Analyst: PlayStation 3 to Win Console War

RADEoN said:
well apparently their stance on HD and online play, as much of a "stupid philosophy" as it is, it works hand in hand with their sales model, and it obviously works well, as the console says have indicated.
Click to expand...

Definitely, and I think it ties into HD and who doesn't have it.
That being said - most people buy LCDs and plasmas to have the best PQ available, and those people aren't going to buy a Wii over a 360 or Ps3 when the Wii doesn't have the same graphics.

A Wii HD could fill this void, but I still don't think it would be done on the level of a 360 or Ps3 where it's going to be jaw dropping and revolutional going from a Wii to a Wii HD like it was going from the Ps1 to the Ps2 and the Ps2 to the Ps3.

The Wii hits the "it's fun" void better than any other console to casual gamers and people who've never played a game before in their lives; the fact that soccer moms can get Wii Fit and nursing homes have Wii bowling tournaments proves it. Those people make up the majority of the Wii sales, if it was broken down. If they polled thousands of gamers who called themselves hardcore gamers, I would be surprised to see the Wii end up in anything but last place (especially since most hardcore gamers are heavy online players). If the Wii didn't have friend codes, I think it would be eons above what it is now; however, it still boils down to what's popular online and that favors the competition (CoD4, MW2, and Halo 3). The Wii is (IMO) it's own double edged sword. It's cheap, lots of people own them...but it's not powerful enough to run a lot of games so they either recode the game for the weaker hardware, or they don't release the title at all.
 
It'd be no surprise.

I mean, look at the biggest most important console war of all time.

Sega Genesis vs. Super Nintendo

Sega Genesis was winning well into the 32 bit console war.
Super Nintendo wasn't discontinued until 2003

Sega would only wind up selling an estimated 40 million consoles, vs. Super Nintendo's 49.10 million.

PS3, if Sony chooses to continue to produce them, could easily wind up being the winner of this console war, looking back on it.
The same way the SNES won the 16 bit console war...way after it was over.
 
krotch said:
Also, time after time, I seem to get a lot more from my firmware updates than what I get from MS's firmware updates. Last major update I can remember from MS, was the move to the new crap avatar style. I felt that was a huge move backwards and really really miss the blade interface. I would literally pay $100 to get my blade interface back.
Click to expand...

Though the old interface was more preferable for most, cross game private group voice chat was a very nice option and it was added around the same time.

Of course the price drop was done to increase sales, but I said they didn't do anything to "deserve" the increase in sales. I never disputed the economics of the situation. Either way, at the end of the day neither company is perfect and if you wish to sit on one console vs. another for whatever reason your going to lose out on something. That's why from the start I set out to own both and I do.
 
Exavior said:
The problems with the xbox 360 have been fixed.

Final Fantasy XIII is on both the xbox360 and PS3 so that isn't anything to sell the PS3.
Click to expand...

xbox version is lower res 576p, on more dvds, compressed verses the ps3 at 1080p, 1 bluray and uncompressed textures.

big difference.
 
Why is it when anybody owns a PS3 and says they are not interested in the 360 for whatever reason, they are immediately labeled a fanboy?

Why can't it just be that the person has no interest in buying a 360?

I simply do not think the 360 offers the best possible experience for me, I however think the PS3 does. I only play PS3 single player games, I use my laptop for multiplayer games. If I was a console multiplayer type, I'd rather have the 360, no question, but since I'm not, because I believe the best multiplayer experiences can only be found on PC, I limit my console game playing to single player games, and the ones I like are on PS3.

All the good 360 games that are single player eventually end up getting ported over to PC or vice versa, so it's all moot on the 360 front.

The history of problems it has then just adds on to that philosophy which results in me not having any interest in the system.

If the next Xbox or whatever it ends up being called can compel me to buy it, then I probably will.

I have owned systems from every major manufacter except Microsoft.

I've been gaming since the Commodore 64. You can take your "fanboy label" and shove it.
 
RiPpLeeFFecT said:
xbox version is lower res 576p, on more dvds, compressed verses the ps3 at 1080p, 1 bluray and uncompressed textures.

big difference.
Click to expand...

FYI, PS3 version is 720, not 1080. Both can be upscaled to 1080p though.

