If the Xbox 360 was the latest Playstation from Sony...

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts

it would have won already.

think about it- the REAL PS3 only started selling well after the pricecut meant the millions of PS2 owners started switching over. but if the PS3 launched in 2005 & was exactly the same as the Xbox360 is with same games etc Sony would have WON ALREADY!

Avatar image for BoD_GOA_French
BoD_GOA_French

971

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#2 BoD_GOA_French
Member since 2006 • 971 Posts
I agree to some extent. I don't know if it would be ahead of the Wii(its a selling monster), but it would have been ahead of the 360.
Avatar image for Andrew_Xavier
Andrew_Xavier

9625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#3 Andrew_Xavier
Member since 2007 • 9625 Posts

See,
would never happen, sony had a horrible hardware failure rate last gen,
this gen they took their time to insure it won't happen again,
they'd have had to rush out the system like they did with the ps2
which would really not be a good thing.

Avatar image for Opalescent
Opalescent

247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#4 Opalescent
Member since 2006 • 247 Posts

I actually agree with this. Sony had name recognition; EVERYONE knew the PS2. And just about everybody had one too. Sony had the upper hand in that regard; the launch of a PS3 would always be much more impressive than the next Xbox, which although the original Xbox was a good system, was nowhere near as popular as the monster that was the PS2.

If Sony had followed Microsoft's plan instead of the one they did follow, they definately wouldn't have had the time to install Blu-Ray on the PS3, which may or many not have hurt/helped it. What's for sure, though, is that the PS3 would've sold very well initially, because it wouldn't have cost $600. Without a Blu-Ray drive (and believe me, if the PS3 had launched as early as the 360, it COULDN'T have had the Blu-Ray) it would be cheaper by at least $150, which was a reasonable amount. That, combined with the name recognition the Playstation brand already enjoyed, would've meant the console would have sold very well.

Part of the 360's problem is that it was developed by Microsoft, which lest we all forget is a software company who really didn't have all that much experience with hardware. Their only big achievement in that field was the original Xbox, which wasn't all that impressive, hardware-wise. Sony, on the other hand, have been making TVs and laptops forever, and so they KNOW their hardware, not to mention they've released a PSOne and a PS2. I don't think that if they released the PS3 early, without Blu-Ray, it would've neccessarily have been a hardware-failure-filled disaster. True, the PS2 had its problems, but nowhere near to the degree that the 360 has with its RROD.

Now, all those factors combined would've meant that this fantasy PS3 would've sold VERY well in its first year. After that, when they realize that it's so hard to program for, and games like Gears of War start coming out for the 360, the sales may start to flag significantly.

Oh and, I doubt ANYTHING Sony could've done would've allowed them to beat the Wii. That thing just prints money.

Avatar image for LibertySaint
LibertySaint

6500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 LibertySaint
Member since 2007 • 6500 Posts
hmmm not won, but be further ahead, i kind of ahree with you, plus they prolly would have pushed blu-ray faster into the 360 because they wouldn't of had to add the rsx last minute.
Avatar image for SecretPolice
SecretPolice

45567

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 SecretPolice
Member since 2007 • 45567 Posts

Indeed, in fact if you switch the name-plate and the launch date; the 360 now launching as a Sony console in Nov. 2005 would have left MS launching with the PS3 one year later and absolutely, no doubt about it, MS would have been D.O.A. trying to sell that thing at 599.99 and laughed right out of the VG business.

Alas, we have the name-plate ( fanboys ) buyers who will be loyal to a company even if the best product is not the one they are buying. :?

Of Course IMHO

Avatar image for mabris
mabris

240

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 mabris
Member since 2007 • 240 Posts
Yeah, because Microsoft suffers from a lack of brand recognition...
Avatar image for dru26
dru26

5505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 dru26
Member since 2005 • 5505 Posts
I liked the Sony brand, I bought a ps2 and a ps3 at launch. I still can't really understand why even 10% of that 120 million user base still hasn't jumped aboard.
Avatar image for Arsenal325
Arsenal325

4899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Arsenal325
Member since 2005 • 4899 Posts
what about the same rrod problems and costly online play?
Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts

what about the same rrod problems and costly online play? Arsenal325

it would make no difference- PS2 wasnt the most reliable & cows earned their name due to all the extras you were encouraged to buy for the PS2