Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PS3 On Track For Spring 2006

Posted by Zonk on from the in-japan dept.

Reuters is reporting that, despite some reservations by analysts, Sony's next-gen console appears to be on-track for a Spring 2006 launch. From the article: " The timing of the release of Sony's updated PlayStation console has become a matter of speculation in the $25 billion video game industry and among the studios, hardware makers and other companies looking to handicap the battle over next-generation DVD technology. A spokesman for Sony, the No. 1 provider of game consoles, said it was still targeting a spring 2006 launch for the PS3, which is key to maintaining its lead in the game console market against Microsoft Corp. which recently launched its competing Xbox 360 console."

38 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. Let the marketing spin... begin! by Walkiry · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hey, it worked for the Dreamcast, right? The PS2 was supposed to be like a quantum supercomputer, hi tech industries would buy stacks of them for nuclear reactors and satellite guidance applications, it's going to have all the games in the world and we're going to release soon soon soon NOW! Wait a little bit and it can be yours!

    History does have a liking for repeating itself.

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    1. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by mrgreen4242 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I predict that the PS3 will be not much more powerful than the 360, cost about the same, and will be wilding disapointing to everyone who actually believed Sony's hype. Also, I predict that "Spring 06" means that in June we will see a few units come out, with mass availability (anyone can walk into any store at any point in time and buy one) sometime around September, perhaps as late as October.

    2. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      Yes, but when will we get a price drop on the current generation so I can buy a PS2?

    3. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by Delphiki · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Also, I predict that "Spring 06" means that in June we will see a few units come out in Japan, with limited availability in North America sometime around September, perhaps as late as November.

      That's my prediction.

      --

      Feel free to mod me "-1 - Angry Jerk".

    4. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      You do realize the $50 you'll save will only buy you between 1 and 5 games right? Probably 2 or 3 really good ones, or 1 new release. What have you been playing all this time instead?

    5. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by vbrtrmn · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the late news of wide spread shortages!

      --
      it's a sig, wtf?
    6. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      I don't know. The $50 I save could buy 3 or 4 games if I shop around.
      It's really the principle, though. If I buy a PS2 or XBOX and a month from now they go down $50, that means I spent around $1.40 a day extra just so I could have it now.
      Plus I really don't have time to play right now, what with finals and Christmas and work, so it would just sit there taunting me.
      Computer games will hold me over until the price drop.

    7. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Which makes sense except that the PS2 dropped from $179 to $149 way back on May 11th, 2004. You could've been enjoying it for a year and a half now. If you'd been willing to pay another $50, it dropped to $199 back on May 14th, 2002. That's 3 and a half years ago.

      Basically I'm sure you had your reasons and things going on to keep you busy, but there's a limit to the depths of frugality that make sense. If I still had time for PC gaming, I wouldn't spend $500 to upgrade my video card, nor even $300. The best bang for the buck is still for $150-200. New cards drop to that price after less than a year. Presently yeah I could save 20-50 bucks and get a GeForce 6600 instead of a 6800, but I'd lose a third of the performance without saving a third of my dollars.

    8. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      But by your logic I should go ahead and fork the moolah over for an XBOX360. If I spend the $400 then I get to enjoy next-gen technology for years before the next next-generation technology comes out.
      We all have busy schedules and limited income, but I figure I can wait until things get cheaper to buy a console I'm only going to play a few hours a week.
      Damn. I wish I had all the money I had now when I was younger and had more free time.

    9. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Nooo, do the math. Fine I'll do it for you.
      If you bought a PS2 in November 2000 for $300, that's $5 per month going to today.
      If you bought a PS2 in May 2002 for $200, that's $4.65 per month
      If you bought a PS2 in May 2003 for $179, that's $5.77 per month
      If you bought a PS2 in May 2004 for $150, that's $7.89 per month going to today.

      Yes you'll get to keep playing the PS2 after today, but the newest systems have the "hottest" games. Anyway, the most bang for the buck is if you'd paid $200.

