't think BR will be that type of factor until xmas 2007 and more-so xmas 2008. HDTV penetration is still small in the heartland of america. Flatscreen panels need to drop considerable before HD-dvd/BR become a killer app.

Ps1 sales weren't eactly stellar out of the gate but a few killer app games came out and people bit around late '96 but more in '97. '96 still looked good for nintendo. 97-98 was when everybody and their brother jumped on SOny.

Anyway 360 software is doing very well and i suspect many publishers have noticed. Which means more software will be developed, which means more people will buy it, which means more software will be developed. Thats how every generation is won.

Way too many factors this gen to decide who will lead the market. Movie formats, TV costs, who will make the next GTA.

 

And what would those similar claims be, for the PS3, that you (and the media?) think are just unfounded hype and not possible to be fulfilled in PS3 lifetime?

All companies project some visions that never are to be fulfilled, and that's because, frankly, they have no 100% certainty as of how the markets will evolve in the future.
I'm still waiting for the user uploadable content in the xb360 marketplace, the kind of content that the content creator would receive micropayments, or even "Live points" from.
That was hyped to be the one feature of xb360 that would draw non-gameres to the xbox360 (the "your non-gamer girlfriend designing "gear" for the characters in a skateboarding game and actually earning money and respekt from her efforts" example).
There has been no mention at all of such feature after the launch.

 

i'm not a console guy and i own 3 ps1's and 2 ps2's (slim and thick ones).... Not in my life, i'll get an xbox360. The variety of games for ps2 > xbox360. Paying extras for graphics and games i don't even like... no way! I rather use that 400-500 for a new video card or CPU

 

So paying 500 for a GPU does not feel extra?...

 

Completely OT, but I was talking with a guy at work who is playing through Medal of Honor on Gamecube right now, of all the odd things. It's his only system, he's not a huge gamer, and with a wife and two young kids he doesn't have a ton of money for videogames anyway. But anyway, feeling sorry for what must be too me the terrible experience of MOH on a GC, I half-jokingly suggested he buy a 360 and COD2 for a real WW2 experience with actual good graphics. I was bragging saying the graphics blow away GC, then he came back with "but my computer blows away X360", knowing only a few high end PC's are capable of that, I asked him his specs, which he claimed were a Athlon 3100+ (dont think that exists) and a Radeon that he didn't know the model but it had 256 of RAM. Being he's somewhat computer illiterate and I feel it was built a couple years ago (he mentioned playing UT2003) I'm pretty sure what he has is well below the 360, but anyway just interesting that some people are not aware that new consoles are basically high end PC's.

They have no game support? Anyway, I certainly think Xbox had Microsoft continued to support it would be giving PS2 all it wanted to this day (in a hypothetical world where it hadn't been garroted at an early stage due to it being an unsolvable cost center).

I mentioned earlier that PS2 was beaten 4 times in monthly NPD sales by Xbox in 2004, I went back and looked and it was actually 5. That was the last year Xbox was truly supported, and that's not too shabby. PS2 was an amazing console, but the fact is when supported the Xbox was doing pretty well itself. Some people tend to look at world shipments, and the last year and a half where Xbox was cut off and PS2 has been routing it in sales. That's not the entire picture. There was a time in the US where Xbox gave PS2 all it wanted and in real terms probably had nearly as much market share (in software sales at that point, etc) as well as arguably greater mindshare (Xbox became very popular on TV and with rappers).

 

Get real. Average Joe's don't even know what the hell an SLI rig is, let alone a GF7950 SLI rig.

Some people really have a warped view of what the market is like, and what an "average Joe" really is.

 

Or maybe that reflects how the mainstream views the xbox360, basing their views on the current games portfolio, which can look like running on a high-end PC from three years ago, for the untrained eye
COD2 on xbox360 versus the PC version of COD2, running on a two or three year old midrange PC hardware... the differene isn't that huge. I can completely understand the average Joe truly can't tell the difference in framerate, textures, models and effects unless viewed side by side (I can't, just by memory of what I've seen on screenshots and videos ).

 

t's likely the people saving up already have the current console(s) and have had them for years. The people buying the PS2's now won't be considering a new console for at least 3 years or so on average, in all likelihood. Sales of current gen won't be taking anything away from sales of next-gen.

 

I'd say some in the media have questioned and not fully accepted Sony's "Ps3 Hype" in the following instances:
cgi renders e3 2005
"videos" e3 2006
"ps3 is a computer"
"Bluray = DVD 2.0"
"ps3 online = xbox live - $"
hdmi 1080p!
hdmi 1080p x2!
hdmi 1080p x2 @ 120fps!

etc...

Not that these things are "not possible to be fulfilled in PS3 lifetime", but maybe taken with a grain or two of salt and taken in context of where these statements came from.

Last gen people ate this kinda stuff up from Sony (Kuta) before PS2 launched and quickly killed off Dreamcast sales before it could even get a foothold. Everywhere you went that sold games, the "experts" behind the counter were spouting off that "you should wait for ps2 because it's going to crush DC!". I can't tell you how many times I'd seen people interested in DC then asking the "experts" about it only to have ps2 get brought up as the second coming. It's impossibe to guage how impactful this hype was on the overall success of ps2, but I'd say it had a not so insignificant impact specifically on early sales where the very lackluster early games library looked like crap compared to DC.

Other elements obviously played into the end result success of ps2, but early on - Hype.