Your point is that the type of consumer I'm saying makes up most of Sony's market share will not care about a $350 price hike, because they don't care how much money their toys cost. I disagree. These are poor college students, to whom there is a world of difference between $250 and $599. How else can your point be interpreted? I think that the group that I'm talking about is less inclined to spend an extra $350 on something that is only a casual hobby to begin with, and that THIS group is what is the difference between an Xbox marketshare and a PS2 marketshare.
If I'm not interpreting your comment about "15k + 5k" cars right, please by all means correct me.
I'll repeat my point again, in case maybe I didn't state it right before:
The difference between the Xbox marketshare and the PS2 marketshare is mostly college guys who live in a frat house or a dorm who saw their friends PS2 and decided they wanted to play Madden too. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked at all if a good 10-15% of all PS2 owners ONLY had versions of Madden and GTA in their game library. These are NOT the kind of consumers who care enough about video games to spend $600 on a video game console.
It has nothing to do with "high school debate class" but certainly taking a jab at me makes your point far superior.
Wow, congratulations on pigeon-holing every single male college student who enjoys video games as an alcoholic and financially irresponsible. I'd say the vast majority are otherwise, and these are the ones who will not simply shrug their shoulders at a $400 price hike in their casual hobby.
You're crazy if you think the average joe is going to spend $600 on a video game system. The PS2's market share comes largely from the dude in a dorm room who saw his friend play Madden and GTA and wanted to do the same. It's not VIDEO GAME fans making up the PS2 market share, it's CASUAL gamers who don't know their Katamari from their Master Sword. And if you think that a college student who barely was able to afford a $250 PS2 3 years ago is going to shell out $600 for a video game system, you're wrong. This will sell well to early adopters (like/. readers) and to Sony fanboys, but the type of consumer that made Sony the market leader won't spend that much money on a video game system.
Well played on the research. Still, why are you considering buying a Mac now, and not in 2001? Clearly something has changed. Is it just intel? Has that made enough difference alone?
I don't remember seeing Mac commercials on TV 5 years ago. I don't remember even CONSIDERING a Mac as a viable platform five years ago. Again, something clearly has changed. Is it only in my head? I suppose that's possible.
Macs are all about perception and appearance, but I know very few people who felt let down when that perception faded, and they were left with a new Mac. I know that I've been very pleased with my Mac. I've heard some customer support horror stories, but I've had nothing but good experiences (2 of them to be precise).
Simply put, I think Macs are a better option for non-tech-heads and I think more people realize this now than they have in years.
Thousands of casual computer users are switching. I switched. I know at least 10 people in my age group (20-30) who have swtiched. 10 more who are thinking about it. People looking to buy a new comptuer when they go off to college are looking at Macs more seriously than ever. They do the same things that any casual user is looking for in a Windows computer (email, web, chat, word processing), they look better doing it, and they work flawlessly (and better) with that iPod they got for Christmas.
You're right when it comes to Gamers not switching to Macs, but how many gamers don't have a PS2 or Xbox? You're right when it comes to businesses not switching to Macs, but the home computer market is certainly not worth overlooking.
Mac's marketshare may not be stellar yet, but compare it to their marketshare 5 years ago.
It's not a coincidence. My conversation with AOL in the summer of 2001 ended like this.
AOL [cheerful]: Hi! This is Blahblahblah Fishcakes from America Online, how are you doing today?
DrewMG: I'm doing okay, thanks.
AOL [cheerful]: Great! Oh, I see you're from Nebraska!
DrewMG: Yeah.
AOL [cheerful]: Hey, how do you think the Huskers are gonna do this year?!
DrewMG: Hopefully pretty good.
AOL [cheerful]: Yeah, I'm a big fan. So, what can we do for you today?
DrewMG: I called to cancel my account.
AOL [sad-face]:... oh.
[awkward pause]
AOL [sad-face]: Well, what's going on? Why do you want to cancel?
DrewMG: Because I have a DSL connection, and no need for your service.
AOL [desperate]: Well, if you want, you can pay $2 a month to access our services over your high speed connection!
DrewMG: Uh, no thanks.
AOL [desperate]: Think of all the exclusive content we provide!
DrewMG: Uh... no. Please cancel my account.
And so on, and so forth.
PS3 and X-Box won't be making lots of money. They'll be losing money hand over fist. Neither of them seems interested in making money, just market share.
What adult pubically announces they have to go home and play video games? Do they hold a press conference first?
75% of PS2 owners don't say PS2 or Playstation, they say "Madden" or "GTA"
Can you imagine how great a Pikmin game would be for either DS or Wii? The interface would be stellar. On Wii, Olimar would move with the nunchuck controller analog stick, and the Wii-mote would select groups of Pikmin. With the slightly beefier hardware, perhaps we could see 200-300 Pikmin on the screen at once.
It's very disappointing that the franchise never sold particularly well, because it's easily the most innovative game Nintendo developed last gen, and that's what they're supposed to be going for now. It's a no-brainer to bring the franchise back for the next system, but with sales having been relatively lackluster, who knows. If the Wii dominates shelves like fanboys (like me!) are convinced it will, perhaps it will be a great chance to introduce the Pikmin games to millions of new players.
The Wii-mote will be great for RPGs (which usually only require basic directional input and menu functionality), first person shooters (there's a good reason two of the launch titles will be FPSs) and Platformers (all reports say that Super Mario Galaxy is one of the best titles on the floor).
Slashdot Mirror
Your point is that the type of consumer I'm saying makes up most of Sony's market share will not care about a $350 price hike, because they don't care how much money their toys cost. I disagree. These are poor college students, to whom there is a world of difference between $250 and $599. How else can your point be interpreted? I think that the group that I'm talking about is less inclined to spend an extra $350 on something that is only a casual hobby to begin with, and that THIS group is what is the difference between an Xbox marketshare and a PS2 marketshare.
If I'm not interpreting your comment about "15k + 5k" cars right, please by all means correct me.
I'll repeat my point again, in case maybe I didn't state it right before:
The difference between the Xbox marketshare and the PS2 marketshare is mostly college guys who live in a frat house or a dorm who saw their friends PS2 and decided they wanted to play Madden too. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked at all if a good 10-15% of all PS2 owners ONLY had versions of Madden and GTA in their game library. These are NOT the kind of consumers who care enough about video games to spend $600 on a video game console.
It has nothing to do with "high school debate class" but certainly taking a jab at me makes your point far superior.
Wow, congratulations on pigeon-holing every single male college student who enjoys video games as an alcoholic and financially irresponsible. I'd say the vast majority are otherwise, and these are the ones who will not simply shrug their shoulders at a $400 price hike in their casual hobby.
It seems to me that Sony has largely been successful because it markets to an audience that doesn't need its parents to buy their toys for them.
You're crazy if you think the average joe is going to spend $600 on a video game system. The PS2's market share comes largely from the dude in a dorm room who saw his friend play Madden and GTA and wanted to do the same. It's not VIDEO GAME fans making up the PS2 market share, it's CASUAL gamers who don't know their Katamari from their Master Sword. And if you think that a college student who barely was able to afford a $250 PS2 3 years ago is going to shell out $600 for a video game system, you're wrong. This will sell well to early adopters (like /. readers) and to Sony fanboys, but the type of consumer that made Sony the market leader won't spend that much money on a video game system.
You'd prefer I used someone else's personal experience to form my opinions? Fine then, I will begin taking applications immediately.
Well played on the research. Still, why are you considering buying a Mac now, and not in 2001? Clearly something has changed. Is it just intel? Has that made enough difference alone?
I don't remember seeing Mac commercials on TV 5 years ago. I don't remember even CONSIDERING a Mac as a viable platform five years ago. Again, something clearly has changed. Is it only in my head? I suppose that's possible.
Macs are all about perception and appearance, but I know very few people who felt let down when that perception faded, and they were left with a new Mac. I know that I've been very pleased with my Mac. I've heard some customer support horror stories, but I've had nothing but good experiences (2 of them to be precise).
Simply put, I think Macs are a better option for non-tech-heads and I think more people realize this now than they have in years.
I too hate to point out the obvious but...
Thousands of casual computer users are switching. I switched. I know at least 10 people in my age group (20-30) who have swtiched. 10 more who are thinking about it. People looking to buy a new comptuer when they go off to college are looking at Macs more seriously than ever. They do the same things that any casual user is looking for in a Windows computer (email, web, chat, word processing), they look better doing it, and they work flawlessly (and better) with that iPod they got for Christmas.
You're right when it comes to Gamers not switching to Macs, but how many gamers don't have a PS2 or Xbox? You're right when it comes to businesses not switching to Macs, but the home computer market is certainly not worth overlooking.
Mac's marketshare may not be stellar yet, but compare it to their marketshare 5 years ago.
It's not a coincidence. My conversation with AOL in the summer of 2001 ended like this. AOL [cheerful]: Hi! This is Blahblahblah Fishcakes from America Online, how are you doing today? DrewMG: I'm doing okay, thanks. AOL [cheerful]: Great! Oh, I see you're from Nebraska! DrewMG: Yeah. AOL [cheerful]: Hey, how do you think the Huskers are gonna do this year?! DrewMG: Hopefully pretty good. AOL [cheerful]: Yeah, I'm a big fan. So, what can we do for you today? DrewMG: I called to cancel my account. AOL [sad-face]: ... oh.
[awkward pause]
AOL [sad-face]: Well, what's going on? Why do you want to cancel?
DrewMG: Because I have a DSL connection, and no need for your service.
AOL [desperate]: Well, if you want, you can pay $2 a month to access our services over your high speed connection!
DrewMG: Uh, no thanks.
AOL [desperate]: Think of all the exclusive content we provide!
DrewMG: Uh... no. Please cancel my account.
And so on, and so forth.
PS3 and X-Box won't be making lots of money. They'll be losing money hand over fist. Neither of them seems interested in making money, just market share.
What adult pubically announces they have to go home and play video games? Do they hold a press conference first? 75% of PS2 owners don't say PS2 or Playstation, they say "Madden" or "GTA"
Can you imagine how great a Pikmin game would be for either DS or Wii? The interface would be stellar. On Wii, Olimar would move with the nunchuck controller analog stick, and the Wii-mote would select groups of Pikmin. With the slightly beefier hardware, perhaps we could see 200-300 Pikmin on the screen at once. It's very disappointing that the franchise never sold particularly well, because it's easily the most innovative game Nintendo developed last gen, and that's what they're supposed to be going for now. It's a no-brainer to bring the franchise back for the next system, but with sales having been relatively lackluster, who knows. If the Wii dominates shelves like fanboys (like me!) are convinced it will, perhaps it will be a great chance to introduce the Pikmin games to millions of new players.
That's why there's a nunchuck extention. It's just as much a part of the Wii controller as the remote.
The Wii-mote will be great for RPGs (which usually only require basic directional input and menu functionality), first person shooters (there's a good reason two of the launch titles will be FPSs) and Platformers (all reports say that Super Mario Galaxy is one of the best titles on the floor).