PS3 to wait until 2007? One analyst thinks it could happen

by Ross Miller { Aug 2nd 2005 at 6:30PM }

With all this talk to day of Xbox 360 - a price cut here, a credit card there - here comes GameSpot with some interesting speculation on Sony's business strategy. One analyst predicts that, if the 360 does not become a giant success, Sony might spend the 2006 year earning profits from $99 slim line PS2 which, due to small production costs, will actually still give Sony a profit with each console sold. With the time, Sony could stock up on PS3's so as to avoid a shortage in late 2006/early 2007.

I could see this happening - the analyst does make a good point, unless Nintendo pulls out surprise success and causes Sony to panic and release the new console early. However, all this is banking on the Xbox 360 having a less-than-stellar debut, which I am not thinking will be a chance. The hype machine is too big on it, if the price is chosen correctly.

[via GameSpot]

Related From Joystiq

Pachter: PS3 price cut could cost Sony $350 million
17 hours ago
Pachter: $299 PS3 would outsell 360, put Sony back in the game
22 hours ago
Sony could break even on PS3 in '09, finally get agressive with pricing
23 hours ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

kelley barry @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Biz strategies aside, I'll believe in a working mass production Cell chip when I see it. Until then it's just exotic vapor-ware to me... I have a strong suspescion we will see a later than expected launch on the ps3...

Beyond all the superKut trash talkin' has anyone seen an official word on a release quarter??? ...didn' think so!

Michael McGuire @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

The longer Sony waits, the more powerful the PS3 will be over the XBox 360. Of course, it won't matter much if 10-20 million people by the Xbox360 before the PS3 launches. I believe that there were 20 million PS2's sold before the Xbox was released.

Thundercizzle @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Anything's possible. I'm still holding my breath for PS3. I know I have to get one of those. Microsoft still has to prove to me that they have the 3rd Party support with some decent games first before I put my money on them. Once I see a good flow of games, then I'll buy. It's not likely that will happen at launch.

Spartacus @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

If this DOES happen, most likely it would only be because the hardware wasn't ready. However I think that this would only hurt Sony, and maybe KILL Sony in the long run. Last one out of the shoot AND the most expensive with the smallest software library (at launch) equals a very bad scenario for the PS3...

� PINION CORPORATION � @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Michael, I beg to differ. The PS3 is losing functions, such as the router, not getting better. Sony is trying to make it more affordable (to them, not us). The PS2 was dominant not because of its power but because of its high quantity of games. Mummys and Daddys would buy the console for their children because of its reputation, not looking at the specifications. The 360 will get a head start, while Sony trys to recoup losses on their new system by selling old systems, hence dooming the PS3. The sooner its out, the better.

Plus, if they release it early, Halo 3 will be rushed, and as lacking as Halo 2.

Lansing @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

I'm starting to think the ps3 will be screwed before it launches whenever it launches. I mean it seems the entire public (online) hates sony much like everyone hates microsoft and loves apple.

chill @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

And yet Micro dominates the pc market and Apple has never made a dent in that market. Guess the public [online] is all talk.

Bryan @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Well-- First of all, Sony were idiots from the beginning: Why did the PS2 sell so well? Because it had great graphics (at the time), it had good games, and it was reasonably affordable! ALSO, it didn't have 1,000 different things all jammed into one console.

I don't understand why Sony and Microsoft continue to jam all these different features into a VIDEO GAME console. It's supposed to be a video game console, NOT A SUPER COMPUTER! And if "super computer" is what Sony was aiming for, so be it, but I know a hell a lot of people that aren't looking for a super computer. Sure, they want good graphics, but they're not going to spend 500+ dollars on features they already have!

Sony: STOP adding so much to your consoles! We already have DVD players, we already have computers, we don't need Blu-Rae Discs and we don't want them!

Why should anyone pay $500 or more for features that we already have?? I think it's really, really cool that Sony can do all that, and I know many people that are definitely going to buy the PS3 regardless of its price, and I'm fine with that! But I think Sony is going down the wrong direction.