      Likewise you should not buy a 360 this Christmas. However in a year or two when the price drops by a hundred bucks that would probably be the best deal for getting to play the newest, best looking games for the least money per month.

    10. Re:Let the marketing spin... begin! by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      You have a good point.
      I'd like to point out that if I did indeed wish to play the latest and greatest games, I would already have an XBOX or a PS2. I don't have that need, or the time, so I'm going to wait until the price drop.

  2. How can the PS3 top the PS2? by Eightyford · · Score: 3, Funny

    How can the PS3 top the PS2? I mean the PS2 had an EMOTION engine for crying out loud!

    --
    Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
    1. Re:How can the PS3 top the PS2? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Maybe the PS3 will have a Whining Bitch Engine....

      <duck/>

    2. Re:How can the PS3 top the PS2? by wheany · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well the PS3 has a reality synthesizer. No really. Look it up.

  3. I can't imagine the PS3 being ready by Rowan_u · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine the PS3 being ready for launch in 5-6 months. However, no one will be happier than me if it is. Competition between Sony and Microsoft is going to be brutal this time around, especially with the added concern both companies have for the support of their next-gen video disk formats. This can only be good for the gamer. We will see cheaper consoles, better games, and amazing high-definition video formats flying at us from every angle very soon. The 360 got in early with a launch somewhere in-between bad and mediocre, but definitely pushing an advantage now, with the 360 now available in limited amounts throughout the world.

    As a game reviewer, and owner of all the current systems (including the 360), I am pretty exited to see what Sony can pull out of its hat. I've got nothing but disrespect for the rest of their DRM/Rootkit laden company, but its gaming division is the single most powerful force in gaming and the PS3 will prove whether or not they can hold their market dominance over Microsoft for another generation, and kill two birds with massive penetration or the blu-ray format.

    --
    only one everything
    1. Re:I can't imagine the PS3 being ready by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      As much as I like Sony, I want to see M$ make them bleed. When I look at all the Tekken, soul calibre, Gran Turismos, it is clear Sony won't last with just another generation with sequels.

    2. Re:I can't imagine the PS3 being ready by cornface · · Score: 1

      and kill two birds with massive penetration

      That's disgusting! This is a family site!

  4. Re:Guess which console I want! by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 2

    Sony didn't make good on their promises, and "all the games in the world" only came because so many people like you just bought the things up when it had no real competition (because quality doesn't sell and the DC was shunned), so before anybody said "Where's my HDD? Where's my online play? Where's my online network to download music and preview movies? Where's all this crap you promised me?", they'd already sold 10 million units and developers knew they were gonna keep making games for it. Also, support brought over from the PS1 was really the most important factor in the PS2's first year, hype put the system in homes and numbers kept the games coming. The PS2 never succeeded due to the merit of its hardware.

    --
    "This is considered plagiarism."
  5. That's fine and good by steveo777 · · Score: 1

    But when can I pre-order the thing? Unlike the 360, this will play nearly all its predecessors' games. Since I don't have a PS2, I'll jump on the bandwagon for this baby so I can play all those PS2 games I missed with some AA? Maybe? Pleeeease...!

    --
    This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    1. Re:That's fine and good by bigman2003 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Xbox 360 will play nearly all of the good Xbox games.

      Here's a list of the backward compatible games.

      Just about every game I still want to play is on that list.

      --
      No reason to lie.
  6. Re:Guess which console I want! by oGMo · · Score: 4, Informative
    I do hope history repeats itself, if they make good on the promises this time, like they did last, we're all in for a real treat.

    I'd like to add some detail to this. There are two big myths regarding PS2 pre-launch claims:

    1. Sony said the PS2 could render Toy Story in realtime
    2. The Final Fantasy 8 demo was faked, and we haven't seen anything like it on the PS2 to date

    The first myth is wrong; Sony never said this. If you don't believe me, try and find a quote, from a Sony spokesperson, that says this. Given all the articles are still on the web, this should be fairly easy to do, if this is true. However, it's fairly easy to find quotes from Microsoft spokespeople, like Bill Gates, that the XBOX would have "Toy Story quality graphics" (this particular case is from CES 2001).

    The second myth is a result of people being wowed by realtime graphics that blew away the current stuff, and forgetting how crappy the graphics at the time were. Here are two screenshots I managed to find from the FF8 tech demo:

    Decent. Way better than the PS1. (Note, in that screenshot, only the characters are 3D, the background is prerendered.) However, the original FMV was still far superior:

    Now, regardless, the claim is that the original demo was faked, and they haven't matched the quality. You be the judge:

    Most of these are at least as good, if not better than the screenshots for the FF8 demo, and most of them are early to mid PS2 games. There are many more examples, but this is enough to compare.

    --

    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

  7. Er by oGMo · · Score: 1
    Sony didn't make good on their promises

    Er, yes they did.

    --

    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    1. Re:Er by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1
      "Where's my HDD? Where's my online play? Where's my online network to download music and preview movies? Where's all this crap you promised me?"
      What part of that was hard to understand? Sony barely beat MS online (with a year head start), the HDD barely even released in the states, and Sony promised pretty much what Xbox Live currently is back when the console was in its infancy, and they failed to deliver. But it's ok, they're Sony and not MS so we're allowed to look the other way and not hold them responsible.

      Also, on the Toy Stoy matter, no I can't find quotes relating the a Sony exec to it, but countless previews did, and that's where the correlation comes from. I remember reading a Popular Science article on it which pretty much blatantly stated that it was as powerful as the machines that were used to create Toy Story. So the implication was there but they cleverly avoided making quotable statements, as far as I care.

      It seems to be SOP for them to make as many deniable claims as possible to boast their machine up ("Spring 2006" launch announcement comes to mind, but TFA indicates that they feel more bold now) and quickly point out that their statements were taken out of context if the need ever arises.
      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
    2. Re:Er by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1
      "("Spring 2006" launch announcement comes to mind, but TFA indicates that they feel more bold now)"


      Whoa, I made that comment without even first deciding to RTFA. I take the second part of that quote back, Sony hasn't changed their tune at all. All that Sony's done is reiterate the point that was made at E3, and I figure we should only take this statement seriously for the Japanese launch.
      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
    3. Re:Er by oGMo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Sony barely beat MS online (with a year head start), the HDD barely even released in the states, and Sony promised pretty much what Xbox Live currently is back when the console was in its infancy, and they failed to deliver.

      They did? Where? They say the same thing about the PS3 they said about the PS2... that the hardware would be there, and the developers could use it as they saw fit. Where did they ever say they'd deliver XBOX Live?

      Also, on the Toy Stoy matter, no I can't find quotes relating the a Sony exec to it, but countless previews did, and that's where the correlation comes from.

      "Countless previews did"? So basically, some journalists made things up, and you blame Sony?

      I remember reading a Popular Science article on it which pretty much blatantly stated that it was as powerful as the machines that were used to create Toy Story.

      Citation please? Otherwise this is unsubstantiated bullshit. Which it is, anyway, because Toy Story was made on a large rendering cluster. You could probably build a nice rendering cluster of PS2s, but even if that's what they claimed, it's not what you're saying.

      So the implication was there but they cleverly avoided making quotable statements, as far as I care.

      So, they didn't actually say anything or mislead anyone, but you're happy to spread misinformation and you don't care that it is.

      It seems to be SOP for them to make as many deniable claims as possible to boast their machine up ("Spring 2006" launch announcement comes to mind, but TFA indicates that they feel more bold now) and quickly point out that their statements were taken out of context if the need ever arises.

      They didn't make "deniable claims" in the first place. They didn't claim any such thing at all! For people who would otherwise claim to demand factual evidence for everything, there seems to be a lot of stubborn belief that something happened despite every fact to the contrary.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    4. Re:Er by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

      Argh, link for the second and third words.

      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
    5. Re:Er by oGMo · · Score: 1

      Again, still no claims of any sort of "PlayStation Live" in this article. We have:

      Microsoft has made the biggest promises for Xbox Live, but Sony will actually get to the Internet first. The giant consumer electronics conglomerate will release on Aug. 27 a network adapter that allows its PlayStation 2 game console to tap into a broadband or a dial-up Internet connection.

      So, MS promises Live, Sony is going to ship a network adaptor.

      Q: Will Sony do all the heavy lifting with online gaming via the PS2, as far as it concerns maintaining servers, doing player-matching--that kind of thing?

      A: Some publishers have already invested a lot of money in building their own infrastructures, or they have deals with outsourcing companies--they've been in this business on the PC side for a while. They certainly want to leverage the infrastructure they've set up already.

      Other publishers are new to this. Some may decide to outsource it; some may decide to invest in technology. We're not going to mandate how they should approach it.

      Specifically: "We're not going to mandate how they should approach it." This is Sony explicitly stating they will not have a Live-like service. What more needs said?

      Will there be subscription charges?

      It's also open as far as whether they want to charge a subscription. For the 13 titles we're going to see by the end of the year, those are nonsubscription services. But if and when publishers come up with titles they think warrant a subscription fee, they're free to do that.

      It's an open-ended proposition for the consumer, too. We're not mandating how they get online. If you already have an ISP (Internet service provider), you're pretty much good to go.

      Again, an "open-ended proposition" which has no necessary subscription fees or explicit model.

      Some publishers are going to need to buy servers, set up login and authentication systems and do all kinds of expensive stuff to make online gaming work. Are there ways to reduce the investment it takes to get online?

      Each publisher is going to have an approach that makes sense for them. Someone like Electronic Arts, where they already have a big online infrastructure, I don't know that they're going to need to invest much to get their PS2 games online. On the other hand, smaller Japanese publishers may need to make some adjustments.

      Again, publishers will need to do their own thing.

      There's been a lot of speculation about using game consoles for other tasks, from e-mail to music playback. What do you see as the function of the game console a couple of years out?

      Given the functionality the PS2 has right out of the box--with the DVD capability, audio CDs, and now the network adapter bringing it online--I think it's one of the most versatile entertainment platforms you're going to have in the living room.

      And it's very important, when you go online, to know you're part of a very large community of PS2 users you can interact with. You can try to be the center of the home digital network, but if you don't have the installed base to create a large community, the experience just isn't that good.

      "There's a lot of speculation", but here it's stated that DVD and CD playback are what make it an "entertainment platform". The final line is an obvious jab at Microsoft's long-tried goal of a "home digital network" and the fact the installed base won't be anything near the PS2.

      So tell me, where in this article is Sony promising a Live-like service again, despite multiple repeated comments to the contrary?

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    6. Re:Er by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

      "You've talked before about the potential of using the PS2 as a conduit for downloading and playing back music, movies and other forms of entertainment. When will that materialize?

      Like I said earlier, that's the best I can find right now because searching for "PS2 movie downloads" just gets me a bunch of crap results. A network where movies and music can be downloaded (an agreement with AOL was also announced, IIRC) that also features possible web browsing and/or (not too sure about this one) email checking just symbolize a lot of bad things for console gaming in my eyes (I wasn't talking about the PS2's online gaming network being Xbox Live in the sense of gaming support, that was easily inferred by the fact that I specified the likeness to the promised network with Xbox Live now rather than 3 years ago). Now Xbox Live is featuring some of those things, and that's where the comparison came from. I don't know the extent to MS's multimedia ambitions with Xbox Live, but they were surpassed by those of Sony with the PS2.

      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
    7. Re:Er by oGMo · · Score: 1
      Now Xbox Live is featuring some of those things, and that's where the comparison came from. I don't know the extent to MS's multimedia ambitions with Xbox Live, but they were surpassed by those of Sony with the PS2.

      Well this is true for the most part; my point is that Sony didn't really promise anything other than what was delivered.

      If you remember the PSX... not the PS1, but the PSX that was a PS2 with extra networking and TiVo-like abilities... they actually did try some of this. And it didn't really go over well (doubtless due to the $700 pricetag). Little reason to do a wider launch if such a thing failed in Japan, I guess.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    8. Re:Er by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

      No, the promise was a network that supported this. It was going to be elaborate and it was being seriously touted. The PSX was pretty much a precursor to the 360 and PS3 crap that everybody should've seen coming long ago (when they announced the online network I'm talking about), but the network was previewed and it was on its way. Sony dropped the ball with the HDD (don't know how significant that was in the scrapping of the plans), and they didn't follow through with their online promises. If I had subscribed to EGM 5 years before I did and had the issues lying around (not like they'd be out here anyway...) I'd post scans of the interface and some details, but the announcement of it is what really made me not want a PS2 ever (though God of War changed my mind).

      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
  8. What they need to top by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    is the game library. Yeah, I know, backwards compatible. But I've got a backlog of ps2 games to play a mile long (Star Ocean, Raditia Stories, FFX, Digital Devil Saga, Atlier Iris, Virta Figther 4, Soul Calibur III, ZOE 2, Metal Gear Solid 2 & 3, Kingdom Hearts II, I could go on like this all day). The market isn't just saturated, it's saturated with really great games. It's gonna be years until I really feel the need for a new console.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What they need to top by Eightyford · · Score: 1

      I think that will be really hard to do. The more these consoles advance, the more work has to go into making content for he games. Just look at the polygon count of the objects in these new games.

      --
      Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
  9. so wait... by subrama6 · · Score: 1

    does this mean launch in japan? i feel like i read something about how sony is going to try to launch simultaneously here and there. if that's the case this is much bigger news. otherwise, it'll be till fall till the US sees them anyway.

  10. I'll wait until... by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... the launch bugs are shaken out and I'm not forced to buy a bundle.

  11. Spring 2006? by JFMulder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Okay, so right off the bat we are pretty much sure it won't launch in March 2006 like a lot of people believed.

    But where are the games? What will it look like? Six months before 360 launched we already knew what the console looked like, an idea of what games were in development. Microsoft slowly started advertising the thing more and more until it launched two weeks ago.

    Now Sony on the other hand has shown pre-rendered movies of incredible quality, but no gameplay yet. Nobody is saying squat about how hard or easy it is to develop for (except that guy from Epic that said it was easy to code for, we haven't heard squat since, unless I'm mistaken).

    Considering all this, it was clear to me that the thing would obviously not launch in March like a lot of people online seemed to believe. But still, Sony hasn't even made an event announcement where they would show the thing.

    Also, on the developer side, I've heard about more people developping for the Revolution and commenting on it then the PS3. I'm not saying nobody is doing something for it, just that nobody seems to have something to say about it. Maybe it's NDAs...

    Anyway, the lack of news from Sony except "We'll be better, Xbox 360 is Xbox 1 1/2, blah blah blah". And even if the thing does ship in June 2006, when will it get to North America?

  12. Re:Straw man alert by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

    The games are only there because of the audience. That seems to be something people fail to grasp. I was floored with the approach MS took with the Xbox and it sucked to see it not pay of, almost as a warning to (potential) future console manufacturers (read: Samsung) that doing things right won't get them shit in the grand scheme of things.

    --
    "This is considered plagiarism."
  13. Re:The question is of course by smaffei · · Score: 1

    Not to forget "Star Wars : Battlefront II" and "Virtua Tennis".

    --
    Sure, Windows PCs dominate the market. But so do cheap toupees.
  14. Re:Guess which console I want! by Walkiry · · Score: 1

    >"Sony never said"

    http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=astroturf ing

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!