Its official, PS3 DELAYS Production Cut 50%

[Groundbeef]

According to the Wall Street Journal, (9-7-06)Sony admitted yesterday that there are significant problems in production with the laser that controls the Blu-Ray player. I will provide links when I can get them together.

In a nutshell, the laser production was great in small scale production, but now that it is in full swing, quality cannot be contained in the numbers demanded. Worldwide production is estimated to be at best 50% for the holiday season. US units are estimated to now be about 400,000 units down from over 800,000 units.

This is bound to cause some heartache for PS3 customers, and could cause the XBOX 360 to cut into Sonys marketshare.

Stay tuned.

[kexodusc]

Aww man...I was hopin' to get one for BluRay purposes...these guys are in major Panic Mode now, if Xbox releases a few killer games in time for christmas, XBox will steal even more market share. I just hope they don't rush out a faulty product to keep up. That would come back to haunt them.

What's the deal with that cool new Nintendo system with the stupid name?

[Groundbeef]

What you mean the Wii? As in, "Dude, you gotta come over and see my Wii!"
I don't know. Nintendo is so kid oriented, I would never consider it.

As far as cool games for 360, have you been looking? Dead Rising, Saints Row, Viva Pinata (for kids), Oblivion, Fight Night 3.... the list goes on. If you havn't seen a 360 in HD on plasma/LCD, you are really missing out. PS3 frankly isn't going to have graphics any better. The Blu-Ray is a nice touch, unless it doesn't work...

[westcott]

Looks like Sony is going to loose another format war.

Imagine that. If it were any other company, they would be out of business by now.

I priced an HD DVD player on the internet at a little less than US$405.00 yesterday.

[Woochifer]

Looks like Sony is going to loose another format war.

Imagine that. If it were any other company, they would be out of business by now.

I priced an HD DVD player on the internet at a little less than US$405.00 yesterday.

Aren't you being a tad premature here, given that Sony hasn't even introduced its Blu-ray player yet? (nor have Pioneer, Panasonic, or other members of the Blu-ray group) Might want to wait until more players and titles are available before sounding the death knell for the format. If you had judged the DVD format after only two months on the market, it too would have been viewed as a failure.

HD-DVD has had its share of issues at launch as well (before the release of the 2.0 firmware a couple of weeks ago, most of Toshiba's HD-DVD players had bugs aplenty and key features disabled), but on the whole has had a better set of titles so far.

Blu-ray has mostly disappointed so far (video quality hasn't been great, no dual layer media, etc.), then again, only that Samsung player introduced in July and a few titles have hit the market so far. Way too early to project what will happen when most of the major manufacturers haven't launched their players yet, and most of the studios on board with Blu-ray haven't rolled out their titles yet.

Besides, by this time next year, it might all be moot, given that LG has already developed a laser capable of reading both HD-DVD and Blu-ray discs, and the Broadcom decoding chip that Toshiba uses on its HD-DVD players can already decode Blu-ray as well.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Looks like Sony is going to loose another format war.

Imagine that. If it were any other company, they would be out of business by now.

I priced an HD DVD player on the internet at a little less than US$405.00 yesterday.

You are waaaaay to early to come to this conclusion. $405 is for a player that is not format complete. Boot times are still too slow, and it still can only produce a 1080i output. From what I have read online, the players still freeze and cannot remember where it last stopped so it could pick the video point up again. This is post firmware updated. This price is also a considerable loss for Toshiba, which cannot be good for the only manufacturer of the player.

I read that Bill Hunt says that the PS3 is going to be the most tested bluray player and game machine to come to the market. I would rather have a delayed well tested product that rolls out than have a player full of bugs that comes to market on the release date.

Why doesn't everyone just wait to see what's going to happen rather than try and lamely predict it?

[Groundbeef]

I read that Bill Hunt says that the PS3 is going to be the most tested bluray player and game machine to come to the market. I would rather have a delayed well tested product that rolls out than have a player full of bugs that comes to market on the release date.

Why doesn't everyone just wait to see what's going to happen rather than try and lamely predict it?

Well for starters, what fun is there in not speculating? It's always fun to pick sides and predict what may or may not happen. This is not the only topic on this forum where people choose sides on a particular topic. Speaker wire, gold connections, Bose/Non Bose, paper vs plastic, etc. Everyone has a favorite.

As far as PS3 being most tested? Sure you have one person say that it is going to be "most tested" and then you have some other expert say its not going to be all peaches and cream. The PS3 that has been tested no doubt was an initial batch product. Now it seems that they are having trouble with mass-producing the laster required for quality control to pass. Does this mean that some of those initial units may fail? Certainly. Did the 360 have problems? Sure, in fact my initial unit failed and was replaced.

