PS2 Mightier Than the 360?

[netcraazzy]

Ars Technica brings us some positive Sony news (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060611-7030.html) amid all the gloom and doom over the PS3. According to the article the PS2 continues to sell very well, so well in fact that it has outsold the Xbox 360 in 6 of the last 7 months.

From the article:

In short, Sony's PS2 sales remain remarkably strong, and with recent price cuts trimming the system down to US$129 (http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/4/20/3679), sales are expected to stay strong throughout the year. Sony has sold more than 100 million PS2s, and this year they can expect to add another three million from the US market alone. The PS2 market isn't "winding down" in any meaningful sense.
The author is quick to note that we are dealing with two consoles at different ends of the product life cycle here but the continued strong sales of the PS2 are impressive none the less. Will the PS2 go down in history as the best selling console ever?

[Liquidize105]

This is positive in a competitive way, hence it's negative for xbox-4-life people.

Nintendo has it right, focus on itself and compare results only to itself.

[rein]

I think that the PS2 is at an advantage for setting that record. It had a much longer life cycle. They did a good job on supporting the original PS after the PS2 launched. Maybe they plan to do the same with the PS2. What I am most dissappointed about from Microsoft is how quickly they are abandoning the Xbox. Next time you are in an EB or Gamestop, look at the coming soon release list for the Xbox. It is really small now.

[Major Dan]

Will the PS2 go down in history as the best selling console ever?[/i]

It will be until the next console dethrones it, and something will. :)

[bone_matrix]

Will the PS2 go down in history as the best selling console ever?[/i]

I think it will. It has one of the longest life cycles, as well as being the big console bringing us into the world of 3d graphics that aren't completely crappy looking. Combine that with price, game selection, and word of mouth, and its hard to beat.

Although the PS2 has sold a bunch, I have bought at least 3 of the PS2s (not saying this is why they sold so many, I'm just saying this is true for me). I'm just suprised at how much software the 360 has moved. They had 10 of the top 25 games for May (from here (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13666) ). Granted, the PS2 had 12 games, but I still consider it great for a brand new, expensive system.

Does anyone think the succes and price/game library of the PS2 may hinder how many PS3s they sell at the $500 or $600 price?

[sonysyndicate]

Will the PS2 go down in history as the best selling console ever?

Isn't the PS2 already the best selling system ever?

[Siraris]

The incredible thing is that there are still a LOT of really cool games coming out for PS2. Rogue Galaxy, Okami, God of War 2, FFXII and something like 200+ other games which is pretty impressive. Perhaps Sony has a strategy in the PS2->PS3 transition. I know that most developers are probably upset how the X-Box just dropped off the face of the earth which probably made their lives a lot more difficult. So many tools are in place for current generation consoles that developers can probably make a good amount putting out games for the PS2 still, which would help ease the transition into the next generation.

I can't think of any real benefit, though. I guess they can see that there will not be a plethora of games for the PS3 yet, and so give developers and consumers a choice until PS3 developed has fully ramped-up.

As for bone_matrix's question, I think that it won't hinder, but it will effect it. The PS3 will come out and sell out, but any shortages or lack of hit titles would be offset by all these great new titles coming out for PS2. So someone could say, "Well I didn't get a PS3 for Christmas, but I did get FFXII and God of War 2, so I have that to tide me over until this spring".

[eatme]

Absolutely. The PS2 was a boon for game developers-- it sold so obscenely well, it enabled games of increasingly large scope to recoup their investment and make a tidy profit. The huge audience on a single platform was fantastic.

With the PS3's high cost, the PS2's brand recognition and low cost, the 360's position somewhere in the middle, and the Wii just totally different, it'll be a long time before we have such a large, unified audience again.

[Mr.Condescension]

Does anyone think the succes and price/game library of the PS2 may hinder how many PS3s they sell at the $500 or $600 price?

I think it's a brilliant strategy, and one that hasn't been tried yet. I think almost everyone agrees that the first 4-6 million PS3s will sell at $500-600. PS2 games are still scheduled for quite a while, so console sales are still high for the PS2 and people who can't afford the PS3 or can't find one will be able to still buy a ps2 and new games for it. Sony probably will lose out on alot less of the revenue that MS lost by not supporting the Xbox into the 360 life cycle.

I think it's also going to keep alot of 3rd party developers happier getting to choose when they want to switch to the PS3 for development. That way smaller developers can wait until there is a larger install base on the PS3 than right around launch. Also it seems pretty likely that the new PS2 games will be compatible with the PS3, so consumers won't feel like they'd have to throw away any new PS2 games they buy. Really the worst feeling is owning an Gamecube right now and knowing you only have a couple more games to look forward to on the console, then FIN.

[Karas]

But who the hell is still buying all these PS2's?

[harle]

Next time you are in an EB or Gamestop, look at the coming soon release list for the Xbox. It is really small now.Look at the release list for the last sixth months on the Gamecube. There has been absolutely nothing but a few nintendo developed games.

[Rook34]

But who the hell is still buying all these PS2's?

It's probably because the PS2 keeps breaking! Actually, I wonder which breaks faster typically: the PS2 or Xbox 360? I know I've gone through 2 Xboxes and my nephew 3 PS2's.

[Rook34]

Look at the release list for the last sixth months on the Gamecube. There has been absolutely nothing but a few nintendo developed games.

The only Gamecube thing I've picked up in the last 6 months was the new Harvest Moon.

[Kelegacy]

Long console life cycles and support after the successor is released is always grand. I was still playing tons of new PS1 games on the PS2 (FFVIII, FFIX, Chrono Cross for example) because they came along after or around the time of the PS2's release. I find that phenomenal. The flurry of pending PS2 releases confirms that this will probably happen again. That's a very good thing.

It is too bad MS gave up on the Xbox when the 360 was birthed. The Xbox was a big loss maker for MS though, and the 360 was designed to be more profitable. I can understand, but many people are now left with a quickly orphaned system.

[Mr.Condescension]

It's probably because the PS2 keeps breaking! Actually, I wonder which breaks faster typically: the PS2 or Xbox 360? I know I've gone through 2 Xboxes and my nephew 3 PS2's.

Man, you guys must do some heinous shit to your systems. I don't know a single person who has had a console break on them for any system (aside from an NES many ages ago after many, many years of use). Guess we're lucky.

[Mr.Condescension]

But who the hell is still buying all these PS2's?

People with young children, low income families, and people who previously only had an xbox and don't want a next-gen system yet.

[Rook34]

I've been lucky with my Gamecube - got it on launch day and it still spins like a charm. My Xbox, the first one I got, was great but as it got older it started to overheat. I literally had to take ice packs while playing Steel Battalion or it would freeze (the irony..). So I got a new one after it died. That one didn't work with all my games and had trouble reading disks so I had to bring it back. My THIRD Xbox is still good.

[kickmybum]

This is kinda silly because for the first 5 months that the Xbox 360 has been out every one available in stores sold.

I think the fact that PS2 sells so well is nice to know, but stating that it outsold the XBox 360 when XBox 360 sales were capped on availability is not much of an achievement. Hell, my neighbor's 5 year old daughter's lemonade stand probably outsold XBox 360.

[Major Dan]

Isn't the PS2 already the best selling system ever?
I am not sure, the Gameboy probably has outsold it, in all of its configurations. But, the PS2 is a great success.

But, one day a cosole will reach 500 million or more, especially as games become more mainstream and consoles become multimedia hubs in the living room. I can see a game/media conosle in every living room like a VCR then the PS2, 100 million number, will look small. That is way in the future I think 10 years at least but it will happen. So yes, one day it will be surpassed.

[TheDancinMan]

I've heard many a story of re-bought PS2s, mainly from breaking. And this isn't because of foolish mistakes or something of that nature. At least with those I know, the PS2 itself malfunctioned. However, this was from when the PS2 launched/first-wave systems, so I can understand problems. Though, to me, it seemed that the PS2 had more hardware issues than most.

The only console that I ever had to replace was an X-Box after the hard drive got fried via lightning eight months or so after it was first purchased. Beauty of it was, we ended up not even paying for a new system. Which is why I also keep all packaging for any peice of high-end electronics.

[rein]

Look at the release list for the last sixth months on the Gamecube. There has been absolutely nothing but a few nintendo developed games.

...but it has always been that small. :D


As far as the broken PS2 argument. You guys realize 360's break too? The PS2 has sold a shit load of consoles, so obviously it will have more total broken systems. I would like to see a break down, percentage wise, on defective systems. My educated guess is that they would be pretty close between PS2 and Xbox.

I know in our store, the defective returns sent back every week seem to be pretty even on number of Xboxs vs PS2s.

[Jack B]

Wow! Finally, an intelligent post based upon facts!

Yes, the PS2 is faster than a speeding bullet and is able to leap tall buildings in a single bound!

The PS2 is mightier than the 360. So mighty in fact, that it's worth more than the 360. $500 at least! :D

What the hell is Sony doing giving it away for $129!!!! That's crazy! It's mightier for pete's sake.... :rolleyes:

Anyone who was to use either system side by side could clearer see the PS2 is mightier! You'd have to be a total fan boy of the 360 not to see that the PS2 is mightier! :D

The PS2 has better graphics, better sound, a better online system, better games, is more reliable, has prettier colors and has a better controller!

In fact, I think it's really a computer that can jack you into the Matrix! :D

[antoniogaud]

Sorry, but I really dont think it is that big a story.

A $129 console outselling a $400 console? This is surprising to people?

Now a $400 console outselling a $129 console (on a consistent basis) is news.

As long a games keep being made for the system, price will ALWAYS dictate console sales.

I don't understand the commotion here.

[Jack B]

Sorry, but I really dont think it is that big a story.

A $129 console outselling a $400 console? This is surprising to people?

Now a $400 console outselling a $129 console (on a consistent basis) is news.

As long a games keep being made for the system, price will ALWAYS dictate console sales.

I don't understand the commotion here.

Don't you get it??? The PS2 is mightier than the 360! Why is this so complicated?? :rolleyes:

[rein]

Don't you get it??? The PS2 is mightier than the 360! Why is this so complicated?? :rolleyes:

We got it in your first post. You think you're funny.

[Demo_Boy]

I think GBA will be the biggest console in history if that counts.
Second place PS2.

[harle]

As far as the broken PS2 argument. You guys realize 360's break too? The PS2 has sold a shit load of consoles, so obviously it will have more total broken systems. I would like to see a break down, percentage wise, on defective systems. My educated guess is that they would be pretty close between PS2 and Xbox. I never recall there being a class action lawsuit (http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/driving/jakx/news.html?sid=6139482) against XBOX for failing systems. The courts found that there were enough legitamate claims against the PS2, and Sony had to end up offering the following to owners of the first three generations of the PS2: a check for $25 ($31 Canadian), a free PS2 game from a specified list, or a free or reduced cost repair or replacement (at SCEA's discretion) of an affected system.

I personally sent my PS2 in two times for repair. Both times they "fixed" the PS2 for free. Unfortunately it went back to getting disc read errors within 3 months. I tried sending it in a third time for repairs but they said they would no longer repair it for free, so i just ended up buying a PS2 slim.

[sTubbs]

Who the hell is buying a PS2 when the PS3 is going to have include the hardware, thus ensuring massive (but not perfect) backwards compatibility? Especially considering the price of the PS3 is so incredible - even the ~$100 would be a big help.

The uninformed public is going to ruin the gaming industry.

I think GBA will be the biggest console in history if that counts.
Second place PS2.

That begs an interesting question: how many times is a system allowed to be radically redesigned before the redesigns are considered seperate systems? The GBA has gone through three versions (GBA, GBA SP, GBA Micro). The PS2 has gone through two (PS2, PS2 Slimline). I think that it is only fair to consider each version seperately when it comes to sales.

[oldjadedgamer]

The GBA continues to sell very well also. Most months outselling the PSP. Not sure I see where there is big news is. Does this mean that the GBA is mighter then the PSP?

[bean19]

Could this post be more deceptively titled though? lol. The console wars have so much freaking flaming bullshit.

