Sony Sells 70 Million PS3s; PS2 is Still King

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
because PS2 had the games that was based purely on game play and FUN plus the backward compatibility that PS3 lacked. RIP Sony, It was nice knowing you when you thrived for the best now you are just sitting on your fat wallets and snoring.
 
Well, PS1, PS2, PS3 has always been the most powerful consoles of their own generation and due to the fact it can play CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays has always been a great selling point for them.

But, I think that is the only thing they got going for them right now. Whens the last time anyone has looked at a Sony product other then their console and thought I NEED TO GET THAT!

TVs, Phone, Blu-Ray players, Computers, Laptops, etc. Always a quarter or two behind their competition. Yet they price it as high as Apple products.
 

good point. i can't remember the last time i bought a sony product.
 
I just bought a PS3 this week. There seems to have always been one in my house wherever I lived and I know there are many like it but, this one is mine. I am primarily a PC gamer though and bought it for its other features.
 
That is 8.5 games per console sold...
That's just downright sad. But then again, there were only 2-3 games that I wanted, which is why I never ended up buying one in the first place. No matter how great the hardware, and the interface, and the control scheme, it can never make up for a lack of good fun cheap games. On my PS2 I picked up at least 20 games for the thing over the years, and never once did I have a purchase I was let down by, and never once did I have to fork over more than $25 for a game. And the thing is that I still game! Granted it has moved to the PC, but it is not like I have forked over a ton of money in hardware to play games for the PC. I only spent $200 above what I already needed to have a decent PC, and BAM, it's a decent game rig. And the best part? between the used game selection, and Steam sales, I have only tqice spent more than $15 on a game (Dragon Age Orgins, and Skyrim).

Consoles are plainly too expensive, and they need to remember that cheap entertainment is what the masses really want.
 
i have a ps3 and had 2 ps2. the 1st ps2 lasted me a solid 6 years, the 2nd ps2 lasted me 5 months with same use. collected over 25 games for them. I now have a ps3 and I honestly only have 5 games. the main problem with this gen of games is the amount of focus thats been given to coop, multiplayer, and run n gun while explosions happen everywhere(CoD style campaign). there havent been many story driven single player games with nice cutscenes and surprises. the ps2 had many.

also doesnt help my gaming on ps3 that I discovered steam over the last 5 year and those pocket emptying sales. neither does it help that they invest in new things that recieve so little support from 3rd parties. but I must admit, Sonys PS+ is quite good. they give away some amazing games.

ps3 is by no means a bad console, it has quite good features. only bad thing about it is the bad games it gets.
 
owned 2 ps, and 3 ps2.... (most died because of bad optic, and bad electricity)

Haven't tried ps3, it was to expensive for me when it launched (not mention the game price and the need for internet connection to utilize it full potential)...

Now don't had the urge to buy one...
maybe i'm just to old, maybe the game not interest me anymore...

but if they release FF7 remake for ps4... I'll buy one for sure (both the game and the console to play it)
 
I don't think Sony's real aim with their consoles is to sell lots of software, but rather to sell their own hardware. The ps3 did a very good job of helping to push the Blu Ray format and HDTVs in people's homes early. Looking at the bigger picture, it was a successful console for that. However, that novelty has faded and as a console device it doesn't distinguish itself from the XBox 360. The Wii at least had some exclusive titles and a different approach to gaming. I don't see any need to own both an XBox and PS3.

Sony's strength with the PS1 and 2 was exclusive top tier 3rd party support. Xbox has gotten many of those former exclusives now, and some of their best franchises like Final Fantasy and Metal Gear have degraded in quality. Now it seems even Wii U has finally gotten some of the former Sony exclusives, like Tekken and Dynasty Warriors. Sony's next move will have to revitalize the Playstation name, or it will break them. Without the exclusive 3rd party titles, the PS1 would have been another CDi. They can't afford to lose it.
 
It's not the console, or the hardware.
It's the way zony implemented their API...
It's clunky... people don't want to build games for the ps3 cause it's hard to program for.

The ps2 was easy.

The wii is easy, that's why there's tons of garbageware out for it...

Keep it simple stupid.
 
[citation][nom]PTNLemay[/nom]Who still buys PS2?[/citation]

People who have PS2 games they still want to play once in a while and they don't have the original Fat PS3. Since Sony saw fit to take away backwards compatibility, the only legitimate way you can keep playing those old games after your PS2 has died is to either A) Buy another PS2 - hence the 4 million sold in 2011, or B) find an old Fat PS3 for sale which is usually too risky and/or expensive.
 
I still have my working PS1 and PS2, the only consoles I have and probably will ever own. Although I have moved on to my custom PC, they still have a place in my heart.
 
[citation][nom]iKyunG[/nom]Well, PS1, PS2, PS3 has always been the most powerful consoles of their own generation and due to the fact it can play CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays has always been a great selling point for them.But, I think that is the only thing they got going for them right now. Whens the last time anyone has looked at a Sony product other then their console and thought I NEED TO GET THAT!TVs, Phone, Blu-Ray players, Computers, Laptops, etc. Always a quarter or two behind their competition. Yet they price it as high as Apple products.[/citation]
PS2 was the least powerful console of that generation (not including the Dreamcast) original Xbox and Gamecube were both way more powerful and the PS1 was somewhat less powerful than the N64 but had the CD format which allowed games to include more and be cheaper.
 
Im just glad that both the PS3 and 360 are close to end of their life cycle. Come June sony and microsoft are announcing the ps4 and 720. About time for full HD 1080p 60 fps (compared to lame 30fps games on the weak ps3/360). GO SONY, GO MICROSOFT! give us next gen!

The current get 30 fps 720p games look way too outdated. When you consider that your console runs on a faultry 256mb ram when there are phones with 2048 mb (8 times ram of the console), you know its about time to move onto better hardware.

Game developers now have to use all kinds of hacks to make games work on the horribl horrible weak consoles. Tekken Tag2 for instance reduces your resolution dynmically when there's too much stuff to handle. Most AAA games have reduced frame rates from 60FPS to 30FPS now and still the games look worse.
 
Bought all my Sony consoles within a year of launch, and to this day they all still work. Sony has seemed to have lost some of it's charm and focus the past few years, but my main complaint is the lack of local co-op from games (all platforms). Yea online multiplayer is handy, but not all my friends have high speed internet access, and nothing beats hanging out with your buddys with some friendly competitive gameplay.
 
In my views from personal experience,
PS2 was very successful because,
it was the only top dog in its gen
its prices were better than ps3 ever had
80% of all the games were on it...they just clicked alot,
NO internet dependancy,
the was alot of local/couch multiplayer
game development at the time probably didnt sound as ???evil??? as it does now

why ps3 not so much,
ALOT of online dependancy
game deving is bloody costly,
games have less focus on where they should be
little to no local couch multiplayer
COST
this time there are 2 top dogs, xbox 360 and ps3
generaly multiplat games dont stand out or are worse on ps3 compared to 360
sony as an entity is losing relevance pretty fast, microsoft is still making headlines (even if some dont like)
 
[citation][nom]pliskin1[/nom]Bought all my Sony consoles within a year of launch, and to this day they all still work. Sony has seemed to have lost some of it's charm and focus the past few years, but my main complaint is the lack of local co-op from games (all platforms). Yea online multiplayer is handy, but not all my friends have high speed internet access, and nothing beats hanging out with your buddys with some friendly competitive gameplay.[/citation]
not to troll or anything, but thats just one of many reasons why sony has lost relevance from me in the last year, xbox has the juggernaught that is halo fo local multiplayer, ps3 to have same type of experience needs to rely on the multiplat juggernaught that is COD
 
[citation][nom]bustapr[/nom]i have a ps3 and had 2 ps2. the 1st ps2 lasted me a solid 6 years, the 2nd ps2 lasted me 5 months with same use. collected over 25 games for them. I now have a ps3 and I honestly only have 5 games. the main problem with this gen of games is the amount of focus thats been given to coop, multiplayer, and run n gun while explosions happen everywhere(CoD style campaign). there havent been many story driven single player games with nice cutscenes and surprises. the ps2 had many.[/citation]

BLACK
 
well this was to be expected when the PS2 came out Sony was the hottest selling console maker on the market and the only console which favored to the more of an maturer crowd. So Sony snagged up a lot of 18-34 year old buyers. Plus this was right when Microsoft made its debute in the console market and it was the new kid on the block and people were still weighing in if it ws going to be a sucess or a flop at the time. Sony would prob still be the hottest selling console right now if it wasn't for microsoft. There is no doubt Microsoft has taken a nice size chunk out of Sony's demographic a lot more so then Nintendo's.
 
It probably has to do with software, and that there's not much "exclusive" software outside first party nowadays. It doesn't help that companies are getting nervous about anti-trust lawsuits, plus the main CPU core of the 360 and the PS3 are so similar that a company spending more than $1 million would be a fool not to make a cross-platform game. Also, a lot of hot games are built on top of UE3
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]It's not the console, or the hardware.It's the way zony implemented their API...It's clunky... people don't want to build games for the ps3 cause it's hard to program for.The ps2 was easy.The wii is easy, that's why there's tons of garbageware out for it...Keep it simple stupid.[/citation]There's some reports that the PS2 was also hard, some say harder than the PS3
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom