340°

Sony's PS3 shows signs of recovery

The history of Sony's Playstation 3 (PS3) is littered with bad luck, bankruptcies and a series of glitches. But there is new hope that the worst days are behind with clear sailing ahead.

European gamers had to wait more than a year for the console to hit markets - until March 2007 - because problems with the blue laser diodes in the system's Blu-ray drive forced multiple launch delays. The lull let competitors snap up Sony's customers.

But those days seem to be in the past.

Read Full Story >>
taipeitimes.com
Mr Bean Laden5369d ago

FAPbox 360° is a thing of the past, last gen tech

FlameBaitGod5369d ago

DMason83 <-- that kid sending me msg's and crying about hes 360 being better than a PS3 LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr Bean Laden5369d ago

PS3 has been going James Bond 007 this whole gen, killing off the FAPbox 360° little by little right under there noses

Xbox360Elite5369d ago

Never heard of this pathetic chinese site probably looking for hits and that won't be hard say something positive about ps3 and all the droid army will visit that site.

Sunny_D5369d ago

Nothing to see here folks... Just a red neck liyyle boy playing with the 3sh^tty!

xb0x_trashie5369d ago

PS3 is the definitive next gen TRUE HD gaming machine

5369d ago
IcyJoker1875369d ago

lol @ getting owned by 360

360 is owning no one, its the slowest selling and its lead is only because of its head start.

-x.Red.x-5369d ago

it's opposite day or something?

The_Devil_Hunter5369d ago

Hmph, pathetic, Sony's got this.

Mo0eY5369d ago

From the weight loss - he'll be ready to go September 1st.

yoghurt5369d ago

Recovery from the Media's onslaught they have given it since launch. The PS3 has won them over, so they either admit to their mistakes over the last 2 years, or suddenly start loving the ps3, it's great to watch.

FlameBaitGod5369d ago

@Press_Agree

360 hasnt been owning any 1 :(, PS3 is 3rd best selling console of all time while the 360 is in 4th place :'(, its only ahead cus it was released more than a year earlyer than the PS3 :(. People get medals for being in first place, second and third. PS3 got the third medal while the 360 is in 4th and they dont get medals :(.

Kushan5369d ago

@FlameBaitGod Yeah but in a race, the timer starts from when the gun goes off, not when you feel like running it.

xTruthx5369d ago (Edited 5369d ago )

All consoles have been doing well and none needs recovering

OtherWhiteMeat5369d ago

Yeah ,but you can also lose a race in the final milliseconds . Who ever is in first when the timer stops is the victor.

zeeshan5369d ago (Edited 5369d ago )

It is actually millions of Xbox360s out there that need recovery... from RROD :)

As for PS3? Yeah, it recovered millions of sales that it could have lost even when it was the most expensive console during recession and up until like what 12 days ago :)

FamilyGuy5369d ago (Edited 5369d ago )

What lead? There's a good chance that 8 million of those 32 are re-purchasers after something went wrong with their previous 360s. 8 million was around how many they were ahead by when sony released the PS3, the majority of those consoles are dead now and out of warranty to boot meaning many simply purchased newer models as nothing was special about the older ones to where they'd WANT to keep them over a newer model. Cheaper, HDMI port, a new 3 year warranty on a new console over having an old one repaired. Match that majority of 8 million with later 360s that died and are now out of warranty and viola! 8 million dead/unused 360s.

I have to give it to M$ gamers though, they keep that attach ration really high considering the situation (I don't know a single person with a 360 that doesn't own or didn't own Halo) and their addiction to Live keeps the Live member numbers high too.

PS3 on the other hand has much more realistic numbers. Without plaguing reliability issues, past or present, there's a chance their numbers might actually be ahead RIGHT NOW. Any time I see the PS3 version of a multi-platform game out sell or be near it's 360 counterpart I put this into question again. If they have such a high attach ratio and 8 million more consoles in the wild how could this possibly happen? It just doesn't make any sense. I'd understand if theses multi-platform games were RPGs but that's NEVER the case.

/rant

I believe Sony is on the road to recovery from heaps of bad media but they probably on the "road to surpassing" the user base that the 360 actually has.

Kushan5369d ago

@OtherWhiteMeat very true, but that requires running much faster than the competition. So far, everyone seems to be going at about the same pace.

onanie5369d ago

So you're saying all the current gen consoles have lost to even the PS1? It's when the gun went off, isn't it?

Kushan5369d ago

I wasn't aware that the PS1 was a 7th generation console.

onanie5369d ago (Edited 5369d ago )

It is when the gun went off, afterall. The other consoles merely started running later, so they have all lost.

That is just using your own logic.

Kushan5369d ago

How are you using ANY logic at all? Why is the PS1 the beginning of ANYTHING? If you really want to bend my logic in such a way to suit yourself, you should have went back to the late 1960's where it REALLY all began.
But to someone with even half a brain, they knew I was talking about the Competition between the 360, the PS3 and the Wii. Also known as the SEVENTH Generation of consoles.

It's all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Feel free to read it or live in ignorance, whatever you choose matters little to me.

onanie5369d ago (Edited 5369d ago )

That is simply your logic, not mine - but it is good to see you questioning it. It doesn't matter when a console started (whether it is the 60s, or 2005), as long as it is winning in marketshare, right?

The PS1 and its games are still selling in some regions, and moreso the case with the PS2. They are relevant, so who are you to say that the gun only went off with the current generation consoles? I could go back to the 1960s - even compared with that period where the gun really went off, the PS1 still wins.

@idle - oh, so you must be the epitome of unbiasedness. But you're right - I had no intention of using logic, since I was using Kushan's own argument.

IdleLeeSiuLung5369d ago

Don't bother! It is clear that he is a fanboi with no intention of using logic. Ignore and move on....

Your argument is clearly unbiased and stating facts, yet you get disagrees. Either there are multiple accounts going on or there are a lot of fanbois here. I would guess the latter.

Kushan5369d ago

onanie, I love the way you keep ignoring everything I've said about the 7th generation of consoles. Please explain why that wasn't the "beginning" of this race.
Or, if you do want to point out why my logic is flawed, explain to me why nobody's comparing the PS3/360 to any previous consoles?

Oner5369d ago

@ Kushan ~ "Yeah but in a race, the timer starts from when the gun goes off, not when you feel like running it."

You can also say that a runner that jumped the start is running their own race for themselves

Or

You can also say that the race is akin to a Rally Race where everyone is set off at separate intervals and the overall time (total sales) is the winner during a set distance (X amount of years)...and last I checked the PS3 is selling quicker than the 360 year to year

Or even yet still

You can also say that the race doesn't END when the first person out says "This is the finish line right here because I say so" when there is pressure upon him. Especially when the finish line is still WAAAAY ahead for the other competitors. And going by MS's previous gen it is fair to believe MS will do exactly that when the PS3 is about to pass them...remember there is quite a few more years ahead.

But either way this is a moot point since the Wii is the only real "Winner" if you REALLY want to nitpick.

onanie5369d ago (Edited 5368d ago )

Dearest Kushan,

I've been ignoring it for your own sake. All this time you've been telling everyone that it doesn't matter when the 360 started "running", but for your last several posts, you've been trying very hard to argue that it DOES matter that the PS1 started running a long time ago.

P.S. in fact, people do compare PS3 to PS2 a lot, strangely enough. Shall I list all those articles, or are you more comfortable googling it yourself?

ginsunuva5368d ago

The ps3 never had a failure era. It was always selling well. Microsoft and news companies just kept making us think the ps3 was in a "desperate struggle". PLus, it was the most expensive, and expensive cars aren't expected to outsell cheaper cars, so why should the ps3?

Poopface the 2nd5368d ago (Edited 5368d ago )

Im not comparing it to 360 cause taht isnt exactly fast selling either. I think its recovering from the fact that it didnt sell as much as It was expected(by gamers/media/sony). Alot of people knew it wouldnt sell as fast as Ps2 cause it started at 600-500, but I think alot of people thought it would be the top dog soon after launch. At 300$ its much more of an impulse buy now. I got mine today and when I woke up this morning I hadnt even planed to get one yet.

I think now at the 300$ sony will start to finally have some of the massive success that many expected before the PS3 launched.

Kushan5368d ago

onanie You're STILL ignoring it. And since I've run out of bubbles, there's nothing further I can add. The fact that you keep ignoring what I'm saying only proves that you have no argument. The fact that you have to pick holes in part of what I'm saying while ignoring the rest is a testament to this.

onanie5368d ago (Edited 5368d ago )

No, I have not ignored it, and I have addressed it in my previous post.

To put it another way (in case you still don't understand it after a second read)...

You disagreed with using PS1's marketshare as comparison, simply because it started earlier than the current generation consoles (the very reason why the PS1 is not "7th generation", to point out the obvious).

So then, why is it valid to place significance into 360's current marketshare, since it resulted ONLY from having started earlier (and is selling slower worldwide)?

You can't have it both ways, dear Kushan. That is called contradicting yourself.

rockleex5367d ago

Microsoft entered the previous race late, and quit early in order to jump the gun this generation.

Both Sony and Nintendo released their consoles around the same time. Microsoft released their console early, even though they couldn't get the hardware failure rates within industry standard.

Why didn't they spend an extra year to fix all those problems and release around the same time as Sony and Nintendo?

Because they wanted to jump the gun to get sales while there is no competition.

Anyways, PS3's are selling at a faster rate than 360's. So if both consoles stay on the market for 10 years each, then the PS3 will end up selling more. Simple logic, no spin.

+ Show (27) more repliesLast reply 5367d ago
Show all comments (84)
110°

7 Deserving Games That Never Got Backward Compatibility

Backward compatibility works for many games on newer consoles, but titles such as The Simpsons: Hit and Run have been left out.

90°

20 Best Survival Games of All Time

From base building to swinging willies, here are the best survival games around, which include a couple of less than obvious picks.

Read Full Story >>
culturedvultures.com
210°

Microsoft once tried to nab LittleBigPlanet from Sony after a few drinks

It turns out that many moons ago, Microsoft once had its eye on the Sony published LittleBigPlanet series.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
XiNatsuDragnel3d ago

Microsoft had a good idea but fumbled it again.

Cacabunga1d 22h ago (Edited 1d 22h ago )

Project Spark idea was decent but they quickly gave up ..
LBP was wonderful

ApocalypseShadow2d ago

Microsoft in a nutshell. Always tried to poach Sony employees, games, 3rd party games and devices like the depth camera that was turned into Kinect but was running on PS2 before Xbox 360. Wouldn't be surprised they wanted LBP. Just like they worked behind the scenes pushing the MLB to bring Sony's baseball game to Xbox instead of making their own.
https://www.playstationlife...

They didn't spend years trying to develop their own baseball game. They wanted Sony's game.

They're scum.

Zachmo1821d 21h ago

Microsoft didn't force MLB on Xbox. MLB gave Sony 2 options either go multiplat or risk losing the license.

Rynxie1d 11h ago

And why do you think MLB said that? I believe Ms approached MLB.

ApocalypseShadow1d 10h ago (Edited 1d 10h ago )

Totally ridiculous comment.

The only exclusivity Sony had was to their own creation of The Show. Microsoft could have paid the MLB for the license just like Sony did and made their own baseball game.

Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox. They're worth 3 TRILLION dollars. You think that's not enough money to make their own baseball game? Don't be delusional.

Microsoft spun it like they always do and told the media that they had to trust Sony with their hardware. After they put Sony in that position of not having a choice. Either go multiplatform or stop making one of their successful games. That's a no win scenario.

And what did Microsoft do? They didn't try to sell the game to the Xbox community. They put it on game pass to hurt Sony. Pushing the idea of why buy games that are $70 when you can play them in their cheap service for $10. It was a dirty tactic.

You fell for the Kool aid drink Microsoft served you instead of spitting it out. Hope it tasted good because you were fooled by Phil and the gang.

1d 6h ago
Hereandthere1d 2h ago

Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.

Bond revealed that MLB The Show “always came up” in conversations between Microsoft and the Major League Baseball organization. “We always said, ‘We love this game. It would be a huge opportunity to bring it to Xbox.'” she recalled. However, when Microsoft’s efforts materialized, it put the company in an awkward situation where it had to send in pre-release consoles to a rival company.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 2h ago
Notellin1d 7h ago

"Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox."

Take a nap, conspiracies are rotting your brain.

1d 6h ago
Hereandthere1d 2h ago

Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.

ApocalypseShadow12h ago

Lying to yourself is unbecoming.

Article link tells you all you need to know in Sarah Bond's own words.

Hereandthere1d 2h ago

They were too cheap/inept/lazy to develop their own mlb game, so they port begged for years and bribed the mlb to make the show multiplatform. Like i said many times, xbox brought nothing to the table their 24 years, ZERO.

ApocalypseShadow12h ago

At least you and others get it. Note drank the Kool aid and asked for seconds thinking it was refreshing.

Most don't even know how it all played out but it's there in black and white for all to see. Microsoft brought it up for years until the MLB forced Sony's hand. It was a win win for Microsoft. Kill one reason to buy a PlayStation or kill the game by dropping it in a cheap service to kill Sony's sales numbers on PlayStation.

OtterX2d ago

"However, Healey said Media Molecule wouldn't have felt right doing that, adding it would have been "morally corrupt"."

Major kudos to Media Molecule for being an upright studio with principles.

Cockney7h ago

They chose well, Sony gave them the backing to pursue their dreams with no restrictions even tho their games especially dreams have very niche appeal. Media molecule and Sony deserve respect for this in an age of risk averse publishing.

RNTody2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Great, more stories like this please. Show the last of the zombies holding the line what we've been saying for years: Microsoft is anti competition, anti industry and has no interest in making games at all.

But hey, at least there's an Xbox Games Showcase to look forward to, right?

Inverno1d 23h ago

Well considering SONY just killed the series, LBP would've been dead by now either way. Though MM probably wouldn't exist by now either, so I'm glad they stayed with SONY, hopefully they don't get shut down any time soon or ever honestly.

Sheppard7t31d 21h ago

How did Sony kill the series?

Inverno1d 21h ago

They shut down the servers, that's millions of user created levels gone. That and dead are pretty much the same, it's also been years since 3 and they cancelled HUB soooo.

1d 6h ago
fsfsxii1d 7h ago

They shutdown the servers because no one was playing, no one in the community cared about the user created levels so why keep them up? Wtf you guys would never succeed in running a business.

Inverno1d 6h ago

Yea dood no one was playing so they shut off the servers. Cause people with enough common sense can't just Google why they were actually shut of, right?

Show all comments (29)