I have the 360 version of the game, still wrapped, probably going to just sell off the pile of crap. Never liked FF, just wanted a 250 gig hdd.
 
krotch said:
FYI, PS3 version is 720, not 1080. Both can be upscaled to 1080p though.

I have the 360 version of the game, still wrapped, probably going to just sell off the pile of crap. Never liked FF, just wanted a 250 gig hdd.
Click to expand...

Then why are some games like uncharted 2 labeled as 720p on the box, but ff13 labeled as 1080p?

that a limitation of game?
 
Sorry, I had to correct. Old article. It was stated at 720p earlier, but it turned into 1080p before it's release. So it's a 1080p game.
 
I play on the PC/PS3/XBOX360. Depends on if I feel like pausing F@H. :p
 
Fail said:
Why is it when anybody owns a PS3 and says they are not interested in the 360 for whatever reason, they are immediately labeled a fanboy?

Why can't it just be that the person has no interest in buying a 360?

I simply do not think the 360 offers the best possible experience for me, I however think the PS3 does. I only play PS3 single player games, I use my laptop for multiplayer games. If I was a console multiplayer type, I'd rather have the 360, no question, but since I'm not, because I believe the best multiplayer experiences can only be found on PC, I limit my console game playing to single player games, and the ones I like are on PS3.

All the good 360 games that are single player eventually end up getting ported over to PC or vice versa, so it's all moot on the 360 front.

The history of problems it has then just adds on to that philosophy which results in me not having any interest in the system.

If the next Xbox or whatever it ends up being called can compel me to buy it, then I probably will.

I have owned systems from every major manufacter except Microsoft.

I've been gaming since the Commodore 64. You can take your "fanboy label" and shove it.
Click to expand...

Wow, i guess you took my comment pretty persona, huh? Im just a lil amused to how you are pretty pro to one product or anti to another product.
 
Babbster said:
Well, first off, if by crush you mean outsell them, Nintendo is already accomplishing that so why would they bother worrying about an HD upgrade to the Wii.

Second, don't be too sure that it would improve sales at all. The Wii is being sold in large part to/for the "casual" and younger (under 10) market. The folks that care enough about having a million-plus pixels that they're unwilling to buy a Wii also might not get the games they want on a Wii HD.

Speaking purely for myself, a Wii HD couldn't replace my 360 or PS3 based on the games and the controller(s). I like the 360 controller best, the DualShock okay. The Wii motion controllers are good for games that utilize them well, but they can ruin an otherwise good game. Maybe it's because I'm "old school" but in any case I'm not at all ready to go motion control-primary.
Click to expand...
Well, I meant that it'd give Wii HD the much better graphics that it needs to compete with the XBox 360 and PS3 for the "big boys" who like HD. Of course for the young kids, girls/women, and senior citizens, they're happy w/ Wii (SD).

And as I just posted a few min. ago, Sony is going the motion-control route, too, b/c that's where Nintendo is killing the competition.
 
beowulf7 said:
Well, I meant that it'd give Wii HD the much better graphics that it needs to compete with the XBox 360 and PS3 for the "big boys" who like HD. Of course for the young kids, girls/women, and senior citizens, they're happy w/ Wii (SD).

And as I just posted a few min. ago, Sony is going the motion-control route, too, b/c that's where Nintendo is killing the competition.
Click to expand...

I'm 23, own PC, 360, PS3, and Wii. I would say so far in the year 2010, my wii has gotten the most play.

The exclusives coming out for it this year (namely Zelda 2010), have a ton of game players excited.

Crysis should be proof that good graphics don't equal great games. And nintendo figured that out.
 
beowulf7 said:
And as I just posted a few min. ago, Sony is going the motion-control route, too, b/c that's where Nintendo is killing the competition.
Click to expand...

Wave and Natal have been announced for awhile now; Sony just finally named it Wave (instead of Sphere which was it's first codename, then Arc).

And I don't see Wave or Natal as doing much other than offering people a choice; it's not like the 360 or Ps3 is going to turn into "only motion controlled" systems or anything. I see those new products as roughly 1% (or less) of the console's total lineup, whereas the other 99% remains a standard "use a controller" game console.

