[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]Last place in sales, First place in games.Ravensmash2nd place in sales if we are putting any year out of 360 since they started a year ahead. No, last place in sales. Did you even read what I said?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="gaming25"] 2nd place in sales if we are putting any year out of 360 since they started a year ahead.gaming25No, last place in sales. Did you even read what I said?
Gen started in 2005
Last place in sales
Should i say it again?
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
[QUOTE="deathtarget04"]
And they're still last place...
Modern_Unit
Last place in sales, First place in games.
PC
PC is a current gen console? Wow.[QUOTE="Modern_Unit"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]
Last place in sales, First place in games.
sayonara89
PC
PC is a current gen console? Wow.Nope, PC just leads in games
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
PC is a current gen console? Wow.[QUOTE="sayonara89"][QUOTE="Modern_Unit"]
PC
Modern_Unit
Nope, PC just leads in games
PC 19xx - 2010, 7th gen of consoles 2005 - 2010.PC is a current gen console? Wow.[QUOTE="sayonara89"][QUOTE="Modern_Unit"]
PC
Modern_Unit
Nope, PC just leads in games
Everyone falls back on PC when they got nothing else. I understand.
You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be.very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
Funny post. Remember Atari 5200? Nintendo 64? Sega Saturn/Dreamcast? No? "I hate Sony - So PS3 is the biggest failure ever!"very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
[QUOTE="JB730"]You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be. Regardless of how you try to spin it... Wii is in first by a large margin Followed by 360, with PS3 trailing behind trying to catch up. The specifics don't matter, worldwide sales do.very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
gaming25
[QUOTE="Modern_Unit"][QUOTE="sayonara89"] PC is a current gen console? Wow.sayonara89
Nope, PC just leads in games
PC 19xx - 2010, 7th gen of consoles 2005 - 2010. PC 2005-2010 leads in games still.[QUOTE="JB730"]Funny post. Remember Atari 5200? Nintendo 64? Sega Saturn/Dreamcast? No? "I hate Sony - So PS3 is the biggest failure ever!"very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
sayonara89
How could you forget the Jaguar and the Virtual Boy? Also the 3DO.
[QUOTE="JB730"]You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be.very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
gaming25
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="JB730"]You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be. Regardless of how you try to spin it... Wii is in first by a large margin Followed by 360, with PS3 trailing behind trying to catch up. The specifics don't matter, worldwide sales do. You cant have it both ways. You can only look at it at all of the consoles. Not the PS3 vs Wii (which the wii costs a lot cheaper so it shouldnt be in comparision anyway).very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
Ravensmash
[QUOTE="JB730"]Funny post. Remember Atari 5200? Nintendo 64? Sega Saturn/Dreamcast? No? "I hate Sony - So PS3 is the biggest failure ever!"very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
sayonara89
i call it the biggest failure in the history of gaming because none of those other systems have given up what sony has given up this gen with the PS3. the PS3 marked the end of rule of the most dominant brand in gaming history. thats a fact. that is far more significant than any of those failures you mentioned above.
Funny post. Remember Atari 5200? Nintendo 64? Sega Saturn/Dreamcast? No? "I hate Sony - So PS3 is the biggest failure ever!"[QUOTE="sayonara89"][QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
i call it the biggest failure in the history of gaming because none of those other systems have given up what sony has given up this gen with the PS3. the PS3 marked the end of the most dominant brand in gaming history. thats a fact. that is far more significant than any of those failures you mentioned above.
It could go either way. Would you say the same thing about Nintendo? SNES sold quite a bit. Virtual Boy, not so much. There is no way from a busniess stand point that the PS3 is the biggest failure in history. The one reason why the PS2 sold a lot is because of little compeition. This gen has way more compeition on both the consoles and the handhelds.
[QUOTE="seabiscuit8686"]
[QUOTE="ps3_owns_360Wii"]
Very Obvious
Blabadon
The only Black person at that party is the server...sad
Wow, racist AND stuck in the past? You rule TC. I must also throw my PS3 out the window now.Wroooooong... there are black people on the back left (top left of picture) as well as the server in the top middle of the picture
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
wrong...actually it's 360.