The majority of the consumers want great graphics, fast loading times, wireless controllerse, and some internet access. NOT a supercomputer.

While I will always support Nintendo, and plan to buy a Revolution, I think the XBOX360 will lead the next generation sales overall, with Nintendo in second, and Sony in third.

I repeat: $500 and up is simply WAY too much for a video game console.

Tough luck Sony, you're going down this generation...

PS) Their controller is the ugliest thing I've ever seen. It looks like either A)some sort of new boomerang technology or B) a lesbian sex toy.

Phil @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

It is almost absolutely certain that it will not be released in spring. No one would release in spring if they can release in the fall, which is the holiday season. It is much more likely that it will see a late 2006 release, especially with all the PS2 titles coming out and the low price of the PS2. If this works well it could drown the 360's start until the PS3 arrives, but my guess is that considering the price of the 360 this could fail.

mike @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

some douchebag thinks they'll push it from March 06 to 2007 and you guys put a story up? lame

Arch-360 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

lol well look at it this way. sony is cramming ALL thses extra super-computer like features it has, (mind you the 360 has the same features),coming out late, AND will have the same graphics as the 360. with LESS games next gen. so whats bringing up the price? blueray thats what. a blueray player goes for 800$ at retail. so the point to buying a console as powerful as the 360, costs more, less games, comes out last? NONE. besides the fanboys ewho folow sony like mindless zombies. sony is going to die next gen and nothing can stop that.

brian @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

So with the 10 year cycle mentioned last week by Kutaragi, we're looking at the next generation from Sony coming in 2017? Nice.

SetupWeasel @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

If this were Nintendo, the Sony fanboys would be out in force berating the Revolution. How the tables turn when the rumor is that their baby will be released late.

b @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

I'm surprised by how many morons have posted their opinion on this article. There's this moron saying that Xbox and Nintendo will beat Sony? That's retarded. I'm a nintendo fanboy, and will always be, but everyone in their right minds know that Playstation will keep their crown, specially because in Japan only 2% will buy Xbox 360 with all it has revealed, while two thirds of the japanese videogame market will buy PS3 no matter what.

There's also the moron that says that Xbox 360 offers what playstation for less. Well, bad news for you, dips***: The playstation is twice as fast as the 360. Nevermind what ATI has to say about pipelines. After all, which company doesn't cheer their own product? The Xbox 360 does NOT offer a 1080i resolution like PS3 does, which isn't that important anyway, as is the Blu-ray.

For the dillhole that said that Blu-ray isn't needed, I've got news for you: HALF OF THE MOVIE STUDIOS ARE BACKING IT. People wants to see movies in HDTV. In 3 years, more than half of the states will have an HDTV. And the 360 won't come out with HD-DVD initially, but it will AFTERWARDS, so that would only alienate the first 360 consumers, and it's still worse than the Blu-ray format. It would be very costly to end up production of the 360's that have just DVD and substitute them for the HD-DVD.

I'm a nintendo fan, as I said, but nintendo won't offer Blu-ray nor Hi-def, but it will have a nice price, so it has a chance to compete.

On the other hand: This is only speculation. This is only IF 360 fails, which may as well fail in the beginning, since they already announced that it will become obsolete as soon as the 360 with HD-DVD comes out. It may not fail, but it won't offer the line-up of games that Sony will, like Devil May Cry, Killzone, and all the Final Fantasys (Note: FFXI will be the only final fantasy to come out for 360... three years after its release on PC, so why bother?).

Halo? That game came out with a different name 8 years ago, it was called GOLDEN EYE, you morons. You should only buy Xbox if you really like First Person Shooters, which is the only thing they have. It is doubtful that any of Mistwalkers productions will equal that of square-enix's. After all, Sony stole Nintendo's crown thanks to final fantasy (and will keep it thanks to it).

And about PS3's control: HEY DUMBASS, have you even seen the size of it, or you're just babbling without even having seen it in person? Everyone seemed disappointed about it, me included, untill I saw that it perfectly fits in your hands, just as the last ones, except a little bit more comfortable to handle. (If they add to it shoulder analog button's like gamecube's it'll be great)

Xbox controller? It took them three iterations to get it right... And it's still a fusion of gamecube's and playstation 2's last controllers.