The VALID response is that the PS2 is a market force due to it's impressive library, cool slimmed down version, affordable price, and the fact that people have to buy new ones. I'm literally on my 4th PS2. . . of course I play a lot more games than your average user, but 4 of those 100 million sales were from me having to buy new systems all the goddam time. :)

Also, it's kind of stupid to compare current-gen vs. next-gen. The PS2 will get new games for about 2 years and then the other consoles will be affordable and everyone will own at least one next-gen console. The fact that the console continues to sell well is thus meaningless in the long-term.

[dimsumx]

Don't you get it??? The PS2 is mightier than the 360! Why is this so complicated?? :rolleyes:

I bet the PS2 will be mightier than the PS3!!!

oh the humanity.

[Jack B]

We got it in your first post. You think you're funny.

Rein, you have your opinion, I have mine.

My opinion is this thread is based upon an assinine assumption that the PS2 is mightier. Simply derived from unit sales.... It's assinine and it begs ridicule and sarcasm.

Hamburgers sell more than Filet Mignon's, so Hamburgers must be mightier than Filet Mignon's too. Yeah, this stuff gets annoying, so you can be annoyed by my sarcastic post. We're even.

If the post were titled better, maybe I wouldn't respond with sarcasm, but these ridiculous assumptions derived from facts get old. I like to believe Evil Avatar represents some of the more intelligent discussions on gaming. Not always, I suppose.

Discussing the staying power of the PS2 is interesting, but title of this post is off-putting.

Main Entry: as·i·nine
Pronunciation: 'a-s&n-"In
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin asininus, from asinus ass
1 : marked by inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment <an asinine excuse>
2 : of, relating to, or resembling an ass

[mister_slim]

Look at the release list for the last sixth months on the Gamecube. There has been absolutely nothing but a few nintendo developed games.
Hey, we're also just about at the one year anniversary of the last MS published Xbox game.

I personally sent my PS2 in two times for repair. Both times they "fixed" the PS2 for free. Unfortunately it went back to getting disc read errors within 3 months. I tried sending it in a third time for repairs but they said they would no longer repair it for free, so i just ended up buying a PS2 slim.
At least you got somewhere with them. I couldn't even get MS's support to let me pay to have my DVD drive replaced.

[rein]

Rein, you have your opinion, I have mine.

My opinion is this thread is based upon an assinine assumption derived from unit sales and why are we even discussing this?

Main Entry: as·i·nine
Pronunciation: 'a-s&n-"In
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin asininus, from asinus ass
1 : marked by inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment <an asinine excuse>
2 : of, relating to, or resembling an ass




I am not going to go to far down this road with you because you are sometimes guilty of typing long asinine post that really add nothing to a thread. Yes, I am aware that I do it too.

If you didn't get it in the topic title (even though it is a little dig on the X360), it is a post about the PS2 selling more units than its current next generation competition. Yes, the X360 has had limited availability, but the fact that the old console is still selling so well at the end of its life cycle warrants discussion. It is a fact, Sony supported the original PS long after its life cycle. It looks like they may do the same for the PS2.

If you do not feel that it is worth discussing, why even bother opening the thread?

Sorry, I still have your original post quoted. At least you saw the error of your ways. :D

[EternalGamer]

PS2 is hands down still the best console system around. If someone was looking for a new system, it would definitely be the first I'd recommend. I just bought Rachet & Clank 3 at Best Buy for $10 (TEN DOLLARS)and I'm having the best time I can ever remember having playing a videogame with it. The PS2 library is filled with dirt cheap, great games and they still look good, even in the post-360 era (also proof to me that Nintendo chose the right strategy with the Wii).

As for Jack B's comment, I'll only say his comparison is pretty crappy. It's more like the PS2 is a 1/2 lb. deluxe burger with everything you could ever want for a $1.99 while the 360 is a $20 overcooked 4 oz filet mignon. I'll take system with hundreds of great games (60+ of which are under $20) over a system with 3 good games each of which costs $60 anyday. I doubt the 360 will ever have the range of unique and fun titles the PS2 has (I'm not sure the PS3 will either, though). I would take Rachet and Clank alone over all 360 games combined. As a matter of fact, time wise I've probably played that single game almost as much in the last week as I've played my 360 since launch.

[Khash]

While I know there are people out there who have had their PS2s break, I feel it is a very vocal minority. I had my PS2 preordered like 4 months before launch and it arrived on launch day. I haven't had a single disk read error and I still use it as a DVD player. My friends who also own PS2s haven't had theirs break. Pretty amazing for a 6-year-old machine.

Sony has been saying since the hype machine for the PS2 began that they view their consoles has having a 10 year life cycle. The PSone continued to sell well long after the PS2 launched. Expect the PS2 to do the same. We could even speculate that the PS3 will have a similar, if not longer, life cycle then the PS2.

[Zulu107]

I'm not impressed with the PS2, since I have not touched it in the past three years. I'll roll with the XBox since they did bring the "Halo" series and to many great titles to name. I grew up just like video games grew up and will continue to do so. Everyone has a fav system and since I like all systems. I'll wait for PS3 and Wii but until then its my PC or XBox360. I figure the PSP will be my flashback system since I have a HDLCD with a 5.1 surround sound system. I'm still on my PC a lot more than 360 so until something better rolls around.


*"I'd Hit That!"*

[Jack B]

I am not going to go to far down this road with you because you are sometimes guilty of typing long asinine post that really add nothing to a thread. Yes, I am aware that I do it too.

If you didn't get it in the topic title (even though it is a little dig on the X360), it is a post about the PS2 selling more units than its current next generation competition. Yes, the X360 has had limited availability, but the fact that the old console is still selling so well at the end of its life cycle warrants discussion. It is a fact, Sony supported the original PS long after its life cycle. It looks like they may do the same for the PS2.

If you do not feel that it is worth discussing, why even bother opening the thread?

Sorry, I still have your original post quoted. At least you saw the error of your ways. :D

Rein,

I did agreed the other topics of the PS2 sales based upon the news article were worthy of discussion. For instance...

1. Continued sales of the PS2 (good thing)
2. Current support of the PS2 by Sony (good thing)
3. Maybe even the PS2 sales in emerging world markets, that don't have broadband and HDTV's in great supply or broadband (interesting topic)

All those and other topics are worthy of discussing. I'm soooo tired of so many posts being about "Console A rules over console B..."

I'm protesting assinine titles, meant to annoy people and remain on the News board title list for any length of time...

Why the dig on the 360 in the title? Why not just discuss the PS2 sales instead of starting with a flame or troll type post designs to piss people off. That's what I'm protesting. This is the News section of Evil Avatar.

I'm not about to post, "Peter Moore is mightier than Kutaragi in the title". If you want to post news about the PS2 sales, great, but "PS2 is Mightier than the 360 is not an intelligent News story". It's sounds like a fan boy spewing crap. IMO.

[harle]

Hey, we're also just about at the one year anniversary of the last MS published Xbox game.I cannot argue with that. :) It seems like Microsoft has completely abandoned the XBOX, and Nintendo lost all of its support from other developers a long time ago. With that said, MS did this because they want to put all their support behind the 360, which has done one hell of a job with its lineup, and particulary with Xbox live. This does not excuse them from abandoning all of the XBOX owners, myself being one of them.

Nintendo still has a while before the Wii releases, and it has been forever since another developer put any support behind the GC. It's been several months since i dusted off either the GC or the XBOX, which is saddening now that i think about it :(

At least you got somewhere with them. I couldn't even get MS's support to let me pay to have my DVD drive replaced.Well i got about as far with my two PS2 repairs as you did with doing nothing if that makes you feel any better. Either way both our system ended up being unusable within a few months.

[Borys]

ICE BURN, REANIMATED!

LIKE TWISTING A KNIFE, KAMALOT

:)

[rein]

Rein,

I did agreed the other topics of the PS2 sales based upon the news article were worthy of discussion. For instance...

Yes, that is why I edited in that last sentence. I had already replied to your original post (the one I had quoted), not the edited version.

But please, work on your analogies. :D

[oldjadedgamer]

While I know there are people out there who have had their PS2s break, I feel it is a very vocal minority. I had my PS2 preordered like 4 months before launch and it arrived on launch day. I haven't had a single disk read error and I still use it as a DVD player. My friends who also own PS2s haven't had theirs break. Pretty amazing for a 6-year-old machine.

Seems your the lucky ones then. Currently, Sony is the only company in videogame history to settle a class action lawsuit over faulty hardware.

http://www.ps2settlement.com

[harle]

PS2 is hands down still the best console system around. If someone was looking for a new system, it would definitely be the first I'd recommend. I just bought Rachet & Clank 3 at Best Buy for $10 (TEN DOLLARS)and I'm having the best time I can ever remember having playing a videogame with it. The PS2 library is filled with dirt cheap, great games and they still look good, even in the post-360 era (also proof to me that Nintendo chose the right strategy with the Wii).QFT. PS2 is easily my most played console. Games like Ratchet and Clank, Guitar Hero, and Disgaea have consumed more of my time than any game on the Gamecube or XBOX. Also, the fact that you have an addition library of 1200 PS1 games makes it even better. Even with all the bad Sony press lately, its not keeping me from playing my PS2 or really looking forward to the PS3.

[harle]

Seems your the lucky ones then. Currently, Sony is the only company in videogame history to settle a class action lawsuit over faulty hardware.

http://www.ps2settlement.comI just posted this the page before, but its always nice to see it again :)

[tombofsoldier]

Best selling console ever "Virtual Reality Tetahydron 9000", but yeah the PS2 will hold the title for a while is my guess, though seeing as Nintendo has sold around 16 million DSs so far, if they can manage relative success with the Wii it might kick the PS2s arse.

[sol740]

This is positive in a competitive way, hence it's negative for xbox-4-life people.

Nintendo has it right, focus on itself and compare results only to itself.

PLEAAAAAASE ...

I love nintendo and all. Hell I grew up with Mario and Zelda. I still recall opening the original Legend Of Zelda for NES on my 5th birthday and almost flipping out, thanks for getting that moment on camera mom. Nintendo's "focus" on themselves is based on the fact that they've lost the last two gens at home. If they were still numero uno you could bet your last buck that they would be touting their success against the competition. Remember Nintendo VS. Sega. Ofcourse this is the kind of comment we should expect from the "nintendo-4-life" people.

[tombofsoldier]

Also, anyone who thinks Sony making people happy with there current console is a good business strategy better forget any hope of becoming a manager. Microsoft has the right idea, buy our new console or you get jack. When Spring rolls around and there are 4 million PS3s sold and 16 million 360s, whos going to be happier? Not Sony certainly.

[rein]

I just posted this the page before, but its always nice to see it again :)

Two things, one, go back to how many PS2 systems were on the market. A lot more than there were 360's when a class action lawsuit was filed against Microsoft for them breaking. That would boost the total number of defective systems and complaints. Microsoft did an excellent job of getting the word out and repairing faulty systems ASAP. They may have learned something from the Sony Lawsuit.

Two, the case was not lost in court. Sony decided it would be cheaper, and they appear more consumer friendly if they settled out of court. They get to claim settlement and probably had minimal number of payouts for the "borken" systems. Did you read what all you had to have to qualify? I'm not sure if many people had their original two year old reciepts.

[Johan]

I would really love to know how many of the PS2 purchases are replacements...hard statistics, not guesses and estimates.

And it will be interesting in a year to see whether the PS2 purchases were from:

1. People who had given up on the PS3 due to purchase price, or
2. People who were unimpressed with the 360 and decided to get a PS2 in the interim between now and finding/affording a PS3, or
3. People who were perhaps replacing a PS2, but only after hearing how much the PS3 would be and getting the replacement PS2 rather than wait for a BC PS3 or
4. People who saw how expensive next-gen gaming is for a 360 or PS3 and decided the catalog of PS2 games, at $129, could keep them happy for some time or
5. Some other factor I can't think of now... :)

I'm enjoying my 360, but I think that MS (I'll blame them...they were first) rushed this generation; I personally think that the PS2, Xbox and GC could have/should have been allowed to continue for a few more years, but MS made a decision in their own interests as they were losing a ton of scratch (a decision not the interest of developers, who are hurting in the transition).

