Support NeoGAF

[DopeyFish]

No kidding. Time for DJ's reality check...

USA:
Sony: 60%
Microsoft: 21%
Nintendo: 19%

Europe:
Sony: 83%
Microsoft: 9%
Nintendo: 8%

Japan:
Sony: 80%
Nintendo: 18%
Microsoft: 2%

Worldwide:
Sony: 70%
Microsoft: 15%
Nintendo: 15%

...the truth is, XBox is doing only about half as well as N64 (number wise, about a third as well in terms of marketshare) in a market that's 20-30% bigger. All it's done is give Sony a stronger lead practically. :/

if you can't do it month-by-month than your argument is useless.

 

[jarrod]

if you can't do it month-by-month than your argument is useless.

What's the advantage of looking at select months over all months? To give some glimmer of hope to comparative Microsoft's Xflop?

Even then, I doubt Xbox at it's best has N64 beat (which was quite competitive with PS1 in it's day, particularly in America).

 

[DopeyFish]

What's the advantage of looking at select months over all months? To give some glimmer of hope to comparative Microsoft's Xflop?

Even then, I doubt Xbox at it's best has N64 beat (which was quite competitive with PS1 in it's day, particularly in America).

Because if for example sony goes broke and pulls out tomorrow, 5 months from now... they will still have a high market share which is wrong.

 

[DarienA]

What's the advantage of looking at select months over all months? To give some glimmer of hope to comparative Microsoft's Xflop?

Even then, I doubt Xbox at it's best has N64 beat (which was quite competitive with PS1 in it's day, particularly in America).

I think Dope wants to see month by month to show that the MS percentages are increasing while the Sony and Nin one's are dropping?

That's my best guess anyway.

Wrong.
But that was already proven.

You know what you're absolutely right the inferior non-online Ghost Recon on the PS2 outsold the Xbox version even though it was released a month later. Since I don't follow the #'s as tightly as I use to I made the assumption that Ghost Recon followed the normal pattern which is to say that there are many more fps on the Xbox because of the built-in XBL capabilities which in turn usually turns in to better sales.

Being on magainze covers != hype
When I look at EGM's hot top ten and see KOTOR2 nowhere to be found or see next to no discussion of KOTOR2 on any forum, then I see no hype.
KOTOR for all of the positive word it received wasn't a massive seller itself. It's been over a year and 2003's GOTY hasn't sold 800k yet.

I'm sorry not everyone adhere's to YOUR specific definition of Hype, and since I don't know YOUR definition I've hype I can only go by how much advertisement in magazines(which are what a majority of the casuals read) look to. With that being the case KOTOR has been feature on the cover and in various previews in various magazines. Since not EVERY upcoming game gets a cover I consider cover to be hype. Massive seller? Where did we become so distored that a title has to sell 800-mil to be consider successful?

Hot Shots Golf 3 outsold Mechassault and we don't consider HSG4 one of PS2 biggest games of '04. enough said.

How exactly does that change the fact that Mechassault is generally considered a sleeper hit? It doesn't.

 

[sonycowboy]

if you can't do it month-by-month than your argument is useless.

De Nile is more than a river in Africa. How can you even argue with those numbers?

PS2 has outsold Xbox 58 million to 15 million since November of 2001 worldwide. It's still regularly being outsold over 4 to 1 in Europe. Do I even need to describe the situation in Japan? The US is the only place where it's competative and Sony has still outsold Microsoft by over 50% YTD, even with the absolute worst lineup of software (saleswise) and the absolute best lineup of Xbox titles and Xbox prematurely dropping their price.

I have no idea what will happen next gen and I believe anything's possible, but to try and declare that the Xbox is some sort of incredible success story is complete hogwash.

 

[sonycowboy]

I think Dope wants to see month by month to show that the MS percentages are increasing while the Sony and Nin one's are dropping?

That's my best guess anyway.

Of course, he'll ignore that facts in my previous post where the PS2 is selling 4 times more than the Xbox in Europe and over 80 times better in Japan. How about we only count sales months where Microsoft actually outsold Sony?