And I bet Revolution's controller will be better than the other console's, just as every other nintendo's controller's compared with their competition's.

In summary:

Graphics: Sony (but they don't really matter)
Online: Microsoft (but it doesn't matter much anyway, since every console will have it much better than this generation)
Movies: Sony, it deffinitely matters having the ability to play Hi-def movies before anyone else, at a much cheaper price than a simple blu-ray drive
Games: Sony has all or almost all the good 3rd party exclusives, while microsoft will try to equal Square's Final Fantasy with some unknown games... (Final fantasy has sold more than 60 million copies world wide, specially thanks to the playstation, and that's why it'll keep the crown). Even nintendo has a much better line-up than Microsoft, since it makes only quality games, and will take an original aproach, as opposed to Xbox, which is merely beefing up everything, EXCEPT their media.

But it looks that everyone of you has bill gates' cock on your mouths.

a gamer @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

B, you are stupid, especially that last sentence. The whole geist of your comment is pointless, too. How can you speculate on the popularity of each next gen console when the friggin controller for the Rev hasn't been shown yet? Not that i'm a Nintendo fanboy, but I truly believe that next Nintendo console will indeed be 'revolutionary'.

matt @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

B, you dont know what you are even talking about. Go look at the facts again and then come back. But i will point out a few thing. The #60 will have hi-def so dont even say sony will have it first. Xbox Live is the best service and will continue to be. Why do you need blue-ray when the DVD9's they use on video games now arent even filled up all the way and they only have 9 gigs why would you want 60 or whatever it is. And Plus that means that the games are going to cost way more. Half the studios are backing the blue-ray disc and half are backing the HD-DVD, idiot. Think. And if you look at the 360's launch line-up. There are at least double the amount of good games then the PS3. And Lastly, if you knew anything about specs then you would know that the PS3 is more powerful but not double.

JPRacer @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

b, you are the moron.

The 360 does support 1080i, just like the current Xbox (I think there's like 3-4 games supporting it). What the 360 lack is support for 1080p but who cares, I never seen a set that can support that res.

The PS3 is not 2x faster than the 360. The Cell chip is vaporware, nobody have real application performance for the chip and the Cell is just a simple processor with 7 DSPs. DSPs are cool for decoding/encoding, loop and things like that, but for code with branching and testing statements, like in game code, general CPUs are much more efficient. So since there's no real performance charts for both CPU, for me they are equal, but I think the 3 general CPUs is the way to go for games.

As for the GPU, sorry, but ATI design is much more efficient than the nVidia one.

Another important thing, it's cool to have the best CPU, GPU, bla bla bla... An important thing is balancing. What use to have the best CPU if the bus is so slow that the CPU can only work at 60% efficiency? So balance is important and the 360 seems to be much more balanced.

For Blu-Ray I don't care, my console is for playing games, not watching movies. I have a DVD player for movies and I'll have a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD player in the future too for those formats. I prefer to have a hard disk than Blu-Ray. Sure the PS3 can have a HD, but since it don't come with the console the support will be poor.

For the games it's personnal preferences, but I prefer the games on Xbox than on PS2. The big titles on PS2 are mostly Japanese games and I prefer western style games more, like FPS and racing (I know racing is popular in Japan, but now it seems they only bother with drifting wich I don't like).

Anyway, I'll buy a 360, maybe a PS3 but I doubt it. And with the months of headstart the 360 will have on the PS3 I'm sure the 360 will be #1, at least in America and Europe. Ok course, in Japan the 360 will probably be last, but worldwide the 360 will be #1.

And please, don't compare Goldeneye with Halo. The only thing they have in common is that they are FPS.

Bryan @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

"B" you crack me up. By the way everyone, I'm the "dips***" he is referring to.

B, I think I'll ask you this personally. Did you not read my post thoroughly? I don't think you understood me. I believe you said Japan will be what hands Sony the crown again?

Honestly, you crack me up. Before I completely insult you, I just want to say it's great you're a Nintendo fan. While everyone (obviously) has their own standpoints about who will win the "next generation console war", quite frankly it doesn't matter to me, because even if Nintendo lands in third place, I'm going to buy their products.

Which is another point I wanted to bring up: I know everyone is here to share their thoughts, which is perfectly fine, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But in the longrun, does it really matter who comes on top of sales? I mean, sure, it matters to the companies themselves, but does it matter to us, the consumers? Well.. not really.

Nintendo fans will buy the Revolution.
Xbox fans will buy the 360.
Sony fans will buy the PS3.

And some fans will switch.. But why does everyone care so much? Buy the console and games you want... who cares what other people think. I'm not going to sit here and criticize each person for what they think. Well, that sounds hypocritical, because I'm about to criticize the crap out of my friend "B".

Eh, oh well.

B, I don't know how you can go and say that, and I quote:

In 3 years, more than half of the states will have an HDTV.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't we told years ago that by the year 2000 we'd all be dead? Or something? I mean, I know you're just going by what scientists (or whatever you want to call them) are saying, which is perfectly fine, but think logically:

These "predictors" have been so awfully wrong wtih several of their predictions. But, I'll go with it -- Let's say in 3 years, that yes, half the population of the United States has a High-Definition TV. Great. So, what?

What percentage of these people will want to buy a PS3? Now take THAT percentage, and think about the number of people that will actually follow through with buying the PS3, and using it through their HDTV.

While you have a rather small percentage, it's still a very large amount of people. Again, think logically: The majority of consumers today aren't saying "Oh! Oh! If one of the next-gen consoles doesn't have HD capabilities, I'm so NOT buying it."

????????????????????????????????

You're crazy. Sony began to dig itself a hole by providing HD capabilites. It completed the hole by adding the Blu-Ray format. And forgive me, I don't know too much about Blu-Ray. Matter of fact, I'd bet you know more about it than I do. But there's got to be a bottom line, and Sony has admitted this bottom line itself, so don't even think about trying to correct me somehow.

In a recent interview, one of Sony's top guys (I don't know these people's names, there are too many to remember) stated something like, "We're warning you. The PS3 won't come cheap."

Experts have analyzed the PS3 and it's components and have said that they're estimating that it cost around $500 to build one PS3. I'm just telling you what sources are saying. If Sony retails the PS3 for $400, which, I might add, is still rather pricy, they're losing $100 with every purchase? HOW in the world can Sony end up in first with something like that???

And might I add something else, IF in 3 years half the US has HDTVs, won't, in 3 years, all XBOX360's be capable of connecting to HDTV's?? Yes, they will. So while Nintendo is not offering HD, there's still Microsoft to compete.

You're being rather stubborn with market share. Nintendo firmly held the crown for years until the Gamecube debuted. And they have learned from their mistakes. I strongly believe that Nintendo is capable of stealing the crown back, just as fast and Sony took it away from them.

And mark my words, if Nintendo isn't in first, Microsoft will be. Sony has made way to many mistakes. They aren't even making a profit? What the hell is that?

You just don't make sense. I try to make sense of your posts but they just sound stubborn. I don't think you realize how many people are not impressed with Sony right now.

Oh and one more thing, Japan doesn't favor Sony over Nintendo (I'm talking about the individual people, not the freaking sales crap). They have ALWAYS loved Nintendo more than Sony, as you can clearly see especially with the DS beating the PSP.

If the Revolution is as innovative as the DS was, it will undoubtedly beat out the simply updated PS2, also known as the PS3.

ESPECIALLY if it costs less, which it will.

Now back the f*** down, and stop calling everyone here all those god damn names. It makes you look extremely unprofessional.

In the meantime, feel free to express your opinions.

Smartass.

Mambo @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

B, 12 and 13 have a point, shut up, first off, i made my mind up on which console i am gonna buy way before the specs came out, XBOX360, i love my xbox, cant stand the ps2. Secondly i dont care much about Devil May Cry, Killzone, and all the Final Fantasys, i play sport games and racing games, Madden, NCAA FOOTBALL, FIFA SOCCER, PGR2 NFS2, the point is next gen games will kill PS2 games if they release the PS3 late. PLUS extra features in a console are always cool, example, xbox's custom playlists. SLAYER

ill trooper @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

"Dead by the year 2000?" What are you talking about? You lost us there champ...

