That headline was Xbox 360 console sales down 60% from previous quarter

I really hate discussing/arguing anything with you, I have to constantly keep your facts in line as well as my own. Maybe I should take your training wheels off and let you crash?

http://kotaku.com/5321559/xbox-division-sees-66-percent-slide-in-09-profit-despite-11-million-units-shipped

You just lied to try save face for a company because you had no idea Sony was a publicly held corporation that posts its financial statements.

I don't care what Sony looks like or whether they save face or not... I do know the last statement from a Sony rep was that they lose money just on making the Slims, but when you take in to account every ancillary sale and income, they have been in the black since last year. Do I need to go link that too to keep you from hurting yourself?

http://kotaku.com/5344701/sony-losing-money-on-ps3-slim

I can think of less than 10 multidisc games on the Xbox 360 period, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make but it faltered as usual.

And it's very likely any game not multi disc is crammed to the brim in order to keep it at 1 disk, leaving a hell of a lot less room to optimize, compressed files, and use of less than optimal locations on the DVD to store info.

Funny how devs are not crying about this but instead crying about how hard it is to work with the PS3. If it's such a problem, how come we never hear about it?

It's not a problem, it's a fact. You can only do so much to optimize an old media format. You hit a brick wall at some point and it becomes common knowledge. As for your Xbot chime about PS3 being difficult to develop for, I have heard more people say they like how PS3 is and it has it's own set of advantages. You need to reread dev comments from people like the ones who made Red Faction, and even the ones from Bioware recently. I am sure you can find those on your own, I don't need to link that too, do I?

Yet again you fail to provide any links to actual graphs or anything at all to support your argument. Here I'll do it for you

Uh, ok, I think I am done arguing anything with you. You do more damage to yourself than any actual furthering of points. That link of yours goes to a gif.jpg file ( http://www.maxconsole.net/content.img/dvdvsbr.gif.jpg ) and has nothing to do with graphing performance of physical media... Am I expected to also search the internet to link proofs of your points now?

In other words, if Microsoft does it, they are the devil. If Sony does it, it's ok.

Xbox = 1 machine per year unless Red Ring of Death last time I checked.
Sony = 5 machines, transferable at any time.

I hate DRM period, but being able to use the non main game files on 5 different consoles is at least reasonable.

Wow you are damaged or something. Sony made SecuRom which does limit installs and made many games unplayable with activations and draconian DRM methods. Microsoft didn't make that, that was SONY.

Just because Sony makes something (that other people wanted to buy), doesn't mean they are to blame for it's use or abuse. Microsoft is the one that started the "Games for Windows" push. Buying up studios, making PC port to Xbox in general. Replacing the PC market with their own Xbox market.

Sony has existed for over a decade in harmony with PC gaming. It wasn't until Xbox came along that you got this destruction on a very large scale. I don't think Steam was some developer casually coming up with a new way to do things, I think this has been a MS board room concocted scheme along with Netflix from the get go. Those 3 companies along with probably a few others positioned themselves to corner and control the PC market, and either chase them to Xbox, or to Steam (or both). Destruction on an incredible scale in the name of preventing piracy to developers/investors, while really being about money and control for Microsoft and it's puppets. So yeah, let's put the blame where it belongs... Those who used the DRM and Microsoft.

Oh geez how generous of them! Restricting what I paid for only 5 times, they should get a medal!

There you go again... Sony you pay 1 time, use 5 different pieces of hardware. Xbox, pay 1 time, use only 1 place. I am not defending DRM, I hate it, but if I have to choose between the 2, Sony owns Xbox easily.

Not too long ago there was a headline that the entire Xbox 360 division was down over 60%. That's not stable growth. They are still down. PS3 has been in the black with all things considered for a year.

That headline was Xbox 360 console sales down 60% from previous quarter, year over year it's still ahead and the Xbox posted a positive growth percentile despite economy while both Nintendo and Sony tanked. The Xbox is still making money, lots of it which is evident in Microsoft's publicly furnished financial statements. And since you brought it up, here's Sony's results. The highlights - loss of $418 million for the entire Playstation division despite being propped up by the PS2's continued success and 1.1 million PS3 systems sold versus 1.3 PS3 million systems sold during the same period last year. In your world, does being in the black mean losing money? In the real world, that's being in the red.

This is exactly what I am talking about when I say fact or fiction. You just lied to try save face for a company because you had no idea Sony was a publicly held corporation that posts its financial statements. All of that data you lied about took three seconds to verify on Google.

Raw sales figures with out context is only something the most naive investor might care about. It's that context and how it matters is what I have been harping on post after post... Raw data can be made to say just about anything. Raw data can be corrupted. Hell a company with money to burn can actually buy it's own inventory and resell it if they thought that it would improve the chances of securing a commanding position in a market, while writing it off as a loss...

In other words, you have zero data to support your assertion and are trying to language dance around being embarassed.

Thank you for agreeing with me, the problem is that the tiny DVD disk is crammed full with little ability to optimize unless you ship with more than 1 disk, or cut lots of content out (or your game was tiny already).

I can think of less than 10 multidisc games on the Xbox 360 period, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make but it faltered as usual.

Not when they are compressed because of disk space issues DVD capacity limitations force on a developer... What ring that is on the disc also matters more on DVD than Blu-ray.. Read speeds are not smooth and constant as you portray, they fluctuate wildly with DVD. Some optimizations can be made, but the best ones require space that many games don't allow for while trying to cram on 1 DVD.

Funny how devs are not crying about this but instead crying about how hard it is to work with the PS3. If it's such a problem, how come we never hear about it?

While I do agree it would have been awesome to have a 4x BD drive, even by the most basic graphs out there, the 2X drive is in the range of a 12x dvd. By having a very consistent read, faster seek time, and less need for optimization in order to remain at that constant read speed, are some of the things that make it perform as good if not better than a 12x DVD...

