Is it time to end the console war

Rev. Kitchen

Looking at the sales figures of 21+mill consoles sold for sony and xbox selling 28+mill surely console sales have peaked so is it time to rethink the exclusive games. How many more consoles can they sell and are they still selling them at a loss to get a hold on the market. So wouldnt it now make sense for microsoft and sony to sign a deal to release games on the other platform opening up the games sales to a possible 20 something million new users.

Imagine getting gears on PS3 or killzone on the xbox.

drunkmonkey

I miss Grand Turismo, Metal Gear and a playstation controller.....what I don't miss is having to upgrade my 1080i TV to 1080p and forking out 400 euro odd for a console with less adult games...

Xbox360 FTW!!!

Otacon

Sony and Microsoft want you to buy their product. Not everyone has enough to buy both systems so they will continue to try hard to convince you that their product is more suited to your needs.

In the end, when making the decision of which console to buy, many people look at the exclusive titles that console has. The number of exclusives is getting smaller compared to what it was ten years ago, but they will continue to be present as, as I said previously, Sony and Microsoft want your money.

Would they make more money if the all sold cross-platform? Not exactly. If a 360 gave you all of its games and games like LBP and GT5, why buy a PS3? As for 20 million being the peak, the PS2 has sold over 140 million units...

Otacon

drunkmonkey wrote: »

what I don't miss is having to upgrade my 1080i TV to 1080p...

You don't have to upgrade your TV to play the PS3...

drunkmonkey wrote: »

...and forking out 400 euro odd for a console with less adult games...

I'm not really sure what you mean here... less adult games? What titles are missing exactly?

Mossy Monk

drunkmonkey wrote: »

what I don't miss is having to upgrade my 1080i TV to 1080p

Why would you need to do that?

Rev. Kitchen

Otacon wrote: »

Sony and Microsoft want you to buy their product. Not everyone has enough to buy both systems so they will continue to try hard to convince you that their product is more suited to your needs.

In the end, when making the decision of which console to buy, many people look at the exclusive titles that console has. The number of exclusives is getting smaller compared to what it was ten years ago, but they will continue to be present as, as I said previously, Sony and Microsoft want your money.

Would they make more money if the all sold cross-platform? Not exactly. If a 360 gave you all of its games and games like LBP and GT5, why buy a PS3? As for 20 million being the peak, the PS2 has sold over 140 million units...

I know what your saying but the ps2 was on its own really ( i thought the xbox was better but it didnt get into the market in the same way came out later and wound up earlier there was no real competition to the PS2 so it took the whole market, thats why it sold so much)but now you also have to factor in the PS3 is up against the Wii and xbox ( combined sales of about 100 mill ).If you took say for example 150mill as the console market that means there is about 50 mill units left to be sold And if you are selling a console at a loss just how much does it end up costing i seem to remember reading something about the xbox selling at a $500 loss when it first came out just to get into the market. I know its prob changed now but i dont think they are making a profit on them. where as its the games that make you the money. And cross platform releases would double there market overnight, how long will it take sony to get to 40 mill PS3 sales.

Just thinking out loud here really

quad_red

If anything, this generation showed the importance for MS and Sony to leech and maintain exclusives, whilst creating new exclusive IPs for their franchises.

Certainly with an eye to the next generation again.

What's the bet M$ will want a Gears game to launch the next xbox? Or a Halo game? And will keep hammering on about GTA.

And Sony, learning lessons from this generation, will ensure that the big exclusive hitters will come in early in the next generation. Whether that's MGS, Little Big Planet, Killzone or whatever.

As Nintendo motor along regardless

smooch71

Otacon wrote: »

You don't have to upgrade your TV to play the PS3...



I'm not really sure what you mean here... less adult games? What titles are missing exactly?

Yeah I'm lost on that one too.

Are you thinking Viva Pinata maybe?

The world of Playstation is certainly an empty place without that adult "classic"

whiterebel

Rev. Kitchen wrote: »

I know what your saying but the ps2 was on its own really ( i thought the xbox was better but it didnt get into the market in the same way came out later and wound up earlier there was no real competition to the PS2 so it took the whole market, thats why it sold so much)but now you also have to factor in the PS3 is up against the Wii and xbox ( combined sales of about 100 mill ).If you took say for example 150mill as the console market that means there is about 50 mill units left to be sold And if you are selling a console at a loss just how much does it end up costing i seem to remember reading something about the xbox selling at a $500 loss when it first came out just to get into the market. I know its prob changed now but i dont think they are making a profit on them. where as its the games that make you the money. And cross platform releases would double there market overnight, how long will it take sony to get to 40 mill PS3 sales.

Just thinking out loud here really

The consoles have always lost money until really late in their cycle. From PS1 through 3 they have made a loss on every console, but made up for it in spades on the games - I remember when MGS2 was being released and they had something in the region of 2 MILLION advance orders in the US alone - you can imagine the Japanese figures on that game!! M$ were just announcing a profit or breakeven on the XBox division when the 3 year warranty had to come into play for the RRoD, costing them in the region of a Billion $.

rizzla

As far as I'm aware the Playstation 3 is still being sold at a loss. Console wars will never end, competition is way too good for business and when you add in fanboys who don't realise that the companies just want your money, it's also entertaining too.

RangeR

Rev. Kitchen wrote: »

I know what your saying but the ps2 was on its own really ( i thought the xbox was better but it didnt get into the market in the same way came out later and wound up earlier there was no real competition to the PS2 so it took the whole market, thats why it sold so much)

The PS2 is STILL selling. It IS competing with PS3 and XBOX.
Up until very recently, anyway. Maybe still is. I know I bought a second PS2 about 2 years ago. Pressie for kinfolk.

Kev_ps3

One problrm I can think of is 360 games still use dvds and ps3 use bluray for storage. Bluray can fit alot more data and could cause problems when the storage is needed!

quad_red

rizzla wrote: »

and when you add in fanboys who don't realise that the companies just want your money, it's also entertaining too.

You were saying...

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

One problrm I can think of is 360 games still use dvds and ps3 use bluray for storage. Bluray can fit alot more data and could cause problems when the storage is needed!

Totally off topic point pumping up his console of choice! Hoh rah!

As IrishTLR said, the PS2 continues to sell. This is as much to do with it's enormous back log of games as it is to do with Sony continuing to develop games and hardware for it. This is totally at odds with M$'s decision to terminate the original xbox definitively.

Whatever happens, I think we're all seeing and will continue to see the benefits of increased competition. Sony's dominance has been successfully challenged and now we're in a situation where we have three viable competitors.

Which is good for all.

Peadar_Rua

I think that stating that the consoles have peaked is a little bit naive, regarding the PS3 anyway. The PS 3 is only 2 years into its lifecycle, and I can only see it cementing it's position in the future, the machine itself offers so much more the than the 360, with a better range of video playback, Blu-Ray player, Web browsing including flash based web videos, Bluetooth, and with the catalogue of games growing and some excellent PS3 exclusive title sin the pipeline, the future is very bright for the PS3

Rev. Kitchen

But is it really good for us to have the split. It doesnt really matter to me as i have both ( well all 3 but i dont count the Wii ) so i can get all the Exclusive games. But for someone that cant afford to buy both machines they are missing out on certain games, the company are missing out on that extra market. There is no point loosing out twice if someone gets an xbox over a ps3 why not try to sell them ps3 games to work on the xbox why push them away alltogether.

I can understand it when it comes to pushing the console technoligy along that its good to have two machines going against each other but now realisically both machines can do almost the same stuff with xbox and sony copying each other. And with them on the market there will be littl emore added to them that they cant do all ready it just needs to be unlocked.

It works on the PC imagine if you couldnt work windows on a sony laptop ??

quad_red

Peadar_Rua wrote: »

I think that stating that the consoles have peaked is a little bit naive, regarding the PS3 anyway. The PS 3 is only 2 years into its lifecycle, and I can only see it cementing it's position in the future, the machine itself offers so much more the than the 360, with a better range of video playback, Blu-Ray player, Web browsing including flash based web videos, Bluetooth, and with the catalogue of games growing and some excellent PS3 exclusive title sin the pipeline, the future is very bright for the PS3

But not as a games machine.

The PS3 is, and always will be, limited in terms of web browsing (in my opinion). Given the plummeting cost of netbooks and cheap laptops, I think the whole convergence argument is still electronics company spin for the time being and in the near future.

In the end - I bought a console to play games. And the vast majority of people I know did the same. The reason M$ was forced to offer such a complete and exhaustive cover on the RROD is because they had competition.



And M$'s willingness to pump money into new IPs, make it easy for developers to produce and port games to the 360, it's willingness to bribe the hell out of developers in terms of DLC and it's creation of a functional, streamlined and very effective online service is what has allowed it to compete in this cycle.

The playing field is roughly equal and we are better off for it.

The PS3 would still be 600 quid if it wasn't for the roasting pressure Sony got from the 360 and the Wii.

GothPunk

Whilst the PS2 is the best selling home console of all time (so far), most of those sales were at the $199-149 price point. The 360 has reached that point and has seen sales increase worldwide, most dramatically in Europe where sales doubled. The Wii has always been at the $249 price point so price was never an issue for Nintendo regarding potential future sales. The PS3 too most likely will see large gains when it's price point reaches $249-$199. Whether like the PS2 the majority of it's sales will be at this price point remains to be seen.

It's a bit early to be saying that the consoles have peaked for a few reasons. Sure we can look at the last generation as being made up of approximately 200 million units sold (Dreamcast -10.6, PS2 -140, Gamecube -21.74 and Xbox -24), but do we really believe that the games console industry is still only selling to 200 million people?

Nintendo and MMOs have broadened the market, to where gaming is being percieved as a normal hobby. More and more people game now who may have never gamed before. The handheld market is also exploding and seems to be helping home console sales as people buy their DS and PSP and then start to look at Wii/360/PS3/PS2. We won't know the size of the gaming market as it is now for a few years, but I seriously doubt it's 140 million. I'd say thanks to Nintendo and Blizzard it'll be more like 500 million at the end of this generation.

It could be said that as the market increases, the more room there is for competing consoles. There most likely are enough consumers out there for Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony to all make a lot of money if they tailor their consoles to different niches of the market (which arguably they are doing already).

Microsoft have dropped price drastically, to undercut the PS3 by a wide margain and also bring it more closely into competition with the Wii. If they are still making profit on their console after this price drop, then they are in a very healthy position. I doubt they've hit their peak. If they're making a loss on each console after the price cut, then perhaps they could be in a bit of trouble, but it's Microsoft - they'll adapt, aggressively if necessary.

Considering the PS3 is almost double the price of the 360 and Wii in most parts of the world, it's still doing well for Sony. We might hate them for it, but they're being smart. They're cutting the price of the console as the price of manufacture drops, so I doubt they've hit their peak as it'll be a while before they reach the $199 sweet spot. Their hardware business is still making losses, but software profits were up 96% from last fiscal year. In a year or so the PS3 will be much more profitable and we'll see more price cuts after the one that's sure to happen later this year. Then we can start thinking about when the PS3 will peak.

The Wii is a powerhouse but it is possible that it has peaked, but only because it has done so amazingly well up to this point. Will they sell 4 million Wii next Xmas in the U.S.? Possibly. We just don't know how much Nintendo have managed to grow the market. We also don't know if people are buying a Wii instead of a 360/PS3, or if a lot of the people buying a Wii represent an entire new market of people who have no interest in a 360 or a PS3. It's also possible that later on in this generation that people will move from the Wii to the 360 or the PS3.

Basically my point is that this generation is so ground breaking it's a bit premature to say that any of the consoles have peaked.

The console wars are a good thing for us anyway. We need competition in all markets to keep the drive there to innovate and attract consumers. I like exclusive games because it means that the game is developed 100% with the strengths of one console in mind. Manufacturers need exclusive games to drive hardware sales, otherwise this Friday more people could be buying Killzone 2 for the 360 as its cheaper.

A better proposal would be for there to be one console next gen and for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo to focus on software. We know that'll never happen though! :pac:

drunkmonkey

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Why would you need to do that?

the last time I checked you needed a 1080p TV to get the best picture out of the ps3, without it the xbox is just as good....yes/no?

GothPunk

drunkmonkey wrote: »

the last time I checked you needed a 1080p TV to get the best picture out of the ps3, without it the xbox is just as good....yes/no?

Most games released for both consoles are only 720p. The Xbox 360 and the PS3 are both HD consoles, but I can't think of many games that are 1080p. WipeOut HD and Gran Turismo 5: Prologue are both 1080p natively (don't know any 1080p 360 games, I'm sure there are a few), but most games are 720p and get upscaled to 1080p.

However, if you plan to be watching a lot of Blu Ray films on your PS3, 1080p would be best.

Mossy Monk

drunkmonkey wrote: »

the last time I checked you needed a 1080p TV to get the best picture out of the ps3, without it the xbox is just as good....yes/no?

How can a 1080i picture on an xbox be as good as a 1080p picture on a PS3? 1080i is 1080i and 1080p is 1080p

Kev_ps3

quad_red wrote: »

You were saying...



Totally off topic point pumping up his console of choice! Hoh rah!

As IrishTLR said, the PS2 continues to sell. This is as much to do with it's enormous back log of games as it is to do with Sony continuing to develop games and hardware for it. This is totally at odds with M$'s decision to terminate the original xbox definitively.

Whatever happens, I think we're all seeing and will continue to see the benefits of increased competition. Sony's dominance has been successfully challenged and now we're in a situation where we have three viable competitors.

Which is good for all.

How is it totally off topic? The OP was saying how wouldnt it be great if ps3 games were available on the 360, and visa-vera. I was just saying that considering the storage differences if a ps3 exclusive on blu-ray was too big to fit on a dvd it would case problems.

giggsy664

And some parts of MGS would have to be edited to avoid "outrage" amongest non Blu-Ray consoles. Hehehe.

AlmightyCushion

drunkmonkey wrote: »

the last time I checked you needed a 1080p TV to get the best picture out of the ps3, without it the xbox is just as good....yes/no?

If a game supports 1080p then yes it will look better than on a 720p/1080i tv. It's by no means neccessary. Also a 1080p picture is better than a 720p/1080i so if a ps3 is outputting content at 1080p and an xbox is outputting content at 1080i/720p the ps3 content will be of a higher quality. If a ps3 or xbox is outputting the same content at 1080i/720p they will look exactly the same.

If you are going to bash a console at least have the technical knowledge to back up some of your complaints about it.

drunkmonkey

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

If a game supports 1080p then yes it will look better than on a 720p/1080i tv. It's by no means neccessary. Also a 1080p picture is better than a 720p/1080i so if a ps3 is outputting content at 1080p and an xbox is outputting content at 1080i/720p the ps3 content will be of a higher quality. If a ps3 or xbox is outputting the same content at 1080i/720p they will look exactly the same.

If you are going to bash a console at least have the technical knowledge to back up some of your complaints about it.

that's what I thought I said.....:rolleyes:
i'd never be happy knowing I had a 1080p capable console and a 1080i TV... the ps3 and the TV needed to go with it is a tad expensive...i'm complaning the ps3 (blueray) is over priced..and the 360 is missing blueray(if that's the future)

admit it's only a niggle....:o

noodler

I have yet to try a blue ray film on my ps3. I bought a HD Ready Monitor with it but will not buy a movie for 20e. I am looking at a fairly cheap First season of Terminator:TSCC on BR as a possible first time purchase though.


I assume it will still look suitably amazing too me given I have only ever watched DVDs in SD before.

Oh and competition is soooo important. If MS completely won this generation and forced Sony out then 360 owners would gain this gen but EVERYONE would lose out next gen.
I would very much like to see a combined online policy for major consoles though. I mean I personally think it is stupid I can't play my 360 mate in PES just cos I have the PS3 version for example. Seems like a compromise the companies could make for us. It would also nearly double the amount of potential players online-especially helpful when a game is getting less popular and you find it takes longer to get an online game.

mayordenis

lol anti console war thread has descended into war.
ghey

noodler

mayordenis wrote: »

lol anti console war thread has descended into war.
ghey

Your definition of war amuses me.

AlmightyCushion

drunkmonkey wrote: »

that's what I thought I said.....:rolleyes:
i'd never be happy knowing I had a 1080p capable console and a 1080i TV... the ps3 and the TV needed to go with it is a tad expensive...i'm complaning the ps3 (blueray) is over priced..and the 360 is missing blueray(if that's the future)

admit it's only a niggle....:o

Unfortunately most of the games don't even output at 1080p so even if you had a 1080p tv on most games it wouldn't be any difference in quality.