HMV says PS3 sales doing as expected

What good is doing as "expected" if competing consoles and other hardware are doing around 10, 20, 30 times more then expected.

Oh well, at least they TRIED to make the PS3 look good.

Everyone is pressuring Sony to drop their price, I expect so by this holiday season. Early owners of that console ROFL

Yeah, right...

the ps3's time to shine is long down the road

Does anybody think that maybe just maybe Sony had an idea of how the PS3 was going to sell initially?

I mean they are a huge company that specialized in electronics. The prices on the products they sell range froma few bucks to many thousands. I am sure they have sales data going back many years for electronics at the PS3's price range.

Also I believe that their strategy takes into consideration the continued strong sales of the PS2. You Wiinis love to point out how much money Nintendo is making off the Wii for some reason but I'm sure Sony is making bank on the surpisingly strong PS2 sales.

I get the feeling Sony knew this was going to be a slow start and they are in it for the long haul.

@ #4 "Does anybody think that maybe just maybe Sony had an idea of how the PS3 was going to sell initially?"

Nope.

Firing the head of the Playstation division isn't exactly a sign that things are going as well as expected.

And saying that Sony knows how a PS3 is going to sell at $600 because they sell a certain amount of TVs or DVD players in that price range is beyond asinine. If I have to explain to you why, it's not worth the bother.

cc123,

Long haul? Why did the get rid of top executives if they expected a slow start. They thought a Hi-Def DVD player and a gaming console bundled together would sell well but they guessed wrong. They lost the exclusives that they thought would help them through the long haul. The PS3 is a loss. No 120 million plus units sold this time around.

So you really think that someone was expecting a $600 electronic to just fly off the shelves?? Saying Sony already lost is what I think is asinine.

@Nessuno
You can get an idea of how many people can afford and are willing to spend $600 dollars by looking at other sales data. No matter how popular or coveted something is a lot of people cannot afford it or are not willing to spend the cash. I'm not referring specifically to the PS3 here but most electronics in general.

This is a fun game. Let's all name one gaming system that cost over $500 and is considered a success.

@9

The PC.

=P

Hahaha, nice.

>9. This is a fun game. Let's all name one gaming system that cost over $500 and is considered a success.

How about let's name a home-console that is considered a success WITHOUT the word "Sony" in it. ;)

Love the amateur fanboy market analysis. So stupid...maybe you really have been playing too many games

Then you should enlighten us vanwagnen so we can all bow to your divine intellect.

Someone that goes into a thread and determines all posts to be stupid must obviously have a wealth of knowledge on the subject.

"Everyone is pressuring Sony to drop their price, I expect so by this holiday season. Early owners of that console ROFL"

Actually I bought a PS3 and even still I really do hope sony does a price drop just so more people will buy it.

Besides if someone gloats and says "HAHA I bought a PS3 at a lower price then you did!!!" then their basically saying "HAHA you bought a PS3 before me while I had to wait for a price drop!!"

and as long as the PS3 is WORTH $600, and it is, then im happy.

@cc123 4. Does anybody think that maybe just maybe Sony had an idea of how the PS3 was going to sell initially?

Poor boy... keep dreaming

kingofwale, that was dumb. What I was hinting at is that there has never been a successful $500 console, let alone a successful $600 console. Are you trying to argue that Sony invented successful game consoles? Were you born in 1997?

>Are you trying to argue that Sony invented successful game consoles?

I don't know, I think I asked a fair question, didn't I? Name me a home console that was considered major success without the word "Sony" in it.

if you want to base on future trend on a merely 20 short years of home console genre's existence, you should expect to answer the question in return, right? :)

For the people bashing early adopters, at least I didn't buy a $99 Wii for $250 when it's bundled with a half assed demo of a video game.

For the people saying that Sony has already lost, you have no idea how these things work, and fail at remembering history.

For those saying comparing this to previous $600 price tag systems, you aren't taking inflation into account AT ALL. When the Genesis came out it was around the equivalent of $500 if priced today. Back then when it was price dropped to $100 everyones' parents STILL thought it was really pricey. This is back in the California of "expensive" $100,000 houses which are now $500,000. The 3D0 is used in this argument often. The 3D0 if sold at today's dollars would be over $1000 easily, so it's a bad comparison. Start comparing based on inflation rates, and you might actually prove your fanboy complaints on price point wrong! And you wouldn't want to contradict yourself would you...

