PS3 comeback
- Thread starter Bocaj2000
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes and no - I would argue that many good games sell consoles, and that if they're exclusive it helps for self-evident reasons. The SNES, for example, didn't eventually surpass the Genesis in sales because it had 'more' games (it actually had less; only 785 games were released on the SNES) but because it had a slew of classics, including varied brand names that were highly marketable - Mario, Zelda, etc. Still, games aren't all that matter: the Wii's sales were bolstered significantly by the novelty of its motion controls, and the hooplah surrounding the Xbox when it came out seemed to have more to do with the console's graphics than its software, short of Halo.
The Wii is the best-selling consule thus far, and has the broadest demographic - how do you describe that as 'cult'? I understand that its software library is an anamoly within the game industry, dependent as it is upon Nintendo exclusives, but you should be more careful in your choice of terminology.
How is that bad? It would seem to me a lack of 'family friendly' marketing caused the original Xbox to be pigeonholed as a shooters-only affair (which is, and was, wildly innacurate), and prevented it from becoming as mainstream as the PS2 - which was successful in part because it was able to bridge casual and hardcore demographics.
That's two games. The PS3 isn't exactly rife with exclusives, and until such time as it is games like Fable II and the Xbox 360's lower price will suffice as a counterpoint.
Why will 'other good games' be released for the PS3 because 'there are very few Xbox 360 exclusives'? If anything, the Xbox 360 is in a better position than the PS3 to attract exclusives because a) its hardware is easier to work with, and b) it's selling better, which means that games released by third-parties on it have the opportunity to amass more sales.
I don't actually disagree - the PS3 got off to a rough start by any measure, meaning there are alot of Sony loyalists who are apt to become late adopters (and moreso with each price drop), and the Wii phenomena will probably subside in the near-future. That said, I can't foresee the PS3 surpassing the Xbox 360 in sales unless it manages to distinguish itself as more than just an expensive 360 with Blu-Ray (admittedly a long-shot), save by prolonging its lifespan beyond its immediate competitors.
The Wii has shipped 35 million units and probably won't sell them off until Christmas, by which point the other consoles will have received a significant boost (the 360 is $199 now, remember). Moreover, I would argue the contrary - that the PS3 might surpass the Wii in sales because there's a good chance the Wii will be a short-lived console (I heard through the grapevine that Sony may keep the PS3 alive for ten years) and it's running thin on good will, but that it will have a hard time catching the Xbox 360 unless it manages to distinguish itself as more than an expensive variant.
In any case, I predict the Xbox 360 will win this round of the console wars - its sold 22m units and is entering Christmas with a major price drop (meaning it's not that far behind the Wii), is in good steads with the gaming community (something the Wii and PS3 often aren't), and has taken an early lead against the PS3 that seems definitive (the PS3 is having a hard time distinguishing itself), which will probably translate into a generational win once the Wii's momentum begins to erode - a natural symptom of the lack of excellent software it has out now, god bless it. Of course, Nintendo could just rush-release Super Mario Theoretical Region of Space and prove me wrong, but I doubt it.
With the 360's recent price drop, just how much of a 'hit' is M$ taking on each console now?
Last I checked, the PS3 is getting closer to 'breaking even' on each ps3, and the PSP is already profiting on each unit sold...
Every chart I have seen, shows the PS3 is on the same 'sale slope' as the 360. Its just a year behind them.
Meaning 1 year ago, the 360 sold as many units, as the Ps3 did this year. And by this time next year, the ps3 will have sold just as many, if not more then the 360 sold 'this' year.
To put it into perspective, it would be like saying the Wii has a slope that is nearly 60 Degrees above 0, the 360 is somehwat around 30 Degrees, and the Ps3 Is also at 30 Degrees.
The 360 just got a 1 year head start.
And yes, the Ps3's longer life Span WILL ultimately 'win' the console war, the 360 is probably gunna last another year before the XBox720 is 'announced', and maybe another year or two before its actually released.
All the while Microsoft is running in the Red hardware wise. (though software its doing quite good.)
As for which console has a larger library. The Ps3 is still winning over the 360 and the Wii.
You forget, the PS3 can play, Ps2, and PsX games.
The 360 can play what, half of the xbox games? And the wii, you have to 'buy' older games...
So in truth the actual library of the ps3 is the largest. Its semantics though, but technically the Wii has games out for the actual console...
(And if your comparing titles for the actual console, and not previous ones, you can also use the arguement that the ps3 is 1 year behind.)
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12/20/tretton_developers_creating_on_ps3_first/1
Also, there has been news recently about Developers starting to make there multiplatform titles on the PS3 first, then working on the 360 version. This doesn't mean they don't both work at the same time, but they have found, that making all the 'code' on the 360 first, then 'porting' it to the ps3, was very, very time consuming. Because the PS3 doesn't use the same 'code', and it HAS to be, by its architecture very efficient in its coding. (Its both a pro and a con). What it means is, once you get the basics programmed for the Ps3, makeing it as 'efficient' as possible on the Ps3's multi-core design, allowing it actually play games at 60fps, with all the bells and whistles, porting it to the 360 is said to be as easy as using a 'compiler' (or whatever those devs use). IF they went 360 -> Ps3, they have to go through every line of code manually to make it work for the ps3, PS3 -> 360, they can use a program to automatically do it for them. Aka click a button and come back 3 weeks later.
This is why multi-plat games have gotten 'better' on the ps3 then they were before. Now the ps3 and 360 versions are nearly identicle. I think CoD4 is an example of this but don't quote me.
Fallout 3 is a bad example, as most of the work for the game was done before the ps3 was released, before Oblivion was even ported to the ps3.
Meaning that all the coding was very 'unoptimized' to run on the ps3, hence why fallout 3 sucks on the ps3, and is better on the 360. (PC version is even better)
But I will say this, there are several things that fallout 3 are better at, than oblivion on the ps3.
Though the grass in oblivion still looks kickass.
Last I checked, the PS3 is getting closer to 'breaking even' on each ps3, and the PSP is already profiting on each unit sold...
Every chart I have seen, shows the PS3 is on the same 'sale slope' as the 360. Its just a year behind them.
Meaning 1 year ago, the 360 sold as many units, as the Ps3 did this year. And by this time next year, the ps3 will have sold just as many, if not more then the 360 sold 'this' year.
To put it into perspective, it would be like saying the Wii has a slope that is nearly 60 Degrees above 0, the 360 is somehwat around 30 Degrees, and the Ps3 Is also at 30 Degrees.
The 360 just got a 1 year head start.
And yes, the Ps3's longer life Span WILL ultimately 'win' the console war, the 360 is probably gunna last another year before the XBox720 is 'announced', and maybe another year or two before its actually released.
All the while Microsoft is running in the Red hardware wise. (though software its doing quite good.)
As for which console has a larger library. The Ps3 is still winning over the 360 and the Wii.
You forget, the PS3 can play, Ps2, and PsX games.
The 360 can play what, half of the xbox games? And the wii, you have to 'buy' older games...
So in truth the actual library of the ps3 is the largest. Its semantics though, but technically the Wii has games out for the actual console...
(And if your comparing titles for the actual console, and not previous ones, you can also use the arguement that the ps3 is 1 year behind.)
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12/20/tretton_developers_creating_on_ps3_first/1
Also, there has been news recently about Developers starting to make there multiplatform titles on the PS3 first, then working on the 360 version. This doesn't mean they don't both work at the same time, but they have found, that making all the 'code' on the 360 first, then 'porting' it to the ps3, was very, very time consuming. Because the PS3 doesn't use the same 'code', and it HAS to be, by its architecture very efficient in its coding. (Its both a pro and a con). What it means is, once you get the basics programmed for the Ps3, makeing it as 'efficient' as possible on the Ps3's multi-core design, allowing it actually play games at 60fps, with all the bells and whistles, porting it to the 360 is said to be as easy as using a 'compiler' (or whatever those devs use). IF they went 360 -> Ps3, they have to go through every line of code manually to make it work for the ps3, PS3 -> 360, they can use a program to automatically do it for them. Aka click a button and come back 3 weeks later.
This is why multi-plat games have gotten 'better' on the ps3 then they were before. Now the ps3 and 360 versions are nearly identicle. I think CoD4 is an example of this but don't quote me.
Fallout 3 is a bad example, as most of the work for the game was done before the ps3 was released, before Oblivion was even ported to the ps3.
Meaning that all the coding was very 'unoptimized' to run on the ps3, hence why fallout 3 sucks on the ps3, and is better on the 360. (PC version is even better)
But I will say this, there are several things that fallout 3 are better at, than oblivion on the ps3.
Though the grass in oblivion still looks kickass.
For 1 month then it becomes a paper weight until something 'fun' comes out, then it becomes a paperweight again?Indigo_Dingo said:
I tend to not comment on these threads, mainly to avoid drama with the resident PS3 fanboys
That being said, I think that the Wii and the 360 still have quite a handle on things, and while the PS3 is making strides, counting ANYONE out at this point in time is pretty silly.
That being said, I think that the Wii and the 360 still have quite a handle on things, and while the PS3 is making strides, counting ANYONE out at this point in time is pretty silly.
Well, I had a room mate who bought a wii, I made a ton of penis jokes, the guy played it about 1-5 hours every day, for about a month. Then it became a paper weight as the games only really work with groups of people.. Solo, it sucks. (well except for that metroid game, but thats about all it had... Though the snowboarding one does look interesting with the wiifit board...)Indigo_Dingo said:
Prove that wrong.
don't be a pompous ass, lolSinisterDeath said:Well, I had a room mate who bought a wii, I made a ton of penis jokes, the guy played it about 1-5 hours every day, for about a month. Then it became a paper weight as the games only really work with groups of people.. Solo, it sucks. (well except for that metroid game, but thats about all it had... Though the snowboarding one does look interesting with the wiifit board...)Indigo_Dingo said:
Prove that wrong.
Ummmm, not quite.SinisterDeath said:
The 40, 60 and 160gb ones don let you play ps2 games
This week my shop has taken in 7 wii's for trade and have only sold 2 new, everyone who was gonna buy one did so last year.Indigo_Dingo said:
The ps3's, we've had one in, and sold 4 new
360, 2 in, 8 out.
The DS's have killed with none coming in and 26 sold.
No PSP trades or sales
What I remember SE saying is that they were going to release it first on the PS3, Then focus on Porting/Optimizing it on the 360, which they estimated to about 3 months of work or so.Arkfeller said:
I still want to know how many disks the 360 version is going to take.
I was talking more of third party developers that had remained loyal to one system in the past, such as Squenix or Rockstar, hell, I hear that even the Tekken developers are crossing over.Indigo_Dingo said:
There's about thirty good games for the Wii, plus it has GC backward-compatibility and WiiWare/VC - and the latter all for free, if you use the Twilight Hack. So can we just stop with the bullshit now?Well, I had a room mate who bought a wii, I made a ton of penis jokes, the guy played it about 1-5 hours every day, for about a month. Then it became a paper weight as the games only really work with groups of people.. Solo, it sucks. (well except for that metroid game, but thats about all it had... Though the snowboarding one does look interesting with the wiifit board...)
Prove that wrong.
When Sony start toting the fact that PSN is free and not £40 (or insert whatever local price) a year, then they might start getting a good grasp on things.
However, we are currently sitting in a time of financial bitching, and it's less likely that a household would be buying a console at all, let alone the highest priced one. PS3 might just be the victim of unfortunate timing where it has to appeal to smaller wallets.
However, we are currently sitting in a time of financial bitching, and it's less likely that a household would be buying a console at all, let alone the highest priced one. PS3 might just be the victim of unfortunate timing where it has to appeal to smaller wallets.
That's no different from the PS1 or PS2, though. The PS1 was kept alive for a good 10 years, even though the PS2 was around for about four of those. Likewise, the PS3 has been out for about two years and the PS2 is still going strong.EzraPound said:
It just sounds good when they say that the console will be going for 10 years, but in reality you'll still be upgrading to the next-gen machine in six. (Unless you, like me, tend to wait for price drops, of course.)
