A chart for wumpus

[Chris Nahr]

It's a funny thing about sales charts, people only quote the ones they like! Here are NPD's American Top 20 console games for the month of November, courtesy of Console Gold (http://www.consolegold.com/):

1. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (PlayStation 2)
2. Metroid Prime (GameCube)
3. WWE Smackdown! Shut Your Mouth (PlayStation 2)
4. Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 4 (PlayStation 2)
5. Yu-Gi-Oh! Eternal (Game Boy Advance)
6. Madden NFL 2003 (PlayStation 2)
7. Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell (Xbox)
8. Lord Of The Rings – Two Towers (PlayStation 2)
9. Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance (PlayStation 2)
10. Metroid Fusion (Game Boy Advance)
11. Harry Potter – Chamber of Secrets (Game Boy Advance)
12. Kingdom Hearts (PlayStation 2)
13. Yoshi’s Island: Super Mario Advance 3 (Game Boy Advance)
14. Mario Party 4 (GameCube)
15. Frogger’s Adventure (Game Boy Advance)
16. Harry Potter – Chamber of Secrets (PlayStation 2)
17. ATV Off Road Fury 2 (PlayStation 2)
18. NBA Live 2003 (PlayStation 2)
19. Bond 007: NightFire (PlayStation 2)
20. Super Mario Sunshine (GameCube)

Let's see...

11 PlayStation 2 games
5 GameBoy Advance games
3 GameCube games
1 (one) Xbox game, ranking 5 places below Metroid Prime

Keep in mind that these are the charts for America where Xbox is strongest and GameCube is weakest. Yep, the Xbox sure is obliterating the Cube. Yep, yep. And Metroid Prime is a huge failure because nobody knows the franchise anymore. Righto.

[Anonymous]

Boo-yah! That's gotta hoit!

[Slothrop]

I was looking through my last issue of Game Informer (it's no Next Generation, but I like parts of it) which had the October NSPD (sp?) chart, which was fairly similar. I can't remember it exactly, except that Nintendo had a handful of top 10 titles, and the XBox had exactly 1. I can't remember what it was, but it was a multiplatform title.

[Chris Nahr]

I was looking through my last issue of Game Informer (it's no Next Generation, but I like parts of it) which had the October NSPD (sp?) chart, which was fairly similar. I can't remember it exactly, except that Nintendo had a handful of top 10 titles, and the XBox had exactly 1. I can't remember what it was, but it was a multiplatform title.

According to NPD Funworld (http://www.npdfunworld.com), the only non-PS2 game in the October Top 10 was a GBA game. They don't make the Top 20 publicly available, though.

But here's the comment from lokiju who posted the chart on Console Gold: "I am going to faint when I see more than one Xbox title in the top twenty!" So I guess you remember correctly except that Nintendo and Microsoft were battling it out in ranks 11-20.

[Slothrop]

Yeah, the gist of it was that the PS2 was rampaging through the top 20 like Godzilla doing the Macharena

[Anonymous]

well if you think about it, even though the GC has more titles in the top 20, it is gettting constantly outsold by the Xbox in hardware except for maybe this month? Its a shame really...

-Contrai

[Chris Nahr]

well if you think about it, even though the GC has more titles in the top 20, it is gettting constantly outsold by the Xbox in hardware except for maybe this month? Its a shame really...

I was wondering about that, too. The obvious guess: people buy the Xbox for Halo. Many gamers want to play Halo, so this translates to a lot of Xboxes sold. But once they've played Halo they find little else of interest, so they don't buy many more Xbox games.

Now the total number of gamers interested in the Cube might be lower than those who want to play Halo, but once they have a Cube they buy lots of titles, not just a single one. And that translates into more Top 20 entries overall for Nintendo.

Hey, it's a nice theory!

[Reeko]

Or it could be that the main audience of Nintendo, young gamers, are getting stuff for Christmas, causing a spike in sales. The main audience of Xbox, older gamers, spend money on games at a much more even rate throughout the year.

Or it could have something to do with Canada. I'm not sure.

[Tom Ohle]

I've only bought 1 game for my gamecube. I've been extremely disappointed in the games for it, and wish I would have bought my Xbox first. I decided in favor of the Gamecube because I hoped all of their existing franchises would pan out--a true Metroid sequel, a new Zelda game, and a continuation of the Super Mario Bros franchise. I think Metroid Prime was a highly overrated game, the new Zelda looks like ass, and Super Mario Sunshine ruined an otherwise great series. Eternal Darkness remains the only GC-exclusive title that I've enjoyed at all.

Edit: Whereas on my Xbox, I've thoroughly enjoyed Munch's Oddysee, Halo, Splinter Cell, Steel Battalion, Mech Assault, Rallisport, and all of the cross-platform titles look way better on Xbox.

[Mark Asher]

Cross-platform titles look "way better" on the Xbox? I know I'm blind, but I see just a marginal difference, if that.

I think the Xbox lineup has been a bit disappointing too, though the Xbox Live stuff is interesting.

[xahlt]

Did you get a bigger tv yet? :)

[Anonymous]

A chart for me? You shouldn't have.

What we're mostly seeing here is that the PS2 has an installed base ratio of about 5:1 (or more) to both Xbox and GC. So, to get into the top 20, an Xbox or GC game has to be purchased by a far higher percentage of console owners. It would be more illuminating, vis-a-vis GC vs. Xbox, to remove the PS2 from the sales data.

The generally held theory about GC is that, for whatever reason, GC owners (children?) tend to buy a few key titles and practically ignore the rest of the library.

The TRSTS data (through oct) I posted supports this theory, particularly the median sales figures of only ~20k for all GC titles. Hearing other industry types anecdotally post here about how multiplatform titles do great on the PS2, okay on the Xbox, and poorly on the GC also supports this theory. And then there is Sega's announcement that they're going to drop the GC ports of their sports titles-- later begrudgingly amended to "maybe we will", but that's a hell of a thing for an official Sega rep to say in public. Sports games are HUGE sellers on consoles and even mentioning that you may drop them is, IMO, a really big sign of trouble.

With regards to Metroid Prime, as I've said all along: it won't outsell Mario Sunshine, which in turn did not outsell Super Smash Bros Melee. I have to agree with that Japanese financial analyst here: Nintendo's real hope is with Zelda.

Later in January once the Xmas frenzy is over and the sales data is all in, we can analyze that and declare a "winner" for second place. Based on the existing trends, I'm fairly confident that will be Xbox, but we'll have to let the data speak for itself.

-wumpus

[Anonymous]

Cross-platform titles look "way better" on the Xbox? I know I'm blind, but I see just a marginal difference, if that.
Well, it depends on the title. The Xbox version is probably going to load/save faster (due to the HDD and greater memory capacity), it will have dolby digital 5.1 sound, and probably a better framerate.

However, on graphics alone, multiplatform titles tend to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator-- the PS2. So I agree, visually the difference may not be that large. And that's what the average guy on the street sees. Most developers don't put a lot of effort into making the GC or Xbox ports look a whole lot better.

[Xaroc]

Cross-platform titles look "way better" on the Xbox? I know I'm blind, but I see just a marginal difference, if that.


Try NHLHitz 2003. It is grainy and laggy and crappy on the PS2 but looks amazing and runs much faster on the Xbox. Titles that are programmed directly for the PS2 tend to look pretty good. Cross platform may look ok on the PS2 but generally range from somewhat better to strikingly better on the Xbox.

-- Xaroc

[Dave Long]

Well, it depends on the title. The Xbox version is probably going to load/save faster (due to the HDD and greater memory capacity)

It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Typically, those that own both GC and Xbox agree that the Gamecube is faster in both loading and saving. Memory cards will always be faster than disks of any kind. The GC discs, because of their size, reduce loading to almost nil on most games.

--Dave

[Dave Long]

The generally held theory about GC is that, for whatever reason, GC owners (children?) tend to buy a few key titles and practically ignore the rest of the library.

...and which would you rather have? A number of key titles that people actually really want that can sell large numbers making your system sought after or a bunch of mediocre selling games that might break even, but do nothing to stop the argument that your console is loaded with a bunch of average games and ports with no real draw except your one big hit?

Your logic is ridiculous, wumpus.

The thing you fail to realize is that Nintendo games often sell well for longer periods of time. The drop off is never as severe as it is with 3rd party games on other consoles. Case in point...Mario Party 4...which has continued to sell well on the Cube in both the US and Japan long after its initial release. The list also supports this with Super Mario Sunshine still coming in at #20 overall for the month despite it shipping in August.

--Dave

[Matthew Gallant]

Typically, those that own both GC and Xbox agree that the Gamecube is faster in both loading and saving.

That is the biggest crock of shit. Seriously.

[Tom Ohle]

Even if it were true that the Gamecube load times are quicker because of the memory card size... that memory card size is the dumbest thing I've ever seen. Want to play through a Madden franchise? Buy a memory card just for that. Fills up the whole thing. Ridiculous.

[Dave Long]

Buy a memory card just for that. Fills up the whole thing. Ridiculous.

They have one with 251 blocks now. It'll hold Madden data and a whole lot more. But you can't blame Nintendo for the game's creators using the entire card for saving. Most games use 1 to 3 blocks of the 59 on a standard memory card.

--Dave

[SpoofyChop]

Want to play through a Madden franchise? Buy a memory card just for that. Fills up the whole thing. Ridiculous.

Yeah...it's just like with the twenty dollar bill and all those gizmos on TV! If the government wouldn't make that damn twenty so worthless then I could buy the clapper AND a chia pet and have money left over! Now, I buy the clapper and I only get 5 cents back!

:wink:

[Xaroc]

Even if it were true that the Gamecube load times are quicker because of the memory card size... that memory card size is the dumbest thing I've ever seen. Want to play through a Madden franchise? Buy a memory card just for that. Fills up the whole thing. Ridiculous.

This is by far the coolest things about using an Xbox, no trying to find the right memory card, no worries about what will fit where. It is the killer sports console because of this. I have franchises going for NHL2k3, NHL Hitz 2003, and Madden 2003 (2 of them). Oh and saving replays, sure why not, as many as you want.

-- Xaroc

[GregB]

That is the biggest crock of shit. Seriously.

No it's not. Most Cube games appear to load instantly.

[GregB]

This is by far the coolest things about using an Xbox, no trying to find the right memory card, no worries about what will fit where.

I generally can't stand sports games, but the saving games to the Xbox Hard Drive has been a godsend for any title on the system. A few friends of mine who don't play much thought this was the best feature on any console.

3DO saved games internally, but you could run out of space fast. This does not appear to be a problem with the Xbox.

[Reeko]

This is by far the coolest things about using an Xbox, no trying to find the right memory card, no worries about what will fit where.

And, I can't stress this enough, the ability to rip songs to the hard drive. No swapping out CD's, no pauses between tracks as the CD changer moves, it's just great.

[Robert Sharp]

Well, the GI list (which I believe is also NPD) is from September and shows the same sort of thing. 2 or 3 GC games, higher than the 1 XBox game in the top 20. PS2 dominates such charts for exactly the reason that Wumpus mentioned above. However, the fact that the GC (and even the XBox) can still make the list means that these games are selling VERY well percentage wise for their respective consoles.

Of course, the only reason sales should matter to ANYONE, except the companies themselves, is because we want our consoles to survive. Personally, I want all three to survive. I do'nt have an XBox because there are only a couple of games I want for it, so it isn't worth it to me. However, I keep hoping there will be more. So I am glad MS keeps it going. The Dreamcast apparently didn't sell well enough, but it had some incredible games before it went away. As a gamer, that's what I really care about.

[Doug Erickson]

The Gamecube save cards are pretty damn slow, and no, save cards are NOT as fast as a hard drive - especially on the PS/PS2. Memory cards are a simple, slow serial device with a tiny data path. The Xbox has by far and away the fastest saves/loads - if it isn't obvious now, wait until the release of the Xbox PSO Ep 1&2. Character loading is significantly speedier on the Xbox.

[Dave Long]

Throwing fuel on the wumpus fire...posted at Evil Avatar, here's the sales units for the top 10 in November...

1. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City - PS2 1,452,729

2. Metroid Prime - GC 363,389

3. WWE: Shut Your Mouth - PS2 348,515

4. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 - PS2 321,941

5. Yu-Gi-Oh! Eternal - GBA 269,498

6. Madden NFL 2003 - PS2 240,796

7. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell - Xbox 223,879

8. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - PS2 203,802

9. Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance - PS2 202,592

10. Metroid Fusion - GBA 199,723

[Anonymous]

erm why bother posting that list? Its already at the top if you just look at the top 10 on that top 20 list =)

-Contrai

[Anonymous]

oh hehe I guess you posted that for the actual sales numbers =)

-Contrai

[Anonymous]

So, for kicks, let's hit it with the installed-user-base divisor.


Throwing fuel on the wumpus fire...posted at Evil Avatar, here's the sales units for the top 10 in November...

1. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City - PS2 1,452,729 290,546

2. Metroid Prime - GC 363,389

3. WWE: Shut Your Mouth - PS2 348,515 69,703

4. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 - PS2 321,941 64,388

5. Yu-Gi-Oh! Eternal - GBA 269,498

6. Madden NFL 2003 - PS2 240,796 48,159

7. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell - Xbox 223,879

8. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - PS2 203,802 40,760

9. Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance - PS2 202,592 40,518

10. Metroid Fusion - GBA 199,723

Everything but Vice City immediately drops off the charts, ratio-wise.

[Met_K]

I think K-Mart's having a blue light special on common sense and dignity, perhaps you should look into it, Jeff.

[Mark Asher]

"installed-user-base divisor."

This is a nonsense stat. It's meaningless to the people who make games and the people who play them.

[DaveC]

Christopher, what's your point? This means nothing in the overall picture of console sales. Let's see final numbers at the end of the year and hten we'll talk. Besides, MS is in for the long haul and the Xbox has helped it's stock prices.

[Supertanker]

Here's CNN/Money's story on Xbox sales (and hoping nobody posted this already since it is dated yesterday): http://money.cnn.com/2002/12/17/technology/xbox_sales/index.htm

[DaveC]

Well, it depends on the title. The Xbox version is probably going to load/save faster (due to the HDD and greater memory capacity)

It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Typically, those that own both GC and Xbox agree that the Gamecube is faster in both loading and saving. Memory cards will always be faster than disks of any kind. The GC discs, because of their size, reduce loading to almost nil on most games.

--Dave

Dave, if you have no axe to grind and you aren't a Nintendo fanboy then why do you always try to put a Nintendo positive spin on everything? Especially when it comes to anything Xbox. Methinks you are a bit of a hypocrite.

[Mark Asher]

Here's CNN/Money's story on Xbox sales (and hoping nobody posted this already since it is dated yesterday): http://money.cnn.com/2002/12/17/technology/xbox_sales/index.htm

Interesting article. Sony's really pulling away. Even when Xbox sales spiked due to the attractive bundling, Sony still was outselling the Xbox by a wide margin. The gap between first and second place is widening, not shrinking.

I was really surprised to see that the online adaptor for the PS2 has outsold Xbox Live by about 3 to 1. You'd think that would be one area where the Xbox would outsell the PS2. Not so, apparently.

Too bad Nintendo didn't report sales. I'd like to see where they rank.

I know everyone says Microsoft is in this for the long haul, but what are they going to do to make the Xbox 2 the leading system? It's hard to imagine anyone unseating Sony with the lead they have. Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe both Microsoft and Nintendo can make good money being a distant second.

[Dave Long]

Dave, if you have no axe to grind and you aren't a Nintendo fanboy then why do you always try to put a Nintendo positive spin on everything? Especially when it comes to anyhing Xbox. Methinks you are a bit of a hypocrite.

Maybe you missed the post by GregB that backed me up? If it's the truth, and the original poster is giving incorrect information, then why shouldn't it be posted?

--Dave

[Dave Long]

Too bad Nintendo didn't report sales. I'd like to see where they rank.

From The Magic Box yesterday...


- NPD/TRSTS has released the sales figures of console systems in North America for the month of November, PS2 is still taking the lead in the home console market.

PlayStation 2 - 1.3 million units
GameBoy Advance - 1.3 million units
Xbox - 468,000 units
GameCube - 468,000 units

Nintendo sold the same amount of units as Microsoft in November and of course you've seen that Metroid Prime outsold Splinter Cell by 100,000 units from within this thread.

This interesting tidbit seemed to slip under everyone's radar today...

Sony, Matsushita Agree to Develop Linux-Based Operating System
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/021218/0358000145_2.html

That most certainly will have implications for PS3.

--Dave

[Jason Cross]

I don't mean this to make a statement about Gamecube vs. Xbox quality or sales, but I should point out a flawi in relying on top-20 data to judge console sales or game sales.

Let's say the Console A has only 4 hit games. They're selling great and the rest of the stuff is selling like trash. Console B is selling more software, but it's spread among a dozen top titles. It's quite possible, even likely, that console A will look far better on top-20 list while Console B doesn't rank. But that's not for lack of quality or sales, it's because the hits are evenly spread.

I'm not saying that's necessarily the case here, because without actual sales numbers for the whole software lineup it's hard to say. Looking at the top 100 would prove far more useful, though.

I will say this much: a chart like that has to be very discouraging to 3rd party Gamecube developers. If the three top GC games are all first-party (and who knows what #4 or 5 are?), that doesn't leave a lot in the customer's wallets for 3rd party games.

Also, at the risk of sounding like I'm defending Xbox, it's worth noting that software tie ratios for Nov and Dec are likely to be down as every new Xbox buyers gets two free games with it. Other systems have optional bundles, which some people buy and some don't.

Again, this is not to pick sides. I just have this nagging thing about statistics and what they might represent. Hopefully some real sales data, international even, will be available in January.

[xahlt]

I didn't look too closely, but I think that was what wumpus was arguing from another thread, where he had some median sales charts for games.

[Anonymous]

I guess you didn't visit this thread, Jason?

http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1414&highlight=october

-wumpus

[DaveC]

Too bad Nintendo didn't report sales. I'd like to see where they rank.

From The Magic Box yesterday...


- NPD/TRSTS has released the sales figures of console systems in North America for the month of November, PS2 is still taking the lead in the home console market.

PlayStation 2 - 1.3 million units
GameBoy Advance - 1.3 million units
Xbox - 468,000 units
GameCube - 468,000 units

Nintendo sold the same amount of units as Microsoft in November and of course you've seen that Metroid Prime outsold Splinter Cell by 100,000 units from within this thread.