 

[DJ Demon J]

No kidding. Time for DJ's reality check...
...the truth is, XBox is doing only about half as well as N64 (number wise, about a third as well in terms of marketshare) in a market that's 20-30% bigger. All it's done is give Sony a stronger lead practically. :/

Wow, that's some great spin, though I'm surprised you didn't praise Gamecube in that post. First, I said ~30%, I knew over all-time it wasn't 30% but it's been trending higher that way and as I said, IIRC, recent reports (someone else mentioned NPD, so maybe that's where I saw it) gave Xbox a near 30% marketshare.

And if Xbox is doing only about half as well as N64 is, how good is Gamecube doing? Answer: Not Very.

 

[sonycowboy]

Wow, that's some great spin, though I'm surprised you didn't praise Gamecube in that post. First, I said ~30%, I knew over all-time it wasn't 30% but it's been trending higher that way and as I said, IIRC, recent reports (someone else mentioned NPD, so maybe that's where I saw it) gave Xbox a near 30% marketshare.

And if Xbox is doing only about half as well as N64 is, how good is Gamecube doing? Answer: Not Very.

You accuse someone else of spin, when you make a claim that Microsoft has 30% market share which is only true in the most narrow sense of a single months' sales?

As far as Microsoft's incredible momentum, here's a interesting face.

Year 1: 5 million units sold
Year 2: 5 million units sold
Year 3: 5 million units sold.

Anybody want to chart that?

And yes, I know Sony's actually has a decline the past year, but I'm not the one making a case for momentum.

Sony
Year 1: 10 million
Year 2: 20 million
Year 3: 22 million
Year 4: 18 million

 

[Shoryuken]

Wow, that's some great spin, though I'm surprised you didn't praise Gamecube in that post. First, I said ~30%, I knew over all-time it wasn't 30% but it's been trending higher that way and as I said, IIRC, recent reports (someone else mentioned NPD, so maybe that's where I saw it) gave Xbox a near 30% marketshare.

And if Xbox is doing only about half as well as N64 is, how good is Gamecube doing? Answer: Not Very.

:lol

You talk about great spin yet you say Xbox is doing great while the GC is dead, even though their userbases are relatively the same.

 

[DJ Demon J]

Continue to feel free to take my points out of context.

With the undeniable breakout success of Microsoft's Xbox (claiming ~30% marketshare with its first console entry, usurping one former industry leader and veteran console manufacturer), MS and Xbox have emerged as major players for the next generation console war.

The point is, the Xbox has been one of the most successful first consoles from a hardware manufacturer, in an increasingly tough marketplace. The other successful first consoles? NES, PlayStation. Both created industry leaders within a generation. Will Xbox be the leader by the end of this generation? Of course not. But I think it's foolish to write off their success in building marketshare and mindshare when competing against, arguably, one of the world's most powerful consumer electronics brands--which Nintendrones and sonycowboy seem all too eager to do.

 

[sonycowboy]

But I think it's foolish to write off their success in building marketshare and mindshare when competing against, arguably, one of the world's most powerful consumer electronics brands--which Nintendrones and sonycowboy seem all too eager to do.

First, if you've read any of my posts, I have been giving Microsoft all the credit in the world. They've done something, nobody ever expected that they would do and they will be a very serious player in the next generation where anything is possible.

The point is, the Xbox has been one of the most successful first consoles from a hardware manufacturer, in an increasingly tough marketplace. The other successful first consoles? NES, PlayStation. Both created industry leaders within a generation. Will Xbox be the leader by the end of this generation? Of course not.

You left out Atari Who else are you going to compare Microsoft to? Intellivision, Coleco, Sega. I'd hope they'd do better than those. Sega, of course, did great with the Genesis as a second system. So, they're right in the middle of how well a company has done, right?? And yet we should be extolling their grand victory?

Your point about Microsoft is understood. I congratulate them and their success.

 

[Shoryuken]

Continue to feel free to take my points out of context.



The point is, the Xbox has been one of the most successful first consoles from a hardware manufacturer, in an increasingly tough marketplace. The other successful first consoles? NES, PlayStation. Both created industry leaders within a generation. Will Xbox be the leader by the end of this generation? Of course not. But I think it's foolish to write off their success in building marketshare and mindshare when competing against, arguably, one of the world's most powerful consumer electronics brands--which Nintendrones and sonycowboy seem all too eager to do.

