Prognosticating Sony's Downfall

Via Evil Avatar, an article on About.com theorizing Sony's defeat at the hands of Nintendo and Microsoft. An interesting piece of speculation. From the article: "Sony introduces the PS3, sporting far more powerful hardware than either alternative system, limited online system support, and a fairly solid launch line-up. Nintendo introduces the Revolution. At the same time that the Revolution and PS3 hit the store shelves, Microsoft reduces the price of the Xbox 360 and releases Halo 3. Halo 3, combined with the price reduction, effectively undercuts the momentum of the PS3 launch. Customers have to decide between the 360 with Halo 3, the PS3 with a potentially high price tag, and the Revolution, priced near current generation game consoles."

Comments

Good news.

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't wait until those computer-destroying sons-of-bitches Sony go down in flames and honest consumer-friendly companies like Nintendo and Microsoft take over.

Re:Good news.

[InsaneLampshade]

You might wanna preview your messages before posting them, you appear to have missed out the tags.

...or were you being serious?

Re:Good news.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeing as this is /., and the gamer section to boot, just take all posts as sarcasm unless otherwise noted. Only way to be safe.

Re:Good news.

[NVP_Radical_Dreamer]

I typed Microsoft + Consumer Friendly into my thesaurus and it gave me Oxymoron.

Re:Good news.

[G-funk]

Microsoft, sure (but I'd still rate them less evil than Sony). But what's evil about the big N? Besides the whole virtual boy thing.

Re:Good news.

[earthbound kid]

They were jerks during the NES era. Everyone wanted to put out cheap and cheesy games, but Nintendo didn't let them. You had to buy your cartridges from them and pay license fees, etc.

Re:Good news.

[dq5 studios]

Yes, they wanted to stop another atari 2600 from happening. So evil of them.

Re:Good news.

[SetupWeasel]

The video game crash was caused by a lack of confidence from the stores selling the games and systems as much as anything. Nintendo's uphill battle included restoring that confidence. Did they hold on to their ways too long? Yes, but the climate that Nintendo entered the home console industry was much different than any of the other companies had to deal with.

Re:Good news.

[Elite Xizer]

Nintendo...not consumer friendly? Bullshit. I had my Nintendo DS repaired last week completely free. I scratched the touch screen, Nintendo paid for shipping there and back, and they even replaced the touch screen. It was shipped there, fixed, and mailed back. The total time for all this? 6 days. Now, you think Sony would do this for you? I believe they have a policy that they won't accept a PSP for a free repair unless it has 14 dead pixels - all close together. Nintendo will replace a DS if it has only one dead pixel.

Re:Good news.

[Xarius]

If you read into Nintendos past they are the biggest control freaks in the history of videogaming, and used shady tactics and threats and such to make their consoles dominant in their prime.

A little history goes a long way, I know I have no link but a simple web search will yield many results...

Re:Good news.

[W2k]

Massive censorship of games to make them more "kiddie-friendly". Absurdly high licensing fees. Reusing the same goddamn "Mario Bros" character set, visuals and music over and over again since the early nineties. Need I go on?

Re:Good news.

[G-funk]

What the hell is evil about that? People like mario. And they used to censor games. It cost them millions upon millions of dollars when MKI came out, 10 years ago. They learned their lesson and everybody outside of the US is over it. Licensing fees are hardly exorbitant in the face of sony/microsoft, and that's the only way people can get $400 of hardware for $200.

Re:Good news.

[mink]

Yah, I bet THAT works realy well.

We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[BigDork1001]

Customers have to decide between the 360 with Halo 3, the PS3 with a potentially high price tag, and the Revolution, priced near current generation game consoles."

No, no, no no, no no. Customers don't have to decide between the three. They can choose more than one. I own all three (actually four, Dreamcast too) of this generations systems. Eventually I will own all three of the next gens too. There is no law that says I can only get one and I won't.

Not to mention that these predictions have little to no value. They are just predictions. People have predicted that Microsoft will flop. People predict that Nintendo will go the way of Sega. People have predicted that the world will end. It's just someone's opinion and while there's a chance it'll happen, whatever, there's a chance it won't too. We'll just have to wait and see.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[Phyvo]

Don't forget that Halo 3 will not be able to counter the PS3's launch (as the author seems to think it still will). It's been delayed. Good thing too, because even if you downplay Bungie's continued work on H:2 it still wouldn't have had the slightest chance of being good otherwise. A little more than a year is simply not enough time to make a good sequel.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[RoadDoggFL]

Halo was mostly done in a little over a year. Work on Halo 2 was nearly reset at about the time the E3 2003 video was shown. And those were with fewer resources than are likely being made available for Halo 3.

Factor in the fact that the PS3 will possibly be delayed until 2007 (Sony never gave a firm US date, and who's to say it won't also be delayed in Japan?) and a Halo 3 release date that coincides with the PS3's is entirely possible and to the optimist, even likely.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[BigDork1001]

Not to mention that there's a chance that Microsoft will have a price cut right about the time of the PS3 launch as well. They've shown in the past they have no issues selling the X-box for a loss so I don't see why they won't do the same thing with the 360 if it'll take some sales away from the PS3. I'd say that depending on how strong or weak the sales of the 360 will be before the PS3 launch will determine how likely a price cut will be.

As I said in my first post, "Not to mention that these predictions have little to no value. They are just predictions." What I just wrote is my prediction and has little to no value. Take it with a grain of salt.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[harrkev]

No, no, no no, no no. Customers don't have to decide between the three. They can choose more than one. I own all three (actually four, Dreamcast too) of this generations systems. Eventually I will own all three of the next gens too. There is no law that says I can only get one and I won't.

You are every company's wet dream. Unfortunately, people like you are in the minority, and cannot support an entire industry for very long.

The average family has a lot of financial stress. Even affording one next-gen system would be tough. In the end, it might be a choice of the Revolution that you can afford, or the PS2 that you will have to save up for in time for next year's Christmas. As for me, I will likely pick up a Revolution after the first round of price cuts (probably a year after release). I do not see a 260 or PS3 in my future.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[RoadDoggFL]

I feel it's almost guaranteed that the price cut will happen either at or shortly before the PS3's launch.

The possibility is that MS could bundle Halo 3 with an HD-DVD drive or even a BluRay drive if HD-DVD remains as dead as it is right now...

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[Anonymous Coward]

Halo was mostly done in a little over a year

Didn't Halo start out on the Mac, have 2-3 years of development before Microsoft bought them? Wouldn't that put it at 3-4 years in development?

Not to be anal, but the only big name game I know of that was developed in a little over a year and still was high quality was Starwars Rogue Squadren 2: Rogue Leader.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[RoadDoggFL]

I said mostly. The game was redone and redone and so much was scrapped that the main work was done in the last year or so.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[oGMo]

Unfortunately, people like you are in the minority, and cannot support an entire industry for very long.

Maybe, but the "videogame generation" who grew up on the NES is now in their 20s and 30s, probably don't have a family to support, and are willing to buy 2-3 consoles. We have money, and we are the gamers.

As for me, I will likely pick up a Revolution after the first round of price cuts (probably a year after release). I do not see a 260 or PS3 in my future.

You are not the sort who supports the industry; you are the "later buyers" who support sales in the 3rd and 4th generation, after the large chunk of the market has adopted, and keep playing the last-gen consoles well after the next gen has launched. Do not think that most people are like you. The market is already well-defined by the time you buy in.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[C0rinthian]

If the EARLY development video is to be believed, Halo started out more like an RTS. (similar to Myth)

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[spir0]

You are every company's wet dream. Unfortunately, people like you are in the minority, and cannot support an entire industry for very long.

About 40% of the gamers I know have multiple consoles.

The average family has a lot of financial stress. Even affording one next-gen system would be tough.

If your bottom line was profit, what interest would you have in financially stressed families?

As for me, I will likely pick up a Revolution after the first round of price cuts (probably a year after release). I do not see a 260 or PS3 in my future.

So we'll ignore your obvious bias. Now -- take Nintendo's point of view? Do you think they spend millions on marketing and high profile events and launch parties just to have their customers wait a year to buy their consoles? You're probably the sort of person who buys second hand games too.

What makes you think they give a damn about you?

The companies want people like you to be in the minority. They want you to pre-order, and they want you to buy all the latest games on release day at retail prices.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[slowbad]

Not to mention that these predictions have little to no value. They are just predictions.

I have a prediction! In about 2 years from now, we will all be Monday morning quarterbacks.

One company will offer a free hardware upgrade (installed by authorized dealers for $29.95)
for customers who promptly registered their product in the first thirty days. These dealers
and Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo will make additional sales of titles when the customers come in.

The hardware upgrade should be something that would currently add $100, but much less later.
And, of course, the free hardware upgrade will not work on machines that have been modified

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[snuf23]

"About 40% of the gamers I know have multiple consoles."

And about 75% of people I know who would not consider themselves gamers have a PS2. These are the people that buy it and play maybe once a week or once a month. They purchase no more than 10 games over the life of the machine. In most cases they rent what they play.
There are a LOT of households that have a console that are not "gamer households". Some of these have it because a kid got one for Christmas one year, some of them are 20 and 30 somethings who play a little Madden with friends once in a while instead of poker.
Most of these casual players don't know about the tech, they buy a system because they heard "Sony was the best" or "Halo is awesome". They don't read gaming websites and magazines, they don't lust after future games. They are casual players and they represent a large amount of systems sold.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[harrkev]

Maybe, but the "videogame generation" who grew up on the NES is now in their 20s and 30s, probably don't have a family to support, and are willing to buy 2-3 consoles. We have money, and we are the gamers.

Huh? What planet are you from? People in their 20's are generally starting a family. People in their 30's are mostly firmly entrenched in doing the "family" thing. I am a part of the Nintendo generation. My first console was an Odyssey 2 (look it up).