[Jack B]

Yes, that is why I edited in that last sentence. I had already replied to your original post (the one I had quoted), not the edited version.

But please, work on your analogies. :D


:D Agreed...

How about Ford Fiesta's are mightier than Lamborghini Gallardo's, because they sell more units! :eek:

[harle]

Two things, one, go back to how many PS2 systems were on the market. A lot more than there were 360's when a class action lawsuit was filed against Microsoft for them breaking. That would boost the total number of defective systems and complaints. Microsoft did an excellent job of getting the word out and repairing faulty systems ASAP. They may have learned something from the Sony Lawsuit.Oh, i was talking about PS2 and XBOX. I realize that there were problems with the XBOX360 as well, but most of the issues have been resolved by now. It took the 4 generations of PS2's in order to fix all of the major problems.


Two, the case was not lost in court. Sony decided it would be cheaper, and they appear more consumer friendly if they settled out of court. They get to claim settlement and probably had minimal number of payouts for the "borken" systems. Did you read what all you had to have to qualify? I'm not sure if many people had their original two year old reciepts.Either way, the defendants got at least something for all of their trouble with the PS2. Sony is definitely happy about this settlement, as they knew so many people would end up buying a new PS2 sometime in the future so they would not have to deal with the bullshit that is PS2 hardware. Myself and four of my friends were very happy to hear this, as we all had several problems with our PS2's.

[Mr.Condescension]

Also, anyone who thinks Sony making people happy with there current console is a good business strategy better forget any hope of becoming a manager. Microsoft has the right idea, buy our new console or you get jack. When Spring rolls around and there are 4 million PS3s sold and 16 million 360s, whos going to be happier? Not Sony certainly.

16 million Xbox 360s. Now that is a bold estimate. They've only sold 5 million so far. Any analyst worth his salt is already questioning the 10 million by November 17 estimate. Considering that PS2 is selling about as well as the xbox 360 it serves to reason that they have as many happy customers right now as Microsoft.

[Jack B]

I would really love to know how many of the PS2 purchases are replacements...hard statistics, not guesses and estimates.

And it will be interesting in a year to see whether the PS2 purchases were from:

1. People who had given up on the PS3 due to purchase price, or
2. People who were unimpressed with the 360 and decided to get a PS2 in the interim between now and finding/affording a PS3, or
3. People who were perhaps replacing a PS2, but only after hearing how much the PS3 would be and getting the replacement PS2 rather than wait for a BC PS3 or
4. People who saw how expensive next-gen gaming is for a 360 or PS3 and decided the catalog of PS2 games, at $129, could keep them happy for some time or
5. Some other factor I can't think of now... :)

I'm enjoying my 360, but I think that MS (I'll blame them...they were first) rushed this generation; I personally think that the PS2, Xbox and GC could have/should have been allowed to continue for a few more years, but MS made a decision in their own interests as they were losing a ton of scratch (a decision not the interest of developers, who are hurting in the transition).

All interesting questions. I don't think we'll see a survey, that gives us the answer.

All companies seem to want the status quo when it suits them and vice versa.

Good example was DOS vs Windows. Ashton Tate/dBase, Lotus/123 and Word Perfect all wanted the DOS world to last forever, because they dominated. Windows was about to dominate, but they refused to believe it and hung on to the DOS world where they have massive marketshare.

Sony in this generation makes money on every PS2, but will lose (initially at least) money on every PS3. Microsoft loses money on every Xbox.j They want to abandon the Xbox as quickly as possible. Yes, they rushed the next Gen, but wouldn't you if you were in their shoes?

Sony's hand has been forced and the pressure is on. Likely they will continue to support 100 million PS2's and will hope people continue to buy software and hardware for years to come.

Microsoft wants to leave last gen as fast as possible.

I would expect Sony would do the same thing is they were losing money on every PS2 and needed this Gen as their chance to turn the tables.

It's just the way things work. Neither Microsoft or Sony are in this business to lose money.

Nintendo seems to fly under the radar, but they are likely to "make" money on every Wii this gen. I seriously, doubt we'll here anyone screaming foul over the Wii pricing. Why not? If they were to lose money like Sony and Microsoft we'd likely be looking at a $79 Wii....

The Wii is barely more powerful than the Gamecube and has been accused by many in the industry of being a Gamecube with new controllers.

If Nintendo makes money on each Wii this Gen are they as greedy as Microsoft and Sony, who "lose" money.

Absolutely. Probably worse. Why don't they sell at a loss?

It's just business. Sony will continue to try and sell PS2's around the world. Microsoft will run from last Gen. We'd likely all do the same thing. Microsoft won't win this Gen without throwing every resource at the 360.

Sony doesn't even have to include software (an exaggeration for sure, but true to some extent in the 1st 3 months or so) in order for fans to buy PS3's.

Everyone has different issues to juggle...

[Mr.Condescension]

:D Agreed...

How about Ford Fiesta's are mightier than Lamborghini Gallardo's, because they sell more units! :eek:

Yes, the title is retarded. No, the actual contents of the thread aren't. Are we all agreed? Hope so. :p

[Mr.Condescension]

I seriously, doubt we'll here anyone screaming foul over the Wii pricing. Why not? If they were to lose money like Sony and Microsoft we'd likely be looking at a $79 Wii....

The Wii is barely more powerful than the Gamecube and has been accused by many in the industry of being a Gamecube with new controllers.

This has been bothering me a bit, actually. I too don't think it's likely they're losing money on their hardware, and while I don't think there's anything wrong with it, we're just not accustomed to it.

No matter which you prefer, or which, if any you think is worth it, both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are being sold at losses, so in a strict monetary sense they are both very much worth their purchase price. (If you took apart a PS3 and could sell the parts to Sony to put it back together you'd make a profit. Same with Xbox 360).

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.

[Jack B]

Yes, the title is retarded. No, the actual contents of the thread aren't. Are we all agreed? Hope so. :p

Definitely agreed. :)

[Jack B]

This has been bothering me a bit, actually. I too don't think it's likely they're losing money on their hardware, and while I don't think there's anything wrong with it, we're just not accustomed to it.

No matter which you prefer, or which, if any you think is worth it, both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are being sold at losses, so in a strict monetary sense they are both very much worth their purchase price. (If you took apart a PS3 and could sell the parts to Sony to put it back together you'd make a profit. Same with Xbox 360).

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.

Oh Oh, better duck! Nintendo fans will call foul. I don't have a problem with Nintendo making money on their hardware, but I do find it very interesting that they seem to be such a "happy" company that their PR department keeps them above the fray... :)

On another slightly related note:

Apple for years had a 45-50% profit margin on Apples. PC manufacturers typically ran closer to 18-21%. I loved the Mac OS and while Apple beat the pants off all the other multitude of PC vendors with as high as a 15% market share, IMO they weren't competing with Gateway, Dell etc., they were competing with Microsoft...

Microsoft was licensing it's OS (Windows) and had 85% of the market. Apple was only looking at Dell and others... So, eventually the Windows OS got better, Intel's/AMD/Cyrix processors got better and Apple's marketshare dropped to as low as 4%.

What I found comical was Apple used to offer a school discount that would allow teachers, schools etc. to purchase Mac's at a substantial discount, but the reality was they were only paying a "fair" price (ie 20% margin for Apple). Apple was gouging the hell out of all their other customers.

What's amazing to me was the loyalty of all the Apple users, who didn't realize they were getting porked for years by Apple. When Apple finally had to drop their operating margins on Mac's to the point the retail Mac's were selling for the same as the School Mac's, it was at that point where the Teachers/schools started to complain Apple didn't care about them anymore.

The joke was they never did.... It was all about money. In fact we all should be using the Mac OS today instead of Windows as they could have dominated long ago if it wasn't for their arrogance and greed.

I wanted Apple to win in the worst way. I hated waiting for years for Windows to catch up (well, I'm still not 100% sure they have).

Funny thing is, to this day Apple is considered the "good guy's" in the Mac vs Windows battle.

Anyway, the reel this thing in, Nintendo is in a similar situation now. Microsoft and Sony are taking all the heat, while Nintendo is likely going to make money on their hardware. In fact, I think there is an excellent chance they'll go with the $249 price... Why? Because they love their fans? No, because that's what they think they can get consumers to pay.

Am I upset? No, they need to run their business. I just think it's interesting to watch....

[jspeak32]

But who the hell is still buying all these PS2's?

I traded in my 1st gen ps2 and bought a slimline ps2 just last week...so Sony got two out of me, and I'm not even a huge sony zealot at all...I just wanted to be able to enable progressive mode, and I was getting sick with how slow my disc drive was, it sounded like it was eating grapenuts when I'd play Dragon Quest VIII :)

I honestly think thats the main reason why ps2's are selling like crazy, people replacing their original (or even 2nd console).

[jspeak32]

3. People who were perhaps replacing a PS2, but only after hearing how much the PS3 would be and getting the replacement PS2 rather than wait for a BC PS3 or

That's exactly what I did.

[pomeroy]

...while Nintendo is likely going to make money on their hardware. In fact, I think there is an excellent chance they'll go with the $249 price... Why? Because they love their fans? No, because that's what they think they can get consumers to pay.

I really think $249 could bite them in the ass. Just my .02, but I think $200 is their sweet spot. It's only $50 but it looks SOOOO much nicer.

[Orosco]

I think they sold so many is because they seemed to break pretty easily. I treat mine very well, protected in a "game cart", for lack of a better word, and now my second one is dying. It won't play any PS1 games anymore, video cuts out for no reason (and its not a loose A/V plug, I think I've only unplugged the cable like 5 times, and if that did it, jeeez). I'm not buying a 3rd one, no way in hell, right now its just a Guitar Hero arcade machine, til God of War 2 comes out.

[Khash]

$199.99 looks worlds better then $249.99

Also, it is my opinion that the only reason you hear more about PS2s breaking is because there are just so many more PS2s out there. Of course you're not going to hear as much about Xboxes or GameCubes. Not to mention that if you're system breaks you're more likely to go on a forum and complain over and over compared to someone, like myself, who's PS2 still works to go on a forum and say "My launch PS2 still works!"

[RMan]

When Spring rolls around and there are 4 million PS3s sold and 16 million 360s, whos going to be happier? Not Sony certainly.
I think the flying pigs will be happiest.

[Rook34]

The Wii is barely more powerful than the Gamecube and has been accused by many in the industry of being a Gamecube with new controllers.

If Nintendo makes money on each Wii this Gen are they as greedy as Microsoft and Sony, who "lose" money.

2 things:

1) This is still in speculation. There have been numerous reports on places like IGN that say the hollywood chip might suprise a few people on how powerful it is. It may be somewhere in-between an Xbox and Xbox 360, and will probably match some of the actual magazine shots for Red Steel as far as graphics go.

2) Nintendo went on record to say to their investors that they do expect a small loss initially. More than likely they will lose a little on each system but probably not as much as the other two companies will be losing on theirs.

That's all - carry on..

[HumpYourWay]

Nintendo has it right, focus on itself and compare results only to itself.

"Compare results only to itself?" LOL - That tactic came up when the Cube bombed...

[Achilles]

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.The Game Cube wasn't sold at a loss either. Though it was cheaper than the Xbox the lack of a hard drive, lower system specs, no DVD drive (top-loading drive in fact), etc, allowed them to bring the cost down.

I don't think the actual hardware value in dollars matters, but how it stacks up to the other systems matters. If it appears cheap, and is priced around the same than there's a problem. For example how many people would think they're getting a good deal if Nintendo charged $300 for the Wii.

[Skjef]

This has been bothering me a bit, actually. I too don't think it's likely they're losing money on their hardware, and while I don't think there's anything wrong with it, we're just not accustomed to it.

No matter which you prefer, or which, if any you think is worth it, both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are being sold at losses, so in a strict monetary sense they are both very much worth their purchase price. (If you took apart a PS3 and could sell the parts to Sony to put it back together you'd make a profit. Same with Xbox 360).

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.Your assumption is incorrect. The Wii will be sold at cost (approximately). Source. (http://today.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompanyNewsArticle.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2006-06-07T094924Z_01_T249037_RTRIDST_0_TECH-JAPAN-NINTENDO-UPDATE-1-PICTURE.XML&rpc=66)

[Mr.Condescension]

Your assumption is incorrect. The Wii will be sold at cost (approximately). Source. (http://today.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompanyNewsArticle.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2006-06-07T094924Z_01_T249037_RTRIDST_0_TECH-JAPAN-NINTENDO-UPDATE-1-PICTURE.XML&rpc=66)

Man, you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

me: "Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss"

To be sold at a loss means they are losing money. To be sold at cost means they are not making or losing any money. Those are completely different things. Thank you for proving my hypothesis, but please actually attempt to comprehend my posts before you reply to them.

[Skjef]

Man, you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

me: "Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss"

To be sold at a loss means they are losing money. To be sold at cost means they are not making or losing any money. Those are completely different things. Please actually attempt to comprehend my posts before you reply to them.Blargh, matey. I do indeedy need to be worksin on me readin' comprehensin.

Did you read the fucking article I linked to? 'Approximately', meaing on the low side. They're not going to be losing much money on the Wii. And the fact that they're going to be almost breaking even at about $225USD means that it's not just a Fisher Price toy, which was what you were implying.

[Mr.Condescension]

Blargh, matey. I do indeedy need to be worksin on me readin' comprehensin.

Did you read the fucking article I linked to? 'Approximately', meaing on the low side. They're not going to be losing much money on the Wii. And the fact that they're going to be almost breaking even at about $225USD means that it's not just a Fisher Price toy, which was what you were implying.

And we're talking about a $250 price point in the US, not a $225 dollar price point, which would make them not lose any money in the US, sir pirate. And I implied nothing about the quality of their product in my question. You would know that had you bothered to read the thread.

[Skjef]

And we're talking about a $250 price point in the US, not a $225 dollar price point, which would make them not lose any money in the US, sir pirate. And I implied nothing about the quality of their product in my question. You would know that had you bothered to read the thread.Do you have a link that's announced the US price yet? Because all I've seen is this (http://www.videogamesblogger.com/2006/05/25/nintendo-announces-japanese-wii-price.htm), which clearly states $225USD. And you may not make assumptions, as Nintendo has never released a console at a price other than $200USD.

And as for the Fisher Price thing, different thread, still you (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showpost.php?p=306408&postcount=31):I view the Wii as a peripheral for the gamecube and I already own a gamecube.

[Chameleo]

jack b - your post about apple was enlightening. well said - and i never realized that but always knew it at the back of my mind somehow...

yeah im curious to see how this gen will work out too. i'm not really a console gamer, but i do play games - so it'll be fun to watch.

[Mr.Condescension]

Do you have a link that's announced the US price yet? Because all I've seen is this (http://www.videogamesblogger.com/2006/05/25/nintendo-announces-japanese-wii-price.htm), which clearly states $225USD. And you may not make assumptions, as Nintendo has never released a console at a price other than $200USD.

Everyone on EvAv has seen these articles, but here you go:

http://wii.ign.com/articles/710/710181p1.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20060526/bs_nf/43564

Everyone assumes $250 for a US release because that's all we've been given. "not to exceed $250". Everyone in this thread before you came along knew that to be the assumed number. You need to read the thread before you post.

And as for the Fisher Price thing, different thread, still you (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showpost.php?p=306408&postcount=31):

I'm sorry if that offended you, but I never once equated the Wii to a fischer price toy. A peripheral and a toy are two entirely different things. My statement has more to do with not seeing much difference between the gamecube (which I own) and the Wii aside from the new controller (which I don't know if I'll like).

[Skjef]

Everyone on EvAv has seen these articles, but here you go:

http://wii.ign.com/articles/710/710181p1.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20060526/bs_nf/43564

Everyone assumes $250 for a US release because that's all we've been given. "not to exceed $250". Everyone in this thread before you came along knew that to be the assumed number. You need to read the thread before you post.



I'm sorry if that offended you, but I never once equated the Wii to a fischer price toy. A peripheral and a toy are two entirely different things. My statement has more to do with not seeing much difference between the gamecube (which I own) and the Wii aside from the new controller (which I don't know if I'll like).I'm just quoting this so you don't edit it away. I need to read the thread to know which numbers I should be using by popular acclamation?

BAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA.

[Mr.Condescension]

I'm just quoting this so you don't edit it away. I need to read the thread to know which numbers I should be using by popular acclamation?

BAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA.

You should know what numbers you should be using by the US news media that has presented you with the "no more than $250" figure. It is available at gamespot, ign, yahoo news, cnn....a million places. I'm sorry you aren't abreast of the newest US pricing information, but it's readily available to you from any internet connection that can reach google.com.

[Skjef]

You should know what numbers you should be using by the US news media that has presented you with the "no more than $250" figure. It is available at gamespot, ign, yahoo news, cnn....a million places. I'm sorry you aren't abreast of the newest US pricing information, but it's readily available to you from any internet connection that can reach google.com.Until Nintendo says that they're releasing their console at $250USD, it's pure speculation. Educated guesses, but nothing more. Am I right or wrong?

[bapenguin]

All I'm going to say is I worked at EB Games the first year or so the PS2 was out. And ya know what? The PS1 kicked it's ass in sales. This is not surprising.

And the correct analogy Eternal Gamer/Jack B would be more like:
Buying a Hamburger at your local Pub vs. Getting a Steak at a fine dining establishment.

It's all about presentation.

[51|RandoM]

It's all about presentation.

Exactly, the xbox360 looks good, but the ps2 is more filling. :-)

[bapenguin]

Exactly, the xbox360 looks good, but the ps2 is more filling. :-)

Exactly. Which is to be expected when you have 6 years of content vs. 6 months.

[UglyPimp]

I don't understand the assumption that the 360 was rushed and that it somehow damaged the console space. Do we really want to be sitting around with 6 year old consoles with dated graphics? I would be happy with a console change ever 3 years.

I can understand people being upset with the Xbox's early demise... but it's understandable from Microsoft's position, it's not like it was making money for them. If Sony and Microsoft were switched Sony would do the same thing.

[RMan]

I don't understand the assumption that the 360 was rushed and that it somehow damaged the console space.
There’s a period of time that has to be spent on a transition, even if customers had endless amounts of money to spend on frequent hardware upgrades. That’s development time and money that could be far better spent. If you’re going to upgrade a standard, ideally you do it when there’s really a need.
Do we really want to be sitting around with 6 year old consoles with dated graphics? I would be happy with a console change ever 3 years.
A system’s graphics are only dated when a new system makes them so, and that perception is pushed through to the public. This news post indicates that people don’t seem to care, so why go through the trouble and expense? IMO, doing a new system every 3 years would be even more stupid than doing a new PC operating system every 3 years.

[Kamalot]

Also it seems pretty likely that the new PS2 games will be compatible with the PS3, so consumers won't feel like they'd have to throw away any new PS2 games they buy. Really the worst feeling is owning an Gamecube right now and knowing you only have a couple more games to look forward to on the console, then FIN.
What are you on? You are saying that PS2 games can be used on the PS3 but if you buy a GameCube game you are screwed?

Seriously, what are you smoking? It better be good cause you have the most twisted 'logic' I've ever seen from a fanboy.

[Kelegacy]

Do we really want to be sitting around with 6 year old consoles with dated graphics? I would be happy with a console change ever 3 years.


You are insane.

[UglyPimp]

You are insane.

I don't know how my statement qualifies me as insane. What's the real reason you want to hold onto your console? I'm assuming because of software titles it supports. What if backwards compatibility really became a standard, would dropping 300 dollars every 3 years for a console with upgraded features and graphics that supported the previous libraries really be that crazy? I don't think so. People pay thousands of dollars every 5-10 years for new or new-used cars.

[Achilles]

A system’s graphics are only dated when a new system makes them so, and that perception is pushed through to the public. This news post indicates that people don’t seem to care, so why go through the trouble and expense? IMO, doing a new system every 3 years would be even more stupid than doing a new PC operating system every 3 years.People upgrade their PCs every year or so to stay at the high end of graphics. The graphics for the PS2 and Xbox compete with those on the PC as well, so it doesn’t take a new console system to make a console look outdated. I agree that a new console every 3 years would probably be too frequent. Typically it takes longer than that to grow the marketshare to a point where the model is profitable.

As far as it being too soon. It’s not too soon, clearly. If it were, the games for the 360 wouldn’t be selling as well as they are because comparable experiences could be found on the older systems for cheaper. Keep in mind that the top ten at this point is around half Xbox 360 games even though they have tens of millions fewer people to sell to. There's a market there for next gen stuff.

[oldjadedgamer]

There’s a period of time that has to be spent on a transition, even if customers had endless amounts of money to spend on frequent hardware upgrades. That’s development time and money that could be far better spent. If you’re going to upgrade a standard, ideally you do it when there’s really a need.

A system’s graphics are only dated when a new system makes them so, and that perception is pushed through to the public. This news post indicates that people don’t seem to care, so why go through the trouble and expense? IMO, doing a new system every 3 years would be even more stupid than doing a new PC operating system every 3 years.

The exact same is said each and every time a new console hits. Nintendo was crying that the Genesis would disrupt the game industry because everyone was set on making NES games. Then Nintendo cried again when Sony released the PSX saying that everyone was still in 16 bit mode and moving to a new system would hurt developers.

It's an old and tired argument that's been going on for decades now. The only companies who cry are the hardware market leaders and companies stupid enough to only support just one system since they have the most to lose from newer systems coming out. This is why developers shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket.

With this thinking, we'd all still be playing NES games.

[Jack B]

I don't know how my statement qualifies me as insane. What's the real reason you want to hold onto your console? I'm assuming because of software titles it supports. What if backwards compatibility really became a standard, would dropping 300 dollars every 3 years for a console with upgraded features and graphics that supported the previous libraries really be that crazy? I don't think so. People pay thousands of dollars every 5-10 years for new or new-used cars.

Personally, I don't think you're insane at all, and I think if Kelegacy thought outside the box a bit more, he might not have agreed, but calling you insane was a bit over the top. He should have seen although your position is not his, it's not insane.

I agree, but I know I'm in the minority. The hardcore PC gamer community (I say hardcore, because many get off the upgrade treadmill) upgrades their PC with new Ram, motherboards, video cards etc. more often than every 3 years.

The console buyer typically doesn't want to upgrade, that often, but I'd be fine with it, as money is not my primary concern. Great gaming is.

I like the console market because of HDTV use, a more seamless online community with Live a better sound system in my HDTV rooms and more comfortable chairs, sofas. I don't mind spending money to enhance that experience.

[Kamalot]

This has been bothering me a bit, actually. I too don't think it's likely they're losing money on their hardware, and while I don't think there's anything wrong with it, we're just not accustomed to it.

No matter which you prefer, or which, if any you think is worth it, both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are being sold at losses, so in a strict monetary sense they are both very much worth their purchase price. (If you took apart a PS3 and could sell the parts to Sony to put it back together you'd make a profit. Same with Xbox 360).

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.
So, a product is worth its selling price as long as the company producing it is losing money, right? What happens when the company puts a bunch of junk in the system that is totally unrelated to gaming. The company is still losing money, but the entire cost of the console goes up for consumers, filled with things nobody asked for except the company itself.

And I believe you are mistaken about consoles always being sold at a loss.

http://www.actsofgord.com/Proclamations/chapter02.html

This is a good read about the myth of consoles being sold at a loss.

Oh, and if consoles were only justifiable purchases if they were being sold at a loss, the PS2 was a total scam last month when it outsold the Xbox 360.

[Kelegacy]

I don't know how my statement qualifies me as insane. What's the real reason you want to hold onto your console? I'm assuming because of software titles it supports. What if backwards compatibility really became a standard, would dropping 300 dollars every 3 years for a console with upgraded features and graphics that supported the previous libraries really be that crazy? I don't think so. People pay thousands of dollars every 5-10 years for new or new-used cars.

So we should cut our console life cycles in half to keep up with new graphics? I think that defeats the purpose of a gaming console. I think what you are looking for is a PC.