So, 'b' speculating on things is somehow different from YOU talking about something that's not out yet either? You guys type like you ACTUALLY understand all the Ars and anandtech articles you see summarized on the web - and that Major Nelson thing? Stop now, don't embarrass yourself - you are only regurgitating what you want to hear. Truth is, we won't know what the systems can do until we see them.

We don't know how much the PS3 is worth, how much it's selling for, and how much Sony is going to eat costs... Just like Microsoft does with the whole XBox project.

Plus, your guess about fans only buying the company they like is off - I'll be buying all three. I'm just glad the systems have some lag time between them to allow us to get our money together.

And by the way, I do want a Blu-Ray player in my PS3 - I remember several people I knew buying the PS2 SPECIFICALLY for the DVD player... Don't underestimate the Blu-Ray aspect. MEGADETH

RM @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

by b
I'm surprised by how many morons have posted their opinion on this article.

Your the biggest so far.....
Keep flappen, its fun stuff to hear.

Rence @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Ah.. I don't believe a word of it.. what would be a Sony launch without major stock shortages?

TJ @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Interesting speculation, but that's all this article is, I'm still sure we'll see a 2006 launch.

As for the 360 beating the PS3, I simply can't see it.

XBOX - 20 Million.
PS2 - 80 Million.

Microsoft would need a 4 year lead on Sony to even contemplate challenging, they might "steal" 10 Million or so Sony gamers but the truth is there's far too many in the Sony camp for a Microsoft victory.

Internet hype is all fair and well but we are but a drop in the ocean and not representative of the casual consumer - the one that holds PS2 and GBA so high. It's not like they buy a console in the first year anyway, just look at current sales of the PS2 as proof.

Then again I could be wrong, it's not happened before but there is still a long shot chance - nothing's impossible and all that.

As for the Revolution, I wouldn't count it out of the next gen race. It's sure looking like a contender to me so far, if the "revolutionary" features are even close to having a DS type impact we'll be looking at some serious sales worldwide.

That's just my take on things anyway, it's going to be one heck of a generation anyway.

010111 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

i'm not too good with the maths and the fractions and all... so maybe someone can help me...

"For the dillhole that said that Blu-ray isn't needed, I've got news for you: HALF OF THE MOVIE STUDIOS ARE BACKING IT."

am i right in thinking that then there is an equal 'HALF' or '50%' that are in fact NOT backing it? making it a negative gain either way?

"People wants to see movies in HDTV. In 3 years, more than half of the states will have an HDTV."

one again... not too clever on all this... so would that mean then that in 3 years... an equal 'HALF' or '50%' would NOT have HDTV? almost seems like this 'not having HDTV' market *might* be the same size as this 'will have HDTV (in 3 years)' market? right? (i worked in broadcasting for 8 years... i remember when 'everyone' had to switch out and be broadcasting both by 2000. hahahaha... yeah. uh huh.)

"Halo? That game came out with a different name 8 years ago, it was called GOLDEN EYE, you morons."

oh. i did not realize that. i always thought Marathon was the antecedent of Halo... when in fact it was allll GoldenEye. boy. i feel dumb! thanks! *writes it down in a book of facts.

Jeffler @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

You guys gotta stop fighting a bout this. Its a bunch of game consoles, not potention presidents/prime ministers/whatever.

Christopher7xii @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Yeah. Just buy all three and shut your mouths.

For starters - The PS3 won't be inferior to the X360. It won't be the same as the X360. The X360 is more like upgrading a piece of hardware on your computer than buying a whole new rig. Same games, same names, same online, new rip-off controller(yay for them, i hate the current Xbox controller).

