Network now...NEWS
Analyst Clips PS3 Sales Estimates
The PS3 has fallen short with hardcore gamers and will lose further market share in 2009, according to investment firm Cowen and Company.
On Friday, analyst Doug Creutz lowered his 2009 U.S. PS3 sales estimates to 4 million units, 2.25 million less than previous estimates. He also cut 2010 estimates to 4.5 million units, a decrease of 2 million.
Creutz wrote in a research note that "disappointing" 2008 PS3 sales were the impetus behind the cuts. "Following another year in which PS3 unit sales lagged behind the Wii and Xbox 360, it is now clear that Sony has failed to establish the PS3 as the console of choice among hardcore gamers this cycle," he wrote.
"Although there appears to be a reasonably robust slate of games for the PlayStation 3 this year, Sony continues to lack a clear 'must-own' title that will drive sales, while its platform continues to be the most expensive in the market in the midst of a consumer slowdown.
"Meanwhile, highly publicized platform initiatives such as Home have failed to get off the ground."
In 2008, PS3 sold just over 3.5 million units in the U.S., short of Cowen's projection of 4.75 million.
Xbox 360 achieved sales of 4.74 million last year, beating the firm's estimate of 4 million. Creutz made only small adjustments to Xbox 360's sales estimates, and expects Microsoft's console to decrease in the coming years, falling to 4.25 million units in 2009 and 4 million in 2010.
"We believe that the Xbox 360 is likely to widen its sales lead over the PS3 in 2009," he wrote.
The firm shifted PS3's lost share to the Nintendo Wii, which is in a class of its own, sales-wise. Cowen raised its 2009 sales projections for the console from 6 million to 8 million, and 2010 estimates from 4 million to 6 million.
The motion-enabled machine sold over 10 million units in 2008, beating Cowen's 2008 U.S. sales forecast of 9 million.
"Nintendo ... seems to have ironed out supply constraint kinks that held back sales in previous years," Creutz stated.
Including console, PC and handhelds, Cowen expects total game software retail sales to hit $12.55 billion in 2009, and $13.43 billion in 2010.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
[Comment Deleted - Rob]
Whatever you think of Mr Naroz, Cul, you cannot post personal information on other users without their permission.
You also cannot turn debates into personal attacks, which is what so many tend to do after Kim posts his opinions.
Kim Naroz has a right to speak his mind in this comments section – without being subjected to personal responses, or antiquated Patrick Stewart photos, or trite emoticons – as much as you do.
Personal attack? You got me completely wrong, Rob. In fact I am one of Kim's greatest admirers! On the contrary, my comment was meant as a glowing tribute to the last neutral, unbiased, independent, and clearly objective professional videogame analyst out there.
Please, direct us to the forum rules, thanks Rob.
[Censorship?]
I goggled Naroz too I saw the same things right there in the public domain, where he obviously wants it. whichever personality he decides to be.. I couldn't quite believe it... I think Mr. Naroz's is work is very clever, although ultimately irritating!.
His opinions are deliberately antagonistic and usually in direct conflict with the subject mater, it like he’s testing us, checking to see if we'll pick him up or whether we'll let his outlandish comments slide.
On thing I would say for him is he certainly keeps these forums humming, talking about some contentious issues which in the large part can be hugely entertaining. Maybe thats his plan. Maybe it's all a genius experiment to get us talking about a product. may be not... either way valuable time and webspace benefits whoevers product is being plugged. Viral marketer is one thing though, acting like a jumped up 12 year old is another.
I'm all for freedom of speech, but maybe it not us you should be censoring.
@savagehenry - I'm not sure what motivates Naroz, but I suspect he's not actually an employee of MS. Other MS employees (Like Ozymandias on Evil Avatar and also has his own MS blog) clearly state their relationship to MS when posting in threads. Ozy, in particular, never fans the flames on those boards, is respectful to the competition and gives them credit where due, and usually has something interesting to offer or will simply correct a factual error.
Maybe Naroz is a sociology professor conducting a massive social engineering study! :)
Maybe Naroz is a sociology professor conducting a massive social engineering study! :)
He's doing a standup job if he is :P
I fully agree w you savage and it seems Edge and its "moderators" condone CENSORSHIP and biased unfactual TROLLING, Which Kim AKA Mike Zoran Is known for maybe Mike/Kim works for edge which may be linked to the constant biased towards Sony that in my opinion EDGE seems to have (Im entitled to my opinion correct?) Oh and by the way information isnt personal if it can be found scattered throughout the internet ROB seems angry that we found out who Mr Naroz really is I wonder why.
I don't think there is any great conspiracy here and very much doubt that someone like that would be working for one of the industry's more intelligent industry magazine. :D
Kim_Naroz : Do overall sales revenues really matter to home users ? Surely for the home user, the sort of numbers sold across the entire next generation console range (Wii, Xbox360 and PS3) will ensure that none of the companies will be short of customers owning their hardware, nor will the home user ever be short on choice. So these arguments, More Sales=Better System isn't the best way of judging hardware.
In my humble opinion. There is no "Best Console" all boxes have merits and shortfalls. But in this period in time, Microsoft have placed their console in the price range that is very hard for the Nintendo and Sony to match, that is why it's selling in such vast numbers. Microsoft have massive amount of financial resources to make sure they can undercut the competition and with this generation of consoles. And have done extremely well shifting as many units as they have done, not to mention securing lot of titles, some of which used to be core titles on other systems.
However it would be interesting to see the table turned. Hypothetically, if the price of the PS3 was lower than all the other console in its class. Would we see the sort of sales phenomenon that we see with the 360?
Regarding controllers. The Six Axis has been discontinued since April2008 and the Dual Shock 3 has been package with every bundle since. Okay so it wasn't available on release, you can't really blame Sony for this. They got dragged through the courts because some company said that they had infringed upon a patent that they owned, something to do with force feedback I believe. Once this had been sorted Sony were free to release Dual Shock 3, all games now support it and have done for a long time and some popular older first gen games have had the Dual Shock feature implemented since release.
Whether you choose Xbox Live or Playstation Network the actual online service remains the same in game, allowing you to jump in and out of servers and joining you buddies in game chatting on VoIP(Which on both hardware is workable, but not the best). If you were to play Battlefield Bad Company on either 360 or PS3 the network performance would be exactly the same.. I have certainly never experience the sort of lag spikes you sometime get with PC's Online.
Whether you prefer the Marketplace or Playstation Store it only really cosmetic difference that separate the two and the way that they have been integrated in the OS. Personally speaking I prefer Playstation Store as it's not so in your face, Where as with the Marketplace.. it's in your face as soon as you switch the box on.
Xbox Live you have to pay £40 a year. Which is fair enough. I don't mind paying for a service. But I see Playstation getting a very similar service for free or at least the cost of PSN could well be pick up from software licensing revenue, I admit we must be paying for it somehow.
In term of raw performance and how that is being handled at the moment.. Both consoles are on equal footing because of the games that being product for it. The F.E.A.R 2 demo on PS3 looks exactly the same as it's Xbox counterpart to the point where is actually difficult to tell them apart. This goes for a lot of games that I have seen feature on both boxes, 1080p work very well on both boxes and both are very powerful in their own right..
I have been able to compare some games(GTA4, Skate, Skate2Demo, F.E.A.R2Demo, Bad Company) at 720p or 1080p on a 100inch plus projected image and the difference I see is negligible. It'll only be in the final year to two of both generation were games will really being using the power of the hardware most efficiently it will be logical progression as we aim to reach that point.
Whether you have the wired or Wireless Xbox Live headset the experience isn't very good, especially if your used to Ventrillo or Team speak. I like the way Xbox Live integrates with games for windows so I can speak to them too. Playstation 3 does offer a similar feature and most games with Online element do support the VoIP function and has done for some time. However it's just a bad as the Xbox live service in terms of sound quality. VoIP is something that both companies need to look into, because given that it such a big part of online play, it should be the best it can be. On par certainly with PC based solutions like Vent or TS.
