iBotModz_Bot Posted March 16, 2010 Report Posted March 16, 2010 From computerandvideogames.com:Microsoft's Aaron Greenberg has claimed that Xbox 360 has "nearly twice" PS3's installed base - partly because its lack of a Blu-ray drive allows it to be sold at a more attractive price point. The Xbox product director claimed that "being $100 cheaper [than PS3] is part of the reason we're nearly twice their installed base". It's likely he was referring to Xbox 360's North American installed base, with 360 and PS3 widely reported to be neck-and-neck in Europe. "Sony bet on the physical disc, and there are costs associated with that," Greenberg told Edge magazine."The fact that we're able to offer a console starting at $199 is a benefit of not being burdened with that cost." Full Story: computerandvideogames.comhttp://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/aNYROXVVV0rARVigGiG5khmpmRg/0/dihttp://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/aNYROXVVV0rARVigGiG5khmpmRg/1/di View the full article
Dark Slipstream Posted March 17, 2010 Report Posted March 17, 2010 ********, it's because they break so often that people have to buy more. BLu-ray my ass.
Curtis Posted March 17, 2010 Report Posted March 17, 2010 BLu ray is kewl, but useless right now imo BLu ray is kewl, but useless right now imo
Azraelrs Posted March 17, 2010 Report Posted March 17, 2010 (edited) Yeah, umm the reason more 360's have been sold (besides the extra year) maybe has something to do with 62-73% of people have to buy more than one 360, while PS3 owners really have had the same console since the first purchase. Blu Ray isn't useless... makes movies look better. Helps space wise with games (ex.. FFXIII: 1 PS3 Disc or 3 ULTRA compressed 360 discs) Curtis I don't know if you have a Blu-Ray player, but in and of themselves they are cool lil toys. All kinds of nice features. I Believe (note the word believe, as in opinion) that the only reason there will never be a Blu Ray drive for 360 is that it's Sony's creation. So, would MS just not want to say that Sony did something better and they are following the lead, or would Sony gloat like lil kids who got the big piece of candy that MS used their technology, therefore admitting that it was superior? Either way, it is technically a superior drive just because in any case(even non-console wise) Blu-Ray players play CD,DVD,BD, with uncompressed tracks (both audio and video). DVD players play DVD and CD only, and they are compressed and upscaled. But, in all honesty most of the time compression really hurts nothing and isn't noticeable. PS: That story quoted in the OP is missing some parts...lol "Speaking about the same subject, Microsoft's Aaron Greenberg highlighted the lack of Blu-ray in the Xbox 360 as one of the reasons why the 360 is currently positioned ahead of the PS3. "Sony bet on the physical disc, and there are costs associated with that," he told Edge. "The fact that we're able to offer a console starting at $199 is a benefit of not being burdened with that cost." He also noted that "being $100 cheaper [than PS3] is part of the reason we're nearly twice their installed base," a comment he has since clarified on Twitter as being based on NPD data that has the 360's U.S. install base at 20 million units to the PS3's 12 million. The same can't be said about worldwide numbers, especially in Japan (where PS3 leads) and Europe (where the 360's lead is much smaller than it is in the U.S.)." My Sourced Quote Yeah...the OP first quote left out the Japanese market... wonder why? Edited March 17, 2010 by Azraelrs
Recommended Posts