The PS3 will be a mass overhaul though. While you say it's losing 1,000 features and gaining none... That's the first I've heard of it. Just the other day Joystiq did a blog from a gaming mag that says they've actually increased the memory size for the PS3, as well as done a lot of tweaking that won't show up on spec sheets but makes it run a hell of a lot better than it did at E3. As for the losing 1000 features thing... The only one I've heard of is the router feature. The HDD got bumped to add-on perepheral... but I rather not pay extra for that since they explained it simply to a be media storage center, not something intended for enhanced gameplay. Then again, my PSP doesn't has downloadable levels that just goes straight on the mem card. Guess it's up to the developer wether or not they wanna support their product with updates. Honestly, I don't envy the idea of patching games for my consoles. It's rediculous IMO.

All three will be fun. All three will cost more than a day's worth of pay. All three will provide you with endless hours of time wasted that you could have spent working to earn money to buy the other systems.

No matter what you do, you're buying a waste of your time. I'm gonna buy the X360 to play with friends out of state, the PS3 for single player games, and the Revolution for a party favor(i mean, who doesn't like going back and playing old games? It'll be a sweet kick for the kids).

As for Blu-Ray, my reason for supporting it over HD-DVD is that DVD is at the end of it's life. HD-DVD hits its max at like 25-30gigs. While the Blu-Ray will go up to 50gigs or so topside right now, it has a theoretical limit of 200gigs or so because it has like 8 possible layers of 25gigs each. While that may sound pointless right now, in the long run(say 10 years from now), while DVD will have already been topped out, blu-ray will still have room to reach that theoretical. It's worth the investment. I mean, hell, even LotR can't even fit on one DVD right now, and the entire box set of one is 4 DVDs, which would be more than 1 HD-DVD to fit all the materials. So we're looking at a 4-5 HD-DVD set just for current videos. Once we start switching over to high def(ya know, that 720i/p or even 1080i), space is going to get really limited really fast for movies. This of course is over the course of the next 10-15 years. While DVDs may have been great thus far, they were nearly our first foray into digital video media.

Sad as it may sound, I love the idea of being able to pop in ONE blu-ray disc and having three seasons of family guy on one disc, not seven. That and blu-ray is a lot more scratch resistant.

Anyways. Buy an X360 now(especially if you like FPSs/sports), buy a PS3 later(especially if you like variety). Regardless of who wins this round, none of the companies are gonna drop hardware. They're too well established. Until a new company enters, there will always be three.

Mr.Sparky @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

In response to #2:

I think if PS3 waits too long, they could be in trouble. Yes, the PS2 sold 20 million before xbox released, but it was also more dominant in all sales because it was launched first. There were more games and accessories by the time xbox released. Not trying to say that I'm not a Playstation fan(because I am), but xbox 360 has already posted their list of games that will launch while we've only seen about a 2 min clip of Kill Zone, and one punch of Fight Night for PS3.
Now, let's talk about price. We all know that when PS2 and xbox first launched they sold for around $300. The new gen consoles are rumored to appear with a price tag around $400. Most people would not want to wait another year before getting their hands on new technology and they would pay the $400 now for the xbox and may not want to pay another $400 for the PS3 with similar stuff.
With that in mind, the xbox 360 would have a lot more games and accessories this time, just like the PS2 did. We may see a similar pattern as before, but it all depends on how devoted Playstation fans are. Hell, I'm going to get a PS3 whenever it comes out anyway and just put it right next to the xbox 360(best of both worlds).lol

Lansing @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

I believe this comment section is a prime example of my first post.

B, who has been attacked as if he committed treason, is being attacked by people that are just about as "dumb" if I dare use the word.

Now correct me if I'm wrong (which I�m sure every one of you xbox360 fans will do) but to say Blu-ray is not needed is fanboyism and you all should know it. Even Microsoft understands it�s needed. Now let me clear this up a bit for all you attackers. I did say Blu-Ray but what maybe I needed to say was (next-gen format) When developers start to code game for HiDef they will need a ton more space. Not to mention the amount of space required to make games as pretty as some of the ones we have seen. 9gigs is enough for this gen, but it sure as hell won�t be for the next gen.