The Wii is the other way around. 99% motion, 1% controller. I admit I haven't played a new Wii game in awhile, but the last Wii game I played that was only partially motion controlled was SPM (Super Paper Mario). I am excited to see what they do with the "mature" Metroid title they're working on; I just wish they'd come out with a Wind Waker sequel. Other than LttP, WW was the best Zelda (IMHO).
 
[adding]

I still think motion controlled gaming is a fad.
The Wii is more successful than what you would call a fad, but I still doubt it's [motion control's] life and how long it'll be relevant. IMHO most games are still best played with a controller, not by waving your arms around.

Granted we're talking about old tech that wasn't as well executed as the Wii, but look at how long the Power Mat lasted. The Power Glove and U-Force. Sega Activator. How long the DDR fad lasted. People have used controllers for over 20 years now; somehow, I don't see motion controls being used for the next 20 years.
 
Power Pad I mean.
[my kingdom for an edit button on the News forums]
 
zero2dash said:
[adding]

I still think motion controlled gaming is a fad.
The Wii is more successful than what you would call a fad, but I still doubt it's [motion control's] life and how long it'll be relevant. IMHO most games are still best played with a controller, not by waving your arms around.

Granted we're talking about old tech that wasn't as well executed as the Wii, but look at how long the Power Mat lasted. The Power Glove and U-Force. Sega Activator. How long the DDR fad lasted. People have used controllers for over 20 years now; somehow, I don't see motion controls being used for the next 20 years.
Click to expand...

I don't think success has anything to do with being a fad or not. You can have fads that make a lot of money and those that don't.

Crocs. Gay fad. Wii controller. Gay fad.
 
yeah i saw that. Even though the console war to me is moot now. Because i will be contributing to all three companies.
 
zero2dash said:
Wave and Natal have been announced for awhile now; Sony just finally named it Wave (instead of Sphere which was it's first codename, then Arc).

And I don't see Wave or Natal as doing much other than offering people a choice; it's not like the 360 or Ps3 is going to turn into "only motion controlled" systems or anything. I see those new products as roughly 1% (or less) of the console's total lineup, whereas the other 99% remains a standard "use a controller" game console.

The Wii is the other way around. 99% motion, 1% controller. I admit I haven't played a new Wii game in awhile, but the last Wii game I played that was only partially motion controlled was SPM (Super Paper Mario). I am excited to see what they do with the "mature" Metroid title they're working on; I just wish they'd come out with a Wind Waker sequel. Other than LttP, WW was the best Zelda (IMHO).
Click to expand...

zero2dash said:
[adding]

I still think motion controlled gaming is a fad.
The Wii is more successful than what you would call a fad, but I still doubt it's [motion control's] life and how long it'll be relevant. IMHO most games are still best played with a controller, not by waving your arms around.

Granted we're talking about old tech that wasn't as well executed as the Wii, but look at how long the Power Mat lasted. The Power Glove and U-Force. Sega Activator. How long the DDR fad lasted. People have used controllers for over 20 years now; somehow, I don't see motion controls being used for the next 20 years.
Click to expand...
Well, let's see how popular Wave and Natal get, not just on taking would-be Wii customers, but having current PS3 and Xbox360 customers buy those motion controllers. And how game developers create killer games (no pun intended) using the Wave and Natal.

In 20 years, who knows. I think by then, controllers will be a distant memory. It'll be virtual reality motion based by then, I suspect. :cool:
 
RADEoN said:
I'm 23, own PC, 360, PS3, and Wii. I would say so far in the year 2010, my wii has gotten the most play.

The exclusives coming out for it this year (namely Zelda 2010), have a ton of game players excited.

Crysis should be proof that good graphics don't equal great games. And nintendo figured that out.
Click to expand...

Must not be much of a gamer with so many hot titles released in 2010. Zero of which came out on the Wii.
 
Some will pay 7k for the report just because they want to see how this, um, analyst could come up with this conclusion.

Or for the comedic material. One or the other.
 
krotch said:
Must not be much of a gamer with so many hot titles released in 2010. Zero of which came out on the Wii.
Click to expand...
And you didn't comment on his dismissal of Crysis, which is currently at 90.25% on GameRankings - doesn't mean everyone should like it but it certain doesn't indicate a suckfest.
 
TechLarry said:
Some will pay 7k for the report just because they want to see how this, um, analyst could come up with this conclusion.

Or for the comedic material. One or the other.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this report is on BitTorrent. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top