Dunno why BD folks are so up on attach rates when a large chunk of PS3 setups look like this. Now, after watching TD on composite, do you really think this person'll go out and shell out $40 msrp for one BD, or just shell out $20 more for a next-gen game?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1_hK3hfM7E

This isn't peculiar either. My brother has two friends who are 14 and have the exact same setups in their room. I doubt they'd allow their parents to borrow the shiny new toy to watch films.

Format partiality aside, I respect most of you guys' projections on how the PS3 will impact this so called war. But remember, most members of AVS are HT enthusiasts and most indeed have HDTVs in the gaming forum. You just can't argue for the efficacy of PS3 attach rates when it comes to 4:3 tube owners.

There are also a large chunk of PS3 owners w/ HDTVs, but 4:3 tube owners are by far more representative of the pool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d_ljeGEE2Y
"too bad the ps3 doesn't come w/ the HD-DVD components...they give you the regular red/yellow/white"....from a guy using a 4:3 SDTV. I'm willin to bet my copy of Se7en on my old 40" Trinitron via Component is superior to Talladega on this setup. 480i vs 480p; composite vs. component - you do the math

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlojjzb640I
guess those units under the Christmas trees have finally been unpacked, eh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dwuj0QWYeE4
chalk up another one for 4:3

Well, I guess Sony did reach their target demographic of 14-20yr olds; trouble is, it's kinda hard to ask your parents to shell out ~$1500 for an HDTV after having them spend upwards of $600 on the console itself.

I think that was a small mistake on their part. But it also gets the players out their so the sales might be their. The problom is you have to to get blu_rays HD-DVDs in all your bargain stores and at good prices. At the moment only a few bargin stores sell them. Those that do have a very limited selection.

Places like BBY and CCY have high prices. The DVDs often overpowerr the HD discs ten fold. How can you sell a new BD/HD-DVD for $24-40 and sell the DVD at 15-20 opening week.
I myself will now only order from amazon as they are so much cheeper. I was going to start buying at BBY on new HDDVDs. But even their free shiping is fast. I got my first 2 discs in 5 days even with xmas shiping. Just amazing.


But I think a lot of pepole will hook up ther new Ps3 via commposite. Even if they have HD set. Many may just replace the ps2. Which uses primarily composite. Sure the games will look better. Even some blu_rays at 480i. But the small improvment at that res does not over come the 50% price hike on the discs. If I had a PS3 and $60 I'd get a game before I'd get 11 /2 -2 movies.

in strictly a gaming sense(and that's the real demographic, unfortunately for Sony), the PS3 provides a vast improvement on 480i over the ps2

Target demographic for PS3 (and Xbox 360) is 18-35. Then that's the problem for Sony right there. Anybody in that demographic then is either smart enough to own a 360 instead, understand what's better about HD DVD instead, etc (especially at this point, given what's been provided). Or they are rich enough to own both.

Frankly though, the 14-20 demographic previously mentioned is where Sony is probably getting the majority of their sales traction on the PS3 right now. I mean that's where most of your confused, misinformed, unaware, or blindly loyal people exist for a maligned product such as this (compared to the competition).

And too bad for Sony that those people also either don't own an HDTV, or are fine with SD DVD, or don't even care or "get" Blu-ray anyway.

Then that's the problem for Sony right there. Anybody in that demographic then is either smart enough to own a 360 instead, understand what's better about HD DVD instead, etc (especially at this point, given what's been provided). Or they are rich enough to own both.

Frankly though, the 14-20 demographic previously mentioned is where Sony is probably getting the majority of their sales traction on the PS3 right now. I mean that's where most of your confused, misinformed, unaware, or blindly loyal people exist for a maligned product such as this (compared to the competition).

And too bad for Sony that those people also either don't own an HDTV, or are fine with SD DVD, or don't even care or "get" Blu-ray anyway.

You are right on point. When i got my 360 it was on launch day. I had a 50 digital Phillpis CRT RPtv. And I waited a hole year for my 1080P set. I have a bigger tv in my bedroom. I dont think they will spen 30 bucks for Blu ray movies.

Then that's the problem for Sony right there. Anybody in that demographic then is either smart enough to own a 360 instead, understand what's better about HD DVD instead, etc (especially at this point, given what's been provided). Or they are rich enough to own both.

Frankly though, the 14-20 demographic previously mentioned is where Sony is probably getting the majority of their sales traction on the PS3 right now. I mean that's where most of your confused, misinformed, unaware, or blindly loyal people exist for a maligned product such as this (compared to the competition).

And too bad for Sony that those people also either don't own an HDTV, or are fine with SD DVD, or don't even care or "get" Blu-ray anyway.

Is that why PS3 is selling 2x more than xbox360 when xbox360 first launched in 2005 ?

Is that why PS3 is selling 2x more than xbox360 when xbox360 first launched in 2005 ?

No thats because Sony has 2x the amount of units to sell. No one is doubting the MS oops with releasing too early. Problem is they had no nexgen competetion to worry about for almost a year so no one said anything about it....

Sony isn't exactly doing so well with PS3 sales these days.

http://www.hdgamenews.com/2006/12/5-out-of-7-playstation-3-consoles.html

The reality is that the PS3 is a game console, is marketed as a game console, and right now is selling badly as a game console. The arguments about PS3 as a Blu-Ray player are worse than pointless, because the PS3 is meant to be a game console first and a Blu-Ray player second, if at all. I don't know if this is a failure of marketing or something else, but right now, nobody outside of AVS Forums even thinks of the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player, they think of it as a game console, and rightfully so, because despite what the Blu-Ray fanboys here may think, the PS3 is a game console, and so is the Xbox 360.

face it, there a huge number of ps3 and xbox360 also, owners who will be using 4:3 CRTs, and they'll still get a substantial improvement in gaming. But for movie content on BD, there is virtually no improvement - nobody in their right mind will spend $40 msrp on ANY barebonesBD title when the SD(se packed w/ extras) can be had for less than half.

What I'm trying to say is, getting a ps3 for SD gaming is not as bad as it sounds. But for BD films, it's nonsensical.

On the other hand, most who buy the HD-DVD drive will have HDTVs, b/c most ppl actually do a bit of reading before spending $200 on an add-on. There is consensus agreement wherever you look on the internet that an HD source fed into SD will not be worth it especially for film content.

Sony isn't exactly doing so well with PS3 sales these days.

http://www.hdgamenews.com/2006/12/5-out-of-7-playstation-3-consoles.html

The reality is that the PS3 is a game console, is marketed as a game console, and right now is selling badly as a game console. The arguments about PS3 as a Blu-Ray player are worse than pointless, because the PS3 is meant to be a game console first and a Blu-Ray player second, if at all. I don't know if this is a failure of marketing or something else, but right now, nobody outside of AVS Forums even thinks of the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player, they think of it as a game console, and rightfully so, because despite what the Blu-Ray fanboys here may think, the PS3 is a game console, and so is the Xbox 360.

Are you serious? You called that news? PS3 is selling great, no matter how you spin it the number doesn't lie. It's more expensive, has more competetions and still sell 2X more than xbox360 when it first launched. Xbox360 is the one that's selling poorly and keeps on failing to meet analyst's expectations.

yea, I don't think anyone would really say PS3 was faltering. But the terrain has shifted dramatically from Gen6. What continues to amaze me is how 360's fanbase is ever more loyal and well-established.

