I just found this awesomely biased website xD

http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/?p=391#comments But its THIS post that made me laugh for real...

"Hardware Mar-08

PlayStation Family 730K
Wii 721K
Nintendo DS 698K
Xbox 360 262K"

Why do they call it the "Playstation Family" then split Nintendo up? Oh wait, its coz Sony got <LOOK MA, I AM SWEARING> creamed

In one of the comments, it got broken down into a more logical construction:

"Wii–721,000
Nintendo DS–698,000
PlayStation Portable–297,000
Xbox 360–262,000
PlayStation 3–257,000
PlayStation 2–216,000"

At last, the sony numbers make sense... xD Just wondered what you guys thought of Nintendo's current dominance in the gaming Market? Handhelds and consoles are outselling everything else by nearly 3 to 1 xD

It's not just Sony getting creamed there, it's Microsoft also. Microsoft in fact are getting more creamed than Sony.

I think the thing with the 360 is the sales are in the dropoff region as it is the oldest console. It's also interesting to see that the PS3 is outselling the PS2, finally, and I didn't expect to see the PSP selling so much.

As for Nintendo selling huge amounts. that's obvious, it has a much broader appeal. My parents have a Wii (they bought it without input from me, other than "Wii's look good"), and they play it a bit (on WiiFit atm). Same for the DS really, but they don't own them (mine and my sisters) but they often play the Brain Training game and the like. The Wii isn't aimed at "gamers", it's aimed at everyone, and it succeeds.

Not really, think about it even more logically... Microsoft only have ONE console on the market... So really that figure should be commended! Nintendo and Sony have 2 and 3 respectively...

The 360 is only selling 5K more than the PS3, and PS2s are still being sold in quite considerable number (you logic is backwards, if MS only have one console, shouldn't it be selling considerably more as it's not competing with itself). Either way, not much victory for anyone except Nintendo there.

I have heard rumours of a 360 shortage, though.

Oh, and that site must be a joke, just look at their "Definitive, unbiased review of both versions of GTA4". You only really need to look at the first pic to see (especially as the 360 one is just the PS3 one under a pixelilisation filter, being exactly the same conditions).

People are stll buying PS2's to cope with the "sold out" amounts of PS3's apparently, or thats what Ive been hearing. Remember, PS2's are still cutting edge in places like India and most of poorer eastern europe where the PS3 hasnt even considered for release...

The data is the same in this article, which says the data is for the US...

As for the PS3 reaching a hard sales limit with the amount available (as you suggest with them being sold out so people buy PS2s instead [which to me doesn't make sense ]) would suggest that it should be selling more.

I think the PS3s are finally getting into their own, with better pricing, the Blu-Ray victory and some good games becoming available for them.

i think the PS3 could soon take over the 360 in profit. correct me if I'm wrong here.
games like Metal Gear solid 4 and final fantasy 13 are fully using the duel layer Blue ray disk (50 gb) the 360 is using a regular dvd which will only hold around 8.5gb. when more games like MGS4 start coming out the 360 will need 6 disks per game to be able to play them. unless they release that Blue ray disk drive they talked about i think its fair to say the PS3 will be getting more and more exclusive titles.

with blue ray however, i think the 360 would win.. the difference in performance inst massive but the console and its games are much cheaper.

- Will

Well the 360 did have a separate HD-DVD drive at one point, but it cost around £120, and I'd image a blu-ray drive for the 360 would cost around the same, possibly more (it's worth considering that a 360HDD costs 3 times that of a PC one), and that would kinda negate the price advantage. I'm not sure how much advantage a Blu-Ray player will have, not many games will need it. I don't really know why MGS4 needs it (lots of HD pre-rended vids?) and FF13 simply has a huge world.

Pretty much Skillers, MGS4 has a lot of dialogue too. I still cant work out how its 50gbs in size mind you O.o

And i still dont think developers WANT to develop for the PS3, for third party, the architecture of the engines are far too foreign from what they are used too... Some companies just wont bother...

Well it doesn't need to be 50GB to constitute a Blu-ray. Considering that Bluray and DVD probably cost the same to actually make right now, and even if they don't it's the matter of pence per product, anything over 9GB is wise to put on Blu-Ray.

As for the developing thing, that is true. Valve point blank refused to do it themselves, and I can imagine others will do the same. However, this is likely to lead to only quality games getting ported as others aren't finacially viable and a higher proportion of exclusive titles, some of which have shaped up pretty nice.

MGS4 does all its cut scenes in real time in HD. the memory it needs is partly because the audio is uncompressed (no idea why) and hopefully it will be a huge game world.
there isn't a large difference in price between blue ray and DVD as far as i know because there almost the same disk. the blue-violet laser of blue ray makes the difference. it has a much smaller wavelength, therefore substantially more date can be stored. when manufactures start producing games in 1080p with advanced physics engines and larger game worlds etc. i dont think a DVD will be able to take it.

if the 360 Blueray-DVD cost that much then it will make the PS3 the cheapest too
your right though, i doubt games like that will be around for some time.
guess we will have to wait and see.

Well 1080p is currently around the same resolution as people play computer games at, so the resolution isn't going to make the games much bigger. It's the inclusion of HD content (movies) and large game worlds that really push it to the limit. Why MGS4 is using uncompressed audio is a mystery, as after a certain point it really doesn't make any noticeable difference at a huge space cost.

your probs right there. i just assumed 1080 would have made a large difference based on my photoshop experience. the day Will come where DVD is no longer practical, when is the question. the Wii is likely to rape the sales in any case.
on MGS4, i have no idea why they refuse to compress it. so its going to be the best sounding game ever? sadly without a overkill surround sound system not many of us will be able to appreciate it.
am I right in saying that Audio compression usually has little effect on the quality too?

Yeah pretty much... Nowadays compressed audio doesnt really do much to the quality... Uncompressed shit takes up HUGE amounts of room... Look at AVI files compared to MP3's... If anything, the compressed MP3 sounds exactly the same if not better....

Thats the only think I think Nintendo got wrong with the Wii... Not having DVD and CD playing capabilities... Remember, the PSOne could play CD's, yet the Wii cannot!

DHR, you mean WAVs not MP3s.

As for compression, what it does is remove frequencies that are typically inaudible to human hearing, so the difference is unnoticeable. Personally, I will encode everything at 192kbps, but anything over 128kbps sounds pretty damn good, and new codecs are even better. Also, new hardware (notabley the Xi-Fi) can improve the quality of sound dramatically.

As for the Wii not playing DVDs... does it really matter? It's designed to play games, and it's not like people don't already have a DVD player of some description. To make it any good they'd have to upgrade the sound system and such (the Wii only has Stereo sound, IIRC) adding unnecessary cost.

Just a mention here... Wii does not support high definition resolutions.

Nope, it doesn't need to, so they made it cheaper by not bothering. DHR was on about basic DVD playback, not HD content, though.

buy a decent comp because that = win.

i like 360 (but hardly use it)
and wii of course (but hardly use it)

therefore i conclude pc sales are enormous just cos its best

PC is definitely the best and most versatile and not necessarily expensive either.

Who needs it to play DVDs or CDs when it's already my media center remote
That and I stream audio and video from my PC to the Wii anyway if I need to, its kinda awesome

Of course the PC sales are huge in comparison, everyone buys one as they do everything. You could build a pretty decent gaming PC for around £500 or less nowadays, and as everyone has a computer, it's more a matter of £100 for a good graphics card to make any PC into a gaming PC (unless you have a really poor bargain bin office comp).

And consoles are quite expensive if you're wanting to get the most out of them... a PS3 with a couple of games will set you back £300ish, maybe an extra controller for £20 or so, and a HDTV can cost quite a lot of money.

Yeah, console games are inordinately expensive in comparison to PC games. Typically I can get a new release PC game for £15-25, except maybe a big name shooter. A console game will cost £35+, so I would be saving around £15 a game, meaning that after 10-20 games, the cost difference becomes moot.

There is also the matter of HDTVs.

Anyway,t his probably shouldn't become another compVScons thread.

i dont really play any single player game anymore. still havent even looked at completing hl2e2. online games are better!!!!! (for any console just generally)