July console sales numbers......

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I don't get this. Halo 3 won't cause a bump because all fans already have 360s, but all the FF fans don't already have PS3s? What's the difference here that makes you say that? Why wouldn't a bunch of Halo fans have held off on buying the 360 until 3 came out?

Most of my friends that have 360's are Halo fans. They went ahead and purchased the console for either next-gen sports games last year or Gears of War, knowing that they would eventually have Halo 3 as well.

There's a lot of people holding off on any PS3 purchase until it's confirmed (basically when it's released) that it's a PS3 exclusive. It's even moreso that way in Japan. The price drop will get a few to jump, but the majority will wait until the big titles are released or they get one for Christmas (so they don't have to pay for it themselves).

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I don't get this. Halo 3 won't cause a bump because all fans already have 360s, but all the FF fans don't already have PS3s? What's the difference here that makes you say that? Why wouldn't a bunch of Halo fans have held off on buying the 360 until 3 came out?

The one friend of mine that wants a PS3 for MGS4, already bought one at launch. So... based on my knowledge, I'm not sure how much of a spike MGS4 and FF will have for the PS3, or Halo 3 for the 360. But I'll guess it does spike.

[Fidatelo]

Honest question: has any system ever come from behind to win a 'generation' when behind by a significant amount after the first year?

I've always had the impression that the first year is make-or-break for a system, and if it isn't Top 2 at that point it never will be.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by path12

I don't have any console yet (haven't since Super Nintendo), but that's what I'm thinking about getting. Cheap, established base of games, plus cutting edge matters little to me......especially since I'm not sure how much I'll like console games.

This is exactly where I was last October. Hadn't had a console in years, didn't care necessarily about being cutting edge, really just wanted it for Guitar Hero. Since then, I've added about a dozen games, mostly older, cheap games, and have enjoyed the system as a casual gamer. I'm not sure when I'll consider getting a next gen, but my guess is probably at the same point I got the PS2 - towards the end of its cycle, when the "next big thing" is on its way.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Honest question: has any system ever come from behind to win a 'generation' when behind by a significant amount after the first year?

I've always had the impression that the first year is make-or-break for a system, and if it isn't Top 2 at that point it never will be.

I'm not sure we've had a situation even remotely similar to this before. We've got a new 'underpowered' system selling extremely well and a last-gen workhorse that continues to sell more units than either of the 'next-gen' systems. Some would question from those numbers whether the 'next generation' has even started yet. It appears that most consumers are more than happy with the last-gen technology right now.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm not sure we've had a situation even remotely similar to this before. We've got a new 'underpowered' system selling extremely well and a last-gen workhorse that continues to sell more units than either of the 'next-gen' systems. Some would question from those numbers whether the 'next generation' has even started yet. It appears that most consumers are more than happy with the last-gen technology right now.

People keep bringing up the "Wii is underpowered" thing. This seems another case where the big guys (and the supreme geeks) just dont get it. The Public doesnt want $600 graphics cards. The public doesnt want cutting edge. They want good, at a good price.

People keep pushing the "Wii isnt HD" thing. The percentage of homes with HDTVs is still under 20%. Most people DONT CARE if the system supports HD. Most people DONT CARE about HDDVD, or Blu-Ray. They just know they dont want to spend $400+ for a videogame. They want a system thats fun to play, and is reasonably priced. The PS3 isnt either one of those(no games). The Wii is both. The 360 is fun to play, but for most of us, is STILL too expensive.

I was a Sony Fanboy. I owned a PS. I Owned a PSOne. I Owned a PS2. I owned a PSP. I own a sony digital camera, and a sony digital camcorder. I bought a Wii back in February. In March, I dropped my PS2 and all my PS2/PS1 games off at my brother's house. Sony REALLY blew it this generation.


The longer FF13 slips back, the more I think its NOT going to be a PS3 exclusive.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

People keep bringing up the "Wii is underpowered" thing. This seems another case where the big guys (and the supreme geeks) just dont get it. The Public doesnt want $600 graphics cards. The public doesnt want cutting edge. They want good, at a good price.

I think you missed my point. I put quotes around the word 'underpowered' for a reason. People argue that, but I was indicating that I didn't agree with that argument. 'Underpowered' is only in the eye of the given consumer making the purchase.

I do find fault with your argument that the public doesn't want cutting edge. Millions of 60 GB PS3's or premium 360 would be flying off the shelves if they were priced at the $250 price point that the Wii currently occupies. People want cutting edge, they just don't want it at the price it's currently selling, especially when there's affordable alternatives like the PS2 and Wii to keep them busy until the prices do fall.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I think you missed my point. I put quotes around the word 'underpowered' for a reason. People argue that, but I was indicating that I didn't agree with that argument. 'Underpowered' is only in the eye of the given consumer making the purchase.

I do find fault with your argument that the public doesn't want cutting edge. Millions of 60 GB PS3's or premium 360 would be flying off the shelves if they were priced at the $250 price point that the Wii currently occupies. People want cutting edge, they just don't want it at the price it's currently selling, especially when there's affordable alternatives like the PS2 and Wii to keep them busy until the prices do fall.

I was trying to use your post as a jump off point more than contradict it. I'm just not that clear.

You can't seperate cutting edge and the associated price of cutting edge. 640mb graphics cards would be flying off the shelves at Best Buy if they were priced at $99. But theyre not, theyre $599.

Honestly, for the average family, the Wii is STILL too expensive, and thats why the PS2 is selling so well. Sony/MS just dont realize that most families dont have an extra $600 sitting around. Right now, a Wii will cost you $400 (system, 2nd controller setup, 2 games, etc). Thats STILL too much for most people. The same thing with the PS2 costs you $150. Thats what people want to spend. The PS3 being about $800 with an extra controller, cables, game, etc, is absurd.


FWIW, If the PS3 was $250, I STILL think the Wii would be outselling it. The Wii opens up gaming to a whole bunch of people who weren't previously targets.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Honestly, for the average family, the Wii is STILL too expensive, and thats why the PS2 is selling so well. Sony/MS just dont realize that most families dont have an extra $600 sitting around. Right now, a Wii will cost you $400 (system, 2nd controller setup, 2 games, etc). Thats STILL too much for most people. The same thing with the PS2 costs you $150. Thats what people want to spend. The PS3 being about $800 with an extra controller, cables, game, etc, is absurd.


FWIW, If the PS3 was $250, I STILL think the Wii would be outselling it. The Wii opens up gaming to a whole bunch of people who weren't previously targets.

Agree fully with your first statement. Totally disagree with your second statement. The PS3's $600 release price was a HUGE turnoff to anyone who already owned another system and a huge price barrier to anyone who had any notion of owning a PS3. My point is not that the PS3 would be blowing the Wii out of the water by any means, but the Wii wouldn't be winning by anything close to the substantial margin that it holds right now. The 360 would sell just as well at $250.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Agree fully with your first statement. Totally disagree with your second statement. The PS3's $600 release price was a HUGE turnoff to anyone who already owned another system and a huge price barrier to anyone who had any notion of owning a PS3. My point is not that the PS3 would be blowing the Wii out of the water by any means, but the Wii wouldn't be winning by anything close to the substantial margin that it holds right now. The 360 would sell just as well at $250.

I agree that the gap wouldnt be as wide, but I still think there'd be a gap. The Wii appeals to a whole segment of gamers that the other two options dont. If the Ps3 debuted at $250, I agree. But dropping the price to $250 right now still woudnt get them back in. Theres too many people who budget for 1 system, and have already made that purchase.

I'm a hardcore gamer. I own a Wii now. Why? Because the PS3/360 can't keep up with my PC, and are more expensive. The Wii gives me something totally different.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

I agree that the gap wouldnt be as wide, but I still think there'd be a gap. The Wii appeals to a whole segment of gamers that the other two options dont.

I'm a hardcore gamer. I own a Wii now. Why? Because the PS3/360 can't keep up with my PC, and are more expensive. The Wii gives me something totally different.

I own both a PS3 and a Wii. I use the PS3 for my personal gaming and bring out the Wii for parties. I have a PC, but I can't stand using it for anything more than text sim gaming. Every game requires a new card here or a new driver there. Way too much of a pain in the ass for my taste. I just upgrade to a new laptop every 5 years or so for text sim purposes.

[Synovia]

Lol, thats because you're using laptops. A $2500 laptop can't keep up with a $600 PC

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Epic Games president has announced that Unreal Tournament 2007 will have cross-platform play for the PS3 and PC. The 360 games will be separate on the Live server. Interesting move as Microsoft has been strongly advocating the ease of cross platform gaming between the 360 and PC. Microsoft may have to change their stance on mods to avoid being shut out of cross-platform play on games where mods are available. Interesting situation to watch to see if any other developers use mods on the PS3 or if it's just an isolated situation.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Synovia

People keep pushing the "Wii isnt HD" thing. The percentage of homes with HDTVs is still under 20%. Most people DONT CARE if the system supports HD. Most people DONT CARE about HDDVD, or Blu-Ray. They just know they dont want to spend $400+ for a videogame. They want a system thats fun to play, and is reasonably priced. The PS3 isnt either one of those(no games). The Wii is both. The 360 is fun to play, but for most of us, is STILL too expensive.

I've got 1 HD TV, but I wouldn't hook up my console to it even if I had one that was HD. The console is in the basement, and that's where it will stay. In fact, I don't even have it hooked up to the internet.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Lol, thats because you're using laptops. A $2500 laptop can't keep up with a $600 PC

I have two desktop computers as well. I understand that a laptop isn't as easy to modify for cheap. Desktops are expensive as well. You can spend way over $800 to get a good gaming experience on your PC.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Honest question: has any system ever come from behind to win a 'generation' when behind by a significant amount after the first year?

I've always had the impression that the first year is make-or-break for a system, and if it isn't Top 2 at that point it never will be.

The difficult part of assessing that question is that, when you think about it, we're in the 7th generation or so of hardware, depending on how you reckon it, but there have really only been three generations - since 1996 or so - where you actually had more than two viable competitors at any given time.

The last remotely analogous situation I can think of was the 16-bit era. Sega launched Genesis in '89, and on the strength of Sonic the Hedgehog and EA Sports, it raced out to a significant market share over the previously dominant Nintendo hegemony. Nintendo finally got into the 16-bit game in 1991, and ultimately wound up with 55% of the market share.

That sort of addresses the latter point - first year isn't necessarily make-or-break, but it is incredibly circumstantial. If you have three competing machines, and two of them sell very well, you'd better have a damn compelling case to make to the public for why they should also buy machine #3, because just on the strength of not being Top 2 right away you have a tougher row to hoe.

This generation isn't like the last, though; last time, you had three competitors all kind of going after the same market, and while Sony was pretty universally successful, Nintendo and Microsoft kind of traded punches.

This time, Nintendo is universally successful, but they're doing it on the whole "Blue Ocean" marketing strategy. Their success isn't necessarily parasitic with respect to the other two consoles, and so the Wii is not directly inhibiting the success (or lack thereof) of the PlayStation 3.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I don't get this. Halo 3 won't cause a bump because all fans already have 360s, but all the FF fans don't already have PS3s? What's the difference here that makes you say that? Why wouldn't a bunch of Halo fans have held off on buying the 360 until 3 came out?

Don't try to make a valid post with MizzouBBfan, he has ps3 glasses, always will. Most of his posts make no f'n sense, yet he still tries to vailidate the exsistance of the ps3.

I'm so tired of his console sales, game sales, and general "360 sucks" and "ps3 totally rulz duDez" posts.... although we still have the U of Missouri in common.. go figure.

[WVUFAN]

Do most think it's the price that's kept the PS3 in 4th place, or it is the fact the the Wii is more easily accessable to non-gamers?

I mean, do you think the PS3 would have Wii-like numbers if the PS3 was, say a $300 system?

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Do most think it's the price that's kept the PS3 in 4th place, or it is the fact the the Wii is more easily accessable to non-gamers?

I mean, do you think the PS3 would have Wii-like numbers if the PS3 was, say a $300 system?

I think the price and the lack of quality games is the reason why the PS3 is staying on store shelves.

For me, I don't think I would have one at $300 either. I got a 360 at launch and shouldn't have. None of the launch titles justified the purchase for me. After the first 2 weeks, mine sat unused until Oblivion came out the following March. So, I don't think I would have made the same mistake with the PS3.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

5. Who were the 11 people that bought an Xbox?????

Those were like the Japanese numbers for the XBox all last gen. It was comical to see stuff like the Wonderswan and PSX outselling it.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

FWIW.......Sony can (and will) sell a few million units worldwide during the weeks when Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy XIII, and FF XIII Versus (especially in Asia where MMO's are extremely popular) are released.

A big fat "No" but thanks for playing. The console numbers for when an "A+" game come out are typically in the low hundred thousand range, even early in a generation. It's not a bad number but it's nothing in the millions. The only time console numbers reach even close to 1M per week are the last week in November and the first couple in December and that's, of course, for an entirely different reason.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Honest question: has any system ever come from behind to win a 'generation' when behind by a significant amount after the first year?

I've always had the impression that the first year is make-or-break for a system, and if it isn't Top 2 at that point it never will be.

Originally Posted by SackAttack

The difficult part of assessing that question is that, when you think about it, we're in the 7th generation or so of hardware, depending on how you reckon it, but there have really only been three generations - since 1996 or so - where you actually had more than two viable competitors at any given time.

The last remotely analogous situation I can think of was the 16-bit era. Sega launched Genesis in '89, and on the strength of Sonic the Hedgehog and EA Sports, it raced out to a significant market share over the previously dominant Nintendo hegemony. Nintendo finally got into the 16-bit game in 1991, and ultimately wound up with 55% of the market share.

I could be wrong but wasn't Nintendo leading during the N64/PSX days when Mario 64 got them off to a quick start?

SI

[sterlingice]

This time, Nintendo is universally successful, but they're doing it on the whole "Blue Ocean" marketing strategy. Their success isn't necessarily parasitic with respect to the other two consoles, and so the Wii is not directly inhibiting the success (or lack thereof) of the PlayStation 3.

You know, as much as I love Reggie and his whole talk of Blue Ocean, I've seen a couple of statistics about how realistically, they're pulling in a little bit of non-gamer market but with the relatively high price point ($250 is still quite a bit), they're mostly just stealing from other systems.

SI

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

That will be interesting to watch as well. I'm not sure that the bump for Halo will be nearly as significant as some think. I think that most of the people that are Halo fans already have a 360. We'll have to see how that all plays out.

FF is obviously going to create a major bump in all three major gaming regions. I don't think MS can do enough with Halo in North America to offset that bump, but it's certainly not going to hurt MS at all in the short run. They need some good press at this point to offset the articles that continue to come out concerning quality control in the 360.

We went over this in another thread. Halo 2, on a system that wasn't as successful as the 360 and was being dominated by the PS2, still led to a boost of roughly 1 million or so consoles.

Halo 3 is the first Halo to be released on the 360, I think you'll see similar numbers.

I really think you've OD'd on the PS3 Kool-Aid or something because the blatant fanboyism is getting ridiculous.

[sterlingice]

Anyone see Microsoft's news for the past week?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/200...fficedoingwell
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/806/806886p1.html

Most notably:

"Microsoft announced July 5 that it would take a $1.1 billion charge to extend warranties on Xbox 360 consoles that were malfunctioning at a high rate. It had sold 11.6 million consoles as of June 30, shy of its forecast of 12 million.

What's more, Peter Moore, who oversaw the Xbox business, abruptly resigned this week to join game maker Electronic Arts. "

"As expected, the recent extension of the 360 warranty resulted in an increased operating loss of $1.2 billion, partially offset by decreasing manufacturing costs for the console.

Revenue increased for the full fiscal year, however, by 28 percent to $6.1 billion. Specifically, software revenue increased by 19 percent to $650 million. Again, though, operating loss increased by 47 percent to $1.9 billion."

So, as successful as the XBox 360 is in theory, they lost almost $2B on it this past year.

SI

[Big Fo]

They might mean sold to retailers in that 11.6 million.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I could be wrong but wasn't Nintendo leading during the N64/PSX days when Mario 64 got them off to a quick start?

SI

There's all kinds of distinctions I can make there that really separate the mid-90s from the current market.

1) We term that the N64/PSX days now, but Sony was really an unknown quantity, a newcomer to the market. Early on it was widely considered to be more of a two-horse race - Sega and Nintendo - since those had been the main combatants in the previous generation.

Sega was not a complete unknown in the 16-bit generation. Their Mega Drive/Master System did very well in Europe and in South America, so they at least had something to build off of.

The ball got dropped by Sega launching their system six months early with no games, and by Nintendo failing to follow Super Mario 64 up with anything of note, either on the first-party or third-party fronts. Sony picked up that ball and ran like they stole something.

2) One of the ways they did that was by cultivating third-party relationships with favorable licensing terms (one of the ways Sega stole 45% of Nintendo's market share in the previous generation before trying to emulate Nintendo's licensing policies). Additionally, optical media gave them a price advantage over N64's cartridges - one of the factors that allowed them to seduce Final Fantasy away from Nintendo - and they enjoyed an architecture that developers found easier to work with than Saturn's.

This time around, they find themselves in the opposite boat. Instead of seducing third parties away from their rivals, they're finding those third parties increasingly either making titles exclusive to non-Sony consoles, or at least committing a form of e-bigamy by putting the game on PS3 and Xbox 360. The latter isn't necessarily Sony's fault, and speaks more to the financial dynamics of this generation than to anything wrong with the PlayStation itself, but you have to view that as either a direct hurdle or the removal of a previous advantage.

3) Ultimately Sony had one strong competitor to deal with in that generation. Sega shot themselves in the foot with the aborted 32X launch, and went downhill from there. This time around, Nintendo's raking in the dollars like they're going out of style, and Microsoft not only has the marketplace presence Sega was attempting to establish with the Saturn, but they have significantly greater financial resources to draw upon.

4) Sony beat Nintendo to the market. They hit American shores on 9/2/95, while the N64 didn't even hit shelves until over a year later, on September 29 the following year. Additionally, their pricing was in line with the competition. If memory serves, N64 launched at around $199. Saturn launched at $399 at E3 '95, while Sony announced a launch price point of $299 to sort of blunt the impact of the surprise launch announcement by Sega.

This time around, Sony was last to market, and with a moderate price disadvantage against Microsoft, and a significant price disadvantage against Nintendo. You can talk about the system being "future-proof" and a great value for the money, and I'll even concede those points for the purpose of this discussion.

Point is, Wii's been selling like crazy all year round because of its attractive price point compared to its rivals. If Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 were closer to Nintendo in pricing, I wonder if we'd see that phenomenon. The PlayStation 3 is not the 3DO, but it's worth noting that the $699 price point on 3DO scared away an awful lot of people.

Heck, I'm fairly certain Microsoft has sold more consoles north of $299 than any console manufacturer in history.

Wikipedia seems to back me up on that, as the Saturn - which launched at $399, remember - apparently didn't quite hit the 10 million mark.

I could keep going, but I think the essential point has been made - the market dynamic was very different in 1995 than it was in 1989, so the Genesis/PlayStation comparisons just aren't similar enough to be worth discussing in this context. Additionally, to tie the PlayStation 3 back into that general argument, their market situation and obstacles - of their own making or otherwise - are significantly more cumbersome than anything the Genesis or PlayStation had to overcome.

If Sony winds up 2nd in this race, it will be a damn fine example of bootstrapping. If they finish on top in this generation, it will be the video game equivalent of the rope-a-dope, and one of the two greatest comebacks the industry has ever seen. I'm not sure if it would top Nintendo single-handedly reviving a moribund industry in 1984, but it would be no worse than #2 to that.

[SackAttack]

Dola,

I should probably give Microsoft an asterisk on that whole "more consoles north of $299" bit, just because I haven't seen a sales breakdown between the Core and Premium/Elite SKUs. I think it's safe to say they will surpass 9.58 million Premium/Elites sold, but they may not have done so quite yet.

I've contacted Microsoft to see if I can get a breakdown on those numbers, but I don't know if they'll release them.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Anyone see Microsoft's news for the past week?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/200...fficedoingwell
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/806/806886p1.html

Most notably:

"Microsoft announced July 5 that it would take a $1.1 billion charge to extend warranties on Xbox 360 consoles that were malfunctioning at a high rate. It had sold 11.6 million consoles as of June 30, shy of its forecast of 12 million.

What's more, Peter Moore, who oversaw the Xbox business, abruptly resigned this week to join game maker Electronic Arts. "

"As expected, the recent extension of the 360 warranty resulted in an increased operating loss of $1.2 billion, partially offset by decreasing manufacturing costs for the console.

Revenue increased for the full fiscal year, however, by 28 percent to $6.1 billion. Specifically, software revenue increased by 19 percent to $650 million. Again, though, operating loss increased by 47 percent to $1.9 billion."

So, as successful as the XBox 360 is in theory, they lost almost $2B on it this past year.

SI

They knew they were going to take a bath on this gen. They knew they'd take a bath on the last gen. I'm not trying to be a fanboy in reverse here, but it's important people understand, MS knew exactly what they were getting into. The goal was always to make money the last few years of this gen and then try to be profitable next gen.

I'm not saying they'll succeed in that, but that was the goal. I could have told you what those numbers would have looked like last year. MS is putting a crapload of money into the gaming division. Not only for the 360 hardware, but all of the software developers they are snapping up. Those exclusives didn't come cheap. Nor did the repair of the 360's. But they've succeeded bigtime in one of their biggets goals. . . slash the Sony market share.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Anyone see Microsoft's news for the past week?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/200...fficedoingwell
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/806/806886p1.html

Most notably:

"Microsoft announced July 5 that it would take a $1.1 billion charge to extend warranties on Xbox 360 consoles that were malfunctioning at a high rate. It had sold 11.6 million consoles as of June 30, shy of its forecast of 12 million.

What's more, Peter Moore, who oversaw the Xbox business, abruptly resigned this week to join game maker Electronic Arts. "

"As expected, the recent extension of the 360 warranty resulted in an increased operating loss of $1.2 billion, partially offset by decreasing manufacturing costs for the console.

Revenue increased for the full fiscal year, however, by 28 percent to $6.1 billion. Specifically, software revenue increased by 19 percent to $650 million. Again, though, operating loss increased by 47 percent to $1.9 billion."

So, as successful as the XBox 360 is in theory, they lost almost $2B on it this past year.

SI

Wow - hadn't heard the Peter Moore news; that's a blow for Xbox.

As for the financials, I wonder if those numbers include the profits on 360 games (they get a cut of every 360 game sold) or if it's specific to the hardware side of the business.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Not that it means much absent context, but 14 of the top 20 selling Wii games have been third party games.

Now, see, if the majority of the third party games weren't utter dreck, that would mean a lot more than "six million sellers from Nintendo and everything else after that."

That may be, but from what I can find the top 5 Wii sellers have been Nintendo games, with Rayman the highest 3rd party title at just over 1M units sold worldwide. That's certainly a decent number and almost assuredly a profitable game, but the fact is the biggest sellers for the Wii (by a big margin) have been 1st party titles.

It should also be noted that game sales in general are favoring the 360 - there seems to be more games sold per 360 than per Wii. Probably not enough of a difference yet to offset the major differences in hardware costs and the profitability Nintendo is experiencing on the hardware side (Nintendo is surely vastly more profitable at this point with the Wii than MS is with the 360), but it is certainly the more critical factor when projecting what platforms game developers will be focusing on moving forward.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Another interesting thing to watch on the console sales front the next couple of weeks. Sony is releasing a new bundle in Japan with the new release of Hot Shots Golf 5. HSG5 in Japan already has 300,000 preorders. Always been a pretty popular franchise in Japan.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

That may be, but from what I can find the top 5 Wii sellers have been Nintendo games, with Rayman the highest 3rd party title at just over 1M units sold worldwide. That's certainly a decent number and almost assuredly a profitable game, but the fact is the biggest sellers for the Wii (by a big margin) have been 1st party titles.

Agreed. Nintendo is going down the same road they have always used. 1st party games have always been the staple of their console, good or bad. This generation hasn't been any different. I'm somewhat frustrated right now as a Wii owner because I was hoping that might change as I'm not a huge fan of the Mario franchise games in general. I'll hold off judgement until next year when more 3rd party games are supposed to be ready. I'm just hoping they aren't rushed to market.

[gstelmack]

Anyone hear more about Howard Stringer (Sony CEO) calling Steve Jobs "greedy"?

http://www.betanews.com/article/Stri...edy/1184951615

Not sure how much credence to lend to this as I haven't seen any of the original bits and haven't seen it on the tech sites I follow regularly, but given the recent foot-in-mouth syndrome from Sony I'm not surprised either.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Another console post of the week by Bill Harris. Discussing the failure rate of the 360 and concerns that it likely is at least 25%, if not more. Also, two new class-action lawsuits (one for disc scratching and one for reliability) have been brought against MS and the 360........

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...microsoft.html

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Another console post of the week by Bill Harris. Discussing the failure rate of the 360 and concerns that it likely is at least 25%, if not more. Also, two new class-action lawsuits (one for disc scratching and one for reliability) have been brought against MS and the 360........

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...microsoft.html

I hope that Skip guy is right and they do a $100 price cut in the fall.

I also hope the failure rate goes down a lot.

[spleen1015]

It doesn't change the fact that MS is still kicking PS3's ass and is going to keep doing it with the games that are on the way.

[Eaglesfan27]

Exactly. Gamespot released the top 20 game sales of June. No PS3 titles made the top 20. They were 5 or 6 360 titles in the top 20 (and 5 or 6 Wii titles.)

Actually, here is the list copied from Gamespot:

1. Mario Party 8--Nintendo--Wii
2. Wii Play with Wii Remote--Nintendo--Wii
3. Pokemon Diamond--Nintendo--DS
4. Pokemon Pearl--Nintendo--DS
5. Forza Motorsport 2--Microsoft--Xbox 360
6. Guitar Hero II bundle--Activision--PS2
7. Guitar Hero II bundle--Activision--Xbox 360
8. Pokemon Battle Revolution--Nintendo--Wii
9. Resident Evil Wii Edition--Capcom--Wii
10. The Darkness--2K Games--Xbox 360
11. Naruto: Ultimate Ninja 2--Namco Bandai--PS2
12. Transformers: The Game--Activision--PS2
13. Tenchu Z--Microsoft--Xbox 360
14. New Super Mario Bros.--Nintendo--DS
15. Tomb Raider: Anniversary--Eidos--PS2
16. Super Paper Mario--Nintendo--Wii
17. Transformers: The Game--Activision--Xbox 360
18. MLB '07: The Show--SCEA--PS2
19. Big Brain Academy--Nintendo--Wii
20. DiRT--Codemasters--Xbox 360

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

It doesn't change the fact that MS is still kicking PS3's ass and is going to keep doing it with the games that are on the way.

I know it's more fun to post mindless flames, but the discussion does have merit. If MS incurs further expenses and bad PR in the form of lawsuits or further recalls/warranty extension, it's going to hurt the 360 in a big way. The 360's failure rate is honestly putting the old PS1/PS2 failure rates to shame, and that's saying something.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I know it's more fun to post mindless flames, but the discussion does have merit. If MS incurs further expenses and bad PR in the form of lawsuits or further recalls/warranty extension, it's going to hurt the 360 in a big way. The 360's failure rate is honestly putting the old PS1/PS2 failure rates to shame, and that's saying something.

This bad PR has been going on for a long time now, yet the 360 continues to outsell the PS3 by a wide margin.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Exactly. Gamespot released the top 20 game sales of June. No PS3 titles made the top 20. They were 5 or 6 360 titles in the top 20 (and 5 or 6 Wii titles.)

Honestly, the top sales charts don't provide a good measurement of success for a console. As dawgfan had stated before, the key indicator is attach rate to determine how successful a console currently is and how developers will respond to that console. The 360 is in first, Wii in second and PS3 third.

I realize that the order would be similar right now in regards to the top sales chart, but that chart could be misleading. If Sony had 3 of the top 5 at some point in the future with 3 AAA titles coming out quickly, that still wouldn't mean that was the best console. It would just mean that those games were good games. Attach rate is a much better consideration in determining the number of quality games without being weighted by the number of consoles.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

This bad PR has been going on for a long time now, yet the 360 continues to outsell the PS3 by a wide margin.

I disagree. The queries by the Australian and EU consumer boards along with the class action lawsuits and MS recent extention of the warranty have all occured in the past 2 months.

Also, the 360 is currently losing on a weekly sales basis in all three major markets.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Another console post of the week by Bill Harris. Discussing the failure rate of the 360 and concerns that it likely is at least 25%, if not more. Also, two new class-action lawsuits (one for disc scratching and one for reliability) have been brought against MS and the 360........

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...microsoft.html

Which branch of Sony do you work for?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Which branch of Sony do you work for?

Obviously, I work for Sony because I have harshly criticized the management of Sony in addition to their slow price cut.

I did nothing more than post something that a respected blogger posted about the 360 situation, which is obviously a big topic right now. I certainly think that's relevant to the discussion. Bill Harris wrote a critical assessment of the situation. Is he an employee of Sony too?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Another post by Bill Harris concerning the just released June numbers. PS3, PS2, and Wii sales remain steady or slightly increase. 360 sales fall 33% in the first month after quality control issues hit the mainstream press (European sales fall over 40%). Also, note that these numbers are from last month before the price drop on the PS3.

Also, discussion on 3rd party Wii games and Japanese TV claims that Wii is lowering TV viewership.

Interesting totals regarding top 10 sales by console for the month as well (for EF27)

Wii: 4
PS2: 3
360: 3

Insane that the PS2 is still selling a ton of games. I'm sure games will continue to come out for the console as long as games sell. GH: The 80s will likely sell a lot of copies for the PS2 this month.

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...plemental.html

[Eaglesfan27]

And yet, the 360 continues to sell more than twice as many PS3's.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

And yet, the 360 continues to sell more than twice as many PS3's.

Note that is last month, before the PS3 price drop. There's certainly nothing unexpected in that.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Insane that the PS2 is still selling a ton of games. I'm sure games will continue to come out for the console as long as games sell. GH: The 80s will likely sell a lot of copies for the PS2 this month.

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...plemental.html

That is not surprising. The PS2 is very popular and has such a huge advantage in install base. Of course, it is going to continue to sell games well, particularly among families who cannot afford or do not want to buy a next gen system. You mentioned the attach rate, but that is also abysmal for the PS3 compared to the 360.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Another post by Bill Harris concerning the just released June numbers. PS3, PS2, and Wii sales remain steady or slightly increase. 360 sales fall 33% in the first month after quality control issues hit the mainstream press (European sales fall over 40%). Also, note that these numbers are from last month before the price drop on the PS3.

Also, discussion on 3rd party Wii games and Japanese TV claims that Wii is lowering TV viewership.

Interesting totals regarding top 10 sales by console for the month as well (for EF27)

Wii: 4
PS2: 3
360: 3

Insane that the PS2 is still selling a ton of games. I'm sure games will continue to come out for the console as long as games sell. GH: The 80s will likely sell a lot of copies for the PS2 this month.

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...plemental.html

I like how you just pick out what makes Sony look good. Harris talks about why he thinks there hasn't been a 360 price drop yet, and it makes sense. Could result in more sales later in the year. He also mentions a good point about 3rd-party Wii games, and the fact that Wii owners want to buy software this generation.

This generation is really interesting.

[Bee]

And when sales of the PS3 peaks next month that's not going to be unexpected either. It's what happens in August and September that's going to be interesting.