Do you think the PS3 will surpass the 360 in sales when it's all said and done?

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="Asim90"]When both consoles reach the end of their life cycles I expect the PS3 will have sold more and I mean worldwide sales, it will definitely take a while but I'm talking about right at the end. I also expect PS3 sales to be more sustained over a longer period of time as Sony support their consoles to the end more then any other company.Asim90

You saying the PS3 is a failure shows you clearly know nothing. The PS3 so far hasn't touched PS2's success but how does that make it a failure when sales are increasing, more games are releasing and costs are down. A console doesn't need to outsell its competitors to be a success, it needs great games and sales will pick up when people are ready to buy it, which is the case with the PS3. If you actually believe that the console is a failure you either don't own one or don't know the meaning of the word.

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"][QUOTE="yoyo462001"]This is PlayStation 3 not PlayStation 2, i dont understand why people bring it in dsmccracken

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="Asim90"]

You saying the PS3 is a failure shows you clearly know nothing. The PS3 so far hasn't touched PS2's success but how does that make it a failure when sales are increasing, more games are releasing and costs are down. A console doesn't need to outsell its competitors to be a success, it needs great games and sales will pick up when people are ready to buy it, which is the case with the PS3. If you actually believe that the console is a failure you either don't own one or don't know the meaning of the word.

knight-k

[QUOTE="Asim90"]

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"] It's easy to support a console, and even easier for the devs to do so by pumping out new content (which is what really makes a console last) when said consoles sell over 100 million units. There is no track record of Sony "supporting their console" when that console has been a failure. Ironically, the reverse is also true of the near-universal cow belief that MS will abandon the 360 after a 4 year cycle because they did so last gen.dsmccracken

You saying the PS3 is a failure shows you clearly know nothing. The PS3 so far hasn't touched PS2's success but how does that make it a failure when sales are increasing, more games are releasing and costs are down. A console doesn't need to outsell its competitors to be a success, it needs great games and sales will pick up when people are ready to buy it, which is the case with the PS3. If you actually believe that the console is a failure you either don't own one or don't know the meaning of the word.

I wasn't nitpicking your choice of language, it was just very poor. The difference between 'less successful' and 'failure' is huge and kind of hard to ignore. Also, yes Sony probably do not think the PS3 is as successful as the PS2 or PS1 so far but you have to take into account how long the console has been out for. Globablly the PS3 hasn't even been out for 2 years yet, people seem to forget this. Also, the fact that it can stay close to the competition while being very expensive shows that people obviously want this thing. I mean the XBOX 360 is supposedly ahead of the PS3 in the EU by a mere 1 million. If its ahead by that much by releasing an entire year earlier, being less then half the price and supposedly having more games then why is competition so close?

Again, since its so early in its life cycle its hard to assume what kind of dev support it will get later in its life, but I'm sure I'm not the only one to say its been pretty good so far. Yes we've all seen the watered down ports but in terms of first and second parts its been great, along with the increase in third party support. As long as sales keep increasing (which they are), support will increase.

Morons like Gabe Newell PoppaGamer

You guys all have PC's anyways just buy TOB and L4D on PC. Calling Gabe Newell a moron when Vale is so highly successful in sales and critical acclaim is a very outlandish comment. Hell it wasn't him who designed the PS3 architecture look at what Kaz said. Valve is a PC dev and the 360 just lucked out being with similar architecture.

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"]But you fail to address the whole point of why it's disingenuous to bring up the PS2. The PS2 isn't still going because Sony is such a swell company and really cares about you, it's still going because 110+ million people own the damn thing so devs have 110+ million reasons to still pump out decent software. You have no reason, other than wishful thinking, to believe that the same will be true of a much, MUCH less successful PS3 console. Address THAT if you really want to explain why cows keep falling back on the "just look at the PS2!" argument.PoppaGamer

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"] Morons like Gabe Newell Blackbond

You guys all have PC's anyways just buy TOB and L4D on PC. Calling Gabe Newell a moron when Vale is so highly successful in sales and critical acclaim is a very outlandish comment. Hell it wasn't him who designed the PS3 architecture look at what Kaz said. Valve is a PC dev and the 360 just lucked out being with similar architecture.

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="Asim90"]

You saying the PS3 is a failure shows you clearly know nothing. The PS3 so far hasn't touched PS2's success but how does that make it a failure when sales are increasing, more games are releasing and costs are down. A console doesn't need to outsell its competitors to be a success, it needs great games and sales will pick up when people are ready to buy it, which is the case with the PS3. If you actually believe that the console is a failure you either don't own one or don't know the meaning of the word.

Asim90

I wasn't nitpicking your choice of language, it was just very poor. The difference between 'less successful' and 'failure' is huge and kind of hard to ignore. Also, yes Sony probably do not think the PS3 is as successful as the PS2 or PS1 so far but you have to take into account how long the console has been out for. Globablly the PS3 hasn't even been out for 2 years yet, people seem to forget this. Also, the fact that it can stay close to the competition while being very expensive shows that people obviously want this thing. I mean the XBOX 360 is supposedly ahead of the PS3 in the EU by a mere 1 million. If its ahead by that much by releasing an entire year earlier, being less then half the price and supposedly having more games then why is competition so close?

Again, since its so early in its life cycle its hard to assume what kind of dev support it will get later in its life, but I'm sure I'm not the only one to say its been pretty good so far. Yes we've all seen the watered down ports but in terms of first and second parts its been great, along with the increase in third party support. As long as sales keep increasing (which they are), support will increase.

Early in the lifecycle? I guess it depends if you have swallowed Sony's line about 10 years. I believe that MS will release a new console in late 2010, maybe 2011. I believe that there is NO chance that Sony will allow them to get another head start. I therefore don't in fact believe that this gen is still "early" for either manufacturer. Even if you believed that somehow Sony would hold off and release next gen one or even two years after MS (read: suicide), that would make this gen 1/3 over... hadly "early." I know that it's comforting to think of it as early, it allows one to think that there are better days just around the corner with a nice prolonged golden period soon after. And maybe there is, maybe I'm wrong... but I wouldn't bet on it.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"] Morons like Gabe Newell PoppaGamer

You guys all have PC's anyways just buy TOB and L4D on PC. Calling Gabe Newell a moron when Vale is so highly successful in sales and critical acclaim is a very outlandish comment. Hell it wasn't him who designed the PS3 architecture look at what Kaz said. Valve is a PC dev and the 360 just lucked out being with similar architecture.

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]But you fail to address the whole point of why it's disingenuous to bring up the PS2. The PS2 isn't still going because Sony is such a swell company and really cares about you, it's still going because 110+ million people own the damn thing so devs have 110+ million reasons to still pump out decent software. You have no reason, other than wishful thinking, to believe that the same will be true of a much, MUCH less successful PS3 console. Address THAT if you really want to explain why cows keep falling back on the "just look at the PS2!" argument.dsmccracken

Would the PS2 still be selling hardware if the software had dried up? Would the software be there if there wasn't 110+ million reasons for it to still be churned out? No, and no.

Your second paragraph would have relevance if I had somehow said the PS3 was about to die tomorrow. I did not. It's selling... kinda... and I'm sure devs have to be encouraged by that, but I was talking about the 10 year lifecycle claim. The fact that devs see some "potential" finally blossoming does not support 10 years. Your third point is your opinion, no need to go there. Lastly, you want credit for the PS2? I give credit to the PS2. Best console of all time, IMO. This is not about the PS2 per se, it is about cows trying to make an ipso facto connection between the PS2 and PS3. If you WEREN'T making that kind of connection, we wouldn't be typing right now, would we?

Are you telling me the 360 will sell to 100+million and have longevity? That you have to sell as much as the PS2 to support it as long as PS2 has been?

Again, you fail to see that Xbox could be going just as strong if not stronger than the PS2, right now, if MS didn't f up the hardware. But they did. And the hardware, thus far, this gen doesn't seem to be going much stronger.

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="PoppaGamer"] You say that as if the PS2 is just selling software. It is selling hardware too. And it is selling hardware because Sony still makes it and supports it. Where the xbox was dead in the water as soon as MS pulled the plug. get it? And then you are under the assumption that devs haevn't already started seeing the PS3 in new light. Morons like Gabe Newell are now the minority of the devs working on consoles. Most now see the potential not only in the hardware but in the growing user base. And with the user base you seem to think that even after a price cut and more games and more features that the PS3 is going to just sit at its current sale rate. When, in reality, the PS3 will gain steam as this gen goes on. And don't simplify my original response to "just look at the PS2." That kind of statement ignores reality as much as you are. In no way, shape, or form do I say that the PS3 is selling as well or as successful as the PS2 was at this time. It is what the PS2 is still doing now, with support from Sony, that makes it part of the discussion. If Sony to the PS2 did what MS did with the xbox, PS2 wouldn't be anywhere near what it is now. Give some credit where it is due.PoppaGamer

Would the PS2 still be selling hardware if the software had dried up? Would the software be there if there wasn't 110+ million reasons for it to still be churned out? No, and no.

Your second paragraph would have relevance if I had somehow said the PS3 was about to die tomorrow. I did not. It's selling... kinda... and I'm sure devs have to be encouraged by that, but I was talking about the 10 year lifecycle claim. The fact that devs see some "potential" finally blossoming does not support 10 years. Your third point is your opinion, no need to go there. Lastly, you want credit for the PS2? I give credit to the PS2. Best console of all time, IMO. This is not about the PS2 per se, it is about cows trying to make an ipso facto connection between the PS2 and PS3. If you WEREN'T making that kind of connection, we wouldn't be typing right now, would we?

Are you telling me the 360 will sell to 100+million and have longevity? That you have to sell as much as the PS2 to support it as long as PS2 has been?

Again, you fail to see that Xbox could be going just as strong if not stronger than the PS2, right now, if MS didn't f up the hardware. But they did. And the hardware, thus far, this gen doesn't seem to be going much stronger.

Again, you fail to see that Xbox could be going just as strong if not stronger than the PS2, right now, if MS didn't f up the hardware. PoppaGamer

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="PoppaGamer"] You say that as if the PS2 is just selling software. It is selling hardware too. And it is selling hardware because Sony still makes it and supports it. Where the xbox was dead in the water as soon as MS pulled the plug. get it? And then you are under the assumption that devs haevn't already started seeing the PS3 in new light. Morons like Gabe Newell are now the minority of the devs working on consoles. Most now see the potential not only in the hardware but in the growing user base. And with the user base you seem to think that even after a price cut and more games and more features that the PS3 is going to just sit at its current sale rate. When, in reality, the PS3 will gain steam as this gen goes on. And don't simplify my original response to "just look at the PS2." That kind of statement ignores reality as much as you are. In no way, shape, or form do I say that the PS3 is selling as well or as successful as the PS2 was at this time. It is what the PS2 is still doing now, with support from Sony, that makes it part of the discussion. If Sony to the PS2 did what MS did with the xbox, PS2 wouldn't be anywhere near what it is now. Give some credit where it is due.PoppaGamer

Would the PS2 still be selling hardware if the software had dried up? Would the software be there if there wasn't 110+ million reasons for it to still be churned out? No, and no.

Your second paragraph would have relevance if I had somehow said the PS3 was about to die tomorrow. I did not. It's selling... kinda... and I'm sure devs have to be encouraged by that, but I was talking about the 10 year lifecycle claim. The fact that devs see some "potential" finally blossoming does not support 10 years. Your third point is your opinion, no need to go there. Lastly, you want credit for the PS2? I give credit to the PS2. Best console of all time, IMO. This is not about the PS2 per se, it is about cows trying to make an ipso facto connection between the PS2 and PS3. If you WEREN'T making that kind of connection, we wouldn't be typing right now, would we?

Are you telling me the 360 will sell to 100+million and have longevity? That you have to sell as much as the PS2 to support it as long as PS2 has been?

Again, you fail to see that Xbox could be going just as strong if not stronger than the PS2, right now, if MS didn't f up the hardware. But they did. And the hardware, thus far, this gen doesn't seem to be going much stronger.

the only way it passes the 360 is if Sony keeps supporting the PS3 after this gen is over and when people dont even care

other than that, NO!

You my friend are just ignorant and impossible to have a conversation with. I haven't 'swallowed' anything from Sony, I'm just being realistic and practical. Whether you like it or not things could turn around quicker then you think. What you believe is irrelevant, I highly doubt after securing a relatively decent sized fanbase for the 360 that they would release a new console next year.

The mistake Sony made this gen wasn't letting Microsoft start early, that isn't why Microsoft is only winning substantially in the US. The mistake they made was charging £425 for a games console. I can guarantee you that if they had priced the console at what it is now at launch, Sony would be beating Microsoft in sales substantially right now. The only thing Sony need is a price cut and with costs down it is likely this year, when that happens sales will increase massively. Also, I take my comfort in playing the awesome games on both consoles and am particularly looking forward to the PS3's 2009 lineup :)

Asim90

[QUOTE="Asim90"]You my friend are just ignorant and impossible to have a conversation with. I haven't 'swallowed' anything from Sony, I'm just being realistic and practical. Whether you like it or not things could turn around quicker then you think. What you believe is irrelevant, I highly doubt after securing a relatively decent sized fanbase for the 360 that they would release a new console next year.

