Sony ships 3.7 m PS3s Q2 2011, Gap now 2.07m from 360 (close it this holiday?)

[FinalEvangelion]

Originally Posted by Omegaice

I'm sorry but that statement makes no sense to me. Specifically the "patriotism" comment. What does being patriotic have to do with the type of console we choose purchase? And your comment in regards to how the Xbox is better suited for FPSs?? I guess I don't see it.

Microsoft being an American company. While it's not a big factor, I can see it being a small factor in people's decisions or a big factor in some people's.

As for FPS - Xbox Live is designed very well for multiplayer FPS gamers as is the controller. Even though I almost never play FPS games, I do know the position of the analog sticks and access to the triggers is better on the 360 controller.

As for Terjyn's comment, that has a lot more to do with advertising dollars than anything. But he is right. Take the hardware failures for instance. They pushed the fact that MS lied for 1.5 years about the design defects under the table, and instead just praised them for fixing the problem that should have been prevented in the first place. I highly doubt Sony or Nintendo would have been let off so easily.

[Secretagentnumber6]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Does it matter?

Only for people who feel that it is necessary to constantly argue which console is better, and of course to Sony and Microsoft for bragging rights.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by FinalEvangelion

Microsoft being an American company. While it's not a big factor, I can see it being a small factor in people's decisions or a big factor in some people's.

As for FPS - Xbox Live is designed very well for multiplayer FPS gamers as is the controller. Even though I almost never play FPS games, I do know the position of the analog sticks and access to the triggers is better on the 360 controller.

As for Terjyn's comment, that has a lot more to do with advertising dollars than anything. But he is right. Take the hardware failures for instance. They pushed the fact that MS lied for 1.5 years about the design defects under the table, and instead just praised them for fixing the problem that should have been prevented in the first place. I highly doubt Sony or Nintendo would have been let off so easily.

I don't think Microsoft being an American company is a strong enough point to sway people to purchase the Xbox over the PS3. As far as your statement in regards to the 360 controller being better designed for FPS is a personal opinion. I find that both the 360 & the PS3 controller do just fine for those types of games. And honestly, the relation to the hardware failures of the 360 & whether or not that Sony & Nintendo would've been "let off" so easily seems kind of a thin comparison.

[slaughinghouse]

IIRC, Sony's Playstation division has nearly always been profitable.....

[Psx0005]

Kudos to Sony for a job well done.

Not even gonna bother getting into a console/company comparison "discussion."

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

More of curiosity as to why it does to anyone without a financial interest in Sony. But here's a thought, if the PS3 is selling strong, but Sony is posting losses, it most likely means the PS4 is being pushed back.

The losses are from their TV division taking inventory write downs because of lower than expected sales in the US and EU which is related to the current economic downturn. Nothing to do with PS3 sales which are actually pretty good and at least break even on hardware if not profitable overall.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Maximus

The losses are from their TV division taking inventory write downs because of lower than expected sales in the US and EU which is related to the current economic downturn. Nothing to do with PS3 sales which are actually pretty good and at least break even on hardware if not profitable overall.

Which is what I said. If the PS3 is selling, and making a profit in a company experiencing losses, I don't see a PS4 coming out soon. The PS3 originally sold at a loss of up to over $200 per unit, based on model, on top of R&D costs. No one is going to rush out and buy new consoles that are much more expensive than a PS3 in this economy for whatever relatively minor upgrades (compared to the jump from PS2 to PS3) it will offer in function. There will be no quantum leap in display like going from SD to HD and the PS3 supports 3D and MOVE.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Which is what I said. If the PS3 is selling, and making a profit in a company experiencing losses, I don't see a PS4 coming out soon. The PS3 originally sold at a loss of up to over $200 per unit, based on model, on top of R&D costs. No one is going to rush out and buy new consoles that are much more expensive than a PS3 in this economy for whatever relatively minor upgrades (compared to the jump from PS2 to PS3) it will offer in function. There will be no quantum leap in display like going from SD to HD and the PS3 supports 3D and MOVE.