Actually the point is the Xbox isn't one of the most successful first consoles ever (at least compared to the NES and PS1). Both the PS1 and NES were market leaders and dominated in marketshare, while the Xbox is struggling for second place. Also note that Sony made a lot of money off of the PS1 and Nintendo made a lot of money off of the NES, while MS is losing billions on the Xbox. Lumping the Xbox in with the PS1 and NES is the same as lumping the Xbox in with the PS2, stupid and nonsensical. Sorry but whether xbots like it or not, the Xbox and GC are interlinked. If the Xbox is a success, then so is the GC. I'd say there both doing average. However in terms of sucess, at least the GC makes Nintendo money, while I can't say the same for MS and the Xbox.

 

[DJ Demon J]

You left out Atari Who else are you going to compare Microsoft to? Intellivision, Coleco, Sega. I'd hope they'd do better than those. Sega, of course, did great with the Genesis as a second system. So, they're right in the middle of how well a company has done, right?? And yet we should be extolling their grand victory?

Your point about Microsoft is understood. I congratulate them and their success.

The point also illustrates that Nintendo has now been outsold in the most important video game industry territory in the world (the US) by two newcomers to the industry that Nintendo revived in 1984. I hope everyone remains cognizant that however strong Sony is now, Nintendo was once just as strong; at the same time, however much ground Xbox is gaining in the past year could easily be lost with blunders like no BC and lack of exclusive content progressing into 2005, 2006 and beyond.

 

[jarrod]

Wow, that's some great spin,

Praise from the master.

though I'm surprised you didn't praise Gamecube in that post.

Why would I? What would that have to do with Xflop? Unlike you, I don't have to bring up the platform in nearly every post.

First, I said ~30%, I knew over all-time it wasn't 30% but it's been trending higher that way and as I said, IIRC, recent reports (someone else mentioned NPD, so maybe that's where I saw it) gave Xbox a near 30% marketshare.

For one month, after numerous high profile releases and yet another price drop in the face of PS2 shortages. I wonder how long until these 'trends' revert back to normal... I'm guessing October.

And if Xbox is doing only about half as well as N64 is, how good is Gamecube doing? Answer: Not Very.

Answer: about half as well also. Truth is, Xbox and GameCube have more or less split N64's fanbase while PS2 is actually building on PS1.... in Microsoft's bid to stop the PlayStation engine and protect their wintel empire/content distribution, they've essentially taken out Sony's only viable competition and allowed the PlayStation brand to get stronger. I sincerely hope round 2 goes better, I'd like nothing better than see Sony (slightly) humbled in consoles (though I'm hoping they take a similar bite out of GameBoy at the same time).

 

[rastex]

I'd ask you to explain how a portable where there is no previous system to be compatible with equates to a console where the predecessor has commonly used components and a standard API, but this is well beyond on your mental capabilities.

Ok listen. The REASON for no backwards compatibility is totally irrelevant. The only thing we're talking about here is Backwards Compatibility and NO BC. Now, what is BC really? It's simply a mechanism whereby a device is able to play a much larger share of games than its "regular" library. That's it. Some systems have this capability, and others don't. I state again: The reason for no BC is irrelevant, whether it's because of a technological reason or by the fact that there's nothing to be BC WITH.

Now do you see the parallel?

Look at P90s post, he understands what I'm saying.

ok... let me try this a different way.

DS will be able to play DS games and GBA games.
PS3 will be able to play PS3 games, and PS2 and PS1 games.

PSP will ONLY be able to play PSP games.
Xenon will ONLY be able to play Xenon games.


Do you get the point now?

Every single argument that is levied against Xenon for not having BC is entirely applicable to the PSP. So for those who think Xenon is going to fail because of lack of BC, then you really have to examine your thoughts about the PSP compared to the DS.

 

[vireland]

It doesn't matter if you spent a lot of money to win, you still win.

Nope. Throwing money at the problem of marketshare helps, but if you make all the wrong moves (like naming games after VP in the company, pricing your CD system at 3x the market, leaving all the great games in Japan, and not getting major support from companies like EA), you'll still lose.

Reference: Turbografx

 

[Fatghost]

Ok listen. The REASON for no backwards compatibility is totally irrelevant. The only thing we're talking about here is Backwards Compatibility and NO BC. Now, what is BC really? It's simply a mechanism whereby a device is able to play a much larger share of games than its "regular" library. That's it. Some systems have this capability, and others don't. I state again: The reason for no BC is irrelevant, whether it's because of a technological reason or by the fact that there's nothing to be BC WITH.

Now do you see the parallel?

Look at P90s post, he understands what I'm saying.

ok... let me try this a different way.

DS will be able to play DS games and GBA games.
PS3 will be able to play PS3 games, and PS2 and PS1 games.

PSP will ONLY be able to play PSP games.
Xenon will ONLY be able to play Xenon games.


Do you get the point now?

Every single argument that is levied against Xenon for not having BC is entirely applicable to the PSP. So for those who think Xenon is going to fail because of lack of BC, then you really have to examine your thoughts about the PSP compared to the DS.

You're missing another point about BC though.


In the case of the PSP, it is an entirely new product line. It starts fresh with no existing fan base or previous system to be compatible with.

In the case of Xenon, it is a successor system. With BC, Xenon has an additional hook to keep Xbox1 customers to upgrade to Xenon over the other next gen systems because Xenon can play their existing library. Without BC, there isn't as much of an incentive for MS' existing fan base to move to Xenon over PS3 or Revolution.

 

[xsarien]

Every single argument that is levied against Xenon for not having BC is entirely applicable to the PSP.

No it can't, because the Xenon is the next iteration of the XBox, what is the PSP following? Nothing.

If the PSP used CD media, then yes, not at least being able to run PS1 games would be a valid criticism to make. Such is the case, it runs UMDs, and is a quasi PS2 platform. What, praytell, would you like to run on it?

 

[rastex]

You're missing another point about BC though.


In the case of the PSP, it is an entirely new product line. It starts fresh with no existing fan base or previous system to be compatible with.

In the case of Xenon, it is a successor system. With BC, Xenon has an additional hook to keep Xbox1 customers to upgrade to Xenon over the other next gen systems because Xenon can play their existing library. Without BC, there isn't as much of an incentive for MS' existing fan base to move to Xenon over PS3 or Revolution.

It's still the same thing. I'll put it mathematically for you because that should make things clearer.

Let's say that I is the extra percentage that will purchase a successor system due to BC. Let P be the population of an existing userbase. Now, the equation for the number of people that are part of the existing userbase that will automatically purchase the successor console based on BC is:

Num = I*P

Now, in Xenon's case, I=0 since there is no BC. So:
Num = I*P = 0*P = 0

In PSP's case there is no existing userbase, and no BC. So:
Num = I*P = 0*0 = 0

See, it's the SAME thing.

Now if we look at DS we have
Num = I*60million (or however number of GBAs have been sold)

and for PS3 we have
Num = I*70million


So now do you see the symmetry in the situations?

The difference between Xenon and the PSP is that there's nothing Sony can do to increase Num, whereas MS can include BC. But the point still remains that for both Xenon and PSP I = 0.

So my question is, why is BC so important to consoles and not handhelds? Because that's really what people are arguing isn't it?

 

[Mooreberg]

There is zero expectation for PSP to be backwards compatible. Why? Because it's completely illogical for a system to be backwards compatible with a predecessor it doesn't have.

XB2 on the other hand is following up a consoles, which, as I said, used common hardware components and DirectX. The entire point of PC-esque hardware and an API like that is so future hardware can work with older software.

Apples and oranges. The only people who are even going to see it as being similar are the one that want to divert negative attention away from XB2, or try to deny the many selling points PSP has (assuming the north american launch price is sane).

 

[P90]

DS will be able to play DS games and GBA games.
PS3 will be able to play PS3 games, and PS2 and PS1 games.

PSP will ONLY be able to play PSP games.
Xenon will ONLY be able to play Xenon games.


You trip up on the "every single argument", as the PSP is a new product with no immediate predecessor, unlike Xenon. Keep with what I bolded of yours, and you can do no wrong. Some others are seem to be overlooking the fact that the DS will have a HUGE library of GBA games to have access to, but credit the PS3 with its BC. Double standard. Blinders.

 

[COCKLES]

Sony are in the not flattering position of being the 'old man' in the console stakes now. The Playstation brand being so '90's doesn't help. Sony will still win out in the next-gen wars, but I expect the share to be closer, something like 40% vs 60%. Will come down to who has the balls - would be a disaster for MS to launch too early...I think Xbox has the branding to go head to head now.

 

[rastex]

P90, good call. I'll leave it at that. And Mooreberg, if you still can't see what I'm trying to say, seriously man... I don't even know.

 

[Mooreberg]

I see what you're saying. And it's a stupid comparison.

 

[Infernodash]

Sony are in the not flattering position of being the 'old man' in the console stakes now. The Playstation brand being so '90's doesn't help. Sony will still win out in the next-gen wars, but I expect the share to be closer, something like 40% vs 60%. Will come down to who has the balls - would be a disaster for MS to launch too early...I think Xbox has the branding to go head to head now.

Sony the old man? LOL LOL LOL

 

[COCKLES]

Sony the old man? LOL LOL LOL

Well the word playstation immediately makes me think of Designers Republic and Nu-Wave logos and the 90's.

 

[border]

I don't really get where the "old man" analogy comes from either....or how people regard the Playstation as being "90's". I really don't think people have the same regard for it as they do Grunge Rock or the Macarena =)

 

[xsarien]

Well the word playstation immediately makes me think of Designers Republic and Nu-Wave logos and the 90's.

It's just you.

 

[Razoric]

Is everyone's Xbox going to blow up when Xbox 2 comes out? I know it would be nice to have BC, but christ it's not THAT big of a deal. I'm more concerned about next generation killer apps. Not old games I can play on my currently existing XBOX.

The ONLY effect it will have is in the very begining because there wont be a lot to choose from. Give it 6 months to a year and BC (or lack thereof) will be long forgotten.

 

[jarrod]

There is zero expectation for PSP to be backwards compatible. Why? Because it's completely illogical for a system to be backwards compatible with a predecessor it doesn't have.

To those halfway informed sure but I can't help but think some consumers will still be surprised when they find out PlayStation Portable won't play their PlayStation/PlayStation 2 games...


...maybe SCEI should've worked out a deal with Bandai to allow WS/WSC game compatability? Then they'd have some Square software anyway.

 

[xsarien]

I'm more concerned about next generation killer apps.

A good game is a good game, regardless of how long ago it came out.

 

[Razoric]

To those halfway informed sure but I can't help but think some consumers will still be surprised when they find out PlayStation Portable won't play their PlayStation/PlayStation 2 games...

Funny you bring that up... there are a couple of friends of mine who STILL think it will play PSOne / PSTwo games everything I've told them it will play brand new PSP games. There will probably be some initial confusion.

 

[Insertia]

Well the word playstation immediately makes me think of Designers Republic and Nu-Wave logos and the 90's.

Yeah, it really is just you.

 

[Razoric]

A good game is a good game, regardless of how long ago it came out.

A good game is a good game no matter what system you play it on. You want to play Halo 2? You want to play Fable? Buy an Xbox.

 

[border]

Well the word playstation immediately makes me think of Designers Republic and Nu-Wave logos and the 90's.

Probably not the best idea to project your own peculiar thought processes onto the population at large....at least if you're trying to predict their actions in the future. To associate a brand or object with a decade generally means it has to have been a huge fad that died out within the decade. Given that "Playstation" held the spotlight as long in the 2000's as it did in the 90's (roughly 4 years in each), I don't see why it'd happen.

Is everyone's Xbox going to blow up when Xbox 2 comes out?

No, but hard drive failure is inevitable given the nature of HDDs. Though the more obvious problem is that most people like to get rid of their old systems when a new one comes out -- extra $$$ and not a lot of space being taken up.

 

[Razoric]

No, but hard drive failure is inevitable given the nature off HDDs. Though the more obvious problem is that most people like to get rid of their old systems when a new one comes out -- extra $$$ and not a lot of space being taken up.

People are jizzing themselves over the PSTwo. What if MS released a mini-Xbox and sold it for 70-100 bucks a pop? Problem solved.

 

[P90]

Sony are in the not flattering position of being the 'old man' in the console stakes now. The Playstation brand being so '90's doesn't help. Sony will still win out in the next-gen wars, but I expect the share to be closer, something like 40% vs 60%. Will come down to who has the balls - would be a disaster for MS to launch too early...I think Xbox has the branding to go head to head now.

that is a marketing tact that MS could take, "Playstation. How 90's" or "Xenon: System for the Now Generation". That kind of stuff got Sony where they are today. But, Sega did that stuff as well. Look what it got them.

Like I said earlier, MS has done a great job of getting mindshare this generation. Despite this mindshare, it has only sold as much as the ill-reputed (by the angst ridden) GCN. That is no victory or even impressive feat, given MS's history in gaming and $50+ Billion resources or in comparing prior companies first efforts going into the console market.

I still see Nintendo having about 15-20% next gen. Their first party titles and family friendly titles will guarantee that. There will ALWAYS be that market.

 

[sonycowboy]

Is everyone's Xbox going to blow up when Xbox 2 comes out? I know it would be nice to have BC, but christ it's not THAT big of a deal. I'm more concerned about next generation killer apps. Not old games I can play on my currently existing XBOX.

The ONLY effect it will have is in the very begining because there wont be a lot to choose from. Give it 6 months to a year and BC (or lack thereof) will be long forgotten.

Backwards compatability is a big deal. You can make all the arguments you'd like, but for a variety of reasons, it hits a cord with consumers.

1) It is huge for marketing.

2) It helps keep sales going late in a products life. Would you buy a VHS tape, when a DVD player is right around the corner? I know it's not quite comparable, but the same thoughts enter people's mind. I can buy this game today and it won't be "useless" next year when I have my new system.

3) Assuming, you held out for a given system, you can buy it's successor and still enjoy all the games you missed. I'd imagine that Halo, Halo 2, and several others would sell pretty well on Xbox 2, even when Halo 3 hits. Hell, look at Halo now, 3 years after it was released. Especially to PS2 owners who never got the Xbox.

I know that I've picked up a ton of PSOne RPG's since the PS2 has been launched. Maybe more than I bought when it was actually the top system.

I don't know if it will be a make or break, but it does make a difference and it will factor into people's decisions.

That being said, a company needs to weigh how much time and resources they're going to pour into making BC a reality. It makes the next system more expensive and that's exactly what you're trying to avoid. So, you have to say, is it worth the effort?

 

[Mooreberg]

To those halfway informed sure but I can't help but think some consumers will still be surprised when they find out PlayStation Portable won't play their PlayStation/PlayStation 2 games...

If they ran on the same disc format than I'd agree people would probably expect it to play the games they already have. As it stands now, thinking a PSP would run a PlayStation game is like thinking you can cram a VHS tape into a DVD player tray actually get opening credits.

If Microsoft was using some type of radically new disc format that made DVD-Rom compatability impossible, then the two systems would be in a similar situation. But as of now, both BRD and HD-DVD are backwards compatible. The issue is going to hang on whether or not Microsoft can incorporate some type of emulation software that can run the NV specific graphics effects. There's some company that claims they have software Microsoft can use, I guess we'll have to wait and see whether or not it gets implemented. You know they're going to include DVD movie playback via remote control purchase. If they can't make the system compatible with games that were designed for an x86 architecture, than they weren't looking too far ahead when they drafted the initial hardware designs.

 

[open_mouth_]

The heat is on, on the street
Inside your head, on every beat
And the beat's so loud, deep inside
The pressure's high, just to stay alive
'Cause the heat is on
Oh-wo-ho, oh-wo-ho

 

[jarrod]

If they ran on the same disc format than I'd agree people would probably expect it to play the games they already have. As it stands now, thinking a PSP would run a PlayStation game is like thinking you can cram a VHS tape into a DVD player tray actually get opening credits.

If Microsoft was using some type of radically new disc format that made DVD-Rom compatability impossible, then the two systems would be in a similar situation. But as of now, both BRD and HD-DVD are backwards compatible. The issue is going to hang on whether or not Microsoft can incorporate some type of emulation software that can run the NV specific graphics effects. There's some company that claims they have software Microsoft can use, I guess we'll have to wait and see whether or not it gets implemented. You know they're going to include DVD movie playback via remote control purchase. If they can't make the system compatible with games that were designed for an x86 architecture, than they weren't looking too far ahead when they drafted the initial hardware designs.

Again, all that makes sense to someone halfway informed but don't you think there's a good number of consumers out there expecting a "new PlayStation" to play their "old PlayStation" games? How many consumers know what UMD is?

 

[border]

People are jizzing themselves over the PSTwo. What if MS released a mini-Xbox and sold it for 70-100 bucks a pop?

Not really, I don't think. People just don't want to have 5 different game boxes all strewn about the TV or clumped in the closet or crammed into an entertainment center.

If the PS2 had not been backwards compatible, I don't think many people would have really just gone out and bought a PSOne....they would have trashed the old system and the games that go along with it. Plus I'm not sure how "miniature" Xbox can get, given that there is no way to shrink a hard drive (as Sony seems to have acknowledged with PSTwo design).

 

[Go Go Ackman!]

In conclusion, xbox sucks shit.

 

[Razoric]

So let me ask you this. If Xbox 2 came out, had Halo 3, Perfect Dark 0, Fable 2, KOTOR 3, racing games, blah whatever games you like... you are telling me you wont buy it because it cant play old games? How many people will not buy it because of that? Not many. Like I said it will hurt Xbox 2 in the beginning but once the hits start rolling in it wont make a damn bit a difference.

 

[P90]

Again, all that makes sense to someone halfway informed but don't you think there's a good number of consumers out there expecting a "new PlayStation" to play their "old PlayStation" games? How many consumers know what UMD is?

Just think about parents of kids wanting a PSP. Of course, they'll see the $299 price tag and buy a GBA.

 

[border]

Again, all that makes sense to someone halfway informed but don't you think there's a good number of consumers out there expecting a "new PlayStation" to play their "old PlayStation" games? How many consumers know what UMD is?

Nobody will expect a handheld system to play console games because it's never really been the standard outside of a few failed aberrations (Nomad, SMS Game Gear Adapter).

 

[jarrod]

Just think about parents of kids wanting a PSP. Of course, they'll see the $299 price tag and buy a GBA.

That's not much of a concern as Sony seems to be aiming at double dipping their current fanbase moreso... risky imo, but it might work.

 

[DarienA]

Again, all that makes sense to someone halfway informed but don't you think there's a good number of consumers out there expecting a "new PlayStation" to play their "old PlayStation" games? How many consumers know what UMD is?

Most people (US) barely or don't even know the thing exists yet. Until Sony releases pricing info, etc magazines and then store employees aren't going to go into detail about it either.

Suffice to say way before the unit goes on sale people will know it is a completely "separate" machine from the home consoles.

 

[Infernodash]

So let me ask you this. If Xbox 2 came out, had Halo 3, Perfect Dark 0, Fable 2, KOTOR 3, racing games, blah whatever games you like... you are telling me you wont buy it because it cant play old games? How many people will not buy it because of that? Not many. Like I said it will hurt Xbox 2 in the beginning but once the hits start rolling in it wont make a damn bit a difference.

To bad none of those games are launch titles or you would of made a good point. I bought my ps2 day 1, and I didnt even buy a game for it until zoe came out. So that should give you an example of what the people of this board is trying to say.

 

[jarrod]

Nobody will expect a handheld system to play console games because it's never really been the standard outside of a few failed aberrations (Nomad, SMS Game Gear Adapter).

So you don't think any consumers will be surprised? None of those 72 million PS2 owners or 100+ million PS/PSone owners? They won't see "PlayStation" advertised and think it'll play old games?