The mistake Sony made this gen wasn't letting Microsoft start early, that isn't why Microsoft is only winning substantially in the US. The mistake they made was charging £425 for a games console. I can guarantee you that if they had priced the console at what it is now at launch, Sony would be beating Microsoft in sales substantially right now. The only thing Sony need is a price cut and with costs down it is likely this year, when that happens sales will increase massively. Also, I take my comfort in playing the awesome games on both consoles and am particularly looking forward to the PS3's 2009 lineup :)

dsmccracken

Why do you keep going on about '10 year life cycle'. I never once actually said the PS3 will have a 10 year life cycle, I said its early in its lifecycle. Please read my comments before you make pointless remarks. It seems as though you are ignoring my actual argument and are focusing on something I never actually said.

[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="Asim90"]

I wasn't nitpicking your choice of language, it was just very poor. The difference between 'less successful' and 'failure' is huge and kind of hard to ignore. Also, yes Sony probably do not think the PS3 is as successful as the PS2 or PS1 so far but you have to take into account how long the console has been out for. Globablly the PS3 hasn't even been out for 2 years yet, people seem to forget this. Also, the fact that it can stay close to the competition while being very expensive shows that people obviously want this thing. I mean the XBOX 360 is supposedly ahead of the PS3 in the EU by a mere 1 million. If its ahead by that much by releasing an entire year earlier, being less then half the price and supposedly having more games then why is competition so close?

Again, since its so early in its life cycle its hard to assume what kind of dev support it will get later in its life, but I'm sure I'm not the only one to say its been pretty good so far. Yes we've all seen the watered down ports but in terms of first and second parts its been great, along with the increase in third party support. As long as sales keep increasing (which they are), support will increase.

Asim90

You my friend are just ignorant and impossible to have a conversation with. I haven't 'swallowed' anything from Sony, I'm just being realistic and practical. Whether you like it or not things could turn around quicker then you think. What you believe is irrelevant, I highly doubt after securing a relatively decent sized fanbase for the 360 that they would release a new console next year.

The mistake Sony made this gen wasn't letting Microsoft start early, that isn't why Microsoft is only winning substantially in the US. The mistake they made was charging £425 for a games console. I can guarantee you that if they had priced the console at what it is now at launch, Sony would be beating Microsoft in sales substantially right now. The only thing Sony need is a price cut and with costs down it is likely this year, when that happens sales will increase massively. Also, I take my comfort in playing the awesome games on both consoles and am particularly looking forward to the PS3's 2009 lineup :)

The mistake Sony made this gen wasn't letting Microsoft start early, that isn't why Microsoft is only winning substantially in the US. The mistake they made was charging £425 for a games console. I can guarantee you that if they had priced the console at what it is now at launch, Sony would be beating Microsoft in sales substantially right now. The only thing Sony need is a price cut and with costs down it is likely this year, when that happens sales will increase massively. Also, I take my comfort in playing the awesome games on both consoles and am particularly looking forward to the PS3's 2009 lineup :)

Why do you keep going on about '10 year life cycle'. I never once actually said the PS3 will have a 10 year life cycle, I said its early in its lifecycle. Please read my comments before you make pointless remarks. It seems as though you are ignoring my actual argument and are focusing on something I never actually said.

Yes I definitely see that happening, majority of PS2 sales didn't happen till the later half of PS2's life span, and the same will happen to the PS3. Sony just needs a casual friendly price tag added with the awesome exclusive and innovative titles and you will witness an explosion in PS3 sales. PS3 has longer legs and will continue to sell greatly over the years, the console isn't even half way through its lifespan. Europe will catch on frst then Japan and lastly America, PS3 will defeat teh xtreme box 360 degrees :lol: Swift_Boss_A

You people need to explain why the PS3 will surpass the 360 not why the PS2 would surpass the 360. The PS3=/= PS2. So stop acting like the PS3 is the PS2.Blackbond

If you look at the life spans of the two systems is likely to happen... Seeing as how the Ps3 was made for the long run while the 360 was just rushed out for a quick buckW1ckedGo0se