Jack B: Thinking outside the box? Upgrading every 3 years is thinking outside the box? What you are both suggesting is we should worry about graphical "newness" first and foremost. Again, if you want to stay on the bleeding edge of tech, become a PC gamer. Consoles don't work that way, at least not the way you are suggesting.

Maybe I'm different. I'm playing new and old titles on my PS2 and the graphics do not torture me. I beat Disaster Report over the weekend, a horribly ugly game, and I didn't cry tears of blood because it wasn't in HD. New consoles are welcome, but a short life span hurts consumers, developers, AND console makers alike. The PS2 has been insanely successful for Sony, and I sure hope they try to milk the PS3 for all it's worth as they have the PS2. THAT is good for gamers (and for Sony). If you worry about graphics and new tech more than anything, you should turn in your gamer badge at the closest Salvation Army.

[RMan]

People upgrade their PCs every year or so to stay at the high end of graphics.
I’m sure many do, but I was talking about consoles and new releases of hardware. I’d agree that no matter what’s released and when, certain people will buy it regardless, but the suggestion was that we’d be unhappy with outdated graphics without frequent system releases. My point was that it’s only ‘outdated’ or perceived as such when something else makes it that way, it doesn’t happen naturally. People wouldn’t stop buying games or even buy less of them if the graphics weren’t improving, because they wouldn’t know that they should be dissatisfied. When people are buying HD-DVDs and/or Bluray movies they will not buy them in higher volumes because of the new standard (unless replacing DVDs), and their purchasing numbers wouldn’t change if the newer standard didn’t come along (unless it opens new markets).
As far as it being too soon. It’s not too soon, clearly.
How on earth is that clear? Unless you can test a later release in an alternate dimension where all else is equal, you can not make that statement. I think that a 4 year system gap is too soon, and regardless of how good you may feel the 360 sales numbers are you can’t make a judgment on if it’s too soon without any idea of what damage was done, which is not quantifiable.
The exact same is said each and every time a new console hits.
That's because it's always true. Look, the question isn't if it's possible that releasing a new system too soon is bad, I'm sure everyone here could agree that releasing a new system every 6 months is bad. Likely they’d even agree that every 2 years is bad, I’d agree that waiting 10 years is too long, I’d never suggest that we should still be playing on NESs, try to keep the hyperbole to a minimum. The question is where the line should be drawn, not whether or not there should be a line. IMO, hardware releases should be getting longer, not shorter, since hardware advances are coming slower so the upgrade benefits are less. Four years is just way too short IMO.

It is true that Sony has more to lose from a quicker system release than MS, but that’s the point, that’s the primary reason it was done, not because it was otherwise needed.

[Mr.Condescension]

What are you on? You are saying that PS2 games can be used on the PS3 but if you buy a GameCube game you are screwed?

Seriously, what are you smoking? It better be good cause you have the most twisted 'logic' I've ever seen from a fanboy.

I'm saying no such thing. I am lamenting the fact that there are basically no new games coming for the gamecube aside from twilight princess. There are many games still slated for the PS2, which makes me happy. What is so hard to understand about that? I am saying that I wish Microsoft and Nintendo still supported their consoles for a time as Sony is doing. It makes the transition easier.

[Jack B]

So we should cut our console life cycles in half to keep up with new graphics? I think that defeats the purpose of a gaming console. I think what you are looking for is a PC.

Jack B: Thinking outside the box? Upgrading every 3 years is thinking outside the box? What you are both suggesting is we should worry about graphical "newness" first and foremost. Again, if you want to stay on the bleeding edge of tech, become a PC gamer. Consoles don't work that way, at least not the way you are suggesting.

Maybe I'm different. I'm playing new and old titles on my PS2 and the graphics do not torture me. I beat Disaster Report over the weekend, a horribly ugly game, and I didn't cry tears of blood because it wasn't in HD. New consoles are welcome, but a short life span hurts consumers, developers, AND console makers alike. The PS2 has been insanely successful for Sony, and I sure hope they try to milk the PS3 for all it's worth as they have the PS2. THAT is good for gamers (and for Sony). If you worry about graphics and new tech more than anything, you should turn in your gamer badge at the closest Salvation Army.

Kelegacy,

When did I say the console should go to a 3 year cycle. I didn't. I said, I am in the minority, but I would be fine with it. I have the disposable income to upgrade my console every 3 years. Most don't, so it's not a great business decision for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo.

I'm not insane for wanting consoles to be upgraded on a 3 year cycle. And I already gave my reason's for not being a PC gamer anymore. I'm OK with a single upgrade every 3 years. I prefer the console experience. Personally, I don't want to wait 'til 2012 for the Next Gen after this one. I'd be fine with spending another $400 in 2009.

I spend $400 golfing in a month. Certainly, for my favorite hobby I could spend $400 every 3 years. That doesn't make me insane, unless you can only see your position and not mine.

Great. Weak graphics don't bother you. Are you insane for that position? No, but I should turn around and call you "insane" for having your opinion as well.

Me, turn in my gamer badge to the nearest Salvation Army for wanting consoles to have the best graphics possible?

You should turn in your gamer badge. You try to pass yourself off as a gamer. Ha!

You bought a 360 and said there "aren't any games that interest you.". What a joke. Here's your game history with your 360.

You have one full game and 2 arcade titles with any achievement points. Yeah, you're exposed.

http://live.xbox.com/en-US/profile/Achievements/ViewAchievementSummary.aspx?compareTo=Kelegacy

Most games average less than an hour to get your 1st points out of 1,000. You haven't played shit on the 360 and you call yourself a gamer.

You're very biased and you'll play Disaster Report on the PS2, but there are no games on the 360 you find worth playing. I can't believe how biased you are.

Here's the link to the consensus score for Disaster Report. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/914509.asp It's very weak. How much do you hate Microsoft to play, that game and beat up on the 360's lineup. What the hell? Did Microsoft personally insult you at some point in your life and you're out to get even?

Show me you've actually played any games besides Oblivion and then I'll respect your opinion. I have no respect for your 360 opinion.

Tell me to turn in my game badge. How pompous!

I enjoy games on all platforms and always have. My 1st console was an Atari 2600. I also had an Atari 800, NES, Amiga. They were all fun. The PS2 is fun. The PS1 is fun. The Gamecube if fun. The PS3 will be fun! What a load of crap you spew.

You probably were a gamer at one point. You're the one that should be turning in your gamer badge to the Salvation Army. You've become old, jaded and can't enjoy the 360 likely because of some deep seated hatred of Microsoft or some other thing.

Believe me, every console has enjoyable games. You turn in your badge! So, there. :D

[Mr.Condescension]

So, a product is worth its selling price as long as the company producing it is losing money, right?

Wrong. I in no way stated that. You have twisted what I said into making it sound like the Wii is not worth its selling price. If I buy a toaster that cost $10 to manufacture, and I buy it for $20 I didn't necessarily get ripped off.

My point was that we are accustomed at this point to purchasing systems for less than their manufacturing costs. The Wii is being sold for equal to or more than its purchase price, making it different in that respect from its rivals. I asked if that matters to anyone or not. You're trying to turn my honest question into anti-nintendo propoganda, and that is most clearly not my intent with the question. (hence my saying this question is not intended to be "a dig of any sort".

I welcome debate on any topic, but please don't resort to twisting my words so much that they're incomprehensible. It doesn't serve you well.

(I do like that I managed to get ad space in your signature. ;) )

[Mr.Condescension]

...You turn in your badge! So, there. :D

Woah....Jack B, did your little brother hijack your keyboard for a while? Out of character much? :confused:

[Jack B]

Woah....Jack B, did your little brother hijack your keyboard for a while? Out of character much? :confused:

I was pissed. :D

When someone like Kelegacy tells me to turn in my gamer badge. The gloves come off!

[Achilles]

You're very biased and you'll play Disaster Report on the PS2, but there are no games on the 360 you find worth playing. I can't believe how biased you are.

Show me you've actually played any games besides Oblivion and then I'll respect your opinion. I have no respect for your 360 opinion.

Tell me to turn in my game badge. How pompous!That’s a heck of a post Jack B.

My point was that it’s only ‘outdated’ or perceived as such when something else makes it that way, it doesn’t happen naturally. People wouldn’t stop buying games or even buy less of them if the graphics weren’t improving, because they wouldn’t know that they should be dissatisfied.That’s why in my post I stated that it would be compared to PC games, and PC games continue to advance whether or not a new console is released. People who play console games also play PC games. If in 3 years no new consoles were released and they still made FPS games that looked like Killzone, than people would move back to PC for those types of games. How on earth is that clear? Unless you can test a later release in an alternate dimension where all else is equal, you can not make that statement.It may not be clear to you, but if it was really too early there wouldn’t be such a huge market for 360 games. The 360 at this point has an attach rate of over 4 games per system, twice as much as other consoles at this point in their lives. That means there's a market for next gen games now and that market is larger than anyone could have predicted, we don't need to wait a year or two.

[Kamalot]

This has been bothering me a bit, actually. I too don't think it's likely they're losing money on their hardware, and while I don't think there's anything wrong with it, we're just not accustomed to it.What system have you been buying? PS2, IF it was sold at a loss (http://www.actsofgord.com/Proclamations/chapter02.html), quickly made a profit. Many consoles are sold at a profit from the Get-Go, including all of Nintendo's previously launched systems.

No matter which you prefer, or which, if any you think is worth it, both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are being sold at losses, so in a strict monetary sense they are both very much worth their purchase price. (If you took apart a PS3 and could sell the parts to Sony to put it back together you'd make a profit. Same with Xbox 360).In this quote, you say that Xbox 360 and PS3 are being sold at a loss and therefore worth their purchase price. You also insinuate that any console not being sold at a loss is not worth its cost. I call bullshit.

Does it bother anyone that the Wii is the first console to not be sold at a loss, or does the actual hardware value not matter? This is a general question for the forum, not a dig of any sort.You are so wrong that it pains me to have to tell you this. The Wii is NOT the first console to be sold at a loss. In fact, in the history of consoles, selling the system at a loss is a fairly recent thing. It hasn't been met with a lot of success either. The only consoles sold at a loss for any significant amount of time include the Sega Saturn, the Sega Dreamcast and the Xbox. Only Microsoft had deep enough pockets to call the situation a success.

Nobody is twisting your words, Mr.Condescension. You do a good enough job of that on your own.

For you to make such bold, sweeping and inaccurate claims in this post, you were either vastly uninformed or snarky and deceptive. I’ve read a lot of your posts since you came to Evil Avatar. I know which one I believe.

[Johan]

I don't understand the assumption that the 360 was rushed and that it somehow damaged the console space. Do we really want to be sitting around with 6 year old consoles with dated graphics? I would be happy with a console change ever 3 years.

I can understand people being upset with the Xbox's early demise... but it's understandable from Microsoft's position, it's not like it was making money for them. If Sony and Microsoft were switched Sony would do the same thing.

I understand your point-of-view, and especially agree with the second part; I own a 360 and I'm happy with it (I would be VERY happy if they would turn on the Live Arcade/new release spigot a bit and get some content moving). I just didn't feel that I was unhappy with the last generation, and I would rather have put my $400 console money into some of the many great games I still want from last generation (which I won't buy now, because most are not BC and I won't be bothered with my original Xbox anymore).

Also, it is a financial reality for developers that the business is cyclical and they suffer depressed sales during every period of console transition that has ever occured in the industry. That's bad for developers, but MS was suffering with the Xbox ($4 billion in losses) and needed to move on and kill that sucker off. Sony, on the other hand, would have probably loved to bleed the life of their PS2 for another couple of years, IMHO.

[Jack B]

I understand your point-of-view, and especially agree with the second part; I own a 360 and I'm happy with it (I would be VERY happy if they would turn on the Live Arcade/new release spigot a bit and get some content moving). I just didn't feel that I was unhappy with the last generation, and I would rather have put my $400 console money into some of the many great games I still want from last generation (which I won't buy now, because most are not BC and I won't be bothered with my original Xbox anymore).

Also, it is a financial reality for developers that the business is cyclical and they suffer depressed sales during every period of console transition that has ever occured in the industry. That's bad for developers, but MS was suffering with the Xbox ($4 billion in losses) and needed to move on and kill that sucker off. Sony, on the other hand, would have probably loved to bleed the life of their PS2 for another couple of years, IMHO.

I don't know the numbers, but some of the lull if not all that the software publishers feel during the transistion is the gamers saving their $600, $400, $249 plus another $100 or more in accessories for their new consoles.

Once, the lull is over the industry starts to roll again. In the long term, the transition probably isn't as bad as it looks. I've spent a lot more on my 360 accessories and games, than I would have if I was only buying Xbox games and no hardware.

Yes, I would have bought some old Xbox games, but I've probably spent close to $1,000 bucks in hardware and games for the 360 gen and personally, I wouldn't have bought more than 3 or 4 Xbox games in the past 6 months without the 360 Gen.... Yeah, try telling my checking account their is a slow down in the console industry... :D

Others who buy a 360 or PS3 or Wii will likely have the same thing happen to their wallet. They won't spend much on the last gen until they plunk down their money on the Next Gen, then bam their wallet will be very very empty and all is good again.

[Johan]

I've spent a lot more on my 360 accessories and games, than I would have if I was only buying Xbox games and no hardware.

Crap...now that you put it that way, so have I...my wife didn't like it any, either ;) However, two-thirds of my spending went to MS, not to developers (I've bought five 360 titles so far, plus seven arcade titles).

Anyway, very good point. And I think you had a really good point in your previous post about gamertag putdowns, as well...I would've been pissed, too.

[Kelegacy]

Kelegacy,
Great. Weak graphics don't bother you. Are you insane for that position? No, but I should turn around and call you "insane" for having your opinion as well. Me, turn in my gamer badge to the nearest Salvation Army for wanting consoles to have the best graphics possible?


Insane isn't a good word, no. Maybe more like "ridiculous" would be a better label for you. Graphics do not a great game make. That's not what consoles are about.

You should turn in your gamer badge. You try to pass yourself off as a gamer. Ha!

Sigh.

You bought a 360 and said there "aren't any games that interest you.". What a joke. Here's your game history with your 360.

You have one full game and 2 arcade titles with any achievement points. Yeah, you're exposed.

http://live.xbox.com/en-US/profile/Achievements/ViewAchievementSummary.aspx?compareTo=Kelegacy

You are a tool. A massive one. The only games I HAVEN'T played on the 360 that I would definitely check out are Perfect Dark and well, I can't think of another right now. Maybe Table Tennis. But there are demos. And if demos suck, the company failed to intrigue me. Why would I dish out more money if I'm not interested in a trial version of a game? I've downloaded a lot of demos. And if you look, you can see which demos I've downloaded. Instead of being a dash, you will see I have a zero for an achievement score. I didn't like many of the demos, but might pick up GRAW someday on the cheap.

Most games average less than an hour to get your 1st points out of 1,000. You haven't played shit on the 360 and you call yourself a gamer.

Sigh. Tool. I played Oblivion for well over 100 hours. That's a lot of game time, nearly two whole months. Since then there have been lots of cross-platform titles, and nothing worth the extra 10 dollars to play in high def. Guess what? I've played Tomb Raider Legends and Blood Money on the regular Xbox.

You're very biased and you'll play Disaster Report on the PS2, but there are no games on the 360 you find worth playing. I can't believe how biased you are.
Tool. Disaster Report is a game that is unlike any I've played. Innovation. No guns and stuff. You escape a collapsing city. Anything like that on the 360? The original Xbox? So shut your mouth. Biased because I played an older game on my PS2? Idiot.

Here's the link to the consensus score for Disaster Report. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/914509.asp It's very weak. How much do you hate Microsoft to play, that game and beat up on the 360's lineup. What the hell? Did Microsoft personally insult you at some point in your life and you're out to get even?
Tool. How does the consensus score show that I hate the 360? It's not MS that I don't like about the 360, it's the library. That's a problem with 3rd parties, not just MS. And have you played Disaster Report? I don't enjoy shitty games...in fact, as I've stated with my complaints of the 360 demos, I don't BUY or PLAY shitty games. Disaster Report is something different, and it was a neat, DIFFERENT experience. And it was 6.95. AND it is beloved on this website, which is why I went out and hunted down a copy. Don't diss something you haven't played. Idiot.

Show me you've actually played any games besides Oblivion and then I'll respect your opinion. I have no respect for your 360 opinion.

Too. Demos. Idiot.

I enjoy games on all platforms and always have. My 1st console was an Atari 2600. I also had an Atari 800, NES, Amiga. They were all fun. The PS2 is fun. The PS1 is fun. The Gamecube if fun. The PS3 will be fun! What a load of crap you spew.
What? I own all platforms. You think I bought a 360 to be bitter? God. Your idiocy stuns me.

You probably were a gamer at one point. You're the one that should be turning in your gamer badge to the Salvation Army. You've become old, jaded and can't enjoy the 360 likely because of some deep seated hatred of Microsoft or some other thing.
25 is old?

It's nice to know I hit a massive nerve with you. I'm a gamer who likes fun and gameplay. You seem to really crave graphics, and openly dissed a game like Disaster Report, which has horrible graphics. Who is the hypocrite here?

[Kamalot]

You seem to really crave graphics, and openly dissed a game like Disaster Report, which has horrible graphics. Who is the hypocrite here?I've never gotten that impression from Jack B. In fact, i think Jack was referring to the terrible review scores that Disaster Report got, across the board and NOT the graphics.

I too have to wonder where you get off playing something like disaster report if you reportedly have an Xbox 360, or even a DS. There are so many better games that disaster report sounds like a waste of my life energy. :D

[Mr.Condescension]

In this quote, you say that Xbox 360 and PS3 are being sold at a loss and therefore worth their purchase price.

I said "in a scrict monetary sense" which is 100% correct and completely factual.

You also insinuate that any console not being sold at a loss is not worth its cost. I call bullshit.

You are reading things from my comments that simply are not there. I have not stated or implied that the Wii is not worth $250 or whatever its cost actually is. I was wondering if it mattered to people that the PS3 and Xbox360 are selling at a loss and the Wii is not. Pure and simple, with no feeling any which way. Anything you're reading into it is being created by your own mind.

[Kamalot]

You are reading things from my comments that simply are not there. I have not stated or implied that the Wii is not worth $250 or whatever its cost actually is.
Your omission of Wii in a value statement of worth implies that Wii is not worth its (unannounced) price. Your statement was sly and cutting without coming right out and making a statement, as is your MO. Impressive. You have skill, too bad it as allied with one particular company and not for the good of gamers. :D

[RMan]

That’s why in my post I stated that it would be compared to PC games, and PC games continue to advance whether or not a new console is released. People who play console games also play PC games. If in 3 years no new consoles were released and they still made FPS games that looked like Killzone, than people would move back to PC for those types of games.
I don’t see people threatening to abandon Halo 2 and go back to PC shooters because Halo 2 doesn’t look good enough. They may move back and forth when cool new games are released, but improvements will be made regardless of hardware upgrades, as I’m sure you’re well aware. Hardcore FPS players are not playing Killzone, and developers have done far better since, so try to use a reasonable example.
It may not be clear to you, but if it was really too early there wouldn’t be such a huge market for 360 games. The 360 at this point has an attach rate of over 4 games per system, twice as much as other consoles at this point in their lives. That means there's a market for next gen games now and that market is larger than anyone could have predicted, we don't need to wait a year or two.
I would say there is not a huge market for 360 games. You seem to think the attach rate is the only useful indicator, when in fact it’s just the only one that looks particularly good on the 360. Every other major system had more hardware sales at this point in their life, and they were often released with competition. I do not think their hardware numbers or overall software sales are that great, especially considering the heavy amount of marketing they’ve done. Although I haven’t researched it, I can’t remember a time when the old system’s hardware and software sales actually increased during the transition. There have clearly been strong software releases on the PS2 lately, but regardless, what should be clear to the objective viewer is that the common consumer is by no means dissatisfied with even a nearly 6 year old system very close to it’s replacement hitting the streets.

Without some really rose-colored glasses I don’t see how the 360 can be seen as the wild success you seem to think, and the sales have been so good as to indicate a market ‘larger than anyone could have predicted’, that’s pretty out there. Heck, now it’s even questionable if they’ll hit that first to 10M mark that seemed a lock before it’s release.

[Jack B]

Kelegacy,

You are not worthy of reviewing any game where you have only played a demo and not the game, so YOU SHUT UP about it.

Review games you've actually played. Or prior to spewing your venom give a non-disclaimer about your actual game (not demo) experience in your posts. Quit trying to come off as an educated impartial judge.

Tell me the game publishers who spent 2-4 years making a game would think you knew shit about their game, because you downloaded a trailer or played the demo without a fucking manual for 10 minutes.

Get all makers of the 59 Xbox 360 games in a room and they'd call you a total joke. Game reviewers would save themselves a lot of time by not playing the games they review. Hmmm, let's just give our review of Halo 3 and MGS4 now. I don't feel like playing the game, but I did watch the trailer.

Oh, yeah I hated the movie. Actually, I only watched the first 3 minutes, but it sucked take it from me. It would never had gotten any better, I'm sure of it. The first 3 minutes is all you need. Take it from me. I work for Toybane.com. I love games. I love all games. I'm a fucking game lover. I would know. Why listen to someone like Bapenguin or Reanimated who actually spent considerable time "PLAYING" 360 games. Listen to me...

No, don't listen to someone who invested real time playing games. Just listen to me and my cranky comments about how the games suck.

You called me a tool and an idiot many times in your post. Now it's my turn. IMO, you are a bored gamer. Period.

I said it before and I'll say it again. I've loved games on every console I've ever played for the past 20 years. I've not said once ever, that a particular console has nothing to offer. You have.

You've done that again and again ragging on the 360, so explain your motivation? What about the DS? What about the PSP? What about the Gamecube?

Are there NO GAMES THAT INTEREST YOU on those platforms too? Or is it just the one platform? Either you like games or you don't. You are either bored as hell or you've got an axe to grind. Which is it?

We all know "you can't find any games on the 360 that interest you...". Great, but don't call yourself a gamer!

All you have the balls to tell me to turn in my gamer card. Yeah, you struck a nerve alright. Why don't you turn in your editor badge for www.toybane.com for reason's of "being a games editor that's jaded and bored with games".

[Mr.Condescension]

Your omission of Wii in a value statement of worth implies that Wii is not worth its (unannounced) price. Your statement was sly and cutting without coming right out and making a statement, as is your MO. Impressive. You have skill, too bad it as allied with one particular company and not for the good of gamers. :D

My comments was very specific in its scope. If a diamond miner offers you a diamond that cost him $10,000 to mine and will sell it to you for $8,000 then in a strict monetary sense it is worth $8,000 without any thought as to whether or not you want or need a diamond. If that same miner wanted to sell you a $5,000 diamond for $5,000 or $6,000, it may or may not be worth buying in a strict monetary sense.

[Kamalot]

My comments was very specific in its scope. If a diamond miner offers you a diamond that cost him $10,000 to mine and will sell it to you for $8,000 then in a strict monetary sense it is worth $8,000 without any thought as to whether or not you want or need a diamond. If that same miner wanted to sell you a $5,000 diamond for $5,000 or $6,000, it may or may not be worth buying in a strict monetary sense.Good thing consoles aren't diamonds. A console is worth more than the sum of its parts.

Do you really, honestly and truthfully, think you could sell a console for parts and recover the cost?

I'll say it again...Your omission of Wii in a value statement of worth implies that Wii is not worth its (unannounced) price. If you were not aware of this before, you are now.

[Jack B]

I've never gotten that impression from Jack B. In fact, i think Jack was referring to the terrible review scores that Disaster Report got, across the board and NOT the graphics.

I too have to wonder where you get off playing something like disaster report if you reportedly have an Xbox 360, or even a DS. There are so many better games that disaster report sounds like a waste of my life energy. :D

Thanks Kamalot,

You're right on the money. I want good AI, gameplay and graphics. You can have all 3. They are not mutually exclusive.

And you nailed it on the Disaster Report point as well. It's the fact, that 40 industry reviews give it a consensus 71%. Gamespot and IGN both had it at 6.2 and 6.5. Man, that's not a blockbuster title.

Kelegacy praises a consensus shitty PS2 title (the consensus reviews, not mine) and bashes the entire 360 lineup.

What a bunch of shit! That was "my fucking point" as Al Swearingen would say.

The fact that Kelegacy is an editor for the www.toybane.com annoys me even more. :mad:

[netcraazzy]

Rein, you have your opinion, I have mine.

My opinion is this thread is based upon an assinine assumption that the PS2 is mightier. Simply derived from unit sales.... It's assinine and it begs ridicule and sarcasm.

Hamburgers sell more than Filet Mignon's, so Hamburgers must be mightier than Filet Mignon's too. Yeah, this stuff gets annoying, so you can be annoyed by my sarcastic post. We're even.

If the post were titled better, maybe I wouldn't respond with sarcasm, but these ridiculous assumptions derived from facts get old. I like to believe Evil Avatar represents some of the more intelligent discussions on gaming. Not always, I suppose.

Discussing the staying power of the PS2 is interesting, but title of this post is off-putting.

Main Entry: as·i·nine
Pronunciation: 'a-s&n-"In
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin asininus, from asinus ass
1 : marked by inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment <an asinine excuse>
2 : of, relating to, or resembling an ass

Honestly Jack B you really need to take a chill pill, or two or three. I chose the title because I hoped it would spark debate about the staying power of the previous generation vs the "new hotness" that is the 360. I wasn't trying to proclaim that the PS2 is greater than the 360 will ever be and I'm a little offended that you automatically assumed that I was some stupid Sony fanboy with an agenda. I chose "PS2 mightier than the 360?" because in the short amount of time I had to submit the news I thought it was a cheesy but funny jab at the old pen mightier than the sword idiom. I apologize to everybody that I didn't have time to sit and precisely craft my title so as not to rile up the natives.

[Johan]

Jack B: I've found your posts to be informative and fair in my short time on EvAv. I also agree that the tag is the best indication of whether a person is actually involved in the stuff they're pronouncing is good/bad, and demos merely give you the slightest taste of a title. I've got 2000 points in five disks and downloads...not a whole lot, but enough to show me that I enjoy the 360 and think it has some good stuff to offer. I think the PS3 and Wii will also have good stuff to offer when they're on the market, as well. I think you were unfairly pissed upon...

The vitriolic spewage on this forum is really building lately; anyone else notice that? It's like Rumble Roses XX...a bit creepy, full of smack-downs, and really not something I enjoy :confused:

[Achilles]

Without some really rose-colored glasses I don’t see how the 360 can be seen as the wild success you seem to think, and the sales have been so good as to indicate a market ‘larger than anyone could have predicted’, that’s pretty out there. Heck, now it’s even questionable if they’ll hit that first to 10M mark that seemed a lock before it’s release.I'll bet anyone who thinks the 360 won't be first to 10 million $40 to Evil's site. I know you don't want to think of the 360 as an indication that people want a next gen format. But really, what else would a 4+ attach rate mean? Would you say the games are just so good that people are buying them like crazy? No rose colored glasses needed, only a reality check to see that the 360 is successful, and they're selling more games per system than anybody predicted, or any console before it.

But this is off the topic at hand, which is that you said people only compare consoles to consoles, and until another console comes out the games will not look outdated because there is nothing else for them to compare it to. So if the only console we had right now was the Atari, and computers were as good looking as they currently are, you think the market for the Atari would still be the same size, and the games would not look outdated?

[Jack B]

Honestly Jack B you really need to take a chill pill, or two or three. I chose the title because I hoped it would spark debate about the staying power of the previous generation vs the "new hotness" that is the 360. I wasn't trying to proclaim that the PS2 is greater than the 360 will ever be and I'm a little offended that you automatically assumed that I was some stupid Sony fanboy with an agenda. I chose "PS2 mightier than the 360?" because in the short amount of time I had to submit the news I thought it was a cheesy but funny jab at the old pen mightier than the sword idiom. I apologize to everybody that I didn't have time to sit and precisely craft my title so as not to rile up the natives.

Netcraazzy,

If I had read your explanation above, I wouldn't have responded in the way I did. I appreciate the response. I don't know enough about your posting history to know if you are a fan boy, but the title would be applauded by Sony fan boys, I'll say that at least.

It certainly did spark debate. :D In order for a title to spark debate it has to be annoying or very disagreable to some. It did all that and then some for me.

If the numbers were revenue and not units, the 360 would likely have tripled the PS2 revenue numbers, so it's all in how you spin the numbers.

It's really just a reaction to the Chinese water torture that is News wrapped in opinion. In its purest form the news is not to include any opinion. More and more, the news is very opinionated. It always was to some extent, but more so today.

I normally, don't bother to respond, but I've seen these numbers every month now for a while and I get tired of the sentiment of your title, being considered truth. I see it every month somewhere....

[Mr.Condescension]

Good thing consoles aren't diamonds. A console is worth more than the sum of its parts.

Do you really, honestly and truthfully, think you could sell a console for parts and recover the cost?

I'll say it again...Your omission of Wii in a value statement of worth implies that Wii is not worth its (unannounced) price. If you were not aware of this before, you are now.

You're not very good with hypotheticals are you? Or with the concept of monetary worth as opposed to perceived value.

[Kamalot]

I'll bet anyone who thinks the 360 won't be first to 10 million $40 to Evil's site.I'm in too. You heard it here. If Sony sells (not ships) more than 10 million PS3s before Microsoft sells 10 million 360s, then I will donate $40 to Evil Avatar.

[Kamalot]

You're not very good with hypotheticals are you? Or with the concept of monetary worth as opposed to perceived value.You aren't very good at social skills, are you? I suppose that comes from presenting such a condescending attitude.

[Jack B]

Jack B: I've found your posts to be informative and fair in my short time on EvAv. I also agree that the tag is the best indication of whether a person is actually involved in the stuff they're pronouncing is good/bad, and demos merely give you the slightest taste of a title. I've got 2000 points in five disks and downloads...not a whole lot, but enough to show me that I enjoy the 360 and think it has some good stuff to offer. I think the PS3 and Wii will also have good stuff to offer when they're on the market, as well. I think you were unfairly pissed upon...

The vitriolic spewage on this forum is really building lately; anyone else notice that? It's like Rumble Roses XX...a bit creepy, full of smack-downs, and really not something I enjoy :confused:

Johan123,

Thanks. My post history is filled with positive comments about all the consoles. I couldn't imagine not finding a launch title for the PS3, that wouldn't interest me. Hell, I have titles on the Dreamcast, I still enjoy.

Either you love games or you don't. Fan boys can be incredibly unfair on one console/platform compared to another. It's bizarre.

I'm looking forward to Resistance, Assassin's Creed on the PS3 and Wii Sports, Zelda on the Wii. There are many more than that. Put me in front of 70% of the games on any platform and I'll have fun. My issue is just not having enough time.... I just don't get all the negativity around certain consoles.

Make you're argument for one being preferred over another, but to say "everything sucks" is just not right. Especially, from an editor of a game site, who is supposed to be unbiased.

[Vanthar]

But really, what else would a 4+ attach rate mean?

It would mean that the people who own the 360's right now are the hardcore gamers. The attach rate is inflated by them as is the Live connecting rate.

[Achilles]

It would mean that the people who own the 360's right now are the hardcore gamers. The attach rate is inflated by them as is the Live connecting rate.No argument there, but don’t the hardcore gamers always show up for system launches? Why’s the number 2x higher than any other system launch if it’s too soon to launch a next gen console?

[Jack B]

It would mean that the people who own the 360's right now are the hardcore gamers. The attach rate is inflated by them as is the Live connecting rate.

I'd agree with that statement. The PS3 will likely have similar attach rates.

As for the Live connecting rate and why it is so high. Hmmm.

One factor is that Live is much better with 360 Live (Arcade, Marketplace, etc.) than the old Xbox Live.

Another is early adopters, tend to be hardcore.

Another is if you can afford $400+ for a Next Gen console, you may have disposable income for DSL/Cable etc.

I think all of those issues play a role. I will say, although I believe the PS3's attach rates will be similar, I'm not sure about their Live connecting rate. The Xbox world have a better experience with Live, so for many it was a no brainer. The PS2 world didn't have a good experience, so they may be less inclined. If they were hardcore online, like me, they would have gravitated to the Xbox last gen as well, which would give the 360 an edge in online connect rate.

Another issue for the PS3 connect rate is that Sony is giving developers freedom to not support Online if they don't want to... Microsoft won't certify titles without it, so the focus for Online is different for Sony.

As publishers decide not to do online for the Sony PS3 it could create a domino effect of less PS3 buyers using online.

On the other hand, because online play will be free (assuming a PS3 publisher decides to not charge... some will some won't...) it will be difficult to compare online connect rates.

Gold service for the 360 is about 55%. Since Sony won't really have a Gold service there won't be a comparable number. Maybe Silver vs PS3 online, but that would be about the same, but I'm not sure what the Silver connect rate is... My guess is about 95% at one point or another during 360 ownership.

Usage (hours playing online games or content downloaded or similar) would be the better comparision, but I doubt the loser would give out those numbers or if they did, they'd figure a way to spin it so it sounded like they won.

[Jack B]

No argument there, but don’t the hardcore gamers always show up for system launches? Why’s the number 2x higher than any other system launch if it’s too soon to launch a next gen console?

Achilles,

That is a good point. Anyway you look at it, if it is indeed 2x the attach rates of other launches, that's saying something.

Not entirely, sure what, but 360 owners are plunking down money for software. It will be very interesting to see the PS3 attach rates. It should be about the same, but if it's different, that will be very interesting.

Hell, it's all going to be interesting this Xmas! :D

[Achilles]

Achilles,

That is a good point. Anyway you look at it, if it is indeed 2x the attach rates of other launches, that's saying something.

Not entirely, sure what, but 360 owners are plunking down money for software. It will be very interesting to see the PS3 attach rates. It should be about the same, but if it's different, that will be very interesting.

Hell, it's all going to be interesting this Xmas! :DI agree that it'll be a very interesting Christmas especially for the kind of debates we have around here. :)

I don’t think the PS3 attach rate will be as high, and I think it’ll clock in at around 2.0 as the PS2 did simply because their lineup won’t get cooking till winter next year when their big titles like MGS2 start to hit. And because instead of being the only place to get next-gen games, as the 360 is now, people will have the option to buy many games on either the 360 or the PS3. For example I don't think Knockout would have sold as well on the 360 if the PS3 had shipped with it in spring as they originally said, because the market for the game would have been divided between the two platforms.

[Kelegacy]

Kelegacy,

You are not worthy of reviewing any game where you have only played a demo and not the game, so YOU SHUT UP about it.

Review games you've actually played. Or prior to spewing your venom give a non-disclaimer about your actual game (not demo) experience in your posts. Quit trying to come off as an educated impartial judge.

I didn't review any of the games. Jesus. I said I wasn't interested in them. Demos...that's what they are meant for. Demo, short for DEMONSTRATION. Which means try it out. I think you can get a pretty good feel for a game via a demo. That's why I bought Geometry Wars. That's why I didn't buy other 360 games. If they fucked up a demo it's not my fault. It's the company's. They failed. I thank God there are demos on Xbox Live or I may have bought some other 360 games on a whim.


Oh, yeah I hated the movie. Actually, I only watched the first 3 minutes, but it sucked take it from me. It would never had gotten any better, I'm sure of it. The first 3 minutes is all you need. Take it from me. I work for Toybane.com. I love games. I love all games. I'm a fucking game lover. I would know. Why listen to someone like Bapenguin or Reanimated who actually spent considerable time "PLAYING" 360 games. Listen to me...

Why don't you leave Toybane out of this. You are just grasping at straws. You are ignorant and are trying to get under my skin, but you are looking more like an ill-informed, offended gamer with nary a shred of rationale. And if you love all games, why'd you slam Disaster Report without playing it? At least I played demos. You are a hypocrite. You and Kamalot should go play the game and then come back and tell me how much it sucks. If you can't find something different, or fun, then you can go back to Halo and I won't bother you again. I won't respect you, but I don't already.