It's more likely that Sony will want to push out new hardware while PS3 is still profitable rather than run the price down and kill the margins before introducing a successor device.

[ObiWanShinobi]

I'll admit that 4 years ago I was big on the fanboy wars of which console was selling the most and yada yada yada but these days I just enjoy games and care less about sales.

It's good to see the PS3 catching up, if anything to show all the non-believers who referred to it as a "sinking ship" or "doomed from the beginning" that its a console worth owning one way or another with great games that, IMO, shouldnt be missed by people that enjoy videogames.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Maximus

It's more likely that Sony will want to push out new hardware while PS3 is still profitable rather than run the price down and kill the margins before introducing a successor device.

I don't see a PS4 for 3 years, at the earliest. And if the economy gets worse, longer. And the PS2 is still $99, hasn't dropped in price for almost 3 years and still selling well after a decade. At some point, the PS3 will drop to its lowest price and continue to increase in profit as components fall in price. A new device will be what kills margins, not the old ones.

[Clark Kent]

The numbers are meaningless at this point in the console wars. As long as both systems are in shouting distance of one another, developers have viable options working on either or both platforms. The danger always was one system getting massacred and so developers would drop that platform, but that did not happen. Sony blew their huge lead from the prior generation and enabled Microsoft to establish themselves as a legitimate gaming company.

Sony did win the Blu-ray victory, so at least they trumped Microsoft on that score.

[Monkey]

Matters to me, I want the PS3 to blow the competition out of the water. Less chance of multiplatform games catered to the lowest common denominator. I want every game to take advantage of the superior PS3 hardware in mind.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Matters to me, I want the PS3 to blow the competition out of the water. Less chance of multiplatform games catered to the lowest common denominator. I want every game to take advantage of the superior PS3 hardware in mind.

It its multiplatfrom, the PC blows the PS3 out of the water in hardware specs.


lol

Battlefield 3 comparation PC vs. Playstation3 Split Screen - YouTube

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Matters to me, I want the PS3 to blow the competition out of the water. Less chance of multiplatform games catered to the lowest common denominator. I want every game to take advantage of the superior PS3 hardware in mind.

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The numbers are meaningless at this point in the console wars. As long as both systems are in shouting distance of one another, developers have viable options working on either or both platforms. The danger always was one system getting massacred and so developers would drop that platform, but that did not happen. Sony blew their huge lead from the prior generation and enabled Microsoft to establish themselves as a legitimate gaming company.

Sony did win the Blu-ray victory, so at least they trumped Microsoft on that score.

I couldn't agree more.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The numbers are meaningless at this point in the console wars. As long as both systems are in shouting distance of one another, developers have viable options working on either or both platforms. The danger always was one system getting massacred and so developers would drop that platform, but that did not happen. Sony blew their huge lead from the prior generation and enabled Microsoft to establish themselves as a legitimate gaming company.

Sony did win the Blu-ray victory, so at least they trumped Microsoft on that score.

And Microsoft turns around and sells what, 60 million consoles that don't have Blu-ray which says much about the format wars. People will buy a product based on what it looks like on screen, not the format its in. Multiple disc installs is not the big deal some touted it to be.

[ariakon]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

It its multiplatfrom, the PC blows the PS3 out of the water in hardware specs.


lol

Now if only anyone outside of Eastern Europe still played on PC (Joking!)

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Wingman1977

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by monkey

smh.

[Terjyn]

I actually want the PS3 to pass Microsoft because of the tool at Microsoft who said that he guaranteed the 360 would outsell the PS3.

I always root against the competition guarantee idiots.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Omegaice

I agree with you in regards to the misleading of consumers. Either console has it's pros & cons. It just comes down to what you as the consumer wants.

Yes, but one has way more pros and less cons than the other. That's the part a lot of people are leaving out these days.