Catching up with Kaz and the PS3 [update 1]

I predict that the PHANTOM will come out of nowhere....just like a phantom would do.. and OWNZ the PS3, Wii and 360 TOGETHER



Fck these guys

The phantom will live again!


Either that, or the PS3 and 360 will fight it out while the Wii, with its low price , exclusive games and new controles will slip in the lead unnoticed.

LOL its -a ME MARIO !!!!

"Rewind to 2001 and the same exact message from Nintendo hopeful/faithful: "The cheaper Gamecube will dominate and the overpriced PS2 will be left in the dust. Who wants to pay extra for DVD? Sony is too arrogant to keep winning the console wars.""

DVD was replacing analog video tapes, which had been around FAR too long. DVDs had all the avantages of a CD over a audiotape (durability, chapters, better quality) + extra features like commentary, deleted scenes, etc. HD/BR just have a better picture. A better picture, only if you have an HDTV, which most people don't. There will be far less demand, at first, for these new formats. Especially since there is a format war (which there wasn't when DVD was introduced).

I have no idea who will be the winner, I just know that whoever it is, will need to do it as a game machine- the HD/BR aspect will not be a big sales boost any time soon.

Re: the CD's invention:

"In the early 1970s, using video Laserdisc technology, Philips' researchers started experiments with "audio-only" optical discs, initially with wideband frequency modulation FM and later with digitized PCM audio signals. The compact disc was thus developed by Philips from its own 12 inch Philips LaserVision discs. At the end of the 1970s, Philips, Sony, and other companies presented prototypes of digital audio discs.

In 1979 Philips and Sony decided to join forces, setting up a joint task force of engineers whose mission was to design the new digital audio disc. Prominent members of the task force were Kees Immink and Toshitada Doi. After a year of experimentation and discussion, the taskforce produced the "Red Book", the Compact Disc standard. Philips contributed the general manufacturing process, based on the video LaserDisc technology. Philips also contributed the Eight-to-Fourteen Modulation, EFM, which offers both a long playing time and a high resilience against disc handling damage such as scratches and fingerprints; while Sony contributed the error-correction method, CIRC."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_disc#History

ThreeSixWii, that is hilarious. Will, you, sir, may go to hell. To all you fanboys, choke on it!

Why don't we all just wait and see? You people with your stupid, pointless arguments, read this comic, this is what you people look like.

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=142

Just shut up, buy what you want, and enjoy it.

Those media, the CD and the DVD, came at the right times. The technology was beginning to become cheaper, the efficiency of the devices were rising. Even then, it took at least a few years before the systems could begin to proliferate.

HD-DVD and Bluray have that working against both companies. There's only so much extra content that people can even dream of wanting. Add to that the decreasing prices of DVDs (you can buy movies at an average of $13.50 at Target), and you're asking people to move onto a new medium just because it looks slightly clearer, all for 10 to 20 times the price of a regular DVD player.

It really does look like Sony's trying to make its investors happy about something. They've encountered a major backlash against their system, and the majority of people still excited about the PS3 still don't know the $600 price tag.

It's not arrogance, so much as it is just being blind to the demands of the public.

@95: As was said earlier, the CD was a joint venture with Phillips.

And I'd hardly call the Memory Stick "successful." Aside from a rare few exceptions, only Sony products use them, and the format is lagging FAR behind all of its competing formats (e.g. CompactFlash, SD...) in market share and sales numbers.

Even counting the CD, they've had two successful formats--one with help, and neither is more recent than twenty years. (CD in 1982, and 3.5" Floppy in 1983.)

KEEP FIGHTING THE GOOD FIGHT PIXELATOR LOL

"MORE LIKE PSP HATEBOYS" LOL

Nice picture to go with this article. I have a feeling many of the people who scoffed at that comment never played the game. The game announcer was so lame, it was funny.

Anyway, I'm ticked off that most of these highlights focus on sales predictions, probably just to reassure developers not to jump ship. What about the damn software? "Not just suddenly becoming a vehicle for delivering Sony entertainment content only." That's nice, but why do you think people ARE going to buy a machine called the PlayStation? Playstation was always a vehicle for games! Every muti-media game machine has had problems being competitive. Blu-ray is functionally identical to DVD, so why would anyone other than a home-theater fanatic buy an HD player?

Playstation sold because it had some awesome games at launch. It was the first system I ever bought the instant it was released, and I didn't regret it. PS2 made it big from the brand name. I preferred the Dreamcast, and waited almost 4 years to get my PS2 (though I liked it when I did). PS3 is in serious trouble. Period.

The PS3 situation is why I turned down the Subaru Impreza STI for an "ordinary" WRX: I could easily afford it, but I really don't want to pay for it.

My vote for PS3 is 3rd place.

1st place? I don't know. XBox360 has a lot of options available, is a good value, and also has some very good games, albeit ones that are for different customers than those Nintendo wants. I'm mortified at what Nintendo has done to their hardware (slow, no Ethernet), but they have all the hype on their side, just because of one feature (admit it... the Wii is nowhere near as innovative as the DS). It'll be interesting to see what happens. My guess is, a lot of people will buy both a Wii and a 360, though while Nintendo will make more money, Microsoft will have and sell more games. Microsoft has always been a developer-friendly company, contrary to what Windows bashers would like the public to think.

But, PS3 is not going to compete without a major price cut. Blu-ray isn't that big a deal as far as price is concerned, since most of the expense of an HD player is because of the full-blown computer inside. But, the hard drive will be an issue. Those things are mechanically complicated, and thus don't get cheaper over time unless demand goes down. They also break. I really don't know why Sony chose the hard drive over a really large memory stick. Sony is trying to boost their sales outside the entertainment market, right? Dump the hard drive and push some memory sticks, for crying out loud!

You want multimedia? Integrate the PS3 with a *SMALL* music player on top of the PSP! Make Sony TV remotes work with the PS3! Sell wireless headphones, using the PS3 as a transmitter! Let the PS3 work as a signal scaler to feed legal HDMI streams!

How can a company screw up so badly?

Here's my in-depth prediction:

Market Share

Time Period
__Xbox 360
__Nintendo Wii
__Playstation 3


2006-Q4
70%
22%
8%


2007-Q1
65%
25%
10%


2007-Q2
60%
28%
12%


2007-Q3
54%
32%
14%


2007-Q4
44%
41%
15%


2008-Q1
35%
44%
21%


2008-Q2
35%
41%
24%


2008-Q3
36%
36%
28%


2008-Q4
33%
34%
33%


By 2009, the three console makers will strike a nearly perfect balance.

LOL! Stupid joystiq and their inability to format HTML. let me try that again...

Market Share
Time Period X360 Wii PS3
2006-Q4 70% 22% 8%
2007-Q1 65% 25% 10%
2007-Q2 60% 28% 12%
2007-Q3 54% 32% 14%
2007-Q4 44% 41% 15%
2008-Q1 35% 44% 21%
2008-Q2 35% 41% 24%
2008-Q3 36% 36% 28%
2008-Q4 33% 34% 33%
By 2009, the three console makers will strike a nearly perfect balance.

To # 60...Infil,

You have no freakin clue what your talkin bout....Oblivion almost filled up the Dvd9 entirely. Just the voice capture filled up around half of the disk all by itself. I know this because i bought the special edition package of oblivion for 360 the day it came out. The developers said this themselves !!! Blu-ray is an excellent idea and Sony is thinking about the future indeed. The developers are already utilizing these blue-ray disks to add lots more hd content !!!

I think at the end of this Playstation 3 debacle, Kaz Hirai will find himself out of a job.
And that's most certainly what it's gonna be: a debacle.
The Playstation 3 is bound for failure.

The death blow will happen when 3rd party leaves for the other competitors.
Nintendo will benefit the most from this & seal the dominance of the Wii which is destined TO dominate, that brilliant concept.

I mean, seriously, it's like they're not even trying to succeed OR even mainTAIN.

More & more this whole situation looks like a payback plan from Ken Kutaragi for not making him the Sony president. It's like he's intentionally sabotaging this whole project. And the others are just along for the unwitting ride.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Kutaragi

You can be certain. Sony is not sure of itself this time around & they know their lucky streak has run out. Substanceless Hype will NOT win the game this time around. No amount of marketing will recover this injury.
It is obvious to see this by how they are jumping on bandwagons of ideas they mocked from Microsoft & ESPECIALLY Nintendo. When in doubt, mimic. And hope that you can hype it enough to gather subscribers.

There's a reason why they pushed back the Spring 2006 launch & it may very well be that they will push back this November launch as well. That's just 3 months away. They have to get production going to meet all of their previously proclaimed goals.

Believe you me, the writing is on the wall.
The attempted copycatting of the Wii control, the high price gambit (to make up for a notoriously bad business model), the prize feature gambit [Blu-Ray] (in hopes to get an edge on competitors due to lack of substance in product), press statements talking about not seeking to maintain existing marketshare(inconceivable in a business)/talking in positives about a competitor in order to slam the other one (upping the Wii to down the 360), numerous absurd out-of-touch quotes of the week/day, lackluster showing at the final E3, no concrete games that really get the crowd anticipating the launch even months before launch, too many examples to count!

Playstation 3's last bastion of dignity will be in Japan only unless Microsoft somehow doesn't go for the kill. Microsoft is gonna try their damndest to replace Sony everywhere they can except for the seemingly impenetrable Land of the Rising Sun. Their money is much longer & they can loss-lead MUCH better than Sony ever will. Losing 4 billion just to get a foot in the industry door (X-Box 1) means this company is willing to do anything it takes to hang on like a nasty summer cold. They HAVE to. The X-Box 360 can't lose another 4 billion. They have to make ground or their time in the game industry is seriously numbered. You better BELIEVE they will be aggressive against Sony who they have to defeat before they can take on overall industry leader Nintendo & their airtight business model.

People the key to watch is the 3rd party.
Sony as a gamecompany EXISTS SOLELY because of the 3rd party that exited Nintendo 10 years ago. They put Sony on the map & keep them there.

If Sony continues creating barriers to system's adoption rate (like price point, etc.), that means less profits for these 3rd parties who will start looking to the other two gamecompanies for survival. Remember 3rd party only makes money by selling games.
Contrary to popular opinion Sony does NOT virtually own them. They can & WILL leave if things get bad.

The appearance of Solid Snake on Super Smash Bros. Brawl does seem like a precursor of things to come with the future of the companies.

The thing to remember is that when 3rd party more strongly embraces Microsoft, Microsoft takes over Sony's place in the market. Microsoft's biggest problem is creating a sustainable distinction between themselves & Playstation. They have been gaining steam in chipping away at that over the years. If 3rd parties see Microsoft as more viable, then along with Microsoft's distinguishing advantages like XBox Live they pull far ahead of Sony. Especially by catering to notoriously neglected/overlooked international markets like Europe & Australia.

If 3rd party looks more to old Nintendo who DOES have a very distinct gaming system (the future of gaming: not opinion, FACT.), Nintendo DOMINATES gaming. Because they are the only ones who have true 1st/2nd party power being one of the oldschool gamemaking companies & just plain ol' being Nintendo.

1st party + 2nd party + 3rd party = Nintendo's party.
Since today's games are more complex & take more time/money to make than back in the Pac-Man/Donkey Kong days 3rd party is needed to fill in the production gaps. Volume AND genre diversity would be solved. That enhances the known high quality stuff coming from 1st party & 2nd party & 1st/2nd/3rd collaborations making the system enormously popular.

One game I see making a BIG difference in Nintendo's 3rd party homecoming is sports games like Madden. The control interface renews a some-would-say increasingly lackluster franchise. And Nintendo has the "party game" thing down pat. Imagine a gaggle of guys having a Madden party where people are "throwing footballs" with the Wiimote instead of pressing mere buttons on a traditional controller.
And furthermore the fact that Nintendo has a tendency to attract audiences who wouldn't play games (females & older people for instance) this can only bode well for the 3rd party's bottom line. You might have entire families eventually playing Madden instead of the established audience for those games.
The Wii-xperience will revamp many genres & in the process the whole industry.

Even if the 3rd party exodus from Sony is evenly split it only spells doom for Sony. Not only not being profitable (loss-leading isn't supposed to be a permanent strategy) but losing tremendous marketshare, clout, loyalty & respect. The Playstation name will go down if Sony doesn't get it together quick.

I really hope they know what they're doing because from what I've seen from these over the months the past year or so is repeated Self-Sabotage.

Good luck to them. They're most certainly gonna need it next-generation.
John Lucas

Well we can easily tell that John Lucas doesn't like Sony !!! LMAO Almost all of the crap you said is ONLY your opinion and not even close to the truth. Your gonna be pissed when Sony does extremely well this time around, even considering the price. It's mainly you guys here on joystiq that are making the price of the PS3 even seem like that big of a deal or whatever else you guys can come up with. It's by far the most powerful and badass gaming machine ever built and as far as price goes, they should be charging more cuz their gonna take a big hit on it. All i know is that only 2 of my friends own a 360 and only 3 owned a gamecube cuz they were $99. All of my friends have owned a PS1 and PS2 and are goin out with me on the 16th to wait for our PS3's (the $599 package). :)

Comment fom Pc from Msg#111:
[[111. Well we can easily tell that John Lucas doesn't like Sony !!! LMAO Almost all of the crap you said is ONLY your opinion and not even close to the truth. Your gonna be pissed when Sony does extremely well this time around, even considering the price. It's mainly you guys here on joystiq that are making the price of the PS3 even seem like that big of a deal or whatever else you guys can come up with. It's by far the most powerful and badass gaming machine ever built and as far as price goes, they should be charging more cuz their gonna take a big hit on it. All i know is that only 2 of my friends own a 360 and only 3 owned a gamecube cuz they were $99. All of my friends have owned a PS1 and PS2 and are goin out with me on the 16th to wait for our PS3's (the $599 package). :)]]

It's just me stating facts, Pc.
I'll be the FIRST to tell that even the XBox 360 is too high. $400 for a damn gamesystem?? It's ridiculous. For me ANYTHING much beyond $200 is pushing it. I think $300 is an absolute CAP on what a gamesystem should cost. And if it's gonna cost $300 it better be the Mecca of gaming to boot or it's not worth its salt either. I'm 30 years old & I've seen gamesystems all my life. I remember & know that all hype aside game consoles are STILL nothing but high-tech TOYS. And I think that has been forgotten over the years.

XBox 360 has been respectable but it has not taken off like it should being the only next-gen system around. The Dreamcast was a runaway hit before PS2 came along. It cost between $200 & $300 at USA launch.
XBox 360's price is slowing the progress of that system's adoption rate & that's a fact. It really should be setting the world on fire since it's the only thing from the next-gen around. That usually empowers sales: being the one & only.

No, I'm not gonna pissed nor am I pissed now. Sony is not going to succeed next generation. That's guaranteed. Only AFTER massive price cuts will they be able to survive into 8th generation. They will have to do that just to stay alive. Microsoft will put the pressure on them like you won't believe as Nintendo Wii becomes one of those uncanny Ripley's phenomena like the DS. Wii will cast a giant shadow over entire of gameworld.

The fact that you say like Kutaragi that they should be paying more for PS3 because they are already taking a big hit on the price as is should alarm you. Nobody with any sense (unless rich or 'hood rich) is gonna by a gamesystem for $800 or $900. Just ain't gonna happen.

I don't know if you've noticed but gas prices were a LOT different in 2000 than they are now (boy I wish we could go back to those days in more ways than one). You gotta think OUTSIDE the world of gaming for a second. Believe it that these external events affect game industry. Videogames are an optional luxury, a diversion, not a necessity. The majority of the world is poor/working/middle class. Price & budgets are ALWAYS a constant factor in their lives. They work for their money; their money does not work for them as with the rich. If the price point doesn't match the perception of product value it won't be bought. Oh sure there are always those impulsives & joneskeepers who will buy regardless of financial status but by & large most people will be turned off by that price. ESPECIALLY parents who REALLY own the wallets not their kids.

You can buy a basic computer for $600 (which has much more usable value) & $600 is mortgage payment or rent for the month. Many will see that kind of money spent on a game system as frivolous & subsequently not worth it. REGARDLESS of ability to afford.

Now your age, financial status, housing situation colors one's view on these types of matters. If one is not in a position to have to work for AND survive off of his/her money then this kind of thing is merely a present or something to save up for from allowance/summer job. Only if supported/backed by another or having massive amounts of leisure funds can someone think in this way. Others weigh costs vs. benefits & make their decisions accordingly. From those types some will STILL buy the PS3 but most WON'T. I can guarantee you that.

I really have nothing against Sony or Microsoft except that I know that either of those companies being at the helm of the industry is bad for gaming. I don't mind them being IN the industry competing & enriching the playing field (competition is necessary) but I NEVER want either of those companies to take over gaming.

People talk of Nintendo as so evil but actually they are more committed to giving the consumer a quality product & experience at a reasonable affordable price & have been this way since the beginning.
Not to mention remembering what gaming is all about when it's all said & done. Plus they move the industry forward with their innovations.

Next year this time August 20, 2007, you'll know how on target my assessments were. And DEFINITELY you'll realize these things on the same date come 2008, 2009, & 2010.

I'll be "Point Correct". P.C.
And you may even think of me as "Prophet Clarity". P.C.
Enjoy your purchase, Pc. No one is saying you shouldn't.
John Lucas

PC:

I'll need to see proof. You may very well be right, but it's not what I had heard.

Even so, game developers will not *require* Blu-ray any time in the next several years. It may be nice to have, as I said before, but it will not be mandatory for any game. A normal DVD (dual-layer, perhaps) will be more than ample space.

Don't forget, people actually have to develop this stuff. Sure, you could stuff 50GB with textures and voiceovers in theory. But games have to be released on time and under budget. Games already have production values through the roof; I can't imagine games requiring more manpower and time than they already do if the industry will remain the same financially.

And let's not forget load times. And the cost to print the discs.