Anyone who buys an Xbox360, be warned, you WILL be buying two of them eventually. Sony is really thinking ahead (I guess hence their quite ridiculous 10 year plan) with Blu-Ray.

But considering just how much everyone seems to love the 360 I�m sure the second buy will be as fun as the first. Probably helps if you play Smile Like You Mean It (The Killers) while buying the same system for the second time.

Now to be fair the first time you buy the 360 it will be at a reasonable price which probably will be very helpful to its sales and hurtful to Sony. The 360 may be the winner this gen because Microsoft�s marketing is a hell of a lot better aimed than Sony. The Killers reference was to the MTV crapfest aimed at the audiences that will be deciding the victor. So, while I personally like the PS3, it seems as if I�ll just have to buy two 360�s

shadyrudy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Even so, the ultimate winners will be us, the gamers. I'd rather wait a bit and get a polished system than something that was rushed to market, with tons of issues.

chill @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Bryan"You're being rather stubborn with market share. Nintendo firmly held the crown for years until the Gamecube debuted".

Jeeze is that Nintendo-fan denial. Sorry but Nintendo lost the crown during the last cycle of gaming systems...PS1 smoked N64, the last time they had the crown was in the SNES years.

Joe @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

One things for sure. Each system's fanboys are going crazy.

Its going to be alot of fun watching the Next Gen systems fight it out for market share.

Hell, who knows. It two years we might all be playing Dreamcast 2.

Christopher7xii @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

I really think Sega is happy as hell with software only. They're making a killing now. As much as I loved the dreamcast, things are perfect the way they are now.

xbair @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

I really don't get why people say you're going to have to get TWO Xbox 360s in order to use a next generation dvd format. There will be an optical disc upgrade where, get this, you remove the dvd drive and replace it with an hd-dvd drive. WOW! What a novel concept!

Christopher7xii @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

Opening a system voids the warranty. You'll have to either take your X360 into a shop, or send it in to get it swapped out. It's not gonna be hotswappable.

Bryan @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

"Chill" - HA!!! You're REALLY cracking me up now. PS1 smoked N64?? When and where did you get this information?? PS1's sucked! N64 had much better graphics, and PS1's loading time was HORRIBLE. Absolutely DREADFUL!

When N64 came out, it was the fasting selling TOY the entire Christmas season! That and tickle me Elmo, or something.

I don't know what gave you the nerve to say that the original Playstation "smoked" N64. It didn't even come close, ESPECIALLY at launch. People wanted N64's, not PS1's.

And notice on IGN's list of the 100 best games EVER, Nintendo holds Mario 64 much higher than any other PS1 game.

You're retarted.

And people, stop trying to correct me. When I said "Nintendo fans will buy the Revolution... Microsot 360.. etc." I was right. They WILL buy them and some WILL switch.

*Sigh*

I don't care who wins, and you all can criticize me all you want. I'm buying the Revolution, get over it.

CapTn_InSanO @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

We will see a 2006 PS3 launch only if 360 does extremely well. We will see record number of 360's sold in the first we days and weeks for sure. It happenes every time a new system comes out. What will be interesting is if they can keep up that pace. Much like the PSP is getting their ass handed to them by the DS. Sure the PSP sold great at first but now the PSP is being out sold by the PS2, an old system.
If after the holidays 360 is still selling well then we will see ps3 by summer. but if it falls off quite well and ps2 is still holding their own then SONY will wait.
If PS2 and Xbox go to $99 does that mean Gamecube at $79? Lets face it, if sony can make a profit on a $99 PS2 than surely Nintendo can make a profit on a $79 GC.

JPRacer @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM

#28, next-gen optical storage formats are not needed for games. With the power of the new systems real-time cinematics will be really good and FMV are not needed in any games.

Also if you still want to put Hi-Def FMV, remember that current DVD uses MPEG2 for compression, with the 360 you can use HD-WMV (or it's WMV-HD ?) with much better compression ratio than mpeg2. With the power of the new systems even better compression can be used for video, textures and audio.

I think M$ is really doing a good decision by skiping on next-gen disc format. They release first and at a better price. These new formats are not needed for games.