Yet again you fail to provide any links to actual graphs or anything at all to support your argument. Here I'll do it for you - Blu-Ray drive speeds graphed versus DVD. Oh look at that, the DVD absolute minimum drive speed is only 5mbps less than the 2x BD drive's MAX speed. Oh and look, the 12x DVD can double the speed of the BD drive at max or stay 1.5x as fast even operating at 50-75% speed.

I won't agree or disagree with you here, but again Blu-ray seek times are faster from the things I have read. Feel free to disagree.

Based on what you've imagined more like it. I don't disagree with you, all of the data does.

Side by side, loading between the same zones while playing both the Xbox and PS3. The whole family agreed the PS3 loaded zones faster than the Xbox. It didn't even need a stopwatch test, the difference was so dramatic. I can't believe we are even discussing this...

So you are saying yes, you know more than the guys who made Oblivion who claim that's not the case. Publish this test. Where is it? Where can I find this mystical creation?

Do you even remember what you are arguing about? I will refresh your memory. I made a claim that in my opinion Xbox will be less patient and force people to digital only much sooner than PS3 in order to compete. I said I felt Xbox drm was draconian, while on PSN you can use the software on 5 different consoles. I said I think Sony is less likely to give up Blu-ray as a format after spending so much in order to make it the standard. God of War 1, and God of War 2 are being released with touch up on Blu-ray (physical media). The meaning of what I said is it's shitty they won't allow people who already own the physical PS2 copies to play the game on all PS3s and are making them repurchase more physical media to play it. It has nothing to do with Xbox or PS3 going digital only... Not sure if you are really that lost here, or just making stuff up now just annoy me...

In other words, if Microsoft does it, they are the devil. If Sony does it, it's ok. Thanks for clearing that up.

I don't credit them for killing PC gaming, I think Microsoft deserves that crown. Limited installs and broken games is the kind of DRM I am talking about

Wow you are damaged or something. Sony made SecuRom which does limit installs and made many games unplayable with activations and draconian DRM methods. Microsoft didn't make that, that was SONY.

They let you use all game software on 5 different consoles..., and you can deactivate and reactivate entire consoles

Oh geez how generous of them! Restricting what I paid for only 5 times, they should get a medal!

It's in your own posting history, find it yourself...

In other words it doesn't exist because you had the argument with someone else. You still haven't even named which bus speed you're referring to.

Last time this happened you were betting I would not be able to come up with 35 PS3 exclusive titles, I found 55+...

Again that was an argument with you had with Verno and Beamer, not me. I remember it well though and it was indeed hilarious seeing your terrible list of titles. You even posted PSP and PSN games as "exclusive" then refused to consider Microsoft XBLA titles as exclusives. In general your posting history is like watching George from Seinfeld.

360 is the only system posting stable sales growth in both software catalog and hardware right now when every other company is having trouble with the economy.

Not too long ago there was a headline that the entire Xbox 360 division was down over 60%. That's not stable growth. They are still down. PS3 has been in the black with all things considered for a year.

If we were talking about the PS3 here, sales figures would matter to you. Second, the sales figures determine the effective install base that publishers can sell content to so it very much matters despite whatever you may think.

Raw sales figures with out context is only something the most naive investor might care about. It's that context and how it matters is what I have been harping on post after post... Raw data can be made to say just about anything. Raw data can be corrupted. Hell a company with money to burn can actually buy it's own inventory and resell it if they thought that it would improve the chances of securing a commanding position in a market, while writing it off as a loss...

are you going to pretend that half of the 32 million Xbox owners are all diehards who bought the system multiple times?

I think it's ore around 30 million and for example I will use it. Let's say 46% of the people who bought an Xbox never had a problem (using Joystiq's sample data). Then lets say that the other 54% had to at least replace their Xbox 1 time. But half of them had to do it a 2nd time, and half of them had to do it a 3rd time, so on and so on. You would reach a figure well beyond cutting total sales in half. My opinion not only holds merit, it's more accurate and in line with the actual graph recently released regarding bad Xboxs. Those who had problems kept pulling bad ones from the "pool" of bad refurbs, this continued until they bought their way out on another xbox, and even some of those were bad too. I know, it's happened to me 3 times. You have a concrete theoretical explanation how it came to pass, and even a graph from a third party showing things like this did in fact most likely occur. You can pretend it isn't the case all you want. If I were selling a game on Xbox, I would seriously cut my expectations for average sales potential in half after filtering out all other factors.

Actually there are very few large singular data files in a typical game and that is what developers move to the outer regions of a DVD.

Thank you for agreeing with me, the problem is that the tiny DVD disk is crammed full with little ability to optimize unless you ship with more than 1 disk, or cut lots of content out (or your game was tiny already).

Most of these will be large textures or levels. This keeps their read speeds relatively stable and at optimal rates.

Not when they are compressed because of disk space issues DVD capacity limitations force on a developer... What ring that is on the disc also matters more on DVD than Blu-ray.. Read speeds are not smooth and constant as you portray, they fluctuate wildly with DVD. Some optimizations can be made, but the best ones require space that many games don't allow for while trying to cram on 1 DVD.

If Sony would include a 4x BD drive we wouldn't even be having this discussion but they keep using old 2x technology which is first gen and slow.

While I do agree it would have been awesome to have a 4x BD drive, even by the most basic graphs out there, the 2X drive is in the range of a 12x dvd. By having a very consistent read, faster seek time, and less need for optimization in order to remain at that constant read speed, are some of the things that make it perform as good if not better than a 12x DVD...

Small reads are unimportant for both Blu-Ray and DVD, seek times are more than adequate there.

I won't agree or disagree with you here, but again Blu-ray seek times are faster from the things I have read. Feel free to disagree.

Where is this comparison?

Side by side, loading between the same zones while playing both the Xbox and PS3. The whole family agreed the PS3 loaded zones faster than the Xbox. It didn't even need a stopwatch test, the difference was so dramatic. I can't believe we are even discussing this...

No, you don't get to do this. Last week you claimed Microsoft was going to do this with their DD store and kept going on and on about how wrong it was. Now it's simply no big deal because Sony's doing it? No, that's exactly the kind of inconsistency that people criticize you for.

Do you even remember what you are arguing about? I will refresh your memory. I made a claim that in my opinion Xbox will be less patient and force people to digital only much sooner than PS3 in order to compete. I said I felt Xbox drm was draconian, while on PSN you can use the software on 5 different consoles. I said I think Sony is less likely to give up Blu-ray as a format after spending so much in order to make it the standard. God of War 1, and God of War 2 are being released with touch up on Blu-ray (physical media). The meaning of what I said is it's shitty they won't allow people who already own the physical PS2 copies to play the game on all PS3s and are making them repurchase more physical media to play it. It has nothing to do with Xbox or PS3 going digital only... Not sure if you are really that lost here, or just making stuff up now just annoy me...

Sony is the king of DRM. They are responsible for the major driving DRM on the PC that you blew off.

I don't credit them for killing PC gaming, I think Microsoft deserves that crown. Limited installs and broken games is the kind of DRM I am talking about. Forcing people to use Game for Windows and Steam. That's the bullshit that killed PC gaming for me and many others. You can't pin that on Sony.

Sony PSN games are DRM'd.

They let you use all game software on 5 different consoles..., and you can deactivate and reactivate entire consoles (PSP and HD changes do not change the counts either). If these were the MAIN games on PS3, I wouldn't buy in to it at all. On Xbox, you get 1 single machine to use your DRM'd software on. Last I checked you could only change to a new machine 1 time a year unless you get RROD or convince a csr to grant you a change. Since Sony will most likely staying on physical media longer, getting the major games on Blu-ray will prevent people from being put in to a position of download only at some point from Xbox via Games on Demand. If you want to pretend PSN DRM is ridiculous when in fact it's pretty generous, that's your choice. It doesn't really affect any of the physical media as you can play every game on Blu-ray for PS3 without ever going online.

Link to this imaginary discussion.

It's in your own posting history, find it yourself...

Lame backpedal that really means you don't have five. This is exactly what people are sick of you doing.

Last time this happened you were betting I would not be able to come up with 35 PS3 exclusive titles, I found 55+...

If you want to play this game, make it worth my while otherwise step off. I don't care what you think or if you believe me at this point, the only thing I ever hear when a service drops support of something it's about Xbox live, and I still think that.

@Verno - Practice what you preach and we will see where it goes...

This comment was edited on Sep 2, 2009, 16:16.

You two are going to go in circles for 20 pages at this rate. Hug it out bros.

When Xbox sales go "dark" it's more than likely gone forever this generation in my opinion (also many are adopting PS3 as their only system and abandoning the Xbox due to hardware issues if you can believe the multitudes of posts declaring just that).

You're welcome to your opinion but the 360 is the only system posting stable sales growth in both software catalog and hardware right now when every other company is having trouble with the economy.

That doesn't mean that is a permanent state, that just means right now, that seems to be the case. Pretending the sales Figures that are out there mean anything other than there's been a lot sold, without a caveat that many Xbox systems have burned out, or are no longer used is dishonest at best.

If we were talking about the PS3 here, sales figures would matter to you. Second, the sales figures determine the effective install base that publishers can sell content to so it very much matters despite whatever you may think.

But this is exactly what some die hard fans have had to do in order to use their software collection. Do you live under a rock or something? I have had to buy an Xbox several times myself.

Diehards will always be diehards, are you going to pretend that half of the 32 million Xbox owners are all diehards who bought the system multiple times? Give up, you lost this one already. It was a stupid claim when you made it and your justifications are even more silly. I'm not even going to address it anymore, it's impossible to take seriously.

What you are seeing most likely if you are looking at the stuff I think you are is flat theory tables with no factoring in of average speed, data location, how many layers involved, where data is on a disk (as this affects DVDs in a big way not BD) ability to have extra space in order to optimize reads (hard to do on most fully loaded small DVDs like a majority of Xbox are, especially if they are dual layered which slows down a DVD drive even more) and of course the superior seek time of Blu-ray. In real world transfer speeds, you will see the Blu-ray has a much better average transfer speed on a 2x versus a 12x trying to read a dual layer DVD with slower seek time, and crowded with data that most likely was unable to be optimized at the time it's created because the whole DVD was needed to produce the game, or they can go to extra DVDs which is rare for single disk non RPG games. Blu-ray runs at a constant load rate, DVD fluctuate wildly, and rarely live up to any theory when presented at black and white face value on a real game.

Actually there are very few large singular data files in a typical game and that is what developers move to the outer regions of a DVD. Most of these will be large textures or levels. This keeps their read speeds relatively stable and at optimal rates. The industry has gotten quite good at optimizing for DVD, it's a known factor and the drives shipping are pretty fast. If Sony would include a 4x BD drive we wouldn't even be having this discussion but they keep using old 2x technology which is first gen and slow. Small reads are unimportant for both Blu-Ray and DVD, seek times are more than adequate there.

I have done a few myself, like Oblivion above, and it was clearly a dominating performance by the PS3

Where is this comparison? Did you catalog it on Youtube? No offense but I'm not going to take your word for it when Bethesda Softworks who made Oblivion claim that the PS3 version loads slower than the Xbox360 version.

What you do is your business, and I am not here to convince you either way. If I want to post something and an organized group of people want to flame and jump my case for my opinion, I will respond. This thread started when I simply posted the gamestop web site the other day with a clever ad about Batman and was jumped on by 4 of you for no reason. You made shit up and made personal attacks. If you want to label people as zealots, look in the mirror...

I am not a group of people, I speak only for myself. You aren't posting your opinions is the problem, you are trying to pass off your opinions as factual data and that is problematic to me. You can say the PS3 will sell 80million systems in your opinion and that doesn't bug me. I wouldn't "jump your shit" as you put it, for that kind of comment. What bugs me is when people post fiction and claim it's reality.

Even Verno's favorite game Prototype had articles pointing out Superior features on the PS3.

I've played Prototype PC and saw the articles in question, yet again you're twisting things. The 360 and PC versions has no shadow volume maps, the PS3 version lacked 2xMSAA. That's it. None of the versions were equal in features.

I think it's kind of shitty that Sony will resell these games instead of making them BC for all (have have the original PS3 so it doesn't affect me directly) but maybe they will change their approach with time.

No, you don't get to do this. Last week you claimed Microsoft was going to do this with their DD store and kept going on and on about how wrong it was. Now it's simply no big deal because Sony's doing it? No, that's exactly the kind of inconsistency that people criticize you for.

I blew off PC gaming when DRM became the norm

Sony is the king of DRM. They are responsible for the major driving DRM on the PC that you blew off. Sony PSN games are DRM'd. They even lock out the RSX from Linux to prevent people from writing their own emulators despite them not wanting to work on backwards compatibility anymore. There's plenty of DRM guilt to spread around in the console industry, Sony is no more innocent than anyone else.

What you mean to say is that you all conspired to attack yme from the get go, and you are continuing to do so while doing a poor job hiding that fact... Don't talk about other people being disingenuous when you have displayed acts of hypocrisy and deceit.

I don't even know a single person on the site in real life nor do I talk to anyone on the site outside of it. You're going to have to do better than baseless paranoid accusations.

Maybe the reason you are incorrect about most of what you say is that you use Google and the internet as your litmus test where I tend to actually use the hardware (years in this case) and even the competition hardware, and form my own educated opinions. It's ok, that's typical for people whom like playing the forum game and really don't care about what the topic is...

You couldn't even get the bus speed information of the PS3 when compared to a PC correct (or you did and bailed), it's not hard to believe that is just going to continue.

Link to this imaginary discussion. I think you're confusing one of your many arguments with Verno, nin or whoever else with me. Which bus speed are you even talking about, you realize there is more than one on a PC right?

I will name 5 examples if you will submit to changing your signature to whatever I want it to read for 60 days. Otherwise jump through those hoops yourself...

Lame backpedal that really means you don't have five. This is exactly what people are sick of you doing. You said the Xbox keeps abandoning games on Live. Prove it.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 17:00.

I thought you were out... Didn't take long to prove to everyone you never mean what you say...

No hug? We're like ying and yang man, what would you do without me? You'd rave on and on about the PS3 and no one would be listening At least this way you have an audience.

That's odd because in the real world, playing the game, the PS3 loads waaaay faster. Maybe a link you guys always expect me to post, but never provide yourself is called for?

He provided a quote from the makers of the game themselves. I mean, what more proof do you want?

I have posted 4 links in this thread backing my claims. No one else has posted a single relevant link. I will back my stuff up more when you start backing up your preposterous counter claims. In addition to that, my hands on observations and opinions on some issues are exactly that.

No, you will back up your stuff or it will be called the opinionated mess that it is. It's really that simple. When you make a claim, you get to back it up otherwise it means nothing. If I say the sky is neon orange then that's just what I think, it has no meaning unless I prove it is indeed neon orange. You make the claims, you back them up. If you don't like it, don't post them. Discussion is fine, we all like to discuss things. Making up preposterous stuff isn't and you will need to back those things up otherwise your posts will be continually invalidated and you're not going to convince anyone of anything.

Anyone can read the first 8 posts of this thread and easily come to the conclusion that the 4 of you have axes to grind with me from previous interactions on other posts and are out to "get" me on this thread. If you think you really think the' Oh it's a conspiracy defense" is going to fly here, then it is you that's a few fries short of a happy meal...

No you're wrong. I have nothing against you. Hell I'd game with you. You're just a dude on the Internet to me. You and I would get along just fine if you'll come down from the "PS3 is god" pedestal. Tell you what, I'll make you a deal. You promise to be a bit more reasonable and stop trying to assert your opinions as facts and I will go buy a PS3. Then we can really get down to discussing things, these threads will be readable for everyone and I'll prove to you that I could care less about what I game on or you as a person.

I think your beef with me is that you think I'm a 360 guy. I'm not. I have a PSP, PS2, an old SNES somewhere, a DS, a 360 and a PC. I just recognize that there is value to the 360 and that a lot of people like it. I like some of the games on it myself. The PS3 has taken awhile to come out of it's slump and Sony made a lot of poor decisions along the way. It shouldn't shock you that people are going to be apprehensive about getting one, especially when they have existing libraries and consoles that they are happy with.

You're going to have to be more accommodating and less assertive/hostile if you want people to come around to your point of view. It's really that easy bro. If I had a PS3 I would go about totally differently and I bet you'd find people a lot more willing to listen. You catch more bees with honey and all that.

Love you too little guy, let's hug it out.

I thought you were out... Didn't take long to prove to everyone you never mean what you say...

The makers of Oblivion say the PS3 loads slower than the 360.

That's odd because in the real world, playing the game, the PS3 loads waaaay faster. Maybe a link you guys always expect me to post, but never provide yourself is called for?

Dude he criticizes you for not backing things up then you make even more claims

I have posted 4 links in this thread backing my claims. No one else has posted a single relevant link. I will back my stuff up more when you start backing up your preposterous counter claims. In addition to that, my hands on observations and opinions on some issues are exactly that.

Seriously? You really need to seek therapy if you think this.

If you think you really think the "Oh it's a conspiracy" defense is going to fly here, then it is you that's a few fries short of a happy meal... Anyone can read the first 8 posts of this thread and easily come to the conclusion that the 4 of you have axes to grind with me from previous interactions on other posts and are out to "get" me on this thread. I am sorry you are such a bad loser that you need to harass people who proved their points better to feel vindicated.

Sure. Wow that's a classic right there.

I seriously do not care what you 3 buy. In fact, stay on Xbox Live, please... Everyone else should get the best piece of hardware known as the PS3.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 16:03.

Love you too little guy, let's hug it out.

I almost always back stuff up and you know it.

Dude he criticizes you for not backing things up then you make even more claims, type up a page long post and still don't post a single link or reference. I mean come on, lol. You have opinions, that's fine. We all have opinions. Doesn't mean they're right or facts. You wuv your PS3 like a family dog and it's so darned cute.

almost always back stuff up and you know it. In this case, the only way to do these things is to take each game on a case by case basis and run PS3 to Xbox and compare the loads which I haven't found. I have done a few myself, like Oblivion above, and it was clearly a dominating performance by the PS3

Did you even read his post? The makers of Oblivion say the PS3 version of Oblivion loads slower than the 360. The dudes who made the game. You should like, read people's posts before responding, that's just embarassing man.

What you mean to say is that you all conspired to attack yme from the get go

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Seriously? You really need to seek therapy if you think this. Yeah me and a random bunch of people on Bluesnews conspired over an internet forum to harass the virtuous Z9000 Are you crazy, in real life? It's a serious question, are you out of your mind?

What you do is your business, and I am not here to convince you either way.

Hahahahahha yeah, hahahahahhaha. Sure. Wow that's a classic right there. Hey guys ignore this PS3 I'm trying to ram down your throats, I don't care at all!

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 15:39.

so I'm out.

Don't lie to people Verno, you can't help but see your own words typed, like spam... You have never left, you even stated, "You will always be here to post" when I do, like some internet cop. omg is it a bird, is it a plane? No, it's SUPER VERNO! Blue's news own misguided demihero of distorted justice and the internet way!

That doesn't mean those people are all running out and buying new Xbox360's is his point

Of course not, some used a refurb program if still within it's limited coverage, and then when that burned out bought a new one. There's a portion of people that bought their Xbox and rarely play it, there's a portion of people who bought 1 or more Xboxs and have abandoned it (like my family and others I know) and there's a portion of people who are die hard Xbox players and have resigned themselves to chewing through hardware as it goes out. When Xbox sales go "dark" it's more than likely gone forever this generation in my opinion (also many are adopting PS3 as their only system and abandoning the Xbox due to hardware issues if you can believe the multitudes of posts declaring just that). When a PS3 went dark, it was because of lack of games at one point, that's no longer the case now. Just about every new PS3 does have a chance of selling a piece of 3rd party software. PS3 is emerging, Xbox is slowing imploding in my opinion. That doesn't mean that is a permanent state, that just means right now, that seems to be the case. Pretending the sales Figures that are out there mean anything other than there's been a lot sold, without a caveat that many Xbox systems have burned out, or are no longer used is dishonest at best.

virtual numbers do not keep people owning a product if they have to pay $1000 to replace it 5 times like

But this is exactly what some die hard fans have had to do in order to use their software collection. Do you live under a rock or something? I have had to buy an Xbox several times myself. I stopped... When I did I was even refused ability to transfer my software purchases to the new system. They have remedied that recently but it didn't change what I and others had to go through to stay Xbox users. I won't defend a multi billion dollar company that crushes people trying to be their fan with bad hardware and unfair business practices. You can support them if you wish. While some policies with MS have changed, I am convinced their philosophy and abusive apathy for the end user and others remains. You want to spend more money for less, that's your choice.

We're talking about a few seconds here at most so it's not a big deal but it's yet another false claim from you with no factual backup.

You are utterly wrong. For example I own Oblivion for both Xbox and PS3, It looks better on PS3, it loads waaay, waaaay faster as well. It is a big deal when a game uses every single zone border as a load point.

No they aren't. Every single multiplatform game loading comparison I just googled has the 360 ahead.

What you are seeing most likely if you are looking at the stuff I think you are is flat theory tables with no factoring in of average speed, data location, how many layers involved, where data is on a disk (as this affects DVDs in a big way not BD) ability to have extra space in order to optimize reads (hard to do on most fully loaded small DVDs like a majority of Xbox are, especially if they are dual layered which slows down a DVD drive even more) and of course the superior seek time of Blu-ray. In real world transfer speeds, you will see the Blu-ray has a much better average transfer speed on a 2x versus a 12x trying to read a dual layer DVD with slower seek time, and crowded with data that most likely was unable to be optimized at the time it's created because the whole DVD was needed to produce the game, or they can go to extra DVDs which is rare for single disk non RPG games. Blu-ray runs at a constant load rate, DVD fluctuate wildly, and rarely live up to any theory when presented at black and white face value on a real game.

You keep making these wild claims with no numbers, no URLs, no sources, nothing.

I almost always back stuff up and you know it. In this case, the only way to do these things is to take each game on a case by case basis and run PS3 to Xbox and compare the loads which I haven't found. I have done a few myself, like Oblivion above, and it was clearly a dominating performance by the PS3. In order to explain why this occurs, you have to look at all the factors like I mentioned above. It would take extremely detailed tests with intersection at the hardware level with readouts and be game to game much like you see varying results on FPS comparisons to make a worthy "proof" which doesn't exist in what browsing I have done.

I'm a PC guy and I tend to do my research before making purchase decisions.

I am the same way. I blew off PC gaming when DRM became the norm, I have tried the alternatives. PS3 has offered a great performance over the last 3 years, the games are here now with truckloads incoming, the multiplay is free, and things like the look and performance of Killzone 2 clearly tells me that there is much more to come. I made a decision to drop PC games in general (may get a few) and now I am making a decision to not buy anything Xbox, at all... What you do is your business, and I am not here to convince you either way. If I want to post something and an organized group of people want to flame and jump my case for my opinion, I will respond. This thread started when I simply posted the gamestop web site the other day with a clever ad about Batman and was jumped on by 4 of you for no reason. You made shit up and made personal attacks. If you want to label people as zealots, look in the mirror...

People are going to buy systems that have the games they want to play.

I posted a list of 55+ PS3 exclusives. That has grown tremendously. Even Verno's favorite game Prototype had articles pointing out Superior features on the PS3. Today I posted a link that shows God of War 1 and 2 coming to PS3 as well. That's PS2 games that work on any PS3, on physical media. I think it's kind of shitty that Sony will resell these games instead of making them BC for all (have have the original PS3 so it doesn't affect me directly) but maybe they will change their approach with time. In a way for these 2, I am glad they reoutched them and that they will be on Blu-ray. I would buy SMT: Noctune this way as well if they ever did it, SSX collection too...

I realize this was directed at Verno but I'm going to respond as it deserves immediate condemnation.

What you mean to say is that you all conspired to attack yme from the get go, and you are continuing to do so while doing a poor job hiding that fact... Don't talk about other people being disingenuous when you have displayed acts of hypocrisy and deceit.

I seem to be able to find out more using Google than you know about your system after owning it for three years.

Maybe the reason you are incorrect about most of what you say is that you use Google and the internet as your litmus test where I tend to actually use the hardware (years in this case) and even the competition hardware, and form my own educated opinions. It's ok, that's typical for people whom like playing the forum game and really don't care about what the topic is... You couldn't even get the bus speed information of the PS3 when compared to a PC correct (or you did and bailed), it's not hard to believe that is just going to continue.

Name five. You always hear it, so surely you can name five examples.

I will name 5 examples if you will submit to changing your signature to whatever I want it to read for 60 days. Otherwise jump through those hoops yourself...

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 15:26.

At this point nothing new is being said and it's an obvious case of "Z9000 loves his PS3 and its the bestest bestbest best at everything" so I'm out. For the record you're wasting time with him, like Beamer mentioned he treats this stuff like a religion instead of an entertaining hobby.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 13:02.

I can't help but see endless confirmation of ridiculously large return rates.

That doesn't mean those people are all running out and buying new Xbox360's is his point. If you have any concrete data then link it, otherwise stop acting like it's a fact when it's simply your opinion. You keep claiming hyper-inflated sales but the evidence shows that most systems are still under warranty since Microsoft provided extensions. Their own warranty costs are a matter of public record as well, are you going to deny those? The worst part is that you didn't even think this through fully. Let's say for a moment your argument was true, people were replacing systems failing on them multiple times and paying retail costs every single time. Think about that, they keep going back to the 360 every single time. What does that say about the PS3? Trust me, you don't want to win that argument as it says nothing good about your system. And don't post some crap about gamerscore because virtual numbers do not keep people owning a product if they have to pay $1000 to replace it 5 times like you claim.

I wouldn't go down this road. Xbox load speeds are way longer, and they have added entire installs just to compete

No they aren't. Every single multiplatform game loading comparison I just googled has the 360 ahead. We're talking about a few seconds here at most so it's not a big deal but it's yet another false claim from you with no factual backup. The PS3 only includes a 2x BD drive for christs sake and the max measureable read rates it hits are below the 360's dvd drive(the BenQ drive anyways, cant find data on the others). A 2x Blu-Ray drive reads at a maximum of 75mbps. The BenQ dvd-rom can read at 98mbps(again I do not have data for the others but they're all rated at the same speed should they should be at about the same level). Developers further optimize this by moving large data to the outer portions of the disc since small reads don't really matter once the initial loads are done. Don't take my word for it, here's a quote from Todd Howard of Bethesda Softworks from EGM online: "Drive speed matters more to me [than capacity], and Blu-ray is slower." In fact the only upside to Blu-Ray as a game medium is capacity and a relatively constant read speed but you don't even mention the latter, probably because you didn't even know.

You keep making these wild claims with no numbers, no URLs, no sources, nothing. And hard drive installs as a user option is a good thing, consumers like having choice. Some PS3 games offer that option too, Valkyria Chronicles just to name one off the top of my head. I guess Sony and Sega just added that to compete with Microsoft, right? What about those required installs that many PS3 games do? Those get a pass just because?

PS3 is the better buy for every possible reason I can think of. Is that condensed enough?

It seems more like you're just saying something, anything no matter how ridiculous to get them to buy a PS3. I might buy a PS3, I'm thinking about it but your kind of zealotry is making me think twice. I'm a PC guy and I tend to do my research before making purchase decisions. Every time I see you post about the PS3, you include something bizarre that doesn't sound right. I go hit google and sure enough, it's not. Why does that keep happening? If people are that desperate to post lies on forums about the system, what kind of state can it be in right now? Why do you feel the need to lie and post such obvious nonsense? Instead of always comparing the PS3 to the 360 or the Wii then making up a bunch of crap, you could simply play up the good aspects of the PS3. You never do though, you always go straight to negative and end up looking ridiculous, it's like watching a Republican convention. Verno or Beamer is right(I forget who said it earlier), you always post as if there's a big need for your system to be better than everything else. No one cares whats better. People are going to buy systems that have the games they want to play. You're making the wrong kinds of arguments and that's why you never have positive results on this site. Why do you think over 10 different posters on the site have labeled you a fanboy in the past month? I'm sure that number increases the further back we go too. You need to seriously stop reading right here, sit back for a moment and think about what kind of "help" you're giving Sony. You're probably doing the PS3 more harm than good with this kind of stuff.

While we are on the subjects of things you misunderstand, my sig is about how a 3 year old XBOX 360 game I own, and own DLC for, is suddenly getting multiplayer removed. What's worse is a company other than microsoft can suddenly decide to negate my ability to play multiplayer on a game I own (and have paid for DLC on) even if I pay for Xbox Live gold. That's not ok to me, and it draws their entire control, and ability to run an online service in favor of gamers in to question. If it can happen on this game, it can happen on any other game a non MS company decides to pull the plug on. If you want to support that kind of service, even champion it, and call me stupid, then go for it, I lost just about any respect I had for you ages ago. Another difference between this issue, and what you said about Warhawk is, that you will still be able to play Warhawk multiplayer... I can't say the same thing for Chrome Hounds.

I realize this was directed at Verno but I'm going to respond as it deserves immediate condemnation. The same exact thing can happen on the PSN if a company decides to withdraw server support for their game. Sony does not run all online servers, just for first party titles. Some devs pay Sony a fee to host for them but again it's not all of them by far. For someone who owns a PS3, you don't seem to know much about it. I seem to be able to find out more using Google than you know about your system after owning it for three years. More evidence that you literally post whatever pops up into your head without research or even understanding.

I always hear how on Xbox Live there are things being removed (not so on PS3)

Name five. You always hear it, so surely you can name five examples.

This comment was edited on Aug 30, 2009, 01:38.

This is your entire problem in a nutshell though. First off, yes it's ludicrous.

Yes it is a problem because you seem to have fooled yourself in to ignoring the probability that failing systems are a very large source of hyper inflated sales figures. This is on top of the real reasons like apparently normal console life for an Xbox, people buying Elite for HDMI, or multiple systems in the same home.

Second, your personal situation does not apply to every other consumer in the universe.

I don't claim my personal experience is the same for everyone else, I can read on the internet in multiple locations. I can't help but see endless confirmation of ridiculously large return rates. It's every single Xbox owner I know as well. Even Fan boys who are stalwart defenders of Xboxs are priding themselves on how many Xboxs they have gone through. I have seen people claiming they have gone through over 10 xboxs since release. Even Joystiq (a report posted right here on Blues) stated 54ish % on Xbox failure and went on to claim if it was their own statistics, it would be well over 100%. It's Hyper inflated sales statistics, stop being silly!

Bluray adoption is going to be a slow and painful process,

Never claimed otherwise, even said it was expected. The same thing happened with Record to CD, VHS to DVD, floppy to CD then DVD. The point I was making is you can wait till later, or build your Blu-ray library now. It is better than streaming, way better...

Trying to pretend that capacity is all that matters is pretty ignorant too.

I agree, glad I didn't do that...

While we are on the subjects of things you misunderstand, my sig is about how a 3 year old XBOX 360 game I own, and own DLC for, is suddenly getting multiplayer removed. I always hear how on Xbox Live there are things being removed (not so on PS3). What's worse is a company other than microsoft can suddenly decide to negate my ability to play multiplayer on a game I own (and have paid for DLC on) even if I pay for Xbox Live gold. That's not ok to me, and it draws their entire control, and ability to run an online service in favor of gamers in to question. If it can happen on this game, it can happen on any other game a non MS company decides to pull the plug on. If you want to support that kind of service, even champion it, and call me stupid, then go for it, I lost just about any respect I had for you ages ago. Another difference between this issue, and what you said about Warhawk is, that you will still be able to play Warhawk multiplayer... I can't say the same thing for Chrome Hounds.

One of the main reasons for most games to have mandatory installs for caching purposes on the PS3.

I wouldn't go down this road. Xbox load speeds are way longer, and they have added entire installs just to compete. Xbox is the low machine in this respects, it's ridiculous to even talk about small 1 gig installs on PS3 when Xbox is produced not to have to, but users are doing 9+ gig installs to get acceptable performance anyways... It's a fact that Xbox installs are longer to accomplish, and require a ton more space if you choose to install the games, or you can play it with slow ass loads. But there's nothing wrong with that. You seem to think it's bad but I guess the list of things to prop up the failing Xbox with is getting shorter and much less believable. BTW any installs to a disc is a bonus for speed. Talking about the need to do it as a bad thing is ignorance... I wish PS3 had full game installs as an option, but the PS3 doesn't need it, Xbox however does.

Can you condense your responses a bit? You replied 4 times in a row and the posts are becoming unmanageable to respond to.

I responded directly to the people who were quoting to me on a post by post basis. Not interjecting comment after comment with new posts like you do. PS3 is the better buy for every possible reason I can think of. Is that condensed enough?

This comment was edited on Aug 29, 2009, 16:41.

No, it's not ludicrous... I have 2 Xboxs... I have had to return them 3 times

This is your entire problem in a nutshell though. First off, yes it's ludicrous. Second, your personal situation does not apply to every other consumer in the universe. Suggesting that we should chop all Xbox sales figures in half just to suit your ego is not reality, sorry. Even doing so wouldn't help Sony as neither company is making a fortune selling the systems in the first place.

You can write books about Bluray but it doesn't change the fact that consumers don't really care about Bluray right now. You do, great, we get it. I like Bluray movies too. The general public is pretty happy with DVD for the time being. That's life, you can't make people do what you want. Bluray adoption is going to be a slow and painful process, it will happen one day but that day will not happen before the PS4 or whatever appears.

Trying to downplay more capacity to create is ignorance plain and simple.

Trying to pretend that capacity is all that matters is pretty ignorant too. You can have all of the capacity in the world but if your drive read speeds are too slow then it's just glorified storage. One of the main reasons for most games to have mandatory installs for caching purposes on the PS3. It's worth noting that the Slim BD drive is actually slower than the other SKU's too which is disappointing considering it wasn't a speed demon to begin with.

Same with the transitions involving 3.5 disks, VHS, Cds, and DVDs.

And each of those transitions took the better part of a DECADE. Assuming Bluray is a sustainable technology and that something better doesn't come along, you've got a long wait ahead of you so you need to have more realistic expectations.

Can you condense your responses a bit? You replied 4 times in a row and the posts are becoming unmanageable to respond to.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 2009, 12:33.

Fortunately no western developer is dumb enough to think its fans want to watch 4-5 hours of pre-rendered cut scenes. That's pretty solely in the realm of FF and MGS, two games that haven't been fun for me since the early 90s, in part because they became more about watching incoherent cut scenes and less about doing anything.

Fortunately for us westerners developers aren't going to stay short sighted as you make them out to be as there are more things than just cut scenes that can be added to take advantage of the extra space.

Even without adding a single bonus feature or cut scene, there are games that are taking up multiple DVDs on an Xbox that would fit on a single Blu-ray.

Trying to downplay more capacity to create is ignorant plain and simple.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 2009, 12:27.

shows a large consumer indifference towards it for the moment.

Same with the transitions involving 3.5 disks, VHS, Cds, and DVDs. This is expected, not some kind of indicator, no matter how marketing people try to make it one.

Stop wasting time on stupid projects like Home that no one seems to care about.

I share this sentiment, however 7 million people regularly visit Home, and that number is on the rise. They have added an extreme amount of content, with plans to add more. Game launching from inside Home is on the way. As a revenue stream, this may be a very nice addition for the PS3. I doubt I will ever use it however.

Netflix was the biggest cool surprise with the 360. I already had netflix but the "free" streaming on demand of TV shows and movies is a HUGE plus. HUGE. I love it. No waiting for the mail and no waiting in line at a rental place. The convenience factor is 100%

Once you adopt Blu-ray, you ultimately get a component Blu-ray player as well. Samsung makes the best ones with HQV. Their firmware offers free Netflix streaming (which I don't use after a few samples and see no need for as physical media is so much better). Sony doesn't really need Netflix, it has an insane library to stream already for people that think its cool. It would be a nice option, but like I said, renting physical media yields a better picture anyways.

The problem with this scenario it doesn't take streaming into account which is a serious growth market.

The problem with streaming is that it doesn't look like Blu-ray or even good upscaled media, and there was even an article posted here on Blues not too long ago that it would be a decade or so for streaming to be comperable HD to even upscaled DVDs on a premium upscaler.

There's a place for it with people who like to stream (I personally hate using streaming at all). That place is pretty much TV shows and news, stuff without a lot of visuals. I still buy regular DVDs of stuff like "House" and "Boston Legal". Because it's nice to have a Blu-ray of it, you just don't have to have it with upscaling on TV shows unless they have special effects like "Stargate" or something animated (yeah animated stuff looks pretty damn good).

Battlestar Galactica Blu-ray set was uttterly amazing, especially since it was all pretty much shot in high def video tape. With Sci-fi stuff, gaming special effects and cut scenes, heavy special effect movies, Blu-ray is a *must have* to me. It makes special effect and animated content look amazing.

Over time being the key words there unfortunately. This kind of thing takes years.

I totally agree, but being ahead of the curve and forming a library congruent to the future standard has a big advantage as it has a much, much longer shelf life. I was one of those guys buying PC CDs like Battle Chess and other more obscure titles well before there was anything truly remarkable and I was listening to the same debate about floppies and modems being all you needed...

DVDs took root eventually in the games market, it's been nice not having to install tons of floppies or CDs. I still have some of the large CD install games like Farcry. Blu-ray is doing the same thing DVDs did for the CD transition.

But back to the quality aspect, why pay to stream lower quality when for the same price or cheaper you can get a Blu-ray version rented. The only real advantage streaming has that I might be interested is if I wanted to sit down and watch more than 12 hours of content on a single day. Otherwise Netflix can get me 5 BDs every couple of days.

That's a really ludicrous suggestion and this discussion was going so well beforehand. Microsoft has shelled out over a billion in warranty/repair costs. The vast majority of consumers get their systems warrantied, they don't don't go running out to buy new systems.

No, it's not ludicrous... I have 2 Xboxs... I have had to return them 3 times (we have all but stopped using them around here or we would probably wuld have had more returns to speak of). When you return a RROD it's only warrantied for a very short time where you are then faced with a choice of paying $99 for refurb service from Xbox, or you say screw it and buy an arcade version and slap your old hard drive on it for a little bit more, with newer 65nm chips and 45nm processor instead of craptastic first run refurbs that have probably been in 3-4 people's homes already... The advantages of that is to get newer and better internal architecture and hopefully improve the odds you will not be in RROD anytime soon. It is artificial inflation of sales figures due to astronomical failure rates. There are even videos and tutorials on how to do it which I have posted to Blues before. Intentional or not, it has impacted the sales figures legit install base and you truly can't count on every Xbox sold as a potential 3rd party sale anymore.

With PS3, you have to consider early sales to people wanting to best Blu-ray player and who could care less about gaming. So PS3 has it's issues too. However, new slim sales, for the most part, are gamer centric, and I think when compared side by side, PS3 install base will have a higher ratio of true install base than when compared with the 360.

Attach rate is a different story, but then that is always shifting and is in a state a bigger flux now. One can quote old figures, basically taking a few battles and declaring a winner of a long protracted war, or you can just wait and see where things settle after GOW3 hits, and it's effects are known (things between here and there are going to keep the shift occurring). I already know that buying in to PS3 early is going to have the better outcome, but I can understand why some are skeptical about Sony. I also know it's hard to make a transition after being in Xbox land awhile, I did it, but I am very, very happy I made the switch to PS3 earlier, rather than waiting for the inevitable.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 2009, 12:24.

That stuff adds up when you toss on 4-5 hours of 1080p movies and cut scenes plus a game.

Fortunately no western developer is dumb enough to think its fans want to watch 4-5 hours of pre-rendered cut scenes. That's pretty solely in the realm of FF and MGS, two games that haven't been fun for me since the early 90s, in part because they became more about watching incoherent cut scenes and less about doing anything.

Exactly, Netflix is just massive. Who wants to wait around for discs when you can have instant satisfaction? That's what Sony really needs to compete with. I know Z9000 thinks Bluray is the cats meow but everything from the real world shows a large consumer indifference towards it for the moment. Streaming video is one place where Sony could get involved quickly and provide some competition. Stop wasting time on stupid projects like Home that no one seems to care about.