This interesting tidbit seemed to slip under everyone's radar today...

Sony, Matsushita Agree to Develop Linux-Based Operating System
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/021218/0358000145_2.html

That most certainly will have implications for PS3.

--Dave

This has no real bearing on the PS3 at all. The PS2 already has Linux and it hasn't been any driving force behind homespun PS2 games nor has it made a surge in Linux popularity. Linux in the background for consumer appliances will never be seen by the end user, it's just an OS they can put a pretty front end on. They don't even mention the PS3:

The companies envision an advanced network environment where products such as TVs, microwaves, refrigerators and car navigation systems will be connected through common networks.

So, I don't know where you pulled that one out from.

Oh, and way to avoid the fanboy question once again.

[voltaic]

This is by far the coolest things about using an Xbox, no trying to find the right memory card, no worries about what will fit where.

And, I can't stress this enough, the ability to rip songs to the hard drive. No swapping out CD's, no pauses between tracks as the CD changer moves, it's just great.

One of these days there will be a sixth or seventh game to even support ripped CDs during gameplay! Schweet!

[Chris Nahr]

I will say this much: a chart like that has to be very discouraging to 3rd party Gamecube developers. If the three top GC games are all first-party (and who knows what #4 or 5 are?), that doesn't leave a lot in the customer's wallets for 3rd party games.

True, but Nintendo couldn't care less, nor could Nintendo's customers. Elephants like Capcom aren't scared by this prospect, their games will sell anyway; and Nintendo doesn't need to court (relatively) small developers like Microsoft does. People buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games, and everything else is just a bonus.


Also, at the risk of sounding like I'm defending Xbox, it's worth noting that software tie ratios for Nov and Dec are likely to be down as every new Xbox buyers gets two free games with it. Other systems have optional bundles, which some people buy and some don't.

That's a good point. I didn't know about the bundle situation in America but I've seen Microsoft's bundle of holiday desperation here in the stores -- the Xbox with three free games thrown in: Sega GT 2002, Jet Set Radio Future, and even Halo, all together for 249 euros!

Giving away your single best game doesn't sound like a clever move to me, but hey, what do I know? Microsoft certainly will boost its installed user base with this kind of giveaways, but their profits will tank again. For a company with as much cash as MS, it's certainly possible to give away games and see what happens, but the charts seem to indicate that people just grab the freebies and have no desire to buy anything else for this system. We'll see if that changes next year once people have finished Halo...

Besides, I wonder if they aren't setting themselves up for an anti-dumping lawsuit. In Europe at least, you can't consistently sell products below cost just to ruin the competition. They'll probably have to terminate this bundle after the holidays.

[Brad Grenz]

Yeah, selling the hardware at a loss then giving away the few games you were actually making money on strikes me as a lose-lose proposition for MS. Great you've incresed the installed based, but you've also statisfied that consumer's software needs for the year in one fell swoop, and it cost you money to do it!!!

Gotta love the way DaveC digs at Dave L., as if he's some kind of paragon of objectivity. Hey, how many dumptrucks full of money had to make the trip from Redmond to Canada for those exclusive Bioware titles? You made them pay you in American, right? They didn't talk you into accepting Loons did they?

[Brian Koontz]

Dave, if you have no axe to grind and you aren't a Nintendo fanboy then why do you always try to put a Nintendo positive spin on everything? Especially when it comes to anything Xbox. Methinks you are a bit of a hypocrite.

Ahem, yes. I covered this as well in the Can Nintendo grow up? thread...

Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:01 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Long wrote:
It's a pretty good article, and gives a lot of fodder to those that dislike Seamus Blackley. He comes off as a corporate suit. The kind of guy that doesn't "get" games at all. He seems to be looking for some "adult" content but doesn't realize that to be adult doesn't have to mean mobsters and horror. He's also a former Microsoft employee that still has strong ties to that company, so he's not exactly a neutral party. Lorne Lanning, another Microsoft partner, is a similarly bad choice for interview in the article.

Brian Koontz wrote:
Damn, Dave... ever since you determined people were "attacking" you for your Pro-Xbox, Pro-Microsoft bias you've sold out. Now all I hear from you are promotions of the Gamecube, PS2, Nintendo, and Sony.

I didn't know souls were so cheap nowadays... coward.

Did you ever think that being BIASED (for good reasons) is not such a bad thing? If you see things in the Xbox that make you love it MORE than the other systems then that is not just your prerogative to express... its your DUTY.

[Dave Long]

This has no real bearing on the PS3 at all. The PS2 already has Linux and it hasn't been any driving force behind homespun PS2 games nor has it made a surge in Linux popularity. Linux in the background for consumer appliances will never be seen by the end user, it's just an OS they can put a pretty front end on. They don't even mention the PS3:


The companies envision an advanced network environment where products such as TVs, microwaves, refrigerators and car navigation systems will be connected through common networks.

So, I don't know where you pulled that one out from.

Oh, and way to avoid the fanboy question once again.

You know DaveC, I didn't think I'd have to spell it out for you, but here you go. Sony using Linux for all their plans will most certainly affect the PS3 and it will affect Microsoft in the long run if Sony continues to be successful. Somehow, Sony has maintained an image of a consumer electronics maker instead of a games maker throughout the lifetime of the Playstation. This is very important to both their sales and their ability to attract a broad user-base. They are perceived by adults as a company that makes electronics and kids are interested in their systems because of the games that appear on them. The further entrenched Sony becomes as a maker of consumer electronics AND video games, the more likely they will be able to sell just about anything with the Sony name on it...including what would amount to a PC-like device not unlike the one they have talked about selling many times. You know, that gateway into your home that Microsoft and Sony want to be.

The key is that Sony will do this with a free operating system that does not supply revenue to one of their key competitors in this new space. They're already using Linux with PS2 and they're transferring that knowledge to all the other devices they want to create. Microsoft has stated their intent (through Bill Gates in keynotes, etc.) to create devices JUST LIKE THESE. It sets up a very big confrontation between Sony and Microsoft and yes, PS3 is where Sony will most likely retain the upper hand and use that to leverage these other products for your home/car/whatever. Compatibility is a powerful tool which Sony proved again with PS2 and it's backwards compatibility to the PSOne. Microsoft proves it again and again with their Windows OS. The Playstation name is ubiquitous. Whereas fifteen years ago you would tell people you were playing "Nintendo" when you talked about video games, and five years after that you were telling people you played "Sega". For the last seven years, the word synonymous with games has been Playstation. With PS3, Sony can connect these other devices together with their console to begin creating these wired homes with the one hub...PS3. The importance of this announcement is that there will be no Microsoft branded product involved with it in any way and for PS3 the synergy (I hate that word) begins there, but these other products may help drive PS3 sales and vice versa.