If you look at the demographics, I think that you will find a fair amount of hard-core gamers with money. But you will probably also find even more teenagers who rely on their parents money on order to buy games and systems. A 16-year-old kid likely cannot afford multiple consoles. If you totally ignore the limited-income families, then you are ignoring a large market. Halo 3 might be the killer app, but how many copies of Halo 3 are you going to buy? Will you enjoy it enough to buy three or four copies

You are not the sort who supports the industry; you are the "later buyers" who support sales in the 3rd and 4th generation, after the large chunk of the market has adopted, and keep playing the last-gen consoles well after the next gen has launched. Do not think that most people are like you. The market is already well-defined by the time you buy in.

You are right. That is because I have a wife and two kids to support. But I still "support the industry." Every sale is still a sale. The initial cost of a console is high partially because of trying to recover the NRE costs. By the time the price drops, the NRE is paid for, so Nintendo will still make a profit off of me. While I am certain that Nintendo would rather have a bunch of early adopters, they would rather have the "late buyers" buy their stuff rather than Microsofts.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[drsquare]

I think they're talking about the majority of customers, not the very small but vocal minority who would buy more than one console. At 300-400 a time, most people will buy only one.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[bigman2003]

If your bottom line was profit, what interest would you have in financially stressed families?

I don't know...ask Wal*mart.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[Austerity Empowers]

Not many can afford to buy all three systems at launch, all at once. But I don't know many people with kids that don't have at least the PS2 & X-Box (or Gamecube and PS2 for the younger crowd). They bought them separately, usually not at launch when they're overpriced. "$100" really isn't that much money, it's really the games that get costly (hence rentals, and buy/sell stores). Once the NRE is paid for, buying a game for the XBox is not different than the Playstation. Within a year you'll be able to buy used 360's on eBay, or even in stores... Sure, the systems aren't "$100" now but they will be soon, where soon is sometime in the next 2-3 years, basically when all these systems are in their prime.

He's right, X-Box games have a limited range that other systems fill in, unless that changes there will not be "only one".

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[spir0]

I don't know anything about Wal*mart. I live in the world outside America.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[Captain Chaos]

http://www.walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/nav igate.do?catg=14
You don't need to live in the US to know about them, they have international stores and their mere existance affects more than just the US. Unfortunately they have grown so large that many products won't even make it to the market if they can't convice Wal-Mart to carry it.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[bigman2003]

Since Wal*Mart is the largest company ever, in the history of the world...I thought that maybe you knew a little bit about it.

In fact, Wal*Mart's revenue last year was $288 billion (dollars, U.S.).

As a comparison, take a look at this chart.

If Walmart were a country, it would rank 14th in terms of size of economy. In fact, financially it is over 5 times larger than the economy of the entire country of New Zealand (which judging from your link, is where you live.)

So I just assume that someone who reads up on current issues, and is even just slightly aware of world politics and/or economy would know something about Wal*Mart.

If you don't know anything about Wal*Mart, you might want to look into it. It *will* be affecting your life soon, because the world is getting smaller, and they are the biggest global powerhouse company.

Whether it be a store opening near you- or the price of wool dropping because of the price pressures Wal*Mart puts on manufacturers, very few people are NOT affected.

Or, you can just stick your head in the sand.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[spir0]

Or, you can just stick your head in the sand.

don't take my sand from me!!

In fact, Wal*Mart's revenue last year was $288 billion (dollars, U.S.)

fuq. I had no idea. I just thought they were a store chain. I didn't know they were that big. The mind boggles.

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[F_Scentura]

"People in their 20's are generally starting a family. People in their 30's are mostly firmly entrenched in doing the 'family' thing."

Perhaps that was an unintentional slight on *gamers* ;)

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[F_Scentura]

From what I remember, it was to be more akin to a futuristic battle sim like Tribes or Planetside (not the MMORPG elements, obviously.)

Re:We Have More Options That Just Those Decisions

[daviddennis]

Actually, it may be a misreading of demographics. Nowadays, I think people in their 20s are still trying to find mates, people in their 30s might be starting families, and so on. The amount of time we spend single and alone has definitely increased over the years.

So this means most people in their 20s shouldn't have much trouble affording gaming consoles, even multiple ones. Heck, you can buy every gaming console on the market for about $1,000, right? Put under $100 a month in the gaming kitty and you're all set. $100 even if you count buying a few games.

D

And Then

[ViperG]

Don't forgot about sony's DRM stuff. Nobody wants a rootkit included in their PS3.

if (Halo.3 > DRM.rootkit)
        DONT_BUY_PS3

Re:And Then

[Xugumad]

This is a point I've been trying to make, actually. Until Sony actually realise that backstabbing the people who actually buy their products (I don't mean reluctantly taking them off the shelves while muttering about it not really being a big deal, I mean actually understanding this is a bad idea) I cannot trust their products. CDs are the first thing we've noticed with DRM in, but I wouldn't touch a DVD they've produced, right at the moment.

And frankly, I'm not willing to trust that the PS3 won't try hacking the rest of the systems on my LAN to discover if they have pirated music, right at this point. Sure, that's almost definitely not happening, but if I told you a month ago that Sony were releasing CDs with rootkits on, you'd look at me like I'm crazy, is this so much of a further leap?

Hmmm...

[fodi]

What a perfect time to spread some FUD about Sony. Perfect timing, since the whole tech-world hates them at the moment. Not that I'm discounting the articles opinions, it's just funny that the DRM debacle has helped bring this article out...

Re:Hmmm...

[Kris_J]

...theorizing Sony's defeat at the hands of Sony.

If they were still innovating like they did back in the days of the VCR and the Walkman then they wouldn't be needing to treat customers like criminals in order to screw money out of them. Until Sony gets rid of its IP-based divisions it's only got a long spiral into self-destruction to look forward to.

Re:Hmmm...

[bynary]

If they were still innovating like they did back in the days of the VCR and the Walkman

Yes, Sony introduced the Walkman to the world, but if you'll remember correctly they were the losing party in the VCR/BetaMax war. I guess you could claim that they were innovative with the Beta, but it doesn't appear to have gotten them anywhere.

Re:Hmmm...

[blincoln]

If they were still innovating like they did back in the days of the VCR and the Walkman then they wouldn't be needing to treat customers like criminals in order to screw money out of them.

Microsoft is certainly no better. I wouldn't be surprised if they're astroturfing some of the anti-Sony sentiment in the hopes of making people forget about "Trusted" Computing, DRM, et cetera.

Nintendo are the ones who invented unlicensed third-party lockout chips for home consoles, censored tons of games, and fixed retail prices for NES titles. I'm sure if they would act the same as Sony and MS again given the chance.

Re:Hmmm...

[harrkev]

One reason that they lost (IIRC) is that they locked down the format. Anybody could make a VHS box. Beta was Sony's ball, and they weren't letting others play. So the ball game was won by the only ball that people could play with.

Of course, this is all from my memory, which could be wrong. Take anything in the internet with a block of salt.

Re:Hmmm...

[Delphiki]

Nobody's as hardcore about DRM as Sony, at least out of the three companies mentioned. I'm not even sure other music/movie companies are as enthusiastic about it as Sony. I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't like DRM, but they also have a strong interest in not crippling Windows. They want to sell a platform to use media, so they have plenty of incentive to let users do as much with media files as they media companies will let them get away with. They're far from perfect, but they're better than Sony.

Re:Hmmm...

[blincoln]

Would you be willing to elaborate more on your line of thinking?

When I think of MS, I think:

- First company to require online/phone activation of a mainstream product (Windows XP).
- Inventor of Windows Media, the format that made useless an entire library of "free*" (as in "*some restrictions apply") music I'd downloaded when the authentication server was turned off.
- First company to market a game console that depends on an online service for a good portion of its functionality.
- First company (at least, that I know of) to market a non-streaming video file format (WMV) that lets the author block random access, so you can't skip commercials.
- Palladium
- HailStorm
- The biggest development company pushing for software subscriptions instead of purchases.
- Restricted HD-DVD video in Vista.

I know Sony has done some stupid things, like ATRAC/Memory Stick/other-proprietary-format and the rootkit, but at least to my knowledge they have put far fewer intrusive and crippled technologies on the market than MS. If I've missed out on something big, I'd really like to hear about it.

As for Nintendo, right now they're relatively benign, but I still remember them well for the things in my original post.

Re:Hmmm...

[Kris_J]

Microsoft has never been innovative in its life. And while Nintendo have made some interesting stuff, they've been into DRM-esq tech since they were locking developers out of the NES platform.

The difference with Sony is that it used to produce interesting hardware and defend fair use. Sony would be the one with the cool harddrive-based MP3 player if they hadn't fallen prey to this content control obsession. Even before the rootkit people were writing articles about Sony's self-destructive actions with the last several generations of their gadgets. (Imagine being a Sony engineer, coming up with a cool new gadget, then being forced to cripple it with DRM and other restrictive junk. Some Sony employees must cry themselves to sleep each night.)

Sony need to decide if they make flexible media gadgets that allow people to enjoy music and video in a convenient way or are they an IP company that publishes music and movies. Given the lack of judgement recently displayed by their music division, they would be well advised to go the gadget route as, frankly, that's the division most likely to have a future not filled with legal action.

Re:Hmmm...

[illumina us]

The biggest development company pushing for software subscriptions instead of purchases.

Not sure if you mean biggest in size or biggest in push, if the latter be the case, perhaps you've never heard of Valve Software.

Re:Hmmm...

[Delphiki]

Yeah, they've created plenty of DRM technology, but they aren't trying to stop people from using more reasonable file formats. Have you ever tried putting any standard file format on any Sony device? You'll need a converter at the very least. Yes, they required online or phone activation, but I'd consider that far less offensive than Sony's rootkit shennanigans. As for Windows Media Player, I have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to free music being deactivated. I've never bothered with WMA files, but this seems like more of a complaint against the company who shut down the server or who chose that method for distributing free music. As for the console that requires an online service for much of it's functionality... how on earth is this a complaint? Xbox Live is nothing but an added feature. If you don't want an online service, you still get a perfectly good console, just without online play. About media authors being able to block random access... have you ever heard of DVD? This isn't an intrusive or crippled technology, it just gives content providers another option for delivering content. Palladium doesn't exist yet. HailStorm - ok, sorry, I'm going to have to claim ignorance on this one. Yes, they're pushing for software subscriptions, but how does that relate to game consoles or DRM? Restricted HD-DVD in Vista. Restricted in what way? That you'll need an HDCP (right abbreviation?) monitor to view them in hi-def? That's hardly a Microsoft decision. That you won't be able to copy them? HD-DVD will require movie studios to support managed copy, which is better than anything Blu-Ray has said they will do so far. If you want to talk about crippled technologies, how about Sony trying to cripple CDs to the point they can't even legally be called CDs anymore? Or creating a handheld (the PSP) that can play videos on a great screen, but doesn't accept any of the widely used video formats. Or BluRay, which has won over movie studios by having the strongest copy protection and by not requiring managed copy.

Re:Hmmm...

[bynary]

Good point. Funny thing is that Sony is still pushing proprietary formats on the general public.

Re:Hmmm...

[bigman2003]

Yeah...Microsoft also makes computer software that depends on an online service for a good portion of its functionality.
(Which you said was a bad thing on the console) In fact, if you took away my internet connection, I wouldn't even use my computer at all.

Do I blame Microsoft for that?

If you downloaded 'free' music which required an authentication server...you made a bad choice. Or at least one that you should have known would end up causing problems in the future. My guess is that you signed up for a free trial of one of the music services...then when the free trial expired, you didn't pony up the money.

That's the way it is supposed to work.

Personally, I think the Plays For Sure plans are pretty good. $5/month for an unlimited number of downloads. Then the day I stop paying, is the day the music dies. It's a totally fair option.

I use that on one of my devices- yet I have a large library of music I 'own' that I use everywhere else. If I really like something, I can buy it...but I rarely do. But the good thing is, it is an option- not a requirement.

Re:Hmmm...

[apoc06]

not that im arguing with you here, but i wanted to offer a different viewpoint for a few of your statements here.

- yes the whole sony rootkit issue is appalling, but at least they are correcting their mistake. as much as people have complained about MS's activation policies [if you change your hardware too drastically you have to reactivate?!?!?] MS has only made their activation policies tighter.

- DRM'ed WMA and WMV files need to be authenticated and need license agreements. if for some reason you cant authenticate [internet outage by either party, using a standalone computer not connected to an ISP, company goes out of business or changes policy... etc], youre SOL.

- yes, xbox live is only an added feature, but it also an exclusive feature. exclusive meaning that it is one of the key reasons to purchase one item over the other. just like halo was exclusive; and therefore a reason you should buy the xbox instead of a ps2, so is live. these two exclusive features are usually at the top of the list of reasons why gamers prefer xbox over ps2. if you remove these two items, you are left with better graphics and custom soundtracks. not all xbox games support custom soundtracks, and ask any gamecube fan or hopeful revolution purchaser, and they will tell you that graphics are what makes a great game.

- DVD? yes, but i do believe that sony was one of the major backers responsible for the dvd standard.

- software subscriptions can be applied to game consoles and drm in the sense that if for some reason MS believes that you have violated your license agreements, or perhaps you were caught cheating on xbox live, they can revoke your subscription. with a subscription you could be caught in a situation where you dont own the game nor the media. also gone is the option to buy/ sell games secondhand, since you never "owned" the game in the first place

- managed copy is now a part of the blu-ray spec now as well. the revision that allowed managed copy was to my knowledge what brought HP over to the blu-ray camp.

- how is the psp crippled? its a video game system that they are trying to sell as a media player. if it were a dvd player, that would be fine. you would just accept that it plays dvds [or in this case UMDs] and that would be that. when the first dvd players came out, people didnt complain that it didnt play their homemade collections of clips without reencoding. but since they tried to be nice and include a way to play your own videos, people are getting upset that they cant just use any random compression scheme they please? lol. first of all, personal video playback wasnt truly a "feature". sure they let people know about it, but it wasnt officially supported. hence, no official software available to encode movies included. not a single mention in the manual IIRC. the psp does what its supposed to do, eventually they may release a new version of the firmware that provides more playback options [they have already done this once]

- you have to re-read the most current revision of the blu-ray spec. managed copy is allowed, just not required. this still gives you the power as a consumer to which studios you will support. just as you are exercizing your right not to purchase a sony product due to the company's mishandling of other aspects of their business practices, you will have the right to not support studios that do not allow you to use your "managed copy"-rights.

but the biggest point to make here, is that no one is talking about windows. no one is talking about sony music. we are talking about two game systems here. just because a company botches up in one division, does not necessarily mean that they will carry those same business practices over into all other divisions. however, given the two companies we are talking about here, i at least hope not.

Re:Hmmm...

[blincoln]

Yeah, they've created plenty of DRM technology, but they aren't trying to stop people from using more reasonable file formats.

Of course they are. Palladium? Like I mentioned? That's what the "Trusted" platform is all about.

Xbox Live is nothing but an added feature.

It started out that way. Now if you don't have Live, games like Ninja Gaiden are crippled. Oblivion on the 360 is going to REQUIRE you to buy items in the Live Marketplace in order to get the full experience.

This isn't an intrusive or crippled technology

It certainly meets the dictionary definition of "crippled."

Yes, they're pushing for software subscriptions, but how does that relate to game consoles or DRM?

Because in order for a software subscription system to work, the software must disable itself if you don't pay up.

That you'll need an HDCP (right abbreviation?) monitor to view them in hi-def? That's hardly a Microsoft decision.

It's their OS, so it's their decision.

Sony trying to cripple CDs to the point they can't even legally be called CDs anymore?

MS did the same thing with their proprietary DVD format for the Xbox, and their WMV "DVDs" like the one included with the T2 Extreme Edition.

Or creating a handheld (the PSP) that can play videos on a great screen, but doesn't accept any of the widely used video formats.

MS did the same thing with the Xbox and ripped audio.

Or BluRay, which has won over movie studios by having the strongest copy protection and by not requiring managed copy.

If HD-DVD retains that vapourware "feature," when it's actually in mass market, we can talk, but it's still a minor point. "Managed copy" is a table scrap for huge media conglomerates to throw to consumers.

Re:Hmmm...

[blincoln]

Yeah... Microsoft also makes computer software that depends on an online service for a good portion of its functionality.

Any modern desktop OS meets that criteria, because so many applications are internet-based.

There is no good reason for Xbox owners to have to have Live in order to get the full version of games like Ninja Gaiden on the original and Oblivion on the 360.

My guess is that you signed up for a free trial of one of the music services...then when the free trial expired, you didn't pony up the money.

I am actually not a dumbass, as amazing as it may seem. This was a library of music (from WaxTrax) clearly labelled as free.

Hit the History Books

[Jerf]

History pop quiz: What video game company has managed to dominate three console generations (~5 years)?

By my reckoning, nobody. (Atari: 2600 era. Nintendo: NES and to some degree SNES. Sony: PS1 & PS2.)

If anyone's going to make it, it's Sony. (I mean that beyond the obvious historically-tautological aspects of the statement; they have a better chance IMHO because this is clearly a "more of the same" generation, which I think is a first, and that makes it easier to maintain momentum. I think the best way to understand the Revolution is as an attempt to disrupt the momentum by disrupting the "more of the same"-ness of this generation.) On the other hand, flaming people for questioning it is probably excessively fanboy-ish. I wouldn't commit to that exact scenario, personally, but scenarios where Sony is not #1 are quite plausible.

Re:Hit the History Books

[Jambon]

Speaking of the history of game consoles, Joystiq has an interesting article about the ~10 year dominance cycle of gaming consoles.

Re:Hit the History Books

[DrWho520]

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
-Someone much smarter than myself

What does this mean for the console wars? Sony was able to take the lead when the largest number of sheep started buy consoles. The drones and dregs only know the names Sony and Playstation. Need further proof? We game in sequel city. Seriously, how many versions of Madden can one person own?

Nintendo will retain its niche and possibly carve a new one, Microsoft will throw more money into the hole and everyone will think those silly boomerang controllers are the next best thing to sliced bread. I hope I am wrong, but...

Re:Hit the History Books

[Guppy06]

"If anyone's going to make it, it's Sony."

Yeahhhhh... You know something else that hasn't happened in the video game industry before? Somebody other than Nintendo topping the Game Boy. In light of the lackluster performance of the PSP, do you still believe Sony has the ability to pull a hat trick out of their rear end?

Besides, the only reason this is a "more of the same" competition is because of the tactics of both Microsoft and Sony, looking for little else beyond keeping it "more of the same," a competition they seem to excel at. Nintendo seems to be going off into a new direction and I'm not sure it's been decided yet whether or not their new direction is going to be rejected.

Re:Hit the History Books

[HarvardAce]

History pop quiz: What video game company has managed to dominate three console generations (~5 years)?

By my reckoning, nobody. (Atari: 2600 era. Nintendo: NES and to some degree SNES. Sony: PS1 & PS2.)

Yes, but there is one other pattern you should see with that list. Each time the previous generation's champion was displaced, it was by a company that was releasing their first console. I'm sure others can come up with other reasons why this is the case, but the first one that comes to my mind is that gamers generally have brand loyalty when it comes to consoles (note all the fanboys that grace /. and other forums constantly). Someone who owns a Gamecube this generation is more likely to buy the Revolution next generation, as is someone who owns a PS2 is likely to get the PS3. Part of this is due to backwards compatibility, but a large portion of it has to do with the types of games on the system.