Aberu, you should go back to sucking Sony's Wii. Its what you do best. You can say whatever you want about the Wii or 360 or whatever, but, I'll just keep on pulling those sales data out...

Speaking of which, the PS3 couldn't even sell 10k in Japan last week.

NES, SNES, Genesis, Atari 2600, and if 30 million is enough for you then N64, and if handhelds count then the Game Boy outsold everything Sony did, and the GBA's at 70 million.

>NES, SNES, Genesis, Atari 2600, and if 30 million is enough for you then N64,

my question said "home console", considering we were talking about home console.

and 30 million is enough to be considered a "success"? if so, then from every analyst's prediction of PS3 sales excess that. I guess that answers your first question. does it? :)

a shame we had to go through all that for you to see it, *sighs*

Aberu makes a good post regarding inflation and how prices for consoles compare at different time periods and you tell him to go suck sony's wii or else you'll pull out sales data. Good job Beni.

Shouldn't you be begging your parents for allowance so you can get some VC games right now?

And Fernando you should get back to picking tomatoes down by the river before you get fired. I've seen you complain about prices soooo much that I would hate for you to lose your job.

*exceeds

Blah, I hate typos.

anyway, Price is definitely a factor in early console sales. but it's not as big an factor as GREAT softwares and strong third party supports.

Sony is now 1/3, they will hope to be 2/3 by the mid of next year. and hopefully that will be enough for them to grind out the first 5 years of PS3's lifespan. and then the last 5 years they can enjoy the success of PS2.

@21 I'm sorry, were you attempting to beat down any of the logical points I brought up? Because if so, you failed miserably in providing any facts, theories, opinions, other than flamebait.

Except that your inflation argument doesn't help anything. Check out http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/643/643170p1.html - scroll down to where it lists inflationary values of all of the major consoles of the past 20.

From this table you can see that the Sega Genesis is worth closer to $400 in current money. More importantly, other than the Atari VCS, no system has been successful at a relative price higher than the Genesis (and electronics *do* tend to go down in relative price over time).

Oh, and $100,000 hasn't been expensive for a house since the early 80s or 70s, so I'm not sure what you were hoping to bring up with your false California example.

Ha.. lookin at that chart, we might see a pattern..

2 others launched for 699.. hmm which are they.. The 3DO and the NeoGeo, and how long did they last.. I never knew anyone that had one..

makes ya think..

I know them as making Arcade's not Consoles..

The PS3 isnt selling as well as it could, but its still a great system (I actually own it unlike most of you)...

and 360 isnt a success either, if it wasnt for the PS3, you xbox fanboys would be the laughing stock of the industry. (as well you should be because you still cant outsell the PS2)

Rest assured if PS3 "fails" like many of you think, the 360 will go down with it. The Wii is dominating both of them.

Gamecube and Xbox were very close in sales, and the PS2 dominated. I dont understand at what point xbox fans think that being number 2 (or 3 if you count PS2 which i do) is something to gloat about

#26


Sales data.. The PS2 is cheaper then the Wii, yet the Wii sells more... hmm?

Err... Gamble, while you make some decent points, you can't base a console's success entirely on just one market. The 360 hasn't done well in Japan, but it is still the world leader in the current generation and slightly ahead of the PS2 when comparing them at their relative positions since launch (according to vgcharts.org).

Still, I mostly agree with your points. The PS3 appears to be a well-made system with a lot of fun technology. On the other hand, I don't own one and probably never will simply because I can't convince myself that I need to spend that much money on a gaming machine or a Blu-Ray player, particularly when I don't have an HDTV.

@30

Whats so hmmm about system 8 months old out selling a system thats 6 years old???

lets see if wii even comes close to PS2 lifespan totals...

Man you guys are really going at it. I would love to see you guys duke it out in the octagon.

@Aberu "This is back in the California of "expensive" $100,000 houses which are now $500,000."

Inflation on the housing market is considerably different to basic currency inflation. According to the Consumer Price index, the Genesis launched at the equivalent of today's $315. Even keeping that in mind, the ps3 is extremely expensive, especially in a time when consumer electronics are becoming much cheaper.

funny...inflation...yeah. $600 was expensive back then for the average consumer and is still expensive today for the average consumer to spend on a VIDEO GAME CONSOLE.

Sure the PS3 is still a great system...but that doesn't mean success.

