PS3 has lost to Wii and Xbox360 (discuss)

[Bodhi]

Thing is though, the PS3 is the only console you can buy that'll last you longer than a week. Don't believe me?

1) Everyone I know who's bought a Wii got bored in about that time. Men, women, children alike, all have bought one. Everyone got bored of Wii Sports then realised there was fuck all else worth playing, and are now leaving the Wii to gather dust.

2) Let's face it with MS's shoddy idea of quality control you'll be lucky to get more than a week out of a 360 before it breaks. If you do, it'll take you an extra 3 days to figure out most of these wondrous games on the 360 aren't actually any better than the ones on PS3, and they're also available in even more HD on the PC aswell. Then you try playing a BlueRay, or playing online out of the box, and you realise you can't. Then you think "Well what the fuck was the point in buying this shoddy white piece of shit then?", and promptly trade it for a PS3. Well you would if you had a brain anyway.

 

[Wij]

and promptly trade it for a PS3. Well you would if you had a brain anyway.

But they aren't. It's over.

PS3 isn't a dead console but it did lose to Wii and 360 and it lost Sony money.

 

[Deebs]

But they aren't. It's over.

PS3 isn't a dead console but it did lose to Wii and 360 and it lost Sony money.

Oh and the 360 didn't lose Microsoft lots of money?

 

[old.user4556]

Noone is getting to my point about the 360 price.

 

[Wij]

Oh and the 360 didn't lose Microsoft lots of money?

XBox did. 360 will make money from software sales in the log run. PS3 will never make it back.

 

[Wij]

Noone is getting to my point about the 360 price.

Doesn't matter. Most people look at the headline price. 360 is loads cheaper out of the box (built in features be damned) and plays games just as well. Plus it has more games and a bigger online community ("Mummy, all my friends are on XBox Live !!!")

Sure, if you want to buy a wireless dongle and a blu-ray player and aren't bothered about a smaller games library then go for the PS3. The point is that the mass market doesn't think that way. I got my PS3 second hand and it was set up to use 576 over composite and had never been online. You think people lke that care about blu-ray ?

 

[Deebs]

XBox did. 360 will make money from software sales in the log run. PS3 will never make it back.

You think? Check again. MS is still losing money over the 360. Shame it happens but it does. The 360 has some cracking games but MS need to be able to stomach this money sink pit if it is to succeed.

Btw, I have both a 360 and a PS3.

 

[cHodAX]

Interesting thread. Sony may have lost the console war this generation but I cannot wait for the next generation. The Cell processor is an incredible piece of technology which was let down by Sony's rush to market on the graphics chip.

G4 consoles are going to be way different. Imagine multi Cells hooked up with decent GPU's. Microsoft will have similar tech but Sony have the headstart in the development knowledge.

I can somewhat agree, the CELL has massive potential but the problem is that the SPE's aren't good for running game code. As a media processor it is downright phenomenal but I would hate to see it in PS4 without a major redesign because it just isn't easy to code for as it stands. If you look around there are many respected game designers who are saying the same, CELL is a brilliant media processor but a very poor fit as a games processor.

6 full HD streams being processed at once though is stunning, I have to tip my hat at that incredible feat.

Oh and as for the next generation, I would expect Xbox to be based on some form of the new Intel cores currently in design stages or even the mega multi cores in the works....

http://news.cnet.com/Intel-readies-massive-multicore-processors/2100-1008_3-6190856.html

They will make this generation of CPU's look slow, including CELL. Just a shame they are 2-3 years away.

 

[Munkey]

In reply to Bodhi, I have actually come to love my xbox. Despite the lack of inbuilt wireless, which is easily solved with a 2 quid cable or one of the second hand routers lying around, its great.

Sure you have to pay to play multiplayer, but when you do its great, and, lets be honest, paying around 30 quid for a year of online gaming isn't bad. Especially when you consider that for a MMORPG that you'll play on your pc, it'll cost you around half that price for only 60 days of playing. Xbox Live hasn't been abandoned, and I love being able to download movies, demos and watch trailers. Playing SHNMT and other arcade classics for a nominal fee, with multiplayer with my friends, is just an added bonus.

I've not once had a problem with the servers, and I have great amounts of fun playing CoD online with my mates, partially assisted by the lack of lag and the voice-comm software, for which they include a free headset.

The other upside? When I wanna use skype, I can use my wireless headset for it (best accessory ever), or just plug in my controller and use the wired headset through that.

As a media centre it excels. As I can't afford a PS3, I most certainly am unable to afford an HD LCD TV that would allow me to get the most out of blueray if I bought one.

Regarding the PS3 games, the only games I remember getting the most enjoyment out of were the GTA series, GT and Pro Evo. Considering two of those are on the Xbox, then I don't see the point of forking out for a PS3 just to play FF (which will take me donkeys years to complete) or the new GT.

Perhaps if I had the moulah to splash out on a 26"+ HD TV, a PS3 and some games, then I would reconsider.

But overall, the xbox provides me better value: more fun, more connected with my friends, and does everything I want it to.


And the Wii? I couldn't agree with you more. But its great for the gaming novice.

 

[~Latency~]

my first 360 lasted 3 years (i got in a lot of playtime on it..we're talking hundreds and hundreds of hours..) second one got recieved in around 10 days brand spanking new..

also has a much better game catalogue (better gfx/less bugs on a lot of games compared to ps3 as ps3 versions are ports)

xbox live is £40 a year.. and for that you get a fucking amazing service.. you actually feel like you're online, never lag in games etc works brilliantly


it depends what you want out of a _console_ .. i know tons of people with 360's and only a few with ps3's.. most people with a ps3 only got it because of a) sony b)promises of an uber gaming console 3)metal gear solid

if you want a media hub you got a great deal with your cash, but most people don't give a flying fuck

there's no doubt that the ps3 lost this round of the console war, who knows where it'll be in a year or twos time.....

 

[soze]

Saying it's not expensive for what it is reminds me of the 3DO back in 1993!

Yes, it's a nice machine and does a lot, but if it's too expensive and people buy cheaper alternatives which can entertain them just as well - why bother paying the extra money?

This is where i have always lost I got my PS3 and used it as a media center and blu ray player so to me when you add the extra's over the base 360 the price was similar. I do get everyones point you do not need all the other stuff to play games though.

 

[Overdriven]

most people with a ps3 only got it because of a) sony b)promises of an uber gaming console 3)metal gear solid

BEFORE I say what I want to say, I own both a PS3 and a 360. PS3 I got last year and I got my 360 LAST WEEK. (For the PURE reason that I didn't want 2 PS3s and the fact that a lot of people on campus have a 360, so MP is easier)

D) People wanted good build quality
E) People wanted games that wouldn't bore them in 5 minutes
F) People wanted ACTUAL HD rendering out of the box
G) People wanted a FREE online service (I admit, I like some of 360s friend stuff)
H) People wanted a INBUILD media-centre.
I) People wanted a CONSOLE that would last more than 5 minutes
J) People actually worked out the prices on a yearly basis and worked out the PS3 was technically the same price, was better kit and offered more.
K) I've got to go to a lecture. Cya!

 

[cHodAX]

BEFORE I say what I want to say, I own both a PS3 and a 360. PS3 I got last year and I got my 360 LAST WEEK. (For the PURE reason that I didn't want 2 PS3s and the fact that a lot of people on campus have a 360, so MP is easier)

D) People wanted good build quality
E) People wanted games that wouldn't bore them in 5 minutes
F) People wanted ACTUAL HD rendering out of the box
G) People wanted a FREE online service (I admit, I like some of 360s friend stuff)
H) People wanted a INBUILD media-centre.
I) People wanted a CONSOLE that would last more than 5 minutes
J) People actually worked out the prices on a yearly basis and worked out the PS3 was technically the same price, was better kit and offered more.
K) I've got to go to a lecture. Cya!

Yes but did all of Sony's 150 million PS2 customers want those things if it was going to make the price twice what it should have been? Not a chance, they voted with thier feet and walked away.

Some will come back, most won't until the price hits rock bottom in 2-3 years time. Wii 2 will be out then and I imagine that it won't be same dinosaur technology powering the current Wii rehashed yet again.

 

[Ch3tan]

D) People wanted good build quality
E) People wanted games that wouldn't bore them in 5 minutes
F) People wanted ACTUAL HD rendering out of the box
G) People wanted a FREE online service (I admit, I like some of 360s friend stuff)
H) People wanted a INBUILD media-centre.
I) People wanted a CONSOLE that would last more than 5 minutes
J) People actually worked out the prices on a yearly basis and worked out the PS3 was technically the same price, was better kit and offered more.
K) I've got to go to a lecture. Cya!

So where was this survey that these statistics came from? Or like most things in this thread, was it just your personal opinion.

 

[Aada]

Thing is though, the PS3 is the only console you can buy that'll last you longer than a week. Don't believe me?

1) Everyone I know who's bought a Wii got bored in about that time. Men, women, children alike, all have bought one. Everyone got bored of Wii Sports then realised there was fuck all else worth playing, and are now leaving the Wii to gather dust.

2) Let's face it with MS's shoddy idea of quality control you'll be lucky to get more than a week out of a 360 before it breaks. If you do, it'll take you an extra 3 days to figure out most of these wondrous games on the 360 aren't actually any better than the ones on PS3, and they're also available in even more HD on the PC aswell. Then you try playing a BlueRay, or playing online out of the box, and you realise you can't. Then you think "Well what the fuck was the point in buying this shoddy white piece of shit then?", and promptly trade it for a PS3. Well you would if you had a brain anyway.

Of course this happens!

Because nobody plays their PS3 more then 3 hours a week because the games catalogue SUCKS!

That's why the PS3 don't break because it doesn't get battered enough.

 

[soze]

Of course this happens!

Because nobody plays their PS3 more then 3 hours a week because the games catalogue SUCKS!

That's why the PS3 don't break because it doesn't get battered enough.

My PS3 is on about 3 hours a day and the worse error i have had was it hanging. I can't believe the 360 was not fixed of the overheating RRoD problem on a new SKU its really poor. Even with the power external the crap design still can't keep cool. But just like ipods it shows when you have a sheep you have them.

 

[Bodhi]

Of course this happens!

Because nobody plays their PS3 more then 3 hours a week because the games catalogue SUCKS!

That's why the PS3 don't break because it doesn't get battered enough.

Mine broke after getting battered for a year with

Resistance
Resistance 2
Wipeout HD
COD 4
COD 5
LittleBigPlanet
Gran Turismo 5 : Prologue
Gran Turismo HD
Free Online play (I've spent 3 and a half days on COD 4, so PS3 online far from sucks)
Bluerays
Media Streaming
A quick dabble with Linux
Fallout 3
Game demos

etc etc.

There's plenty there to keep you entertained for a good while more than 3 hours a week. To be honest with you, the only 360 exclusives I can think of are Fable 2, GOW2 and Forza 2. Fable doesn't interest me, Forza is a poor man's GT and GOW2 is no better than Resistance 2. So actually, the 360's game catalogue is really quite sucky. Mind you that's kind of what I'd expect from a poor man's PlayStation.

On the what happened to the PS2 fans argument, an awful lot of the ones I speak to through work are still on PS2, and are simply waiting for PS3 to come down in price. Once it gets to around the £199 mark there will really be no other option.

And also, with the money 360 has cost MS, who's to say they're going to be in the console market much longer? MS are still a business, and businesses really don't like making money - SCE are still turning Sony a very nice profit. It's the rest of Sony that's screwed.

 

[Overdriven]

@Chet: This is from people I've actually asked IRL, may not be true for anyone (Who actually knows the exact stats apart from Sony?) and I admit, some of my personal opinions in there.

@Cho: Not going to disagree with you, a good chunk were probably expecting the ubermachine. Personally, I wasn't.

 

[Aada]

Mine broke after getting battered for a year with

Resistance
Resistance 2
Wipeout HD
COD 4
COD 5
LittleBigPlanet
Gran Turismo 5 : Prologue
Gran Turismo HD
Free Online play (I've spent 3 and a half days on COD 4, so PS3 online far from sucks)
Bluerays
Media Streaming
A quick dabble with Linux
Fallout 3
Game demos

etc etc.

There's plenty there to keep you entertained for a good while more than 3 hours a week. To be honest with you, the only 360 exclusives I can think of are Fable 2, GOW2 and Forza 2. Fable doesn't interest me, Forza is a poor man's GT and GOW2 is no better than Resistance 2. So actually, the 360's game catalogue is really quite sucky. Mind you that's kind of what I'd expect from a poor man's PlayStation.

On the what happened to the PS2 fans argument, an awful lot of the ones I speak to through work are still on PS2, and are simply waiting for PS3 to come down in price. Once it gets to around the £199 mark there will really be no other option.

And also, with the money 360 has cost MS, who's to say they're going to be in the console market much longer? MS are still a business, and businesses really don't like making money - SCE are still turning Sony a very nice profit. It's the rest of Sony that's screwed.

MS make a nice sum of money from XBL subscriptions/content bought so your bullshit doesn't wash.

 

[Aada]

My PS3 is on about 3 hours a day and the worse error i have had was it hanging. I can't believe the 360 was not fixed of the overheating RRoD problem on a new SKU its really poor. Even with the power external the crap design still can't keep cool. But just like ipods it shows when you have a sheep you have them.

Whats wrong with the Ipod? it works and it does what it does well if it didn't it wouldn't sell nearly as well as it has.

Same with the 360 it sells because it has a huge collection of games and a great selection of A+++ games to buy right off the bat.

Face it Sony FAILED :kissit:

 

[Wij]

That's overstatng the case. PS3 didn't fail but Sony didn't do everything right so it came 3rd.

 

[Bodhi]

MS make a nice sum of money from XBL subscriptions/content bought so your bullshit doesn't wash.

Well it does, as it's a well known fact the RROD debacle has cost MS $1billion in extended warranties alone, and this WILL go up as the machine gets older. Plus, actualy working in the Server Infrastructure business tells me that Live! doesn't cost them nothing to run, the servers alone must cost thousands.

 

[Bodhi]

That's overstatng the case. PS3 didn't fail but Sony didn't do everything right so it came 3rd.

Why do you insist on referring to this generation in the past tense? We're only a couple of years into it?

 

[cHodAX]

Of course this happens!

Because nobody plays their PS3 more then 3 hours a week because the games catalogue SUCKS!

That's why the PS3 don't break because it doesn't get battered enough.

I know plenty of PS3 owners who have had broken Blu-Ray drives, not on a 360 RROD scale or even remotely close to the same league but fairly common none the less.

 

[old.user4556]

Doesn't matter. Most people look at the headline price. 360 is loads cheaper out of the box (built in features be damned) and plays games just as well. Plus it has more games and a bigger online community ("Mummy, all my friends are on XBox Live !!!")

Sure, if you want to buy a wireless dongle and a blu-ray player and aren't bothered about a smaller games library then go for the PS3. The point is that the mass market doesn't think that way. I got my PS3 second hand and it was set up to use 576 over composite and had never been online. You think people lke that care about blu-ray ?

SPOT ON.

That's exactly the conclusion I came to, and maybe that's where Sony "got it wrong" (i use that term loosely because I think the PS3 is a brilliantly engineered piece of kit from a hardware point of view, not primarily gaming point of view).

If Sony brought out a cut down PS3 (no wireless, no blu-ray drive, tiny or no hard disk - i'd not have bought one btw ) for £150-£190 with a premium edition at £300 that featured all the best bits then maybe the uptake would have been the same, if not better than the 360. However I can't help but feel that Sony won't lower themselves to that sort of feature stripping just to get "bums on seats" figures to appease the fanboys.

However Wij, your comment about 576 over composite; don't be silly, why make them HD consoles at all then in that case? If you haven't seen a Wii on a 46" TV, then you need to - it'll make your eyes bleed.

Chet, i'm still waiting on the correct 360 prices you speak of.

 

[cHodAX]

That's overstatng the case. PS3 didn't fail but Sony didn't do everything right so it came 3rd.

Best summation of the whole scenario so far.

 

[Ch3tan]

I was leaving it to the others G, this thread is boring as hell.

Arcade £130

Pro £170

Elite £225

I have rounded prices up by a penny. Not sure how the offers compare on the net, but pre xmas when woolies were still trading (before we started reducing things). you could get any of those for that price, with two games and an extra wireless controller.

You didn't overstate prices hugely, but you did.

This is why this thread is pointless. There are very few objective people and even those that say they are, are in one camp or the other.

Seriously Wij, how many times are you going to repeat the same point and start the fanbois off on another round of repeating the same points?

 

[ST^]

XBox did. 360 will make money from software sales in the log run. PS3 will never make it back.

I know you say you're not a fanboy cos you own a PS3 and all that but seriously, how else can you come up with such an uninformed post? Microsoft lost more on the Xbox 1 than they'll ever make back from the 360. It is debatable whether they'll even recover the cost of the 360 and the warranty bailout.

And why can't Sony make everything back "from software sales in the long run"? They'll most likely keep their console on the market far longer than Microsoft, and their strategy right now is completely focused on achieving profitability -- completely the opposite of Microsoft, who are trying to put out consoles as fast as possible.

 

[old.user4556]

You didn't overstate prices hugely, but you did.

By £10-£15

...and your prices are depending on a) it has free delivery b) it has games in the bundle.

You're missing my point; people scream "360 is way cheaper" when infact after asking some basic questions about the prices found out it works out to be only slightly cheaper than a similar spec PS3.

I admit I was completely ignorant about 360 prices, infact even believing the hype that the PS3 was hideously more expensive for the same spec.

Using price comparisons I went on a hunt to find the cheapest I could:

I found the 360 Elite for £210 with no games at Amazon; but once I add a Gold account and the wireless dongle, you're looking at £310.

Oh look, it's more expensive than a £299 PS3 80 GB with two games and a film.

Now, predicting what the fanboys will say is that "lolz omg, it has 40 GB more in hard disk capacity". Well if that's the case, why do you bleet on about the Arcade being fantastic because it doesn't even need a hard disk?

 

[Ch3tan]

nah hd capacity is pointless, even 20gb wouldn't be used by most people.

Why do you insist on adding wireless to the price? I for one don't need it, and am fine to not have to pay extra for it.

Live is worth it for online console gaming, when sony offer the same level of service for free then I will agree MS are overcharging.

Again it comes down to what you want from your console, if you want a bells and whistles super console and will use it as such then the ps3 is the best choice -as long as games you will play are there. If you want a base console then 360 is the way to go, you can upgrade it to what you need.

the key point, that Wij made and i am sure has been made before many times, is that the ps3 looks a lot more expensive to most consumers. It has features many will never use. I have had my ps3 since about 6 months after release, and only last week did I bother using any of the media center features of it (same with my 360 though). Sony should have offered a scaled back version for the mass market, or taken a big hit on the price initially.

Bodhi is right though, Sony will not be upgrading the ps3 or releasing a new console anytime soon. MS probably will release a new console in 3 years or less. But I would expect MS to include full backwards compatibility. That will be the time when the ps3 will have the chance to come into it's own though, it should by then be the "cheaper" console.