Except most versions of the PS3, including all availible units in Europe, don't do the PS2 backwards compatibility thing. Heck, Sony have even stated that their customers don't even want it to begin with, since not being able to sell our old PS2s will make us much happier.SinisterDeath said:
The Wii, on the other hand, has only one version of the hardware with a library consisting of Commodore 64 (Europe), NES, Master System, MSX (Japan), SNES, MegaDrive, Turbografx-16, Turbografx-CD, Neo Geo, Nintendo 64, Gamecube and (of course) Wii games.
I lol'd, because I'm a programmer.SinisterDeath said:Also, there has been news recently about Developers starting to make there multiplatform titles on the PS3 first, then working on the 360 version. This doesn't mean they don't both work at the same time, but they have found, that making all the 'code' on the 360 first, then 'porting' it to the ps3, was very, very time consuming. Because the PS3 doesn't use the same 'code', and it HAS to be, by its architecture very efficient in its coding. (Its both a pro and a con). What it means is, once you get the basics programmed for the Ps3, makeing it as 'efficient' as possible on the Ps3's multi-core design, allowing it actually play games at 60fps, with all the bells and whistles, porting it to the 360 is said to be as easy as using a 'compiler' (or whatever those devs use). IF they went 360 -> Ps3, they have to go through every line of code manually to make it work for the ps3, PS3 -> 360, they can use a program to automatically do it for them. Aka click a button and come back 3 weeks later.
Because it was ridiculous?JediMB said:
Or because it was right?
I have no idea about which one they start on or even try to comprehend how they can be so different.
Alot of PS3 games still come out (much cheaper) on the PS2. Those that dont that im interested in (which for games in general is increasingly 0) I can get on the x360 I have. When its working at least. I dont really see the PS3's sales kicking into overdrive until they (& developers) stop supporting the PS2. Yet if they do that now it wont help greatly imo because the pricegap between them is still pretty insane (£15-20 more for a game & +/-£200-250 for the console). PS3 still has a way to go yet I think, but its crawling there; one step at a time.
Because the text is clearly based on some accurate facts, but the person who wrote it has been doing a lot of guess work to fill in the blanks (using terminology that he doesn't really understand) and the end result just comes off as amusing.TheGhostOfSin said:
I really don't see the PS3 closing any gap but I also don't see their sales decreasing month to month either. My reason for believing this is simply because of the price. People buy Wiis because it is the "in" thing to do but people buy 360s and PS3s because they actually intend on using them extensively. But say someone is going to buy this as a present for someone else and they compare the price of a 360 and PS3 eight times out of ten they'll pick the 360 especially since most consumers are scalling down their holiday spending this year. PS3 can not lower their price because they are already selling at a big loss and therefore can not compete with the 360s price in the long run. But the PS3s blue-ray capabilities will keep sales steady, I believe.
Clarification, not a fanboy of any sort. Last generation I owned a PS2 and this generation I own a 360.
Clarification, not a fanboy of any sort. Last generation I owned a PS2 and this generation I own a 360.
Very true - I do wonder if LBP is as good as they say in ponder getting a PS3 to replace my XBox 360, but the way I see it, I already have alot of XBox games, both produce enough heat to heat my room BETTER THAN MY RADIATOR, and both are very similar. Plus, I find Japanese RPGs and games in general to be tedious movies as opposed to games (my own view), and most PS3 only games are Japanese in origin at least (Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid).Bocaj2000 said:
But one thing I have noticed are Xbox 'exclusives' end up porting onto other platforms over time (Mass Effect, for example).
Personally, I think that its better to port games out to other platforms (when possible - for example, the Wii hardware has large differences in performance and input to other platforms). Exclusives, whilst they can improve sales of one platform, will hurt gaming overall.
Some people can afford all 3 consoles and a PC, but I doubt the majority do. (I could in theory afford it but it seems like a waste to buy a Wii and PS3).
Whilst I can understand LittleBigPlanet is a Sony owned product, I would have personally thought they could make more money and spread the risk out by branching out onto other platforms after, say, a year. Same with Halo for Microsoft.