As for it not being the PS3s time to shine yet...by the time it does we will be getting Wii 2 and Xbox 720.

Don't worry their will be a niche following for the PS3 like the DC but you won't be seeing any garage games on it due to the stupidity that went into under the hood.

I'm expecting it to be more of a Sega Saturn than a Dreamcast, really.

Can anybody spin the sales figures so that the Wii isn't in first place by the end of the year? The Wii will sell in 1 year what the 360 couldn't in 2 years. The PS3 will do, I don't know, whatever it does.

It's just the plain old PS3 news, just like the fact that production of the PS3 was not lowered because they still are planning to ship 10 million consoles before end of december.
In october there will be great PS3 news because the production of the PS3 was increased, but then they wont tell its for the same 10 million goal. Maybe they can just state they'll produce 11 million consoles and production has immediatly virtually increased.
But now they have the whole summer thinking about how they will explain that they old about 8 million but produced 10 million. Probably by saying they sold over the XBox360 if you don't count the last year.
If the PS3 is for hardcore gamers well it looks like the hardcore gamer is a dying breed. Or just a breed that has never existed, and are just people that buy a PS3 because the PS2 was good or just because it's the most expensive. I'm not suggesting anything but sell your PS3, and buy yourself another console and have a good meal in a fine restaurant somewhere...

Fanboys sometime forget that a game console is usually bought on value, and this value is denoted by price vs. games people want. Unfortunatly, the PS3 has no games at the moment for me to even consider the £425 price tag. The 360 was a much better choice for me and I'll probably pick up a Wii, which thanks to a discount in the store I got my premium 360, I can get the £180 Wii and the 360+Wii combo will come to about £425.

The PS3 is not expensive. It just may be expensive to you. It is still is the cheapest Blu-ray player on the market and it plays games. All of you that think it's too expensive must live in a one bedroom apartment(or moms basement), drive a chevelle(or a bike), and eat ramen noodles 3 times a day because the nicer things in life are "TOO EXPENSIVE".

BMWs are not expensive... they're just expensive to you.

You're right, for some sections of the market this is not a huge expense. For that matter, it *is* a good value compared to other consoles. Still, it's without of the range of the mainstream video game market (as shown by the success and failure of past consoles by relative price), and not every value is worth its price. Sure, a Ferrari at half price would be a heck of a value, but I'm still not going to buy one (unless I sell my wife's kidneys on the black market).

i will take the wii only the wii

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE BEING CHEAP AND COMPLAINING ABOUT THE PS3 PRICE, YOUR BEING CHEAP AND ACTING LIKE $50 A YEARS IS ALOT, YOU SPEND OVER $50 WHEN YOU BUY A GAME OR CONTROLLER, AND PEOPLE COMPARING HOW MUCH YOU'LL SPEND THIS IS HOW I C IT:

PRICE FOR HI-DEF USER'S AND FIRST-TIMER FOR BOTH
CONSOLE'S

XBOX 360 ELITE: $480
GEARS OF WAR: $60
X-TRA CONTROLL:$40
XBOXLIVE:$50
OPTIONAL IF YOU DON'T HAVE INTERNET WIFI:$100
OPTIONAL HD-DVD DRIVE:$200
1. THAT'S $930 WITH WIFI AND HD-DVD INCLUDE'D
2. THAT'S $730 WITH WIFI INCLUDE'D BUT HD-DVD OUT
3. THAT'S $630 IF YOU DON'T NEED EITHER

VOTE ON WHICH ONE YOU TRUEFULLY NEED:1, 2, or 3?!!!

PS3:$600
RESISTANCE:FALL OF MAN:$60
X-TRA CONTROLL:$50
HEADSET:$30
OPTIONAL HDMI CABLE:$100 FOR A NICE DECENT BRAND NAME ONE. (BUT I DOUBT ANYONE WILL PLAY THERE PS3 USING PS1 AND PS2 COMPATIBLE CABLES)

1. WITHOUT THE HDMI:$740
2. WITH HDMI:$840

VOTE WHICH OPTION YOU WOULD MOST LIKELY USE FOR PS3 1 OR 2.