Anyway, let's stick to attach rates. Can anyone challenge this claim? :: Most ps3 owners are using 4:3 SDTVs - they'll see a great improvement in their games due to the CPU and GPU but for BD content, there is virtually no improvement other than a cleaner source.

Demographically, it's still 14-20yr olds. While for the 360 add-on, consumers already know exaclty what their purchasing and know that an HDTV is required or don't bother. They WILL buy films and have high attach rates

Ive yet to lay my eyes on a PS3 that can be purchased in Southern California. I call stores all the time, make random visits, they are IMPOSSIBLE to find. Maybe in some hick county in the midwest theres 2-3 on a shelf, but thats not how it is for everyone else. Ive been looking since launch and still, NONE. Every place i go, the workers tell me the same thing, they sell out immediately. Theres never been one just sitting there.

However, there tons and tons of xbox 360s in stock at every store, and ive yet to witness a person buy one in front of my eyes during this holiday season. Im sure they sold well, but the system is for the most hardcore of gamers. Casual gamers and Hardcore gamers alike want a PS3.

Ive yet to lay my eyes on a PS3 that can be purchased in Southern California. I call stores all the time, make random visits, they are IMPOSSIBLE to find. Maybe in some hick county in the midwest theres 2-3 on a shelf, but thats not how it is for everyone else. Ive been looking since launch and still, NONE. Every place i go, the workers tell me the same thing, they sell out immediately. Theres never been one just sitting there.

However, there tons and tons of xbox 360s in stock at every store, and ive yet to witness a person buy one in front of my eyes during this holiday season. Im sure they sold well, but the system is for the most hardcore of gamers. Casual gamers and Hardcore gamers alike want a PS3.

Be careful with calling stores...I called Best Buy and they told me they didn't have any PS3s or Nintendo Wiis in stock. I walked into that same Best Buy an hour later and they had plenty of Wiis and I walked out with a PS3 straight from the floor.

As for the 360, I would disagree that it's just for hardcore gamers. A lot of casual gamers picked it up this season since the PS3 was not fully available. I think casual gamers are turned off by the PS3 because of the price and game selection.

You are too hilarious. Wouldn't the smart person buy a 20GB PS3 at $499 over a 20GB Xbox 360 w/ HD DVD add-on for $599?
So I'm going to take a wild guess that you are between the ages of 14 and 20.

well, that's true, but visit any gaming forum and you'll hardly find PS3 proponents arguing it's better pricing. On the other side, the 360 proponents(me included) would argue that it's got a great batch of HD games now - don't have to wait 6 months to a year for highly anticipated formerly PS exclusive titles.

Again, which ever format you support, what are your projections on the purported ps3 attach rates given the unduring popularity of tube sets? I'm sure most would upgrade to HDTVs if budget allowed but I'm getting the impression that at this point, they're complacent

Maybe in some hick county in the midwest .....
.

This cracks me up. Why do you think you are so much better than people in the midwest. We are just as sophisticated as you but we have the sense to not overpay for everything and desire some elbow room. Not my fault I was born here...you are NOT better than us! Hehe.

The percentage of people with PS3s who also own HDTVs is going to be the same as for 360 because they both appeal to the same demographic. It is a none-issue in the long term.

EXACTLY! What possible reason is there that 360 owners would be more likely to own an HDTV or watch HD content than PS3 owners? I've asked this question at least three times in the past in different threads and not one HD-DVD supporter has even TRIED to answer it. They just pretend I didn't ask it. Why? Because there is no reliable evidence or logical explanation that will support the belief that 360 owners have a higher HDTV ownership rate than PS3 owners. HD-DVDwonder, I'd love for you to take a crack at this question since you started this thread.

The pro 360 group also ignores the fact that there is a sizeable group of PS3 owners (as evidenced by multiple polls in this very forum) that bought a PS3 primarily or exclusively for Blu-ray playback. For this group of consumers, the XBox has ZERO appeal compared to the PS3. Folks like me would never consider a device with no HDMI and limited audio support. Hell, even I had scratched the PS3 of my list until they announced the HDMI 1.3 support. And polls on gaming sites have zero representation for people in MY demographic.

That video on Youtube only means something if you can guarantee me that similar scenes with XBox 360s and 4:3 TVs don't exist.

If it's 360 owner vs. PS3 owner, then I agree with you; I see no reason why the percentages of HDTV ownership or HD movie playback would be any different from one group to the other.

However, if we are comparing 360 *Add-On* purchasers vs. PS3 purchasers, that's a different comparison, and I would expect the HDTV-ownership and HD-playback intent of the former group to be virtually 100% (since the only reason to purchase the 360 Add-On is for HD-DVD playback), whereas the percentage of the PS3 purchasers will be lower, since it includes setups similar to the one linked in the OP, as well as PS3s purchased solely for gaming.

If it's 360 owner vs. PS3 owner, then I agree with you; I see no reason why the percentages of HDTV ownership or HD movie playback would be any different from one group to the other.

However, if we are comparing 360 *Add-On* purchasers vs. PS3 purchasers, that's a different comparison, and I would expect the HDTV-ownership and HD-playback intent of the former group to be virtually 100% (since the only reason to purchase the 360 Add-On is for HD-DVD playback),

Factually, everything you're saying is correct. My objection is with the use of the "Add-on attach rate vs. overall PS3 attach rate" argument itself, which is meaningless. If you think about it logically, this comparison is hugely unfair to the PS3 from a statistical standpoint. Obviously, the only reason to buy the add-on is to watch HD-DVDs, but this ignores the fact that 100 percent of add-on owners only account for a small percentage of TOTAL XBox 360 owners. It looks good number-wise to say that 100 percent of add-on owners will watch HD-DVDs on an HDTV, but does this translate to a higher percentage of XBox 360 owners watching HD discs on HDTVs than PS3 owners? Of course not. This is why nobody even tries to answer the question I posed above, despite my asking it time after time. The only fair comparison is the percentage of Xbox owners willing to BUY the add-on versus the percentage of PS3 owners who intend to WATCH Blu-ray movies. Don't penalize PS3 owners just because we don't HAVE to buy a separate drive to watch Blu-ray movies.

whereas the percentage of the PS3 purchasers will be lower, since it includes setups similar to the one linked in the OP, as well as PS3s purchased solely for gaming.

Are you implying that only PS3 owners have setups like the one in the Youtube video? Do all XBox 360 owners use their game consoles with high-end TVs? Unless there's some evidence that the percentage of PS3 owners with crappy systems outnumbers 360 owners with crappy systems, it's a wash. If anything, I would think that 360s are more likely to be used in budget systems because of the lower cost of entry. Also, unlike the PS3, which is ready for Blu-ray movies out-of-the-box, it's seems more likely that XBox 360 would be purchased solely for gaming. I personally know several people with high-end home theater systems who have bought the PS3 primarily as an inexpensive Blu-ray player (some of them on this forum). Do you know anyone who's not interested in gaming who's bought a 360 for the same reason?

I personally know several people with high-end home theater systems who have bought the PS3 primarily as an inexpensive Blu-ray player (some of them on this forum). Do you know anyone who's not interested in gaming who's bought a 360 for the same reason?

In fact, I bought a 360 as a media center more than a year ago, before I ever knew there would be an HD DVD drive. I bought it to stream HDTV, both live and recorded OTA, wirelessly from an HTPC in another room. I personally know several people who did the same thing for the same reason.

I do play games, but I've spent far more hours streaming HD shows and movies via my Xbox.

The $199 add-on was a welcome surprise, and the best AV bargain of recent years. The addition of downloadable HD content on Xbox Live makes the 360 a more complete home theater solution than the PS3, IMHO.

All of you guys are so much fun! I think it is pretty simple. What ever the total amount of 360 add ons sold is will be equal to the attach rate for the PS3 and BD playback. Easy enough?

I really look at both systems as a wash. When you get down to it, they look the same and play the same. What are we arguing here? Details? What is going to sell each system is games. You like Halo, you get the 360. You like MGS, you get the PS3. WE are the exception. We have more money and other priorities...namely HD movies.

All of you who are arguing that one system is better than the other, ask yourself this. How many of us support both at AVS? I would say more that you think. And if you only support one, ask yourself this question. Go to the mirror if you have to. Do I really hate the other gaming console so much that I will spend days of my life fighting tooth and nail on some forum to prove my point, or is it because I can't/won't support both and I need to justify my purchases to make myself feel better.

When it really comes down to HD DVD, BD, the 360, PS3, blah, blah, blah...does it really matter to you, personally how many have sold? How the stock is going? Exclusive games? Exclusive movies? Does it really matter to you? If it deos, you have more issues than any game system game fix.

In fact, I bought a 360 as a media center more than a year ago, before I ever knew there would be an HD DVD drive. I bought it to stream HDTV, both live and recorded OTA, wirelessly from an HTPC in another room. I personally know several people who did the same thing for the same reason.

I do play games, but I've spent far more hours streaming HD shows and movies via my Xbox.

The $199 add-on was a welcome surprise, and the best AV bargain of recent years. The addition of downloadable HD content on Xbox Live makes the 360 a more complete home theater solution than the PS3, IMHO.

Which is why I specified Blu-ray disc playback in my post. This thread (as do most 360 vs. PS3 discussions on AVS Forum) deals with the two platforms' functionality as HD disc players. I never disputed the 360's usefulness as a media center, although it's too early to say that the PS3 won't have much of the same functionality eventually.

But even conceding 360's superiority as a media center, it requires compromises in certain areas that I'm just not willing to make. For example, one thing that you can't do (and will never be able to do) with the current 360 and its "optical output only" audio capability is to feed Dolby TrueHD at it's highest quality. It's always downsampled to standard Dolby Digital. In fact, the 360's lack of an HDMI output hobbles it's audio potential considerably. It can't pass multi-channel uncompressed audio (which is done via HDMI on the PS3), and it will never be able to pass DTS-HD Lossless Master Audio even though it is becoming almost a standard feature on new Fox releases. If you have even a moderately high-end multi-channel home theater audio system, this is a HUGE limitation. For me, this makes it a far from "complete" home theater solution. In terms of my personal priorities for video AND audio capability, the PS3 is a more complete package.

EXACTLY! What possible reason is there that 360 owners would be more likely to own an HDTV or watch HD content than PS3 owners? I've asked this question at least three times in the past in different threads and not one HD-DVD supporter has even TRIED to answer it. They just pretend I didn't ask it. Why? Because there is no reliable evidence or logical explanation that will support the belief that 360 owners have a higher HDTV ownership rate than PS3 owners. HD-DVDwonder, I'd love for you to take a crack at this question since you started this thread.

The pro 360 group also ignores the fact that there is a sizeable group of PS3 owners (as evidenced by multiple polls in this very forum) that bought a PS3 primarily or exclusively for Blu-ray playback. For this group of consumers, the XBox has ZERO appeal compared to the PS3. Folks like me would never consider a device with no HDMI and limited audio support. Hell, even I had scratched the PS3 of my list until they announced the HDMI 1.3 support. And polls on gaming sites have zero representation for people in MY demographic.

That video on Youtube only means something if you can guarantee me that similar scenes with XBox 360s and 4:3 TVs don't exist.

I've yet to encounter one 360 Addon owner without an HDTV. Recent numbers show 42,000 - that's not bad. Can't deny that both are gaming consoles first and foremost - and most consumers will see it that way. But those who purchased or are thinking of purchasing 360 add-ons are specifically looking for an HD DVD player, hence very nice attach rates, despite the lowly 42,000 figure. There has been and still is alot of buzz about the drive on XboxLive

Even though Dpowers took a cheap shot at me in another thread regarding another forum we both participate in, I agree with him. In the end it will be a wash. Game consoles and gamers will not decide the Great Format War in the end. Especially since the PS3 is being increasingly regarded as a poorer pure gaming console than the 360, which is death to a machine that is marketed and sold as a game console.

The 360 requires an add-on, but for existing 360 owners (all 10 million of them), the incremental cost to add HD DVD playback is only $200. The PS3, by cramming the Blu-Ray player into the console and eliminating the option for gamers to pay less if they aren't interested in Blu-Ray movies right away, is saddled with a higher initial price. Plus the buzz around PS3 in all gaming circles is increasingly universally negative, which never helps matters. So I think between the 360 requiring an add-on and the PS3 being lambasted by gamers as a game console, I doubt very much gamers will decide the Great Format War.

Especially since the PS3 is being increasingly regarded as a poorer pure gaming console than the 360, which is death to a machine that is marketed and sold as a game console. Absolute rubbish. The only people who consider it a poorer choice than the 360 are those who lack the foresight to look beyond the launch titles and those who believe the online capabilities were frozen on November 17th. The PS2 had an equally pathetic launch, but look at how that turned out. Motorstorm and GTHD have already shown that it has some mighty fine potential, despite coming out little more than a month after launch, and there's a lot more yet to come.

Then of course you have to remember that the PS3 has only been launched in two regions so far and has yet to hit Europe and Australasia, both notoriously big Playstation supporters. People tend to forget that there's a world beyond the US borders clamoring for HD.

This cracks me up. Why do you think you are so much better than people in the midwest. We are just as sophisticated as you but we have the sense to not overpay for everything and desire some elbow room. Not my fault I was born here...you are NOT better than us! Hehe.

You need to relax and calm down. When I read his post I don't feel that tone at all. Here in Canada we call certain far away places (from a densely populated Toronto) as "the boonies". It only means "a place where it's far away from the densely populated town".

Of course if you want to take things only in a negative way all you see is negative.

Absolute rubbish. The only people who consider it a poorer choice than the 360 are those who lack the foresight to look beyond the launch titles and those who believe the online capabilities were frozen on November 17th.

Ahhhh, the old "wait-until/potential" argument. Gotta love the BD crowd.

well, i've seen very many extensive BD and 360 comparisons and all conlude w/ dispelling the PS3 as a jump from 360 - most even acknowledge that the 360's GPU is half a generation ahead of the PS3s, nevermind it's ease in development. So many formerly exclusive titles coming to my 360 this spring, guess I don't need a ps3 after all.

If you're at all a serious gamer then you've been tracking the hundreds of reputable game sites over the past few months. It all comes down to: the 360 is the industry standard, and it's "wait and see" for the ps3 to catch up. hmmm....sounds familiar doesn't it?

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1

In fact, I bought a 360 as a media center more than a year ago, before I ever knew there would be an HD DVD drive. I bought it to stream HDTV, both live and recorded OTA, wirelessly from an HTPC in another room. I personally know several people who did the same thing for the same reason.

I do play games, but I've spent far more hours streaming HD shows and movies via my Xbox.

The $199 add-on was a welcome surprise, and the best AV bargain of recent years. The addition of downloadable HD content on Xbox Live makes the 360 a more complete home theater solution than the PS3, IMHO.

Even though I bought my 360 for some of those same reasons, I would tend to think that more people would buy a PS3 as a "cheap" Blu-Ray player vs the 360 to stream and download media. I think the average consumer understands just popping in a disc to view a movie more than hooking up the 360 to your network and streaming media or downloading media to a hard drive to rent or own.

Absolute rubbish. The only people who consider it a poorer choice than the 360 are those who lack the foresight to look beyond the launch titles and those who believe the online capabilities were frozen on November 17th. The PS2 had an equally pathetic launch, but look at how that turned out. Motorstorm and GTHD have already shown that it has some mighty fine potential, despite coming out little more than a month after launch, and there's a lot more yet to come.

Then of course you have to remember that the PS3 has only been launched in two regions so far and has yet to hit Europe and Australasia, both notoriously big Playstation supporters. People tend to forget that there's a world beyond the US borders clamoring for HD.

Even though I think it's unfair for people to compare the PS3 to the 360 which has a pretty nice head start, it's still going to happen. After all the hype and the waiting, the PS3 is still not a better gaming choice than the 360 simply because of the TITLES. Most people don't want to plop down $500-$600 for the "potential". Speaking as someone who has both, I am way more excited about gaming on my 360 vs my PS3 when looking at present and future titles. I would imagine most in the market for a new console feel the same way.

I've yet to encounter one 360 Addon owner without an HDTV. Recent numbers show 42,000 - that's not bad. Can't deny that both are gaming consoles first and foremost - and most consumers will see it that way. But those who purchased or are thinking of purchasing 360 add-ons are specifically looking for an HD DVD player, hence very nice attach rates, despite the lowly 42,000 figure. There has been and still is alot of buzz about the drive on XboxLive

Please read post #22 regarding my feelings about comparing the attach rates of the add-on versus attach rates of the PS3. The bottom line is that the add-on is an optional accessory, it's not a platform. So comparing the two as indicators of each platform's popularity as HD disc players makes no sense. I hate cliches, but it's the most blatant example of apples and oranges that I can imagine.

Let me put it another way. Suppose you have two different makes and models of cars. Both have similar or equal specifications in terms of automotive performance. However, "Car A" (XBox 360) comes only with a cassette player while "Car B" (PS3) comes with a CD player. If 5 percent of Car A owners go out and buy CD head units (HD-DVD add-ons) to install in their cars, we can assume that the CD attach rate for these owners will be 100 percent, right? But it still means that only 5 percent of all Car A owners are listening to CDs in their car.

This does NOT mean that a higher percentage of Car A owners now listen to CDs than Car B owners, which is essentially the argument that people who use the add-on versus PS3 attach rate argument are trying to make. Isn't it more likely that the percentage of Car B owners who are listening to CDs is at equal to or higher than Car A? After all, maybe there are Car B owners who never owned a CD but decide to go out and buy some since they have the player in their car anyway. Their only additional investment is the cost of the CDs. Also consider tha fact that there are people (like myself), who decided on Car B primarily BECAUSE it came with a CD player as standard equipment.

This all goes back to my question in post #20 asking for a logical explanation as to why XBox 360 owners would be more likely to watch HD discs than PS3 owners. The question remains unanswered, and it's telling that no one even attampts to address it. Instead we keep going back to add-on attach rates like a broken record, even though it's obvious to anyone who thinks about it rationally that these numbers mean nothing in terms of the success of one platform over the other for HD disc playback.

Ahhhh, the old "wait-until/potential" argument. Gotta love the BD crowd.Spoken like a non-gamer unfamiliar with the realities of console development.

Better games will come, as they always do once developers get used to the tools and techniques required to get what they want out of the system, and firmware updates will add features and fix bugs. The PSP has already shown the commitment Sony have when it comes to these updates. Since v1.0 they've added (off the top of my head):

Web browser
PS1 emulator
Remote play functionality for remotely viewing and controlling your PS3 and it's output
Location Free Player
WPA support
Music visualiser
WMA support
Flash support
MJPEG Support
The ability to use an attached camera
GPS support
RSS Support

Not bad for a handheld. This, combined with the stream of PS3 updates already released and the massive March firmware update coming soon, is a pretty good indicator of why laughing off the whole "wait-until/potential" argument is a little short-sighted.

If it's 360 owner vs. PS3 owner, then I agree with you; I see no reason why the percentages of HDTV ownership or HD movie playback would be any different from one group to the other.

We don't yet know the demographics of PS3 to really compare to 360. But if you take the older generation, the avg age of a xbox owner was higher than that of ps2. So was the income / education level. Also people in general thought xbox was not kid friendly ...

Considering the price of ps3, that may not turn out to be true this time.

Spoken like a non-gamer unfamiliar with the realities of console development.

Better games will come, as they always do once developers get used to the tools and techniques required to get what they want out of the system, and firmware updates will add features and fix bugs. The PSP has already shown the commitment Sony have when it comes to these updates. Since v1.0 they've added (off the top of my head):

Web browser
PS1 emulator
Remote play functionality for remotely viewing and controlling your PS3 and it's output
Location Free Player
WPA support
Music visualiser
WMA support
Flash support
MJPEG Support
The ability to use an attached camera
GPS support
RSS Support

Not bad for a handheld. This, combined with the stream of PS3 updates already released and the massive March firmware update coming soon, is a pretty good indicator of why laughing off the whole "wait-until/potential" argument is a little short-sighted.

You picked the worst example for trying to disprove the wait-until/potential argument, considering that for all the features Sony has added to bolster PSP's multimedia capabilities, for some reason Sony has been completely unable to add quality games to the library and sales. PSP is still outsold by Nintendo DS 5:1 and has been since it was released. In many regions, Nintendo DS Lite sells so quickly it's virtually impossible to find any in stock just sitting around. In Japan, it's impossible to ever find Nintendo DS Lite available, you have to sign up for a waiting list and wait for Nintendo to manufacture one so you can buy it.

PSP never was able to shake the reputation of being half-baked and being a machine with more potential than real reasons to buy it right now. UMD movie sales have been so abysmal that all studios except for Sony Pictures have pulled support and ended new releases for that format. EA actually threatened Sony with the end of new game releases for that platform unless Sony did something to promote the PSP more effectively. The reality is that most people preferred the Nintendo DS, which was less powerful, used cartridges instead of optical discs, and was a pure gaming system as opposed to the multimedia-oriented PSP, and furthermore was a lot cheaper. Does this sound familiar to anybody yet? It's the exact situation that PS3 faces versus the 360 and the Wii. Sony hasn't learned a thing from the ass-whuppin' that PSP has received by the DS and made the exact same mistakes with the PS3.

But you can go ahead and waste $600 on potential that will probably never be realized if you want. For $600 you can almost buy an Xbox 360 Premium and a Nintendo Wii. There isn't a sane gamer on Earth who would pick the $600 PS3 over a 360 and a Wii.

If you want to see how many kiddees are saving their pennies for HD sets (cheap, nasty, westinghouse and other crap LCDs in the under 30" range mostly) just look at Gamespot's forums, General Hardware section

The morons keep asking the same stupid questions including "is this (piece of crap) HDTV good for XBox or PS3?" (they then get mad when you tell them to save up more money and get something decent)

For $600 you can almost buy an Xbox 360 Premium and a Nintendo Wii. There isn't a sane gamer on Earth who would pick the $600 PS3 over a 360 and a Wii.

There are quite a few people here who not only chose a PS3 over the Wii60, but chose the PS3 as their only gaming system period. I have no interest in owning a Wii. It is exactly what I don't want.

Personally, I like the 360 better, but I bought a PS3 mainly as a BD player as did quite a few people on these boards. My opinion of the PS3 as a gaming system could change over the next year as better games start coming out. I am looking forward to some great HD cutscenes that couldn't fit on a DVD9. Until then I have a couple of great games to play on my 360.

Forgive my cross-posting from the HD DVD player forum, but I thought this news on-topic here as well:

Year-old Xbox 360 outsells Wii and PS3 during crucial Xmas season.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/0...sole_sales_npd/

I know, I know ...

"Just wait"

This news, plus another thread showing the HD DVD add-on sold out in Europe, has to be spun really hard to sound like good news for Sony and BD.

Meh, If there were more of either system the numbers could have been reversed, but that wasn't the case. What also isn't mentioned is that the PS2 outsole the 360. If you mention the Wii in the equation, you have to mention the PS2. They are both "cheap" gaming systems of relatively similar technology.

I do think Sony has an up hill battle, but it isn't as easy as "the 360 sold more units than the PS3". There were more 360s available, hence more units sold.

PSP never was able to shake the reputation of being half-baked and being a machine with more potential than real reasons to buy it right now. UMD movie sales have been so abysmal that all studios except for Sony Pictures have pulled support and ended new releases for that format. EA actually threatened Sony with the end of new game releases for that platform unless Sony did something to promote the PSP more effectively. The reality is that most people preferred the Nintendo DS, which was less powerful, used cartridges instead of optical discs, and was a pure gaming system as opposed to the multimedia-oriented PSP, and furthermore was a lot cheaper. Does this sound familiar to anybody yet? It's the exact situation that PS3 faces versus the 360 and the Wii. Sony hasn't learned a thing from the ass-whuppin' that PSP has received by the DS and made the exact same mistakes with the PS3.
.

that's a great analogy. the DS-Lite was my Christmas present to myself. There is no substantiated evidence that PS2 contributed in any appreciable way to the popularity of DVD - yet it is frequently cited by Sony proponents. At the time it was also marketed as a media center(peripheral to that of a game machine, which is the same case with ps3, which many BD proponents forget). Not many ppl though ended up using it as a 'media' center, or DVD player for that matter.

If you want to see how many kiddees are saving their pennies for HD sets (cheap, nasty, westinghouse and other crap LCDs in the under 30" range mostly) just look at Gamespot's forums, General Hardware section

The morons keep asking the same stupid questions including "is this (piece of crap) HDTV good for XBox or PS3?" (they then get mad when you tell them to save up more money and get something decent)

Actually I think Westinghouse are very nice LCDs, they've come a long way and have gained a sizable market share. I think many are misinformed, IMO, LCDs are useless for HD gaming - I'm a big fan though, I own two for non-gaming. I may pick up the Panasonic 50in plasma for 360 this week - the $1200 price tag is a steal IMO. It would be hard for me to part w/ my 32in HDcrt though, as it's still the best image, bar none. As a gamer, imo, those forum members would be wasting cash on a $1000 LCD when a much better solution can be had for half that amount

As a corollary to my original projection of 4:3 users, I think that all this LCD and Plasma flatpanel aggressive marketing is counterproductive to ps3 users who've yet to invest in HDTV. All electronic botique stores are phasing out HD crts - they can be had for like $500 and it's an incomparable gaming experience. Stuck w/ 4:3 SDTVs for the time being, you're not going to see the projected attach rates for BD.

There is also a misinterpretation in the overlap b/t HT enthusisast and gamers. At AVS, a sizable majority fall into both categories. But in the general pop, not every gamer is interested in home theater and movies. And although gamers as an aggregate have moved up in age range, the majority are still younger males.

Forgive my cross-posting from the HD DVD player forum, but I thought this news on-topic here as well:

Year-old Xbox 360 outsells Wii and PS3 during crucial Xmas season.


I know, I know ...

"Just wait"

This news, plus another thread showing the HD DVD add-on sold out in Europe, has to be spun really hard to sound like good news for Sony and BD.

Yeah, it's always funny that people hailing the "year old" Xbox360 outselling the Wii and PS3 dont' mention the PS2, PSP and Nintendo DS that outsold all of them.

But from a gamer's perspective, games like Tekken 6, FF 13, MGS4, Kingdom Hearts, and Gran Turismo 5 are gonna make me purchase a PS3, it's just a matter of when. Games like Zelda, Mario, Metriod make me want to purchase a Wii. Notice a trend here? Legacy games make people want that system. Halo is a legacy game for Microsoft, GoW is the *new* game that will push systems. I'm still taking a wait and see attitude to the Xbox 360 due to the fact that it's been 1 year and GoW is the only decent offering out there. (And by decent, I mean system selling) And I know someone will step in with games like bioshock, blue dragon, assassin's creed, etc. etc. The only problem with new games is that they get hyped to no end. A fate PC gamers are all too familiar with. We get 10 page previews on games and 1.5 page reviews. Doom 3 was described as the second coming of 1st person shooters and it needless to say, it wasn't. I at least figure that in another year I could get a used Xbox360 pretty cheap and by then there should be at least 3 new system sellers and the new Halo.

But why have the PS2, DS, DS light sold so well? Because they are CHEAP.

all I can add, is that even though my target never has any ps3's around. The same hd-dvd addon has been there since novermber, now has 3 brothers.

And the blu-ray/hd-dvd section (though painfull small) has all of a sudden sold out of some disks, I've been checking and looking at the disks since I got my hd-dvd add-on for the 360 from c.c.

The side with the empty slots for movies right now is....

(should I draw this out, or just tell you guys)


There are only like 20-35 titles tops there.


its not a huge selection.



its absolute meaningless in the whole scheme of things.



But in the past month + I have never seen any missing blu-ray/hd-dvd slots.




Oh here goes.



The blu-ray side all of a sudden sold out of about 5-6 if not more titles.

I think the analysis for this whole situation is very simple..... a gamer is a gamer is a gamer.

Percentage wise, just as many Xbox 360 owners will use hi-def TV's as PS3 owners. Just as many Xbox 360 owners will be interested in using their machine to watch hi-def video as PS3 owners. Just as many PS3's will be purchased for movie only use as Xbox 360 w/ addons.

The reason the PS3 will lag is that at the end of 2006, Microsoft has nearly 10 million players in circulation (November and December sales of the Xbox 360 beat Wii's and PS3's). The PS3 has fewer than a million (the December 31st number was about 860,000 in circulation worldwide).

Because of that imbalance I think HD-DVD will get a higher attach rate at a quicker rate. The Bluray format will need to stick around long enough for the number of PS3's to equal the number of X360's before the playing field levels on game system hi-def players. Previous projections would put that happening in early 2008. However, only half as many PS3's have been sold as originally projected, so they are already behind schedule a bit.

all I can add, is that even though my target never has any ps3's around. The same hd-dvd addon has been there since novermber, now has 3 brothers.

And the blu-ray/hd-dvd section (though painfull small) has all of a sudden sold out of some disks, I've been checking and looking at the disks since I got my hd-dvd add-on for the 360 from c.c.

The side with the empty slots for movies right now is....

(should I draw this out, or just tell you guys)


There are only like 20-35 titles tops there.


its not a huge selection.



its absolute meaningless in the whole scheme of things.



But in the past month + I have never seen any missing blu-ray/hd-dvd slots.




Oh here goes.



The blu-ray side all of a sudden sold out of about 5-6 if not more titles.

My Target was the opposite. It has space for 20 HD-DVD's and 20 BD's and was fully stocked two weeks before Christmas. I had a gift card and went to buy one this past weekend. They only had 8 HD-DVD titles left (12 slots completely empty). The BD side had 4 empty slots. They also had 5 60 GB PS3's for sale in the case (and this was at 8 pm on a Friday, so I'm assuming they were out all day). A couple of people looked at them and one family commented it was just too expensive and they would wait to get a Wii.

This past weekend, Walmart had 4 60 GB systems (one was still out today actually). I saw those 5 at Target. My local EB Games had 6 60 GB systems and 10 20 GB systems, Meijers had 1 60 GB and 1 20 GB, and Sears had 4 20 GB systems. This is what I saw on my Friday afternoon shopping. So I had shot at 31 PS3's this weekend, but I was looking for a Wii and couldn't find a single one. Go figure...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=775633

*roundhouse kick to BD's face*

recommend reading the whole thread - so many consumer experiences. A2 flying off shelves. I wish we had a corresponding thread for the 360 Add-on.

Just as many PS3's will be purchased for movie only use as Xbox 360 w/ addons.

I agree with everything else in your post except for this one point, assuming you really mean "movie only." As many posts on this forum have shown, quite a few people (myself included) are using their PS3 primarily or exclusively for watching HD movies, with little or no game usage. On the other hand, I don't think you'll find any people buying the Xbox 360 and add-on primarily or exclusively for HD-DVD playback. I think it safe to assume that most of the people here who bought the add-on were either already using the 360 as a game console or bought the two pieces at the same time to do both. If there's anyone here who has a 360 and add-on who only watches HD-DVDs on it, please correct me.

First, there's the pricing factor. The PS3 makes an attractive option as a Blu-ray player because it's at least a couple of hundred dollars (going strictly by MSRP) less than its nearest standalone competitor. Feature-wise, you lose very little (in fact, the PS3 offers some Blu-ray features (existing or upcoming via firmware upgrades) that even some standalones don't offer.

On the other hand, the most basic Xbox 360 Core System plus add-on comes out to about the same price as the new entry level Toshiba (again going by MSRP). So why would anyone buy the Xbox plus add-on if they aren't planning to play games on it? Not only is it less convenient to set-up, you lose HDMI connectivity and some key audio capabilities that the standalone Toshiba provides for the same price. The Toshiba will also run a lot quieter than the Xbox will.

*roundhouse kick to BD's face*

recommend reading the whole thread - so many consumer experiences. A2 flying off shelves. I wish we had a corresponding thread for the 360 Add-on.

Yeah, HD-DVD doesn't get a fair shake in my local BB either. Not sure if it's their fault or Toshiba's. I'm really hoping for a $250 HD-DVD player announcement at CES. I'll get my PS3 for gaming, enjoy whatever movies are Blu-Ray only, and hopefully by Christmas 2007 they'll be a sub $200 HD-DVD player out there.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=775633

*roundhouse kick to BD's face*

recommend reading the whole thread - so many consumer experiences. A2 flying off shelves. I wish we had a corresponding thread for the 360 Add-on.

Wait, what? Chuck Norris is an HD DVD supporter?

BD is screwed. Nobody takes on Chuck Norris and lives.

;)

Wait, what? Chuck Norris is an HD DVD supporter?

BD is screwed. Nobody takes on Chuck Norris and lives.

;)


There are no format war winners. Just the formats that chuck norris deems worthy of living ;)

Dunno why BD folks are so up on attach rates when a large chunk of PS3 setups look like this. Now, after watching TD on composite, do you really think this person'll go out and shell out $40 msrp for one BD, or just shell out $20 more for a next-gen game?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1_hK3hfM7E

This isn't peculiar either. My brother has two friends who are 14 and have the exact same setups in their room. I doubt they'd allow their parents to borrow the shiny new toy to watch films.

OMG that is the funniest thing I have seen in a long time. ROFLMAO!!!!!

I owned a Xbox and PS2. I now own a 360 and as of yesterday a PS3. I'm 33, not 14-20. I have a 1080P LCD. 360 buyers are no more mature or knowledgeable, just visit the official Xbox 360 forums, it's full of ignorant 14-20 year olds.

As for the HD-DVD add-on, I did not buy it and probably never will. I got Blu-ray with my PS3. I have HDMI for full 1080P digital picture (not the analog VGA upscaling that I get with the 360) and full HD sound not DD5.1. I also don't have the headache of a separate box. The Ps3 is a very nice piece of hardware and well worth the $600. My 360 cost me $500 (needed the wi-fi $100 add-on) and another $200 for HD-DVD is not a good deal. MS should have delayed the 360 and included HD-DVD and HDMI, they rushed to the market and not they are stuck with add-ons that will sell to very few and analog video and optical audio.

They are both good consoles and will both have great games (GOW and Resistance), but the petty fanboy attacks on the PS3 are transparent. It's so called weaknesses are strength IMO. Year late? Ya but BD and HDMI 1.3. $600? Still better than the 360 with it's add-ons. Large heavy console? Built in PS, takes less room in my setup than the 360 does. Consider this along with the slick package (black >> white) and it's QUIET!!! I can't stand the jet engine noise of the 360.

So you can own one and attack the other (ie. fanboy) or be a gamer and engoy all consoles and know that compitetion makes them better. You 360 guys really want MS to have a monopoly in the console market and get Windows/IE/Office quality consoles hardware and software? I don't...

I owned a Xbox and PS2. I now own a 360 and as of yesterday a PS3. I'm 33, not 14-20. I have a 1080P LCD. 360 buyers are no more mature or knowledgeable, just visit the official Xbox 360 forums, it's full of ignorant 14-20 year olds.

As for the HD-DVD add-on, I did not buy it and probably never will. I got Blu-ray with my PS3. I have HDMI for full 1080P digital picture (not the analog VGA upscaling that I get with the 360) and full HD sound not DD5.1. I also don't have the headache of a separate box. The Ps3 is a very nice piece of hardware and well worth the $600. My 360 cost me $500 (needed the wi-fi $100 add-on) and another $200 for HD-DVD is not a good deal. MS should have delayed the 360 and included HD-DVD and HDMI, they rushed to the market and not they are stuck with add-ons that will sell to very few and analog video and optical audio.

They are both good consoles and will both have great games (GOW and Resistance), but the petty fanboy attacks on the PS3 are transparent. It's so called weaknesses are strength IMO. Year late? Ya but BD and HDMI 1.3. $600? Still better than the 360 with it's add-ons. Large heavy console? Built in PS, takes less room in my setup than the 360 does. Consider this along with the slick package (black >> white) and it's QUIET!!! I can't stand the jet engine noise of the 360.

So you can own one and attack the other (ie. fanboy) or be a gamer and engoy all consoles and know that compitetion makes them better. You 360 guys really want MS to have a monopoly in the console market and get Windows/IE/Office quality consoles hardware and software? I don't...

Although I do appreciate your position and your equipment, I have to piont out that you are the exception and not the rule. What I am getting at is that you can take advantage of 1080p, HDMI, and advanced audio. You are one of the few that understands what that list of abbreviations actually means.

The vast majority of HDTV owners does not own a 1080p display or an HDMI capable receiver. The 360 drive has it's place in many more homes than that of the PS3. How many PS3s do you think are hooked up right now with component cables and optical audio? Quite a few, and that is exactly how the 360 drive would be hooked up.

I own a PS3 and it buy no means is perfect. Especially for those that don't own 1080p displays. It won't downscale BD to 720p if your display can accept a 1080i signal. Games won't scale at all so if you can only accept 1080i and the game is 720p you are screwed and the PS3 doesn't upscale SD DVD at all. All of these issues alienates the vast majority of HDTV owners that own equipment that is anything over a year old and that is quite a few.

I have great respect for the PS3. I enjoy it, but there are some things that need to addressed and to make it sound like the 360 drive is useless is inaccurate, especially when it would actually be more useful in more homes than the PS3.

All of these issues alienates the vast majority of HDTV owners that own equipment that is anything over a year old and that is quite a few.


I think a lot of people who get fixated on the PS3's HDMI-only output forget that HDMI is also compatible with HDPC-compliant DVI connections which have been available on many HD displays for more than three years. All you need is either an HDMI cable with DVI adapter or an HDMI/DVI cable. I recently bought a one-meter cable like this from Monoprice for $1.99 (Special Deal of the Day) for use with my 3-year-old Sanyo Z2. It works perfectly and I haven't had a single handshake problem.

This is why I never begrudged Sony for not including an HDMI cable with the PS3. If they had done so, chances are that the vast majority of their customers wouldn't have been able to use it anyway because of the current lack of HDMI-equipped displays in people's homes. Even if they had included a free HDMI cable, I would have had to buy an HDMI to DVI adapter for my Z2 which frankly would have cost me just as much as buying a dedicated HDMI to DVI cable.

The vast majority of HDTV owners does not own a 1080p display or an HDMI capable receiver. The 360 drive has it's place in many more homes than that of the PS3. How many PS3s do you think are hooked up right now with component cables and optical audio? Quite a few, and that is exactly how the 360 drive would be hooked up.

I own a PS3 and it buy no means is perfect. Especially for those that don't own 1080p displays. It won't downscale BD to 720p if your display can accept a 1080i signal. Games won't scale at all so if you can only accept 1080i and the game is 720p you are screwed and the PS3 doesn't upscale SD DVD at all. All of these issues alienates the vast majority of HDTV owners that own equipment that is anything over a year old and that is quite a few.



Both the 360 and PS3 support composite, component and s-video. The PS3 just happens to support HDMI and DVI (via HDMI->DVI cable). As for the vastly exaggerated scaling issue ("alienates the vast majority of HDTV owners"), all but a few TVs will do the scaling for you. My old CRT RP would do it and it's was from 2001 era. I agree the PS3 should have included a scaler, but it's such a small percentage of the HDTVs (ie. crappy ones - 720P and 1080i are the HDTV standards and if your TV is a HDTV it must accept both both to be called HDTV) it's not some doom and gloom issue for Sony, I think the defective rate of the 360s and 90 day warranty fiasco was worse for MS.

Sony is a harwdare company and MS is a software one, the PS3 is an engineering marvel, but the software (XB, store, etc.) is immature, but that can be patched. Good luck "patching" the 360 with missing features like digital video output and HD storage.

I really look at both systems as a wash. When you get down to it, they look the same and play the same. What are we arguing here? Details? What is going to sell each system is games. You like Halo, you get the 360. You like MGS, you get the PS3. WE are the exception. We have more money and other priorities...namely HD movies.

I'm watching HD movies now and will be playing both Halo 3 and MGS 4 when they come out for their respective consoles. Now if I could just find a Wii... I nearly scored one yesterday. I guess I'm the exception to the exceptions. I love gaming and movies, and I know that I'm not the only one, especially as gamers get older.

Good luck "patching" the 360 with missing features like digital video output and HD storage.


They can put out larger HDs any time they want, and I'll honestly be shocked if they don't make the HD casing a caddy to replicate the PS3 function of user upgradeable drives.

The big difference to me as an owner of both machines is the build quality. The 360 is a shoddily built machine, that many have had to replace several times. I myself am on my second. Live is better, current games are better, but in everything else the machine is inferior. The PS3 is a quality box - extremely well built, quiet, and the HDMI makes all the difference in the world. Just needs the games, and those are coming soon.

However, the 360 will probably win this war because most people do not
have the setup to take advantage of either machine. And Nintendo is running away with Japan - it isn't even a race over there.

tgable:

Ok, they're equal according to you. I'll settle for that as a future projection. Can you at least concede that Xbox has eaten away a sizable market share from the PS franchise? Iknow we'll be seen alot more dual format consumers in the 7th gen of gaming.

Can you at least concede that Xbox has eaten away a sizable market share from the PS franchise?

Absolutely. It'll probably end up more like 40-40-20(Nintendo) this time

I think the real question is this. Will these old legacy games continue to drive systems. How many times can Sony make Gran Turismo before we all go , "eh, been there, done that". Halo 2 sold a ton of games but many fans of the original will tell you it doesn't quite have that magic that the original did. Take Two's Bully game isn't doing as well as a GTA game despite having the same gameplay overall. With all the copy cat, True Crime, etc. games out there, will millions of people still line up to buy the latest GTA crime-fest or will we finally say "eh, been there, done that"? Guitar Hero I & II came out of left field and sold a ton of games. There's always people waiting to play that thing in stores. Where is the next Half Life?? Where is the next Diablo?? The next Warcraft/Starcraft?? Who has the next genre/generation defining game which everyone will play and proclaim to be the "best of the best".

I find it quite amusing reading all these threads about 360 and PS3 (and now also Wii which i guess most people forgot in the heat). I currently live in London, England, and previously lived in Norway (in Europe for those in the US who don't know where that is).

I think a lot of guys around the world really think the format war and console war only goes on in their own countries. In Norway in the forums people seem to think that the sales in Norway (4.5 million inhabitants) determines the winner. In your forum it seems like it's the US that will decide.

The world in the last 5 years has changed. China and India (and the a certain degree russia) now has respectable middle classes who can afford consoles. And we're talking probably 100-200 million extra people in the world from 5-6 years ago who can afford these new consoles.

Now to the average gamer of PS3. Who is he? Well keeping in mind that PS2 sold over 100 million consoles (and still outselling all other consoles in the market), is it not reasonable to think that many of these will buy the PS3 as well? The Xbox sold around 20 million in total, and offcourse a lot of these will buy the 360. So I think the age span on the new consoles will be bigger than before, and there's not really a maximum age to talk about for any of the consoles. But walking in the game shops in London it seems to be Nintendo and Playstation that caters best for kids games, so i think the Wii will get the youngest gamers (also because of price).

Im 34 years old, and bought my PS2 as my first DVD player in 2000 (or 2001). Now im gonna buy the PS3 as well as my first BD player. Do I use it or games or movies? I'll use it as both, but mainly movies, but i'm definitely gonna get GT 5 and a couple of other games. In addition my wife loves Singstar and Buzz (as does all our friends), so there will be some gaming and entertainment as well.

If I wasnt married these days I would also buy the 360 just to play Halo which is a great game. But I think it will be enough with PS3 (for me) and Wii (for the kids).

When the PS3 is in the house (in March hopefully) i will buy a 1080p 40" LCD to get full performance from the PS3.

And now my predictions of the future :D as it seems most people have a view about it here hehe :

The 360 will be a great gaming machine and with the possibility to add on HD it will perform well, better than xbox. It will probably be the favoured machine in the US, in Europe it will be a even match i think and in Asia i think PS3 and Wii will dominate the arena.

For gamers and HD interested people the world has never really been any better. You can now get a combined gaming system with HD playing capabilites for $600 and under. Keep in mind how much the PS2 cost when it came, was not far from $400 in real money terms. And a lot of people will be able to afford every console there is.

Anyway, just had to get it out. Can't see why people are getting so emotional over some plastic and metals that will be worthless in 5 years anyway :confused: :)

When the PS3 is in the house (in March hopefully) i will buy a 1080p 40" LCD to get full performance from the PS3.


You'll need a screen larger than 40" to get full performance of 1080p. May as well save coin and get 720p at that size.


Sony is a harwdare company and MS is a software one, the PS3 is an engineering marvel, but the software (XB, store, etc.) is immature, but that can be patched. Good luck "patching" the 360 with missing features like digital video output and HD storage.

A marvel? lol, just like their batteries? Those were a marvel. Some hardware company!

[QUOTE=SteroMAdMAn]You'll need a screen larger than 40" to get full performance of 1080p. May as well save coin and get 720p at that size.

or sit 5ft away from the display like me from when watching my 46in Bravia. I'm starting to hate LCDs though - gonna get an RP any day now.

1) the VAST majority of PS3 owners are GAMERS - sure, they'll go for the occasional Spiderman or Pirates, but for the most part, they'll be spending their hard earned cash on $60 games.

2) there aren't numbers, but it's fair to say that a sizable majority of PS3 owners use SDTVs, given that the VAST number of US households have yet to go HD.

I think the US is the biggest market for CE, I think it's fair to say. But the EU is undoubtedly the 2nd largest. As far as China, there will be a huge influx of console ownership in the 7th gen but along with it will be a huge pirating problem

But the EU is undoubtedly the 2nd largest

Depends. Japan is the second largest market actually, they just tend toward different gadgetry.

Is that why PS3 is selling 2x more than xbox360 when xbox360 first launched in 2005 ?

X360 outsold PS3 in Nov and Dec, no clue what you're talking about...

Ive yet to lay my eyes on a PS3 that can be purchased in Southern California. I call stores all the time, make random visits, they are IMPOSSIBLE to find. Maybe in some hick county in the midwest theres 2-3 on a shelf, but thats not how it is for everyone else. Ive been looking since launch and still, NONE. Every place i go, the workers tell me the same thing, they sell out immediately. Theres never been one just sitting there.

However, there tons and tons of xbox 360s in stock at every store, and ive yet to witness a person buy one in front of my eyes during this holiday season. Im sure they sold well, but the system is for the most hardcore of gamers. Casual gamers and Hardcore gamers alike want a PS3.

PS3's are on shelves in NEARLY EVERY BB, WalMart, Target, CC, and Fry's in San diego. There are more 360's because the supply is far greater. Duh?

You are too hilarious. Wouldn't the smart person buy a 20GB PS3 at $499 over a 20GB Xbox 360 w/ HD DVD add-on for $599?



Wouldn't the smart person buy the system with GAMES FOR SALE?

However, the 360 will probably win this war because most people do not
have the setup to take advantage of either machine.

I have:

Sony KDS-R70XBR2 70"
Denon 4306
Onix Rocket speakers
SVS PB12+/2 sub

I chose the 360. There went your argument.

Here's an interesting thread over on the Playstation board about buying Blu-ray titles for the PS3....and before any of you get your panties in a bunch, I'm not saying this represents all or even the majority of PS3 owners.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=783621

Wouldn't the smart person buy the system with GAMES FOR SALE?

Funny you make that arguement, because when we try the "won't people buy the movie format with the majority of movies ever made exclusive for it, and with a massive software advantage announced", then it's a TOTALLY different story

Funny you make that arguement, because when we try the "won't people buy the movie format with the majority of movies ever made exclusive for it, and with a massive software advantage announced", then it's a TOTALLY different story

All of us zealots fail to recognize that JP6 is paying no attention to this 'war'. the VAST majority are debating 360 vs. ps3 - and those that are clamoring and saving for HD sets are anticipating for HD GAMING - BD is only secondary or tertiary - 360 addon owners however, do own HDTVs like 99.9999% of the time

Funny you make that arguement, because when we try the "won't people buy the movie format with the majority of movies ever made exclusive for it, and with a massive software advantage announced", then it's a TOTALLY different story

Massive software advantage announced? where? HD DVD announced 300 new titles in 2007. The BD-A list that goes through May or whatever isn't even close to that.

The majority of movies is not in BD's favor. it's a wash right now regarding # of titles.

I know, "just wait!"

I haven't seen that list of titles yet though, have you?

I do know that whatever movies on that list are from Paramount and Warner will be on BD as well, leaving Universal (whatever the deal is with them), some Bandai, and some porn I guess.

Massive software advantage announced? where? HD DVD announced 300 new titles in 2007. The BD-A list that goes through May or whatever isn't even close to that.


They announced the number 300, BD announced what, 2 or 3 to 1 over the HD ones, and 90% of those were comign to both

The name of the game is EXCLUSIVE titles

60-70% of what BR announced were exclusive

X360 outsold PS3 in Nov and Dec, no clue what you're talking about...


Not in the months described in his post

PS3 isn't selling

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070108-8574.html

Looks like the core market for PS3, the gamers, aren't amused by the force-bundled Blu-Ray trojan horse. If Sony had followed MS's lead and released the Blu-Ray drive as an add-on, PS3 would have launched earlier and have been cheaper. Now Sony has an uphill mountain to climb, with a product that costs $200 more and offers way fewer games to play.

Of course the PS3 is selling. It just isn't selling out, which I guess some people can't get their heads around as being different. Also - you have scalpers returning the thing; makes sense to me!

As it stands now, PS3 has a larger install base in both the US and Japan than 360 did at this time last year. Let's wait until Feb 21st (Motostorm) and March 6th (Heavenly Sword) to see what interest in the PS3 looks like trending longer term.

A marvel? lol, just like their batteries? Those were a marvel. Some hardware company!

Batteries are a very tricky component of notebooks. Everyone wants more battery life, and it is intensely competitive and time to market is crazy short, not allowing for long term/various condition tests. If you try to push the engineering too far, reliability goes down, and for a battery that can mean fire and even explosions.

Apple and Dell have had dramatic failures as well as a few lesser known companies. Given all this, I personally would not judge a company harshly for a run of exploding/flaming batteries.

OTOH, I did find the 360's reports from last year of overheating forcing shutdowns and scratching up DVDs to be disturbing. Those are not common issues and are trivial to engineer around. It seems they've fixed all that (except the loud fan), and they have a rev2 version coming out, so I may still go that way.

PS3 isn't selling

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070108-8574.html

Looks like the core market for PS3, the gamers, aren't amused by the force-bundled Blu-Ray trojan horse. If Sony had followed MS's lead and released the Blu-Ray drive as an add-on, PS3 would have launched earlier and have been cheaper. Now Sony has an uphill mountain to climb, with a product that costs $200 more and offers way fewer games to play.

I guess you missed this quote in the article:

It's not the case that the PS3 isn't selling well, however. One store manager revealed that they have sold 24 of 28 launch units, and most others who would talk to us told similar tales. Sales are strong; they're simply not as strong as many expected and a few even hoped.

That kinda goes against your claim that the PS3 isn't selling. :rolleyes:

Peopel still aren't getting that Blu-Ray is as much a copy protection mechanism on PS3 as it is a movie playback and cost-cutting measure on their backend. As has been oft stated, Japanese developers like HD prerendered cutscenes and lots of them, combine that with 6-8 spoken languages, and you're way over the limit on DVD