TVG has predicted that Playstation PS3 sales are going to overtake Xbox 360 sales in January 2011. Using the flakiest of science. All they have done is to extend sales projections graphs. To extrapolate a trend. Why this is so wrong:
- If you do a graph of ice cream sales in a April, May and June, then extend it you will find that you are going to have absolutely enormous ice cream sales in November.
- The graphs of every consoles sales in every generation fit under a curve, not a straight line. Why should this generation be different and follow a straight line?
- Sales of consoles are demand elastic for price. The cheaper they are the more you will sell, all other things being equal. Microsoft have demonstrated that they can sell the 360 vastly cheaper than Sony can sell the PS3. This is because the 360 is a far more elegant design and because Microsoft have lots of money whilst Sony don’t.
- The Xbox 360 has an effective relaunch coming up with the introduction of Natal, which offers a step change in home console capabilities. This could very well make the 360 a must have device.
- On the other hand the PS3 is about to be relaunched as the PS3 Slim at a lower price and Sony have three MMOs coming to the machine that could attract massive audiences.
- Gamasutra have analysed the methodology and are also pretty scathing.
If you really want to know what the comparative sales of these two consoles you would be far better off starting a flame war on a forum about it. You would still be wrong, but at least you would be having some fun.
Permalink
And you are somehow right I take it!? I get your point about the methodology used to show PS3 sales overtaking X360, it’s ridiculous, but at the same time you rattle off points that make it seem as though you are having a sort of love affair with the 360.
Natal could completely flop out of the gate, or it could be gangbusters to the casual audience(doubtful), but it will likely alienate the 360’s Core audience if the latter happens. If Microsoft starts going full tilt casual and loses the core then they are no better off than Nintendo. I think you are greatly underestimating what a significant PS3 price cut and slimmer console will do for Sony, and that’s just sad.
And personally I think both consoles have a very nice aesthetic to them, but the 360 is no more better looking than the PS3, and saying otherwise is kinda silly. Especially when one considers that is probably the very last reason someone buys a console.
Flat out ignoring facts is also stupid, it says a lot that Sony managed to pretty much knock out an almost dead even FQ with Microsoft at double the price. A $299 PS3 will obliterate the 360, period end of story. Microsoft may be willing to continue to leed money for their console but that’s the dumbest thing in the world to do, so if they counter a cut if Sony does one they will continue to sell at a loss. That is of course unless Natal is really going to usher in a ‘Half-gen reboot’ for the 360, and it’s super cheap and sells extremely well.
In the end I think Sony’s plan is working out pretty well, and will continue to keep them in the ‘game’, so to speak, for many years to come. Microsoft I just don’t see going past one more gen, esp. once the PS3 passes it and leaves them in the dust…again.
Permalink
Look out Pachter, Makadian is here . . . . . . . . . .
Permalink
@woodins, haha, you said what I was thinking.
Except I am not sure Pachter was a Sony fanboy.
I say you are a fanboy Makadian as you seem as though you are being attacked or that Bruce is biased toward a system you don’t have as much faith in. Most things are really just speculation and informed guessing.