If it's the same group of companies producing consoles each generation, then there won't be a lot of switching between the ranks. People who were happy with their previous console will stick with the same company more often than not. However, when a new company comes into the game, you are going to get people to switch who think the new console fits their gaming preferences better, and you are also going to get people who didn't own a console to buy this new console as well.

Therefore, I think this next generation will, barring Sony self-destructing or the Revolution's controller being an unprecedented success, end up being just like the last generation -- with the PS3 in the lead, the XBox 360 in a closer second (because of the first-to-market), and the Revolution a somewhat distant third.

>sarcasm<The other variable is of course the Phantom -- if it comes out this generation, then it'll fit the new company coming to market, and will of course blow the other three away.&gt/sarcasm<

Re:Hit the History Books

[HarvardAce]

>sarcasm<The other variable is of course the Phantom -- if it comes out this generation, then it'll fit the new company coming to market, and will of course blow the other three away.&gt/sarcasm<

Oops...I apologize for my poor syntax there...it should have been:
<sarcasm>The other variable is of course the Phantom -- if it comes out this generation, then it'll fit the new company coming to market, and will of course blow the other three away.</sarcasm>

Re:Hit the History Books

[Jerf]

I don't think Sony stands a good chance because they have such wonderfully superior products. I think Sony stands a good chance because they have the largest group of fanboys I've ever seen, many of which write in influential gaming publications.

While a PS2 is actually the only current-gen console I own (unless you count the Dreamcast), it's because of the games, not the hardware; I think the hardware has some amazingly bad design decisions in it and is clearly the worst hardware of the current generation. (In fact, while it is capable of out-doing the Dreamcast, it takes a surprising amount of work due to the aforementioned amazingly bad design decisions; even that isn't the knockout it should have been.)

I'm extremely excited about the Revolution. I may or may not purchase a PS3 or an XBox 360, depending on the games. (Morrowind is tempting and I don't have a PC that can come even close to running it. On the other hand I just realized that I can probably run Morrowind 3 and that might just tide me over for a long time, given my work schedule.)

Insufficient

[dbhankins]

All this is not enough to ensure the PS3's failure. To make it complete, Sony needs to:

- Reduce or eliminate backwards compatibility, like the Silver Slimline PS2 but more so
- Implement nodelocking of game- and video-disks, using the technology they've recently secured a US patent on
- Make game development as difficult as possible and as different from conventional architectures as possible to reduce the number of game companies willing to crossdevelop for or port to the new system

Only then can they guarantee the PS3 will flop.

Re:Insufficient

[Guppy06]

"Reduce or eliminate backwards compatibility, like the Silver Slimline PS2 but more so"

You mean like not being able to take your old memory cards?

Re:Insufficient

[nine-times]

All this is not enough to ensure the PS3's failure. To make it complete, Sony needs to:

...allow Vadar to discover that Luke has a twin sister? Then, their failure is complete. If Luke will not turn to the Dark Side, then perhaps she will.

10 pages? bleh

[GoNINzo]

After 10 pages of extensive advertising, I see some problems, besides the about.com revenue stream.

1. Needs a much stronger outline form. I'm not the best writer in the world but that is a rambling article.
2. The handhelds are basically useless in this discussion, unless you talk about integration with the platforms. And I'm sure the market will accomidate whatever is popular.
3. The market has already seemed to have pushed the revolution out of the running as the 'next console'. But as long as they continue to make money on the hardware and the software, I'm sure they will continue to sell. It just won't be the 'it' console, which is okay with Nintendo.
4. It's not clear the market has the room for another console entry such as the ybox or ps3 or revolution, especialy if people keep making sequels for all the old generation machines.
5. I don't believe online will make/break this generations release, still. However, the download part might seriously help some platforms.
6. The consolidated control preferences and user details within the ybox series might seriously help them, as people are generally lazy. heh
7. Halo 3 is not the 'killer app' it used to be. Halo 2 didn't sell more xboxes.
8. The Revolution is not getting nearly the developer support that the PS3 or the ybox.
9. The PS3 will have exclusive titles that people will be willing to buy one for. And they are promising on release now, but we'll see.
10. I don't think the sony rootkit problem has much to do with their games division, really. And I doubt it will bankrupt them.
11. Backwards compatibility is still questionable on all three systems. Xbox 360 has 200 some titles they've announced, but how well they work and the requirements for a hard drive make it somewhat questionable. The others are questionable entirely. I think this will influence buyers, as it did when the PS2 came out.
12. The use of the multiple cores on the ybox and ps3 might be a total success on some software titles and a total bomb on others, it's an unknown and dependant upon the developers.
13. The prices of the hardware are pies in the sky, it's what they'd like to get near. And it's not completely clear if microsoft can drop the price of hardware, though they have the deepest pockets to do so. They won't let it get dreamcasted. (*sob*)
14. The launch of the ybox is not looking good currently, due to the restricted inventory and lack of revolutionary single platform games. However, microsoft will throw money to make it 'good', I'm sure.
15. I'm not without bias, but damn, you could at least pretend for a bit.

Anyway, I'm not convinced either way, it's still wait and see. With this subject matter, you'd be better off getting a random games.slashdot.org reader to come up with a comparison between the machines and the possible outcomes. Plus, you might not have to deal with 10 pages of ads.

Re:10 pages? bleh

[BigDork1001]

I'm just going to hit on a couple of these. I don't necessarily disagree with your post on a whole. I'm just bored at work and looking for conversation.

It just won't be the 'it' console, which is okay with Nintendo.
I think it's okay with Nintendo fans too. Not the fanboys but the fans. I'm okay with Nintendo not being number one. As long as they are cranking out good games what do I care if PS3 is outselling them?

Halo 3 is not the 'killer app' it used to be. Halo 2 didn't sell more xboxes.
True but Halo 2 came out after X-box was in a lot of homes. People who loved Halo didn't have to buy a new X-box to enjoy Halo 2. In order to enjoy Halo 3 they have to buy a 360. Halo and Halo 3 have more in common than Halo 2 and Halo 3. Halo 3 will definitely sell 360s.

The PS3 will have exclusive titles that people will be willing to buy one for. And they are promising on release now, but we'll see.
Revolution will have exclusive titles that people will be willing to buy one for too. SMB Melee, Mario Kart, Zelda, Metroid, these are going to be exclusive and they're going to sell systems. I agree that PS3 will sell systems for the same reason though.

The launch of the ybox is not looking good currently, due to the restricted inventory and lack of revolutionary single platform games. However, microsoft will throw money to make it 'good', I'm sure.
Lord knows they have enough money.

Anyway, I'm not convinced either way, it's still wait and see.
100% with you on this. :)

-BigD

Re:10 pages? bleh

[GoNINzo]

I'm not 100% sure that Halo 3 will be good enough to sell xbox 360's, but who knows. Marketing may overcome this.

I agree with you on the rest of these points. `8r)

Re:10 pages? bleh

[ClamIAm]

[TFA] Needs a much stronger outline form. I'm not the best writer in the world but that is a rambling article.

Pot, meet kettle.

The handhelds are basically useless in this discussion, unless you talk about integration with the platforms. And I'm sure the market will accomidate whatever is popular.

Not really. Sony dumped a lot of money into the PSP. The handheld market is also Nintendo's cash cow.

The market has already seemed to have pushed the revolution out of the running as the 'next console'.

Sorry, but unless by "market" you mean "self-proclaimed experts wanking on the internet", you may need to back up your assertion a little more. Most people will buy whatever they bought in the past, unless a competitor has a compelling reason to switch.

The consolidated control preferences and user details within the ybox series might seriously help them, as people are generally lazy. heh

Why you are calling the 360 the "ybox" is beyond me, but whatever. Aaanyway, unless this is a point that MS seriously advertises or is covered extensively in the press, I can't see it being a huge selling point. I say this because I follow the gaming press more than the average person, and this is the first I've heard of this.

The PS3 will have exclusive titles that people will be willing to buy one for.

As will the other systems.

I don't think the sony rootkit problem has much to do with their games division, really. And I doubt it will bankrupt them.

A piece of straw can break a camel's back.

Backwards compatibility is still questionable on all three systems.

What, aside from the fact that both Sony and Nintendo have stated their next-get systems will be backwards-compatible?

The use of the multiple cores on the ybox and ps3 might be a total success on some software titles and a total bomb on others, it's an unknown and dependant upon the developers.

I really don't see how the use of a powerful technology will make software "bomb", considering the average consumer doesn't even understand what a CPU does, let alone grasp the concept of multiple cores. This is barring the possibility that there is some bug that causes multi-cored games to crash and burn, and the bug isn't caught by QA or something.

The launch of the ybox is not looking good currently, due to the restricted inventory and lack of revolutionary single platform games.

Try telling this to my roomate. The hype machine has already bought many people hook, line and sinker.

Re:10 pages? bleh

[mrgreen4242]

A decently done Halo 3 coupled with a good pricecut will sell systems though and good marketing. If they can get Halo 3 out the door in 1 year from now, drop the price of the 360 to $199/$299 (core/premium or whatever they are calling it), they'll push some units for Christmas 2006. The other thing that they could move a ton of merchandise would be to launch Halo 3 in a pack that includes whatever you don't get in the premium kit for $100, and get all the people who bought the core system this year to shell out for an upgrade. Not a new console sale, but the markup on the accessories junk is so high anyways that they'd probably make a killing.

Re:10 pages? bleh

[HarvardAce]

Halo 3 is not the 'killer app' it used to be. Halo 2 didn't sell more xboxes.

As someone has already posted, this isn't a very good argument as most of the people who bought Halo 2 already had an XBox because of the original Halo. That's like saying GTA:SA didn't sell more PS2's...it probably didn't, but that's because most people already had a PS2 because of GTA or GTA:VC. You can't expect games that come out late in a generation's lifespan to be console movers. You better believe, however, that Halo3 and the next GTA will be huge "Killer Apps" when they are released for the next generation.

Having said that, Halo 2 was still a killer app, because it increased the subscription numbers of XBox live significantly (I couldn't find a specific reference to the approximate numbers, if someone can find one please link it!).

Re:10 pages? bleh

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

What's a ybox? Who makes the ybox? why have i never heard of a ybox? and finally, when does this fabled ybox come out? I seriously doubt the ybox will be able to compete with the xbox 360 launch this month. . .

Man, it's so early yet this getting old already

[Morinaga]

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=2005- 02-05 Yes, it's true.

Highly doubtful!

[ssand]

While online gaming is a large factor for the xbox, and is a nice feature, there are still quite a few gamers out there who don't go online with their consoles. Even though Sony won't have a fortifide online structure, that still does not mean that some games will have it. In addition to that, as an xbox owner I have never really seen any big titles for the Xbox. Sure there is Halo 3 for the 360 but At the rate Halo 2 was going, it won't be anything more than a good game. Many large titles that will be on the 360 like GTA or Burnout will be on the PS3 at the same time, if not before the 360.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[sdhankin]

While online gaming is a large factor for the xbox...

I keep hearing this, and it confuses me. By Microsoft's own figures, 90% of Xbox owners don't care about online at all. How does that make it so important?

Re:Highly doubtful!

[Delphiki]

90% of owners didn't purchase an addon for playing online. Gee, do you think it might be more popular when it's built into the system? So, based on the fact that the PS2 hard drive sold for shit, can we assume that gamers don't prefer a hard drive? Or does it mean that optional accessories consistently sell for shit?

Even though you still have to pay for a subscription to Xbox Live Gold to get all of the features, the vast majority of people who buy an Xbox will get a free trial to Xbox Live Gold, many of whom will decide they like it and keep it on after the free trial.

What percentage of game players have wireless controllers now? Not that high of a percentage. Just about everyone I know who's looking forward to the 360 has mentioned those as a reason. But because not a lot of people bought them before, it must not be a large factor?

Re:Highly doubtful!

[king-manic]

90% of owners didn't purchase an addon for playing online. Gee, do you think it might be more popular when it's built into the system? So, based on the fact that the PS2 hard drive sold for shit, can we assume that gamers don't prefer a hard drive? Or does it mean that optional accessories consistently sell for shit?

Even though you still have to pay for a subscription to Xbox Live Gold to get all of the features, the vast majority of people who buy an Xbox will get a free trial to Xbox Live Gold, many of whom will decide they like it and keep it on after the free trial.

What percentage of game players have wireless controllers now? Not that high of a percentage. Just about everyone I know who's looking forward to the 360 has mentioned those as a reason. But because not a lot of people bought them before, it must not be a large factor?

Live isn't that popular. Most people actually prefer not to play with random retards who scream in thier ear or who are so ridicoulously betters/worse then they are that playign isn't fun. The subscription rate per xbox hovers at around 10%. Same wiht Pc online play, most people just aren't that interested. They prefer real people or solo play. So while Sony is being backwards with thier online support, it likly won't hurt them.

But only time will tell.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[Chazmyrr]

The PS2 hard drive didn't sell for shit because Sony crippled it intentionally. The only reason they released it in the states is because FFXI can't be played without it. Many other games that had hard drive support in Japan were forced to disable that support when they were localized for NA.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[HarvardAce]

In addition to that, as an xbox owner I have never really seen any big titles for the Xbox.

Sure...because Halo: CE and Halo 2 weren't big titles for the xbox, nor was Fable, KOTOR, DOA3, etc.

Sure there is Halo 3 for the 360 but At the rate Halo 2 was going, it won't be anything more than a good game.

Halo 2 is the most popular game on the xbox, so I'd say that the rate that Halo 2 was going would bode well for Halo 3. Even if Halo 2 was a disappointment to some, that doesn't mean that the next game in the series will be bad. See Zelda, Zelda 2, and Zelda: A Link to the Past for a good example.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[Prophet of Nixon]

Agreed, Live is awful, and the fault is mainly the other people. The people are entertaining for a few minutes, since most of them really deserve to die and they are entertaining to shoot, but it becomes annoying quickly. Its made slightly more bearable (if you're messing around with a trial key or something) by disabling voice chat entirely in the Xbox dashboard. I'm really hoping that the 360 continues to push split-screen competitive/co-op game modes (or anything else that can support 4 players in a room), otherwise I'm probably not even going to get one. The only reason I keep consoles around is for multiplayer games, more or less. Though if they brought back lightguns, I would really consider it anyway.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[mirror_ed123]

DOA3 was big? Did not notice that friend :) I always thought that the best fighter out there on the Xbox was Soul Calibur 2 (which happened to be on all the other consoles as well). The DOA series, though having a great concept with regards to the arena, lacked innovation with regards to combos and all. Rather repetitive if you ask me... And comparing Zelda with Halo is, IMO - so wrong. There's plenty of room for tweaks and changes in an action/adventure/platform game. Zelda is indeed a good example. Wind Waker was so different in the look and feel department as opposed to the dark feel of Ocarina of Time (same series for those not in the know). But Halo ... How different can Halo 3 be from Halo CE & 2...? New weapons? Vehicle? Halo fans might find this interesting though - Halo 2 is being released on the 360 http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/667/667069p1.html I do agree that Fable and KOTOR are great titles. I personally would like to see True Fantasy Live Online be released on 360 (or any other consoles).

Re:Highly doubtful!

[F_Scentura]

"The subscription rate per xbox hovers at around 10%. Same wiht Pc online play, most people just aren't that interested."

You're honestly claiming that online gaming is not a significant factor considered by gamers in this day and age? Thankfully, you do not speak for "most" people. On the PC, the top hits nearly always include a multiplayer feature.

Re:Highly doubtful!

[king-manic]

You're honestly claiming that online gaming is not a significant factor considered by gamers in this day and age? Thankfully, you do not speak for "most" people. On the PC, the top hits nearly always include a multiplayer feature.

It isn't. PC gaming and Xbox live are niche products. Look at the units of pure multiplayer games that move vs games that are single player. Most people do not enjoy getting their ass kicked online and if they play with friends, they can do so at home. The numbers bear out my assertion while yrou is intuitive to us geeks but wrong.

Revolution

[CH0DE]

As everyone is talking about the next gen consoles the revolution is rarely mentioned. Is it because Nintendo isn't aiming to be the "it" system? I really think that a lot of us who go back several generations of consoles have a quiet respect for Nintendo and what they've done for console gaming. Not to mention you can almost always guarantee that Nintendo will sacrifice flashy graphics, blood and gore to make fun games. IMO that is the biggest downfall of sony and M$. Lots of games lots of explosions but not tons o' fun.

Re:Revolution

[BigDork1001]

Sony and MS have spent a lot of money to hype up their products. Boasting impressive numbers that mean little to most people and making claims that might or might not be met. All the while Nintendo has kept quiet. I think their plan is to just let the product speak for itself. In the end I hope it works for them. It may or may not. But as long as there are quality games and they aren't losing money who cares if they are #1 or #6?

Re:Revolution

[hords]

I know I'm buying a revolution console on it's launch date. I'm really excited to see all the innovative uses that this controller will get. At first when I saw it I thought "WTF?", but it just seems genius to me now. As for the 360 and PS3 we'll see. Most likely I'll pick up the PS3, but the 360 I'm only going to get if a game blows me away. I think most games will end up being on both the 360 and PS3, but the PS3 will have the HD discs that can hold much more data, which could later hurt the 360 when games are made that utilize that much space.

Re:Revolution

[ClamIAm]

As everyone is talking about the next gen consoles the revolution is rarely mentioned.

DUH, everybody already knows that N1NTENDO is T3H D00M3D!!11

Re:Revolution

[mrgreen4242]

I think that it is a foregone conclusion that N will "win" in this generation. Not "win" in the sense they will sell the most systems or have the most games, but rather that they will sell enough consoles, controllers, and games to make a tidy profit, and hence Nintendo will be around for the next generation. That's all it's really about, isn't it? Nintendo isn't going to care whether you buy just a Revolution, or a PS3 and a Rev, or a 360 and a Rev, or all damn three, so long as you buy the Revolution.

The GameCube sort of filled this role this time around. It became the cheaper "add-on" console that PS2 owners bought for Mario Party when their friends came over, and Zelda and Paper Mario for when they were alone and no one could see them playing a game with :gasp: cartoon style graphics and no ho's to smack!

Re:Revolution

[HarvardAce]

But as long as there are quality games and they aren't losing money who cares if they are #1 or #6?

The shareholders will. If the difference is between being #3 (or #6 as you say) and making $10M in profit and being #1 and making $100M in profit, then you can be sure that the shareholders will care. Now, what is more likely the case is that Nintendo knows that in order to get close to #1 or #2 they would have to spend too much money in marketing. Therefore, the profit wouldn't be any greater (or perhaps even less) than where they are now. Remember, Nintendo is a business just like Sony and MS, and they are going to try and make the most profit that they can. If that means that they stay back in #3 instead of selling their console at a big loss and being #2 or #1, then that's what they'll do.

Re:Revolution

[HarvardAce]

Somewhat off topic, but has anyone else seen the new ads for the xbox 360? I've seen two of them -- one with the jumprope and the other with the water balloons. I was amazed at the jump rope one, and the water balloon one really made me want to go have a water balloon war (except for the fact it's about 40 degrees out right now), but what does either really have to do with the xbox 360? I guess nothing, but since I'm talking about it here it must have done it's job...those darn marketing folks messing with my head again!

Duplicate Article

[esampson]

http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/10/25/ 2034217&tid=10

This article was posted on Slashdot on October 25th talking about how the Microsoft's game console was going to be released and completely crush Sony's.

I realize it's a different author but its pretty much the same talking points. Microsoft has endless supplies of money, it will be easier to program the XBox than the PS2, people will have to choose one or the other (since we all know that at night when everyone is asleep the two systems would fight to the death), blah, blah, blah.

Do we really need to have such similar articles posted within the same 1,846 day span?

