Where is this 10% figure coming from. Just curious thats all.
I remember some publisher basically saying that they think Nintendo's claims that they reaching a whole new market is exaggerated. Based on their data less than 10% of people who purchased a Wii have never bought a console before.
I can't seem to find where
Nintendo themselves said this. It was at that conference.. the one where it was real boring, iirc.
Actually, that says the cost is $100 lower than it was at launch. However, IIRC, it originally was estimated to cost $350/drive. So the Blu Ray drive should cost about $250 after the reduction.
I honestly don't conceptually have a problem with the idea of the PS3 turning around its momentum. I mean, Nintendo was in something of the same boat with the DS: market leader, crappy first year of games, rapidly losing ground to competitor, etc. But they managed to turn things around by bringing great games.
I guess the problem with the PS3 is its strength: the graphics. When your system's main advantage over its competitors is pure horsepower, that comes with an expectation of putting out games with the best graphics. But doing that requires lots of time and lots of money, and the Wii (and to an extent, the 360, especially with LiveArcade) are better arenas for cheap publishing, where tidier profits can be made, to boot.
Pricepoint is an issue to be sure, but being cheaper didn't help make the GCN anything but the least popular console last-gen (though, conversely, it can be argued that its low price was one of the few things that saved it from oblivion). The problem with the GCN, N64, Genesis, and pretty much every other "loser" system, in my book, is pretty simple: not as many quality titles as the other guy. When Sony designed its system in a way that only seems to allow for a few, potentially high-quality games, they did a pretty bad thing. The simple truth is that the system with more games will almost certainly be the system with more quality games, and thus be a better buy. Law of averages and all that.
I think the best thing that could happen for the PS3 would be for a) development to become cheaper/easier/faster and b) for there to be not just a few, but a load of awesome games coming out. I'd lay down 500 or 600 bucks if I knew I'd be getting a huge library of quality games.
...ironically, probably the only way for the PS3 to achieve this would be for developers to STOP focusing on graphics and just focus on getting quality games out quickly, sort of like Nippon Ichi seems to be doing with Disgaea 3 (not the prettiest looking game, especially by PS3 standards, but we all want it, right?). Of course, this would only validate Nintendo's stance on the hardware race, and Nintendo's the one with the neat controller, the mindshare, and the market lead...mhm.
Build in Blu Ray would mean selling it at that cost would be suicide.
This.
Will.
Not.
Happen.
Believe me.
aw, scarab! now you make me want it to drop to $400 just to spite you. No fair.
If there is a 399 PS3 then it will be the equivalent of a tard pack and will be just as retarded as the 20gig model.
regardless, there will still be the proper 599 pack so the problem remains.
I would have maybe done a 'ill eat my cock' kind of wager here but i dont do that.
a new price cut will only be in conjunction with a hardware redesign or new sku. it wont just be 200 dollars off gratis. that is insane. then you will have had 4 skus in less than 12 months. what kind of confidence does that give anyone?
if I was sony id keep the PS3 the same price. itll do badly this holiday but no amount of pricing and revising will prevent that. especially with nintendo stockpiling wiis.
what they need to do is spend the money they would have thrown away with a price cut on securing some fucking games for the system. price is the first barrier to entry. but behind that barrier is the games barrier. no matter how cheap it was people would still not buy it if it had no decent games. especially when its main competitors are going to have a barnstormer of a holiday season.
sony definetly wont just do another pricecut. iirc they already lose 250-300 dollars on each one sold. and sony execs have made it perfectly clear they want the ps3 to be profitable in the foreseeable future. and if you want citation on that then id have to trawl through a whole backlog of 1up interviews. its out there. im just too lazy to link it. so dont trust what i say until i come back with links.
I can see Sony losing the Xmas season, but the most important thing that they can do is to start and continue 2008 with a bang. No game drought with no more P.R. nightmares.
someone on these boards once made the statement that sony is a lot like cobra command in the whole "i'll get you NEXT TIME!!" attitude. I believe it was accompanied by a gif...anyone know what I'm talking about?
as far as sony making a comeback, I completely agree with scarab's strategy. They need some goddamn games. Warhawk, uncharted and rachet and clank will help quite a bit but I don't think they're enough to overcome the tarnished image they've created. and mgs4 can't do it alone in 2008.
price cut would be nice too but having one before the new year just makes them seem so damn...desperate.
what the ps3 needs is for naughty dog to get to work on the new jak and daxter game because fuck i really want it
I thought that series was 'ended.'
