Network now...NEWS
Big Three Respond to NPD Results
Nintendo, meanwhile, had clearly won its own race, stating that the Wii and DS had broken US sales records for November.
The company had sold a combined total of 3.6 million units for the Wii and DS, of which, as previously reported, was split by the Wii moving over 2 million units and the DS selling some 1.56 million.
Nintendo’s claim was that the Wii’s staggering November sales in the US had set an all-time record for a non-December month, while the DS sales represent the second-highest total for a non-December month. “Nintendo’s record-breaking sales demonstrate that consumers are looking for the best value not only among video games, but also among all entertainment options,” said NOA’s Cammie Dunaway. “Shoppers are looking for gifts that can be enjoyed by the whole family, and Nintendo provides an incomparable range of experiences that gets the whole family involved.”
Nintendo also made brief comparisons with the competition, stating that the Wii represented 59 percent of TV console sales for November and the DS took an impressive 79 percent share of handheld sales in the month.
The phenomenal success of both consoles overall was again put into focus: “The Wii console has sold 15.4 million in the United States since it launched in November 2006, and Nintendo DS has sold nearly 24.6 million in the United States since it launched in November 2004.”
Nintendo was a little sheepish on software details, and outright silent on its tie ratios, though the company claimed a unique achievment in that four of its titles hung in the November software top ten where each had been released prior to November (and in some cases prior to 2008). Wii Play, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii and Wii Music represented the company’s "evergreen" titles.
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
If you go through some of his previous posts he does give loads of information out that is since proved correct. Feel free. I understand the sceptisism due to the nature of the forum however.
So was this the year of the ps3 like sony said it would be? Is this it the best their customers can hope for?
This is a quote from someone that actually works for Sony in finance:
"I actually think it is quite impressive that PS3 is keeping up with a competitor that is half the price. I mean the 360 can be had for £99 including 2 games ffs! That's cheaper than a PS2 which is going for £69 no games and £79 with one game! To compare the Wii sells for £169 including 1 game and PS3 £279 with two games. In PAL PS3 and 360 have sold the same amount since MS cut the prices, before it wasn't much of a competition, and once this price cut wears off, it will go back to to the same situation.
Over the calendar year PS3 is going to be down by about 600k units. Big deal!
MS had to use up all of their moves this year leaving next year very empty in terms of strategy, and for what? 600k units! Sony still have 2 big price cuts (maybe 3 smaller ones) before they reach $199. MS can't lower the price below $199 unless they really want the investors to scream bloody murder, so the only thing they can do is add value to the $199 unit which we know doesn't work (have the sales of the 80GB PS3 been any higher than the 40GB? Answer is no, btw).
So what's the situation going to be next year then? Well, PS3 will be priced the same for a while and get outsold about 1.5:1 every month in the US until there is a price cut. Japan will be lol 360 next year and the gains made this year will be wiped out by the juggernaut that is Final Fantasy (Square are making 2009 "the year of FF" in Japan). PAL will be competitive until about March, but eventually the PS3 will take the lead in monthly sales. So, added together, the three main territories will have equal sales of both consoles, one priced at $199 for the base package and the other at $399 for the base package, please tell me which one of these is in trouble?"
People just look at NPDs and go OMG! What about the rest of the world....
"People just look at NPDs and go OMG! What about the rest of the world...."
That's why I included this in my post on this very thread..."the PS3 is lagging behind the 360 WORLDWIDE by over 8 million consoles. Which, with the PS3's WORLDWIDE monthly sales average of 700k (8.4 million annually) units just being literally only 5,500 units ahead of the 360's WORLDWIDE monthly average of 694,500 (8.33 million annually), it'll take a huge change of events for the PS3 to pass up the 360 before this generation proper is over."
Last month both companies had released worldwide sales figures that seemed to be widly accepted as accurate so I don't have a link to provide for the worldwide numbers as they really don't exist other than Sony and MS's press releases, but my original post provided a link to a breakdown of this generation's NPD numbers. So even worldwide the PS3 has significant ground to make up.
I think you and Ryda do offer good points and I do wonder why MS has let some of their 2nd party developers go (they lost Bioware, Bungie, Bizarre, Ensemble) so I don't know what their strategy is with their in-house developement but it doesn't seem to make too much sense.
As for 09, I guess we'll see.
Do you have any evidence of this quote? I find it difficult to believe any sony rep in any official capacity would use internet slang such as 'ffs'
Japan will be lol 360 next year
what is this supposed to mean? and is it still part of the official source you claim to be quoting?
Happy to supply the link. This is from the Blu-ray forums from someone that has been proven to be a Sony Finance insider.