NOW COMPARE:
XBOX 360:$630, $730,OR $930

SONY'S PS3: $740, OR $840
YOUR CHOICE

NOW LOOKING AT THE COMPARISION THE CHEAPEST R $630:XBOX AND $740:PS3.
THAT'S A $60 DOLLAR DIFFERENCE THAT CAN B USED T'WARD A GAME OR XBOXLIVE POINTS

Hahahahahaha, nice. "But the PS3 is actually cheaper than the 360 if you buy all the extra crap you don't need to play GAMES."

"OPTIONAL HDMI CABLE:$100 FOR A NICE DECENT BRAND NAME ONE. (BUT I DOUBT ANYONE WILL PLAY THERE PS3 USING PS1 AND PS2 COMPATIBLE CABLES)"

Are you kidding me? I know some people are clueless about electronics but when a retailer (looking at you Best Buy) tries to charge them $100 for a fucking cable shouldn't an alarm go off?

Do a search on amazon.com for hdmi cable, they start at a whopping $2.58.

And if the friendly salesman tries to tell you that the picture will be much better with a $100 Monster Cable go out, buy a cheap then go back to the store and tell the salesman to prove it.

It may sound wierd, but as MS seems to be waiting for Sony to cut price, does anything think Sony gains by not doing it, even if it means low sales?
Think of it - its not absolute sales but gap versus 360 that matters in the long run. And as long as both consoles remain above USD250-300 BOTH are out of reach for most gamers.
So why not just keep sales slow for both machines, wait for all the 360 titles to pass by this year, wait till the PS3 costs fall sharply and then come with a massive USD150-200 drop after a year?

As far as the price is concerned - i wonder whats the value an average 360 owner would put on 1) multiplayer for life 2) The comfort of knowing that the system is not going to crash on you or gouge your discs. I would USD50 each.
Of course the actual cost of just multiplayer on 360 is USD50 each year - which is why just 3 million Live Gold users / 35 million XBOX1 / 360 sold. Kinda sad on a system which is totally geared towards multiplayer.

don't cry when in 3 years your ps3 blu-ray drive goes out and u have 2 spend 600 more. and about the online, developers can charge u since they run the servers and have 2 make there money. and since where getting the 60nm first that means a price drop and will b profitable next year by the time sony catches up XBOX 3 will be out
with POSSIBILY Quad Core. With HD-DVD Built in sice it will be cheaper and the drive will be faster.

The Ps3 I See It Is Like The Original Xbox Big N Black With No Games And The Other System (which Was Ps2) Had All Exclusive, And Remember How People Were So Not Interested N The Harddrive, That They Forced N There, It Wasn't A Must And Had No Games But Was More Hardware Advanced Than The Ps2. But The Ps2 Was Basic And Offered Choice. Vice-versa Ps3 Has Blu-ray Built N That Isn't A Must And No Games, 360 Basic And Has Games But The Ps3 Is More Hardware Advanced But It's Not Catching The Eye Of Ordinary People, Who Really Decide How Well The Game Does N The Market. Now The Tables Turned And 360 Has The Exclusive's.And Another Thing Is That Even Tho The Xboxlive Is $50 A Year (which Isn't Expensive, A Ps3 Controller Cost's $50) It Give's A Hell Of Alot: Movies,tv Shows,music Vids And Trailers, Arcade Games,xna,game Demos,exclusive Content,instant Messanger,chat,video Chat (up To 6 People),cross Platform (pc-laptop-xbox360-mobile Phone), Live Anywhere Is Coming In Affect. Soon To Come Microsoft's Iptv, Directv Blade, Of Course Multip-play N Almost Every Game, And More Great Games. And Everyone Know's It Cost's To Run An Online Service. Sony's Service Is Free But To The Developer's It Is Not

DO MY RESEARCH. DO YOURS LAST TIME I CHECKED, NO ONE IN THERE RIGHT MINE WOULD GO AND GET SOMETHING HIGH TECH AND TURN AROUND AND GET A 3 DOLLAR 6 FOOT CABLE.
THATS LIKE BUYING A 70INCH 1080P MONITOR
AND ALL OF YOUR CONNECTIONS ARE 480i.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE NOW DO IT

@49

I do my research on all my purchases. I am big into home theater and my equipment runs into the many thousands. The cable quality argument held more weight with analog signals and their tendency to degrade over longer runs. Digital signals act differently than analog.

I don't mind spending the cash on things as long as there are benefits to it. Spending $100 on an 6 foot hdmi cable is beyond retarded.

PS> You sound like a fucking idiot so theres no use arguing with you.