You called me a tool and an idiot many times in your post. Now it's my turn. IMO, you are a bored gamer. Period.
Who's fault is that? And no, I'm not bored. I play games every weekend. I'm buying a DS for the second time. I beat Disaster Report in two sittings and then switched over to Liberty City Stories. And Star Ocean. Tomorrow I'm buying New Super Mario Brothers. Yeah, I hate games.

I said it before and I'll say it again. I've loved games on every console I've ever played for the past 20 years. I've not said once ever, that a particular console has nothing to offer. You have.
No I haven't. 360 has Oblivion. That's the killer app right now.

You've done that again and again ragging on the 360, so explain your motivation? What about the DS? What about the PSP? What about the Gamecube? Are there NO GAMES THAT INTEREST YOU on those platforms too? Or is it just the one platform? Either you like games or you don't. You are either bored as hell or you've got an axe to grind. Which is it? I have tons of games for the DS. I have tons of games for the Gamecube. I have tons of games for the Xbox and PS2, Dreamcast and every other system released besides PSP, Jaguar and 3DO. Your point? At 60 bucks a pop, I'm not going to buy something I don't really like. Goddamn you are thick.

We all know "you can't find any games on the 360 that interest you...". Great, but don't call yourself a gamer!I'm not a gamer because I don't have more than 3 games on my 360? Yeah. You look smarter with each paragraph.

All you have the balls to tell me to turn in my gamer card. Yeah, you struck a nerve alright. Why don't you turn in your editor badge for www.toybane.com for reason's of "being a games editor that's jaded and bored with games".
Again. Good job. I say that you should turn in a fictious gamer badge because you are more obsessed with graphics than longevity of a console, which you have already admitted, and you try to turn it around that I'm a jaded gamer that doesn't even like games, attacking the website I write for.

At least Reanimated has some sense. I think my respect for him just increased tenfold after reading your fatuous arguements.

Keep your goddamn Gamer Badge. I don't know what that really means, but you seem to have taken it hard.

[Jack B]

I agree that it'll be a very interesting Christmas especially for the kind of debates we have around here. :)

I don’t think the PS3 attach rate will be as high, and I think it’ll clock in at around 2.0 as the PS2 did simply because their lineup won’t get cooking till winter next year when their big titles like MGS2 start to hit. And because instead of being the only place to get next-gen games, as the 360 is now, people will have the option to buy many games on either the 360 or the PS3. For example I don't think Knockout would have sold as well on the 360 if the PS3 had shipped with it in spring as they originally said, because the market for the game would have been divided between the two platforms.

You might be right about the PS3 attach rate. I think Resistance will be a 75% title like COD2, but then again the PS3 users might not support shooters like the 360 crowd.

I don't know for sure all of the titles at launch for the PS3. That will be key. I've heard from Kaz, it's around 15. Some of the EA games could be OK, but we won't know for sure about the list until Oct/Nov.

My guess is some titles will be better than the 360 launch like Resistance as they've had longer to prepare. Although, it may be that the launch lineup is slightly weaker overall.

On the other hand, PS3 buyers could be even more hardcore than the 360 buyers. After all, they'd be spending $600+ and they would be the a few million from an a pool of Sony fans, that was much bigger than the original Xbox pool...

Should be fun. My guess. Similar attach rates. If anyone wins that war, I'd say Microsoft by a nose, just because 4x is such a high number.

[Jack B]

I didn't review any of the games. Jesus. I said I wasn't interested in them. Demos...that's what they are meant for. Demo, short for DEMONSTRATION. Which means try it out. I think you can get a pretty good feel for a game via a demo. That's why I bought Geometry Wars. That's why I didn't buy other 360 games. If they fucked up a demo it's not my fault. It's the company's. They failed. I thank God there are demos on Xbox Live or I may have bought some other 360 games on a whim.

And they didn't fuck up the demos. I've said it before. Know true "unbiased" game lover really gives all the 360 titles a fair shake and say "there aren't any decent games...". You've slammed the 360's lineup in many posts, not me. Ask the 59 developers of 360 games if they "fucked up the demos" and they'd tell you to go fuck yourself. All 59. Yeah, you're not biased.

If you want to say in your posts, "I played the demo, but wasn't impressed." Fine, just quit slamming the entire lineup, when you obviously have only played demos.

Read that again to be sure you heard me right. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not ripping www.toybane.com when I've only briefly visited the site. You are doing that to the 360 lineup. Fun isn't it... if someone were to rag on Toybane.com without even reading the articles.

Why don't you leave Toybane out of this.

You take www.toybane.com out of your sig and I'll keep it out as well. You're promoting Toybane, not me. Take it out or quit compaining. I dare you. Leave Toybane out of this. Go ahead make my day.

And if you love all games, why'd you slam Disaster Report without playing it? At least I played demos. You are a hypocrite.

I pointed to a consensus of 40+ reviews by gaming mags/sites showing it as having recieved a consensus of 71%. I never claimed to have played it or was I reviewing it. Show me where I said I had experience with Disaster Report...

I was commenting that you claim to have given 360 games a fair shot, and although www.gamerankings.com has over 30 titles rated higher than 71%, I'm supposed to take your word for it that all 30 of those titles suck, because you played a demo?????

Yeah, let's see should I believe Kelegacy, who's played a demo or a consensus of magazines/game sites. Yeah, I'll take the consensus. Oh, but those reviews are done by 40 magazine reviews who played the game. Hmmm, no I think Kelegacy played the demo. He's more reliable. No chance.

Who's fault is that? And no, I'm not bored. I play games every weekend. I'm buying a DS for the second time. I beat Disaster Report in two sittings and then switched over to Liberty City Stories. And Star Ocean. Tomorrow I'm buying New Super Mario Brothers. Yeah, I hate games.

How do we prove that? I had to look up your Xbox 360 gamertag to see your true history of actual Xbox 360 play. Show me a post on Evil Avatar, where you offered that up before spewing your venon about the 360's entire lineup? I bet you never did. You wanted people to believe you were an experienced Xbox 360 user, that gave it a fair shot. Not true. You mislead people.

Read it and weep. Kelegacy's 360 game experience (http://live.xbox.com/en-US/profile/Achievements/ViewAchievementSummary.aspx?compareTo=kelegacy)

So, I'm supposed to believe you now?

However, I've already stated previously that it's an either/or proposition.

Either you're a bored gamer or you have an axe to grind against Microsoft. Don't tell me 30+ consensus reviews about your 71% for Disaster Report and you don't have some issues with Microsoft. You are not being objective or you are lying about how much time you invested in the demos.

We only know you didn't get any Achievements except for Oblivion, Geometry Wars and Hexic. Not very impressive. You could have spent 5 minutes with the demo. Like I said, that's not giving an entire lineup a fair shot.

No I haven't. 360 has Oblivion. That's the killer app right now.

I have tons of games for the DS. I have tons of games for the Gamecube. I have tons of games for the Xbox and PS2, Dreamcast and every other system released besides PSP, Jaguar and 3DO. Your point? At 60 bucks a pop, I'm not going to buy something I don't really like. Goddamn you are thick.

This isn't helping your case. Why you are so irrational about an entire 360 lineup you haven't played (except for 3 games)....?

And why have you posted your feelings so often about the crappy 360 lineup. Even in posts where you had no need. What's your motivation? Why bother. So, you don't like the lineup. Why keep posting that fact even when the thread isn't about the 360 lineup...?

I'm not a gamer because I don't have more than 3 games on my 360? Yeah. You look smarter with each paragraph.

I've said you likely have a bias and aren't qualified to review/comment on the entire 360 lineup without experience. I stand by that.

Again. Good job. I say that you should turn in a fictious gamer badge because you are more obsessed with graphics than longevity of a console, which you have already admitted, and you try to turn it around that I'm a jaded gamer that doesn't even like games, attacking the website I write for.

I have never said, I'm "obsessed" with graphics. I want 3 things. Good graphics, AI and gameplay. They are not mutually exclusive. I like all 3. I would assume we're in agreement here. Don't tell me what I believe.

I was playing and enjoying games with crappy graphics in 1976 when I graduated high school. What were you doing in 1976? Oh, let's see you weren't born yet...

Don't tell me I'm obsessed with graphics and don't appreciate good AI and gameplay.

At least Reanimated has some sense. I think my respect for him just increased tenfold after reading your fatuous arguements

Keep your goddamn Gamer Badge. I don't know what that really means, but you seem to have taken it hard.

Was that supposed to be a compliment for Reanimated? Reanimated has over 15,000 Xbox 360 achievements. Gee, should I ask Reanimated what he thinks about a particular game or you. Well, let's see he's actually invested hours in those games. You? Ha! What a joke.

I respect the hell out of Reanimated's opinion on 360 games, because he's earned it. It doesn't mean I'd agree with everything he say's, but I respect the hell out of his Achievement score and he earned his opinion that old fashioned way. He EARNED it. Same with Bapenguin.

And I lose more respect for you with every post. Your sig promotion of www.toybane.com makes me less interested in going there every day.

And using your logic I should say, "Yeah, Toybane.com sucks. I went there a couple times, read the first paragraph of a few articles and it sucked.... trust me. Oh, and by the way, check my sig as I represent a gaming site, so I'm important and have gaming cred...".

Yeah right. I feel sorry for the other editors, because when you put Toybane in your sig you are representing them. Take it out of your sig and be anonymous, otherwise it comes with the territory....

I can't be the only person of the 6,000 on Evil Avatar that isn't impressed with your objectivity. Is your association with Toybane helping or hurting Toybane. It hurt with for me.

When I first started reading Evil Avatar I expected you were a credible source of info, because of your affiliation. I've changed that opinion now from reading your posts.

Next time you get on your high horse and tell someone to turn in their gamer card, take a good hard look at yourself first.

[Kelegacy]

This is getting tiresome. You were obviously born with a mental deficiency and it isn't right of me to argue with you. But I'll say the following in the nicest way possible:

I didn't even bother to read your entire reply, but you mentioned Toybane in my sig. Where is it? It's not there, hasn't been for a while. That shows your lack of observation skills.

And achievement points do not a gamer make. You seem to be focusing on them more than anything. I don't have a high gamer score for the 360, thus I'm not a gamer. Ah, I see where you're coming from.

You're an idiot. And now you're on my ignore list because you're an idiot. Even Reanimated isn't on that list.

Oh, and look up the word objectivity in the dictionary. Disliking a console's library does not make me non-objective. I've played many 360 games and didn't like them, or not enough to warrant a purchase. Saying that I need to go out and rent or buy games instead of playing demos--spend my cash on mediocrity--to prove that I'm a real gamer is ludicrous. Look up that word while you're at it. Because that's what you are.

[Jack B]

Nice come back. Yeah, I know I'm on his ignore list. Maybe he'll hear it through the grapevine.

[RMan]

I know you don't want to think of the 360 as an indication that people want a next gen format. But really, what else would a 4+ attach rate mean?
I’d say it means nothing, like I said a long time ago, if the other systems had sold primarily to hardcore gamers they’d have a high attach rate too. What matters is the total sales, if the system had sold 100 systems the attach rate would have been through the roof, but that doesn’t make the system successful.
So if the only console we had right now was the Atari, and computers were as good looking as they currently are, you think the market for the Atari would still be the same size, and the games would not look outdated?
Uhh, no, because the something else (the PC) would be making it look bad. In this case, I’m sure more players and developers would be moved towards the PC. Without the PC, no, the games wouldn’t look dated.

[RMan]

Why’s the number 2x higher than any other system launch if it’s too soon to launch a next gen console?
I think the part your missing in my argument is that we unfortunately cannot know this. The high attach rate is not an indicator of anything, even if you think it’s an indicator of the 360’s success, you cannot know how successful it could have been if released a year later, or how much better off the customer and industry would be if it were. This would require an alternate universe to test the theory in, because it’s not provable any other way. You feel that 4 years is a good release schedule, I think it is not, but neither could ever prove the other wrong.