At what point should a company release a product? Ideally it should be done only after through testing is completed. But we do not live in an ideal world. Sony is betting the farm on this product. Remeber, for every 360 sold, most likely a PS3 will not be sold. Sure, we all know someone who has every gadget under the sun, but for MOST people this holiday season, it will be either a 360 or PS3. For us gamers over 18, if we need to wait until Feb-March 07, thats fine. But there are plenty of folks who want to get a system for Christmas (or Hanauka sp) and don't want to dissapoint their child.

Sony is well aware of this issue, and will do everything to release it by Nov 17. If there are some issues with performance, they can be dealt with at a later date.

[Woochifer]

According to the Wall Street Journal, (9-7-06)Sony admitted yesterday that there are significant problems in production with the laser that controls the Blu-Ray player. I will provide links when I can get them together.

In a nutshell, the laser production was great in small scale production, but now that it is in full swing, quality cannot be contained in the numbers demanded. Worldwide production is estimated to be at best 50% for the holiday season. US units are estimated to now be about 400,000 units down from over 800,000 units.

This is bound to cause some heartache for PS3 customers, and could cause the XBOX 360 to cut into Sonys marketshare.

Stay tuned.

Not a good development for Sony. I've read a couple of articles opining that Sony might have made a mistake in tying the PS3 to the Blu-ray format, and so far, the Blu-ray launch has not gone well with substandard discs and manufacturers unable to get the dual layer function to work right. We'll see how it plays out. Your subject heading is a bit misleading though because the introduction date has not been pushed back. Only the projected number of units available at launch has changed. I posted an article previously that Sony had started PS3 production back in July. Obviously, they have yet to get volumes up to where they had projected earlier.

What's the deal with that cool new Nintendo system with the stupid name?

The Nintendo Wii will launch around the same time as the PS3, and it has created a buzz because of its two-piece motion controller (the PS3 will have a similar motion control feature, though not with the same wand design as the Nintendo controller). I think Nintendo might be the dark horse here, because they decided not to get into a technological arms race with Sony and Microsoft, and focus more on changing the gaming experience.

The Wii will not go HD, nor will it include digital media center features. It's a basic gaming console with a new controller design and more processing power than the previous gen Xbox and PS2. But, with a projected price of $200, it undercuts both the X360 and the PS3. In addition, the cost of developing games for the Wii will be a lot lower.

[Groundbeef]

Not a good development for Sony. I've read a couple of articles opining that Sony might have made a mistake in tying the PS3 to the Blu-ray format, and so far, the Blu-ray launch has not gone well with substandard discs and manufacturers unable to get the dual layer function to work right. We'll see how it plays out.

Your subject heading is a bit misleading though because the introduction date has not been pushed back. Only the projected number of units available at launch has changed.

I posted an article previously that Sony had started PS3 production back in July. Obviously, they have yet to get volumes up to where they had projected earlier.

.

Wasn't trying to mislead. I should have headed it---It's official, PS3 DELAYS; Production Cut 50%.

You are correct in that the distribution date is unchanged. However, a cut of at least 50% of available units would be considered a "Delay" for those who had pre-ordered and now need to wait unitil after the holidays for their unit.

I figured you would be posting Woochifer, this topic is like honey to bees for you. I half posted just to draw you in.

For all of you looking for a PS3 for a cheap Blu-Ray player, doesn't look good for the holidays. If last holiday season is an indicator, (When 360's sold for 8-900 on ebay) the PS3 street price will no doubt be close to $1000 or more. Especially considering the demand for units with only half the stock.
When I say "Street Price" this is AFTER retail purchase. Yes, as shocking as it sounds, people like me snap up retail units and resell on Ebay for schleps who don't want to wait in the cold all night. If you don't think its fair, wait in line and get one for retail.

[Woochifer]

I figured you would be posting Woochifer, this topic is like honey to bees for you. I half posted just to draw you in.

I would hope that you have better reasons for posting than trying to goad a response out of me! Given that you're the resident Microsoft fanboy on this board, it would seem that any bad news on the PS3 would be motivation enough.

For all of you looking for a PS3 for a cheap Blu-Ray player, doesn't look good for the holidays. If last holiday season is an indicator, (When 360's sold for 8-900 on ebay) the PS3 street price will no doubt be close to $1000 or more. Especially considering the demand for units with only half the stock.
When I say "Street Price" this is AFTER retail purchase. Yes, as shocking as it sounds, people like me snap up retail units and resell on Ebay for schleps who don't want to wait in the cold all night. If you don't think its fair, wait in line and get one for retail.