And that the next best thing you'll get are the Daxter games on the PSP.
But Naughty Dog is doing Uncharted now, aren't they?
they better start the new jak as soon as uncharted goes gold
Of course [the idea of] doing another Jak and Daxter game is very exciting for us here at Naughty Dog still, but we wanted to do something fresh and brand new to keep our personal interests peaked. We've done four games in the Jak and Daxter universe in five or six years and we wanted to take a break from it and put a new franchise out there [which is] hopefully successful--and we want to do some sequels there too--but yeah, I think we'll probably go back to Jak and Daxter at one point.
I'm guessing whoever reported the rumour is stupid and was actually talking about the memory stick slots. That would make a lot more sense, especially since Sony already took it out of the 20GB model.
Also, I'm guessing a lot of people wouldn't really give a shit about how gimped it is. Most people didn't even use the PS2's backwards compatibility. I mean, I wouldn't buy it if it came out (I like my backwards compatibility thanks) but I still think it's a smart idea for Sony to drop the price.
The_Scarab: The only thing retarded thing about the 20GB PS3 was that Sony only produced 10 of them (for the US at least). The stuff you missed out on (wifi, 40GB's and memory stick slots) weren't that important at all.
slash000: They've hinted at going back to it after Uncharted, plus they also trademarked 'Jak & Daxter: The Lost Frontier' a while back. My guess is that they'll copy Insomniac's formula and release one game a year. So Uncharted in 2007, J&D in 2008 and Uncharted 2 in 2009. It seems to have worked for Insomniac, so I wouldn't count it out.
Guek: There's also Infamous, Killzone 2, White Knight Story, LittleBigPlanet and Gran Turismo 5 hitting in 2008. Doesn't seem so bad, does it?
I'm guessing whoever reported the rumour is stupid and was actually talking about the memory stick slots. That would make a lot more sense, especially since Sony already took it out of the 20GB model.
Also, I'm guessing a lot of people wouldn't really give a shit about how gimped it is. Most people didn't even use the PS2's backwards compatibility. I mean, I wouldn't buy it if it came out (I like my backwards compatibility thanks) but I still think it's a smart idea for Sony to drop the price.
You're confusing "what people would be ok with" and "What people want" with "What Sony will do".
I'm guessing that a lot of people would buy a cheaper, less-functional PS3, as long as it could, say, still play PS3 games. Sony has not hinted in any way that they are going to release one. They have in fact specifically stated that they are sticking to a single-SKU paradigm.
I'm guessing whoever reported the rumour is stupid and was actually talking about the memory stick slots. That would make a lot more sense, especially since Sony already took it out of the 20GB model.
Also, I'm guessing a lot of people wouldn't really give a shit about how gimped it is. Most people didn't even use the PS2's backwards compatibility. I mean, I wouldn't buy it if it came out (I like my backwards compatibility thanks) but I still think it's a smart idea for Sony to drop the price.
You're confusing "what people would be ok with" and "What people want" with "What Sony will do".
I'm guessing that a lot of people would buy a cheaper, less-functional PS3, as long as it could, say, still play PS3 games. Sony has not hinted in any way that they are going to release one. They have in fact specifically stated that they are sticking to a single-SKU paradigm.
Sony says a lot of things. One of them being "fuck rumble." We all know how that turned out.
Still, I'm not sure how Sony could lower the cost of the PS3 to $400 without crippling the machine. I mean, memory and usb ports don't cost THAT much to make. Even though $400 would be nice. But more fantastic games would be nicer.
I'm guessing whoever reported the rumour is stupid and was actually talking about the memory stick slots. That would make a lot more sense, especially since Sony already took it out of the 20GB model.
Also, I'm guessing a lot of people wouldn't really give a shit about how gimped it is. Most people didn't even use the PS2's backwards compatibility. I mean, I wouldn't buy it if it came out (I like my backwards compatibility thanks) but I still think it's a smart idea for Sony to drop the price.
