your average PS3 gamer

[HD-DVDwonder]

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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

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.

[homerx]

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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

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

[Amiable-Akuma]

Originally Posted by joshd2012

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.

[hd nOOb]

Originally Posted by Amiable-Akuma

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.

[hd90210]

Originally Posted by Amiable-Akuma

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 ?

[AZHTGeek]

Originally Posted by hd90210

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....

[Faceless Rebel]

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

http://www.hdgamenews.com/2006/12/5-...-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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

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.

[hd90210]

Originally Posted by Faceless Rebel

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

http://www.hdgamenews.com/2006/12/5-...-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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

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

[PacoFromDelTaco]

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.

[csmith75]

Originally Posted by PacoFromDelTaco

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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

Originally Posted by joshd2012

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

[greg_mitch]

Originally Posted by PacoFromDelTaco

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.

[Ktak]

Originally Posted by joshd2012

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.

[heavyharmonies]

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.

[Ktak]

Originally Posted by heavyharmonies

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?

[wittangamo]

Originally Posted by Ktak

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.

[DPowers]

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.

[Ktak]

Originally Posted by wittangamo

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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

Originally Posted by Ktak

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

[Faceless Rebel]

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.

[Subotnik]

Originally Posted by Faceless Rebel

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.

[David Susilo]

Originally Posted by greg_mitch

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.

[David Susilo]

Originally Posted by Subotnik

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.

[HD-DVDwonder]

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

[csmith75]

Originally Posted by wittangamo

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.

[csmith75]

Originally Posted by Subotnik

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.