Thanks but no thanks. My billing rate is worth more than that, and I'd rather sleep in. PS3 and Blu-ray can wait.

[Groundbeef]

I would hope that you have better reasons for posting than trying to goad a response out of me! Given that you're the resident Microsoft fanboy on this board, it would seem that any bad news on the PS3 would be motivation enough.

Ouch....the claws are out today ladies and gents. Thought we had buried the hatchet long ago after you were so bloodied and sent home weeping. I think at one point you called me a "whipper snapper".

Anyway, for your info, I like MS, but am also a fan of Sony, my plasma, upstairs sound system, dvd-video recorder, Tivo unit and various other entertainment devices are all Sony. So I really don't hate Sony.

I do prefer MS gaming machines XBOX v PS2. Sony may have had more games, but XBOX was a better machine. Although you personally are not a big proponent of online gaming, that's where its headed. And XBOX kicks Sony's ass in this arena. And yes, I must admit a problem with the PS3 did sort of make me giddy.

[Woochifer]

Ouch....the claws are out today ladies and gents. Thought we had buried the hatchet long ago after you were so bloodied and sent home weeping. I think at one point you called me a "whipper snapper".

Nope, that would not be me.

Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

I do prefer MS gaming machines XBOX v PS2. Sony may have had more games, but XBOX was a better machine. Although you personally are not a big proponent of online gaming, that's where its headed. And XBOX kicks Sony's ass in this arena. And yes, I must admit a problem with the PS3 did sort of make me giddy.

Truer fanboy words have never been spoken!

[audio_dude]

ok, as i gamer, i'm going to put in my two cents:

first, about the game war, PS3, its going to bomb, it will be at the bottom of the ladder for this generation, the XboX 360 will hold a nice market share due to the fact that its a pretty decent console (PS, i HATE control pads, they're ok for racing and rpgs and that sort of thing, but garbage for most FPS games...) and in my opinion, nintendo will hold top spot, or stay even with the 360. just take a look at the wii, what is nintendo doing? they're breaking the mold, yet again, shaking off all the other companies that have copied it over the years... oh ya, and i'm in disgust at you people that are still stuck in 1999 with the "nintendo is for kids" attitude, the gamecube has had its fair share of adult oriented games, certainly not as much as the XboX or PS2, but that doesn't matter... have you even looked at the game list for the Wii? yes, there are the usual Mario, Zelda and typical nintendo awesomeness there, but have any of you seen or heard about "Red Steel"? if you haven't check it out, it may just change your opinion of the Wii.

if i want to play an ultra high end graphics games, i'll use my PC, thats what its for, the Wii isn't about cutting edge 3D super graphics, its ALL about the gameplay, sure, graphics make a game look nice, but would you rather have a game that looks spectacular, but plays like a piece of sh it? no? thats what i thought, why do you think the original Super Mario World was, and still is so popular? because it was a GREAT game, the controls were perfect, the game was a perect blend of stategy and action, and just hard enough, it would be challenging without being frustrating. oh ya, and the Wii is still only 200 smackers, and the games are still gonna be 40-55 bucks, nothing compared to the $400 for a 360 PLUS $60-70 bucks on a game!! its ridiculous, and i'm not even going to start on the PS3...

and so ends my rant on these consoles, so check the Wii out, i'm not telling you, not forcing you, just asking, yes, i do have a small bias, but i just don't see the value in one a PS3 (although if i had the money and a wii, i would probably get the 360)

[Groundbeef]

ok, as i gamer, i'm going to put in my two cents:

first, about the game war, PS3, its going to bomb, it will be at the bottom of the ladder for this generation, the XboX 360 will hold a nice market share due to the fact that its a pretty decent console (PS, i HATE control pads, they're ok for racing and rpgs and that sort of thing, but garbage for most FPS games...) and in my opinion, nintendo will hold top spot, or stay even with the 360. just take a look at the wii, what is nintendo doing? they're breaking the mold, yet again, shaking off all the other companies that have copied it over the years... oh ya, and i'm in disgust at you people that are still stuck in 1999 with the "nintendo is for kids" attitude, the gamecube has had its fair share of adult oriented games, certainly not as much as the XboX or PS2, but that doesn't matter... have you even looked at the game list for the Wii? yes, there are the usual Mario, Zelda and typical nintendo awesomeness there, but have any of you seen or heard about "Red Steel"? if you haven't check it out, it may just change your opinion of the Wii.

