SNES, Wii, 360, DS, Xbox1, PS2, Gameboy, N64 Outselling PS3

[Easy Mac]

At least they are right now on Amazon

There are even 3 versions of the DS and the PS2 network adapter outselling it.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers...767220-7204861

[SackAttack]

In fairness, that's probably more a matter of availability than anything else.

There are like 100 million SNES units out there. Not nearly that many PS3's (even if it is readily available in stores now).

[PadresFan104]

Funny you mention that. Went looking for a Wii for my brother today at Best Buy, Fry's, EBGames, and Target. All Stores had more than 10 PS3's available for $599. No Wii's to be found.

I honestly don't think it's an availability issue, it's a price/value issue.

[rowech]

I just bought a 360 after much debate...just simply decided the PS3 was too much for such little difference gaming wise. If I had a 1080p TV instead of 720p I might have gone for the PS3 a bit more than I did for the Blue Ray player. In some ways, I think PS3 might have built too good of a system for the current technology in most houses.

[Fidatelo]

PS3 = 3DO

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

PS3 = 3DO

BURN

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by PadresFan104

I honestly don't think it's an availability issue, it's a price/value issue.

It's not an availability issue relative to contemporary systems.

It's a matter of market share for the older stuff like SNES. If there are 100x as many vintage systems on the market, even 2% turnover on Amazon is still going to be twice as many sales.

Obviously it's not that extreme. I'm simply saying that PS3 to Wii and 360 is a fair comparison.

PS3 to anything prior is a little more shaded.

[PadresFan104]

Fair enough.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

PS3 = 3DO

Dude, that's just low.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Dude, that's just low.

PS3=NeoGeo?

[WVUFAN]

There are far too many 360 fanboys on this site.

[Mike Lowe]

I've never understood the talk of a PS3 being too costly when compared to a 360. With all of the exrtra add-on purchases required for an X-Box 360, to get it to its full capacity, it just doesn't make sense to me. Unless you lack the ability to think ahead and see past your initial purchase, the two systems are almost identically priced over time.

[Easy Mac]

i don't own either, nor do i intend to buy either. i also have a ps2, ps1 and a normal xbox... not sure how that makes someone a fanboy, but ok. I just found it interesting that practically every console in existence is outselling the PS3 on Amazon.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Mike Lowe

I've never understood the talk of a PS3 being too costly when compared to a 360. With all of the exrtra add-on purchases required for an X-Box 360, to get it to its full capacity, it just doesn't make sense to me. Unless you lack the ability to think ahead and see past your initial purchase, the two systems are almost identically priced over time.

They are? How so?

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by dangarion

They are? How so?

399 for the premium 360 with the harddrive and wireless + 199 for the HD-DVD player = 598 before tax. Even then, you only get a 20 gig hard drive compared to 60gigs. Throw in the wireless network adapter and you are at 700 bucks plus tax and you have no games and one controller (same with PS3 but point being it's still expensive).

[INDalltheway]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

399 for the premium 360 with the harddrive and wireless + 199 for the HD-DVD player = 598 before tax. Even then, you only get a 20 gig hard drive compared to 60gigs. Throw in the wireless network adapter and you are at 700 bucks plus tax and you have no games and one controller (same with PS3 but point being it's still expensive).

I hate this argument. The thing is Xbox gives you the option whether you want to spend $200 dollars on the HD-DVD player instead of forcing it on the customer. Not many people have bought this (HD-DVD) because it hasn't become a mainstream thing to buy HD-DVDs. You can't just say you "have to spend $200." Most people want to play games on their gaming system and watching movies elsewhere. I understand that Sony is trying to make the gaming system and movie player become 1 thing, but it isn't that way in many homes. So yeah, please don't use that argument ever again.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by INDalltheway

I hate this argument. The thing is Xbox gives you the option whether you want to spend $200 dollars on the HD-DVD player instead of forcing it on the customer. Not many people have bought this (HD-DVD) because it hasn't become a mainstream thing to buy HD-DVDs. You can't just say you "have to spend $200." Most people want to play games on their gaming system and watching movies elsewhere. I understand that Sony is trying to make the gaming system and movie player become 1 thing, but it isn't that way in many homes. So yeah, please don't use that argument ever again.

Uh? hello?

The guy asked how the systems costed the same with the xbox 360 addons to make it run at full capacity (which to me is the same capacity as a PS3). I never said they weren't optional.

I find this argument about how they are optional even more stupid, nobody ever stated they aren't optional - it's simply if you want the best experience you have to spend as much money as the PS3 (if not more). This is also forgetting the fact that because of all these addons being optional for the 360, they will not be as thoroughly supported (ie the HD-DVD player, and the hard drive). Since every PS3 has a hard drive and a blu-ray player, they can be fully maximized assuming the system takes off (this is still debatable but it'll atleast be mildly supported short-term).

[INDalltheway]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

they will not be as thoroughly supported (ie the HD-DVD player, and the hard drive.

I hope you are kidding... That is all I am going to say.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by INDalltheway

I hope you are kidding... That is all I am going to say.

The market place does great with the hard drive but developers can't build games with the hard drive in mind because it's an optional purchase. HD-DVD addons weren't even launched with HDMI, they have no game support and Microsoft only chose to support HD-DVD due to the fact their opposition owns blu-ray.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

The market place does great with the hard drive but developers can't build games with the hard drive in mind because it's an optional purchase. HD-DVD addons weren't even launched with HDMI, they have no game support and Microsoft only chose to support HD-DVD due to the fact their opposition owns blu-ray.

I'd be willing to bet you that if Microsoft ever released sales numbers reflecting the breakdown between core and premium 360s, you'd find at least 9 premium systems in homes for every one core that sells.

Further, there are some games that *require* the hard drive. I doubt Splinter Cell has seen material sales reductions due to that requirement. There's nothing stopping any of these companies from optimizing their product except a nebulous fear of 'what if.'

I don't think the HD-DVD drive even connects directly to a TV, so the HDMI argument is specious at best (although it would have been nice if the 360 proper had had those inputs).

As to the reasons for their support, I tend to think they'd much rather see Video Marketplace succeed than *either* HD-DVD or Blu-ray (which I suspect you were alluding to). HD-DVD is just an effective blunting tool. Had a guy yesterday choose not to buy a PS3 because he was uncertain how the market between the formats would shake out and he wanted to reserve the option to just spend $200 if that's how things play out.

It also works for people who haven't purchased either but have doubts about the format wars, as Microsoft has the option of releasing a Blu-ray addon later if necessary.

That said, I really think that if HD-DVD bit the big one, Microsoft would just forge full-steam-ahead with much larger hard drives and a significant expansion of Video Marketplace. That's where they're headed anyway; I think they just view next-gen DVD as the stepping stone between current delivery methods (which are slow as all get-out, even on broadband) and what they envision 5 years down the line.

[Deattribution]

I agree with your post, SA.

And anyone who has a 360 without a hard drive is severely missing out, it's nearly a necessity to really enjoy the systems intended potential but that's all the more reason I hate the 'well Microsoft makes it optional so they're better' argument. Microsoft only made most of these things optional (HD DVD player aside) because #1 they wanted to be first out, and #2 fear of going through the backlash that Sony is experiencing. It's not because they felt like it was the nice and fair thing to do.

Sony on the other hand started with the next gen in mind, and refused to compromise on making everything optional so their release took longer (imagine if Microsoft had waited for HD-DVD addon or HD-DVD game support to release), and their price is higher at start. Sony took more of a risk, it doesn't make them the devil nor does it make the 360 inferior - they're about the same but the 360 has the superior library right now.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by INDalltheway

I hate this argument. The thing is Xbox gives you the option whether you want to spend $200 dollars on the HD-DVD player instead of forcing it on the customer. Not many people have bought this (HD-DVD) because it hasn't become a mainstream thing to buy HD-DVDs. You can't just say you "have to spend $200." Most people want to play games on their gaming system and watching movies elsewhere. I understand that Sony is trying to make the gaming system and movie player become 1 thing, but it isn't that way in many homes. So yeah, please don't use that argument ever again.

Not to mention the most commone gamers are probably in the age range of about 13-25. If they actually have to buy the system themselves, they'll go 360 more than PS3 because of cost. 360 made a wise decision in making the owner be able to choose what to add on, etc. The only knock I have against them is not having wifi built in but so far, that's my only complaint about the 360.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by rowech

Not to mention the most commone gamers are probably in the age range of about 13-25. If they actually have to buy the system themselves, they'll go 360 more than PS3 because of cost. 360 made a wise decision in making the owner be able to choose what to add on, etc. The only knock I have against them is not having wifi built in but so far, that's my only complaint about the 360.

For the record we have both consoles in our home, don't ask

IMHO both machines offer a similar value per dollar spent. But what if the 360 came with built in wifi and the price was 499? Or perhaps wifi and a 60g drive and was 499?

Adding the wifi costs $99 for the MS connector and $89 (maybe there's cheaper ones out there that work?)for other brand of connectors. This takes you to roughly $490-$499 for a wifi 360. Now IF I have a router close to where I'd want to put my console I could get a ps3 with 20g and blue ray for the same money. If I need the wifi I can upgrade to a ps3 for $100 more than the 360+wifi and get blue ray and a 60g drive to boot.

So, back to my original point both systems offer similar value to dollar spent.

I'm not saying the original poster in this thread is in this group but lots of people seem to want to see sony fail in a big way with this. Just as others seem to hate MS, I just don't understand why that is. IMHO the competition is good and I don't want to see either company fail as it will lead to an EA-Madden type situation for the consumer, only one choice for next-gen console gaming.

[gstelmack]

I don't have WiFi at home (I prefer making someone go to the trouble of physically tapping the wires in my house to get my private data rather than just leeching it out of the air, and instead make me go to the hassles of running some lines through the house, but that's just me) so I'm glad Microsoft didn't make me pay extra for a wasted WiFi adapter I'd never use.

[rowech]

I told my wife that I could actually envision us having both if Blue Ray ends up winning.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

399 for the premium 360 with the harddrive and wireless + 199 for the HD-DVD player = 598 before tax. Even then, you only get a 20 gig hard drive compared to 60gigs. Throw in the wireless network adapter and you are at 700 bucks plus tax and you have no games and one controller (same with PS3 but point being it's still expensive).

So you considering forcing a customer to purchase blueray and wireless is full capacity? That's silly.

360 doesn't force a customer to get stuff they don't need. I didn't need wireless. I didn't need to waste 200 bucks on a disc format that isn't considered a standard yet.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Sweed

I'm not saying the original poster in this thread is in this group but lots of people seem to want to see sony fail in a big way with this. Just as others seem to hate MS, I just don't understand why that is. IMHO the competition is good and I don't want to see either company fail as it will lead to an EA-Madden type situation for the consumer, only one choice for next-gen console gaming.

You could just read, but that's a bit tough for most people on this board.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Sweed

I'm not saying the original poster in this thread is in this group but lots of people seem to want to see sony fail in a big way with this. Just as others seem to hate MS, I just don't understand why that is. IMHO the competition is good and I don't want to see either company fail as it will lead to an EA-Madden type situation for the consumer, only one choice for next-gen console gaming.

I think they ticked a lot of people off with their post-E3 attitude ("You should be happy it's only $600", etc).

[kcchief19]

The thing that ticked me off about Sony's decision to force the Blu-ray DVD on people is that it has nothing to do with providing a consumer value
or a superior gaming experience -- it has to do with thrusting Blu-ray into as many homes as possible so that the format beats HD-DVD. I'm cynical enough to believe that the PS3 is less of a next generation gaming system and more of a Blu-ray delivery system.

I'm the last guy to defend MS, but I actually like the fact that some of the more premium upgrades are optional. I don't plan to get a next-gen DVD until one format becomes standard. If I don't need Wi-Fi, I like not having to pay for it.

[nilodor]

If your system isn't close to your ethernet connection and you get a system without wi-fi, can you still install the firmware updates? Can it be done using a flash card? Am I the only person worried that console games are going to become like PC games where you need to be connected to the internet so you can download patches and such to make the game fully playable, or will that be less of a problem because there is only 1 system instead of a myriad of systems (everyone's PC is pretty much different)?

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by nilodor

If your system isn't close to your ethernet connection and you get a system without wi-fi, can you still install the firmware updates? Can it be done using a flash card? Am I the only person worried that console games are going to become like PC games where you need to be connected to the internet so you can download patches and such to make the game fully playable, or will that be less of a problem because there is only 1 system instead of a myriad of systems (everyone's PC is pretty much different)?

For the first update, you could burn it to a CD after you download it from M$'s website. I did that because I didn't have an ethernet connection or wireless connection to my 360. Since we moved here last Summer I have an ethernet connection to my 360 so I haven't worried about it.

On the PSP, the UMDs have updates (Madden 07 had it) for firmware. The game requires an updated firmware and it includes it. Sort of like how PC games had DirectX on them if you didn't have the version required to play. I could see console games going that direction.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Sweed

I'm not saying the original poster in this thread is in this group but lots of people seem to want to see sony fail in a big way with this. Just as others seem to hate MS, I just don't understand why that is. IMHO the competition is good and I don't want to see either company fail as it will lead to an EA-Madden type situation for the consumer, only one choice for next-gen console gaming.

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

You could just read, but that's a bit tough for most people on this board.

Yes that would work but without the disclaimer someone would have jumped in to say "Easy Mac only reported on sales of systems, he didn't say anything about wanting Sony to fail". So, for the non-readers it seemed like a good idea to include the disclaimer.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I think they ticked a lot of people off with their post-E3 attitude ("You should be happy it's only $600", etc).

Well, I'm not part of the technology industry, I don't go to e3, and I don't pay a lot of attention to what Sony, MS, or the other manufacturers do so I can't comment on Sony's attitude.

I only go by the value a product provides per dollar spent when I make a purchase. IMHO both companies are providing fair value, in the current market place, for what they are selling.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Well, I'm not part of the technology industry, I don't go to e3, and I don't pay a lot of attention to what Sony, MS, or the other manufacturers do so I can't comment on Sony's attitude.

I only go by the value a product provides per dollar spent when I make a purchase. IMHO both companies are providing fair value, in the current market place, for what they are selling.

That's fair. I'm just telling you what those who are bashing Sony were talking about, because many of them DID read what Sony's comments were in the post-E3 timeframe and didn't like it. You were wondering why people were wanting Sony to fail, and I gave you one of the reasons. It may not apply to you, but it certainly applies to a lot of people who read gaming news websites and don't like it when someone says "You'll take it and you'll like it".

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

There are far too many 360 fanboys on this site.

Shouldn't that be expected, since we've had our consoles for months and months now?

[TroyF]

It's the same old story, the PS3 fans saying the 360 guys are fanboys. It's been said repeatedly, but I'll add it again. . . most of the 360 fanboys on this site either were Sony fanboys a couple of years ago or were going to buy the PS3 as soon as they could.

How can you be a console video game player and not appreciate the PS2? Say what you want about every other system before it, the PS2 defined gaming. I love my old Genesis and Super Nintendo, but the PS2 is the dominant console in our lifetime to this point. Why would anyone NOT want to get the next version of it?

Well, for me it's because I don't give a damn about movies on my console. Not even a little bit. I don't want the HD Drive for the 360. Blu-Ray has as much appeal to me as reading more about Anna Nicole Smith's sex life. It's worthless.

To this point, the PS3 has failed on just about every avenue for my tastes. The price point is to high for me. Sorry, I'm not using the Blu-Ray for movies, so unless the games are better, that's not an advantage. The gaming library is beyond weak at this point. March is gonna be big for the PS3. . . I see FEAR, Rainbow Six Vegas, The Godfather, Obilivion and NCAA2K7 hoops are coming out. If only I hadn't played all of those games for months now on the 360.

The PS3's can be found everywhere. Anyone who wants one, can walk into a Wal Mart and pick one up.

As of now, this is a dead issue. The PS3 is getting its ass kicked. That's not me being a fanboy or me saying I'll never get a PS3. It's just reality. Sony had better pray that Blu-Ray really does win the next gen movie craze, because without it, I think the PS3 is in trouble.

And right there is the issue that I think a lot of people are missing. A GAMING machine is relying on the movie part of it to win the console race. Sorry, but I'd really prefer my gaming console try winning the gaming race. Sony slaughtered it with the PS2. They are failing miserably with the PS3. We'll have to see how things play out in the next six months to a year, but I think Nintendo is going to steamroll this round of consoles, with the 360 taking second slot.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by TroyF

It's the same old story, the PS3 fans saying the 360 guys are fanboys. It's been said repeatedly, but I'll add it again. . . most of the 360 fanboys on this site either were Sony fanboys a couple of years ago or were going to buy the PS3 as soon as they could.

How can you be a console video game player and not appreciate the PS2? Say what you want about every other system before it, the PS2 defined gaming. I love my old Genesis and Super Nintendo, but the PS2 is the dominant console in our lifetime to this point. Why would anyone NOT want to get the next version of it?

Well, for me it's because I don't give a damn about movies on my console. Not even a little bit. I don't want the HD Drive for the 360. Blu-Ray has as much appeal to me as reading more about Anna Nicole Smith's sex life. It's worthless.

To this point, the PS3 has failed on just about every avenue for my tastes. The price point is to high for me. Sorry, I'm not using the Blu-Ray for movies, so unless the games are better, that's not an advantage. The gaming library is beyond weak at this point. March is gonna be big for the PS3. . . I see FEAR, Rainbow Six Vegas, The Godfather, Obilivion and NCAA2K7 hoops are coming out. If only I hadn't played all of those games for months now on the 360.

The PS3's can be found everywhere. Anyone who wants one, can walk into a Wal Mart and pick one up.

As of now, this is a dead issue. The PS3 is getting its ass kicked. That's not me being a fanboy or me saying I'll never get a PS3. It's just reality. Sony had better pray that Blu-Ray really does win the next gen movie craze, because without it, I think the PS3 is in trouble.

And right there is the issue that I think a lot of people are missing. A GAMING machine is relying on the movie part of it to win the console race. Sorry, but I'd really prefer my gaming console try winning the gaming race. Sony slaughtered it with the PS2. They are failing miserably with the PS3. We'll have to see how things play out in the next six months to a year, but I think Nintendo is going to steamroll this round of consoles, with the 360 taking second slot.

You saved me alot of typing, thanks! Well said Troy and my feelings exactly.

I'll still buy Sony TV's though.

[rowech]

[quote=TroyF;1396967]but the PS2 is the dominant console in our lifetime to this point. quote]

I think the original Nintendo dominated it's competition more. I know number wise it might not stack up to PS2. (not sure what the numbers actually are) There really was nothing else when Nintendo was the king.

[MJ4H]

The PS2 sent me into the dark ages of gaming.

[TroyF]

rowech,

I'm not only talking with numbers or install bases or anything like that. The PS2 simply stands alone as the best console of all time in my opinion. Even with three next gen systems coming out, the PS2 is still putting out quality games. God of War II will be out soon and will be an immediate purchase for me. If MLB: The Show is again better than the 2K one put out for the 360, I'll buy that for my baseball fix.

You pick your genre and the PS2 has classic games out for it. When the PS2 came out, my Super Nintendo and Genesis pretty much died on the spot. I won't even consider giving up my PS2 now despite owning 2 of the 3 next gen systems. In fact, if it died tomorrow, I'd probably buy another PS2. That's how incredible that system is.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Well, I'm not part of the technology industry, I don't go to e3, and I don't pay a lot of attention to what Sony, MS, or the other manufacturers do so I can't comment on Sony's attitude.

I only go by the value a product provides per dollar spent when I make a purchase. IMHO both companies are providing fair value, in the current market place, for what they are selling.

Just to give a little insight on why some people aren't crying any tears over Sony's trouble with the PS3. This is from an excellent Blog called Dubious Quality.

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/

I haven't mentioned Jack Tretton making an ass out of himself in the latest issue of EGM because it's nothing new--every executive at Sony has been making a gigantic ass out of himself for the last year. When was the last time you saw an interview with any of those guys where they didn't act like an ass?

In case you hadn't heard, here's what Tretton said in the latest issue of EGM:
JT: If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it. I can get any retail buyer on the phone with you and get them to verify that there's not a single retail location in America where there's been a Playstation 3 on the shelf for sale. They've all been sold in a matter of minutes.

There was a note attached to the article at that point that said [Editor's note: This interview took place in early January 2007].

I wrote about eBay auction prices on December 18, over two weeks before Tretton's interview took place. In the vast majority of auctions, the premium was under $100. And there were plenty of anecdotal reports of PS3's sitting on store shelves in the week before Christmas. And here's an excerpt from what I wrote on January 4:
One thing we do know is that there are plenty of PS3's available right now. I called a Best Buy on Tuesday and they said they had fifteen in stock. The Best Buy website? In stock. Circuit City website? In stock. Amazon website? In stock.

Why did we have far more accurate information than the CEO of SCEA? Because to us, data is data. We're not trying to spin it or manipulate it or ignore it if it doesn't agree with what we believe. Either Tretton was ignoring data or, even worse, he wasn't even being given the latest data.

Tretton's comments display how dangerous it is to live in an insular corporate culture, and from what I've been told, Sony is incredibly insular. He was absolutely correct--a month before he gave the interview. But in the consumer entertainment industry, a month is a long, long time, and in that month, the PS3 buzz went to sub-zero.

To EGM's credit, they challenged Tretton:
EGM: But we called 18 random retailers, including Best Buy and EB Games, and half of them had PS3's in stock...some had as many as 20 in the store.

Watch Tretton backtrack:
JT: I am not sitting in the store to know when they got put on the shelves or if a salesperson is giving you accurate information, but if only nine of the 18 stores you contacted had supplies, that seems to be a clear indication that sales continue to be outstanding.

Wait a minute--asshole--you JUST SAID that there's not a "single retail location in America" where there's been a PS3 for sale, because they've all sold in a "matter of minutes."

Do you see how impossible it is to respect these people right now? Executives used what's called "puffery" all the time. It's exaggeration. This is not exaggeration. This is fabrication.

There's more, but I didn't want to post the whole blog... He also highlights Sony's apparent fudging of Blue-Ray / PS3 sales numbers. I don't really have a dog in this fight (I won't be buying either console), but I do get annoyed when corporate mouthpieces try to piss on me and tell me it's raining.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by TroyF

It's the same old story, the PS3 fans saying the 360 guys are fanboys. It's been said repeatedly, but I'll add it again. . . most of the 360 fanboys on this site either were Sony fanboys a couple of years ago or were going to buy the PS3 as soon as they could.

How can you be a console video game player and not appreciate the PS2? Say what you want about every other system before it, the PS2 defined gaming. I love my old Genesis and Super Nintendo, but the PS2 is the dominant console in our lifetime to this point. Why would anyone NOT want to get the next version of it?

Well, for me it's because I don't give a damn about movies on my console. Not even a little bit. I don't want the HD Drive for the 360. Blu-Ray has as much appeal to me as reading more about Anna Nicole Smith's sex life. It's worthless.

To this point, the PS3 has failed on just about every avenue for my tastes. The price point is to high for me. Sorry, I'm not using the Blu-Ray for movies, so unless the games are better, that's not an advantage. The gaming library is beyond weak at this point. March is gonna be big for the PS3. . . I see FEAR, Rainbow Six Vegas, The Godfather, Obilivion and NCAA2K7 hoops are coming out. If only I hadn't played all of those games for months now on the 360.

The PS3's can be found everywhere. Anyone who wants one, can walk into a Wal Mart and pick one up.

As of now, this is a dead issue. The PS3 is getting its ass kicked. That's not me being a fanboy or me saying I'll never get a PS3. It's just reality. Sony had better pray that Blu-Ray really does win the next gen movie craze, because without it, I think the PS3 is in trouble.

And right there is the issue that I think a lot of people are missing. A GAMING machine is relying on the movie part of it to win the console race. Sorry, but I'd really prefer my gaming console try winning the gaming race. Sony slaughtered it with the PS2. They are failing miserably with the PS3. We'll have to see how things play out in the next six months to a year, but I think Nintendo is going to steamroll this round of consoles, with the 360 taking second slot.

I agree with all of this. FWIW, I went to my local gamestop for the first time in 2 months today. The manager is always very talkative and he told me they have had the same 12 PS3's available at his store for the last 2 weeks. He predicts that the price is going to come down within the next 6-8 months because they are selling poorly at all of the stores within the district that he works at. He did say that Wii sales are slowing down in this district as well. They had 3 in stock (and I had to resist the temptation to pick one up.)

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I agree with all of this. FWIW, I went to my local gamestop for the first time in 2 months today. The manager is always very talkative and he told me they have had the same 12 PS3's available at his store for the last 2 weeks. He predicts that the price is going to come down within the next 6-8 months because they are selling poorly at all of the stores within the district that he works at. He did say that Wii sales are slowing down in this district as well. They had 3 in stock (and I had to resist the temptation to pick one up.)

They'll HAVE TO come down in price. I'm sure this manager is not unique in his situation and all of them probably want to move the stock just sitting there. Wii sales will, of course, slow down. It's been out for a few months now and demand is a bit less. Then it'll come down to software... and as of yet, the Wii doesn't have much.

I think Microsoft is all grins. They decided to come out early, for a pretty low price point (comparatively) and make the other stuff optional add ons. Brilliant. I'm sure that 360 sales probably shot up a little bit after Sony revealed the PS3's price and there look to be some great games on the horizon for the 360 that'll really help the console out (look at the effect "Gears of War" had after all).

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I think Microsoft is all grins. They decided to come out early, for a pretty low price point (comparatively) and make the other stuff optional add ons. Brilliant. I'm sure that 360 sales probably shot up a little bit after Sony revealed the PS3's price and there look to be some great games on the horizon for the 360 that'll really help the console out (look at the effect "Gears of War" had after all).

Yep. I thought they were nuts for not having Halo 3 out this past holiday season to counter the PS3 launch, but now it looks brilliant - just another carrot to dangle to potential 360 buyers away from considering the PS3. And it allows Bungie more time to polish the game. From their perspective, if they hit a home run with Halo 3 (i.e. it needs to be better than Halo 2) they should be looking real good, both for having a killer system-selling title and a printing-money profitable first-party property

[ISiddiqui]

And on the heels of all those problems:

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6166312....tag=latestnews

The European model of the PlayStation 3, due to launch on March 23, will use different hardware specifications from the models already released in Japan on November 11, 2006, and in the US on November 17, Sony announced in a statement today.

The European PS3s will be designed differently, meaning that a "new combination of hardware and software emulation" will enable the new PS3s to be compatible with only a "limited range" of PS2 titles and a "broad range" of original PlayStation games.

A Sony spokesperson told Reuters that "the backwards compatibility is not going to be as good as the US and Japan models."

SCEE president David Reeves added, "PS3 is first and foremost a system that excels in playing games specifically designed to exploit the power and potential of the PS3 system. Games designed for PS3 offer incredible graphics quality, stunning gameplay, and massively improved audio and video fidelity that is simply not achievable with PS and PS2 games. Rather than concentrate on PS2 backwards compatibility, in the future, company resources will be increasingly focused on developing new games and entertainment features exclusively for PS3, truly taking advantage of this exciting technology."

In a statement, the company added that some additional titles would be made compatible through regular firmware updates--a similar setup as in the US, where initially some previous Sony format games experienced problems, but many were fixed through online updates for the console. The Japanese and American PS3s play an estimated 98 percent of the old games. The first update is planned for the European and Australian launch on March 23, and gamers can check out compatibility on Sony's Web site, which will go live on the launch date.

Are you kidding me? If I didn't know better, I'd swear that Microsoft bought out Sony and is doing this shit on purpose.

[Easy Mac]

just so people know, the PS3 is upto 6...

[kingfc22]

My store got 15 Wii's in today. We sold out of them by noon.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Not sure if this point has been made, but the PS3 is ahead of the pace that the 360 set upon its release at this point in time. They've done this with only one (and some might say questionable) system-seller in Resistance and plenty of negative press.

I think some may be quite surprised how healthy this system gets over the coming 3-4 months with a lot of big games being released in March and April and a European release to boost the console sales numbers. Most reports are saying that the PS3 pre-order numbers are very brisk in Europe. No region locks is reportedly a major selling point for the sales in Europe.

[Kodos]

Count me among the former PS2 fanboys who feel no need to get PS3 at this point. It needs a major price drop and some great games before I will start to get the itch.