Sorry if that sounds like a lecture. I didn't think it was that unclear to my nemesis, DaveC. It's what you don't read that's important as what you do read in that article. Forest for the trees and all that...

--Dave

[Tyjenks]

Here's CNN/Money's story on Xbox sales (and hoping nobody posted this already since it is dated yesterday): http://money.cnn.com/2002/12/17/technology/xbox_sales/index.htm

Interesting article. Sony's really pulling away. Even when Xbox sales spiked due to the attractive bundling, Sony still was outselling the Xbox by a wide margin. The gap between first and second place is widening, not shrinking.

I was really surprised to see that the online adaptor for the PS2 has outsold Xbox Live by about 3 to 1. You'd think that would be one area where the Xbox would outsell the PS2. Not so, apparently.

And look at how much MS has had to dump into advertising to stay that close. Until the last week or two, I had not seen a single commercial for one PS2 game that even mentioned online play much less promoted it. Now a couple of games mention it in a blurb on the screen, but not through the voiceover. I think that one was SOCOM.

Has anyone seen any dedicated PS2 adapter ads or ads shouting about the online feature for their games? Maybe even on Tech TV?

[DaveC]

Yeah, selling the hardware at a loss then giving away the few games you were actually making money on strikes me as a lose-lose proposition for MS. Great you've incresed the installed based, but you've also statisfied that consumer's software needs for the year in one fell swoop, and it cost you money to do it!!!

Gotta love the way DaveC digs at Dave L., as if he's some kind of paragon of objectivity. Hey, how many dumptrucks full of money had to make the trip from Redmond to Canada for those exclusive Bioware titles? You made them pay you in American, right? They didn't talk you into accepting Loons did they?

For your information I own a Dreamcast, a PS2 and an Xbox. Right now I play more Xbox games than the other two because there are more games to play. Your implication that somehow I am an Xbox fanboy is asinine. As soon as there are enough games I want on the GC I will buy one. However, I get a little annoyed by the constant pot shots and gloom and doom predictions coming from Nintendo fanboys in regards to the Xbox. I'm not sure why, but a lot of these people believe in the "only 2 can survive" console market which is complete and utter bullshit.

As for the dumptrucks full of money, you live in a naive fantasy world if you think Sony and Nintendo don't have their own money dumptrucks.

[DaveC]

I was really surprised to see that the online adaptor for the PS2 has outsold Xbox Live by about 3 to 1. You'd think that would be one area where the Xbox would outsell the PS2. Not so, apparently.
[/quote]

Considering the PS2 install base this is not surprising at all. Let's get a ratio of total consoles vs. online players. That would be an interesting comparison.

[DaveC]

Sorry if that sounds like a lecture. I didn't think it was that unclear to my nemesis, DaveC. It's what you don't read that's important as what you do read in that article. Forest for the trees and all that...

--Dave

The average consumer knows nothing about Linux and could care less. They do know about Windows because the vast majority use it on their PCs at home and work. So, brand and image wise I'd say MS has a head start. The Xbox is just a first step towards that "synergy" you speak of. Both Sony and MS have long terms plans to penetrate further into the home market and the battle hasn't even begun. I don't know hwo will win, but I do know trying to declare a winner right now is pointless. Gates isn't kidding when he says that in the tech industry the tides can change quickly and those on top today can't assume they will be there tomorrow.

[Reeko]

Back to the original article, how good is this reporting?


Sony's big title appears to be "SOCOM: U.S. Navy Seals," an online action game which has sold a half-million copies in three months

Wha? He uses the NPD figures and doesn't list the GTA/GTA:VC as Sony's big titles?

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

[Dave Long]

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

That's splitting hairs, don't you think? It costs Microsoft a hell of a lot of money in server costs too. Doesn't matter who's footing the bill, someone's got to pay it.

Arguably, Sony is the smarter one there since they don't have to maintain anything in order to take their console online, they just sell the hardware and support whatever games they decide to sell. Microsoft must turn Xbox Live into a revenue stream or they'll forever be losing money on the support costs. They've also got to make developers give up their autonomy when it comes to online aspects of their games...which has apparently been a tough sell. Note Electronic Arts' decisions on Xbox Live support...


Sony's big title appears to be "SOCOM: U.S. Navy Seals," an online action game which has sold a half-million copies in three months.

The above is true. It's published by Sony. GTA: Vice City is not published by Sony. So Sony's big title appears to be SOCOM.

--Dave

[Tyjenks]

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

That's splitting hairs, don't you think? It costs Microsoft a hell of a lot of money in server costs too. Doesn't matter who's footing the bill, someone's got to pay it.
--Dave

Again. Is Microsoft not spending a small fortune on X-box Live promotions with commercials, in-store set-ups, etc. when compared to Sony? I am really asking because I know there has been a shitload of advertising I have seen in my limited TV viewing and that ain't cheap.

[Dave Long]

The average consumer knows nothing about Linux and could care less. They do know about Windows because the vast majority use it on their PCs at home and work. So, brand and image wise I'd say MS has a head start. The Xbox is just a first step towards that "synergy" you speak of. Both Sony and MS have long terms plans to penetrate further into the home market and the battle hasn't even begun. I don't know hwo will win, but I do know trying to declare a winner right now is pointless. Gates isn't kidding when he says that in the tech industry the tides can change quickly and those on top today can't assume they will be there tomorrow.

Man, you just don't quit. No one is declaring a winner. You asked me why the news had any bearing and I explained it. Now you're saying I declared Sony the champ? And you wonder why Brad called you out on your company's money hat? But I'll play along...

You speak as though you believe Microsoft has already won. If the fates of tech can change so quickly, they can easily reverse against Microsoft. Their Office monopoly hasn't been generating the kind of revenue it did five years ago. They may not be able to count on that revenue stream. Who knows about .NET. It's possible no one will buy in? My company is steering away from Microsoft products for all but the desktop right now. AIX, Linux VM, Mainframe... we're primarily running IBM hardware. We'll also be running the largest e-commerce site on a mainframe using Linux on VM by the end of next year. We're leaving MS Commerce Server behind. I'm very glad we're keeping MS products on the desktop because they work great. I'm not happy we move so slow with upgrades because of the draconian licensing agreements Microsoft wants all companies to sign. I love the MS OS and XP is fantastic. But there's no reason to believe they'll be able to convert this into control of the home.

You made my point for me at any rate. People don't know Linux and with these devices, they still won't. What they will know is that the Sony toaster they got will work with the Sony TV, will work with the Sony car stereo, will work with the Sony Playstation 3, etc. If it all runs on Linux, Microsoft gets zip. Sony's consumer electronics brand is extremely strong. It is certainly going to be a hard thing for Microsoft to topple. This is clear with the Xbox and the PS2. Some would say they've already lost because Xbox has not reached their expectations. Typically, once you "lose" with one console, consumers are far less interested in stepping up for the next one. Just ask Sega.

--Dave

[Reeko]

It costs Microsoft a hell of a lot of money in server costs too. Doesn't matter who's footing the bill, someone's got to pay it.


Okay, Dave. You must not be aware of how Xbox LIVE! works. It's a subscription service. After the initial 1 year for $50, it's going to cost a monthly fee (I expect $10). It does matter who's footing the bill. In the case of LIVE!, it's the users who foot the bill. In Sony's case, it's the developer.


They've also got to make developers give up their autonomy when it comes to online aspects of their games...which has apparently been a tough sell. Note Electronic Arts' decisions on Xbox Live support...

Who knows what EA's motives were? Anyway, they are a special case because their big cash cows (sports games) are in direct competition with those published by the maker of the Xbox. I don't think their decision not to support Xbox LIVE! was over control of "online aspects."


The above is true. It's published by Sony. GTA: Vice City is not published by Sony. So Sony's big title appears to be SOCOM.

Oh. So that's what he meant.

[Dave Long]

Okay, Dave. You must not be aware of how Xbox LIVE! works. It's a subscription service. After the initial 1 year for $50, it's going to cost a monthly fee (I expect $10). It does matter who's footing the bill. In the case of LIVE!, it's the users who foot the bill. In Sony's case, it's the developer.

This is not yet true. Microsoft has made no announcement regarding the future of Xbox Live and its fees. This has been dutifully pointed out by many Xbox fans when people claim they don't want to pay a subscription fee to play console games online. All they've said is it's $50 for the headset and the service to start and future programs are not determined. Live also doesn't pay for the service when you're running many servers for about 100,000 users. Yes, the userbase will grow, but it must grow, must be charged a fee and be sustained in order to cover costs. It also puts all the money on Micrsoft's pocket, making it unattractive to publishers (like EA) that want the revenue stream from their games to go in their own pockets.

For Sony, the developer can charge what they want for their service. If it's just game matching, one server box will probably do. If it's more, then fees might be expected. A developer might even count on the huge internet community to put up servers as happens with most PC games? I'm not advocating one or the other, but there are certainly merits to both approaches and one favors the game maker, while the other favors the console maker.


Who knows what EA's motives were? Anyway, they are a special case because their big cash cows (sports games) are in direct competition with those published by the maker of the Xbox. I don't think their decision not to support Xbox LIVE! was over control of "online aspects."

Uh...we know what EA's motives were. They said it had to do with Live and their unwillingness to allow Microsoft control of their customers and their customers' information. Direct competition had nothing to do with it. Maybe you didn't know it, because the games have been so poor lately, but Sony sells sports franchises too and is a direct competitor to EA on the PS2 as well.

--Dave

[Mark Asher]

Back to the original article, how good is this reporting?


Sony's big title appears to be "SOCOM: U.S. Navy Seals," an online action game which has sold a half-million copies in three months

Wha? He uses the NPD figures and doesn't list the GTA/GTA:VC as Sony's big titles?

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

Why isn't Xbox Live also a drain on operating profits? The PS2 adapter and Xbox Live kit cost about the same. Why does one generate profits and the other generate loss? By the time the one-year subscription for Xbox Live is up, Sony may have a subscription service ready to go. EverQuest Adventures for the PS2 will be up and running and generating profits before then anyway.

[Reeko]

Why does one generate profits and the other generate loss...

Sony may have a subscription service ready to go. EverQuest Adventures for the PS2 will be up and running and generating profits before then anyway.

1. LIVE! subscriptions pay for the costs of the service and hopefully turn a profit. For the Playstation, if a developer wants an on-line component, they have to either charge for it (micropayments?) or it will cut into their profits from the sale of the game. Developers using LIVE! get to keep all of their profits.

2. Sony has never said anything about a subscription service. They would definitely be talking about it if they had plans. Even if they were thinking about it, they would say something.

3. EverQuest Adventures is an MMORPG. If past experience is indicitive of future results, they will have enough problems without trying to pioneer the entire Sony on-line effort.

[Mark Asher]

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

That's splitting hairs, don't you think? It costs Microsoft a hell of a lot of money in server costs too. Doesn't matter who's footing the bill, someone's got to pay it.
--Dave

Again. Is Microsoft not spending a small fortune on X-box Live promotions with commercials, in-store set-ups, etc. when compared to Sony? I am really asking because I know there has been a shitload of advertising I have seen in my limited TV viewing and that ain't cheap.

I'm sure they're spending a lot more to promote Xbox Live than is Sony to promote their online stuff, though we may see an onslaught of ads once the EverQuest game is ready to launch.

Square recently hit the 200,000 subscriber mark in Japan for the online Final Fantasy. If you want to talk about Xbox Live generating revenue, the Final Fantasy game has more subscribers than Xbox Live and charges a monthly fee (I think). By just about any measuring stick (other than user satisfaction, which is a judgement call), Sony has been more immediately successful than Microsoft with their online initiative.

[Tom Ohle]

I really doubt that EverQuest on the PS2 will be a profitable title for Sony. How well have the Phantasy Star Online titles done? I really don't know--it just doesn't seem to me like a lot of people play them. The console crowd is very different from the MMORPG crowd, as far as I can tell.

[Mark Asher]

1. LIVE! subscriptions pay for the costs of the service and hopefully turn a profit. For the Playstation, if a developer wants an on-line component, they have to either charge for it (micropayments?) or it will cut into their profits from the sale of the game. Developers using LIVE! get to keep all of their profits.

Third-party developers using Live still have to spend the dev money to make a game work online. The only difference between PS2 and Xbox is that with the Xbox the developers don't have to bear the cost of hosting the online play, but neither do they get any Xbox Live revenue. With the PS2 the developer has to host the service but can then reap all the online fees, if any.


2. Sony has never said anything about a subscription service. They would definitely be talking about it if they had plans. Even if they were thinking about it, they would say something.

Why would they discuss something in public if it was just in the planning stages? Sony may not have plans for a fee-based online service, or they may be reluctant to discuss it at this point. Maybe they've determined that giving away online play for free is the way to go in the long run and that they'll make their money on increased sales. Maybe Microsoft's business model is suspect. After all, TEN, MPlayer, and others never made it as fee-based services.


3. EverQuest Adventures is an MMORPG. If past experience is indicitive of future results, they will have enough problems without trying to pioneer the entire Sony on-line effort.

If past experience is indictative of future results, Sony will make a LOT of money from EverQuest Adventures. You can fix a lot of problems when several hundred thousand players are paying you $13 a month to play.

I don't expect the PS2 EQ to be as successful as the PC version, but who knows? They might easily get 200,000 subscribers. [/quote]

[Mark Asher]

I really doubt that EverQuest on the PS2 will be a profitable title for Sony. How well have the Phantasy Star Online titles done? I really don't know--it just doesn't seem to me like a lot of people play them. The console crowd is very different from the MMORPG crowd, as far as I can tell.

I dunno -- 200,000 people play Final Fantasy online in Japan.

[DaveC]

I really doubt that EverQuest on the PS2 will be a profitable title for Sony. How well have the Phantasy Star Online titles done? I really don't know--it just doesn't seem to me like a lot of people play them. The console crowd is very different from the MMORPG crowd, as far as I can tell.

I dunno -- 200,000 people play Final Fantasy online in Japan.

That's because it's FF. The problem is that without a keyboard at least 50% of the reason most people play EQ is gone and that's the social interaction. I'm not sure how they are going to compensate for this, but if they don't have keyboard support it will most likely tank. Also, most of the people that wnat to play EQ are playing it on the PC.

[DaveC]

Man, you just don't quit. No one is declaring a winner. You asked me why the news had any bearing and I explained it. Now you're saying I declared Sony the champ? And you wonder why Brad called you out on your company's money hat? But I'll play along...

Speaking of don't quit I have yet to see you leave a console thread untouched. Oh, and the money hat comment is usually the refuge of people trying to invalidate your argument because you have a business relationship with MS. I don't see anyone bitch-slapping Rockstar for being in bed with Sony.

You speak as though you believe Microsoft has already won. If the fates of tech can change so quickly, they can easily reverse against Microsoft. Their Office monopoly hasn't been generating the kind of revenue it did five years ago. They may not be able to count on that revenue stream. Who knows about .NET. It's possible no one will buy in? My company is steering away from Microsoft products for all but the desktop right now. AIX, Linux VM, Mainframe... we're primarily running IBM hardware. We'll also be running the largest e-commerce site on a mainframe using Linux on VM by the end of next year. We're leaving MS Commerce Server behind. I'm very glad we're keeping MS products on the desktop because they work great. I'm not happy we move so slow with upgrades because of the draconian licensing agreements Microsoft wants all companies to sign. I love the MS OS and XP is fantastic. But there's no reason to believe they'll be able to convert this into control of the home.

Large companies have always used mainframes for certain tasks and always will. This has nothing to do with consumer electronics OR consoles. The fact that they use XP on desktops and that most people use a Windows desktop at work or home is because for better or worse MS has spent billions to make Windows easy to use for common tasks. When it comes to the home I'd say that MS is willing to spend what it takes to get into the home market. They have tried and failed in the past, but that doesn't mean they are out. Sony has also had failed experiments, but no one counts them out. The average consumer is not directlyaffected by what your company chooses for a data system. So, what this has to do with anything other than more gloom and doom MS bashing I'm not sure.

You made my point for me at any rate. People don't know Linux and with these devices, they still won't. What they will know is that the Sony toaster they got will work with the Sony TV, will work with the Sony car stereo, will work with the Sony Playstation 3, etc. If it all runs on Linux, Microsoft gets zip. Sony's consumer electronics brand is extremely strong. It is certainly going to be a hard thing for Microsoft to topple. This is clear with the Xbox and the PS2. Some would say they've already lost because Xbox has not reached their expectations. Typically, once you "lose" with one console, consumers are far less interested in stepping up for the next one. Just ask Sega.


You accuse me of assuming that MS will win when you are assuming that the Xbox will fail because of some anecdotal evidence. What I am saying is that battle is just starting.

[Anonymous]

I don't expect the PS2 EQ to be as successful as the PC version, but who knows? They might easily get 200,000 subscribers.
Sony is saying they _expect_ to sell 400,000 online adapters by the end of the year. So you think half of all PS2 online adapter owners will subscribe to EQ Adventures? I don't know about that.

I expect EQ for PS2 to tank pretty horribly for a number of reasons.

-wumpus

[Xaroc]

Back to the original article, how good is this reporting?


Sony's big title appears to be "SOCOM: U.S. Navy Seals," an online action game which has sold a half-million copies in three months

Wha? He uses the NPD figures and doesn't list the GTA/GTA:VC as Sony's big titles?

As far as online adapter sales go, so what? The LIVE kits sold represent a continuous revenue stream. The Sony add-on represents a continual drain on operating profits for whoever is paying the server costs.

Why isn't Xbox Live also a drain on operating profits? The PS2 adapter and Xbox Live kit cost about the same. Why does one generate profits and the other generate loss? By the time the one-year subscription for Xbox Live is up, Sony may have a subscription service ready to go. EverQuest Adventures for the PS2 will be up and running and generating profits before then anyway.

This is really obvious for a number of reasons. That Live! headset doesn't cost anywhere near $50 to create. I am guessing the PS2 network adapter costs more so there is less profit there. Plus where are those profits going. For the PS2 they are going right to Sony who is not putting that money into a standard online infrastructure. For Live! they are going into server costs for the service. Mark what are people going to play on this subscription service Sony is going to come up with? They have what 1 online ready title and no direction for developers on what to do. EQ adventures may do ok but I kind of doubt it.

-- Xaroc

[Tom Ohle]

Yeah, 200,000 people playing Final Fantasy in Japan. Huge franchise, very online-friendly people. I'd be surprised if EQ Adventures breaks 100K subscriptions... and that'd be super-optimistic. I'm thinking more like 35K.

[Brad Grenz]

For your information I own a Dreamcast, a PS2 and an Xbox. Right now I play more Xbox games than theother two because there are more games to play. Your implication that somehow I am an Xbox fanboy is asinine.

Classic fanboy defense: "yeah, I own 'em all but my Xbox is the rocktasticest". You never miss an opprotunity to talk up the Xbox and make snide comments about it's competitors. You also never miss an opprotunity to attack Dave Long, in many cases where it is far from warrented.


As for the dumptrucks full of money, you live in a naive fantasy world if you think Sony and Nintendo don't have their own money dumptrucks.

I'm sure they do, but let's not pretend you don't have a financial interest in the Xbox's success. The Nintendo cash-mobile hasn't visited the Long residence as far as we know.

All I'm saying is ease off, cause you're coming off like a more rabid ass-hole than even wumpus these days.

[DaveC]

For your information I own a Dreamcast, a PS2 and an Xbox. Right now I play more Xbox games than the other two because there are more games to play. Your implication that somehow I am an Xbox fanboy is asinine.

Classic fanboy defense: "yeah, I own 'em all but my Xbox is the rocktasticest". You never miss an opprotunity to talk up the Xbox and make snide comments about it's competitors. You also never miss an opprotunity to attack Dave Long, in many cases where it is far from warrented.


As for the dumptrucks full of money, you live in a naive fantasy world if you think Sony and Nintendo don't have their own money dumptrucks.

I'm sure they do, but let's not pretend you don't have a financial interest in the Xbox's success. The Nintendo cash-mobile hasn't visited the Long residence as far as we know.

All I'm saying is ease off, cause you're coming off like a more rabid ass-hole than even wumpus these days.

Aaahh, the old "defending what you like makes you an asshole" tactic. Regardless, my job doesn't live or die by the Xbox's fortunes. I am stating a current preference and arguing a point. I don't see how this is any different than what you or Mr. Long do. Hell, if a game comes out for GC next year that kicks my ass up and down the block I will be right here with Mr. Long singing it's praises. So far, the most fun I've had with my PS2 is GT3, ICO and Jak and Daxter. Whereas on the Xbox I am playing Splinter Cell, Mech Assualt, Morrowind, PGR, RSC, Spiderman, Halo and Buffy. It's all relative.

[Dave Long]

Sony gave their holiday report, Microsoft gave theirs and now Nintendo...

http://cube.ign.com/articles/380/380790p1.html

--Dave

[Jason Becker]

I'm gonna say EQ Adventures will be a success and will help push more adapters for Sony. Don't really know why just a guess.

[Mark Asher]

I'm gonna say EQ Adventures will be a success and will help push more adapters for Sony. Don't really know why just a guess.

I think it will do ok too. There seemed to be pent up demand among the hardcore console crowd for Xbox Live. I think there's some similar demand for a console MMOG. The lack of chat is the one thing that might kill the game. OTOH, it would be a game that my wife would allow my kids to play online due to the lack of chat.

[Mark Asher]

Yeah, 200,000 people playing Final Fantasy in Japan. Huge franchise, very online-friendly people. I'd be surprised if EQ Adventures breaks 100K subscriptions... and that'd be super-optimistic. I'm thinking more like 35K.

You could be right, but I don't understand why you're dismissive of FF's numbers.

[Brad Grenz]

Aaahh, the old "defending what you like makes you an asshole" tactic. Regardless, my job doesn't live or die by the Xbox's fortunes. I am stating a current preference and arguing a point. I don't see how this is any different than what you or Mr. Long do.

No it's the old "acting like an ass-hole makes you an ass-hole tactic". If Dave Long does is no different from what you do, why do you feel the need to hunt him down in every thread where he posts to antagonize him? Your biggest beef with him seems to be that he's a Nintendo fanboy, but you're not exactly coming from a place of strength when you voice that complaint. I kept quiet for the last week, but I'm finally saying something because this anti-Long movement from you and some of the other guys is becoming obscene.

[DaveC]

Aaahh, the old "defending what you like makes you an asshole" tactic. Regardless, my job doesn't live or die by the Xbox's fortunes. I am stating a current preference and arguing a point. I don't see how this is any different than what you or Mr. Long do.

No it's the old "acting like an ass-hole makes you an ass-hole tactic". If Dave Long does is no different from what you do, why do you feel the need to hunt him down in every thread where he posts to antagonize him? Your biggest beef with him seems to be that he's a Nintendo fanboy, but you're not exactly coming from a place of strength when you voice that complaint. I kept quiet for the last week, but I'm finally saying something because this anti-Long movement from you and some of the other guys is becoming obscene.

Well, if you are going to put your opinions out in a public forum like this expect to get them picked apart. Just as my statements are picked apart by yourself and Mr. Long. If you feel the need to come to his defense then do so, but don't expect me to be not comment if agree or disagree with someone else's post. You say it's me and "others" that are picking on him yet you only attack me and my "dumptrucks of money".

[Brad Grenz]

You were an easy mark, the most vociferous and least rational.

[Jason Becker]

" I think there's some similar demand for a console MMOG. "

I think thats the best reason. There's simply not going to be any competition on the PS2 except for FF whenever it comes out over here. The only Xbox game I can think of the SWG, which I think is supposed to get ported eventually. Also EQ does have name recognition sonce its the only thats gets mentioned all the time when any articel realating to MM games comes up. I think console gamers will want to at least try it out to see "What the hoopla is about".

[Dave Long]

EQOA is already in beta and it seems to be generating some buzz. I think it's going to sell to at least half of those people that bought the broadband adapter. I also think it might have less longevity with its players. If the average PC gamer plays an MMOG for a year, I wouldn't be surprised if the average console gamer only plays for about six months. It may not be as long-term a revenue stream.

--Dave