if i want to play an ultra high end graphics games, i'll use my PC, thats what its for, the Wii isn't about cutting edge 3D super graphics, its ALL about the gameplay, sure, graphics make a game look nice, but would you rather have a game that looks spectacular, but plays like a piece of sh it? no? thats what i thought, why do you think the original Super Mario World was, and still is so popular? because it was a GREAT game, the controls were perfect, the game was a perect blend of stategy and action, and just hard enough, it would be challenging without being frustrating. oh ya, and the Wii is still only 200 smackers, and the games are still gonna be 40-55 bucks, nothing compared to the $400 for a 360 PLUS $60-70 bucks on a game!! its ridiculous, and i'm not even going to start on the PS3...

and so ends my rant on these consoles, so check the Wii out, i'm not telling you, not forcing you, just asking, yes, i do have a small bias, but i just don't see the value in one a PS3 (although if i had the money and a wii, i would probably get the 360)

Ok, 1st things first. Even a fanboy like myself for MS is not niave enough to think that the PS3 will "Bomb". There's just simply too much pent up demand for it to think it won't sell. Granted there are too many things I think that it has against it to do as well as it could, but it will sell, and sell huge.

2. PC games used to be my forte for games as well. It has a lot going for it as well. Controls are better for FPS and flight games, but I gotta admit my 360 is changing my mind. You cannot get the same graphics that I get on my 360 on a widescreen Plasma, on any computer that costs close to $400. More like $2000 or more. Some alienware go for $5k plus. The continued hardware upgrades and requirements are making PC games less attractive compared to the hardware that a console offers today.

3. The wii may be worth a look, but as a 2nd system. Nintendo is still a kids platform. Always been, always will be. An adult game here or there doesn't make it a playstation or 360.

[Lensman]

ok, as i gamer, i'm going to put in my two cents:

first, about the game war, PS3, its going to bomb, it will be at the bottom of the ladder for this generation, the XboX 360 will hold a nice market share due to the fact that its a pretty decent console ... and in my opinion, nintendo will hold top spot, or stay even with the 360.

If history is a lesson, you may well be correct about the PS3. The next-generation console that gets market share first has traditionally gone on to dominate. The Sega Genesis took the lion's share of the market from Nintendo by going to 16 bits first. The Playstation allowed Sony to take the crown from Sega (though the Saturn actually came out a few weeks earlier, Sega had been caught asleep at the wheel and the rushed console was not at the same next generation level of Sony's machine). The PS2 reached the market ahead of the Xbox or Gamecube. The notable exception was the 3DO - the first disk-based machine and one that was a technological quantum leap over its competition. It sold for $700. It was expensive and had so-so games for the most part. It sold poorly and the company no longer exists.

if i want to play an ultra high end graphics games, i'll use my PC, thats what its for, the Wii isn't about cutting edge 3D super graphics, its ALL about the gameplay, sure, graphics make a game look nice, but would you rather have a game that looks spectacular, but plays like a piece of sh it? no? thats what i thought, why do you think the original Super Mario World was, and still is so popular? because it was a GREAT game, the controls were perfect, the game was a perect blend of stategy and action, and just hard enough, it would be challenging without being frustrating. oh ya, and the Wii is still only 200 smackers, and the games are still gonna be 40-55 bucks, nothing compared to the $400 for a 360 PLUS $60-70 bucks on a game!! its ridiculous, and i'm not even going to start on the PS3...)

Well said. What's the point of having a superior audio system if you're bored with or hate all the music available for it or if there are only a few types of music available for it? One could easily argue the best audio system is the one with the best library. The Wii is likely to have some very solid games on relaes. And though the hardware specs are inferior to the Xbox, the features of the Wii are revolutionary enough that there's a reasonable chance the average public could actually percieve it as a next-generation machine beyond the Xbox2.

Ok, 1st things first. Even a fanboy like myself for MS is not niave enough to think that the PS3 will "Bomb". There's just simply too much pent up demand for it to think it won't sell. Granted there are too many things I think that it has against it to do as well as it could, but it will sell, and sell huge.

This depends on your definition of failure. Microsoft succeeded in selling 24 million Xboxs. But they lost $4 billion doing it. The economic model for the PS3 is, if anything, worse. The hardware is much more expensive, limiting consumer entry. The production of units will be drastically below needed levels, the machine is over a year behind schedule for release, and the game technology is not sufficiently different from the Xbox 2 for the machine to be considered an advancement over it. Sure the machine will sell in the millions - just as the Xbox did. But will it be profitable for Sony?

2. PC games used to be my forte for games as well. It has a lot going for it as well. Controls are better for FPS and flight games, but I gotta admit my 360 is changing my mind. You cannot get the same graphics that I get on my 360 on a widescreen Plasma, on any computer that costs close to $400. More like $2000 or more. Some alienware go for $5k plus. The continued hardware upgrades and requirements are making PC games less attractive compared to the hardware that a console offers today.

Yes, games are likely to look best on an Xbox 2. But gameplay is critical and the Xbox 2 has yet to have a "killer app." The Wii could have several on release. See my earlier post on the relative importance people place on gameplay and game control vs. graphics.

3. The wii may be worth a look, but as a 2nd system. Nintendo is still a kids platform. Always been, always will be. An adult game here or there doesn't make it a playstation or 360.

Nintendo has always had a solid reputation as a kids platform and it's nothing to be ashamed of. They could be extinct today were it not for Pokemon. This is a company that knows the importance of catering to this market. But their reputation for NOT being an adult platform (deserved as it is) wasn't part of their master plan. Their insistence on lording over licensing and placing massive burdens on game developers by forcing them to pay for expensive cartridges with the N64, while the PS and Saturn were based on cheap disks forced them into the position. Their ecenomic model didn't win them many friends and they were forced to rely on their in-house developers more than intended who, you guessed it, specialized in kids games. Nintendo tried to lure developers back with the Gamecube. But the machine didn't have enough wow factor to impress anyone. This time things are different. Nintendo has learned from its mistake and the Wii does have some wow. The result is a system that will be released with a respectable range of titles for adults as well as children that makes it hard to argue it's not a platform for adults. Here's a list of games in development:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii_games

[Groundbeef]

:
Well said. What's the point of having a superior audio system if you're bored with or hate all the music available for it or if there are only a few types of music available for it? One could easily argue the best audio system is the one with the best library. The Wii is likely to have some very solid games on relaes. And though the hardware specs are inferior to the Xbox, the features of the Wii are revolutionary enough that there's a reasonable chance the average public could actually percieve it as a next-generation machine beyond the Xbox2.

Ummm, no, that is not likely. Although the controls on the Wii may be revolutionary, being able to "cast" your line for fishing or "swing" your club for golf my be exciting; if your graphics look like 2D sprites next to the 360 or PS3 you will NOT be considered beyond the 360 or PS3. Again, it is an exciting concept, but it will never be next gen beyond MS and Sony.

[/QUOTE]
This depends on your definition of failure. Microsoft succeeded in selling 24 million Xboxs. But they lost $4 billion doing it. The economic model for the PS3 is, if anything, worse. The hardware is much more expensive, limiting consumer entry. The production of units will be drastically below needed levels, the machine is over a year behind schedule for release, and the game technology is not sufficiently different from the Xbox 2 for the machine to be considered an advancement over it. Sure the machine will sell in the millions - just as the Xbox did. But will it be profitable for Sony?[/QUOTE]
Maybe, if they can get the volume up enough, we will see.


[/QUOTE]
Yes, games are likely to look best on an Xbox 2. But gameplay is critical and the Xbox 2 has yet to have a "killer app." The Wii could have several on release. See my earlier post on the relative importance people place on gameplay and game control vs. graphics.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry. Please elaborate your outlandish claims of no "killer" apps? Have you heard of Oblivion-The Elder Scrolls? This one game sold 1.7 million copies back in MARCH for the 360 alone. That is huge.
http://www.emergent.net/index.php/ho...-detail&id=387

And Fight Night 3? Have you played it? The 360 version, not the ps2 or Xbox version. Dead Rising is out and sold huge. These games are moving systems. And there are so many more up coming. Gears of War, Halo 3, Viva Pinata (my kids want it).

I will conceed that on FPS and Flight simulation the PC has the advantage. However there are plenty of games that do not require the precision of a mouse and ASWD controls. I used to think that controllers were terrible, but they are actually pretty intuitive to learn and use. And with driving simulations just like the PC you can now hook up a USB steering wheel and pedals and drive just like a PC.

For the money and graphics presentation, the current gen consoles are kicking butt. The key advantage is that there is not upgrading of hardware. If I have my computer for 3 years by the end of the cycle I can hardly play any new games. Console? Slip in the disc and go to town.


[/QUOTE]
Nintendo has always had a solid reputation as a kids platform and it's nothing to be ashamed of. They could be extinct today were it not for Pokemon. This is a company that knows the importance of catering to this market. But their reputation for NOT being an adult platform (deserved as it is) wasn't part of their master plan. Their insistence on lording over licensing and placing massive burdens on game developers by forcing them to pay for expensive cartridges with the N64, while the PS and Saturn were based on cheap disks forced them into the position. Their ecenomic model didn't win them many friends and they were forced to rely on their in-house developers more than intended who, you guessed it, specialized in kids games. Nintendo tried to lure developers back with the Gamecube. But the machine didn't have enough wow factor to impress anyone. This time things are different. Nintendo has learned from its mistake and the Wii does have some wow. The result is a system that will be released with a respectable range of titles for adults as well as children that makes it hard to argue it's not a platform for adults. Here's a list of games in development:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii_games[/QUOTE]

We shall see. I can tell you that the reputation preceeds them, and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[Lensman]

Ummm, no, that is not likely. Although the controls on the Wii may be revolutionary, being able to "cast" your line for fishing or "swing" your club for golf my be exciting; if your graphics look like 2D sprites next to the 360 or PS3 you will NOT be considered beyond the 360 or PS3. Again, it is an exciting concept, but it will never be next gen beyond MS and Sony.

