Analysts Predict PS3 Will Win Next Gen War
188 page report states bleedin' obvious.
Analysts at US firm Wedbush Morgan Securities have recently submitted a whopping 188-page report on the next gen console war, with some interesting predictions.
The report, written by Wedbush Morgan analysts Michael Pachter and Edward Woo, predicts that the Xbox 360 will retain its first-mover advantage for around two years and that Sony will be the dominant console at the end of the next gen life cycle, as the company is - somewhat cleverly according to this analysis - more interested in the HD format wars than the console battle.
Ignoring the fact that it took these two fellows 188 pages of hardcore analysing to essentially tell us what we already know, let’s have a little deeper look-see into why they reached these conclusions.
The basic theory which the report postulates goes like this: that the primary driver of next gen games sales will not be the amount or the quality of games released on each console, but will instead be consumers' willingness to adopt new high definition DVD formats.
Indeed, many saw the PS2’s initial healthy sales as being boosted by the fact that it doubled up as a handy and cheap DVD player. In this report, Michael Pachter suggests that the delay of PS3 was in actuality a well-planned move, to enable Sony to target movie fans with a Blu-ray enabled console, on which they can also play some pretty cool-looking games.
Up to the end of 2007, the analysts predict that Xbox 360 will capture approximately 42% of US and European next gen console sales, that the PS3 will capture 39%, and the Wii the remaining 19%.
They go on to state that, "As consumers begin to purchase a second console, we think that market shares will normalize, with Sony capturing around 45% of the total market, Microsoft capturing 35%, and Nintendo capturing 20%."
The report also contains some welcome reading for Nintendo fanboys – the Wii possee – as the analysts state that, "We believe that the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are far more similar than their predecessors were, and believe that the economics of game development will serve as a disincentive to third party publishers to offer exclusive content for either console. As a result, we think that Nintendo’s Wii, backed by the company’s deep library of high quality content, may surprise many by gaining a greater share of the market than did its predecessor, the GameCube."
Of course, the key issue here is whether or not Blu-ray succeeds as a viable format. If so, then it’s a clear no-brainer to say that Sony will be at a definite advantage in the next gen console war. If not, what then for Sony?
The report, written by Wedbush Morgan analysts Michael Pachter and Edward Woo, predicts that the Xbox 360 will retain its first-mover advantage for around two years and that Sony will be the dominant console at the end of the next gen life cycle, as the company is - somewhat cleverly according to this analysis - more interested in the HD format wars than the console battle.
Ignoring the fact that it took these two fellows 188 pages of hardcore analysing to essentially tell us what we already know, let’s have a little deeper look-see into why they reached these conclusions.
The basic theory which the report postulates goes like this: that the primary driver of next gen games sales will not be the amount or the quality of games released on each console, but will instead be consumers' willingness to adopt new high definition DVD formats.
Indeed, many saw the PS2’s initial healthy sales as being boosted by the fact that it doubled up as a handy and cheap DVD player. In this report, Michael Pachter suggests that the delay of PS3 was in actuality a well-planned move, to enable Sony to target movie fans with a Blu-ray enabled console, on which they can also play some pretty cool-looking games.
Up to the end of 2007, the analysts predict that Xbox 360 will capture approximately 42% of US and European next gen console sales, that the PS3 will capture 39%, and the Wii the remaining 19%.
They go on to state that, "As consumers begin to purchase a second console, we think that market shares will normalize, with Sony capturing around 45% of the total market, Microsoft capturing 35%, and Nintendo capturing 20%."
The report also contains some welcome reading for Nintendo fanboys – the Wii possee – as the analysts state that, "We believe that the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are far more similar than their predecessors were, and believe that the economics of game development will serve as a disincentive to third party publishers to offer exclusive content for either console. As a result, we think that Nintendo’s Wii, backed by the company’s deep library of high quality content, may surprise many by gaining a greater share of the market than did its predecessor, the GameCube."
Of course, the key issue here is whether or not Blu-ray succeeds as a viable format. If so, then it’s a clear no-brainer to say that Sony will be at a definite advantage in the next gen console war. If not, what then for Sony?
Comments
king skins 2 May 2006 14:02
1/20
Isn't there rumours about Toshiba and Sony making a hybrid HD DVD format?
I'm still not sure either will take off. VHS to DVD was a huge leap in quality and usability, but I don't see a huge differencey between 720p and upscalled DVD's on my HD TV and I can't see lots of people rebuying there movie collections.
I'm still not sure either will take off. VHS to DVD was a huge leap in quality and usability, but I don't see a huge differencey between 720p and upscalled DVD's on my HD TV and I can't see lots of people rebuying there movie collections.
bendragonbrown47 2 May 2006 16:24
2/20
That's what people said about DVD, but plenty of people have rebought their video collections...
more comments below our sponsor's message
ozfunghi 2 May 2006 17:22
3/20
Ben Brown wrote:
That's what people said about DVD, but plenty of people have rebought their video collections...
The main reason why people bought DVD's was because they didn't take as much space, kept the same quality (except when scratched), had extra's and certainly for functionality (skip, FFW, chapter select, subtitles, languages etc). I for one have no intention of repurchasing my hundreds of DVD's on HD-DVD or BR for that matter just to get a higher resolution.
tyrion 2 May 2006 19:42
4/20
king skins wrote:
Isn't there rumours about Toshiba and Sony making a hybrid HD DVD format?
That's fallen through from all accounts.
There will be dual format players though.
vault 13 2 May 2006 23:38
5/20
king skins wrote:
...but I don't see a huge differencey between 720p and upscalled DVD's on my HD TV...quote]
That's because it's not improving the quality of the compression and mastering. BD and HD-DVDs have much more space to deal with. 4.7 gigs vs. 15 gigs. So the compression rate will be much less. Alot less artifacting and pixelating. Better color gradation. Just take a look in any $9.99 bin and play said DVD on any HD or even non HDTV and look expecially at the shadows and dark areas. I was watching Wall Street and I could see the color breaking up and the detail that was lost.
There's going to be a big difference if and when it comes out as long as it's hooked up corrrectly. You won't see jack if you use component wires in lieu of HDMI.
Don't let anyone tell you there's no difference. Only a handful of people at tech demos and behind closed doors have seen what HD or Blu-Ray DVDs look like.
That's because it's not improving the quality of the compression and mastering. BD and HD-DVDs have much more space to deal with. 4.7 gigs vs. 15 gigs. So the compression rate will be much less. Alot less artifacting and pixelating. Better color gradation. Just take a look in any $9.99 bin and play said DVD on any HD or even non HDTV and look expecially at the shadows and dark areas. I was watching Wall Street and I could see the color breaking up and the detail that was lost.
There's going to be a big difference if and when it comes out as long as it's hooked up corrrectly. You won't see jack if you use component wires in lieu of HDMI.
Don't let anyone tell you there's no difference. Only a handful of people at tech demos and behind closed doors have seen what HD or Blu-Ray DVDs look like.
realvictory 2 May 2006 23:42
6/20
ozfunghi wrote:
Ben Brown wrote:
That's what people said about DVD, but plenty of people have rebought their video collections...
The main reason why people bought DVD's was because they didn't take as much space, kept the same quality (except when scratched), had extra's and certainly for functionality (skip, FFW, chapter select, subtitles, languages etc). I for one have no intention of repurchasing my hundreds of DVD's on HD-DVD or BR for that matter just to get a higher resolution.
Yeah, and if Blu-Ray players read DVDs anyway, people might as well just keep the DVDs. Maybe once the price goes down, and lots of movies have come out people will buy it, but I don't know if the majority will.
On the other hand, the PS3 is a Blu-Ray player that also plays all Playstation games. See - just to get the other consoles to play "old fashioned" DVDs you still need to buy extra accessories, whereas the PS3 plays everything, straight out of the box.
My personal opinion is, I don't really care about resolution - you get movie files off the internet at lower-than-PAL resolution, which I don't have a problem with watching. High reolution is nice, but it doesn't add a lot to the experience. And I want Nintendo to do better...
Joji 3 May 2006 01:34
7/20
I still think Son ywill have a problem convncing non gamers, but perhaps that might come much later. Either way the fact remains that even your grandmother can now invest in a cheap dvd player so just about anyone can afford one. Telling gamers to upgrade every five years might work but to others it won't and they won't do it just because Sony and co want you to.
The obvious difference between the VHS-DVD transition are a rather obvious large amount of years (vhs has been around a long time so replcing it with easier to store dvds was a good and overdue thing, also remember that vhs players came before the recorders). And ask yourself this, dvd recorders are now kicking about at good prices, how many people have them though?
Until Blu Ray and such can record not much will happen.
The obvious difference between the VHS-DVD transition are a rather obvious large amount of years (vhs has been around a long time so replcing it with easier to store dvds was a good and overdue thing, also remember that vhs players came before the recorders). And ask yourself this, dvd recorders are now kicking about at good prices, how many people have them though?
Until Blu Ray and such can record not much will happen.
king skins 3 May 2006 10:01
8/20
tyrion wrote:
king skins wrote:
Isn't there rumours about Toshiba and Sony making a hybrid HD DVD format?
That's fallen through from all accounts.
There will be dual format players though.
I thought I saw a headline somewhere about them trying again a couple of weeks back... didn't read the article though...
king skins 3 May 2006 10:19
9/20
vault 13 wrote:
king skins wrote:
...but I don't see a huge differencey between 720p and upscalled DVD's on my HD TV...
That's because it's not improving the quality of the compression and mastering. BD and HD-DVDs have much more space to deal with. 4.7 gigs vs. 15 gigs. So the compression rate will be much less. Alot less artifacting and pixelating. Better color gradation. Just take a look in any $9.99 bin and play said DVD on any HD or even non HDTV and look expecially at the shadows and dark areas. I was watching Wall Street and I could see the color breaking up and the detail that was lost.
There's going to be a big difference if and when it comes out as long as it's hooked up corrrectly. You won't see jack if you use component wires in lieu of HDMI.
Don't let anyone tell you there's no difference. Only a handful of people at tech demos and behind closed doors have seen what HD or Blu-Ray DVDs look like.
Sorry I don't think I made it very clear i my first post.
I counldn't tell much difference between 720p videos on my 360 and DVDs being upscalled by my 360.
Obviously the 720p was sharper and better quality but not by a huge margin.
thane_jaw 3 May 2006 11:25
10/20
realvictory wrote:
Yeah, and if Blu-Ray players read DVDs anyway, people might as well just keep the DVDs. Maybe once the price goes down, and lots of movies have come out people will buy it, but I don't know if the majority will.
On the other hand, the PS3 is a Blu-Ray player that also plays all Playstation games. See - just to get the other consoles to play "old fashioned" DVDs you still need to buy extra accessories, whereas the PS3 plays everything, straight out of the box.
Que? xbox needed fancy wireless addons, but the 360 doesn't need anything extra to play regular dvds, aside from a controller. Never owned a gamecube so can't comment on that.
I also thought a big deal with blu-ray was that it used a different light then dvds to read discs, which drove up the cost of doing hybrid players (ala the ps3) - and is such a main marketing advantage of the hd-dvd, in that with a hd-dvd you wouldn't have to pay an extra £10 to buy the same movie you already own. I am of course basing this all on stuff I read on the internet, so I am definately correct.
realvictory wrote:
My personal opinion is, I don't really care about resolution - you get movie files off the internet at lower-than-PAL resolution, which I don't have a problem with watching. High reolution is nice, but it doesn't add a lot to the experience. And I want Nintendo to do better...
There's a huge difference in watching something ripped off the internet on your screen and watching it on the couch on a widescreen. High res makes a huge difference, especially compared against lower-than-pal resolution. The difference in experience is so clear, because instead of straining your eyes you can actually see what's going on. My personal opinion is that dvd quality is fine for me, but I'd balk at watching anything of lower quality for more then 10 minutes and certainly not for an hour and a half.
Oh and another major thing fueling the transistion from VHS to dvd was the release of the matrix, which was banned in vhs format in the states (to do with columbine) and so became a veritable showcase for the new format (with the little white rabbits popping up, showing you how they did the stunt) and the extras it could do. There's not a comparable showpiece big release with the same kind of cultural momentum to coincide with these launches. Perhaps a comparable motivation to get people to switch to blu-ray would be if Sony could produce a similar killer-app for the ps3 that positively required blu-ray to run, but then again who else aside from gamers would give a s**t.
tyrion 3 May 2006 12:18
11/20
thane_jaw wrote:
I also thought a big deal with blu-ray was that it used a different light then dvds to read discs, which drove up the cost of doing hybrid players (ala the ps3) - and is such a main marketing advantage of the hd-dvd, in that with a hd-dvd you wouldn't have to pay an extra £10 to buy the same movie you already own. I am of course basing this all on stuff I read on the internet, so I am definately correct.
As far as I know, and I get my information from the Internet too (pinch of salt to table six) both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use blue lasers to get more data onto the same size discs. Blue light has a lower wavelength than red light and so can detect smaller pits in the disc, or something similar.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
thane_jaw 3 May 2006 17:26
12/20
tyrion wrote:
As far as I know, and I get my information from the Internet too (pinch of salt to table six) both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use blue lasers to get more data onto the same size discs. Blue light has a lower wavelength than red light and so can detect smaller pits in the disc, or something similar.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
So the cheaper cost in HD-DVD is due to the relative ease of convincing a chinese factory to transfer over from DVD to hd-dvd, rather then blurray? Or so I heard. On a completely reliable site (*cough*ign*cough*) of course.
warbaby 3 May 2006 22:22
13/20
Anything with a title that contains "analyst" I take with as much seriousness as I do the weather man. Didn't analysts say 2000 would herald then end of the world? Devastation to all computer operated devices?... *looks around*... No, my computer is still working...
At the end of the day, you can analyze blu-ray and hd-dvd all you want, but until the "war" actually beings, all it is is speculation.
If you've ever watched a sports TV network a week before any given sporting playoffs, they talk for hours about "who will be playing who if they win, or they lose. If they tie, they will play them."... wait another week and you'll know for sure.
I hope to God these guys were getting paid allot to write a 188(?) page report on video games... video games... keyword being game...
At the end of the day, you can analyze blu-ray and hd-dvd all you want, but until the "war" actually beings, all it is is speculation.
If you've ever watched a sports TV network a week before any given sporting playoffs, they talk for hours about "who will be playing who if they win, or they lose. If they tie, they will play them."... wait another week and you'll know for sure.
I hope to God these guys were getting paid allot to write a 188(?) page report on video games... video games... keyword being game...
vault 13 4 May 2006 04:50
14/20
tyrion wrote:
As far as I know, and I get my information from the Internet too (pinch of salt to table six) both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use blue lasers to get more data onto the same size discs. Blue light has a lower wavelength than red light and so can detect smaller pits in the disc, or something similar.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
Check, check, and check. Good someone else knows the facts around here.
As for all of you folks who think that DVD quality is just fine, well your gonna be forced to upgrade no matter what. For all of you who are using component video or any other analog cables to achieve HD will also have to upgrade.
HDMI cables are being forced by the FCC as a national standard for HD. Basically for HDCP (copyright protection). Sucks balls for anyone who bought HDTVs early. Sucks even more for dubbing, burning, taping, copying stuff in the future. Wonder who's gonna crack that code.
And the whole, "I'm fine with DVD quality...", I don't buy it. We're all graphic whores. We all buy new systems for better graphics and we will all end up buying new dvd players for better quality. I'll bet 2 dollars on it.
vault 13 4 May 2006 04:54
15/20
tyrion wrote:
As far as I know, and I get my information from the Internet too (pinch of salt to table six) both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use blue lasers to get more data onto the same size discs. Blue light has a lower wavelength than red light and so can detect smaller pits in the disc, or something similar.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
Any DVD capable Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players are going to have to include two laser assemblies (one red, one blue) in order to read the HD formats and standard DVDs, not to mention CDs.
I believe the reduced costs of the HD-DVD format are to do with manufacturing of the discs, not the drives.
I think that both ranges will have DVD capabilities and I bet it won't be long before a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD/CD drive becomes available and it won't matter which format wins.
Check, check, and check. Good someone else knows the facts around here.
As for all of you folks who think that DVD quality is just fine, well your gonna be forced to upgrade no matter what. For all of you who are using component video or any other analog cables to achieve HD will also have to upgrade.
HDMI cables are being forced by the FCC as a national standard for HD. Basically for HDCP (copyright protection). Sucks balls for anyone who bought HDTVs early. Sucks even more for dubbing, burning, taping, copying stuff in the future. Wonder who's gonna crack that code.
And the whole, "I'm fine with DVD quality...", I don't buy it. We're all graphic whores. We all buy new systems for better graphics and we will all end up buying new dvd players for better quality. I'll bet 2 dollars on it.
P.S. I was one of the biggest opponents to the DVD format among my frieds back in the day. Now I'm loving it and can't wait for HD and Blu-Ray.
thane_jaw 4 May 2006 10:51
16/20
vault 13 wrote:
As for all of you folks who think that DVD quality is just fine, well your gonna be forced to upgrade no matter what. For all of you who are using component video or any other analog cables to achieve HD will also have to upgrade.
HDMI cables are being forced by the FCC as a national standard for HD. Basically for HDCP (copyright protection). Sucks balls for anyone who bought HDTVs early. Sucks even more for dubbing, burning, taping, copying stuff in the future. Wonder who's gonna crack that code.
And the whole, "I'm fine with DVD quality...", I don't buy it. We're all graphic whores. We all buy new systems for better graphics and we will all end up buying new dvd players for better quality. I'll bet 2 dollars on it.
P.S. I was one of the biggest opponents to the DVD format among my frieds back in the day. Now I'm loving it and can't wait for HD and Blu-Ray.
Well hopefully the fcc won't be forcing it on me straightaway in sunny manchester, although I realise it'll have knockon effects.
I truly am fine with dvd quality, I've no doubt that once I start getting a substantial disposable income I'll be forced to upgrade to some degree, but given the comparatively low uptake on HD tvs in the u.k.(and few hd broadcasting services, sky have only just launched theirs and the main other digital broadcasters aren't due to launch theirs until the summer) I imagine lots of people have yet to purchase one, let alone be able to take advantage of it with fancy new dvds or consoles (i've currently rigged up my 360 to my monitor because dropping £500 for a new tv is low in priorities right now) - I can see HD tv is the next big consumer purchase in the U.K. but that will prevent purchases in the immediate future for next gen dvd players from the average household stuggling to get by.
I guess I'll start frothing at the mouth for this new stuff when they start offering HD to me at reasonable prices (say beginning of 2008 IMO for a decent 42 inch tv), until then I am gonna struggle to justify spending cash for a next gen player that I'll use infrequently without the facilities to display it (unless of course i just buy a ps3 and be done with it).
vault 13 4 May 2006 16:39
17/20
Yeah I forget that you guys are like 5 years behind us here in America! (*stands proud like a good ol' Bush loving army inlisted brainless republican should) And of course we're 20 years behind Japan. I'm not sure how Japan is doing with it, but I think the US is the only place that really has a decent amount of HD content if even at all. Hooray, score one for the nation obsessed with the middle east.
warbaby 4 May 2006 21:05
18/20
This whole new HDMI and new media format junk is a complete waste of time. I speak from experience when I say my current rig is just fine. 20 000 yamaha front projection display. DVD's look fine on a 100 inch display, and if your disagree, your welcome to come up to Canada and take a look. HDTV is freaking brilliant. I can already see the 5 o'clock shadow on the pitcher during a baseball game, do i really need to see his pores?
vault 13 5 May 2006 02:21
19/20
warbaby wrote:
This whole new HDMI and new media format junk is a complete waste of time.
As for HD cable or HD transmission from Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players, the FCC is mandating it.
As for your argument of seeing people's pores; do you plan on buying a 360, PS3, or any other future game systems? Because then you'd be a admiting you do care about better graphics. I don't believe for one minute that people don't care about a better looking anything; a girlfriend, apartment, wardrobe, game graphics, tv resolution! Granted that most people can't tell the difference between DLP vs. 3LCD but I think we can all agree that Fight Night Round 3 on 360 looks better than Round 3 on XBox.
warbaby 5 May 2006 03:40
20/20
vault 13 wrote:
warbaby wrote:
This whole new HDMI and new media format junk is a complete waste of time.
As for HD cable or HD transmission from Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players, the FCC is mandating it.
As for your argument of seeing people's pores; do you plan on buying a 360, PS3, or any other future game systems? Because then you'd be a admiting you do care about better graphics. I don't believe for one minute that people don't care about a better looking anything; a girlfriend, apartment, wardrobe, game graphics, tv resolution! Granted that most people can't tell the difference between DLP vs. 3LCD but I think we can all agree that Fight Night Round 3 on 360 looks better than Round 3 on XBox.
Kinda missed your analogy somewhat. Sure I like things that look better, but to some extent. The difference between FN3 between the two gens of xbox is quite a bit more night and day than other such comparisons. The visual difference between a highend TV right now, compared to one running with HDMI and the whole bit in a year will be nill at best. Even if there is a difference, does that justify the cost of "upgrading"... Not this time, not gonna have this one jammed down my throat. I'll wait until Sony takes up their patent rights to feed signals directly into our brains...
Thank God I won't have to be dealing with this, it will be all Revo-... er Wii, for me during this next gen.