To Everyone : I'm not trying to say which system is better at the end of the day whether you chose Microsoft Nintendo or Sony, you're not going to be disappointed!! Personally speaking I've made my bed and am more than happy to lie in to, the games are great this generation regardless of what box you own. So why then are these forums filled with this ridiculous "My Console is better that yours because..." Both machine can easily be viewed and embraced on their merits. I don't understand why one camp has to be defensive or aggressive over another.
Both machines happily co-exist in the real world as they do on my shelf.. Why can't it's users ?!
Response to SavageHenry:
1. Xbox 360 has completely dominated BOTH the Wii and the PS3 in terms of overall "Sales Revenue," of Hardware/Software.
2. Microsoft has repeatedly confirmed that if you COMBINE the amount of Sales Revenue generated by the Wii AND the Playstation 3, you will see that it is LESS THAN the amount of Sales Revenue generated by the Xbox 360.
3. In other words, when you add up the amount of money (the most important category of all), you will see that the Xbox 360 has generated more money that both the Wii and PS3 combined!
4. The Wii may have sold more Hardware units that either the Xbox 360 or the PS3, but there is NO DOUBT, which system is the individual leader this generation in terms of technology and overall sales of Software/Hardware...That system is the Xbox 360. This is a simple fact based on numbers.
5. Actually, when you own both the Xbox 360 and the PS3, you find out very quickly that they are NOT EQUAL:
(a) The Xbox 360 offers online performance that is far superior.
(b) In terms of graphics, the overwhelming majority of multi-platform games end up either "noticably" or "significantly" better on the Xbox 360, according to all the reviews out there.
(c) Rumble: You might also notice that PS3 games, even new games like Soul Calibur 4, still do NOT support the Rumble feature for the PS3 controller--even if you spent the $60 to buy the Dual-Shock 3 controller.
Some people might say things like "PS3 doesn't come with any form of high-definition cable at all." And some people might say "Xbox 360 doesn't come with built in wireless Internet." But, those arguments really don't matter, because you can easily buy HDTV cables for your PS3, and you can easily buy wireless router for your Xbox 360.
However, the PS3 faces problems that SUCK...Due to the fact that the PS3 never came packaged with the Rumble controller, it means that even if you buy the Rumble controller Dual-Shock 3 as an accessory, many games STILL do NOT support the Rumble feature, since they don't think it would be a good idea to invest the money.
PS3 faces a similar problem with all of the games out there that do NOT allow you to talk online while playing games, even if you purchased a headset seperately. The reason for this is because the PS3 does NOT come packaged with a headset the way the Xbox 360 does. Every Xbox 360 game allows you to play online because all developers know that Xbox 360 owners have a headset. But it isn't like that with the Playstation 3. Developers don't want to waste money programming features into games that they think only a small percentage of owners might have.
...So, we can clearly see that PS3 and Xbox 360 are NOT created equally. Xbox 360 is vastly superior in every genre of gaming. Xbox 360 has a bigger and better lineup of games. Xbox 360 receives far more exclusive support from third-party publishers. These are some of the key reasons why the Xbox 360 has outsold the PS3 worldwide by such a large margin.
1. Sony as a whole continues to dominate the gaming market with the most market share overall and also the PS2 still racks up the most gaming minutes out of all last gen and this gen consoles.
2.Microsoft will never except the FACT that the PS2,PS3 and PSP are dominating with overall marketshare and are three successful gaming devices all making money at the same time. Microsoft will always wish to do this but never succeed.
3.In other words, when you add up the amount of money Sonys gaming division is making more than the 360 and WII combined.
4. The 360 may have sold more hardware (so far) than the PS3 but there is NO DOUBT which system is the individual leader in terms of technology and dependability. This is a simple fact based on a 30% failure rate shoddy building and a 3 year warrenty also the lack of blutooth bluray and wireless online not to mention many othe features.
5. Actually when you own both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 you find out very quickly they are NOT EQUAL.
a) you need to pay to play the 360 online even though most games are laggy and P2P, While PSN is free and most games are on dedicated servers and absolutely lag free like Warhawk 32p R1 40p R2 60 players. Im IMPRESSED at Resistance 2s ability to have 30 on 30 team deathmatches with 0 LAG a feat that Microsoft with its paid service and year head start has yet to achieve .
b) In terms of graphics PS3s 1st party and 2nd party games blow anything the 360 has away this is confirmed on many reviews.
c) The whole rumble and headset argument is bullshit and a blatent lie which continues to skewer Kims reliability on these forums and further reinforces the well known fact that he is a JACKASS.
Kim seems to forget the fact that you can get an HD cable for as little as 10 bucks, While the wireless adapter is over 100 dollars not to mention the other OUTRAGOUSLY overpriced perephrials for the Xbox 360.
1. You're both incredible bores.
2. None of the above matters in terms of good games being made.
3. Anyone who uses more than 3 points to make their argument should spare the world their opinions.
Come on Edge! I don't remember the magazine being mostly recycled press releases and endless articles about sales figures (when I could get hold of it).
Another negative Sony post for the Xbox360 owners to jump up and down on.. But does it really matter? I assume that those of us who've already bought a PS3 and are more than happy with it as are those who bought the 360. Are we really that worried about this year's sales projections ?
Let's face it, unless you have money to burn and are dead serious about gaming that you would have all the current gen consoles and if you were one of the hardcore then you would realise after have the Xbox and PS3 sat side by side and comparing them for a few hours on performance and features, you'll find that there very much the same.
Aside from the obvious cosmetic and hardware features that sets them each apart. From the gaming point of view, they're very much alike.. So whether you own a PS3 or an XBox360 it doesn't matter. Whatever box you choose their back catalogue are equally as good.
The fact remains, as you guys argue over who's console is better. Sony and Microsoft have had their asses handed to them by the Nintendo Wii. Personally I feel that this whole Microsoft vs. Sony vs. Nintendo thing should be put to a stop, It's out control!!
You can say that again, seriously guys, give it a rest and try and talk about something interesting instead.
Biased...Non-Biased...Xbox 360 is the one with the games!
...That's the simple reason why Xbox 360 has dominated the Playstation 3 in sales and popularity.
Wow, why can't people just play the games and shut up. It's the 8/16-bit era all over again.
The minute Edge ban the following: Nickgamertag01, Wall_e, OmegaVader, Top_dollar, jb1, grognard66, Peter_Pesic, Kim_Naroz, etc it'll be a better place for the rest of us non-biased gamers.
Fucking fanboys, they waste it for the rest of us. Take your petty arguments elsewhere.
Says the kettle to the pot (or does that saying go the other way around?). Curiously, all of your posts are biased to Sony but you don't have a problem with that. If Edge banned all the people you cited they should just not bother with the comments section, since there wouldn't be anyone left.
Just because you feel threatened by opinions that don't match up with your own doesn't mean the rest of us don't appreciate civil debate back and forth. It may not have occured to you, but you don't HAVE to read the comments or leave any of your own biased opinions...
It's pot calling kettle black, but otherwise you're bang on.
This topic was dead and should've remained that way.
You're a fool for bringing it back up again. Idiots never learn.
100% agreed.
Calm down Barla ! dont you find it funny !
Let's translate, SHALL we?
"analyst Doug Creutz lowered his 2009 U.S. PS3 sales estimates to 4 million units, 2.25 million less than previous estimates."
"Creutz made only small adjustments to Xbox 360's sales estimates,"
"Cowen raised its 2009 sales projections for the console from 6 million to 8 million, and 2010 estimates from 4 million to 6 million."
trans; Ummmm I earn a living trying to predict the future market trends in consumer electronics and to be blunt, all my guestimates were like, TOTALLY wrong, SO, I am going to warp the english language, cherry pick my words and make it look like this was all OK and part of my plan.
a 5 year old could predict the future market trends of consumer electronics in the worst recession since the 1930's. The console with the biggest price tag comes last, regardless of what it does, and the cheapest one wins, and the middle price one finishes in the middle.
The prediction may be accurate but there is no mention in the article of the forthcoming PS3 price drop (although MS are sure to drop at the same time to soften the blow). I think the other problem Sony actually have is that the PS2 is still doing extremely well for a console of it's age.
I think Sony is robbing itself of potential customers by supporting the PS2 so well but once the price comes down on the PS3 I reckon a lot more people will invest in it, especially with exclusive 1st party titles this year like Killzone 2, God Of War 3, GT5, Uncharted 2, White Knight Chronicles and Heavy Rain.
Surely with the lower price point, one of these games will be a console seller in 2009. Only time will tell I guess.
Couldn't agree more. I appreciate that it would be hard to model sales based on unannounced and unknown price points, but PS3 will pick up significantly once the price goes down.
In the meantime, news stories like these are all part of the pressure building on Sony to finally get going with a price cut!
I plan to buy a PS3 soon, FYI
One things for sure Sony have lost loads of marketshare this gen , if anyone would have suggested say 3 years ago that Sony would be in this position i would have never believed them.
Things will pick up for Sony this year thats for sure look @ Killzone 2 for a start , but then again from a business standpoint Sony needed this game last fall NOT this spring and being in the UK the PS3 is still @ £299.
Imagine if Sony had got this title out last fall and its console was @ say £200 their sales would have beeen huge , i dont think Sony realised just how aggressive Microsoft were going to be or the master stroke Nintendo were pulling competing with neither and carving thier own niche devoid of hardcore gamers with a console without any real processing power, how times change.
People moan about the cost of PS3 & yet PS2 was a high price and came with considerably less features & yet people still bought it by the truckload..
Bear in mind though that the value of money has changed a lot since then, not to mention the economic situation and how that affects individuals and what they can reasonably spend on entertainment items like games consoles.
Ahh let start with I've been a reader of Edge for a long time so I finally decided to sign up and be able to engage in some of these discussions. Well PS3 is most certainly due to pick up its sales in the year 2009. Its hard to see that not happening. Sony has Killzone 2, Infamous, White Knight Chronicles just to name a few games along with God of War3, Gran Turismo. Hell if you'd like to go thr route of third party games they've got RE5, Final Fantasy XIII. As for RE5 the RE series hasn't been the same since it was on the PSOne game lost the luster it used to be a game of scaring the bejeebus out of you now its just become nothing but stale. There's also a few things people tend to forget Square Enix might have confirmed Final Fantasy XIII but did they confirm Versus as well for 360. Hell Sony will have KH3 coming out. There's even an old game by the name of Final Fantasy VII that if remade would absolutely help PS3 crush virtually all the competition. And if anyone has some sort objections to this feel free to chime in. BTW regardless of what people say beating the PS3 like a dead horse on its price its fair to say in response to them that regardless the 360 still suffers from the RRoD until that problem has been totally solved it'll always be in the back of every consmers mind. As for the lifecycle of the consoles 360 and PS3. This is the way I have seen it since day 1 and have stood by it and will stand by it. The 360 can win the sprint but the PS3 will win the marathon.
Sure I'll admit it, I drank the koolaid years a go. But it's ridiculous to be predicting anything that has the most remote connect to money in these tough economic times. For start here in Australia the government gave a 1000+ "christmas bonus" that most people used to go and buy Wii's, 360's and PS3's. This resulted in a huge spike in sales. I'm just saying that there is no way you can predict this sort of thing these days.
But saying that there will be a reduction in sales because there is no money for such frivolous entertainment products.
Listening to analysts is like believing the weather service when they try to predict the weather over a timespan of 3 months. It will be 15 degrees on May, 14th. But we might alter that number soon again. Right now, nothing is set in stone - and I'm certainly not going to believe yet another analyst with some half assed statement on how a particular machine, in this case the PS3, will do. It's similar to claiming the 360 will do bad this year because of its line-up. Sure, Microsoft is going to let their machine lose its position and sure, they have made enough money... right.
The ps3 is in a really bad position. The wii has the casual market sewn up and the 360 is cheaper and has a way better games library. The ps3 has nothing to make it standout to any demographic.
Well its kind of hard to establish yourself if publishers are literally porting XBOX games to the damn thing for fearing of pissing off Microsuck. NOBODY outside sony themselves are trying to pull anything out of the hardware. Hell you mean to tell me that a system with a 50 GB storage disc CANNOT differentiate itself. It cant in the sport genre because EA got all the licencss on lock down and is focusing on make "games with SOME simulation elements" unreal. Some of you Dreamcast eeeerrrrrr XBOX 360 owners are really from outer space if you think Sony is gonna give this business up BELIEVE me if the publishers weren't so shook like bitches of Microsuck, The PS3 would be rocking..HARD.
[Image deleted with warning - Rob]
jb1 said:
the 360 is cheaper and has a way better games library.
_________
Horses for courses n' all that.
Some members here should really stop bitching about the PS3's price, it's old news. I can't afford a Ferrari, but i'm not going to cry like a little baby over it!
Nobody was bickering about the 360's 20GB SKU price tag of $399.99 at launch and that was missing an HDMI port and had a rather pathetic 20GB, not to mention the horrendous reliability issues (which still haven't been completely banished even today).
Also, the 360's Elite console at present is $399.99, the same price as the PS3 and that SKU isn't half the console the PS3 is in terms of technology and upgradability (you're stuck with the 120GB drive, right?!).
I'd like to see the PS3 to 360 Elite SKU ratio as the results would tell a different story, rather than PS3- to-all-360-SKU's ratio.
Completely agree, especially on the $399.99 at launch part.
This is why i don't and never will own a 360:
http://ntsc-uk.domino.org/showthread.php?t=74913
The last post (and counting) was on 21-01-2009. Clearly MS aren't getting their shit together regarding reliability.
Personally, i couldn't be bothered with the hassle.
PS3 launch-
$499, 20gig PS3 ($399, 80 gig now)
$599, 40gig PS3 ($499, 160 gig now)
360 launch-
$299, no HDD 360 ($199, no HDD now)
$399, 20gig 360 ($299, 60 gig now)
($399, 120 gig just for fun)
As you see you can get a more than comparable 360 with nearly the same amount of gigs as the PS3 for 100 bucks less (the $299 model).
I don't see how Sony's prices were any better. By the time Sony offered a 40/60 gig for $399, the 360 already had HDMI ports available. Your point holds no water whatsoever.
Jesus Nick, will you pull your head out of your ass. You're starting to sound like Kim everyday now.
Where there is a positive PS3 comment there's Nick, jb1, Kim_Naroz, OmegaVader or Peter_Pesic to pull it down.
Get a bloody grip man.
How is that different from you, Whiskey, Wall-E etc. singing Sony's praises and keeping your heads in the sand? If Sony was based out of anywhere but Japan, execs like Kaz Hirai would have been fired ignominously long ago. The company has been a complete and utter disaster for over 4 years now and shows little sign of understanding what got them in this situation.
I gambled and bought a PS3 in 06 - biggest console purchasing mistake I ever made. It's a good Blu-Ray Player and "progress bar player" (since I spend more time looking at the progress bar fill up for firmware and patches to download and install), but it is a poor GAME machine. What good is hardware if you don't have the software to go along with it. I'm not just talking aobut games, but the features (universal features like cross-game voicechat, website integration, etc.) that we're still waiting for that were promised BEFORE launch.
Third parties are not supporting PS3 because Sony's tech support, SDK's and architecture are a joke - not because MS is pressuring them to port to it. When you combine that with PS3's market share, who in their right mind would lead with that system? Any publisher/developer would get slammed by shareholders for leading with the most expensive to develop for, smallest install base, and worst attach rate system. That's reality - deal with it.
Wall_E
"Where there is a positive PS3 comment there's Nick, jb1, Kim_Naroz, OmegaVader or Peter_Pesic to pull it down."
I don't have to agree with you or anyone else. If I disagree I will state it. It's my opinion and if happens to be wrong or you don't like it, I can accept that. I wasn't replying to put a console "down" (its a toy for crying out loud), it was just to give my honest opinion on Top's comment. Isn't that the point of debate/discussion? To hear people's opinions, be open to them, and possibly see something in a light you hadn't previously considered? If I stuck to my ways, or if you stuck to your ways, how could you ever learn from being wrong from time to time? I'm not saying your or anyone else is wrong necessarily, but I like to keep my eyes and ears open to other people's perspectives, cause there's always something you can learn from others as none of us know everything (as much as we may think we do).
Point is, for the price that the PS3 is now as opposed to when the 360 was released at $399.99, you get more for your money. Nobody complained then that the 360 was $399.99 on launch, just as the Elite SKU is $399.99 just now with no Wi-Fi, Blu-ray drive with no way of upgrading the 120 HDD.
You've basically manipulated the important points of my discussion to put them in the 360's favour, when in fact that's far from the truth.
I'm not going to go round in circles with you on this as you're completely biased towards one system. Therefore i've came to the conclusion that there is no talking to you type of people.
Good night.
Ignore nick, the guy is just a fanboy of massive proportions.
Yeah, just like the PS3 fanboys (whisky, Top, Wall E, Rider aka Jimmy, aka Big Jim, aka JM) are quick to the spot when its time for PS3 damage control. You guys are just as bad as us 360 "fanboys".
Rider (not to be confused with Rydamgw), credit to you for actually offering a reply. You're right I did take only portions of your point and you have also brought an interesting paradox to my attention. It seems not too many people complained when the top-of-the-line 360 20gig was $399 but seem to have problems with Sony's now $399 80gig. I don't know, maybe the misconception that the PS3 is doing bad worldwide (its actually literally neck and neck with the 360 on average worldwide annual sales, just not US sales). I think the main problem may be that the 360 was at its higher price when there wasn't an economic meltdown going on and now that the PS3 has had a poor holiday showing (the only console that had a decrease in sales over December of 2007) its easy to attribute that to price. I think that people see Sony's woes right now as directly related to price since it is the most expensive console and it happens to own that title during one of the worst economic crisis' we've seen in years. I honestly feel if the economy wasn't as bad as it is, the PS3 would have done much better over the holidays. How else can you explain a DROP in sales over the biggest shopping month of the year when all the other consoles had increases? Its not lack of games right?
Nick (or should i say OmegaVader), if you want to extend your personal philosophies, then go to 360 Fanboy.
Here, i'll even provide you with the link:
http://www.xbox360fanboy.com/
"He made an opinion, you clearly didn't like it, get over it." Sound familiar?
Personally I'd rather Nick stayed here, I might not agree with him on everything but at least he's polite and I know his real name (probably).
The fact that the people who comment on this site write intelligently and act maturely - and that they tend to respect each other's opinions even when they don't agree - is a big part of why I read these news stories. It's good that there are fanboys on both sides (keeps things interesting!), but it's the people who make solid arguments and then respond to the counter-arguments intelligently who really make it worthwhile. Nick is always polite and will yield the point if you convince him he's wrong. I wish more people were like that!
So to conclude, more Nick and less Wall_E please.
Wall_E,
C'mon man, can't you set aside the typical forum banter and just talk like a regular adult? Just because this is a gaming forum doesn't mean we can't converse like grown-ups.
I didn't know personal philosophies should be kept exclusive to "fanboy" forums. Apparently it would be detrimental to this otherwise mature and intellectual site to include discussion that might invoke thought beyond who's the bigger fanboy.
@Belcaw
Thanks for the support man.
No way! These forums need level headed people to keep the opinions and bias' of extemists in line. For both sides of the fandom.
Everyone can see that Nick prefers the 360. It's no secret and he doesn't hide the fact. Nick gives opinions that are thought out and, as best I can tell, factual. He's certainly not purposely misleading anyone.
If you get upset because someone doesn't share your passion for a particular system, then you have a lot to learn about life in general. The whole point to a discussion forum (in my opinion) is to debate views of the truth.
But whatever, that's my opinion and you're welcome to keep yours to yourself. :-)