Has Sony Won The Console War?

you wrong

are you an moron sony will be a king again .beside ms loose money for 3 rod

Matt Peckham looks like he's on Sony's Payroll

This guy's credibility as an unbiased reporter of facts has been all but shredded in my eyes.

"This places the Sony PS3 in a commanding position to usurp the Xbox 360 and Wii as Europe's best-selling console. (Prior to the launch of the Slim, the original PlayStation 3 was only a million units behind its competitors in this territory.)"

This line is such horseshit it isn't even funny and looks to be designed to do nothing more than <strong>boost shareholder confidence. </strong>

The PS3 may be just a hair behind the Xbox360 in EU sales however it is <strong>no where near the Wii</strong> in sales, and keep in mind that is JUST Europe.

http://vgchartz.com/hwcomps.php?cons1=Wii&reg1=Europe&cons2=PS3&reg2=Europe&cons3=X360&reg3=Europe&start=39089&end=40055&weekly=1

Worldwide the PS3 is <strong>19 million units</strong> behind the Wii and 8 behind the Xbox360
http://vgchartz.com/hwcomps.php?cons1=Wii&reg1=All&cons2=PS3&reg2=All&cons3=X360&reg3=All&start=39355&end=40055&weekly=1

Article titles such as 'Has sony won the console war' are intended for a specific purpose and that's the boost confidence of shareholders and open the wallets of potential investors. All of which I wouldn't be surprised if Matt wasn't getting compensated for. If you go back through his writings it's painfully obvious to see the very <strong>anti-nintendo</strong> bias that he's had throughout but recently it's become <strong>blatantly pro-sony. </strong>
I for one have trouble trusting what comes out of this man's mouth as being the honest truth and I'm certainly not alone:
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=17370

The shame is that people still publish his work and let him spread his one-sided biased spin, pawning it off as something to be trusted. This makes those sites, such as this one appear less trust-worthy themselves for not doing their homework on who they publish.

Let me end by quoting this crony from one of this past biased articles where he was quoting Socrates:

<strong>"Rhetoric is the art of ruling the minds of men,"</strong>

It's funny how he was almost rubbing in his own devious tricks in the public's faces.

I just traded my 360 in for a new slim ps3. I am tired of these crappy built 360's. Now i am aware that the 360 probally has an edge as far as 3rd party games go but whats the use if it rrod on you! I really love this new ps3. Microsoft really has no idea how to build hardware. A few months ago i was in best buy and noticed they had the elite 360's with halo 3 and fable 2. I thought this was a good package until i looked and the manufacture date on the xbox. They were made in feb 2008. Those systems made then are guarenteed to rrod and microsoft knows that! They are more worried with clearing out there inventories than giving the customer a well built console. I guess they figure they can just fix it for them in 12 to 18 months! To me thats being sneaky and dishonest. I do not want any part of a company that is that way. A person i work with has 3 xbox 360's in her house now. One of them is a new jasper model that was bought to replace one that had rrod. She had the bad one packaged up to send in and the new one died as well! The third 360 has already been fixed once and has rrod again as well. They do the towel trick and get it to work for a short period of time. They are waiting to get the other 2 back before sending in the 3rd!! This is just crazy!! I know people like the games that are on the 360 and people are always talking about how the 360 is ahead of the ps3 but lets really do the math! I would say half of the 360's sold are in a graveyard somewhere with rrod!! So in my opinion the ps3 has more consoles in the market!!

Well Below Cost

by the way, it's still not below cost. sony loses $100 for each slim sold. they lost more than that selling off the remaining 80 gigs for $299 also

sony already proved it

IT was announced about 2 weeks before the slim launched by SONY , yes sony that's right that: PS3 costs were reduced by 70% from their launch date price which would put the original $840 for a 60 GB PS3 to $240 for a slim. so sony is making $60 profit on every slim. and $160 on every uncharted bundle

proving it

It's simple. the PS3 120g is sold at cost to retailers in actuality and if you know anyone who works for either Best Buy or Future Shop then they have access to the dealer cost which works out to be 294.00. Sony has never sold their hardware at a profit because they make their money from the games and accessories like all the other companies. Think about it like the cell phone industry, you don't really get a phone for free you pay for it in the contract but in this case you don't get the console at cost you pay for it through your entertainment purchases and accessory add-on's. in fact the best way to support a company you like is by buying the accessories they make as well. that is where sony profits. BTW it is not a $100 loss, it was a $100 profit the last poster mentioned. besides that, the reality is that they just barely break even on hardware and always have.

No, you are

you are a simple sad boy, sony has fired 30 000 employees, of course they have money :D go and say "sony will be a king" to the employees, you little twat

only time will tell

they have had much success with their other consoles
but since the price was too high it wasnt selling anything
but now since the price is affordable
Playstation has a very good chance to be top dog again
the PS2 is still the MOST SELLING CONSOLE WORLDWIDE
and i bet that 100 million PS2 owners are dying to get their hands on ps3s
i think ps3 has a good chance of becoming #2 and A SLIM CHANCE OF BEING #1 but hey
its called the ps3 slim
:)

sales

It winds me up up when people say ps3 is millions of sales behind! Really? in business, people talk about Year-to-date sales, and people choose to forget that the X360 has been out a year longer than the ps3 and year on year the ps3 has outsold the X360, even with the higher price. And yeah with a strong line-up of exclusive games between now and mid 2010, Id say Sony are allowed to be a bit smug. This one is in the bag

So says some anonymous user who doesn't even know anything about PS3 costs and profits. And keep in mind that Sony has been making profits for years on their PSPs and PS2s.

Also, if you want to talk about loss, how much do you think MS is losing on the RROD failures of the 360?

I'm glad MS gave Sony a good challenge because it forced Sony to step off their high horses and start releasing good games and lowering the cost. The PS3 may have had a rough start but it now has the best exclusive games library along with a competitive price point.

Behind by over 10 million?

Wicked made up fact bro!

You are wrong... unless of course you have a source for that (lol) "fact"?

"Idiotic banter" says Gladiator007

You can't be serious... I mean really. You call it after one week of sales? Sony is behind the eight ball and will always be. The best move Microsoft made was launching first. Yes, that's right even given the problems with the RRD as well as no Blue Ray-, why? because by the time the Sony PS3 really penetrates and gains real traction it will be outdated. Meaning both Microsoft and Nintendo will more than likely launching new consolses well before Sony can launch their next one. And let's not forget about Project Natal, if its as good as it appears to be, it will move systems.

Sony is a day late and a dollar short simply because they chose to gamble a delayed launch on blue-ray, which by the way has growing competition from video on demand. Technology is only going to get better in this areana and blue-ray is no way the leaps and bounds better tech than DVD was as compared to VHS.

And finally, let's not forget the financial side of things. Sony is still losing money. The only reason they launched the slim was to make up for the cluster fu,,,k of a launch the original PS3 was. If they had brains, they would have launched the slim as the original. How many iterations of the PS3 have they had?

Xbox 360 has games "Now"

"With great games like Tekken 6, Final Fantasy 13, Final Fantasy 13 Versus, Gran Turismo 5, God of War 3, Final Fantasy 14 (heck, why not add FF15, FF16, FF17, God of War 4, and Gran Turismo 6 into the list) the PS3 has more games than anything else out there."

The comments PS3 fanboys make are pathetic.

Playstation fanboys used to rip on Sega Saturn fanboys when the Sega fans would say things like:

"Saturn may be more difficult to develop software for, but it is more powerful -- which means Saturn will have much better graphics than Playstation when developers become familiar with the hardware."

Looking back, we can say that only three Sega games were able to truly take advantage of Sega hardware. Those games were Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Rally, and Nights. So far on PS3 the only graphic standout is Killzone 2, and the only reason it stands out graphically is because Co-Op was removed from the game in order to allow the processing power to be devoted to graphics instead of online play.

Another thing Sega Saturn fans used to say was:

"We may not have games now, but look at the future -- look at what is on the way for next year."

Looking back, we can say that countless games were delayed and/or cancelled countless times. The same thing has happened with the PS3. Remember, the name "Fony Delaystation" was not given to the PS3 for free; it was earned with lots hard work leading to delays and cancellations.

There are several things that are important to remember:

* Xbox 360 versions of third-party software are rated higher than PS3 versions. Xbox 360 versions of games have better graphics and better online play with more people to play with. This instantly means two-thirds of all games are better on Xbox 360 because of third-party software superiority.

For example, there are lots of games such as Saints Row 2 and GTA4 where the Xbox 360 version runs at 720p resolution while the PS3 version runs at only 640p. Soul Calibur 4 runs at 720p on PS3, yet the Xbox 360 version runs at 960p.

Another example is framerate. Games like All Pro Football run at 60 frames per second on Xbox 360, but only 30 frames per second on PS3. The reason for this is because the Xbox 360 GPU can display nearly twice as many polygons as the PS3 GPU. Games like FEAR and Splinter Cell that run at 30 frames per second on Xbox 360 dipped down to below 20 frames per second on PS3, and experienced 8-bit style slowdown and screen-flicker. This is one of the reasons why Splinter Cell: Conviction is not being released for PS3. And the developers of Valve have made it clear they want to part of the PS3 because they don't like developing for its developer-unfriendly hardware.

* Xbox 360 receives far more third-party support than PS3, which is why Xbox 360 ends up with far more console-exclusive games than PS3. Look at the huge number of games released for Xbox 360 and PC, but not for PS3. This means award-winning games like Mass Effect and Left 4 Dead end up with Xbox 360 as the only console you can play those games on. PS3 gamers always say "Well, I can buy that on my PC." Eventually you end up hearing PS3 gamers say it so much that it becomes apparently they spend a large percentage of their time playing games on PC instead of their PS3. On Xbox 360 it isn't like that; Xbox 360 is a vastly superior games machine in the area of console-exclusives.

* Xbox 360 sees games launched first on a regular basis. Look how even new games like Marvel vs Capcom 2 launched earlier on Xbox 360. It's like this with a countless number of titles. Everything from Lost Planet, Command & Conquer, Rainbow Six, Bioshock, Orange Box, and many others. Even though the PS3 versions are released later, the Xbox 360 versions still have better graphics and far more people to play online with. What's worse for the PS3 is that when the PS3 verions are released a year later for $59, the Xbox 360 version has become a best-seller Platinum Hit and sells for only $29! It makes more sense to buy the less expensive version with better graphics and more people to play online with!

At the 2009 E3, Channel G4 made the comment that even if a PS3 version of a game is released simultaneously and has identical graphics, the Xbox 360 version of a game is still superior because there are more people to play games online with -- most of which have headsets to talk online with (common Xbox 360, but not common on PS3 since only Xbox 360 includes a headset with the hardware).

* Exclusive features are included in Xbox 360 versions of games. Grand Theft Auto 4 shows how Microsoft is willing to go the extra mile to make sure exclusive features are included in Xbox 360 versions of games. PS3 fanboys say "Microsoft cheated and paid $50 Million to get those extra expansions." Well, it doesnt matter why Microsoft did it, the point is the Xbox 360 versions of games like Grand Theft Auto 4 have extra expansions that the PS3 versions don't. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is being released simultaneously for Xbox 360 and PS3, but only the Xbox 360 version is launching with those special features. So, like Channel G4 said, there is no doubt that it makes a lot more sense to get the Xbox 360 version.

* First-party software is a lot more popular on Xbox 360. Games like Halo, Gears of War, Forza Motorsport, Fable, Shadow Complex, Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark, Project Gotham Racing, Halo Wars, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey all earned Game of the Year awards and sell far better in target markets on Xbox 360 than games on PS3 such as Little Big Planet or Killzone 2. Remember, Killzone 2 was on the market only three months before it was receiving negative publiclity for being outsold monthly by Halo 3 -- a game that had been on the market for 21 months.

And God of War is a franchise that sold nearly identical numbers on the PS2 as Killzone -- relatively disappointing considering they were released when there were nearly 120 Million owners of PS2. So, don't expect God of War 3 to be a killer-app; it will put up sales numbers similar to Killzone 2 -- not a failure, but certainly disappointing.

And lets not forget that Resistance 2 sold far fewer copies than Resistance 1, showing that the only reason Resistance 1 sold well was because it was one of only two decent launch games on PS3. The same can be said for Motorstorm. If Sony had done those games right the first time and included Co-Op, there wouldn't have been a need for sequels.

As far as Uncharted is concerned, that game only lasted four hours and it was over. You literally could beat it in only four hours, and Uncharted 2 has the same problem. As far as graphics go, both Uncharted and Gears of War were released in 2006, and we saw which game got all the graphics. Gears of War won everything from Best Graphics to Game of the Year.

MGS4 was a great movie on PS3, but certainly not a great game. The game had so many problems that Konami literally forced reviewers to sign a contract saying that they could not penalize the game for: Long Loading "installs"; Cinema Scenes; Lack of Replay Value; Poor Online Setup; Resolution that was grainy. Remember, the movies scenes of MGS4 looked great because they were true HD. But the actual game of MGS4 was not in true 1280x720p resolution; it was only 1024x768p, which is quite a bit lower since the game still only used a single-frame buffer. This is why MGS4 has the "grainy" resolution when you are playing. Hopefully MGS5 will be better when it is released for Xbox 360 and PS3.

* Forza Motorsport 2 is generally accepted as the best Racing Sim ever created. Forza Motorsport 2 is better than any other Racing Sim ever created, including any previous Gran Turismo game. Forza Motorsport 3 is so infinitely better than Forza Motorsport 2 it is revolutionary; it has so many tracks and cars that it is on two discs! The cars in Forza Motorsport 3 have TEN TIMES as many polygons as in Forza Motorsport 2. Every car (including real-life cars) in Forza Motorsport 3 has fully-simulated damage from crashes -- something Gran Turismo 5 cannot match. It also is pathetic the way Sony tries marketing Gran Turismo 5 as a 1080p game, as if it were 1920x1080p, even though the game actually runs at only 960x1080p -- displaying the exact same number of pixels as 1080i.

No one should defend microsoft for its sells

360 owners are suckers they get the ring of dead then buy a new system and rejoice that microsoft out sells sony lol everyone that i know that owns a 360 has gotten this scam of a ring.