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=1404348&postcount=184
You can check his other posts as well. He's been on the money for the last year.
I'm not sure a blu ray forum is gonna be a place to find unbias views in regard to ps3. The construction of his post is bordeline fanboyism.
still interested in the proof he is/was a "sony finance insider" as open to interpretation as that position is.
i'm sick of microsoft keep telling that they have sold more than the ps3....okay, we get it,you beat the ps3...so shut the hell up...how 'bout you outsold the Wii first then talk crap 'bout how great you are...geez!!!
PS3 isn't doing well until sony stops summarizing NPD reports by saying 'total hardware sales' in lieu of 'total PS3 sales'
Oh yeah forgot about HOME defintely amazing never seen anything like it
Im gonna have to go w Anthony on this one Nick yes the ps3 slashed there prices but they also took out components of the ps3 which made it cost more ex backwards compatibility ( lucky 4 me I own a 60 gig ) which I wouldn't say thats a real price drop when they do drop the price and put out a PS3 slim its going to gain serious momentum and pull ahead of the xbox. As for game lineups all of 360s heavy hitters are exsausted and w only around 3 first party studios the 360 is running out of gas quick meanwhile w Sonys 1st party studios coming in around 15 to 20 your going to see many exclusives coming to the ps3 in the coming months where xbox wont be able to keep up this in a way is a fact the only way microsoft will keep up is to continually open there wallets. From what I know in 2009 the game lineup for ps3 is far supierior to xbox from Killzone 2 to GOW3 its looking really good for sony not to mention the mmos there realeasing and MAG
Yeah, their first price drop was 7 months after launch and was a phase out of the 20gig $499 PS3 by dropping the price to $399. But from what I can remember by the time the 20gigs ran out the lowered the 40gig down to $399 and introduced the 60gig. Which has since been replaced with the 80gig (correct me if I'm wrong on that). Now they have the 80gig at $399 and the 160gig at $499. Maybe MS's next drop will be a similar phase out and just can the arcade and lower the price of the 60gig $299 model to $199.
I think you do have offer some good points on software, but similar things were said for '08 for Sony and they kinda fell on their face a bit. So as I said before, we'll see in '09.
Two undisputed champions exist this generation:
1. Xbox 360 is the undisputed software champion this generation. Microsoft points out that the Xbox 360 software has generated more revenue that the Wii and the PS3 combined.
2. Wii is the hardware champion in terms of the number of consoles sold worldwide. The lower price of the Wii for such a long time gave it a huge advantage that resulted in a lot of momentum.
...To reply to the sports game comment of Nick, the game on the high-definition channel between the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 isn't close at all. Xbox 360 has a sales lead of millions of systems over the Playstation 3. What's worse for Sony is that when Sony talks about "sales" they are actually talking about the number of systems "produced," not the number of consumers who "own" the system.
For example, Sony originally said that their sales goal was to sell 6 million systems by spring of 2007. When spring of 2007 arrived, Sony had only produced 5.5 million systems, and they had only sold 1.4 million Playstation 3 systems. Yet, Sony's employees such as Jack Tretton continued to say idiotic thing like "We are only 500,000 systems behind our sales goal," when in reality Sony was 4.6 million systems behind their sales goal.
It is too soon to make comments conveyed as absolutes, this early in the generation. I will leave Wii out of this since it is not the competition (though it does take a bite out of Sony and MS revenue). PS3 is only a price drop away from taking the lead, again, against the 360. Let's keep in mind that everyone buying the 360 these days are buying the noob, Arcade model.
If people bought their consoles based on quality, value, and technology- PS3 would clearly have the lead on all of its competition right now. It bears to mention that the oscillating properties of the struggle between 360 and PS3 have yet settled victory in anyone's camp. The effects of a much more fulfilling and prominent '09 software line-up by Sony, versus a seeming drought of anything worth mentioning by MS- will indeed be interesting to watch. Especially for PS3 fans. Also, bearing knowledge, as to which system has the best future games, and considering an almost guaranteed future price drop...it is pretty obvious which console will begin to take the lead (again), and never give it back.
After all, lets face it- EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE knows that PS3 is the finest built, most technologically advanced, and desirable console. The problem with PS3's lag is not indicative of any inherent qualities about it, but rather that most mainstream consumers simply cannot afford it...so they settle for MS's cheap, entry level machine. That is why MS has the lead right now, and it is the ONLY reason. This is nothing for 360 fans to be smug about. If I were a 360 supporter I would be worried about what's going to happen when PS3 slashes the price of its console by 100.00.
It is too soon to make comments conveyed as absolutes, this early in the generation.
