ghaleon0721's forum posts

Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="ghaleon0721"] Blazing full speed ahead while being outsold 2x by the 360.... If that is the PS3 blazing full speed ahead, I hate to see what the future holds for it. The 360 is still about 1.5 years away from it's peak IMO. I am thinking Christmas season 08 is the exact time it will sale the most consoles in it's entire lifespan.

It's all in how you look at the numbers. The PS3 is selling FASTER than the Xbox 360. However in recent months, yes, you're right the 360 sold more. And I believe that you are right about the 1.5 years before the 360 peaks. Just in case anyone didn't realize, that is a BAD thing. That means it only took the system 3 years to reach its pinnacle. Where do you think the PS3 will be on X-mas 08?
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
[QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"][QUOTE="ghaleon0721"]For those of you who are saying that Sony is screwing up......what do you mean? What is Sony supposed to do about losing its 3rd party exclusives. All Sony did was put out a superior machine at a FAIR price. They're only selling FASTER (not more, yet) than the competition. All that's left is to PAY for exclusives. If you were a developer, how much would it cost for you to ignore 5+ million 360 gamers (and growing)? No Game - Including FF and MGS - is worth that price.

the 360 has sold more than 10 million worldwide.

10 million huh? Ok...so then I guess I'm doubly right
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts

It is my opinion and my belief that the PS3 is, as Sony promisedNew0001

I do agree that the PS3 was designed with the long run in mind but that is unrealistic. The hardware is already out dated so 10 years from now I can't imagine the PS3 lasting that long. Regardless of how good it is or how good it becomes the competition will always force their hand and they will eventually have to design and implement a PS4 long before that time. The history of gaming states that every 5 years, give or take, a successor is born. There is no reason to believe the PS4, if Sony makes one, will not be released at the most around the 6th year. The competition will force it (indirectly) eventually. Just like the Dreamcast indirectly lead to the birth of the PS2 and GameCube. This would have happened anyway but the birth of the Dreamcast was the catalst for it to happen when it did. You don't spend millions if not billions on a new product if the current one is doing just fine and will be for quite a while unless you have to. R&D is one thing.

No, you're wrong. The PS3 will last because of the cost. People are already griping about the $600. There is no way a PS4 will be released that is a full generation ahead of the PS3 before the cost can be controlled. A PS4 6 years from now will probably retail for $1000. I'm just pulling numbers out of the air here, but that is my guess. That is why the $600 price tag on the PS3 is a fair price. You're partly right, the PS3 came out when it did because the 360 "forced" Sony's hand. Don't you think that Sony would have preferred to milk one more year out of the PS2 (which it could have easily done) and then release a more cost effective PS3? Sure they would have preferred that, but they had to keep up. So they built this expensive system with longevity in mind. Developers aren't even close to using its full potential which means that it will feel like the system is progressing as the years wear on.
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
For those of you who are saying that Sony is screwing up......what do you mean? What is Sony supposed to do about losing its 3rd party exclusives. All Sony did was put out a superior machine at a FAIR price. They're only selling FASTER (not more, yet) than the competition. All that's left is to PAY for exclusives. If you were a developer, how much would it cost for you to ignore 5+ million 360 gamers (and growing)? No Game - Including FF and MGS - is worth that price.
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
[QUOTE="vaibhav-ahlawat"]

right now all people wanting an xbox360 have bought one but only 10% people wanting a ps3 have had a chance to buy it..for eg people in europe, people who cant afford one yet, people who believe in buying consoles after the console has settled...

people who will buy only one console, (like me) wont be concerened about the exclusives going multiplat if good games continue to come for ps3......i never liked halo. and bioshock, mass efect,... games will be good but they are shooters and they are coming on pc too. By the end of 2007 bluray will have appeared victorious and then people choosing between consoles will cosider ps3 for its high end value.

snyper1982
Really? Everyone who wants a 360 has got one? Is that why the 360 sold twice as many as the PS3 last month?