FUD

[Tachikoma]

Riddle me this :
Say two men came up to you and offer you differnt gaming systems. Both promise great hardware and good games (in the long run), but both at a hefty price. One man raves about his product, blasts all of your senses with how awesome it will be, claims the other's hardware will be lacking and too costly, but goes out of his way to make sure there will be a limited supply of his own.

The other man speaks softly and carries a big fuckin' stick. He says nothing of the other company. He let's his reputation as being a power house in the game console world speak for itself.

Personally I would rather give my money to the latter. Given that past performance does not guarantee future results, both consoles will be great and I really doubt one will bankrupt the other. There are plenty of people in the world who wont touch a piece of Microsoft ANYTHING in less they absolutely have too, and there are people who feel the same about Sony.

I beat Halo into the ground on legendary while on my roommates Xbox in college. I graduated, moved out and haven't played since. I enjoyed it, it was a fun AND great game, but I didn't buy an Xbox when 2 came out, and I won't buy a 360 when 3 comes out. Personally, I'd rather play metal gear solid, even if I spend more time watching it.

Re:FUD

[ClamIAm]

Yeah, that's because if you give your money to the first guy, the dude with the "big fuckin' stick" will break your knees.

Re:FUD

[SledgeHBK]

Er... Insightful? Pretty thinly veiled fanboyism here.

It has nothing to do with approach. It has to do with games. Isn't that your mantra?

Big stick? Reputation? I hope somebody trying to sell you the brooklyn bridge doesn't carry a big stick.

Re:FUD

[Tachikoma]

Yeah games are kinda what is important. I'm not going to buy either one to put on display and brag to my friends about, I'm going to buy one for the games, an xbox360 seems to be launching with 11 out of 18 games being sports or racing. Personally, I think racing games are a notch above retarded, and i'd rather physically play sports than watch them.

PS3 launches with like 5 sports/racing, so yes games are influencing me a bit

Not all of us are Holo fanboys

[Nursie]

You know that right? The last thing I want to do is play an FPS on a console. Just doesn't work for me. I like consoles for the more social games that are not done better by PC.

I'm sure Halo sold well, but I' equally sure there are many more like me out there.

Having said all that I'll be buying the 360 because it's out first. Later I'll likely get a PS3.

Re:Not all of us are Holo fanboys

[Xugumad]

Oh thank goodness I was beginning to think I was the only one. I liked Halo, don't get me wrong, but I'm not going to rush out and buy an XBox 360 because of any of its sequels.

Re:Not all of us are Holo fanboys

[HarvardAce]

Oh thank goodness I was beginning to think I was the only one.

I would say you must be new here, but since your UID is 5 digits, you can't be that new (unless you bought it on ebay, of course). Therefore, you must be using sarcasm, as every time Halo or any other FPS on a console is brought up, there are at least 50 postings about "Does it come with a mouse and keyboard?" or "I can't play FPS's with my thumbs." In fact, I think it is even more common than the "Does it run on linux" comments when discussing a PC game/application.

Re:Not all of us are Holo fanboys

[mirror_ed123]

Agreed indeed. Halo was fun indeed and I like playing it. But like most FPS.. it gets a bit boring after a while. Saw a video once about a boy who kept on yelling and swearing at his online buddy everytime he got fragged (playing Halo online) and it was hilarious ... The video was dubbed something like the "Stress-Box" :P But then again... 360 is not only about Halo 3 - or am I wrong to assume this :P

Really? I think not.

[non0score]

Customers have to decide between the 360 with Halo 3, the PS3 with a potentially high price tag, and the Revolution, priced near current generation game consoles.

What, people who don't play FPSs are all of a sudden going to start running out and playing Halo 3? C'mon, not everyone is into the FPS genre (although I am, but I'm not everyone), especially the Japanese market that is dominated by RPGs and other genres. I mean, the quoted argument might be true about the non-Asian market (and Halo 3 would most definitely be a fine game), but it certainly holds little water otherwise. So the bottom line is, take the article with a bag of salt and just watch the show.

I need to start a website

[ivan256]

That way I can make stuff up and get ad revenue for it.

This article would be great, but it's based on two longshot assumptions. First, that Microsoft will lower the price of the 360 any time in the next 18-24 months. They probably won't. They certainly wont if it's still selling well at the higher price. Second, that Halo 3 will be ready in time for the PS3 launch. It probably won't. The tenative release date is "Fall 2006" right now (Two seasons past the tenative PS3 release). That's before you factor in the inevitable delays.

Let's stop paying attention to fanboy prediction and just wait and see. Just like every other console generation in history, the winner(s) will be system(s) with the best games. There certainly doesn't have to be a single winner (though the trade rags would love there to be one, because it gives them copy to attach ads to), since hardcore gamers will buy all the ones with compelling games. The only people left fighting over which is best are the children who can only get their mommies to buy one of the three, and feel the need to explain why the one that they have is the best to everybody else (them and adults who haven't grown up yet). Silly business manuvers that aren't backed up with the games usually leave the company that pulls them with egg on their face.

Re:I need to start a website

[vertinox]

Just like every other console generation in history, the winner(s) will be system(s) with the best games

So who won last round?

Re:I need to start a website

[ivan256]

All three.

Re:I need to start a website

[ivan256]

I should be more specific than "All three.". since there were four. Sega lost. Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony won.

You could probably make an argument for Microsoft losing too, since they lost money on their product, but it was available and maintained demand through the entire generation so I'd say they 'won' just like the others.

Re:I need to start a website

[Xugumad]

Third assumption; that the success of the PS3 will be determined at it's launch; certainly the impression I get is that the vast majority of console buyers won't be upgrading until a year or more into the next gen, when the price drops start coming through and there's a good number of games available.

Re:I need to start a website

[BenjyD]

I don't think any of the major three 'lost': Sony sold untold millions of consoles and games, Microsoft went from zero to major console player and Nintendo made a healthy profit (and learned some important lessons for the next round).

Re:I need to start a website

[king-manic]

All three.

If you consider surviving winning, then yes. IF you consider coming in with most units/games sold then it was the PS2.

Re:I need to start a website

[ivan256]

Are you going back through all my old comments just to disagree with me or something? If so you've failed. You'll notice that I said the same exact thing in a followup to this comment.

Having the most market share isn't a metric that anybody sane uses to measure success anyway. At least not since the dot-com boom ended. In the real world, success is typically measured in profit on a balance sheet and through survival on a resume. On the balance sheet, Sony and Nintendo both won, Sega lost, and Microsoft lost big. On their resumes, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo all succeeded, and Sega lost big. Consumers care about survival, and investors care about profit. Only fanboys care about market share.

Re:I need to start a website

[king-manic]

Having the most market share isn't a metric that anybody sane uses to measure success anyway. At least not since the dot-com boom ended. In the real world, success is typically measured in profit on a balance sheet and through survival on a resume. On the balance sheet, Sony and Nintendo both won, Sega lost, and Microsoft lost big. On their resumes, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo all succeeded, and Sega lost big. Consumers care about survival, and investors care about profit. Only fanboys care about market share.

I only specified a criteria for considering the winner. Most units sold PS2, survival all 3. Balance sheet Sony/Nintentdo. Most money made Sony.

PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[HunterZ]

Sony introduces the PS3, sporting far more powerful hardware than either alternative system

What? I admit that I haven't been following this for the last month or so, but from what I've seen the XBox 360 will be at least as powerful as the PS3. Yes, the PS3 has a bunch of processing units in its cell processor, but most of them are special-purpose and not as powerful as the XBox 360's three generic cores.

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[harrkev]

Gaaaa. Processing power again.

Processing power != fun
(or for you VHDL jocks, processing_power /= fun)
(or PERL, processing_power ne fun)

What really matters is the GAMEPLAY. A great game with fewer polygons is still a great game. A crappy game with more polygons is still a crappy game. This war will NOT be won or lost on technical specifications. It will be decided by the game quality, availability, and price. Period. In the end, that is what people look at.

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[king-manic]

Gaaaa. Processing power again.

Processing power != fun
(or for you VHDL jocks, processing_power /= fun)
(or PERL, processing_power ne fun)

What really matters is the GAMEPLAY. A great game with fewer polygons is still a great game. A crappy game with more polygons is still a crappy game. This war will NOT be won or lost on technical specifications. It will be decided by the game quality, availability, and price. Period. In the end, that is what people look at.

Yes very very true. Sony actually has been better in that department. More developers = more games = more chances for something good to be made = more fun. None of the games for Xbox have apealed ot me except Ninja Gaiden. Otherwise it's a lot of PC games dressed up for the console. I especially despise console FPS and even PC FPS bore me after an hour. GC has soem funs games though, so did the DC.

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[king-manic]

What? I admit that I haven't been following this for the last month or so, but from what I've seen the XBox 360 will be at least as powerful as the PS3. Yes, the PS3 has a bunch of processing units in its cell processor, but most of them are special-purpose and not as powerful as the XBox 360's three generic cores.

Both have a PPC based chip running at 3.2 ghz. Except the 360 has a shared cache, while the Cell has multiple cashes. Speed is a hard thing to calculate with such different architectures but generally, the division of work set up in the cell chip has less obvious bottle necks then the 3 core 360 chip. 1mb lvl 2 cache as opposed to 512k l2 and 32k l1 with 7 256 caches. The price of branch prediction failure is much lower in the cell chip, and parrellelism is easier to achive due to the almost independant nature of eact SPU. Both have similiar memory bandwidth profiles with the PS3 having a slight edge. The memory systems give a huge edge to the ps3, having ram clocked at the same speed at the CPU while both have 512 total, the PS3 has 256 in 3.2ghz rama nd 256 in 700 mzh ram, while the Xbox 360 is all 700 mhz. This in essence adds a new layer of cache/memory architecture that allows for some creative storage algorithms. The only major question is how fast will the blu-ray be vs the 12 speed DVD. It is a fairly major question since the one wiht the fastest drive will have the least load time.

From a Computer architecture point of view, the PS3 will most likly be more powerful hands down if for no there reason then for the 3.2 mzh clocked ram. Drastically reducing the cost of any and all cache misses. But only time will tell if this is true.

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[HunterZ]

What really matters is the GAMEPLAY. A great game with fewer polygons is still a great game. A crappy game with more polygons is still a crappy game. This war will NOT be won or lost on technical specifications. It will be decided by the game quality, availability, and price. Period. In the end, that is what people look at.

No, that's only one factor among several -- the quality, availability, and price of games for a console are only a major factor when one of those three aspects is at an extreme. What is the strongest factor? These days, the consoles project somewhat different images to target themselves (via marketing, game linup, and stigma from the existing generation of consoles) at different audiences (disclaimer: none of the consoles appeal to me as I'm a diehard PC gamer, so put on your anti-cynic glasses):
- The Nintendo Revolution will be both the "family" console, with a more cure and kid-safe game lineup than the other consoles -- and *may* (Nintendo hopes) also appeal to those with only a casual interest in video game consoles but want something that looks "cool" and "innovative" (I'm too skeptical of gimmicks to be able to guess how well it will do, however)
- The PS3 will be the next-generation modern Japanese console, catering to those who've grown up on the PSX/PS2
- The XBox 360 will be the next-generation American console and will continue to bridge the gap between PC and consoles

As you can see, this already strongly divides gamers along three lines.

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[HunterZ]

The problem is partly that programmers don't really know how to take advantage of the parallel processing architecture of the PS3. Yes, the will learn, but it may take most of the lifespan of the PS3 and XBox 360 for them to invent a new way of programming games that takes advantage of multi-processor and/or multi-core hardware.

Another part of the problem is that the industry likes porting games across multiple platforms as cheaply as possible, which means that multiplatform titles will probably take as little advantage as possible of system-specific features (which will cripple PS3 titles more than XBox titles).

Also, RAM speeds won't make much difference on consoles due to the low resolutions at which they render. The cache RAM is always much faster than the system RAM as well, so don't believe that it will have an impact at that level.

Even with the numbers on the PS3's side, I expect higher-quality early- and mid-life XBox 360 titles due to the fact that it has diverged less from current hardware architectures (resulting in a softer learning curve).

Re:PS3 = far more powerful hardware than 360?

[king-manic]

The problem is partly that programmers don't really know how to take advantage of the parallel processing architecture of the PS3. Yes, the will learn, but it may take most of the lifespan of the PS3 and XBox 360 for them to invent a new way of programming games that takes advantage of multi-processor and/or multi-core hardware.

Another part of the problem is that the industry likes porting games across multiple platforms as cheaply as possible, which means that multiplatform titles will probably take as little advantage as possible of system-specific features (which will cripple PS3 titles more than XBox titles).

Also, RAM speeds won't make much difference on consoles due to the low resolutions at which they render. The cache RAM is always much faster than the system RAM as well, so don't believe that it will have an impact at that level.

Even with the numbers on the PS3's side, I expect higher-quality early- and mid-life XBox 360 titles due to the fact that it has diverged less from current hardware architectures (resulting in a softer learning curve).

PS2 developers have had 6 years experience programming for 3 cores. I don't think having 8 will change that much. Since their all seperate CPU's, it means they simply can parrelize things more effectivly. The first gen Xbox 360 games won't because they were rushed out. The first gen PS3 games may not either but 2nd and onwards will. Memory speed is essential for media and 3d proccessing. Texture are gettign bigger, all 3 of the next gen systems have HD-TV output and HD-TV is now become cheaper and more common. I in fact have one, bought it for $3000 CND (the old joke, thats $400USD).

The numbers favor the PS3, as does most theoretical Aritecture analysis. CPU speeds means dick all these days it's all about memory bandwidth, cacheing, and efficient I/O. Since the PS3 has half year behind the 360 this isn't surprising.

I don't know?

[dr.banes]

Interestingly enough, though very speculative, there are some valid points.One thing that has not been proven is the "most powerful" hardware of the 3, particularly in Sony's case-I've only seen lots of hype and MGS4, they don't look any better than Xbox 360 games. This whole rootkit fiasco maybe be big, or can be easily swept under the rug-as usual. They already have 2 big beefs with M$, blu-ray and rootkit. If M$ wanted they can run a dirty smear campaign against Sony ala the recent New Jersey governor race. Another interesting thing, though not mentioned is the patent that they applied for the ability to detect used and obviously pirated software.Pirated, I can understand, but used or rented-thats ridiculous as reported at http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000420067137/.I can't believe that the inventors of the walkman can't get their shit together to beat Apple? If they keep treating the consumers like criminals, they'll just keep losing. I will wind up buying all 3 systems eventually as that is the nature of the beast. Sony has a PR team to rival the WhiteHouse-so they can still pull it off.

FPS on a console...

[BulletMagnet]

Let's take a look at the recently released Battlefield 2 on your XB and then take a look at it on your POS PC (or your ubergamebox, whatever you have) and see what you see. Aside from them not being even remotely the same game, the console version feels like you're playing on the inside of a shoebox, in a tiny little world. and that can be said for any online FPS console game. The feel is far different. Other gaming genres don't have much choice than being parked on a console. When was the last time there was a good baseball PC? High Heat 2003 (pardons to the text-based interfaces like BM, OOTP, etc) EA couldn't ever get baseball right with their billions, and is making football worse every year... Sole MLBPA License Holder 2K Games didn't even BOTHER to put something out on PC (at least EA put out MVP 05 on PC out, just in time to lose the license) and I don't forsee it happening next year either.

Re:FPS on a console...

[ivan256]

I think you replied to the wrong comment.

Re:FACT

[easychord]

HALO is quite popular in here in Europe. America is the biggest single market for games anyway though, so what exactly is your point?

Re:Fanboys and Whatnot.

[Delphiki]

Hell, microsoft doesnt even have a firm ground in the japanese market and they need that to get anywhere.

Why? The US is a larger market, and Europe's not too bad either. I imagine the US and Europe have more room for overall growth in the console market anyway, since if I'm not mistaken, a higher percentage of Japanese people are already gamers than either of the other two markets. Of course, I could be wrong about the growth thing, but the bottom line is that Microsoft can do just fine even if the Japanese don't care about the console.

Pure daydreaming nonsense.....

[stavx]

The scenario that plays out is as plausible as anyone's guess. But what killed the "article" for me is knowing the difference between loose and lose. The writer ignores grammar checking his piece, Even sadder would be if he didn't know the proper usage of both words. For those who want to be spared reading his rambling he wrote:

"Facing a competitor determined to wear them into the ground, Sony begins to LOOSE?!(SIC) ground in the home console market."

Hmmph

BOYCOTT SONY (and do yourself a favour)

[FFFish]

First, Sony needs to be boycotted as a consumer act that sends a clear message to Big Business that we will not accept invasive DRM, such as that which made the headlines this past week. Smashing a security hole into our systems? That must be protested, no two ways about it.

Second, Sony will not be destroyed by the boycott. And to your benefit it will motivate Sony to perform so very, very well that they regain their loyal customers. This time next year they'd re-release the product with such stunning capabilities that you'd happily purchase it at even a premium price. Your boycott will spur them to outperform themselves.

Win-win situation all around. Boycott Sony. :-)

Re:BOYCOTT SONY (and do yourself a favour)

[FFFish]

BoingBoing has a nice list of what Sony has done wrong. Take the boycott suggestion seriously: this is a prime opportunity for the consumer to communicate with the company. Opportunities for communicating such a very clear message do not come around often. In fact, if the companies have their way, the opportunity will never, ever happen again.

Summarized:

Oct 31: Sony DRM uses black-hat rootkits
Nov 3: Sony releases de-rootkit-ifier, lies about risks from rootkits
Nov 3: Felten on Sony's rootkit-"remover: they're still adding something"
Nov 3: Defeat WoW spyware using Sony's rootkit: proof it has side-effects
Nov 9: List of CDs infected with Sony's rootkit DRM
Nov 9: Sony's EULA is worse than their rootkit
Nov 10: Sony Music CDs infect Macs, too
Nov 10: Fantastic screed against the coders who wrote the previous Sony DRM junk: they've done it before
Nov 11: Sony will stop shipping infectious CDs -- too little, too late
Nov 12: Sony's *other* malicious audio CD trojan
Nov 12: New Sony lockware prevents selling or loaning of games
Nov 13: Sony's malware uninstaller leaves your computer vulnerable
Nov 13: Sony's rootkit infringes on software copyrights

Other stuff:
Sony lied about its rootkit. They said it didn't phone home with information about your deeds. It does. When they were caught in the lie, they said that they didn't pay attention to the information it sent back, so it's OK
Microsoft is building a Sony rootkit-remover into its anti-spyware product
Lawsuits against Sony are already underway in Italy and the US
At least one piece of malicious software that exploits Sony's rootkit has been discovered in the wild

Update: Christopher sez, "You missed one in your Sony timeline that I think is excellent. A call from Dan Goodin over on Wired to boycott all Sony products until they make amends..."
posted by Cory Doctorow at 09:40:06 AM

If you expect to be treated fairly, you must take this seriously. You need to boycott Sony products. You harm yourself if you do not: you will make it okay for them to harm you again and again.

Re:BOYCOTT SONY (and do yourself a favour)

[javaxman]

Tell you what... I'll boycott Sony's MUSIC and maybe VIDEO products, how does that sound?

Oh, wait, I almost forgot. I boycott ALL "copy-protected" CDs already. If there's a copy-protected CD that I want, I'll purposely avoid buying it and go download it from some gnutella network or something like that... or just live without it. Everyone needs to consistently boycott copy-protected CDs, that's the moral of this story, really.

Honestly, I think that should do the trick. These divisions within Sony are just that- separate corporate divisions. If the music publishing portion were to actually become *unprofitable*, I somehow doubt that money would be siphoned off of the gaming, computer and electronics divisions to prop it up, *especially* not the gaming division just now. If consumers keep punishing the *bad* behaviors of corporations, and rewarding the *good* behaviors, eventually maybe they'll get the message and only the *good* will remain. Or they'll slowly become unprofitable.

In short, I might go for a boycott of Sony Music and maybe even Sony Pictures, but as evil as this is, I'm going to keep buying PS2 games, and I wouldn't let this whole mess stop me from buying a Viao or PSP ( not that I'm about to; I'd sooner buy an iBook and a NDS ).

Re:BOYCOTT SONY (and do yourself a favour)

[xero314]

Why is it that everyone is upset at Sony for exploiting a hole in Windows?
Why is it that everyone is upset at Sony for acting within their legal right and protecting their intelectual property?
Why is it that everyone is upset at Sony for making low quality music difficult to copy?

Isn't that what Sony did and is doing?

[MMaestro]

Before the PS2 came out, Sony was raving about how the DVD playing ability would blow people away, how the Dreamcast was gonna fail, and how they'd already 'killed' Nintendo (which just about everyone mentions, every time, since the PS1).

Now Sony is trying to hype the PS3 as some kind of supercomputer playing video game system with their Cell processors, their Blu-Ray discs will become the new industry replacement for DVDs and that they're gonna nail the coffin shut on Nintendo (again).

I'd say Microsoft is just taking a page out of Sony's marketing book here. Artifical shortage? PS2 did that. First to launch? PS2 did that to the Xbox and Gamecube. Claiming the opposition is already defeated? PS2 did that to the Dreamcast. Hyping up hardware as primary feature? PS2 did that.

Re:Isn't that what Sony did and is doing?

[king-manic]

Before the PS2 came out, Sony was raving about how the DVD playing ability would blow people away, how the Dreamcast was gonna fail, and how they'd already 'killed' Nintendo (which just about everyone mentions, every time, since the PS1).

Which was all basically true.

I'd say Microsoft is just taking a page out of Sony's marketing book here. Artifical shortage? PS2 did that.

The supply wasn't that low, also there was a true shortage of dvd lasers at the time. The shortage may nto have been planned.

First to launch? PS2 did that to the Xbox and Gamecube.

Except it wasn't first to launch. Microsoft is actually taking a page from Sega's play book.

Claiming the opposition is already defeated? PS2 did that to the Dreamcast.


Yeah, that's Sony Entertainments game division alright.

Hyping up hardware as primary feature? PS2 did that.

? Hyping the hardware is apart of anyone campaign for a new system From Atari to SNES to PS1.

I think you missed the point.

[Hidyman]

The author was talking about Sony, not just the PS3.
More and more people have been moving away from Sony in different areas.
The rootkit debacle is just an extension of Sony's proprietary "I want to control all aspects of the market" philosophy. For example: Beta, MiniDisc, MemoryStick/MagicGate.

I have seen the quality of Sony products go downhill in the last decade or two. I used to love Sony products, but I refuse to buy any of their junk anymore.

The problem is...

[Nicolay77]

Stopping the buying of hardware from sony will make their content division stronger, not weaker, inside the company.

People should stop giving sony money for any content, and that means music and movies (any movie! you know who I'm talking about).

And may be buy one or two electronic gadgets from them.

Yeah i dont give a shit

[Fjacky66]

when i have the money i`ll have both ps3 and 360,its all about when i walk into a store and i got the mula,and a wild hair up my ass i`ll have them both..

Maybe to Americans...

[RealmRPGer]

Halo 3 was noted as an American console buyer. In particular, the Japanese really don't care for FPSes, so the release of Halo is hardly going to sway them. Instead, I find it likely that Squaresoft will unveil Final Fantasy XIII around the time of the PS3 release, which will capture pretty much all of Japan and a growing market of the US and the rest of the world.

Though I love Nintendo to death, I can't help but be wary of their move. Sure, the console will support traditional games, but the GameCube supports online games and look where that lead it.

In the end, it seems quite clear: Halo fans will buy a 360, Japan and FF fans (and there are a LOT of those) will buy a PS3, and devote Nintendo fans (and maybe some newcomers) will buy the Revolution. It's like clockwork, people.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[briankoenig]

Sure, the console will support traditional games, but the GameCube supports online games and look where that lead it.

If by "traditional games" you mean Madden 2009 "with added spin-move!!" or Medal of Honor XII "Kill the Germans again in this town this time!" then I'll be happy to not have all of them.
If Nintendo really pulls through with what they say, and there are tennis games where you swing the controller like a racket, Zelda games where you swing it like a sword, then use it like reins on a horse, then pull it back like a bow and arrow, or the metroid game where you move it like a gun, or the conductor's game that I could play with my 5 year old nephew or my 85 year old grandmother without spending 15 minutes explaining that "the b button does this, and the joystick does this", then I think that a huge portion of the market would move away from the "traditional games" and truly open a new horizon of gaming. Sure, I love current gen games as much as the next guy, but if I could play games in a completely different way like the Revolution promises, for less money than Sony wants for their 9 cores, then I would jump ship in a heartbeat.

And let's not forget that although the Gamecube isn't the "it" console, Nintendo was the only one of the big 3 to post a profit in their gaming division last year.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[Rallion]

Though I love Nintendo to death, I can't help but be wary of their move. Sure, the console will support traditional games, but the GameCube supports online games and look where that lead it.

The difference is that the Revolution will probably fully support traditional games out-of-the-box. (I think I saw something from Iwata or Miyamoto saying that the nunchaku attachment would be included, and probably a traditional shell as well.) That's hugely important. Things that don't come with the system never succeed. AFAIK, the closest thing to a succesful peripheral was actually the N64 RAM expansion pak.

In the end, it seems quite clear: Halo fans will buy a 360, Japan and FF fans (and there are a LOT of those) will buy a PS3, and devote Nintendo fans (and maybe some newcomers) will buy the Revolution. It's like clockwork, people.

I think it has to happen more than once to be 'like clockwork.'

Though you may be right.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[Guppy06]

"Instead, I find it likely that Squaresoft will unveil Final Fantasy XIII around the time of the PS3 release,"

Final Fantasy XI will be released for the X360, bundled with the upcoming new expansion pack. FFXII is probably still in development for the PS2, but ultimately S-E is getting more hardware agnostic; they actually made games for the GameCube.

At this point, I don't think anybody knows what consode FFXIII (or DQIX, for that matter) will grace. For all we know, they'll be on the Revolution.

And there's still the matter of the Phantasy Star line.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[HarvardAce]

Instead, I find it likely that Squaresoft will unveil Final Fantasy XIII around the time of the PS3 release...

While it may be likely that FFXIII is "unveiled" at the time of the PS3 release, it probably wouldn't be released for another year or two after that, so it probably won't drive too many console sales initially. Since FFXII isn't due out until the second half of 2006 in the US, I find it highly unlikely that FFXIII would be released within 2 years of that date. And even then, I would take those dates with a grain of thought. After all, Square Enix originally said that FFXII would be released in "the second half of the fiscal year ending March 2004" and it looks like they'll be off by 2 years (assuming a March 2006 release for the Japanese version).

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[RealmRPGer]

Actually, Square stated that they are working on FFXIII for the PS3. I believe this was at E3.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[RealmRPGer]

Which marks their first time ever being so late.

You find it highly unlikely because Square has traditionally held a track record of releasing Final Fantasties about every year? Think about it:
1997 - Final Fantasy VII
1999 - Final Fantasy VIII
2000 - Final Fantasy IX
2001 - Final Fantasy X
2002 - Final Fantasy XI
2003 - Final Fantasy X-2

This was their <i>only</i> skip since Final Fantasy VII. Now <i>tell me again</i> why I should believe they can't crank out another one a year after XII, let alone two.

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[HarvardAce]

Now tell me again why I should believe they can't crank out another one a year after XII, let alone two.

I'm not disputing this. I'm merely saying that a year after XII will be at least a year after the release of the PS3, assuming that both XII and the PS3 release as expected (both in early/middle 2006).

Re:Maybe to Americans...

[RealmRPGer]

This is true. FFXII almost certainly won't be a release title, but it also wouldn't be the first time that anticipation alone drove the sales of a console.

Enough awe and anxiety can really go a long way.

Re:Fanboys and Whatnot.

[king-manic]

The US is a larger market, and Europe's not too bad either.

For video games, Japan is still the larger market. Although Games are making inroads in North America.

Halo 3 and PS3, different release dates.

[MeanderingMind]

The following article eliminates thoroughly a point heavily relied upon by the article. Namely that Halo 3 and the PS3 will be released at the same time. I believe there was a slashdot entry on it, but I could not find it.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/655/655574p1.html

Additionally, the article itself admits to be speculation. It is based on little more than what those biased here on slashdot continually tout to claim their favorite console will be victorious.

The only thing the article managed to prove was that baseless projections are just as bad as what the experts say.

Re:All it would take...

[skreeech]

MGS4 looked pretty big. MGS3:substance is going to/has online competative play, maybe MGS4 could have something like that and take some of the halo audiance.

Problems with PS3

[Phantasmo]

I think that the PS3's major obstacle will be making software development easy. Writing software that takes full advantage of the Cell processor is not exactly child's play. I'm sure they'll have some really impressive launch titles but will every 3rd party developer be willing to hire the best/most expensive coders?
Short of falling back on strong support from Unreal 3...

Compare this with Xbox 360 (with MS pushing its XNA platform for combined Windows and 360 development) and Revolution (which is essentially a beefier Gamecube).

Re:FACT

[HarvardAce]

HALO is meh outside of the US. Especially in Japan, it sells only as much as an obscure mahjong game.

Don't obscure mahjong games sell really well in Japan?

Re:FACT

[easychord]

Check again.