“Exciting” is an emotional state, not a reasoning one. Be that as it may, excitement is a very powerful cahce to have. Excitment the prime motivating factor in product selection and purchase among consumers.

If what you said about the graphics was factually accurate, you’d be correct because the Wii’s graphics would not be exciting. However, while graphics capabilities have continue to improve, the perceptible improvements have continued to become smaller, and as a result, less important to the nondiscerning general public. (Much as it is in the audio world – consider the iPod.) Hardcore gamers are driven to see the last little detail possible. This is not the case with average consumers. They are much more interested in how fun, involving or different the gameplay experience will be.

Graphics are better on the Xbox 360 than on the Xbox, PS2, or Wii. But “better” is not “exciting”, nor is it “different”. And gameplay mechanics on the Xbox 360 is none of the above. The graphics on the Wii are inferior to the Xbox 360, but not to predecessors – in short, not better, different, or exciting. But the gameplay is very different. And different is exciting. Let’s consider a current example of graphics versus gameplay in motivating consumers to buy:

In 21 months the Xbox 360 has sold around 5.5 million units (we’ll call it 262,000 per month). The Nintendo DS, an infinitely inferior platform technically, but one with gameplay via a different dual touch-screen mechanism has sold in excess of 22 million in 27 months (nearly 815,000 per month) – a three to one per month margin. The lower price point of the DS certainly doesn’t hurt either.

Maybe, if they can get the volume up enough, we will see.

Yes But we’ve seen there are a lot of factors now working against Sony and it will be an uphill battle. But they could succeed with a killer app. It worked for Sega when the Super NES was released.

I'm sorry. Please elaborate your outlandish claims of no "killer" apps? Have you heard of Oblivion-The Elder Scrolls? This one game sold 1.7 million copies back in MARCH for the 360 alone. That is huge.
http://www.emergent.net/index.php/ho...-detail&id=387

And Fight Night 3? Have you played it? The 360 version, not the ps2 or Xbox version. Dead Rising is out and sold huge. These games are moving systems. And there are so many more up coming. Gears of War, Halo 3, Viva Pinata (my kids want it).

Okay, a killer app is a game that is unique to a console and is so good it makes the general public buy the machine just to play it. Killer apps are games that transcend niche market sales to hardcore gamers and become commonly recognized namebrands to the general public. These games include titles such as Superior Mario Bros, Sonic the Hedgehog, Pokemon, Tetris, The Sims, Madden NFL, etc. These games move in substantial volume and continue to sell well long after release. Super Mario Bros. sold over 40 million copies. Not having a killer app doesn’t mean a system won’t sale or that there won’t be brisk sales for a tile when it’s first released. But it will severely limit the total volume of consoles sold.

The killer app for Microsoft so far has been Halo 2 with 7.7 million sales. Excluding Halo: Combat Evolved, no other Xbox or Xbox 360 game has sold more than 3 million copies. But sales could arguably have been much higher had it not been a PC game, which could have pushed Xbox sales much higher. If everyone who bought Halo had had to buy an Xbox, Microsoft would have sold another 6.5 million machines. Oblivion is indeed doing well and could be Microsoft’s new killer app. But its too early to tell how well the game will continue to sell. But it’s dropped off the top ten lists and it’s predecessor, Morrowind, only managed 4 million in combined PC and Xbox sales. Oblivion is also available on the PC, which accounted for half a million of the 1.7 million sales you mentioned. Half a million who did not decide to by an Xbox 360 to play it. Of the other titles you mention, only Fright Night 3 has cracked the top ten in videogame sales in recent weeks. It’s number 9. And, as you’ve pointed out, its also available on competing platforms. Once again, I don’t need an Xbox 360 to play it. The number one game for the last several weeks has been the non-graphic intensive, educational, problem-solving game Brain Age for the Nintendo DS – which requires a DS to play.

I will conceed that on FPS and Flight simulation the PC has the advantage. However there are plenty of games that do not require the precision of a mouse and ASWD controls. I used to think that controllers were terrible, but they are actually pretty intuitive to learn and use. And with driving simulations just like the PC you can now hook up a USB steering wheel and pedals and drive just like a PC.