Yeah but which system sold more in its fourth month since launch?
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
Finally, this thread seems to have taken a more intelligent and analytical turn. It still seems that we are in agreement that the PS1 beat the N64 because the hardware was better for developers which in turn led to better software. But it all began with the hardware. I will concede that the PS2 vs Xbox debate is probably not relevant since it was MS's first console and it came later and it was not designed to overthrow Sony, but to poise MS as a legitimate player in the marketplace. However, you cannot deny, that as both systems' lives wore on, Microsoft NEVER gained ground on Sony and only a miniscule amount of former Sony exclusives migrated to the Xbox. The best selling system, right now, today, March 20, 2007 is the PS2. In this generation, I agree that Sony losing exclusives is a defeat for Sony and a victory for MS. Though for me, the average gamer, I don't care. I still get the games I want on my PS3. If for some reason a Sony exclusive, or great multi-platform suddenly becomes a MS exclusive, that is when I panic. And even then, I would want to know why the exclusive was lost. Microsoft buying the developer doesn't really constitute a victory in my eyes. It is my opinion and my belief that the PS3 is, as Sony promised, poised to supply a top quality gaming and media experience for the next 10 years. I just don't see how MS can make the same claim. It is my OPINION that the Xbox 360 is nothing more than a suped up Xbox. While the PS3 offers next-gen movies, photo and video integration, free online, and motion sensitive controllers. To me, The xbox 360 represents GROWTH, while the PS3 represents EVOLUTION. Therefore, I believe that the PS3 will outlast the Xbox 360. I can almost garauntee that the Xbox 720 (or whatever it will be called) will hit the market WELL before the PS4. I am predicting that MS will have an even larger head start the next time around. You almost get the sense that the 360 has already, or will soon, hit its peak. While, by the same token, the PS3 is blazing full speed ahead. And to the guy who said that the 360 has MORE exclusives than the PS3....where is the list?
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
Pay attention everyone. I'm tired of being misquoted and misunderstood. A system is only as good as it's SOFTWARE. I admit it. I never denied it. I've been around games long enough to know that. HOWEVER.....in this case, the software argument is moot since we are talking about exclusive games going multi-platform. That means NEITHER system has a software advantage. (By the way, if we are going to talk about a software advantage, this would be a short thread. If you look at the list of games coming out over the next 12 months, there are more PS3 exclusives, than 360 exclusives. Period. Discussion over). It's obvious that the gaming market has CHANGED. What worked for the NES in 1986 isn't going to work today. BOTH systems have had success in the market. 5+ million Xbox 360's is too big for developers to ignore. The PS3 is on its way there too. No 3rd party developer in his right mind is going to pick one system over the other right now. There is too much potential money to be lost by choosing sides. The only thing that will stop that is if Sony or MS start paying for exclusives. Sony has vowed not to do it, I don't know about MS. But if I were a developer, I don't think that MS could offer me enough money to ignore the PS3 market. But that's just me. If you really look at the previous generations. It was the system itself and not the games that was the difference maker. PS1 vs N64. On the surface, Sony won because they had more games and more exclusives. But why? Why did developers choose the PS1. It's because of the CD media afforded them easier development, more flexibility, and lower production and distribution costs. If the N64 was CD-based, things would have been VERY different. Now lets look at the PS2 vs Xbox. PS2 won because it had a larger library of games right? That's only HALF-right. Sony had the larger library of games because developers supported it more. And why did they do that? Numbers. There were WAY too many PS2's out there for them to ignore. And why did the PS2 sell so well over the Xbox? Hardware. The ability to play DVD's right out of the box, pressure sensitive controls, and backward compatibility made the PS2 a more attractive buy. Therefore, more units sold. Therefore more developers supported it. Hence, more exclusive titles. To be fair, I'm sure a lot of developers were wary of the Xbox since it was the new kid on the block. They didn't know if it would last. The abysmal sales figures in Japan didn't help MS either. So YES, Software is the key. It wins the war. However, you have to GET the software first. That means you have to have a machine with features that people will buy.
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="ghaleon0721"][QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"][QUOTE="ghaleon0721"][QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"] Hardware isn't what one for the PS1. It is what made devs choose it, which made the PS1 more attractive to the consumers, because it had more SOFTWARE.... Your logic is all messed up man. Hardware may win developer support, but it all comes down to consumers. The consumer pick the winners, not the devs, and the consumers have ALWAYS sided with the system with better software support.

So you're saying that the PS1 won because it had better SOFTWARE because developers found it attractive because if its HARDWARE. And the N64 didn't have better software because developers didn't like the hardware. Got it. Thanks for proving my point.
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
[QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"][QUOTE="ghaleon0721"][QUOTE="eclipsed4utoo"] anybody who says hardware wins generations, knows nothing about the gaming industry. if hardware wins a generation....the Xbox was the most powerful console last gen. did it win?

If you look back I said that games ARE what won last generation. That doesn't mean it applies to this generation. Go back one more generation and you'll see that hardware WON. It may appear that software did because the PS1 library was larger than N64, but that is because the hardware was more attractive to developers. The N64 was the more powerful system
Avatar image for ghaleon0721
ghaleon0721

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 ghaleon0721
Member since 2003 • 338 Posts
So lets recap....what will win this generation's console war? Price? - Nope. It didnt' work for the game cube. And even if it did, once you add up all the extras you have to buy for the 360 to match the PS3 feature for feature, the price difference is negligible. Software Support? - It's not looking like it. The 360's headstart has created a market of 5+million gamers that is impossible for developers to ignore. And the number keeps growing. By the same token, PS3's are selling faster than Xbox 360's were in its fourth month after launch which means a potential gaming market that is also too big to ignore. It's not like last generation where the potential profits from the comaparatively miniscule Xbox market didn't justify the cost of multi-platforming the game. Besides if software support WAS going to win the war, then PS3 shouldn't worry until some developer says "Hey we used to be PS3 exclusive (or multi-platform) and now we are Xbox exclusive". That has not happened and probably won't happen. So what's left? The hardware. Free Online, Innovative Controls, Blu-Ray, Photos and Videos that integrate perfectly with your other home electronics. PSP connectivity. The list goes on.