You're confusing "what people would be ok with" and "What people want" with "What Sony will do".
I'm guessing that a lot of people would buy a cheaper, less-functional PS3, as long as it could, say, still play PS3 games. Sony has not hinted in any way that they are going to release one. They have in fact specifically stated that they are sticking to a single-SKU paradigm.
Sony says a lot of things. One of them being "fuck rumble." We all know how that turned out.
Still, I'm not sure how Sony could lower the cost of the PS3 to $400 without crippling the machine. I mean, memory and usb ports don't cost THAT much to make. Even though $400 would be nice. But more fantastic games would be nicer.
Well according to the rumours it won't have backwards compatibility either. Taking out the GS chip would take the price down a good $50.
Where is this 10% figure coming from. Just curious thats all.
I remember some publisher basically saying that they think Nintendo's claims that they reaching a whole new market is exaggerated. Based on their data less than 10% of people who purchased a Wii have never bought a console before.
I can't seem to find where
Nintendo themselves said this. It was at that conference.. the one where it was real boring, iirc.
You are probably right.
Don't mind me... I'm just losing my mind
i think most people wouldn't realize it wasn't BC until they took it home.
That didn't work with the Core. Why would it work with Sony doing the same thing except and a higher price?
cuz a missing harddrive is a lot more conspicuous than a missing chip? *shrugs* just sayin, I doubt there's going to be a big sticker on the box that shouts "NOW WITH LESS BACKWARDS COMPATABILITY!!!"
Removing the BC would take the interest in the new model down a good 50 percent.
You're seriously saying that 50% of the reason to buy a PS3 is to play PS1 and PS2 game on it? Despite the fact that you could play those games on a system less than a quarter of the price of a PS3? Garbage.
Most people buy new systems so they can play new games on them. It's only the hardcore, people like us, that really make use of backwards compatibility.
Guek: I'd say there'll be a fair amount of people that would never realise that it wasn't BC. Again, there's a pretty high percentage of PS2 owners that never even bothered to play PS1 games on it. Hell, there's probably people out there that don't even know the PS2 is backwards compatible (or even what that phrase means).
It's only the hardcore, people like us, that really make use of backwards compatibility.
I don't know... my cousins are the very definition of casual gamers (their latest game purchases were Crazy Frog Racer and American Chopper: The Game). Yet they still play Playstation 1 games all the time on their PS2. They don't have many games, so they replay their old ones regularly.
Also, I've seen a lot of you guys mentioning how huge Gran Turismo is going to be for the PS3 next year. This strikes me as odd. I understand how good the games are, but do they have some massive broad appeal I am unaware of? How have the previous GT games done sales-wise?
Also, I've seen a lot of you guys mentioning how huge Gran Turismo is going to be for the PS3 next year. This strikes me as odd. I understand how good the games are, but do they have some massive broad appeal I am unaware of? How have the previous GT games done sales-wise?
If I remember correctly, crazy well. I think they have at least one title in the top ten most sold games.
Also, I've seen a lot of you guys mentioning how huge Gran Turismo is going to be for the PS3 next year. This strikes me as odd. I understand how good the games are, but do they have some massive broad appeal I am unaware of? How have the previous GT games done sales-wise?
We'll probably get some rough estimations and shipped numbers in the next week but we won't get any accurate figures until the NPD numbers come out. I'm not sure when they'll come out though.
As for Gran Turismo, it's pretty massive. People seem to forget about it but Gran Turismo 3 was one of the best selling games last gen with over 14 and a half million sold. Gran Turismo 4 is the lowest selling main title in series at around 9 million units sold.
Also, I've seen a lot of you guys mentioning how huge Gran Turismo is going to be for the PS3 next year. This strikes me as odd. I understand how good the games are, but do they have some massive broad appeal I am unaware of? How have the previous GT games done sales-wise?
We'll probably get some rough estimations and shipped numbers in the next week but we won't get any accurate figures until the NPD numbers come out. I'm not sure when they'll come out though.
As for Gran Turismo, it's pretty massive. People seem to forget about it but Gran Turismo 3 was one of the best selling games last gen with over 14 and a half million sold. Gran Turismo 4 is the lowest selling main title in series at around 9 million units sold.
Aye. But again like all PS2 games, its selling to an instll base 5 times that of the Gamecube and the Xbox. So when you say it sold 9 million it sold 'ok', whereas a game like Sunshine or Halo 2 with 5 or 10 million sold 'well' because it sold to a much higher percentage of the people who owned a console.
Im not saying it sold bad at all. But you cannot use PS2 sales figures to predict PS3 sales figures. That would be stupid. GT5 is not going to sell 14 million. nowhere near.
Aye. But again like all PS2 games, its selling to an instll base 5 times that of the Gamecube and the Xbox. So when you say it sold 9 million it sold 'ok', whereas a game like Sunshine or Halo 2 with 5 or 10 million sold 'well' because it sold to a much higher percentage of the people who owned a console.
Im not saying it sold bad at all. But you cannot use PS2 sales figures to predict PS3 sales figures. That would be stupid. GT5 is not going to sell 14 million. nowhere near.
ARGH! I've already argued this point the last time you brought it up. Being released on a system with a high install base does NOT mean your game is more likely to sell well! Actually, it might even make it harder. Why? Because having a massive install base leads to more games, which in turn leads to a shitload more competition.
Of course you can't use PS2 sales figures to predict PS3 figures but it's still pretty easy to figure out that GT5 will sell well. Probably not 15 million 'well' but I doubt any 360 or PS3 games will sell those kind of figures.
someone on these boards once made the statement that sony is a lot like cobra command in the whole "i'll get you NEXT TIME!!" attitude. I believe it was accompanied by a gif...anyone know what I'm talking about?
as far as sony making a comeback, I completely agree with scarab's strategy. They need some goddamn games. Warhawk, uncharted and rachet and clank will help quite a bit but I don't think they're enough to overcome the tarnished image they've created. and mgs4 can't do it alone in 2008.
price cut would be nice too but having one before the new year just makes them seem so damn...desperate.
Wow, I knew Nintendogs was huge, but I had no idea it was that huge. I am amazed that there is no Nintencats or equivalent yet, very restrained of them. (Same goes for NSMB 2, but they would have to make New Doki Doki Panic first really)
Wow, I knew Nintendogs was huge, but I had no idea it was that huge. I am amazed that there is no Nintencats or equivalent yet, very restrained of them. (Same goes for NSMB 2, but they would have to make New Doki Doki Panic first really)
There's 4 versions of Nintendogs. It's not exactly the modern model of restraint.
Wow, I knew Nintendogs was huge, but I had no idea it was that huge. I am amazed that there is no Nintencats or equivalent yet, very restrained of them. (Same goes for NSMB 2, but they would have to make New Doki Doki Panic first really)
There's 4 versions of Nintendogs. It's not exactly the modern model of restraint.
Posts
but but but.... That guy from newsweek said that the PS3 is going to come down to $200!
Nintendo themselves said this. It was at that conference.. the one where it was real boring, iirc.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
Actually, that says the cost is $100 lower than it was at launch. However, IIRC, it originally was estimated to cost $350/drive. So the Blu Ray drive should cost about $250 after the reduction.
source: Merrill Lynch via Engadget
Looks like they expect the drive will cost $100 after 3 years of production.
aw, scarab! now you make me want it to drop to $400 just to spite you. No fair.
The USB ports and chipset cost one or two dollars. Removing them will allow massive price cuts!!
I guess the problem with the PS3 is its strength: the graphics. When your system's main advantage over its competitors is pure horsepower, that comes with an expectation of putting out games with the best graphics. But doing that requires lots of time and lots of money, and the Wii (and to an extent, the 360, especially with LiveArcade) are better arenas for cheap publishing, where tidier profits can be made, to boot.
Pricepoint is an issue to be sure, but being cheaper didn't help make the GCN anything but the least popular console last-gen (though, conversely, it can be argued that its low price was one of the few things that saved it from oblivion). The problem with the GCN, N64, Genesis, and pretty much every other "loser" system, in my book, is pretty simple: not as many quality titles as the other guy. When Sony designed its system in a way that only seems to allow for a few, potentially high-quality games, they did a pretty bad thing. The simple truth is that the system with more games will almost certainly be the system with more quality games, and thus be a better buy. Law of averages and all that.
