what was the previous gen total? It'd be safer to ass-u-me a similar increase...maybe more due to Wii reaching a different audience?
I'd say it'll break 200m but still be way off 300m (IMHO)
PS3 Price drop and 40GB SKU confirmed *
- Thread starter scooby_dooby
- Start date
- Status
what was the previous gen total? It'd be safer to ass-u-me a similar increase...maybe more due to Wii reaching a different audience?
I'd say it'll break 200m but still be way off 300m (IMHO)
We don´t have the final number of the last gen yet, Sony plan to sell about 10 million PS2 this fiscal year and will probably sell a few million more through the coming years, so we may very well endup at 200 million units for the last gen.
Considering all developing markets and Nintendos expansion of the game playing demographics, 300 million by 2016 does not sound far-fetched to me.
You say its better while you dont explain why.
You are also making me repeat myself. PS3 games not selling well is partially irrelevant to the quality of the games. There are other factors as well
Critically reviewed favorably simply because there was no competition to compare to begin with. They also sold much better because of this.
Yeah which many of them were also released on the PS3 as well a few months later. Games that were released nearly the end of 2006 on 360. And they werent anything to be considered AAA to begin with.Until this holiday season is over, its hard to determine the effect of future titles due out this holiday, so Haze, UT3, RC or Uncharted shouldn't be weighed heavily. However, the 360 06 holiday releases included GeOW, COD3, SCA and R6 Vegas, which the PS3 titles would have a hard time overshadowing even if they perform well.
You say they are hard to overshadow. Ofcourse again you are avoiding to refer to the reasons why they cant. Quality? Even if these PS3 games prove to be AAA, they cant overshadow how? Again it has nothing to do with "better line up". No competition, no other games available on a competitive console, this is what sold 360`s 06 line up so much. PS3 has a small userbase in a more competitive environment and is not doing well due to price and consumer expectations because of low sales and fewer games available.
Ofcourse. No competition, no other games to compare to. 360 was all that was available with an already built userbase. The games you mentioned werent anything unique. Simply there was NO Sony console nor a Nintendo console in the market.
It was just 360. It was inevitable they would sell well
Thanks for agreeing with me that it was due to favorable conditions and not due to a better line up. No competitors, no other console in thge market to be released on
You say stronger but once again you do not explain how they are stronger. You just throw a sentence without an explanation.
I think an important factor is that in the 360's first year, not only more wealthy people get a console this early in the generation, but it is also a console that sold, especially in the first year, to consumers who also bought HD tvs early. In other words, these people have a lot of money. This is then matched by how many games they can afford to buy. All that combines to a great attach rate. Linking the attach rate to the quality of the games under these circumstances is a bit questionable, I think.
actually I meant from last, last gen LOL
seriously tho, I think a 50% increase is stretching it a bit...but I guess anything is possible.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Those orders were likely placed back in July or even earlier, because that was when Andre Vrignaud started predicitng the 40 GB PS3.
http://kotaku.com/gaming/addicts/microsoft-bets-ngai-again-ps3-will-be-399-this-year-282303.php
Maybe, I should flesh out my comment a little more because I'm feeling a little miscommunication is going on.
My initial response came from a post claiming a $400 PS3 should sell as well as a $400 360 during the holiday season with the claim that the 360 had a weaker library going in yet sold 1.5 mil.
I disagreed based on my belief that consumers' outlook going into 06 for the 360's library was more favorable than consumers' going into 07 for the PS3's library. My comments was based relative to time. My comments aren't to be construed to say that if you play the games in the 360's library for 06 you will find more quality games than the PS3's library for 07.
The 2005-2006 library for the 360 sold better and even if you standardized with a per hardware unit measurement that remains true. While sales aren't a true measure of quality they affects consumers' general perceptions (this comment excludes all the movie based trash with hefty marketing budgets).
The 2005-2006 library for the 360 reviewed better (close to 2X the number of 360 games scored 80% of better for gameranking and metacritic) and when ports of some of those games were released for the Ps3 in 2007, generally they were still reviewed favorably even with limited additions.
You right the 360 had no competition, but that plays into the 360's hand. Going into and during the 06 holiday season there were no PS3/Wii library outside of Resistance and Mario Sports while the PS3's offerings is facing Halo 3, Bioshock Mass Effect, Metroid and just slew of other games from the other two manufacturers, whose libraries extend 1 and 2 years back.
Consumers don't judge game libraries in a vacuum as the market conditions at the time influence their perception. The 360 has all the general advantages going into 06 versus the PS3 going into 07.
Last edited by a moderator:
While, that theory may play a small part into attach rate, I argue it simply comes down to the quality of games. The more quality games you release, the more they will sell.
VG Chartz said:
Those are the million game sellers so far.
Out of those, about 75% are arguably quality games. For you to say that linking quality of games to attach rate is questionable in and of itself. In the long run, its always going to come down to quality of games. Also, about half of those came within the first year of launch of the 360.
We have 2, million sellers for PS3, Resistance and Motorstorm.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
This says one of two things to me:
1) The rumors are just flat-out wrong
or
2) The rumors are mostly right, but any price-cut announcement is at least a month or two away.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Exactly the same way they shot down the $500 starter pack before they announced it.
July 6, 2007 - Sony denies rumors that PS3 will be reduced in price
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/801/801981p1.html
July 8, 2007 - Sony drops price by $100
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6173806.html?sid=6173806
What more proof do we need?!
If Sony wants 2 SKUs that make sense to people, then they should do the following:
40GB version
1 joystick, composite cables, no multi-card reader, Wifi included and all USBs
80GB version
2 josticks, HDMI cables, multi-card reader, Wifi included and all USBs (and possibly BluRay remote)
I would love to see these 2 SKUs... talk about value add on the 80GB!!!
40GB version
1 joystick, composite cables, no multi-card reader, Wifi included and all USBs
80GB version
2 josticks, HDMI cables, multi-card reader, Wifi included and all USBs (and possibly BluRay remote)
I would love to see these 2 SKUs... talk about value add on the 80GB!!!
The 80 GB is enough value as is. The cheap 40GB Sku should focus on games, Joystick ,Usb and Bluray. Buy the extras in the form of USB addons if you need them.
I've fixed it. There is no reason to include an HDMI cable when it's not standard. Including a composite / component hybrid, like MS did, is the only possible route to offer both HD and SD, seeing as how not everyone owns an HDTV.
Also, Blu-Ray remote would be a waste. Headset = +Value x 100.
inefficient
Veteran
Only 2 USB ports seems to imply a new form factor.
Just going from 4 to 2 ports using the same housing doesnt seem to make much sense. The cost saved would be so insignificant.
Just going from 4 to 2 ports using the same housing doesnt seem to make much sense. The cost saved would be so insignificant.
A shrinked PS3 with the USB ports on the mainboard.
- Status