Even with it available, it will not be a feasible option for most developers.

Oblivion, a game many years in the making, stuffed to the brim with more content than any game in recent memory, fitting just fine on a standard, non-dual-layer DVD is ample proof that HD discs for games are a ways off being required.

To all Bluray fans, Look at this HD-DVD/Bluray review site:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/hd.php

DO NOT BUY BLURAY OR HD-DVD UNTIL YOU HAVE DONE YOUR RESEARCH IT. THEN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION!!!

to #93 Darth Pixel

Or maybe we're old enough to remember the truimphant PS2 over the much more technically advanced Dreamcast.

In my opinion, it is highly likely that both the Wii and the PS3 will sell out at least for this year. (only exception: Nintendo actually produces sufficient consoles to meet demand, which in my opinion is far greater than 6 mil) Based on that, PS3 is unlikely to be at first place, but the Wii would be (in terms of consoles sold, not total marketshare. If based on marketshare, the 360 would likely still remain as no.1 until Q1 2007 [chances of them making a bundle to steal the thunder of Wii and PS3: 99.99%]. After that it would be hard to predict.).

so. its about 90 days before launch, ..
2,000,000 / 90 = 22, 222 playstation 3 units a day.

even if this was split between say 4 manufacturing plants that works out at....5555 units a day..and they havent even started yet.
probably wont matter to me as i wont be buying one till 2007 when all the shortage probs are sorted out. These days it just seems as though sony are filling us with s*** pie, i am tired of all this crap. All you read when you want to find somat out about the ps3 is fanboy bull or sony bull (thats ms fanboy bull also.

How about the ditching the region encoding for DVD's? I assume that BR is also regionally encoded. Now that would be a bold move. If they made it a truly region free machine that would be a selling point, probably a minor one but still a good point.

How about the ditching the region encoding for DVD's? I assume that BR is also regionally encoded. Now that would be a bold move. If they made it a truly region free machine that would be a selling point, probably a minor one but still a good point.

In principle, I agree with comment #19. I think that most people don't buy based on thinking, speculating or consideration of specs. Their motivation to buy stems mainly from earlier enjoyable gaming experiences now rooted in their head. These rooted desires are unfortunately strongly associated with a brand name that is stuck in their head. For most, especially adolescents, and naive parents, the brand names "Sony" or "playstation" or "playstation games" are stuck in their head and this becomes an unconscious motivating factor in their choice. Of course price will offset this brand name argument for buying to some degree, but in the end, I believe it will win, that is Sony will win. I think we give the consumer community in general too much credit, and Sony, well aware of the powerful brand name psychological factor, are probably not to worried. They know those more aware of gaming industry dynamics, such as many who post their comments at such sites (except of course fanboys) are few and far between compared to the mass buying community.

MOM: My son said he wanted a new game system.
STORE_REP: We have these 3 choices; Nintendo Wii, Xbox 360 and Sony PlayStation 3.
MOM: I not going to spend $600 dollars for a toy for my son. I've read about Wii somewhere and it sounded nice and it's $250 is the same I spent a couple years age, so I'll take that one.
SR: Thanks for your purchase.

* Infil: "Don't forget, people actually have to develop this stuff. Sure, you could stuff 50GB with textures and voiceovers in theory. But games have to be released on time and under budget."

Some games will benefit from Blu-ray, others won't. There's no law that says a disc has to be filled. Over time, the cost of Blu-ray will be a non-issue. DVD was expensive when it came out, too.

* Infil: "And let's not forget load times. And the cost to print the discs."

Er, load times depend on how fast the drive is vs how much memory needs to be filled. Why would a drive faster than DVD result in slower load times?

118. In principle, I agree with comment #19. I think that most people don't buy based on thinking, speculating or consideration of specs. Their motivation to buy stems mainly from earlier enjoyable gaming experiences now rooted in their head. These rooted desires are unfortunately strongly associated with a brand name that is stuck in their head. For most, especially adolescents, and naive parents, the brand names "Sony" or "playstation" or "playstation games" are stuck in their head and this becomes an unconscious motivating factor in their choice.

I agree with that part, ps3 can have ps1 graphics and will still out beat teh xbox360 or wii. TO bad things didnt go that way with the psp vs the DS. But back to topic lots people will want a ps3 and many people still believe that the ps3 will cost 300 dollars. many ordinary Americans will walk in to gamestop with 300 dollars in thier hands to get a ps3 but when they find out the ps3 cost 500-600 dollars plus tax and a game those casuals will do an about face and walk out the store like nothing happened. People will buy a ps3 and it will sell out by xmas. The only people taht will buy a ps3 are playstationfanboys and Japanese RPGfans thats it, when ps3 launches jocks, soccermoms black people, lower income Americans, rednecks etc wont buy a ps3 because of the price. Ps3 price point is the biggest factor for sonys downfall from gaming. But I do feel sorry for image concious Americans like teenagers, if they dont get a ps3 they wont feel cool anymore. If soccer moms and casual gamers see the nintendo wii or the xbox360 core packege more appealing then sony is screwed, just hope more ps2s break down by xmas so the average American can pick up another ps2 instead of buying xbox360 or Wii.

I wondered when someone else was going to run the numbers - I knew I'd get whacked on if I said anything.

Using the 360 launch as a guide - the first actual retail production units for the 360 came off the line around October 1st. The retail demonstrator market - the ones that went into Wal-Mart, Game Stop, etc., in the U.S. alone took up nearly 20,000 units - which was, at the apparent line speed, almost the first weeks worth of production.

There were, IIRC, three facilities making 360's, and by the middle of November, they were cranking out almost 10,000 units per day. Which, when you think about it, means that it took two days worth of production just to get ONE 360 for each retailer in the U.S. - which is why there were shortages - let alone dealing with the entire world. That's another reason why it took until May for production to finally catch up with pre-sale demand.

Now - what's Sony going to do with all of these retail store units? That's the question - both Nintendo and Microsoft have an active retail support division outside of the major markets. Sony does not - this is not bashing, this is just the honest truth. If you don't live in a major city, chances are your gaming stores are ignored by Sony.

Remember, too, that Microsoft installed the 360's into Wal-Marts, etc., several weeks prior to launch - that should indicate that the PS3 should hit the stores in mid-October.

It's also interesting to note that the first comments were that Sony would have 1 million units available for launch, and now they're saying that they'll have 2 million available by end of year - which would indicate a production capability of 1 million units per month. They're going to make 33,300 units per day - on something this complex? That would have to indicate 6 or 7 dedicated production facilities - from a logistics perscpective, I can't see this happening - not if they're going to have any kind of quality control at all.

The actual study is probably right - Sony may maintain 44% market share once the PS3 does get launched - but that means that it's going to lose the extra 16% that it had. I do think that Tom is overly optimistic with the consoles themselves - PS2 is going to be VERY popular for as long as it remains out simply due to the price. Perhaps split the percentages of PS3 and PS2 and call it Sony may make more sense - a lot of people and kids earning their own money can't justify spending $399 or $599 for a gaming console, but they can spend $129.

48. NeoSkye

"which are hard to deliver with only 2-4GB of storage media."
Last time I checked, standard dual layer dvd's hold ~8gb...not 2-4. Sorry dude.
And $600 is a lot of money to spend on a blu-ray player if you don't want it because it actually has a worse picture (currently) than HD-DVDs are putting out. (If you want to debate on this one, please just look at them side by side and tell me which looks better)

PS3 WON'T be able to outsell the 360 and the Wii this holiday season. Even at 4 million units, when they sell out, they can't sell more than that. 360 and Wii will sell because people will look to those consoles once the PS3 sells out completely. So even IF the Wii doesn't sell out immediately, and even IF the 360 doesn't sell a ton, when the PS3 sells out of stock, Nintendo and MS will be laughing while they rake in the sales

Well, it is a bit bothersome, to say the least, to know that Sony hasn't even begun producing PS3 units. I note, however, that they've sold over 100 million PS2s in about 5 and a half years... which means they've produced more than that (let's say 110 million) in the same amount of time. if you divide that out, that's approximately 20 million Playstation 2 units per year (and they've produced more in recent times, suggesting that their ability to produce consoles has increased). So even if we take the average, Sony is capable of making 5 million PS2s in a three-month span. Should they switch 40% of their production facilities towards PS3 production and presuming they can produce PS3s at the same rate as PS2s (which they may not, but they can always reallocate more than 40% of PS2 production towards it, or cut back on producing other electronics to pick up the slack), the 2 million worldwide at launch figure certainly looks quite possible, even if they aren't producing any yet.

However, that leads me to another common concern about the PS3. The amount of turnaround that would require would be quite precise, and it doesn't leave any wiggle room for error. I believe it would be much more likely for a defective unit to get made than if Sony had started earlier or decided to produce less units. The chances of defective PS3 units being manufactured seems to be rising upward, which is a dangerous precident for those of us who know about how buggy Sony systems can be.

Also, I don't get why people say that the PSP needs a price drop. Taking David's figures into account (by the way, great work on that), they've most likely moved in the neighborhood of 14 million units worldwide. Heck, that ain't bad at all, folks. It's not DS numbers, but it's not bad.

But the thing people have to remember is that the games (also probably the movies), not the hardware, is where Sony really makes a profit on their stuff. So the problem isn't that the PSP is too expensive to move enough units. It's that the games and movies aren't worth the value. If Sony can deal with taking a lesser profit from the software and dropped prices by $10 across the board (seriously, can anyone justify why a UMD movie should cost more than $15? Anyone?), they'd sell more software. And if people see alot of good deals on games for a system, they're much more likely to buy more units of the system.

Yeah, the words "PSP" and "price cut" do belong together, but only if the word "software" seperates them.

32 -

That is a somewhat fair consideration, but there are a few falacies that need to be pointed out. The first one is Sony cannot just switch over production facilities. True, they averaged 5 million units over a three month span, but this is factoring in improved production runs later in the life of the unit. Sony wasn't able to put out 5 million PS2's at launch. They had to improve production runs to get better yields of processor cores and improve efficiency in assembly. Given the PS3 isn't produced in the same way, making 2 million units in the course of three months may be quite difficult, especially with the reports of poor yields of Cell processors. The inclusion of BluRay doesn't help either. The PS3 has too many pieces of new technology to call hitting the 2 million mark by launch a safe bet. 2 million by the end of the year is a more managable number.

Also, while the PSP is only behind by 6 million units, the software sales is what causes the problems. Sony's consoles are notorious for having poor attach rates. In July, for example, nearly as many units of Xbox 360 games were moved as PS2 games even though PS2 owners outnumber 360 owners by around 18-1. These are US numbers. The story with the PSP and DS is even larger apparently (using the unreliable US tracking numbers anyway). Not only do DS owners buy more software per unit sold, there are more DS units out there. This creates a doubling effect in favor of the DS. Software developers understand this. If the PSP held a 5-1 advantage over the DS, then publishers would show a much larger interest in putting new IPs on the system instead of porting existing titles. The PSP is too much of a multimedia device to be a reliable platform to move game software. The PSP will ultimately be a failure not because it didn't sell as many units, but because down the line, developers are going to start pulling support for the unit. PSP owners just don't buy that many games, especially when they can download free emulators.

This is where the PS3 is going to run into a lot of trouble. Pure volume of units won't matter unless the lead is massive, as it was in the PS2 generation. Even though the PS2 only averages 1.5 units of software per system sold, having 5 times the units on the market more than makes up for it when the competition has averages around 4, like the Gamecube. The PS2 was being purchased as a DVD player after all and not a game player, so there are many PS2 units sold that never saw a piece of game software in the drive and were later discarded when cheaper better DVD players hit the market. The PS3 is going to have the same issue, especially since it is being used to drive a new technology. The PS2 wasn't harmed as much as the PS3 has the potential to be because DVD players were fairly established prior to the release of the PS2. I got my first DVD player a year and a half before the PS2 released for $50 more than the PS2 launched at. Because the PS3 is going to be radically less expensive than the current stand-alone BluRay players, there is a good chance that a huge portion of the early adopters will never play a game in it. It will defenitely not see the same 5 games per unit attach rate the 360 has been seeing thus far. The only thing the 360 does is play games (yes, it plays DVDs, but no one goes out to buy a $400 DVD player nowadays when $40 ones work just as well), so the people who buy it are buying it to play games.

Publishers will recognize this and unless the PS3 starts pulling a massive lead, meaning hitting around 60 million units worldwide by the end of 2007, then based on projected poor software sales rates, developing on the PS3 won't be worth the time or effort. Selling games on the 360 is already proving to be more profitable than selling on the PS2, and there are tons more PS2 owners. Selling 1.3 million units at $60 each vs 1.5 million units at $40 each in a given month shows a clear advantage to the $60, especially when it is obvious that the $60 game didn't cost $20 more per unit to make.

Success is based on software sales, not unit sales. The PS3 itself will never make Sony any money, it is the royalties of the software. This is where they'll run into a lot of trouble. They simply gave their consumer too many features, most of which have absolutely no revenue generating functions for Sony or anyone else. This is why the PSP and PS3 will ultimately be judged as failures - they simply are not designed to drive software, the primary method of profit.

So, at the end of the day, the PS3 can be #1 in units sold, but still be dead last.

sony will easily sell 100 million ps3's in the first few hours of release. microsoft will recall all their xbox 360's and give everyone refunds because theyr microsoft and they suck and will then go onto sell 11 units. Nintendo will sell about 20 wii's.

that's my non fanboy prediction.

Quoting an interview with a moron.

Biased Joystiq motherfucks!

I'll admit, I am a Nintendo fanboy, but I seriously can't understand why people would shell out $600 dollars for 360-like quality. Yeah, the PS3 is showcasing new technology, but here are the inherent problems:

Blu-Ray: Boasts higher capacity, but at a higher price. And will it become a mass media format or go the road of UMD?

Cell Processor: Fast and small...but how fast? Nothing that they (Sony) have shown me looks any better than the 360. Given the gap in developement (between the 360 and PS3), one would think that the graphics would be that much better..but, for the moment, they're not.

Price: PS3=$600, XB360=$400, Wii=$250 (all prices are average or estimate). Why the $600? I don't care what kind of technology your packing...you need to give me something that looks worth that kind of money.

Now, I may be wrong on all notes, I'm not an analyst. But, from my viewpoint as a simple consumer, the PS3 is at a major disadvantage...for now. The price is just too high, and the PR is terrible, banking on the fact that we consumers have no care for the consequences of the price but going to buy one anyway. Sony is just way too optomistic (well, actually, all the companies are.) Maybe over time thay may gain a foothold in the market, but only after the price goes down. And maybe the graphics will get better as developers get more acquainted with the technolgy. But, for now, I don't have $600 dollars lying around, and, even if I did, I would most likely spend it on either a.) a Wii or 360, b.) new parts for my computer, or c.) let it drift away like most of my money does (had to be honest on that last one.)

LOL! That was awesome, John.

Seriously, enough with the "non-fanboy predictions". They're rediculous and just about as valid as my dog's. And she doesn't even have opposable thumbs.

LT -

Admittedly, I did oversimplify the situation with Sony and production. To some extent, we can quibble over numbers alot, because Sony of late isn't one to go revealing anything resembling precise numbers (witness how difficult it is to pin down how many PSPs have been sold).

However, one factor I think you're forgetting is increased ability to produce. Sony has more production facilities now, and while a given plant might not produce as many PS3s as PS2s, they have more plants (and enlarged existing plants) with which to produce the hardware. I believe that mitigates the circumstances somewhat, and I think it is realistic to make the 2 million.

Of course, the point about poor Cell yields plays into one point I made but perhaps didn't emphasize enough - I personally expect that there will be some serious bugs in the first run of Playstation 3 consoles. I could easily see 25% - a half a million - having some serious issue within 3-6 months after launch (this would naturally include any that had issues any point before).

And hey, I recognize that software sales are what's hurting the PSP - that's why I'm saying that they need to drop PSP software in price by $10 across the board, to move more units. I think (or I'd hope) that Sony realizes their pitiful games sold:consoles sold ratio, and that prices for the software need to drop in order to bring that ration more in line with what Nintendo or Microsoft provide with their systems. If that occurs to them, Sony will be able to take much more control over their destiny.

Of course, given that UMD movies still cost the same as DVD movies, and the lowest rumored price on PS3 games is $60, I'm probably giving Sony way too much credit here. The prices are going to kill Sony... but in the end, I think they have more to fear from software prices than hardware prices.

"[...] They simply gave their consumer too many features, most of which have absolutely no revenue generating functions for Sony or anyone else. This is why the PSP and PS3 will ultimately be judged as failures - they simply are not designed to drive software, the primary method of profit.

So, at the end of the day, the PS3 can be #1 in units sold, but still be dead last."

That's an excellent point. Though I think what Sony is trying to do with the PS3 is push Bluray because supposedly every Bluray movie sold will make them money in royalties. However, this was a huge mistake since I can't imagine Bluray or HDDVD will be adopted by mainstream consumers, at least not anytime soon. Videophiles will buy them because they are obsessed with movies and want the highest possible quality and so forth. But the mainstream consumer doesn't even have an HDTV, and probably won't for several years, and thus have no reason to buy an HD player. Sony is relying too much on Bluray, just like they relied too much on UMD with the PSP. Sony was hoping to make truckloads of money on royalties with UMD movies, but UMD ended up holding the PSP back due to the higher price of software and longass load times. I think the PS3 is headed for the same fate.

"The prices are going to kill Sony... but in the end, I think they have more to fear from software prices than hardware prices." 32_footsteps

That is true, but also keep in mind that the extra cost of the hardware will hurt software sales as well. The 360 costs $200 less than the PS3, which means 360 owners have an extra $200 to spend on games. Given, not all of those 360 owners will use that money to buy games, but the fact that 360 owners will have more money left over to buy games should help them move software sales faster than PS3. Of course, that goes double for the Wii.

If Nintendo brings Wii games out for $40 a pop, then I expect the software:console ratio to be huuuuuuuuuge. And, if they sell games like Wii Sports, which should really appeal to casual gamers, for $20 each, that will help even more. Gamecube was designed to move software, but it looks like Wii will be the one to do it.

There has been a lot of good posts recently. I'm looking at you Laughing Target, 32_footsteps, and John Lucas!

PSP games are already drasticaly reduced in price in Japan with the PSP reduced in price as well. Often stores bundle it with five games and the bundle costs as much as a psp in the states. The DS lite btw is much more expensive in Japan because they know people will pay for it.

Many people if you mention the PS3 price to them and the graphics statements from developers their eyes go wide and they state they won't buy a PS3 till it hits 300 dollars.

DVDs cost less then one hundred of a cent to produce. Please provide the reference that shows how much they cost when the first commerical movies came out. Because I highly doubt it was 25 dollars which is what each blu-ray disc costs to produce.

Btw people when shown an upscale dvd player playing on a hdtv and a blu-ray movie player admit they cannot see a damn difference in quality. Blu-ray doesn't offer anything more then dvds. The blu-ray movies do they have more special features then the dvd versions? Are blu-ray season box sets going to cost 30 dollars and have more content then the 30 dollar dvd season box sets out now?

So far the blu-ray movies seem to lack special features or anything else that makes them desirable. As for avphiles buying them you guys really should look on various av forums where the techheads go. They are enraged at the blu-ray/hd-dvd format war. When the people that buy every videoplayer with a new format admit they won't buy blu-ray/hd-dvd because of how the old format wars had burned them you know those companies are fubared. These are people that spend 15,000 or more on a Video entertainment setup every year or two. They are not interested in blu-ray or hd-dvd. They are convinced it's the next super-vhs, betamax, super-beta, super cd, laserdisc format.

Hell the laserdisc format was very attractive compared to vhs. It had a hell of a lot more chance at becoming popular then blu-ray will. I also guess you blu-ray fanatics missed out that a blu-ray player released by sony cannot play blu-ray movies but user recorded video camera content on recordable blu-ray discs.

For those the game storage argument guess what developers can use multiple dvds like they used multiple cd-roms. There are literaly thousands of games that came out on multiple cd-roms sometimes five or six because the game was large enough to use all the cd-roms. Now how many games have come out on multiple dvds? Can you name five? Name any game that used three dvds? If you cannot name five what the **** do you think developers need blu-ray for storage when they don't have the ******* need for it know? There is nothing preventing developers from making the game content spread across two dvds. The storage argument has the exact chemical makeup of bull semen mixed with bull feces.

Has it ever occured to anyone that the public might view the Wii as just another Gamecube with a new controller? I mean every one knows about the success of the DS ( I am a proud owner may I add) but that doesn't translate very well into providing a clear picture on how the Wii might do. If the Wii becomes another Gamecube, Nintendo is going to have a serious problem.

LaughingTarget: You did not factor in that 360 and PS3 games cost more to produce than PS2 games. All those high-resolution textures and meshes require more time and artists.

Current-gen games are the cheapest because the art is simple and everyone is familiar with them and already has their tools sorted out.

Wii games will be the cheapest of the next-gen systems to develop: standard resolution graphics, a single full-featured CPU, and a development environment that most major studios are familiar with.

360 games will cost more to develop because of the higher resolution art. Also, its CPU is a little more difficult to work with because it's multi-core and more striped-down, but it isn't too bad because you can start with a C++ application and gradually massage it into instrinsics/assembly and multiple threads. And Microsoft has gone out of their way to make it as easy as possible for developers by providing solid tools and support.

PS3 games will be the most expensive to develop. It'll have the similarly expensive art as the 360. The Cell CPU is much more difficult to work with. And Sony isn't being much help; developers are much more dependent on finding 3rd party tools or creating their own solutions.

Advantage: Wii

Also, it's not in a developer's best interest to produce launch games. It doesn't mean much if 1-in-4 PS3 owners buy a launch game, when there are only a million PS3s out there. By the time there's a sufficient install base, that launch game will be in the bargain bin and there'll be a newer game drawing all the sales. It's not the responsibility of 3rd party developers to build support for a console; they are not loyal to a console and they can make more money developing for whichever console has the largest install base.

Advantage: Xbox 360

I can't think of any scenario right now for 3rd party developers to favor the PS3.

idioteraser has a very good point - standard DVDs look very good upscaled on HDTVs. Many HDTVs include upscalers that process the image, to remove noise, sharpen detail, and smooth out the edges of text. It's not necessary to buy a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, many HDTV owners may be satisfied with the improvement in their existing DVDs.

And, those HDTV's upscalers should do wonders on the Wii's graphics! The Wii's better-than-XBox1 power should be able to render 480P widescreen with pixel-perfect 4x anti-aliasing, which should scale very well!

Hm, just read an interesting article from 2004.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=ret&aid=3663

-R.U.Sirius

Let's look at that again through the power of self-delusion!

JR

Evan -

I actually did factor in the so-called HD difference. The reason HD is being made such a big deal out of is because the typical console owner isn't familiar with high resolution visuals. PC gamers, however, have been enjoying those high resolution textures and graphics for years. As it stands, PC games are much cheaper to develop for even though they are out of the box designed to run under resolutions higher than the current HD sets can pump out. Larger textures aren't inflating costs. A 360 game that sells 500,000 units doesn't cost $10 million more than a PS2 game selling the same amount. Even at 50,000 sold units, it is hard to argue the 360 version somehow costs a full million more than the previous generation version. From a cost accounting standpoint, this is ludicrous, especially in terms of cross-platforms where the bulk of the cost is equal between the two.

The games sell for $60 not because they are that much more expensive, but because the publishers can get away with it. There is a big difference between your basic SD set and an HD set in visual quality, and consumers percieve that to be a $10-$20 improvement, even though the actual cost isn't much higher at all. There is no way that Call of Duty 2 for the 360 cost $10 million more than the PC version, which has superior visuals and textures, yet the 360 version sold for $10 more at launch.

The $10 price hike is simply due to percieved improvements, not massive development cost increases associated with "next-gen" gaming. PC games are cheaper to make than console games, yet use high resolution textures.

* Evan: "Wii games will be the cheapest of the next-gen systems to develop: standard resolution graphics, a single full-featured CPU, and a development environment that most major studios are familiar with."

Nintendo is based primarily on proprietary tools. XBox360 and PS3 use industry-standary tools. It's only easy to develop for Wii if you have experience with Gamecube. The lack of power can be a liability, too, as you have to optimize the hell out of everything, whereas other systems give you more breathing room. What's so full-featured about the Wii CPU? The XBox360 has a full-featured CPU, too, it just has three of them. Well, actually, it has three cores. There's a difference between coding for three cores and three seperate CPUs (ask any arcade machine programmer).

* Evan: "360 games will cost more to develop because of the higher resolution art."

Development costs depend on management and the tools that are available. Games are cheap to develop if your standards aren't very high, just like saturday morning cartoons that don't use many in-betweens.

* Evan: "The Cell CPU is much more difficult to work with. And Sony isn't being much help; developers are much more dependent on finding 3rd party tools or creating their own solutions."

On what do you base this, the PS2? The PS3 toolkit is very large and has a lot of engines available, as opposed to just APIs. There are SPE-VMX compilers, too. You don't have to code them in assembly, you know. Working with PS3 is more difficult than other systems due to the lack of scalar performance, but it's not a nightmare. Having seperate scalar and vector units is actually a very good idea.

* Evan: "And, those HDTV's upscalers should do wonders on the Wii's graphics! The Wii's better-than-XBox1 power should be able to render 480P widescreen with pixel-perfect 4x anti-aliasing, which should scale very well!"

Serious question: does anyone know yet if Wii developers are actually using anti-aliasing? All the screenshots I've seen are either super hi-res with 16x anti-aliasing (fake), or standard TV res with no anti-aliasing. It's hard to tell what real-world graphics are going to look like. I hate early screenshots.

For $600, there's more value in spending the night in Vegas with a hooker.

I do not know about most of you but I have a feeling Nintendo is going to get access to that market share it has been looking for.

I recently found myself having some friends over and was a little stuck on what to play on the 360 because there are not that many 4 player games out there and I am sure that most people will want those for when they get their friends to come over. Little kids included.

As for Sony being able to get 2 million units out by November if they have not started manufacture that is going to be difficult. If they rush production I fear faulty units galore and quite a lot of money lost.

The relatively small number of units available at launch will probably be sold out no doubt. However it remains to see how fast production can keep up. Microsoft had to get some extra help to ramp up its production lines.

As a prediction I see Japan's units selling out, the US most probably although I am not entirely convinced. The European market might be a little cooler to the PS3. However I am sure the allocations will mean that Japan gets a higher number of units, US in second and Europe in 3rd.

End of 2006 1.Msoft 2.Wii 3.PS3 (that is units sold btw).

Mid 2007 I guess it will stay the same. Give the market a couple of years and figures will probably have a little more meaning. Microsoft has such a huge lead at the moment. Nintendo will have more consoles available in the short run and Sony have to play the catch up game.

Microsoft and Sony have almost reversed roles. Sony now has to play catch up.

Nintendo is all about having fun and providing that fun to the users. Sony seems to be more focused on making money than caring what the public really wants. The DS is outselling the PSP in Japan and America. Boasting to having great sales, or shipping, is pointless if your ass is being handed to you. Failing to drop the price just enforces Sony's desire to make the user pay out the ass rather than increase market share for the PSP.

The Wii will outsell the PS3 this year, for two reasons.
1. More units of the Wii will be available
2. Bigger price tag will sway users to buy elsewhere

My prediction for top selling/market share consoles for the coming year.
1. DS
2. Xbox (already has a foothold)
3. Wii
3. PS2
4. PS3
5. PSP

You have to realize that many game companies, at this stage, are still looking to develop for the PS2 and really have no interest with the PS3. The PS3 is a gamble because there's no telling what the selling audience will be like. The niche market for the PS3 is kinda small, since you'll have to be a working adult, rich kid, a working college student with no responsibilities in order to afford the system.

Personally I have no interest in the PS3. So far the majority of the games look to be either war simulators and racing games. I need a broader spectrum and selection of games than that. Sure the SquareEnix games look good, but I've gotten bored with their direction over the years. With an Xbox + Wii I can get double the games, broader the experience, and won't have to worry about spending $80 a pop on a PS3 game. For $600 I can get both the Xbox + Wii + Games and still be fine.

Looking at these comments, most of these posts use the word "prediction" when the phrase "complete guess" would accurately describe it better.

@111: If Oblivion nearly filled a DVD9, why did the PC version (identical in every respect to the 360 version) only take up a 4.5GB DVD?

Just to ask - but why would a PS2 owner with say, 20, games buy a PS3? They have a DVD player - the next gen format doesn't matter for a few years at least (3 even?). It's all about backwards capability with the PS2/3. And if that's the case, does the PS3 price tag count against it? I mean - why bother with a new console at all ... would it be for some innovation? I can't see the PS3 bringing that to the fore ... the 360 has its mature market place and online gaming, and the wii has - ummh - the fun factor?

Can someone please tell me why you'd buy a PS3 if it's not for blueray? Are the upcoming games really better than Gears of War? Is there any innovation better than the wii controller?

A year from now, Wii is going to have sold the most units - like EA said if you are second on everybodies list, you are first overall. Thing is, most people I know have Wii as first on their list and something else second.

Counting Wii out... of the mix becaise it's not a direct competitor - Microsoft have a console that is cheaper and can push just as many pixels.

Gears of war looks better than any sony game shown thus far and it's nearly finished. Most of the really good stuff sony showed back at e3 was still showreel, with only resistance and heavenly sword looking really worthwhile.

Anyway, I digress.

Wii first - cheap, different, and fun
Xbox second - a harcdcore gamers system, which has a much more 'gamer' focus than it's currently being given credit for (compared to PS3)
ps3 third - expensive and not living up to a single promise so far.

The PS3 is doomed!