I think the best thing that could happen for the PS3 would be for a) development to become cheaper/easier/faster and b) for there to be not just a few, but a load of awesome games coming out. I'd lay down 500 or 600 bucks if I knew I'd be getting a huge library of quality games.
...ironically, probably the only way for the PS3 to achieve this would be for developers to STOP focusing on graphics and just focus on getting quality games out quickly, sort of like Nippon Ichi seems to be doing with Disgaea 3 (not the prettiest looking game, especially by PS3 standards, but we all want it, right?). Of course, this would only validate Nintendo's stance on the hardware race, and Nintendo's the one with the neat controller, the mindshare, and the market lead...mhm.
If there is a 399 PS3 then it will be the equivalent of a tard pack and will be just as retarded as the 20gig model.
regardless, there will still be the proper 599 pack so the problem remains.
I would have maybe done a 'ill eat my cock' kind of wager here but i dont do that.
a new price cut will only be in conjunction with a hardware redesign or new sku. it wont just be 200 dollars off gratis. that is insane. then you will have had 4 skus in less than 12 months. what kind of confidence does that give anyone?
if I was sony id keep the PS3 the same price. itll do badly this holiday but no amount of pricing and revising will prevent that. especially with nintendo stockpiling wiis.
what they need to do is spend the money they would have thrown away with a price cut on securing some fucking games for the system. price is the first barrier to entry. but behind that barrier is the games barrier. no matter how cheap it was people would still not buy it if it had no decent games. especially when its main competitors are going to have a barnstormer of a holiday season.
sony definetly wont just do another pricecut. iirc they already lose 250-300 dollars on each one sold. and sony execs have made it perfectly clear they want the ps3 to be profitable in the foreseeable future. and if you want citation on that then id have to trawl through a whole backlog of 1up interviews. its out there. im just too lazy to link it. so dont trust what i say until i come back with links.
as far as sony making a comeback, I completely agree with scarab's strategy. They need some goddamn games. Warhawk, uncharted and rachet and clank will help quite a bit but I don't think they're enough to overcome the tarnished image they've created. and mgs4 can't do it alone in 2008.
price cut would be nice too but having one before the new year just makes them seem so damn...desperate.
I thought that series was 'ended.'
And that the next best thing you'll get are the Daxter games on the PSP.
But Naughty Dog is doing Uncharted now, aren't they?
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
they better start the new jak as soon as uncharted goes gold
Jak PSP is also rumored.
I'm guessing whoever reported the rumour is stupid and was actually talking about the memory stick slots. That would make a lot more sense, especially since Sony already took it out of the 20GB model.
Also, I'm guessing a lot of people wouldn't really give a shit about how gimped it is. Most people didn't even use the PS2's backwards compatibility. I mean, I wouldn't buy it if it came out (I like my backwards compatibility thanks) but I still think it's a smart idea for Sony to drop the price.
The_Scarab: The only thing retarded thing about the 20GB PS3 was that Sony only produced 10 of them (for the US at least). The stuff you missed out on (wifi, 40GB's and memory stick slots) weren't that important at all.
slash000: They've hinted at going back to it after Uncharted, plus they also trademarked 'Jak & Daxter: The Lost Frontier' a while back. My guess is that they'll copy Insomniac's formula and release one game a year. So Uncharted in 2007, J&D in 2008 and Uncharted 2 in 2009. It seems to have worked for Insomniac, so I wouldn't count it out.
Guek: There's also Infamous, Killzone 2, White Knight Story, LittleBigPlanet and Gran Turismo 5 hitting in 2008. Doesn't seem so bad, does it?
You're confusing "what people would be ok with" and "What people want" with "What Sony will do".
I'm guessing that a lot of people would buy a cheaper, less-functional PS3, as long as it could, say, still play PS3 games. Sony has not hinted in any way that they are going to release one. They have in fact specifically stated that they are sticking to a single-SKU paradigm.
Sony says a lot of things. One of them being "fuck rumble." We all know how that turned out.
Still, I'm not sure how Sony could lower the cost of the PS3 to $400 without crippling the machine. I mean, memory and usb ports don't cost THAT much to make. Even though $400 would be nice. But more fantastic games would be nicer.
Well according to the rumours it won't have backwards compatibility either. Taking out the GS chip would take the price down a good $50.
You are probably right.
Don't mind me... I'm just losing my mind
Well, I mean...
What the hell kind of PS3 can't play God Hand?
More seriously, though, I can see Gran Turismo being the biggest seller next year, but if Sony catches up in the race it will not be that quickly.
That didn't work with the Core. Why would it work with Sony doing the same thing except and a higher price?
cuz a missing harddrive is a lot more conspicuous than a missing chip? *shrugs* just sayin, I doubt there's going to be a big sticker on the box that shouts "NOW WITH LESS BACKWARDS COMPATABILITY!!!"
You're seriously saying that 50% of the reason to buy a PS3 is to play PS1 and PS2 game on it? Despite the fact that you could play those games on a system less than a quarter of the price of a PS3? Garbage.
Most people buy new systems so they can play new games on them. It's only the hardcore, people like us, that really make use of backwards compatibility.
Guek: I'd say there'll be a fair amount of people that would never realise that it wasn't BC. Again, there's a pretty high percentage of PS2 owners that never even bothered to play PS1 games on it. Hell, there's probably people out there that don't even know the PS2 is backwards compatible (or even what that phrase means).
Oh yeah that's right. I totally forgot about that.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
I don't know... my cousins are the very definition of casual gamers (their latest game purchases were Crazy Frog Racer and American Chopper: The Game). Yet they still play Playstation 1 games all the time on their PS2. They don't have many games, so they replay their old ones regularly.
Also, I've seen a lot of you guys mentioning how huge Gran Turismo is going to be for the PS3 next year. This strikes me as odd. I understand how good the games are, but do they have some massive broad appeal I am unaware of? How have the previous GT games done sales-wise?
Switch - SW-3699-5063-5018
If I remember correctly, crazy well. I think they have at least one title in the top ten most sold games.
We'll probably get some rough estimations and shipped numbers in the next week but we won't get any accurate figures until the NPD numbers come out. I'm not sure when they'll come out though.
As for Gran Turismo, it's pretty massive. People seem to forget about it but Gran Turismo 3 was one of the best selling games last gen with over 14 and a half million sold. Gran Turismo 4 is the lowest selling main title in series at around 9 million units sold.
Aye. But again like all PS2 games, its selling to an instll base 5 times that of the Gamecube and the Xbox. So when you say it sold 9 million it sold 'ok', whereas a game like Sunshine or Halo 2 with 5 or 10 million sold 'well' because it sold to a much higher percentage of the people who owned a console.
Im not saying it sold bad at all. But you cannot use PS2 sales figures to predict PS3 sales figures. That would be stupid. GT5 is not going to sell 14 million. nowhere near.
ARGH! I've already argued this point the last time you brought it up. Being released on a system with a high install base does NOT mean your game is more likely to sell well! Actually, it might even make it harder. Why? Because having a massive install base leads to more games, which in turn leads to a shitload more competition.
Of course you can't use PS2 sales figures to predict PS3 figures but it's still pretty easy to figure out that GT5 will sell well. Probably not 15 million 'well' but I doubt any 360 or PS3 games will sell those kind of figures.
i have absolutely no idea
Hasn't NSMB sold almost 15mil?;-)
If you can only point out one, it's definitely rare as shit. From a quick survey of the Wikipedia list, the games that meet that criterion are:
That's it. You get one or two per generation if you're lucky. New Super Mario Bros. is at 10.5 million according to that list, BTW.
There's 4 versions of Nintendogs. It's not exactly the modern model of restraint.
Didn't they come out in a similar fasion to Pokémon though, 3 at once, then another which is a special edition shortly after, but they are basically the same game.
There's been no "Nintendogs 2" that's for sure.
whoops ... I skipped the GameBoy list entirely for no apparent reason. I added Tetris and Pokemon Red, Blue, and Green to the list.