After all, lets face it- EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE knows that PS3 is the finest built, most technologically advanced, and desirable console.
You contradict yourself in the same comment for me there.
That is not a contradiction, it is a fact ( as is proven by: A- the rate of M$'s defective hardware vs. Sony's and B- the PS3's Blu-Ray optical drive, excellent firmware updates, built in wi-fi and other amenities that the 360 simply does not have). When you see what happens when Sony cuts the price of the PS3 you will have no choice but to defer.
anthony_boscarino : "After all, lets face it- EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE knows that PS3 is the finest built, most technologically advanced, and desirable console."
I disagree, i think that the PS3 is a poorly designed peice of crap with no good games.
The only thing poorly designed is your opinion, which. while may be your right, is still the real piece of crap.
You are obviously too confused about which console is plagued with RROD, or, simply do not own a PS3. Spare me.
Were you not reading? He said EVERYONE. That means you too. Not just that, but it was all capital letters so that REALLY means everyone, including yourself.
LOL. Hey, after all, let's face it- there are a ton of gamers who own "other" console's, but secretly desire a PS3- the only thing stopping them is the price.
I forgot to mention, I think you were more making an argument that the PS3 itself may be of higher quality than the 360 more than the PS3 will sell better. But I also think that is debatable. And the Wii goes to show that system stated capabilities and system options (non-required, non-gaming additions to the console) are not what sell systems. The PS3 may have a technical on paper advantage and a historically (with the PS3 anyway) more reliable system, but that isn't what sells consoles, and definitely isn't what sells games. The two biggest problems with the PS3 as I see it, is a low quantity of high quality games, and to a lesser degree, price.
I think you may have a point in the argument that the PS3 is a better built machine, but that doesn't make a console, compelling software (and lots of it) are what pushes a system. The PS1 and 2 nailed that, and had a huge lineup of titles, exclusives, and quality software, the PS3 so far hasn't done nearly as well. And I think that's its problem. Ironically, the PS2 was inferior to the Xbox 1 when it came to hardware specs, but it not only had a year head start on the xbox 1, but had a better lineup of software. Are we so shocked fortunes have changed? (Roles seem to have been reversed, and maybe Sony can ill afford giving MS a head start next time).
At least I can respect your intellectual retort, as opposed to some Xbot saying, "PS3 sucks." But I still disagree. PS3 have a slew of quality titles and I think that perception of PS3 having no games died out almost a year ago. If you look to the future, it is the PS3 that actually has the best line up of games, apart from the games that M$ ashamedly stole/bought out of Sony exclusivity. Still, I think you undermine price. You use games as a point of PS3 shortcomings, but it is the mainstream consumer who drives this industry. Right now, they choose the Wii. You you say the Wii have a strong games library? No. the mainstream consumer, and the hardcore gamer to a lesser extent, see PS3's library rich in titles and growing. It is the price of the console that is preventing most people (mainstream) from purchasing one. It is obvious that apart from games, the built in Blu Ray player is a strong selling feature to most consumers. The price goes down and the sales figures will be record breaking. Sony knows this from observing what happened with the last price drop...PS3 dominated 360, and was even outselling Wii in Japan for a time. Clearly, Sony would like to squeeze every once of revenue they can out of the console at this high price point before slashing the price. If the console was on life support, like the naysayers and Xbots ignorantly proclaim, then surely the price would have gone down by now. Matter of fact, that's why 360 dropped in price...because it was getting creamed. Price cuts are synonymous with a white flag. The reason I made any original comment at all, was because the original dude's post was the last ignorant Xbot comment I could take, and it represented to me the quintessential and rampant, ill-conceived, Xbot notion that 360's greater sales as of late, is somehow linked to it being the better console. This couldn't be farther from the truth.
What's the... erm... PS3 version of an 'Xbot' again (whatever that means)? Seriously, this is like watching priests from two different religions arguing with each other about why the other is biased.
Why is it even important to you? Let Sony and Microsoft make all the business decisions - after all, if you're not a shareholder, it doesn't really impact your life whichever way the sales go. Personally I bought my Xbox 360 because it had games which fit my tastes better, the price had nothing to do with it and I was well aware of the reliability problems it had. While people such as yourself are trying to argue, for no apparent reason, about which one is best, myself and others are busy actually enjoying their consoles. Isn't that why you shelled out hundreds of quid for one?
I agree, as I love and still play my Dreamcast. The reason why I "care" is because (if you remember anything about the way DC died) the ill conceived notion of a strong fan base can carry over to public propaganda and into the mainstream consumer psyche. This fan based bias and drivel, can make or break a system. This is why it is important to me.
