Damage Control: PS3 outsold 360 in February, say Microsoft

[PS3ds]

Originally Posted by Jordahn

It's pretty obvious that most of us here have taken Business 101 while at the same time kept up with tech trends and events for at least the last 15 years if not more. Anyone who agrees that competiton is good will also agree that Microsoft is bad for competition. Now don't get me wrong. No company is perfect, and they have all had their fair share of misdealings, but Microsoft is a constant pro-monopoly/anti-competitive entity. Therefore, Microsoft is good for cometition in the short run, but the reality is that they are bad for competition in the long run, given their past and current pro-monopoly/anti-competitive history. If a company like Hitachi or Hasbro or IBM were the ones behind the Xbox brandname, gamers and the industry will have less reason to be caution of that namebrand. But because it'a a Microsoft product and, again, because of their pro-monopoly/anti-competitive history, anyone who has taken Business 101 can tell you that Microsoft is ultimately bad for competiton because thay are pro-monopoly/anti-competitive.

Exactly!! Took the words right outta my mouth.

[PA_Kid]

Originally Posted by Jordahn

It's pretty obvious that most of us here have taken Business 101 while at the same time kept up with tech trends and events for at least the last 15 years if not more. Anyone who agrees that competiton is good will also agree that Microsoft is bad for competition. Now don't get me wrong. No company is perfect, and they have all had their fair share of misdealings, but Microsoft is a constant pro-monopoly/anti-competitive entity. Therefore, Microsoft is good for cometition in the short run, but the reality is that they are bad for competition in the long run, given their past and current pro-monopoly/anti-competitive history. If a company like Hitachi or Hasbro or IBM were the ones behind the Xbox brandname, gamers and the industry will have less reason to be caution of that namebrand. But because it'a a Microsoft product and, again, because of their pro-monopoly/anti-competitive history, anyone who has taken Business 101 can tell you that Microsoft is ultimately bad for competiton because thay are pro-monopoly/anti-competitive.

You know this had me thinking.... Every HD tv can play every television program that comes in from antenna, direct tv, dish, and cable. There really is only one TV standard, but that's not a monopoly. Blu-ray is quickly becoming the same for playback media.

While less likely it's not completely unreasonable to think that someday Nintendo, Sony, and MS will wise up and realize that they'd be better off setting one single set of next gen basic specs and then if they really want to compete on hardware do it on the extras. Considering how often all these systems seem to be loss leaders, splitting one system between the three of them and then raking it in on software sales.

Let's be honest, Nintendo probably could have built a proprietory Wii control pack for PS3 and ran all the same stuff on the PS3 without having to deal with hardware sales. Granted that's a bad example because the target price point for the Wii was much lower, but you can see what I mean.

[BluRayExplosion]

The thing is, Nintendo likes selling Wii hardware because they make a profit on each one sold. Same thing is true for the PS2 (And PS3 soon enough.)

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by PA_Kid

Let's be honest, Nintendo probably could have built a proprietory Wii control pack for PS3 and ran all the same stuff on the PS3 without having to deal with hardware sales. Granted that's a bad example because the target price point for the Wii was much lower, but you can see what I mean.

The business model is different for Nintendo. I read somewhere (sorry I don't have a link) sales of Wii consoles turn a modest profit for N. Not so wrt PS3 for Sony or Xbox for MS.

If they weren't making money on the Wii maybe there would be an incentive for N to allow Mario and co. to appear on other consoles. Right now those precious IPs are driving their hardware business.

[PA_Kid]

Originally Posted by Teazle

The business model is different for Nintendo. I read somewhere (sorry I don't have a link) sales of Wii consoles turn a modest profit for N. Not so wrt PS3 for Sony or Xbox for MS.

If they weren't making money on the Wii maybe there would be an incentive for N to allow Mario and co. to appear on other consoles. Right now those precious IPs are driving their hardware business.

True, but I wonder if they could have made just as much if not more on the profit margin if they had just made the Wiimote and Nunchuck controlers for PS3 and then made most if not all of their games require it. Imagine how well Legend of Zelda would have sold on PS3 - even factoring in the cost of buying the controlers and the game.

Not holding my breath that something like this would ever happen, but you never know.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by PA_Kid

True, but I wonder if they could have made just as much if not more on the profit margin if they had just made the Wiimote and Nunchuck controlers for PS3 and then made most if not all of their games require it. Imagine how well Legend of Zelda would have sold on PS3 - even factoring in the cost of buying the controlers and the game.

Not holding my breath that something like this would ever happen, but you never know.

Nintendo's now facing a major R&D investment for their next console since it will have to be for HD gaming. They got away with Wii on the cheap by sticking to standard def and basically hot-rodding the GameCube. (By contrast, development for Cell alone went into the hundreds of millions. Then there were development costs for Blu-ray.)

If Nintendo follows your advice, becoming like a Guitar Hero / Rock Band / DDR style producer of games plus innovative controllers, they stand to save themselves oodles on console development. On the other hand they may be spurred on by the huge success of the Wii to invest big in hardware next generation (like they used to do -- N64).

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

That "shortage" excuse (for the Crapbox360) is a load of BS.

It's NOT BS --> There IS a shortage......... of demand



And with FACTUAL stories like this:

Microsoft Now Denies Blu-ray Disc on Xbox 360

http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft+N...ticle11105.htm

and this:

Warranty Report Pegs Xbox 360 Failure Rates at 16 Percent

http://www.dailytech.com/Warranty+Re...ticle10699.htm

and stories like this for the PS3 :

In-Game Communication Coming to PS3 in 2.4 Firmware

http://www.dailytech.com/InGame+Comm...ticle10945.htm

Not to mention BD LIVE 2.0 profile and DTS-HD MA coming soon... + all the kick ass games...

You can bet demand will further decrease for the Crapbox360 while demand for the PS3 will only increase

There is a slight chance that a RROD free Xbox360 might show up in the fall (Jasper version)... but the PS3 will counter that unicorn with a 100$ price drop

[PS34EVER]

I just noticed that according to VGChartz.com (as much as I know you all love that site ), the PS3 reached 10 Million units sold nearly 4 months quicker than the 360 did.

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php

[mightypen]

Originally Posted by PA_Kid

True, but I wonder if they could have made just as much if not more on the profit margin if they had just made the Wiimote and Nunchuck controlers for PS3 and then made most if not all of their games require it. Imagine how well Legend of Zelda would have sold on PS3 - even factoring in the cost of buying the controlers and the game.

Try googling: Nintendo profit 2007 for your answer.

You honestly think going third party would be better for Nintendo than what they're making with the wii and ds?

[PS3-Playb3yond]

Hopefully this happens in March as well.

[HDGamer]

Originally Posted by PS34EVER

I just noticed that according to VGChartz.com (as much as I know you all love that site ), the PS3 reached 10 Million units sold nearly 4 months quicker than the 360 did.

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php

Trust me when I say this. VGChartz is not reliable.

[PS3ds]

Originally Posted by HDGamer

Trust me when I say this. VGChartz is not reliable.

Now THIS is not reliable...

http://www.nexgenwars.com/

[PS3ds]

THis shortage shit is bullshit. If anything, it looks like there is a shortage of PS3s... every store I've been in lately has had way more CrapBox360s than PS3s... 12 360s and only 1 PS3 for example. Just an observation.

[GotToyota?]

Originally Posted by Sith

until the ps3 starts selling more software, the 360 is still winning

You also realize that the 360 came out much earlier than the PS3, right?

[Sith]

Originally Posted by GotToyota?

You also realize that the 360 came out much earlier than the PS3, right?

considering i bought both on launch day yes i do realize that...all i'm saying
is if the ps3 only had a 30,000 advantage, i'm sure at least that many just
bought for blu ray so basically gamer wise that score is basically even...

We'll see when gta comes out...

[Havok83]

Originally Posted by PS3-Playb3yond

Hopefully this happens in March as well.

Haha, Microsoft already announced that the PS3 will most likely win in March

[richieb1971]

The only people who are buying XB360's are those that sold off systems that are almost dead to buy the new model that is supposedly better or for warranty purposes. I don't know a single person buying their first 360 in 2008.

[syncguy]

Some people buy Xbox just for their game. If it is not on PS3 they don't want it. At least in some cases content is the king.

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by HDGamer

Trust me when I say this. VGChartz is not reliable.

You can parrot this all you want, but you are twisting it.

For history, VGChartz is VERY reliable, because they go retrofit their numbers to match reality.

It's only for current and for predictions where it is not reliable.

Which means, basically, the graphs since inception are extremely close to reality.

[ikbradley]

Originally Posted by jubei29

I give up. The fanboys on this board are just as bad as the kids at gametrailers.com. Keep believing what your Sony world tells you to. I'll enjoy it all in the meantime.

I don't think that you have looked at the specs too much. From a hardware point of view, the PS3 is vastly superior, except for RAM (about equal) and the video card on the 360 is slightly better. With this said, the video card for the PS3 is an after thought because the Cell can be used to more than compensate. This was the intention of the designers.The drive speed has not been a factor.

The PS3 has a much better processor for handing complex physics and can also take on complex computations for lighting, etc. The standard requirements for the PS3 ensure hard drive space which has been a problem with the 360, because programmers can't require an HD for the Core crowd.

Also, the build quality of the 360 is horrendous. You can't argue this point. The heatsinks were improperly designed, the motherboards and the GPUs were not affixed properly.

This said, the PS3 has yet to achive its potential. The 360 hit its stride a long time ago and this is why it is keeping up with the PS3. However, don't consider the GPU superiority of the 360 an argument for stating that the PS3 is not technically superior overall.

Am I fanboy, or did I actually raise some valid points?