Slashdot Mirror
Sony - PS2 Until 2010, First PSP Game Demo?
ack154 writes "Reuters has a good article from the Game Developers Conference in San Jose, explaining how Sony is planning to milk PS2 sales until 2010. They see a lot of potential still down the road. Also mentioned at the conference was that Sony has no plans to speed up PS3 development based on the next Xbox system. There was also an emulated demo of a game for the upcoming PSP handheld." Elsewhere, GameSpy has a more detailed write-up of the same GDC keynote, and 1UP.com has in-depth information on programming the PSP from another GDC lecture. Update: 03/26 14:31 GMT by S : 1UP has added a streaming movie of Death Jr., the PSP game demonstrated, to its coverage of the keynote.
Sony does certainly hace the hype machine in the thier court. If Microsoft starts to release the Xbox next before Sony releases the PS3, then all Sony has to do is start leaking rumors that they will be releasing the PS3 at about the same time Xbox next is going to be released. Then all the people more interested in Sony will wait it out, instead of buying an Xbox next in the short run.
I do believe that this round backward compatability is key, as well as network multi-player games. In addition to those, the console that adds the most multi-media functions as an easy side-task will get my dollars. I'd love to have a game machine for fun, as well as a HTPC for DVD playback, video/music streaming, PVR functions. I want an all-in-one box at a low price, and I don't want to have to hack it to get that.
--
Real time updates from Slickdeals, Techbargains, Bens Bargains, Got|Apex and more!
6 years ago was 1998.
I was using a 200 mhz pentium, playing games on my Playstation 1, and surfing the internet on a 28.8 baud modem, and I think I had a Voodoo 2 graphics accelerator card.
6 years from now.. who knows what I will be doing. But there is no way I will be sitting around playing a PS2.
Like my subject says.. 6 years is a really really long time in terms of technology. If Sony sits on their PS2 for that long they are going to be left behind.
Really? I plan on buying something that'll play video games and do it well. I don't need any of that other stuff to take away from that. Don't need an iffy DVD player included(I already own one), I don't need it to play CDs(I have a stereo), I don't need it to record TV shows(I have a VCR)
"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home" - Cicero
6 years ago was 1998.
I was using a 200 mhz pentium, playing games on my Playstation 1, and surfing the internet on a 28.8 baud modem, and I think I had a Voodoo 2 graphics accelerator card.
6 years from now.. who knows what I will be doing. But there is no way I will be sitting around playing a PS2.
In 1998 I had a 400MHz P2 and was within a few months of stripping my Voodoo 2 cards out of my system (and had already replaced one that fried from the heat of the SLI setup). I had cable internet access, and had only been using 28.8 before that because my parents' ISP didn't support 33.6.
On the other hand, I still play PS1 games almost as much as PS2 games, though I play them on a PS2. I've probably bought more PS1 games since the PS2 was released, but I can't say for sure because I sold a lot of my PS1 games with my PS1 (most of them were pretty horrible games).
-PainKilleR-[CE]
some ps1 titles still get sold.
consider that.
they can still continue to milk ps2 line after they make ps3.
.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I don't think that they are planning to wait with the PS3 until 2010. They're just going to support the PS2 until then, very much like they did with PS1(PSX). Even now you sometimes see games coming out for that system. The Backwards compatibility of the PS3 will give them a certain advantage, even when the PS3 is out, they can still make PS2 games, and PS3 owners will be able to play them.
It's clever, all those old PS2s need to go somewhere. They will probably go over to people that don't want to spend their money on an expensive console and are satisfied with something older. So next to the small PS3 start-up market after the release, they can continue to make money on the PS2, until enough people own a PS3.
You do realize that its saying that Sony expects PS2 development to be active and profitable, meaning it will still have new games coming out for it, untill at least 2010 and not that they are waiting till 2010 to release the PS3. You do understand that right? Afterall, there are still new PS1 games being released.
I think the plan is that they're going to continue to milk PS2 sales until 2010 like they continue to milk PS1 sales now. There might not be anything new that's worth buying coming out, but the system and games continue to be availible. I don't think a system has ever lasted as long on the shelves after "death" as the PSOne is, actually.
Hey, it worked for cripping the Dreamcast...
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
Even if Sony doesn't push the PS3 faster, they should consider a PS2.5 box, no change to the CPU or GPU hardware, but have a build in HDD, network adapter, multitap, and/or better memory card system. Maybe update the firmware to fix some of the DVD viewing problems that also exist (esp. with multilayer DVDs). Heck, if they use a good size HDD (60g+), they could build a PVR unit easily off the PS2 base, sell this PS2.5 for $200-250, drop the PS2 to $150, and stay competive on hardware for the Xbox(2) and GC. Just give the consumer something that shows maybe a taste of what the PS3 will have and work from there.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
The original Playstation / PSOne is coming up to ten years old, and a few games are still being produced for it, albeit not many, and the console is still available. So Sony thinking they can get their current console to 2010 isn't that stupid.
:) I guess they're clearing stock, I don't think the PSOne has that much life left in it, although it might not get officially canned until a 'PSTwo' comes out.
Although the PSOne is getting rare nowadays, but Game (a UK games store) is selling PSOne + Official Screen for GB80 (only 30 more than the usual selling price of the PSOne on it's own), if only I had the money I'd get one and a car adaptor.
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
In your face non-biased journalism!
When you get to hell -- tell 'em Itchy sent ya!
Sold? Heck, the still get made, too, you know.
Nintendo still made profit selling the Famicom and Super Famicom in Japan until September 2003. Not much, but they didn't mass produce the console.
I didn't see anywhere where Sony said they'd sell the PS2 in the US six years from now, and Japanese gamers aren't as vain as US gamers. FDS games are still developed and sold there. Try selling an 8-bit game in the US and see how fast you get laughed out of the country.
It's called the PSX, and you can already buy it in Japan
www.psx.sony.co.jp
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
In 6 years the PS2 will be as usefull as the PS1 is today.. as in not at all.
You might like its legacy games and quaint graphics, but, its useless.
What need to they have to keep around aging technology for so long?
Just because they say they're going to milk the PS2 for another 6 years doesn't mean that they aren't going to be putting out the PS3. All it said was that they aren't going to speed up the PS3 release because of the XBox2.
I still play PS1 games (and Genesis and SNES and so forth), and stores still sell PS1 games, and I'm pretty sure that there are a few PS1 games still being made (albiet rare). And I fully intend to continue playing the games I have on my PS2 (and the games still to be released) for plenty of more years, including after the PS3 is out (and probably the PS4, PS5, and so on).
Just because Sony CAN milk the PS2 until 2010 doesn't mean they'll be making anything/much. It'll be like milking dead cow.
Reading through those articles i noticed a couple of things 1) Rumor that a psp and ps2 will be able to link up 2) gfx power is about equal between ps2 and psp 3) Porting to psp is very easy 4) PS2 sales are expected to extend into 2010 (don't worry, i am getting to my point here shortly) Basically what i am getting at is that Sony is going to use the psp to drive sales of the ps2 (although i doubt it will stay in its current form..they will probably redesign it like they did with the ps1). Why do i think that? Glad you asked. With other handheld gaming systems the power discrepancy is always so huge between the home gaming machine and the handheld (look at Gameboy advanced and the gamecube) there wasn't much possibility for a game that you could play on the move and that you could sit down in front of your t.v. and waste a couple of hours. I think nintendo tried doing that with some of the pokemon games but i am not sure on that so someone please correct me if i am wrong. Anyways my point is that the PS2 and PSP look like an electronic peanut butter and jam. Why wouldn?t a game developer develop for both platforms especially since it is supposedly very easy to do and both platforms have similar capabilities. I think this is why sony is saying that the PS2 will remain viable until 2010 peace
--I swear, it was a case of isolated idiopathic hemibalissmus
The problem with that analogy is that the DC wasn't that much of an improvement over the PS1. It was still CD-driven, it didn't have that much more horsepower, and it didn't have must-have titles.
The PS2 on the other hand was promising dual functionality of dvd playback, must-have titles, and noticeably more horsepower than the DC.
If rumors of more horsepower within a year were enough by themselves to wipe out a 1 year head start, then the XBox would've hampered PS2 sales -- which it didn't at all. Even despite that the XBox has numerous, tangible, technical advantages on the PS2 (HD, ethernet, proscan, HDTV, dolby 5.1, etc). What it didn't have - was advantages that consumers were clamoring for out of the box. (DVD playback, must-have games)
If the neXtBox is just more polygons, more HDTV support, and even HD-DVD support - it likely will fail like the DC did.
If it comes with PVR functionality and stays at consumer prices - it might explode like the PS2 did. If they include PVR and a blue laser DVD RW drive - who knows how big they could get. PVR today is great technology looking for the consumer price point, just like DVD was in 2000.
(Un)fortunately for Microsoft, it appears they don't quite get it (or they're masterful at disinformation). They're talking about just releasing merely a bigger/better/faster console with the neXtBox, while Sony is already gathering market experience with a consumer PVR + console. (PSX)
With MS being wishy-washy on backwards compatibility, and waffling on the HD - they might not even be able to sell the neXtBox to current fans.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
The original gameboy supposedly "died" back in 1996 or so, and still sells games today. Once again backward compatibility is helping here. NES lasted for a good long while too (with games released up to 1995) probably because the SNES was just a higher colour/pixel count (much like the PS2 is just more polygons and better load times over the PS1--doesn't even have four controller ports).
Nintendo 64 was released eight years ago. Nintendo is still milking profits from it--it was launched under a year ago in China as the iQue. My point is that while you, me and most enthusiasts will have no use for a PS2 in six years, some demographic probably will.
PS2 exclusive .Hack, Legend of Legaia 2, Okage: Shadow King, Shadow Hearts, Unlimited SaGa, Wild ARMs 3.
FFX, Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, Suikoden 3, Breath of Fire 5, Xenosaga, Arc the Lad 4, FFX-2, Grandia 2,
PS1 games
FF1(r), FF2(r), FF4, FF5, FF6, FF7, FF8, FF9, FFT, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean 2, Koudelka, Brigandine, Rhapsody, Xenogears, Tactics Ogre, Ogre Battle, Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, Wild ARMs, Wild ARMs 2, Suikoden, Suikoden 2, Lunar SSSC, Lunar EBC, Grandia, Legend of Dragoon, Breath of Fire 3, Breath of Fire 4, SaGa Frontier, SaGa Frontier 2, Legend of Legaia, Legend of Mana, Threads of Fate, Persona, Persona 2, Tales of Destiny, Tales of Eternia, Alundra, Vandal Hearts, Vandal Hearts 2, Arc the Lad 1, Arc the Lad 2, Arc the Lad 3, Azure Dreams, Beyond the Beyond, Brave Fencer Mushashi, Chocobo's Mysterious Dungeon 2, Dragon Warrior 7, Front Mission 3, Granstream SaGa, Guardian's Crusade, Hoshigami: Ruining Blue Earth, Jade Cocoon, Kartia, Parasite Eve, Shadow Madness, Thousand Arms, Vagrant Story
Now, by no means do I want to play every game on that list as many of them are trash, though I'm not exactly interested in a few of the PS2 games either. Frankly, though, there's just more PS1 RPGs that I'm interested in, even after playing a good number of them. I mean I'm sure I'll get a PS2 eventually (though no guarantee it'll be before the PS3 comes out) but for the moment I'm enjoying FF6.
As far as non-RPGs, though...well there's a reason I went out and bought a Gamecube (cheap, for one thing...).
Sony has no plans to speed up PS3 development based on the next Xbox system.
Good.
At least someone is learning from Sega's old mistakes.
I am a huge Xbox fan, and even I can see that this strategy of overlapping systems and backwards compatibility is why Sony has dominated the market. I wonder, why can't Microsoft or Nintendo* see this? *I realize Nintendo uses this strategy with great success with the Gameboy(s), why can't they adapt it to their consoles as well?
But 6 years? PS2 is hardly the most advanced one out there. Are they not expecting HDTV to become more mainstream between now and then?
Either they are betting on the PSP and then it better be a bloody good system or they are gambling on making the PS3 leap years ahead rather then getting yet another slightly better system out now.
Oh well. HL2 out yet?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Another thing that Nintendo is doing right now is just re-releasing their old NES and SNES games on the Game Boy Advance. Example, the Super Mario Advance games, The re-release of Zelda: A link to the past, etc. Companies can still sell their games long after the console is rendered obsolete. Just look at all of the games for the PS1, PS2, and Xbox that have old intellivision and atari 2600 games. I'm not sure how well they sell, but I have a couple of them for my PS1, and they are pretty nostalgic to me. So in that case, the company is making money from a console game thats 20 years old. Not too far-fetched then for a company like Sony to still make money from a game even if that particular console is succeeded by another "more advanced" console.
"Damn TV, you've ruined my imagination, just like you've ruined my ability to -- to, um...uh...oh well."
I'm sorry, but that is just completely wrong, and you're buying into Sony's hype machine. I'm curious if you've ever compared the three:
The PSone (or playstation):
Has a 33 MHz, 32 bit processor, with 2MB of RAM.
The dreamcast:
Has a 128-bit, 200 MHz main processor, with 16 megs of system RAM, 8 megs of dedicated video RAM and 2 megs of audio RAM.
The ps2:
Has a 128-bit, 294 MHz main processor, with 32 megs of system RAM and 4 megs of video RAM.
According to the specs, the PS2 has a faster clock (though different processor) and more RAM. Unfortunately, it has far less video RAM, which is very important. Want to see great graphics? Take a look at the DC Soul Calibur.
The DC kicked the pants off of the PS1 and was very competitive with (besides DVD playback many would say better than) the PS2. Play a DC and PS1 game back to back and you'll see (because you would have never said they were comparable if you've ever used a Dreamcast). Play a DC and PS2 game side-by-side and I think you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference. The dreamcast was ahead of its time.
God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
But look at the games that are being made for the PS1 still. They're all really, really corny games intended for little kids, because they know that a sizable percentage of the people who have PS1's but not PS2's are children. Once PS3 comes out, major game developers will move to PS3 for all their new, good titles. All that will continue to be developed for PS2 are mediocre titles and childrens games.
Rufus Dark~~
Play a DC and PS2 game side-by-side and I think you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference
Actually, DC games look way better than PS2 games, I even think the image quality looks as good as the Xbox.
The PS2 triangle rasteriser is an absolute piece of shit. It supports about two blending modes - and doesn't even support anti-aliasing, bilinear filtering or MIP mapping. A 3Dfx Voodoo 1 graphics accelerator was more technically advanced.
The DC used a hybrid tile rendering system that severly helped deal with overdraw in complex scenes. It was effectively performing visibility determination without having to render polygons that would have been overdrawn with a traditional rasteriser. Hence it needed the 8MB video memory to store a bit of data about each tile on the screen. But this did mean that it was way ahead of it's time when it came to rendering speed and quality.
The Playstation's success is due to nothing more than the triumph of marketing bullshit. They have vastly inferior products that do the absolute bare minimum.
Can Sony afford to release the PS3 long after the Next Box?
Loyal Sony fans, like myself, will definately wait for the PS3 to come out, and will not bow to Microsoft. But what about developers? Will the major companies continue to release their big name titles on the PS2?
Honestly, there are not nearly enough people that are that loyal to Sony. That means a lot of people will readily go from PS2 to Next Box. Do gaming companies hold strong loyalties where more money is to be made elsewhere? I have my doubts.
So far, PS1/PS2 together have not only a much larger library of games than Xbox, but the I believe the games they do have tend to be better. That, more than anything else, I think, is what has kept PS2 so strong against Xbox.
On the flip side, a large portion (perhaps most, I've not seen the statistics laid before me) of PS2 game developers are based in Japan. There is virtually no X-Box market in Japan, so Sony's biggest contender there is Nintendo. So, we don't have to fear too much for Sony's financial well-being, nor that the japanese developers will move to X-box. The biggest potential problem of Sony not releasing PS3 until after Next Box is released is obviously profits in America, and possibly Europe (don't quote me on that). If Sony takes a major financial hit in mid-developement of the PS3, what does that mean for it's developement? The major benefit for us as consumers to wait for the PS3 is that they can spend longer time developing it, hopefully making it a better system. But what happens when while they're developing it, budget for it is drastically reduced? That's what I'm worried about.
----------
Maiden of the Seventh Sunrise
" The problem with that analogy is that the DC wasn't that much of an improvement over the PS1. It was still CD-driven, it didn't have that much more horsepower, and it didn't have must-have titles."
You are the bane of my existence. The Dreamcast was a generation ahead of the PS1. All the late-generation Dreamcast games (and even some earlier ones, notably Soul Calibur) blew the lid off the PS2 competition. For 2001, games like Shenmue 2 was astounding. Forget the PS1, the Dreamcast was easier to develop for, and had more innovative features than the PS2- a new controller (more or less the design of the Xbox), a VMU, and a built-in network card (a first, by the way) than the PS2. Co.mpare a game like Rez or Tennis 2K2 present on both consoles - the games always look cleaner and brighter on Dreamcast. The Dreamcast not only annihilated the PS1 in terms of hardware, but it was also staunch competition to the PS2.
Oh, the Dreamcast was CD-based, by the way. The Dreamcast can read CDs as well as GD-ROMs.
Hardware aside, the assertion that "Dreamcast had no must-have games" particularly makes my blood boil. You must have never played Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Soul Calibur, Power Stone, MDK2 (which ran gorgeously on the DC), Seaman, Samba de Amigo, Skies of Arcadia, Phantasy Star Online, any of the 2K2 series, Ferrari F355 Challenge, Test Drive Le Mans, Chu Chu Rocket (the first online console game ever), Ikaruga, or Crazy Taxi 1 and 2. A better claim would be that the PS2 had no must-have games until well over a year after launch. Gran Turismo 3 and Onimusha - wow.
The Dreamcast died not because of inferior hardware, or lack of content, but because of Sega's waning finances thanks to utter failures during the Saturn era, and the blitzkreiging Sony marketing machine. Get it right.
Not only all of the points you raised, but the DC also was much easier to program games for and thus was cheaper to develop games for.
The DC lost because of lack of EA games and the Sony hype machine. They were saying it was some sort of super computer in your house when that was a total lie.
you think they release shit titles just for fun?
no they don't, those shit titles cost next to nothing to make.
they're not milkin ps1 just for fun.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Sure thing, why not milk it? I mean, come on, it's not like you would be enjoying games that look like 3D Mark '03 anyday soon, anyway.
;), but just to mention, that the graphical improvements seen in games lately doesn't require the hardware just yet. Maybe the demoscene revisited on consoles - push that machine further and further, over the limits.
I for one cannot think of what the games of the future can offer, besides more polygons. I can see it all here already! That's why they're milking it. They don't need more polygon horsepower, if I'm looking at the correct situation - since - the gaming's future is in the handheld's (not saying that set-top would be abandoned..).
I can't see why Sony should rush out the PS3, and they've got all the reasons not to, because their system is still doing well and probably will be for a long time. This is though a topic that you could go on forever (like I seem to be doing...
THIS IS THE INTERNET. PLEASE PICK UP YOUR SERIOUS BUSINESS SUIT AT THE FRONT COUNTER.
...about the PS2 thing: No duh. I'm just waiting for the PSTwo :-) ...about the PSP: It's AMAZING. Download the video. Now. It looks like a PS2 game, only arguably better, and its a) early in development for the game and b) before the system is released, much less "hit its stride." It's not some useless FMV tech demo, either. I want I want I want.
The dreamcast: Has a 128-bit, 200 MHz main processor, with 16 megs of system RAM, 8 megs of dedicated video RAM and 2 megs of audio RAM. The Dreamcast's SH-4 is actually 32-bit, which is confirmed by Hitachi's website: http://www.renesas.com/eng/products/mpumcu/32bit/s h/sh7750s/index.html (Apparently the SuperH series was merged with another company, so that's why it's not on Hitachi's website.) So where did Sega come up with the 128-bit figure?
Nintendo did this with the Super Nintendo and the N64 - for an example, take Donkey Kong Country 3, a major game that came out *after* the N64's launch but was still on the SNES. In fact, one of the characters in the game - Wrinkly Kong - could sometimes be found playing on an N64.
--- Bwah?
hype machine (just like the PS2 being delayed because of missile technology or some crap like that...)