"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1500202.YVkUvgURIp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PS3 to lead in market share with 44% by 2011 says analyst
,----[ Quote ]
| From the "more good news for the PS3" feed comes a positive forecast by
| the Yankee Group regarding the pricey console. The analyst group
believes
| Sony will lead in next-gen market share by 44% in 2011, with Xbox 360
| taking a close 40% share, followed by Wii with a wee little bitty 16%
| share. That's a safe projection considering the PS2 sold a gazillion
| units this last generation.
`----
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/16/ps3-to-lead-in-market-share-by-44-in-2011-says-yankee-group/
Let's not feed the Yankee Group.
This must be the post you were talking about, Roy. My comments:
I haven't seen very many people excited about the PS3, while almost
everyone who knows what the Wii is seems to be excited about it. I also
think that everyone agrees that it's the games that make or break a console.
The reason the PS2 won over the XBox and the GameCube, IMHO, is that the
exclusive games were simply better (in terms of word of mouth advertising,
brand name recognition, etc.) If you wanted to buy the games that everyone
was raving about, you had to buy a PS2. If you had some spare cash left
over, you could look at the GameCube or the XBox, but buying a PS2 was
higher up on the priority list. I believe this is also the reason why
Nintendo won over Sega, and Playstation won over Nintendo.
With the next gen consoles, there aren't really any must-have games for
any of them. The XBox360 has been out for a while now, and doesn't have much
to show for it other than the Dead or Alive franchise, which has only
received lukewarm enthusiasm. The PS3 pretty much only has Metal Gear Solid
4 going for it. The Wii is in a special position in that while it doesn't
have any must-have games either, it has an excuse for this with its novel
controller. With the 360, the games are out and are known to be crappy. With
the PS3, most of the games look okay on paper, but they are sequels to games
which were available on the PS2 and known to be crappy (e.g. the Killzone
series). With the Wii, you don't really have any idea what to expect with
the games, because the experience will be completely different due to the
controller. Mario Universe, Wario Ware, Zelda, Tony Hawk, etc. These were
all decent games on the previous gen consoles (The Nintendo DS,
GameboyAdvance and GameCube). The Wii is, in a manner of speaking, the
lesser of three evils.
However, the gamers are hungry. There hasn't been a good game released
anywhere (not even on the PC) for quite a while now. They want something new
to play. That's why the Wii is so attractive. It promises something
completly different from the previous experiences. And being the cheapest of
the three consoles, it's least painful risk to take. Spending $250 on a Wii
and finding out the games aren't all that great won't be nearly as bad as
spending $700 on a PS3 and finding out the games aren't all that great.
Obligatory Linux advocacy: If you check out the comments for the above
post, there's arguments as to whether the Wii or the PS3 will be the big
winner of this next gen consoles. Both of these consoles run Linux. Almost
nobody is foolish enough to think that Microsoft's XBox360 will be the
winner.
- Oliver
|
|
