The Playstation Loses.. To the Playstation

Recommended Videos

branalvere

New member
May 18, 2009
47
0
0
Mazty said:
branalvere said:
Mazty said:
BolognaBaloney said:
Mazty said:
BolognaBaloney said:
Mazty said:
BolognaBaloney said:
Mazty said:
Khazoth said:
So, apparently the Playstation 3 has dropped way behind the Xbox 360, Wii, and even the Playstation 2.

Anyways, I thought that was good for a laugh, I mean losing a console war is no shame, but losing the console war to the system you are trying to replace.. Wow.


Source: http://videogames.yahoo.com/events/plugged-in/ps3-bested-by-older-brother/1315218
http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php

Yeah, thing is, the PS3 is still selling better than the 360 in comparison to release dates.
I think that's the figure that's important and the media chooses to ignore, as there isn't a hype-making story behind it. Either way, the PS3 is hardly loosing any war.
Don't kid yourself boy, the ps3 is not even close to the 360 in terms of sales.
Ha, boy?
First of all, you clearly need to brush up on your maths and grammar.
Secondly, how can you say that when the PS3 has sold more in RELATIVE sales, considering the 360 had a year headstart.
Don't kid yourself, look at the facts, and leave your ignorance and rudeness for youtube.
And now the ignorant speaks of ignorance, congrats.
Speaking of math, want to explain how a the ps3 is behind by a mere 7 million consoles?
Are you being simple on purpose? Really? It feels like I'm just feeding a troll here, so here is what I am saying in the most simple form:
http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php
LOOK AT THE BLOODY GRAPH
See that line which is the PS3? It's above the 360 is it not?
Why is that ? Because if the 360 had been released at the same time as the PS3, then the PS3 would be outselling it.
100 weeks (or however many, the graph date is fuzzy) into the PS3's life, it has sold 22.2 Million units.
100 weeks into the 360's life, it only sold 18.7 million units.
Does that make sense? No one said 100 weeks into the 360's life that it's sales were sucking, so why are they looking at the totals sold, when the consoles weren't all released on the same date.
Now stop trolling, and actually look at the graph, understand it, and move on.
Yes, I've seen the graph, here's a quick update, nobody fucking cares about relative sales, 360 has sold more, end of story. Your one of those sony fan-boys who is riding on the belief that the ps3 will EVENTUALLY over-take the 360, but the fact is, it hasn't happened so kindly shut your gob and stopped bugging out because you feel like you have to defend your precious black box.
If no one cares about relative sales, then the PS2 has outsold all this generations consoles but together.
Don't be an ignorant fanboy whose pissy that the 360 is quickly crashing to it's knees, loosing it's DLC to the PS3 (Fallout 3, paying for XBL when the content just ends up for free on PSN.), having problems with DVD (Rage), and has bugger all exclusives coming out for it.
You just don't want to admit that the 360 is a waste of time and money, and that it has no advantages over the PS3 which is faster, more powerful, better graphics, better exclusives etc.
Grow up and look at the facts. When the 360 stops selling (which looks like will happen soon with the lack of games coming out for it) the PS3 will outsell it because it's technically better in every way. Not my problem if you can't afford onerm...I hate to get involved in this little fanboy vs fanboy thing, but if you go and have a look at the games release schedules for both 360 and PS3...erm.....they're pretty much exactly the same.

Isn't the reality that if you have one or other of these 2 consoles there is very little reason at present to compel you to buy the other one? For me the reason I have a 360 is because I was able to buy it in 2006 and play Oblivion rather than wait for a year for a PS3 and 360 has Halo. That's it. As a personal preference I prefer the 360 controller, to the sixaxis or dual shock, actually, but that wouldn't stop me buying a PS3 tomorrow if that game I HAD to play came out for it. Where is Gran Turismo Sony? What are Team ICO doing? Come on, make me buy one, I want a bluray player!
See, I'd say that you are completely justified and sane for being the 360 for those reasons, and I'm not being sarcastic.
It's if you bought it after the PS3 dropped to the £300 mark, then it makes no sense as the 360, with add-ons, is more expensive, and technically worse.
As for the games, there's enough coming out this year to cater for most people, as well as a huge catalogue of multiplatform titles, but does boil down to personal preference.
Oh totally. I bought my 360 in March 2006, which at £5 a month means I have spent £330 on Xbox live subscription since then. More than enough to buy a PS3 at today's prices, where the online support is free of charge. I have also had 2 xboxes go down with the red ring of death, the first I exchanged but the second one I had for nearly 2 years so had to go and buy another. 360 is not a cheap option. It just has Halo 3.
 

Woe Is You

New member
Jul 5, 2008
1,444
0
0
Am I the only one finding it kind of interesting that it's the guys who don't play PC games pointing out that a lot of the games on the 360 are also on the PC? Then in a different thread it's the same guys complaining how expensive gaming PCs are (while not even wanting to find out what the reality is, oftentimes).
 

Khazoth

New member
Sep 4, 2008
1,229
0
0
I think the ironic thing is, if the console DOES fail, it will go down in history as artistic and "before its time" where as if it doesn't fail it'll just slide into mediocrity. What I don't understand is the rabid fervor that this thread is soliciting. I mean, there has to be more to it then just "I have this console, so it must be better."


So, instead of flaming each other, lets make actual discussion on the original topic. Why is the prices slumping? I mean the games industry has proven to be recession proof so I doubt that the recession, while a big part, is the only player in Sony's lagging behind the pack. What would you think they'd have to do to catch back up in sales? Is it possible for them to catch up this late in the game? What games do they have to release to strengthen sales?
 

Merteg

New member
May 9, 2009
1,579
0
0
I'm not a Microsoft/Nintendo fan-boy, I'm just an "Anti-Playstation Fan-boy"

On a more related note, not surprised.
 

ElephantGuts

New member
Jul 9, 2008
3,520
0
0
Oh well that is just hilarious.

No sarcasm there, people. Sony wasted a lot of money on that new-fangled and apparently unnecessary PS3. Shoulda made a PS2.5.
 

MBurner 93

New member
Mar 26, 2009
233
0
0
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! This is the funniest effing news I've heard all week! I actually feel sorry for Sony...
 

Pendragon9

New member
Apr 26, 2009
1,968
0
0
ElephantGuts said:
Oh well that is just hilarious.

No sarcasm there, people. Sony wasted a lot of money on that new-fangled and apparently unnecessary PS3. Shoulda made a PS2.5.
Say that to 24 million people who bought it.
 

ElephantGuts

New member
Jul 9, 2008
3,520
0
0
Pendragon9 said:
ElephantGuts said:
Oh well that is just hilarious.

No sarcasm there, people. Sony wasted a lot of money on that new-fangled and apparently unnecessary PS3. Shoulda made a PS2.5.
Say that to 24 million people who bought it.
Okay.

Hey, guys. Apparently you wasted your money. The PS2 is still better.
 

devildog1170

New member
Apr 17, 2009
452
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
aleczm said:
I don't understand why Sony would decide not to include backwards compatibility for games of THEIR BEST SYSTEM EVER (PS2) into the PS3.
Because people wanted the system cheaper. Very simple. So I must assume everyone who complains about lack of backwards compatability all feel the price is too low, and should be higher.
Too bad that Sony said that BC didn't cost them any money
 

Laughing Man

New member
Oct 10, 2008
1,715
0
0
Please not due to the high amount of 360 smacktardery in this topic this response will be heavily aimed at the 360 morons, but don;t worry the PS3 muppets will get some bile aimed at them as well.

Some info for the 360 fanboys lording it up over the fact that the PS2 outsold the PS3.

1). Let's not forget that the last XBox was so shite that MS withdrew it from sale ahead of schedule so that they could replace it with a poorly designed and, by any other criteria, heavily flawed console.

2). The PS3 isn't even half way through it's life cycle the 360 is closer to it's death than it is to it's birth now.

3). You're acting superior whilst your own console only managed to finish fourth in the same ranking. Well done your console is only a bit better than the PS3 but not quite as good as the three that finished in front of it.

A side note I own a PS3 that has BC. Wanna know how many times I've used it. NEVER. I have 30 Ps2 games and I have NEVER used my PS3s BC. Get over it the new ones don't have it because no one apart from the elite retards actually think they need it. Besides you can download a PS2 emulator and run it on a piss pot Pentium 3 and use that to run your old PS2 games... if you're that god damn desperate to play them.

This is total arse. 360 owners talking shit about why their system is the best. Using the same old bullshit arguments to justify the fact that they bought what amounts to a great big pile of fail. MS sitting by rubbing it's hands while the morons continue to buy a console THAT WILL FAIL on them. Live, cost, exclusives, graphics, DLC all the usual shite that gets brought out to justify why you bought your console and worse still to reassure your own self that you purchased a console that couldn't beat a GOD DAMN WII in sales.

As for the PS3 owners who cares. Yes the PS3 may be able to produce better graphics but so bloody what? Whilst developers are getting pockets full of cash from the overlord Microsoft all the PS3 will get is shitty half arsed conversions of 360 games while the 360 fanboys bang on about how great their console is because they get the opportunity to have their wallets double fleeced by shitty exclusive DLC for said games and the oh so wonderful Live service. The only games that show the PS3's power are exclusives and to use those as an argument to prove the consoles graphics power is like comparing the 0 - 60 times of a Ferrari to thin air.

Sony made an arse of it, face it and deal with it. You can at least feel safe in the knowledge that unlike MS, where 'originality' is a sweary word and will result in you actually being physically escorted out to the back of their buildings before being shot by security, at least they tried to incorporate some new tech in to their console. It failed in the short term and in ten years time we will know if it failed in the long term but by then the 360 fanboys will have the XBox 'look at how big my cock is' and they'll be banging on about how their £70 quid a day Live fee and the fact they can play their console for almost three whole hours before they have to phone MS's wonder customer service line to get it repaired.

To sum up PS2 outsells PS3; big fucking deal.
 

MrGFunk

New member
Oct 29, 2008
1,350
0
0
Mazty said:
BolognaBaloney said:
Mazty said:
Khazoth said:
So, apparently the Playstation 3 has dropped way behind the Xbox 360, Wii, and even the Playstation 2.

Anyways, I thought that was good for a laugh, I mean losing a console war is no shame, but losing the console war to the system you are trying to replace.. Wow.


Source: http://videogames.yahoo.com/events/plugged-in/ps3-bested-by-older-brother/1315218
http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php

Yeah, thing is, the PS3 is still selling better than the 360 in comparison to release dates.
I think that's the figure that's important and the media chooses to ignore, as there isn't a hype-making story behind it. Either way, the PS3 is hardly loosing any war.
Don't kid yourself boy, the ps3 is not even close to the 360 in terms of sales.
Ha, boy?
First of all, you clearly need to brush up on your maths and grammar.
Secondly, how can you say that when the PS3 has sold more in RELATIVE sales, considering the 360 had a year headstart.
Don't kid yourself, look at the facts, and leave your ignorance and rudeness for youtube.
Finally, I was worried.

I go off line for two weeks - we're getting Fallout 3 DLC but my console's going to be dead.

Why would anyone want Sony to be out of the games business?

What benefits would that have?
 

bad rider

The prodigal son of a goat boy
Dec 23, 2007
2,252
0
0
devildog1170 said:
Indigo_Dingo said:
aleczm said:
I don't understand why Sony would decide not to include backwards compatibility for games of THEIR BEST SYSTEM EVER (PS2) into the PS3.
Because people wanted the system cheaper. Very simple. So I must assume everyone who complains about lack of backwards compatability all feel the price is too low, and should be higher.
Too bad that Sony said that BC didn't cost them any money
Don't argue with dingo, tell the tide to go back. (It's far easier)
 

branalvere

New member
May 18, 2009
47
0
0
Sony made an arse of it, face it and deal with it. You can at least feel safe in the knowledge that unlike MS, where 'originality' is a sweary word and will result in you actually being physically escorted out to the back of their buildings before being shot by security, at least they tried to incorporate some new tech in to their console. It failed in the short term and in ten years time we will know if it failed in the long term but by then the 360 fanboys will have the XBox 'look at how big my cock is' and they'll be banging on about how their £70 quid a day Live fee and the fact they can play their console for almost three whole hours before they have to phone MS's wonder customer service line to get it repaired.

To sum up PS2 outsells PS3; big fucking deal.
Oh my God, are you seriously suggesting that anything about PS3 is original? It has a bluray player. That's it. There is not a single shred of originality anywhere else in the whole system. MS are just as bad. Both they and Sony have been ripping off original ideas from Nintendo and Sega for years. You know N64 does rumble and analogue - Sony does dual shock; Nintendo do wii, Sony does 6 axis; sega does analogue triggers, MS does too. Then Sony does as well. Just about the only original thing MS did was xbox live. Sony copied that too.

So Sony has a bluray player in it's game console; big fucking deal.
 

Zefar

New member
May 11, 2009
485
0
0
One thing that I think is worth mentioning is about the Final Fantasy titles.

The 360 will be getting ONE of the two that are coming out. This is a pure marketing purpose and they did this because they had loads of fans on the 360. They will still only let one of the two onto the 360.

Also both games deals with the same world what I know.

As for PS3 selling, well maybe it sells bad because it actually have a good chance of living for quite some time. Unlike the 360 which and you know I'm not lieing about, brakes down a lot more than it should.
 

tenlong

New member
Apr 26, 2009
548
0
0
if the ps3 fails then we are all screwed. ms would most like likely dominate game sales. they could charge 700 bucks and 100 bucks a game if they wanted to. i am not knocking the wii in all this. i don't see the as a primary gaming system.it is a fun system tho.it has good games but most wii games are garbage or average at best. i do believe as of right now the 360 has the best game library. back to my point. the ps3 is a good system. has it lived up to the hype game wise ? no ,but but its getting better. the ps3 has a lot of exclusives this year. the ps2 is a hard act to follow for any game company . i doubt any game company will beat the ps2 sales wise or the quality game library for years to come. by the way i am no means a ps3 fanboy. if you wanna call me a fanboy then call me a good game fanboy.