No gaming console has so high failure rate like xbox 360...
funny thing is American still buy it...i can understand it. After all, American still buy American automobile. lol
[QUOTE="Nyxathid_Horror"][QUOTE="Blabadon"]
Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...... They realized there is still like 5 years left in this generation.seabiscuit8686
For the PS3 that is, and it's more like 5-10; 360 has 2-4 (if even).
Even if the PS3 lasts 10 years to the XBOX 360s 4 years.....the POINT IS - Sony lost market share and profit (even after 10 years) while MS gained market share and profit. I can't believe this is so difficult to grasp. No company would look at Sony and say "I will model myself after this company and their PS3" because it was a failureAnother premature assumption from our local Econ major. The system is still in its prime years, so how could you so boldy claim the PS3 a failure? If you knew what you were talking about, then you would take the PS2 and Xbox into account with your "guesstimations". You cannot look at the "big picture" without taking each companies past products and profits, and adding them to the equation. Seeing as how the PS2 is still around, and Xbox being dropped off the face of the planet, it's hard to even compare the 360 in terms of life-span and market value. For all we know Microsoft could announce a Xbox 720 in 1-2 years, and the 360 will follow suite with the Xbox.
Sony knew of intital start-up costs to get the ps3 up and running, which has vastly paid off in comparison to the 360, and now PS3's are flying off the shelves quicker than stores can stock. Not to mention the fact that developers are catching onto Sony, and now Sony has a library of games that make the 360's conglomeration of mediocre (and mostly shooters) pale in comparison. Sony has proved to be a better overall company, and if I were to invest in stocks, I would put my money on Sony.
Wow, racist AND stuck in the past? You rule TC. I must also throw my PS3 out the window now.[QUOTE="Blabadon"]
[QUOTE="seabiscuit8686"]
The only Black person at that party is the server...sad
MellowMighty
Wroooooong... there are black people on the back left (top left of picture) as well as the server in the top middle of the picture
i see system wars is playing spot the black guy again.[QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
oajlu
wrong...actually it's 360.
No gaming console has so high failure rate like xbox 360...
funny thing is American still buy it...i can understand it. After all, American still buy American automobile. lol
I think he means from a business perspective. In which case, 360 has been a massive success.[QUOTE="oajlu"][QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
Ravensmash
wrong...actually it's 360.
No gaming console has so high failure rate like xbox 360...
funny thing is American still buy it...i can understand it. After all, American still buy American automobile. lol
I think he means from a business perspective. In which case, 360 has been a massive success.Nope. The 360 was an ok success. The Wii was a massive success.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="sayonara89"] Funny post. Remember Atari 5200? Nintendo 64? Sega Saturn/Dreamcast? No? "I hate Sony - So PS3 is the biggest failure ever!"dream431ca
i call it the biggest failure in the history of gaming because none of those other systems have given up what sony has given up this gen with the PS3. the PS3 marked the end of the most dominant brand in gaming history. thats a fact. that is far more significant than any of those failures you mentioned above.
It could go either way. Would you say the same thing about Nintendo? SNES sold quite a bit. Virtual Boy, not so much. There is no way from a busniess stand point that the PS3 is the biggest failure in history. The one reason why the PS2 sold a lot is because of little compeition. This gen has way more compeition on both the consoles and the handhelds.
i disagree with that. from a business perspective, a company in a dominant position needs to KEEP its dominant position, or its a failure for them.
imagine if in a couple years, yahoo suddenly become almost as widely used as google. google would still be a very profitable company, but from a business standpoint - that would be a failure on google's part. google can't let that happen. same thing for sony.
in business, you either grow, or die.
sony had the dominance in the market like no other console before (120+ million?). they gave up that lead within a couple years, and are now arguably the losers of this generation. the number of consumers for their gaming department is shrinking significantly, not growing. thats a failure.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
oajlu
wrong...actually it's 360.
No gaming console has so high failure rate like xbox 360...
funny thing is American still buy it...i can understand it. After all, American still buy American automobile. lol
lol, nice twist of words there. but no.
You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.In read life... we don't care about sales and number of games that may not interest as. Again Nintendo failed after 16-bit era and for 2 gens they been dead last, but without fans that still like Nintendo there would't be Wii the leading console of this gen, so never say never until theres a cows :)
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
[QUOTE="JB730"]
i call it the biggest failure in the history of gaming because none of those other systems have given up what sony has given up this gen with the PS3. the PS3 marked the end of the most dominant brand in gaming history. thats a fact. that is far more significant than any of those failures you mentioned above.
JB730
It could go either way. Would you say the same thing about Nintendo? SNES sold quite a bit. Virtual Boy, not so much. There is no way from a busniess stand point that the PS3 is the biggest failure in history. The one reason why the PS2 sold a lot is because of little compeition. This gen has way more compeition on both the consoles and the handhelds.
i disagree with that. from a business perspective, a company in a dominant position needs to KEEP its dominant position, or its a failure for them.
imagine if in a couple years, yahoo suddenly become almost as widely used as google. google would still be a very profitable company, but from a business standpoint - that would be a failure on google's part. google can't let that happen. same thing for sony.
in business, you either grow, or die.
sony had the dominance in the market like no other console before (120+ million?). they gave up that lead within a couple years, and are now arguably the losers of this genration. the number of consumers in for their gaming department is shrinking significantly, not growing. thats a failure.
I agree with some of your points, but this isn't "busniess wars". While we are on the topic, Busniesses go up and down all the time. To call a Business a "failure" because it didn't meet what it did before is kinda ignorant. It doesn't make too much sense with me. A failure to me, is when a busniess goes out of busniess. Then I can call it a failure. Also, I don't think real business people will agree with your logic. 33 Million + units sold is a failure? They would laugh at you if you told them that.
[QUOTE="JB730"][QUOTE="gaming25"] You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be.gaming25
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting. Major props for stating actual business facts, rather than "SW sales that show irrefutable truth". For being a thread about business and marketing analysis, there's a rather large lack of business knowledge in this thread...[QUOTE="JB730"][QUOTE="gaming25"] You havent looked at any facts whatsoever. The PS3 is still outselling the 360 in terms of sales once the PS3 entered the market. And 33 million sold in 3 and a half years isnt a "failure" in anyones book, no matter how you try to slice it up or shape it up to be.gaming25
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
It could go either way. Would you say the same thing about Nintendo? SNES sold quite a bit. Virtual Boy, not so much. There is no way from a busniess stand point that the PS3 is the biggest failure in history. The one reason why the PS2 sold a lot is because of little compeition. This gen has way more compeition on both the consoles and the handhelds.
dream431ca
i disagree with that. from a business perspective, a company in a dominant position needs to KEEP its dominant position, or its a failure for them.
imagine if in a couple years, yahoo suddenly become almost as widely used as google. google would still be a very profitable company, but from a business standpoint - that would be a failure on google's part. google can't let that happen. same thing for sony.
in business, you either grow, or die.
sony had the dominance in the market like no other console before (120+ million?). they gave up that lead within a couple years, and are now arguably the losers of this genration. the number of consumers in for their gaming department is shrinking significantly, not growing. thats a failure.
I agree with some of your points, but this isn't "busniess wars". While we are on the topic, Busniesses go up and down all the time. To call a Business a "failure" because it didn't meet what it did before is kinda ignorant. It doesn't make too much sense with me. A failure to me, is when a busniess goes out of busniess. Then I can call it a failure. Also, I don't think real business people will agree with your logic. 33 Million + units sold is a failure? They would laugh at you if you told them that.
thats not how business works. dominant businesses strive to keep their dominance. ask facebook if they'd be happy if another social networking company took even 30% of their userbase.
That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="JB730"]
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
JB730
PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
Irrelevant?? So should we just forget the PS2? Come on dude. Busniess, remember?? :roll:
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="gaming25"] That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.dream431ca
PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
Irrelevant?? So should we just forget the PS2? Come on dude. Busniess, remember?? :roll:
when talking about the success/failure of the PS3.....uh...yah. stay on topic.
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
[QUOTE="JB730"]
i disagree with that. from a business perspective, a company in a dominant position needs to KEEP its dominant position, or its a failure for them.
imagine if in a couple years, yahoo suddenly become almost as widely used as google. google would still be a very profitable company, but from a business standpoint - that would be a failure on google's part. google can't let that happen. same thing for sony.
in business, you either grow, or die.
sony had the dominance in the market like no other console before (120+ million?). they gave up that lead within a couple years, and are now arguably the losers of this genration. the number of consumers in for their gaming department is shrinking significantly, not growing. thats a failure.
JB730
I agree with some of your points, but this isn't "busniess wars". While we are on the topic, Busniesses go up and down all the time. To call a Business a "failure" because it didn't meet what it did before is kinda ignorant. It doesn't make too much sense with me. A failure to me, is when a busniess goes out of busniess. Then I can call it a failure. Also, I don't think real business people will agree with your logic. 33 Million + units sold is a failure? They would laugh at you if you told them that.
thats not how business works. dominant businesses strive to keep their dominance. ask facebook if they'd be happy if another social networking company took even 30% of their userbase.
Market share. You should have said the "Market Share" that Sony has lost, not dominance. Your telling me that busniesses have to maintain their "dominance" (market share)? Of course they do. Sony lost a lot of market share, but still, that doesn't mean that Sony out right failed as you put it.
That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="JB730"]
its last in total sales. that means its last place in the market. thats a fact. deal with it.
if you know anything about business, you'd know that the playstation brand going from 1st place to last place, with significantly smaller user base this gen - is a failure of epic proportions.
JB730
PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
Once again, you cannot claim Sony as the loser of this gen, due to the fact that there's not a PS4 or Xbox 720. Another example of somebody incorrectly evaluating "the big picture". If you want to get technical about it, how could PS2 be considered "last gen" if it's still selling consoles and developing games, unlike the Xbox. That sounds very this generation to me...
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
[QUOTE="JB730"]
PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
JB730
Irrelevant?? So should we just forget the PS2? Come on dude. Busniess, remember?? :roll:
when talking about the success/failure of the PS3.....uh...yah. stay on topic.
No, we are talking about "Busniess" which is a completely different realm. When you talk about Sony as a Busniess, your talking about Sony as a whole, not just one product. The PS2 is part of Sony, therefore is a valid topic in this discussion. To further my point, the title of this thread does not mention the PS3 at all. Just Sony.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
I agree with some of your points, but this isn't "busniess wars". While we are on the topic, Busniesses go up and down all the time. To call a Business a "failure" because it didn't meet what it did before is kinda ignorant. It doesn't make too much sense with me. A failure to me, is when a busniess goes out of busniess. Then I can call it a failure. Also, I don't think real business people will agree with your logic. 33 Million + units sold is a failure? They would laugh at you if you told them that.
dream431ca
thats not how business works. dominant businesses strive to keep their dominance. ask facebook if they'd be happy if another social networking company took even 30% of their userbase.
Market share. You should have said the "Market Share" that Sony has lost, not dominance. Your telling me that busniesses have to maintain their "dominance" (market share)? Of course they do. Sony lost a lot of market share, but still, that doesn't mean that Sony out right failed as you put it.
i'd say it failed to meet expectations. no company would go into a new generation expecting to lose market share.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="gaming25"] That is ridiculous, especially how you came to that conclusion. When you go about seeing what the PS3 has done in terms of sales, and why it occurred, you have to see how many PS2s were sold after the PS3 came out. Why??? Because that would show that people STILL had the option to get a PS2 instead of a PS3. And then afterward, you see how many gamecubes and original xboxs were sold. Many people who buy for specific brands (which is what people would do especially since there is only 3 main consoles) didnt have to make the switch because the PS2 was still a good option vs having a xbox or a gamecube. And we all know that sales for the xbox and gamecube became almost non existent after the 360/Wii had been out for a year. But more importantly, you then MUST consider that the 360 had a year start. And since you bring the 360 vs PS3 up, you must consider the 360 in whatever equation that you have. And finally to claim a "significant smaller user base" as you put it, you would HAVE to see how many PS2s were sold three and a half years into its generation (where the PS3 is at now), which I know you havent done. So you are overreacting.Nyxathid_Horror
PS2 is a last generation console that is reaping the benefits form what sony did LAST generation, has nothing to do with this generation or the PS3. irrelevant point. nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever (which, just to remind you, is about the PS3).
even after considering the year head start, the PS3 and 360 are pretty much neck and neck (hence arguably, sony is the loser of this gen), and sony is still trailing nintendo by a rediculous margin. yet another irrelevant point. sony still lost its market share, regardless of that year head start.
Once again, you cannot claim Sony as the loser of this gen, due to the fact that there's not a PS4 or Xbox 720. Another example of somebody incorrectly evaluating "the big picture". If you want to get technical about it, how could PS2 be considered "last gen" if it's still selling consoles and developing games, unlike the Xbox. That sounds very this generation to me...
The ps2 is last gen because the ps3 was made.look dude here is the basic problem, this is sw and most of these guys are never going to make the connection between going from 70% market share to last place and what a huge huge huuuuuuuge failure that is on sonys part.Obviously this is system wars and everyone cares about sales and graphics....but I've noted one big thing everyone forgets - Sony is a business and the PS3 has been a horrible failure for them as a company.
Why?
Look at the fact that last generation they sold around (greater than) 140 million units (PS2) vs. a mere 25 million Xbox originals. If you look at the percentage (between only these companies), that is 560% more than the Xbox.
So even if the PS3 eventually outsells the Xbox 360 by 10 million or 20 million, what an embarrassment. They are still hemorrhaging money and will NEVER have the same results as the previous generation.
For a company, the ONLY thing that matters is money. The difference between last gen and this gen is horrifying if you are Sony. The bickering on here is laughable because it is clear...SONY HAS LOST
Not the "console wars" but the utter domination they had, and the utter cash cow they had.
seabiscuit8686
what they see is that mgs has teh AAAA and teh cell and they have an emotional connection to a system and swallow whole hog what the sony marketing teamtells them to swallow
trying to show them any sort of business reality is quite frankly beyond them and a waste of your time
[QUOTE="oajlu"]
[QUOTE="JB730"]
very true.
the PS3 is the biggest failure in the history of gaming.
from sony having the best selling console of all time, with the greatest total lead over competitors in gaming history just one generation ago - to last place. dead last. ROFL.
a failure of epic proportions. and it's not like its only competing against one console (like the 64 was after the saturn got booted out), it's competing against TWO other consoles, BOTH of which are beating it in the market, and one that is absolutely CRUSHING it! thats just an embarrassment.
JB730
wrong...actually it's 360.
No gaming console has so high failure rate like xbox 360...
funny thing is American still buy it...i can understand it. After all, American still buy American automobile. lol
lol, nice twist of words there. but no.
Your "no" cant change the fact that 360 has the highest failure rate.
seriously, as long as ps3 users enjoy it, ps3 is not a failure to each individual user. how many consoles ps3 sold is not going to affect ps3 users as much as RROD does. Can you still play games on a RROD 360? a big lol.
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
[QUOTE="JB730"]
thats not how business works. dominant businesses strive to keep their dominance. ask facebook if they'd be happy if another social networking company took even 30% of their userbase.
JB730
Market share. You should have said the "Market Share" that Sony has lost, not dominance. Your telling me that busniesses have to maintain their "dominance" (market share)? Of course they do. Sony lost a lot of market share, but still, that doesn't mean that Sony out right failed as you put it.
i'd say it failed to meet expectations. no company would go into a new generation expecting to lose market share.
Well of course not, but, surprise, companies do...All the time.
[QUOTE="JB730"]
[QUOTE="dream431ca"]
Irrelevant?? So should we just forget the PS2? Come on dude. Busniess, remember?? :roll:
dream431ca
when talking about the success/failure of the PS3.....uh...yah. stay on topic.
No, we are talking about "Busniess" which is a completely different realm. When you talk about Sony as a Busniess, your talking about Sony as a whole, not just one product. The PS2 is part of Sony, therefore is a valid topic in this discussion. To further my point, the title of this thread does not mention the PS3 at all. Just Sony.
the post you responded to (ie. my post) was referring to the PS3. when i refer to the PS3 as the biggest failure of all time - yes, i am talking about the PS3, not the PS2. lol.
you can credit the PS2 sales this gen to the fantastic job sony did last gen. but the PS3 is a failure, no matter how well the PS2 sells.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment