Skip to main content

11,000 PS3s for Australian Launch?

I know you all love hearing about rumours, so it's my pleasure to present a bit of a whopper if it is indeed true. Kotaku is reporting that the number of Playstation 3 consoles allocated for the Australian launch might be pretty low. How low? Well, as the heading suggests, it could be as low as 11,000 units. That certainly isn't a lot at all. If you were disappointed in waiting four months behind the official launch of the PS3, I'm sure you'd be pretty miffed at those numbers (if you haven't pre-ordered already).

The Playstation 3 launches in Australia on March, 23.

Submitted by anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 21/02/07 - 11:48 AM Permalink

  • 1. fil k - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:30:25Z
    no ps3 for me
    as, i love the nintendo wii

    imo gears of war is too violent too .

    First post yay

  • 2. Anonymous Coward - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:50:12Z
    Why are we such an afterthought in the world console market. We're getting the smallest scraps here.
  • 3. Anonymous Coward - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:39:17Z
    Depends on the console manufacturer, Nintendo tend to do releases at times first here over other parts of the world.
  • 4. Grover - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:49:14Z
    Good work - impressive how no-one can even bother talking about the topic, and instantly start talking about the Wii. Nice to see we have such a level headed audience here... damn funny stuff really. Why is that? As soon as someone puts up a Sony article, everyone.. and I mean _everyone_ goes all extreme on commenting against them regardless of the content? In fact, find me someone posting just plain normal Sony news, rather than the usual Sony-bashing gear? Heck.. I don't rekon you even see this much company bashing even on Linux forums bashing MS... its weird. More oddly.. its people that aren't even buying Sony products that do the bashing? Look at post one for the perfect example response. How can you even judge something without having an intent to fully explore it? HEHEHE ahh.. this stuff cracks me up.
  • 5. Anonymous Coward - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:55:15Z
    Seems like the usual garbage to me. "Wii is the best since I can put the remote up my arse! " Really, it is just kind of pathetic.

    As for the article, well, seems pretty fair for a starting number, as long as they have more to back it up. With the price point, the PS2 still selling very well - yes, I said PS2, not XBOX or the much "loved" GCUBE - not to mention the fact that Australia is a small market... seems like it isn't that bad for a start.

    Maybe I've got the numbers wrong... not that it would matter to most, as the smarter ones (or poorer ones) are still getting the money's worth out of their existing (XBOX, PS2, GCUBE) consoles.

  • 6. Souri - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:8:49Z
    "In fact, find me someone posting just plain normal Sony news, rather than the usual Sony-bashing gear? Heck.. I don't rekon you even see this much company bashing even on Linux forums bashing MS... its weird"

    Grover, were you referring to the news posts on Sumea? If you look over to the left there on Sony related news items on Sumea, you'll see that there are pretty few of those kinds of news items posted here. I wouldn't say this news item is a bash against Sony either, but more of a lament on our location being the arse end of the console/hardware world for launches. There's no bias for any console in the news postings - the comments area is a different story though as you can see! You'll always get console bashing in every forum or comments area.

  • 7. Mdobele - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:11:8Z
    As a comparison the Xbox 360 sold 30,000 units in Australia in the first 4 days. 11k units of the PS3 for Australia is a pathetically small amount. You probably won't be able to get one outside of pre-ordering or Ebay ( god, going to love to see what they go for on that during the first month ).
  • 8. sh0v0r - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:22:3Z
    I'd be amazed if they actually do sell all of them?

    Either way they'll have another shipment to meet demand a week or two after, you've waited this long surely you can wait another 2 - 4 weeks.

    I personally have intent to buy one but not until it's at least $500 and has a compelling library of games that I can't get on the 360.

  • 9. kazi - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:43:15Z
    Sony be praised!
  • 10. some dude - Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:24:32Z
    Mdobele - i doubt there will be any of the Ebay craziness for the PAL launch compared to the earlier American/Japan launch.

    I'm one of the ?few? that has it on pre-order, i'm a little worried about the amount of units and if I will be able to get my hands on one on Day 1, but we'll see. I will be getting Motorstorm and Resistance, there's not much else worth playing at the moment, i wish they would speed up some of the big games that were supposed to be released in March like Heavenly Sword and Lair.

  • 11. Ben T - Thu, 22 Feb 2007 9:57:23Z
    I dont know why everyone is down on Sony! They are so awesome! All their consoles, including the PSP, are the best thats out there. The PS3 is far superior than the Wii and 360 and will be better than the Xbox 720, 1480 etc etc etc. I love Sony so much I would work for them for free, No! infact I would pay to work for Sony they are that good!
  • 12. fil k - Thu, 22 Feb 2007 9:59:59Z
    i couldn't agree more but the wii is the exception
  • 13. Ben T - Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:49:15Z
    Sony is great! The PS3 is worth every last cent of $1000. Sony always does things the right way. They know whats best for the consumer and could have made the PS3 $2000 and it would still be worth it. Even if you didnt have any games for it, the PS3 is worthwhile having as you can play bluray movies on it. Even though I dont have a HD tv, the quality of the laser in the bluray players makes the image quality 10x better than DVD.
  • 14. Ben T - Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:28:27Z
    Im not sure how 11k PS3 is meant to supply the current demand. Last count Sony said that 10(percent) of Australians wanted a PS3. Thats like 200,000 people or more! I might buy two and sell one on eBay for twice its price. I suggest everyone reading this to do the same!
  • 15. Neale M - Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:34:39Z
    Its funny because they won't even sell 11k ps3s.
  • 16. Souri - Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:31:49Z
    Screenplay contacted Michael Ephraim, head of the PlayStation business in Australia, who shot down the 11,000 Playstation3's at launch rumour...

    <a href="http://blogs.theage.com.au/screenplay/archives//005191.html">http://blogs.theage.com.au/screenplay/archives//005191.html</a>

  • 17. Andrew S - Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:38:39Z
    Awesome! I'll get 5!
  • 18. Grover - Mon, 5 Mar 2007 4:2:30Z
    Souri - Yes I was referring to the general tone of the article. Like all Sony articles, even here, seem to follow a traditional negative reporting of information about them. I really couldn't care if it were Sony, Nintendo, MS .. or Gamepark that this was happening to, but the fact is, much like many news sites, you purvey they same sentiment.
    Compare it against say your X360 Article on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 10:33:43 PM. Or the Wii one on Tuesday, December 12, 2006. Both of these articles are talking about delays or shortages, but don't have some snide commentary or such? So why the difference? Thats all I'm asking. Fact is, if you have a good look around _all_ media sites, this is a very common theme - why the unbalance?

    And if its hard to tell why your article is snide.. then why the additional commentary of:
    "That certainly isn't a lot at all. If you were disappointed in waiting four months behind the official launch of the PS3, I'm sure you'd be pretty miffed at those numbers (if you haven't pre-ordered already)."
    The undertones are quite obvious - why not just report that the rumour was for 11K? What has waiting 4 months to do with it? Why should anyone be miffed at those numbers - without knowing demand, thats a plain beat-up?

    Then of course.. the story turns out to be false, and all the flubbery is quickly ignored - you see, like many of your media friends, you are very quick to jump on any news(?) that might put Sony in bad light? When was the last time you did that with MS or Nintendo?

    Additionally its even more interesting to see members/visitors here propagating the same silliness. Whether it is true or not, any bad Sony news is great news to ppl here it seems? Erm.. and that brings me to my last point. Why no news about positive things in the PS3 launch? Hrm? There certainly has been a fair amount lately but has been missed here? odd... isn't it.

  • 19. Souri - Mon, 5 Mar 2007 14:40:11Z
    I think you're probably seeing more into this that what it is. Like I said previously, this news item is more of a lament on our market being a sad afterthought rather than a news item about Sony bashing. I had the same sentiment when the other consoles were delayed. As for it being snide or being of that undertone, I would say it's for that sane reason as well. Why didn't the Microsoft / Nintendo news items have the same undertone? Because this is the third or so time it's happened now for consoles here? Aren't we all getting tired of it all by now? You're asking what has waiting 4 months got to do with it when the news item was concerning a rumour about limited consoles at launch - well, I am lamenting for our neglected consumers, why wouldn't I mention that?

    And when the story turned out to be false, it wasn't ignored. I posted the link to Screenplay straight away.

    You say that I'm quick to jump on any news that might put Sony in a bad light - Sony sure has had a tonne of bad press about them in recent times, but I can honestly say that I have not even posted about many of them at all. In fact, if there aren't many good Sony posts either, then here's probably why. I'm only really interested in posting locally related news on Sumea. It has to be interesting and locally related, or it has to be big news. The rumour on the PS3 fit that bill. All other bad or good PS3 news usually doesn't. So that means no posts on the latest wacky comment by Ken Kutaragi or Phil Harrison, no posts on the new cool online features of the PS3 etc You can get all that news on most other game sites.

    To be honest, I'm a bit at a loss for being called out on this one. If you're sick of media pushing the same sentiment against Sony, that's fine. But I think it's unfair to say this site does the same, and that there's some sort of an agenda against Sony. There's certainly been ample of opportunity to do a lot of that, yet there aren't many posts like that at all here. I have no stake in Sony's success of loss, nor do I think I exhibit any fanboy-isms for any console, but I know that the games that will come out for the PS3 will be bloody good.

  • 20. Shams - Wed, 7 Mar 2007 15:15:4Z
    The whole story doesn't make sense. With the relatively low sales of the PS3 in the US/Japan, there are plenty of units available for the European launch - including Australia. They will probably launch with 50,000 at retail or something like that.

    What Im more curious about is whether *all* the units we get will be the 'new' model (without the EmotionEngine chip, and using software simulation for PS2 game playback) - or the old model, or a mix of both.

  • 21. Anonymous Coward - Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:18:18Z
    Perhaps the initial versions will be the non-sw emulator version, but the bulk we will get will be the SW versions - at least that is my guess, just like Europe.
  • 22. Anonymous Coward - Sat, 10 Mar 2007 5:35:29Z
    I'm not saying its an intended slant against Sony, I just dont see why its necessary, since you manage to be more fair and informative in the other articles? - the MS and Nintendo ones do not contain any lament at all. I don't take the excuse, that because you see a third maker make a delay, that you single them out for such commentary? In fact most platforms have delays. Did you bother reading your archived items I noted? Did you see how they were information based? All Im asking is why isn't it so for this article as well? If you honestly feel that you are running balanced news (which you do most of the time), then simply answer why the undertones of the commentary were necessary? Because the fact is, they just can't be justified, if a balanced view is your aim.
    I think if you compare with this article you wrote: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 6:51:12 PM. You'd see the pretty stark difference I refer to.