The death of the Dreamcast had as much to do with Sega's screw ups and Sony's strategy as anything. Not that it's particularly relevant here - this generation of consoles is perhaps the most competitive, least clear-cut of all generations. None of them are exactly 'suffering' and none of them will. If you think that continuously praising the PS3 and slagging off the Xbox 360 on a web forum is going to change anything around the world, then perhaps you need to boot up that DC a little more often.
Ha.ha.ha. You sound like someone who would not mind to read of someone "praising" another console. Keep in mind, praising PS3 is not the objective to my posts. Injecting my opinion against the original post-which was, incidentally, "praising 360 (which I doubt that you would mind) and bashing PS3. My only objective was to combat the original post and point out its flaws. What else is a forum for, if not to state one's opinion? But you are right, none of the console's are suffering, though some people would claim that PS3 is. If I feel the urgency to nullify these claims, then it is my right to do so. It is not my intention to "change" anything. It is my intention to have my opinion heard via a forum created for that purpose, so your sarcasm about booting up my Dreamcast goes misplaced and unfounded.
The irony being that a big part of the reason the dc died is because of the underhand tactics used by sony (paying developers to can dc games etc), something which MS has done much less of yet you still acuse them.
Also as much as you don't want to hear it, the ps3 games library is still very weak.
Its good enough for me and millions of other users. Also, keeping in mind that I have close to 10 consoles and an upper mid range PC, I would gander that the library of games at my disposal is very satisfactory indeed.
You forget the fact that Sony already slashed 100 bucks off the PS3 since launch (and did so only 7 months after launch). And you also don't mention that the 360 sold at launch price until it had been on the market for over 2 years, in which they built a near 2:1 lead of the PS3 in the US in that timeframe at Sony's now $400 price. The 360 had a little over 3 million console lead in the US prior to the PS3 coming out which since the PS3 has come out they've more than doubled their LEAD of 3 million to 6+ million (as of NPD's November 2008's numbers).
Although well written, I can forgive most of your comments for being a tad bit biased and more opinion than fact. You point to 09 being a strong year for Sony with a strong lineup of games and an inevitable price cut. Well, in my opinion (that's all we're really talkin here) is that 09 will be strong year for 360 software as well (I'm not going to throw up a long list of titles, not necessary). If Sony cuts (again) their price by $100 and starts to gain a little momentum MS will most likely follow suit with their own cut, maybe to $149 for the arcade (remember, 09 will be starting the 360's 4th year on the market, within two years they most likely will have their next box out so they'll push these last couple years hard). MS's price drop will just undercut Sony's attempt at matching their price and they will be left where they are now. It'll really come out to software more than price and that's where the PS3 has really suffered (just look at NPD software numbers for proof of this).
Sony has to improve their software, their marketing, and their price. Unfortunately they only truly control 2 of those factors considering MS can just counter a PS3 cut with their own. And with the 360's commanding software dominance of both the PS3 and the Wii, it doesn't look like the 360 is going anywhere any time soon (except above the PS3).
You provide a somewhat solid argument, but with the way things went in '07 and '08 ('08 being the supposed "year of the PS3"), its hard to be convinced 09 is going to be much different.
Oh, and here's some factual numbers to go along with my claims. It has NPD numbers of all the console manufacturer's (360, PS3, Wii) lifetime hardware and software revenue as well as annual console sales breakdowns. Again, this is US only. If you're curious, the PS3 is lagging behind the 360 WORLDWIDE by over 8 million consoles. Which, with the PS3's WORLDWIDE monthly sales average of 700k (8.4 million annually) units just being literally only 5,500 units ahead of the 360's WORLDWIDE monthly average of 694,500 (8.33 million annually), it'll take a huge change of events for the PS3 to pass up the 360 before this generation proper is over.
http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/NPD_Seventh_generation
I can appreciate that . I guess we'll have to wait and see.
You're right, the Wii is dominating. But its kinda like when you're watching a football game, and one team is winning by so much that its no longer interesting so you switch channels to a game that is close because it is interesting. Its a fairly close race between the PS3 and the 360 which is more interesting than hearing about how badly the Wii is beating everything.
It is news that the Wii sold 2 million in November, that is just insane.
I find it a bit sad that everyone else is fighting for second place. They aren't even remotely close. Wii outsold 360, PSP, PS3, and PS2 combined. It's astounding.
Microsoft fanatics will come in claiming victory because 360 outsold the PS3, but how is that a victory when you're still below the DS and Wii (the former of which nearly doubled the 360's numbers)?
It's just ridiculous, especially considering the 360 had a year ahead to launch. The Wii vaulted ahead and is nearing 50% market share worldwide.
do real gamers actually care about "victory"?