PS3 Is "Dying On The Shelves"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Whatever. I bought the PS3 mainly for the bluray anyway. if it all goes bellyup, ill just buy a 360.
Seriously, it will take more than a few exclusives for consumers to shell out extra cash on a console in these times. Considering the average consumer doesn't have a TV or sound system capable of watching Blu-Ray movies at their fullest potential without shelling out even *more* money on top of the console itself, it's not really much of a wonder why average consumers are picking up 360 or the Wii.ElArabDeMagnifico said:
All that said, I don't think the PS3 is going anywhere just because sales are slumping. I feel like there's too much potential there for Sony to let it just disappear.
I own a PS3 and I love it, but this market isn't one for promoting the bleeding edge technologies that Sony is trying to get us to buy and it's showing.
The same reason why blu-ray is the bright light for Sony is the same reason it would be bad news for Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony can pull funds out of their other resources. Sony holds pretty much anything tied to blu-ray except the players and when blu-ray movies first came out the Ps3 was the cheapest player. So it's still a win for Sony, but a long term cash cow (Which does not help in this economy).dcheppy said:
Does this remind anybody about Sega and it's Dreamcast? You know. . .the little differences? Both put out a solid system, both had really good games out for it, but really bad marketing is affecting the sales. I know there were other reasoning behind the Dreamcast's demise, but yeah. . .just made me think about it for a while there. *sigh* I liked my Dreamcast. ^.^
The NPD report this is from points out that PS3 still has a positive growth for year-on-year total units. November was just a bad month, and folks want the news to sound as gloomy as possible.
The PS3 is _not_ going the way of the Dreamcast because, um, PS3 (16mil+ as of Sept) already beaten the Dreamcast(10.1mil LIFETIME), in sales terms alone, soundly. That won't go away even if they fail to sell another unit, which will not happen.
It's hype and hyperbole that willfully ignores important analysis in the source article. Move along, please. This is a manufactured circus.
The PS3 is _not_ going the way of the Dreamcast because, um, PS3 (16mil+ as of Sept) already beaten the Dreamcast(10.1mil LIFETIME), in sales terms alone, soundly. That won't go away even if they fail to sell another unit, which will not happen.
It's hype and hyperbole that willfully ignores important analysis in the source article. Move along, please. This is a manufactured circus.
Hmm, considering that the PS3 is 400 dollars while all the others are 300 or less... I'm quite surprised.
Dreamcast was a SEGA console, and SEGA was a games\gaming company. ONLY. And even if, in the closing of that last year of the dreamcast, SEGA sales suddenly picked up and started selling many more millions of consoles, they could not keep the company afloat. Something had to give.
SONY does not have this problem. They have no need to pull a profit from their console sales as their game division is a small piece of the big pie. Microsoft is in the same boat, they are simply large companies fighting over your living room.
Nintendo does not have this luxury, they are a gaming company that depends on their nintendoisms. I do wish, however, that the PS3\XBOX360 folks would lay off the constant digs at nintendo quality. I've been console gaming since the early 80s, and I can assure you that most games for all systems generally suck and are of low quality.
Most games, all systems. And one only needs to compare the side-by-sides of games like Fallout 3 to the PC version to se that not all is peachy in the land of console graphics. The console versions are for practical purposes identical, and the pc version looks *good* (if you have a suitable gaming rig, of course).
Nintendo can't afford to compete in graphics, so chose to compete differently. And love motion controls or hate them, wii bowling is the only killer app nintendo needs to sell a billion consoles.
SONY does not have this problem. They have no need to pull a profit from their console sales as their game division is a small piece of the big pie. Microsoft is in the same boat, they are simply large companies fighting over your living room.
Nintendo does not have this luxury, they are a gaming company that depends on their nintendoisms. I do wish, however, that the PS3\XBOX360 folks would lay off the constant digs at nintendo quality. I've been console gaming since the early 80s, and I can assure you that most games for all systems generally suck and are of low quality.
Most games, all systems. And one only needs to compare the side-by-sides of games like Fallout 3 to the PC version to se that not all is peachy in the land of console graphics. The console versions are for practical purposes identical, and the pc version looks *good* (if you have a suitable gaming rig, of course).
Nintendo can't afford to compete in graphics, so chose to compete differently. And love motion controls or hate them, wii bowling is the only killer app nintendo needs to sell a billion consoles.
Since we're on the topic of PS3's, I was reading the newest issue of Game Informer when I saw Killzone 2 in the previews section. I looked at the consoles they were planning on releasing it for and it said: PS3, Xbox 360, PC.
Is Killzone 2 really coming out for the 360? I'm not upset about this or anything but I thought I would've heard about this sooner, seems like a big deal for some PS3 fans.
Or was it just some sort of typo?
Is Killzone 2 really coming out for the 360? I'm not upset about this or anything but I thought I would've heard about this sooner, seems like a big deal for some PS3 fans.
Or was it just some sort of typo?
I think the funniest line in there is "The problem for Sony isn't the recession, it's the PS3" followed by "and above all else, price. The cheapest PlayStation 3 is listed at $399 at GameStop". So, it isn't the recession affecting it, but for some reason people aren't picking it up because of its price tag. Weird logic there.
If it's 1st party it'll definately be a PS3 exclusive. If, however, like Final Fantasy 13, it's 3rd party, it's always possible, even if it just comes out on other consoles at a later date. There are plenty of examples, Resident Evil 4 was originally a Gamecube exclusive, but it eventually got released on the PS2. Gears of War and Halo's 1 & 2 were originally Xbox exclusives, but a little while later, they were out on PC. Possibly most famously, GTA 3, Vice City, and San Andreas were all originally PS2 exclusives, but eventually got released on Xbox and later, PC.silentsentinel said: