backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 63 comment(s) - last by Erudite.. on May 10 at 11:42 PM

Analysts believe PlayStation 3 will be console war winner, but needs price cut

Despite PlayStation 3’s currently sluggish sales, Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter is picking it to be the overall winner in the console war. According to him, the outcome won’t be decided on exclusive games like Final Fantasy XIII or Metal Gear Solid 4, but rather exclusive movie titles like Casino Royale. “Notwithstanding the efforts of the three console manufacturers to deliver compelling exclusive content, we expect the ultimate outcome of the console wars to be decided by the motion picture studios,” Pachter wrote in a 207-page industry report

“Should the studios embrace Sony's Blu-ray standard for high definition DVDs, we think Sony will gain an insurmountable advantage over Microsoft; should the studios embrace Sony rival Toshiba's HD-DVD format, we think that Microsoft can maintain its first mover advantage and will dominate software sales for years to come,” clarified Pachter.

Pachter goes into specifics about how he believes the video game console race will play out over the next few years. He guesses that Microsoft will capture 44 percent of the U.S. and European market by the end of this year, with PS3 and Wii to capture approximately 21 percent and 35 percent, respectively. Nintendo will then take over for a short while in 2008 with 39 percent share, eventually with all three console makers eventually sharing the market.

“Ultimately, we see Sony 'winning' the console war with 36 percent of the market, with Nintendo 'capturing' second place at 34 percent and Microsoft finishing third at 30 percent. We believe that this is essentially a dead heat, and each manufacturer will have sufficient market share to generate significant profits,” Pachter concluded.

The report’s forecasts are for the western market, however, as the Xbox 360’s foothold in Japan is far behind the U.S. and Europe. “These estimates do not include market shares in Japan, which we expect to be dominated by Nintendo (51 percent through 2011) and Sony (44 percent),” Pachter added.

Another analyst, Colin Sebastian at Lazard, continues to harp on the PlayStation 3’s high cost barrier to entry, stating that consumers are unlikely to purchase the console until either a price drop or greater selection of games. “We continue to believe that a significant pre-holiday ramp in PS3 unit sales is unlikely without a more robust title lineup and/or a hardware price cut,” he said.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 3:50:58 PM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I am wrong, but Microsoft can't use BluRay unless they get permission from the patent owner or manufacturer, which in this case is Sony. Like I said, I could be wrong, but if Sony doesn't want to license BluRay to Microsoft, then Microsoft would have to either stick with DVD, or create their own format, which would most likely fail.

Now, why would Sony not want to license BluRay to Microsoft? Well, for one reason. If Sony does license it, then Microsoft's xBox 360 sales might dramatically rise while Sony's PS3 sales dramatically drop. Yes, Sony would get some profit due to Microsoft using their technology and making BluRay more popular, but it still probably wouldn't be equal or better than the profit they could make off the PS3.

If, I am wrong, correct me.




RE: Actually...
By MonkeyPaw on 5/8/2007 3:58:58 PM , Rating: 1
I don't doubt that Sony would license it to MS. Why not? Shutting out such a deal isn't going to put MS out of the console business (as BR isn't necessary for gameplay). The only thing such a deal would do is hurt Sony's chance to sell more BR players--there's already 10 million 360 owners out there. Even if just 5% of those owners buy the add-on, think of the revenue they could have, not to mention the extra market penetration for thier media.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 4:07:40 PM , Rating: 1
Yes, but sooner or later, PS3's graphics are going to surpass xBox 360's graphics by a large margin, mostly because of BluRay. A developer can allow his software to run on a higher resolution and can add more physics to the game, which at this moment is easier to do on a PS3 than on a xBox 360.

Just think of an xBox 360 with with CD only, while a PS3 has DVD only. Who do you think will have better graphics and better physics?


RE: Actually...
By LostInRehab on 5/8/2007 4:46:28 PM , Rating: 1
Actually the PS3 will not have better graphics than the 360 due to the fact the 360 has a better Graphics Processing Unit. The amount of space Blu ray offers over dvd will not help that. As for better physics that may be but again it is not because of blu ray but because the PS3's cell processors may very well be more powerful and or more efficient processor than the 360's xenon processor.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 5:01:25 PM , Rating: 1
Well, like before, correct me if I am wrong, but BluRay has more space which allows the data to not be crammed together and compressed. Since the data is not compressed, I believe that that PS3 can access it faster because it doesn't need to decompress it. The data on the xBox 360 has to be compressed or else it wouldn't fit, thus forcing the xBox 360 to decompress the data first and then play it. It's more steps and more time needed to complete those steps.


RE: Actually...
By jkresh on 5/8/2007 5:44:08 PM , Rating: 1
the compression is much more of an issue for fmv during a game then actual game play. If you remember the transition from cd's for games to dvd's the vast majority of the ones that needed to transition were ones with a lot of fmv (generally big rpg's). Eventually the storage space of a dvd will make a difference but probably not till the end of this console generation beginning of the next (unless it really lasts 10 years like Sony suggests).


RE: Actually...
By Zoomer on 5/8/2007 6:03:34 PM , Rating: 1
More fmv == good! :)


RE: Actually...
By d0gb0y on 5/9/2007 10:42:23 AM , Rating: 2
FMV = bad! :)

I like the use of game-engine cut scenes instead of FMV. They help transition to the action easier and keep with the flow. It also allows for changes on the playable characters to be depicted in the cut scene. If you have different armor or weapons, then you will see it. If the game allows for even more physical alterations, the more advantages and more engrossing. IMHO


RE: Actually...
By UNCjigga on 5/8/2007 6:01:06 PM , Rating: 3
I'm not really following your thought process here. The true graphics and physics processing potential of a console is dictated by GPU and CPU capability, available memory (and bandwidth) and a developer's ability to harness that power. It has NOTHING to do with the storage medium!

The only thing Blu-Ray will do for graphics is allow developers to use LOTS of pre-rendered HD cutscenes, which won't be interactive and won't really add to the gameplay experience. If developers want to create a cache of uncompressed textures (why?) that data would still feed the framebuffer faster coming from the PS3's hard drive and not from the BD-ROM.

I fully expect that Microsoft will release a Blu-Ray drive for the Xbox 360 if that's the direction the market takes. Its smart not to commit to one format and let the consumer decide which standard to adopt. If Xbox 360 developers need more space for content, they should stream it via Live to 360's hard drive (Core owners will be stuck up a creek though!)


RE: Actually...
By ChronoReverse on 5/8/2007 6:59:28 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, compression allows for faster transfer rates provided you have enough horsepower to decompress.

Even on the PS3, there's a case for compression since it does have extra power well-suited for decompression.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/9/2007 8:05:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but transfer rate can be easily improved if one increased the speed of the drive inside the PS3, which is possible.

But then again, you need more powerful hardware for decompression. Instead of using some power for decompression, you could use it for better graphics and better frame rates.


RE: Actually...
By Locutus465 on 5/8/2007 9:29:22 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm... Worst case senario they put the game out on multiple discs... But even considering what you're saying, the capacity of blue ray won't affect in game graphics an ounce. The console is still limited by the hardware, and the programmers abilities to utilize it. Blue-ray will not affect the quality of graphics on the PS3. If you need proof look at the PS2 v. X-Box.. Both used DVD, both should have had equal graphical quality per your argument. However the PS2 lacked effect AA, there for the X-Box rendered prettier pictures.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/9/2007 8:02:16 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I sort of agree with you, but not completely.

If you are saying there is no difference in graphics between a DVD and BluRay, then answer this question: If space doesn't matter, then why are all of today's games recorded onto DVDs instead of CDs?


RE: Actually...
By Erudite on 5/10/2007 1:12:10 PM , Rating: 2
Not all games are that way. It is nice when they are, though. When I got Unreal Tournament 2004 I got it on CDs instead of DVD, and I'm the only person I know of that got it that way. Same content during gameplay, all the graphics are the same on mine as my friends that I play with, but where they can just load the game using one DVD, I have to install with 5 CDs. The graphics in the game aren't different, but in a console case, you don't have to change discs all the time (at least one of the FF games for PSOne was multiple discs), so really, if you can put the same game on one disc or have it spanned over four or five, which would you rather buy?


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/10/2007 5:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
No thats not what I mean. I'm trying to find out why developers put games on one DVD instead of one CD . After all, someone a couple posts above me said there is no difference.


RE: Actually...
By Erudite on 5/10/2007 11:42:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the compression is much more of an issue for fmv during a game then actual game play. If you remember the transition from cd's for games to dvd's the vast majority of the ones that needed to transition were ones with a lot of fmv (generally big rpg's). Eventually the storage space of a dvd will make a difference but probably not till the end of this console generation beginning of the next (unless it really lasts 10 years like Sony suggests).


I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that HD discs were what was being talked about. Right now, I don't think that the games will really take up an entire BR disc - or a HD DVD, for that matter. On the other hand, they do take up more space than a CD will hold, hence why they're on DVDs. Unless there's a really huge leap forward in compression, I doubt you'll see games going back on CD again.

I'm not saying it will never happen, I'm just not sure at the moment they can compress it much more. And as I believe someone else mentioned, the more the console has to decompress, the less the CPU devotes to noticeable game play (unless you count longer load times).

For example, my Quake4 DVD has 2.7 GB of data on it, and it does not use FMVs for the cut scenes (if I remember correctly). My NFS:Carbon disc, on the other hand, has 3.9 GB of data on it, and it does have FMV cut scenes. Relatively FMV, anyway. Granted those are not console games, and the actual drive space consumed by Carbon is more than 5 GB, while the size of Quake4 is the same size as the data on the disc.

My Star Wars II game for my PS2, on the other hand, obviously has no installed size, and if my DVD drive can be believed, the data size of the disc is 4.29 GB, and it does not have FMV cut scenes.

So if my system is not lying to me, compression and all, Star Wars II would take up what, 8 - 600 MB CDs, maybe 7 if 700 MB discs were used.

Anyway, I don't think it's possible to cram one DVD worth of information on a CD, even without FMV.


RE: Actually...
By darkpaw on 5/8/2007 4:09:10 PM , Rating: 2
Sony doesn't own BluRay, its a consortium. Sony is a principle party in the consortium and has a major financial stake in BluRay, but I think anyone can license the technology.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 4:20:17 PM , Rating: 2
Well it is own by many companies, including Sony. However, Sony is the "superhead" behind BluRay. The other companies are "founders" because they were the first to adopt the technology, which doesn't necessarily mean that they created it.


RE: Actually...
By Murst on 5/8/2007 5:04:18 PM , Rating: 2
You think Sony would not want to license BD to microsoft? You've gotta be joking. Sony is dreaming of the day that HD-DVD dies and BD becomes standard. They are already taking huge losses just to have BD accepted, and they'll love any help they can get.


RE: Actually...
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 6:39:11 PM , Rating: 2
Well Sony would love to license it to other companies that pose minimal or no threat at all to Sony. Microsoft is Sony's biggest competitor when it comes to the console market. Either way, Sony will still benefit - regardless of whether they license it to Microsoft or not.


RE: Actually...
By d0gb0y on 5/9/2007 10:38:08 AM , Rating: 2
I doubt Sony can legally prevent MS from making a Blue-Ray drive as long as MS pays the fees and follows the spec.


Sigh
By Aikouka on 5/8/2007 2:47:19 PM , Rating: 5
You know it's a sad state of affairs when movies are slated to define which gaming machine will fair the best in the market.




RE: Sigh
By Gekko on 5/8/2007 2:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
ditto


RE: Sigh
By enlil242 on 5/8/2007 2:56:39 PM , Rating: 5
If I'm not mistaken, and I am on occassion, I thought I read on DT that Microsoft is not opposed to supporting Blu-Ray in the future.

So... If they come out with a Blu-Ray add-on, how does this make the PS3 a winner? I certainly wouldn't hire that analyst...


RE: Sigh
By GoatMonkey on 5/8/2007 3:30:49 PM , Rating: 3
I remember reading that too. I think it was actually their reason for not making the HD-DVD drive internal.


RE: Sigh
By kelmon on 5/9/2007 3:18:15 AM , Rating: 3
To be honest, I'm not interested in a 360 as a movie player for the simple reason that it requires an add-on device. In this respect the PS3 delivers a complete system out-of-the-box that is more convenient to the consumer. That said I would not base a buying decision on a console's ability to play movies since a dedicated unit will almost certainly deliver a better experience. I may well be in a minority here but I don't see movies as a means for determining which console will sell the best. Rather, because I don't see either format as being "the winner" I would not buy a player or perceive value from a console that supported a format since either or both formats might not succeed.


RE: Sigh
By MonkeyPaw on 5/8/2007 3:52:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the funny thing is that these analysts want the PS3 to come down in price to make it more successful, when ultimately the BluRay drive itself is causing the PS3 to be so expensive. By the time Sony cuts the PS3's price to make it attractive for watching movies, reasonably priced stand-alone BR players will more than likely be readily available, since cheaper BR drives won't exclusively benefit the PS3!

I also like how "winning" means having 36% of the market compared to Nintendo's 34%. I'm sure there is a 5% margin of error in thier figures. All things considered, MS holding 30% isn't that bad when you realize that they haven't been in the console industry nearly as long as Sony and Nintendo. It's not like any of the big 3 are going to disappear. Instead, they are predicting some very solid competition.


RE: Sigh
By encryptkeeper on 5/8/2007 4:16:30 PM , Rating: 1
These numbers are pretty close to what I've been saying for a while, but at the same time I just can't listen to these analysts anymore. I just can't understand their thought process. The format war isn't even close to being decided, and already they're claiming the PS3 the winner? Besides, the 360 is beating it 3 to 1. There are no signs of the PS3 suddenly becoming popular either, whether it's north america or japan, which are usually the biggest markets. So why is it first? Plus, they fail to account for lower cost players for either HD or BR, since no old people ever buy a PS2 because it plays DVDs. And they failed to account for the Wii being the hottest console around, and with price drops it'll probably stay on top (albeit with a small margin). Arrrrrgh see what I mean? These guys are INSANE. I wonder (in fact, I'd BET) they said the PSP would most certainly beat the DS, and we all know how that fight is going.


RE: Sigh
By dragonlordkain on 5/8/2007 4:31:42 PM , Rating: 3
if they based what console wins by the movie format.. well, its stupid

if people bought PS3 just for movies, Sony would be in a bad place, since they lose money for every PS3 sold, expecting to pay it back with the money from software sales...
yes, they do sell movies, but its another division of the company.. the gaming division would be at a huge loss


RE: Sigh
By othercents on 5/8/2007 4:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
My sentiments exactly... People don't buy consoles to play movies. They buy consoles to play games and the console that is the most enjoyable gaming console will win. Plus if the price difference between the consoles continues then at some point buying a HDDVD or Blueray player along with a Wii might be cheaper than buying a PS3 or 360.

Not only that, but there isn't any information about the possibility that new consoles will be introduced or new models of the same console. Nintendo might make an HD-Wii, BlueRay-Wii, or Wii2 (with Core2) depending on demand. However my expectations is that Wii is going to win the next gen console wars and in 2009 we will see a new model come out that will be made for HD along with new PS4 and Xbox1280.

Other


RE: Sigh
By mrteddyears on 5/10/2007 6:16:27 AM , Rating: 2
I think you will find that the analyst are paid for their views and wont bite the hand that feeds them.

Do you really think a cisco router can route a terabit of data ?


RE: Sigh
By encryptkeeper on 5/8/2007 4:32:01 PM , Rating: 2
These numbers are pretty close to what I've been saying for a while, but at the same time I just can't listen to these analysts anymore. I just can't understand their thought process. The format war isn't even close to being decided, and already they're claiming the PS3 the winner? Besides, the 360 is beating it 3 to 1. There are no signs of the PS3 suddenly becoming popular either, whether it's north america or japan, which are usually the biggest markets. So why is it first? Arrrrrgh see what I mean? These guys are INSANE.


RE: Sigh
By encryptkeeper on 5/8/2007 4:43:18 PM , Rating: 2
Double post due to FF error, sorry.


207 Pages!
By IGoodwin on 5/8/2007 2:44:07 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, not sure I could write 207 pages on the future of the console market; however, I am hoping he took into account something that appears obvious to me.

The price point of a PS3 is going to remain the same for some time, as Sony is producing it at a loss. The price of dedicated Blue-ray players will drop below that of a PS3, reducing and even eliminating the effect of buying the PS3 as a cheap High def. movie player.




RE: 207 Pages!
By bkm32 on 5/8/2007 3:22:36 PM , Rating: 3
You'd also have to take into account rising sea levels due to global warming flooding SE Asia and wiping out most the chipmaking manufacturing infrastructure, the onset of radiation poison due to WW3's nuclear holocaust, and the price of tea in China going so low that automakers use it to fuel the next-generation of "green" autos.

Analyzing these plus many other "relevant" trends is what makes analysts so "spot on" with their..ur..analyses. That is what fills the 207 pages. Also, did you know that the sun will expand to engulf Redmond, WA; thereby eliminating MS from this round of console wars?

Yeah, I thought so. See, we are too ignorant to understand these trends. That is why analysts will always be needed to tell us which system to buy.


RE: 207 Pages!
By Scabies on 5/8/2007 3:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
I'm glad that there is someone more informed than I calling out my future. Gives me warm fuzzies and makes me feel secure.
</lol>
Who thought of paying people to predict the future anyways? Does this come from the tabloid market, or some strange recursion of the Gypsie/Fortune-Teller? Things like "Computers will be faster in five years" and "Fossil Fuel Consuption goes up during the summer months" are sort of a no brainer, but honestly talking along these lines, I cant help but yell out "B.S." Does he take 200 pages to establish his credibility as an analyst, or to cite things such as "Google Searches including 'Blu'" and "Dollars invested in HD-DVD advertising"?


RE: 207 Pages!
By aos007 on 5/8/2007 6:05:24 PM , Rating: 2
Philadelphia has a fairly old bylaw against psychics: it's illegal to charge money to read one's fortune. They just started enforcing it recently. Why don't they apply it against these "analysts" too?


RE: 207 Pages!
By BMFPitt on 5/8/2007 3:45:15 PM , Rating: 2
I predict the Pittsburgh Pirates will win the World Series because of the current trend towards combating global warming. As we all know, an increase in pirates leads to a decrease in global temperatures, so it will have to happen soon.

But really, what are the odds that this report wasn't paid for by Sony?


RE: 207 Pages!
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 4:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah I agree. Considering what Steve Jobs did with his stocks, there is no reason why Sony wouldn't pay to have it their way.


RE: 207 Pages!
By encryptkeeper on 5/8/2007 4:46:53 PM , Rating: 2
LOL

We all know the Pirates have nooooooooooooooo chance...Pens couldn't go all the way, guess we'll have to wait and see if the Steelers can bring any glory back to Pittsburgh.


RE: 207 Pages!
By Vanilla Thunder on 5/8/2007 5:59:53 PM , Rating: 2
I predict the Cubs will beat the Pirates today in a score of 4-2. Lilly will go 8 innings, and Dempster will get the save. We will then procede to make our way to the World Series, shunning the goat and all others in our way.

Vanilla


heh
By jay401 on 5/8/2007 2:44:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Analysts believe PlayStation 3 will be console war winner...


The key word in that sentence is "analysts". Consumers may determine otherwise.




RE: heh
By Scabies on 5/8/2007 3:38:28 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, speculating on past numbers and trends really only works on a few things. Consoles are so different though, I wouldn't believe an analyst's word on it.
Consider, a year ago, everyone started hearing about the "Revolution" (Wii) having motion sensitive controls. At first, people thought it was a secondary control (normal D-pad and stick would still reign) and were like "motion WTF!?" It has become, however, a massive hit. What analysts thought was a gimmick (and some reviewers thought to be merely an entertaining quirk) has brought gaming to parts of the market that have been, until now, mostly ignored. Stupid fun, perhaps, but stupid fun for the hardcore gamer and casual gamer alike.
Microsoft's analysts originally told their company that HDMI was not a worthwhile investment, so when PS3 came out with it they first said "unnecessary." Then HDTVs took off, PS3 started some 1080p business (VGA doesnt count, the average '360 owner doesnt use theirs in conjunction with a PC moniter or happen to have a VGA-in HDTV) and HD-DVD/HDCP became attractive (though hdcp will never really be attractive,) so we now have the Elite along with rumblings of Core and Premium HDMI goodness.
Do you believe analysts?

I personally agree with the logic of a recent DT-sponsered blog post: No one is really going to win this. We will continue to have both, much like we have iTunes format and WMA format music (and real and ATRAC and mp3, etc.) They will coexist, and we will see things like hybrid/combo players as the 'norm.' Sony has vehement supporters and vehement enemies. MS has vehement supporters and vehement enemies. Nintendo... hmm, Nintendo will, in this round, continue to pander to all parties (how many people rail against the N these days?) Microsoft has stated, as someone said earlier, that if Blu-ray takes over, they will look into releasing a USB Blu-ray player. We cant really say the same for Sony, they probably will not abandon Blu-ray (or at least support HD-DVD) ever, probably thinking of doing so as a cowardly or dishonerable move.

for the record, I own the PSWii60 Elite (no HD-DVD add-on,) and my Sony support is faltering. For me, PS3-Movies, 360-Great games, Wii-Fun/party


RE: heh
By d0gb0y on 5/9/2007 10:51:41 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft's analysts originally told their company that HDMI was not a worthwhile investment, so when PS3 came out with it they first said "unnecessary." Then HDTVs took off, PS3 started some 1080p business (VGA doesnt count, the average '360 owner doesnt use theirs in conjunction with a PC moniter or happen to have a VGA-in HDTV) and HD-DVD/HDCP became attractive (though hdcp will never really be attractive,) so we now have the Elite along with rumblings of Core and Premium HDMI goodness.


OK, so your telling me consumers that have HDTVs have HDTVs with HDMI, but the same TVs with HDMI do not have VGA connections?

Other then that, good points!


RE: heh
By mars777 on 5/10/2007 12:35:38 AM , Rating: 2
If you have any brain then you can conclude by yourself.

Why is the PS2 the most selling console today?

Because it is a really cheap gaming device including a DVD player.

Exactly that will be the PS3 after some years pass (and if BD wins).


RE: heh
By mars777 on 5/10/2007 12:55:13 AM , Rating: 2
Assuming the BD wins:

- In 4 years a BD lens and laser mechanism will be like 15$ because the market will be flooded like the DVD market today.

- In 4 Years Cell and RSX will be made in 45nm, and there will be a slim PS3 like current slim PS2. Cells are now starting to mass produce for servers not only PS3s so they will be cheaper because of mass production and because of nm technology.

- 60Gb laptop hdds ... in 4 years?
0$ - sony can send and email to seagate or hitachi stating: we offer to destroy your excess of production for free.

But all of this means that Nintendo wins in production rate/profit. When the PS3 will be cheap and strong selling (because of it's longevity) there will be Xbox720 and Nintendo DoubleWiis around.. Nintendo will be making money and sony will be making money (Nintendo because they make consoles that make money from the start). The only one loosing money will be Microsoft. But microsoft will have the best graphics in its mediocre media device (since the term "console" is going to be forgot and it will become a media-gaming device).


How to get rich fast.
By masher2 (blog) on 5/8/2007 4:25:37 PM , Rating: 5
Get a list of all stocks this analyst recommends...and buy the exact opposite.




RE: How to get rich fast.
By vze4z7nx on 5/8/2007 4:39:00 PM , Rating: 2
Haha...


RE: How to get rich fast.
By mars777 on 5/10/2007 12:38:59 AM , Rating: 2
Do it yourself and spend all your money if you are so sure :)


Waste of time
By OrSin on 5/8/2007 2:39:37 PM , Rating: 2
Let see they say the winner in the console wars will be the winner in the HD wars, but they dont know who will win that.

Also PS3 will sell better at a cheap pricer or if it had
better games

I could get 3 ho's to do 4 way If a few million in pocket too. Never seen so much of just stating the obvious in any "report".




Analyst always get it wrong
By Gekko on 5/8/2007 2:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
Remember when the ps3 was supposed to slaughter the 360 and how the psp was supposed to "kill" the DS and how the Wii was supposed (according to some analyst) sell worse than the GC.

But I do agree that blue ray has a high chance of winning the HD format war and that the ps3 really helped push the format forward.




360 is not locked in to HD-DVD
By Flunk on 5/8/2007 3:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
If blue-ray were to completely win the high def race Microsoft can just release a blue-ray drive for the 360 if they were to price it right (so that a 360+blue ray drive is the same price as a PS3 I don't think that consumers would be too offended to buy it. This argument is based squarely on the assumption that Microsoft is completely locked into HD-DVD which is completely untrue.




By UNCjigga on 5/8/2007 6:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
Here's my prediction: by the time the whole HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray mess gets sorted out, no one will care because we'll all have $100 set-top boxes that can stream HD movies direct from BlockBuster, Netflix, Unbox etc. in realtime.




If blue-ray wins....
By Locutus465 on 5/8/2007 9:23:47 PM , Rating: 2
<sarcasm>
Microsoft will just come out with an external blue-ray player at a reasonble price... OMG... Insurmountable odds... Oh the horror... Oh the horror how will microsoft survive? It's the end of the x-box...
</sarcasm>




Just goes to show
By FITCamaro on 5/8/2007 3:15:14 PM , Rating: 1
How clueless these "analysts" really are. Even if Blu-ray wins the format war, Microsoft isn't worse off either way. They can just as easily sell a Blu-ray addon drive as the current HD-DVD drive. So if Blu-ray does win, they develop a Blu-ray addon, sell it for $200 the same as the HD-DVD drive, and still ring in at the same price or cheaper(if you just got the Core) as a PS3. Only the Elite would be more expensive but I expect Microsoft to drop prices before Sony will.




Analysts....
By SavagePotato on 5/8/2007 5:17:42 PM , Rating: 1
These analysts are a riot. HD formats and studio support will decide the outcome of consoles? Only one of them actually comes with hd capability. The 360's is an optional addon. The console thats ruling the charts for that matter the Wii does nothing whatsoever HD.

I think this analyst needs to analyze his analysis again.

As well as give his head a shake.




Microsoft vs Sony
By wallijonn on 5/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By FITCamaro on 5/8/2007 3:22:32 PM , Rating: 1
Microsoft was involved with the development of HD-DVD but it hardly wrote it. They support HD-DVD, nothing more though. They don't loose anything regardless of who wins the format war.

Java is Sun's baby, not Microsoft's. And thats what HD-DVD uses for its menu and content language(a version of it anyway).

Regardless of the PS3s Blu-ray player, its still selling like crap. The majority has spoken. And it says no to $600 games consoles . Regardless of what features it might have.


RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By bkm32 on 5/8/2007 3:36:00 PM , Rating: 2
What is really going on with this round of console wars is the consumers are picking the machines that for the most part only play games. for now, those systems are the DS, PS2 and Wii. What a concept--gaming devices for playing (wait for it)...games! Brilliant!

All sarcasm aside, the X360 acts as a Windows Media Center Extender and has some HD qualities, the PS3 is the cheapest all-in-one HD-media console device, and the PSP is a PS3 extender.

Interestingly enough, the first three systems come equipped with last-gen graphics and sound (and are priced under $250). It is quite possible that the next-gen came on too quickly. At least, that's what most consumers are saying.


RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By encryptkeeper on 5/8/2007 4:29:04 PM , Rating: 2
That's all true, and even though there are plenty of people out there with HD setups ready to get their hands on their 360's Nintendo proved the market was still full of average Joes that could still have fun with minor to moderate improvements in graphics and sound. They're finding there are *more* of those customers out there and quite frankly, unless Sony and Microsoft realize they have alienated a significant customer base, they might just find themselves behind Nintendo again.


RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By DCstewieG on 5/8/2007 3:46:55 PM , Rating: 2
HD DVD does NOT use Java. Blu-ray does. This is part of the reason why HD DVD has (for now) better support for special features like PIP. It uses something called iHD.

http://news.com.com/FAQ+HD+DVD+vs.+Blu-ray/2100-10...


RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By mars777 on 5/10/2007 12:37:21 AM , Rating: 2
You should explain to me this...
Why on earth a custom way of doing something is better than a programming language that can do anything?


RE: Microsoft vs Sony
By GoatMonkey on 5/8/2007 3:41:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
they want to buy a DVD with both formats

I think the average non-techie consumer doesn't care which format it is as long at they get HD playback. So the multi-format player is key to the average consumer more than getting multiple formats of a movie in one package.


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki