Slashdot Mirror
PS3 Delay To Have Little Impact?
According to analyst firm Strategy Analytics, the PS3's delay is unlikely to have much of an effect on the next-gen race, reports GameDailyBiz. From the article: "While 2006 sales will clearly fall short of previous expectations, Strategy Analytics maintains its previous forecast of PS3 sales of 121.8 million units through 2012 ... This compares to expected sales of Microsoft's Xbox 360 of 58.8 million units over the same period." Gamasutra reports that, from Steve Ballmer's perspective, the opposite is true. From that article: "In every other generation, the first guy to 10 million consoles was the number one seller in the generation ... Did we just get an even better opportunity to be the first guy to 10 million? Yeah, of course we did." This all assumes the console launches this year.
the ps installed user base is too big to overcome. most ps2 owners will re up and get a ps3. most ps2 owners are satisfied with their gaming experience, and I have no reason to believe that this will change between now and when the ps3 is released.
the ps3 will do well. how well the 360 does isn't dependent on what Sony does, more on what microsoft does. they have been marketing the 360 poorly in my opinion, thus limiting the reach of the console.
un burrito me trampeó.
Those analyst forecasts are way off.
By my calculations, it's 121.6 (they must have forgotten to take into account leap year, tax increases, etc).
How can somebody make predictions on the sale of a new piece of technology, projecting 6 years into the future, and to be so arrogant that they use the tenth's decimal place to make their forecast? Whatever...
-THE END-
Indeed, but the original PlayStation came out at a time when people had been VERY satisfied with their previous Nintendo system, the SNES. In fact, the first PlayStation was originally going to be a collaboration between Nintendo and Sony as a CD-ROM drive for the SNES. Nintendo pulled out, Sony continued developing it, and the cancellation of that contract turned out to be the worst decision that Nintendo ever made.
My point is, at some point in time, the "popular" brand of systems always falls. Atari, Nintendo (and Sega?), and Sony's time will eventually come... It might not happen with the PS3, but the important thing to remember is that can happen, and eventually will. All empires are eventually toppled.
I just want the PS3 to kick ass. If it kicks ass I won't mind if they even skip a whole generation of consoles. I want an awesome experience and I'm willing to pay for it. Deliver and you'll make some cash. I'd even go as far as saying that I'd pay $1000 for a console if it really blew me away. I really want to see something more powerful than the XBox 360 which in my mind is comparable to my (fairly high-end) PC. Cram two or three Cell processors in there and some serious amounts of RAM if needed. I want a machine that I'll lust over the way I wanted a Nintendo when I was a kid.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
I don't think Ballmer is exactly right, nor whoever wrote the article either. If Microsoft starts really hammering it in that the "next generation" is here, people will get sick of waiting for the PS3 and get a 360. It's common sense. If you are putzing along on a PS2 and get sick of waiting for the PS3, you'll get the itch and pick one up. Sad but true.
I think many people, including myself, will wait with a (much needed) pc upgrade until MS Vista (DirectX 10) capable hardware is around. Ok, I have run Kororaa with XGL (but normally run Gentoo), and I like it A LOT. However, I have kids... And unless there are compelling Linux gaming alternatives the upgrade may well be Vista... Also, I may need to by a new tv... An HDTV. Oooo, another 1,000$ So, if the PS3 will work as a Linux-based pc, too, then it is clear. It will be PS3. If it will be cheap, like 500$, then maybe both a new pc and a PS3. Oh, I almost forgot, I need a new car, too...
I guess this is as good an article to make this comment. As someone who has worked in retail for 6 years (Gamestop and now Gamecrazy) I am eternally amused that no analyst (that I've read, at least) has ever once mentioned that the installed PS2 user base is grossly overstated. Yes, the PS2 has sold well over 100 million units, but I would be very conservative in estimating that at least 30 million of those units(AT LEAST) are replacements for broken PS2's. It's really quite amazing to me that I've sold quite a few customers their 4th PS2 since 2001. The thing is, they're so invested in games, that they simply must replace their PS2 when it breaks, and they break... gosh, seems yearly.
Besides the replacements, there are tons of users that have second and third machines. Much like the GBA buyers, they just had to get the special edition units, or the slimmer unit, or... whatever, you get it.
I'd say that the installed user base for PS2s, based on my own experience, is overstated by 40-50%. The PS2 won the last console war, but not by nearly as much as the sales figures show.
(and, yes, the Xbox had quite a few return customers due to broken hardware, but not nearly as many. The Gamecube appears to be indestructible)
I understand a decimal place, when applied to millions of units, equals hundreds of thousands. That doesn't diminish the principle that the analyst numbers are garbage. You're applying a decimal to a 3 digit number, which means you're forecasting a number with more accuracy than a percentage point. It's no more accurate than a fart in the wind.
-THE END-