At significant additional expense, forcing gamers to choose between a wheel or a new game. And requiring special conditions - a table of adequate height with a lip, suitable chair, and families that don’t mind wires running across the living room floor. What is a casual gamer likely to choose? The Wii’s controller can work well as a sword, tennis racket, golf club, etc. with additional equipment. Inexpenisve plastic wheel and gun frames the controller can clip into are cheap enough they may be packaged with certain games. The controller remain wireless.

For the money and graphics presentation, the current gen consoles are kicking butt. The key advantage is that there is not upgrading of hardware. If I have my computer for 3 years by the end of the cycle I can hardly play any new games. Console? Slip in the disc and go to town.

This has been argued before. The 3DO had graphics that kicked but as well. And $700 wasn’t outlandish for the features it offered at the time either especially compared to prices of PCs at the time. This is obviously a formula that does not guarantee success or longevity.

We shall see. I can tell you that the reputation preceeds them, and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

The Wii is squarely targeted at the casual gamer – a much larger market than niche hardcore gamers. The reputation will probably help them in reaching this audience.

[Groundbeef]

[QUOTE=LensmanIf what you said about the graphics was factually accurate, you’d be correct because the Wii’s graphics would not be exciting. However, while graphics capabilities have continue to improve, the perceptible improvements have continued to become smaller, and as a result, less important to the nondiscerning general public. (Much as it is in the audio world – consider the iPod.) Hardcore gamers are driven to see the last little detail possible. This is not the case with average consumers. They are much more interested in how fun, involving or different the gameplay experience will be.

Graphics are better on the Xbox 360 than on the Xbox, PS2, or Wii. But “better” is not “exciting”, nor is it “different”. And gameplay mechanics on the Xbox 360 is none of the above. The graphics on the Wii are inferior to the Xbox 360, but not to predecessors – in short, not better, different, or exciting. But the gameplay is very different. And different is exciting. Let’s consider a current example of graphics versus gameplay in motivating consumers to buy:

In 21 months the Xbox 360 has sold around 5.5 million units (we’ll call it 262,000 per month). The Nintendo DS, an infinitely inferior platform technically, but one with gameplay via a different dual touch-screen mechanism has sold in excess of 22 million in 27 months (nearly 815,000 per month) – a three to one per month margin. The lower price point of the DS certainly doesn’t hurt either.
.[/QUOTE]

You are being overly simplistic in your opinion of graphics vs gameplay. The current generation of games are more "exciting" BECAUSE of increased use of 3D modeling, graphics acceleration, anti-analising, etc. Game enviroments are becoming more immersive because they are looking more lifelike, and AI is becoming more intelligent due to increased CPU horsepower, and utilization.

Look back at one of the biggest sellers of all time DOOM. It was hands down the undisputed king of the FPS when it debuted. Then Quake, SWAT, and others came along using similar (or the same) formula. The difference is the graphics engine and programming code. Go back and play the original DOOM. For a few minutes its fun, but not really so much today. People are excited about fancy graphics.
Madden sells because it looks real, and is fun to play.

Second. Where are you getting your numbers? The 360 Debuted on November 22, 2005. Thats about 9 months give or take a few days, far short of your 21 months in your example.

And to compare a hand held game machine and a living room console is in a word stupid. If we follow your example I would suggest that cell phones that play games are far bigger seller than the DS, so the DS must be inferior to my Sanyo Sprint phone that plays Tetris. A better example would have been the PSP vs DS. I don't know sales #'s for either so I can't give a comparison.

""Of the other titles you mention, only Fright Night 3 has cracked the top ten in videogame sales in recent weeks. It’s number 9. And, as you’ve pointed out, its also available on competing platforms. Once again, I don’t need an Xbox 360 to play it. The number one game for the last several weeks has been the non-graphic intensive, educational, problem-solving game Brain Age for the Nintendo DS – which requires a DS to play.""

No you dont NEED a 360 to play FN3, but your not playing the same game if you don't. Please don't think that it is the same game, as it is coded differently for all platforms. Even the 360 vs Xbox title is different. Yes, they are both boxing games, but gameplay is vastly better on the 360. If you haven't tried it in HD, you are missing out.

As for Brain Age, more DS are on the market, it would stand to reason that it would sell more copies than a 360 game. Again, different market, different device.


""At significant additional expense, forcing gamers to choose between a wheel or a new game. And requiring special conditions - a table of adequate height with a lip, suitable chair, and families that don’t mind wires running across the living room floor. What is a casual gamer likely to choose? The Wii’s controller can work well as a sword, tennis racket, golf club, etc. with additional equipment. Inexpenisve plastic wheel and gun frames the controller can clip into are cheap enough they may be packaged with certain games. The controller remain wireless.""

Again, apples to oranges. If you want to play a Flight Sim on a PC, you need additional hardware as well. If you want an immersive enviroment, you get the tools to experience it. It is nonsensical to think that waving the Wii around will approximate a driving simulation, or a flight simulation. Flight paddles, Flight sticks, and Driving gear are not just for the rich and famous. They are not all expensive (some ring out for over $200, but most can be had for less than $50.00) So whats the differnce? You buy a steering wheel, or an attachment for your Wii (hehe...)

""This has been argued before. The 3DO had graphics that kicked but as well. And $700 wasn’t outlandish for the features it offered at the time either especially compared to prices of PCs at the time. This is obviously a formula that does not guarantee success or longevity.""

At the time $700 was considered an OUTLANDISH sum considering consoles were selling for $150-$200. Consoles now cost $250-400 (next gen). Again, a COMPARABLE costing computer to power the games in production would run $2000 plus. Don't kid yourself and think that the $499 Dell is going to work. Its not, and you know it. The power available in consoles today surpasses the power in most desktop computers and they are only coded for playing graphics intense games. No word, no quicken, no fancy GUI interface that hogs memory. Just straight gameplay.


ON a side note. How do you do the "Quote" thing? My posts look like crap because I cannot get the quote thing down.

[audio_dude]

ok, guys, this is hilarious to read...

oh, you can adjust the sensitivity of the Wii controller so its almost the same or less movement than using a mouse! ya, i know for a fact that nintendo will make a bunch of little attachments for the wii controller (case in point, they already have a "zapper" shell [remeber the zapper for the NES?] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii_Remote#Wii_Zapper ) oh ya, and it works with Gamecube controllers...

finally, why don't we discuss the online capabilities of these consoles, for starters, the Wii has a FREE online game connection service, lets see microsoft of sony do that!

[Groundbeef]

finally, why don't we discuss the online capabilities of these consoles, for starters, the Wii has a FREE online game connection service, lets see microsoft of sony do that!

OK, I'll bite. What are you contending? That Free is better? Better than what? Here are the 3 services as they stand now.

1. MS XBOX/XBOX 360 LIVE 2 levels of service "Silver" and "Gold"

Silver has all connections to "Marketplace" where game updates/patches, free demos, free video, and the XBOX LIVE arcade is located. You cannont play multiplayer enabled games with a silver account online except for special dates set up by MS.

Gold costs approx $49.99 for 1 year and that works out to about $4.07/ month. This has all the benefits of silver plus unlimited playablilty of multiplayer enabled games.

Keep in mind that MS has set up a set of standards that programmers must work within to make their games work on the MS network. This prohibits several standards and conflicts. The service only works with DSL or Cable connections. XBOX / XBOX 360 doens't come with wireless connections enabled. However, you can connect directly to your LAN with wire or purchase wireless connections.

I have used both and wired is better. Suffered some signal conflicts in my house that made wireless not satisfactory.

2. Sony

Sony is p issing an opportuinity away here. They are opting for a non-unified service and programming structure for its developers. This leaves gamers in the lurch without assurance that they will not have to have several accounts to play games online. This also makes development difficult for programmers who need to make their own standards for each game.

Currently there is no pricing guidence for Sony online play as it will be up to the indiviual game developers to determine if players will need to "pay to play"

Wireless connection is "in" the box. However, it will be to the /g/ standard. This standard is being moved away from for /N/ and MIMO. Both offer better speeds and signal quality. There may be compatibility issues with routers as well, but that is speculation.

3. Nintendo

Currently appears to be "Free" Again, no word on standards and who develops them. Unsure if individual companies can charge gamers to "play".

Wireless is "in" the box. /g/ standard.

I am biased for MS, and don't mind paying for the service. It is rock solid and has never gone down. Your milage may vary.

[audio_dude]

i think nintendo is going to have a unified standard... and other companies will NOT be able to charge for online service...

[Groundbeef]

i think nintendo is going to have a unified standard... and other companies will NOT be able to charge for online service...

Based on what? There is nothing that I have been able to find currently to support that theory. There isn't much disputing it either to be fair. However, if they follow the path of Sony, there isn't much they can do if developers want to charge for service.

Currently the only "online" type of service that nintendo offers is with the DS. And it is not a "true" online situation. From what I have gathered you have to know who you are joining with to play together. There really are not any "pick-up" games.

This is from some online readings I have seen. If you have any other sources please divulge.