Slashdot Mirror
PS3 In U.S. In November?
Next Generation reports that yet another analyst sees the U.S. PS3 launch a ways off. A gent from the Pacific Crest Securities group forsees a 1M unit strong launch in the U.S. sometime in November, with a Japanese launch the summer before and an EU launch the spring after. From the article: "Despite speculation of high launch prices - some quoting a ludicrously high $700 mark - these numbers will certainly lead to severe shortages. Sony will struggle to meet retail demand with a million units at launch, and will face the same kind of criticism leveled at Microsoft if it fails to back the launch up with regular pre-Holiday shipments."
"If they minimize their shipments by avoiding doing something crazy like...oh...let's say giving away a PS3 every 10 minutes for a month. I guess the reality is that sort of scheme doesn't dent the overall shipments much."
Crazy?
60*24*31/10 = around 4,000 Xbox360's. That is nothing compared to the demand. It was effective advertising for both Mountain Dew and the 360. There were some people with a few hundred caps they saved for one drawing.
speculative. Who are the sources for these analysts? I'll wait to hear from Sony, thanks.
I just wanted to let you know that you shouldn't buy Sony products because of rootkits and DRM. Instead you should buy open, hackable platforms like the Game Park GP2X and the Nintendo DS. Buy a Revolution, too.
Although I agree with your point, the GP2X isn't the isn't the best example to use right now.
Now then, if they were to include the updated source, that would be freaking sweet.
If Sony were to "wisen up" and open the platform of the PSP and PS3, the company would be killed by infighting. Sony is in the unique position of being both a device producer and a content producer. Sadly, in this case the content side of the business has almost total control over the device side of the business. This can be seen in the early digital media players that wouldn't play MP3s, and by exploit-laden CDs still in stores despite a recall. Indeed, the main problem for Sony is that the device side cannot pull itself out from the grip of the media side. Sony made a great piece of hardware with the PSP, but because of the content side's desire of creating a mobile video platform, the devices needs to stay locked-down and DRM'ed so that piracy is less of a worry.
The biggest problem Sony faces is itself, and it is a similar problem to what is faced by all device producers: Content producers understand neither the technology their content is played on nor the demands and wants of the buying public. It is not a question of "if" but "when" DRM methods will be cracked, and no movie or record executive will believe that fact. Until they do, we will continue to see DRM.
freeflux-powered open-source blog
"Hardware and software glitches, not enough stock, no real nex-generation games"
Have you even played a 360 yet? The only hardware problems were around 2% of people who stuck their power brick behind a hot TV with ventillation. There haven't been any Microsoft software glitches.
The 360 is over a million out the door. It is far ahead of the PS2 pace 2 months into release.
No real nex-gen games? Play Kameo, COD2 and PGR3 on any TV with the full 1080 resolution. You are blind to call them non "nexgen".
Sony will fail with the PS3 unless they pull the plug on Blu-Ray. The system will cost about twice that of the 360 with less features (online play) and less games (same stuff minus Halo).
Wow, a whole million? If you look at the actual facts, you'll find Sony sold just shy if a million PS2s on opening weekend... in Japan alone. Over half a million in the US on opening day. And over 100 million to date.
If Microsoft were to continue selling, on average, 500k a month, it would take them sixteen years of consecutive continuous sales to match the PS2's record.
Oh yeah, the 360 is a success all right.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
You would think that fanboys would be disheartened by the fact that, well, the Xbox kind of blew. You would think that a console that maxed itself out in a year compared to the still improving yet considerably older PS2 would lose its fanbase. But no - they just keep chugging along, proudly displaying their white and green flag, singing the same old song. They once said that the Xbox was better than the PS2 because it had better specs. Now, since the PS3 will debut with superior specs - that the 360 is better because, well, they have Xbox Live!
Microsoft has proven to us that they can't be trusted as a console manufacturer, much like Sega did. Who cares if the Dreamcast was good? They blew it too many times in the past with the lackluster game gear, Sega CD and 32x add-ons, and Saturn (Master System and Genesis were relative successes). These consoles had some REAL potential, and yet, each console failed after about a year or two after release. Now look where Sega is - producing games.
While Sony has made some silly decisions, each of their entries into the console world were pretty much complete successes, the PSP to a lesser extent due to its short time on the market and high cost. PS1 crushed the N64, and the PS2 crushed both the Gamecube and the Xbox, much to Microsoft's surprise. See a pattern here? People are ALREADY fed up with MS, and they haven't even been in the game very long. Their only claim to fame is the Live service, which is admittedly a good thing. Too bad they don't have (hardly) any good games to play online to begin with.
Why do you care what other people spend their money on?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
For once I wish I had mod points to Mod up some of the comments below this Post.
As stated in other comments, Xbox has a long way to go before reaching the level the PS2 has managed to reach. Technical Problems aside, the hardware problems has tarnished the image of the X360 release. 2% or not, many seemed to know someone who knew someone who's brother's dad had problems with it. True or not hearsay is powerful.
Next-Gen is still unknown to the masses. Technology right now is diluting itself. Retailers are pushing Hi-def, but there is little content for it, and non-techies can't tell the diffrence less they see it side by side. HD/Blu-Ray are pushing for new Media, but DVD is out there, and VHS still has a significant role as well, evident by the availablilty of new movies on DVD and VHS Format. Game is no diffrent. It looks like a game. It plays like a game, wow this must be another game!
It's highly unlikely the PS3 will Fail due to blu-ray, and every article and speculation (since there is NOTHING ELSE but speculation) I've read indicates Blu-Ray costs will most likely get eaten by Sony, akin to DVD drives in the PS2 Release. Sony can build most of the parts for their consoles in house via their own manufacturing plants further reducing the costs.
Anything is possible, but its pretty unlikely the PS3 will fail. Many thought the market would not support 3 Mainstream consoles when Xbox Came out, but its proven it can, and looks to continue that trend.
WHY ISNT LS WORKING ON MY PC?! well it's ls not LS LS IS NOT WORKING! turn caps off CAPS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LS!
I've got all three last-gen consoles, plus a 360.
Of the three older systems, I like the XBox the most; I've preferred the games and the presentation there. Most of the time, when you have the same game on both the PS2 and the XBox, it will load and run fastest, and look the best, on the XBox.
The Gamecube, despite being unpopular, has always impressed me. It hasn't had as many games, but they've always been well-done... fast and easy to play. It's quite undeserving of its red-headed stepchild reputation. If it had used full-size disks, I don't see any reason why it couldn't have done just as well or better than the other two. I think the tiny game disks were its biggest limitation.
The PS2 has always felt sort of hackish. It has good games, but the limitations of the hardware are almost always visible in some way. Look at Shadow of the Colossus, for example... a great game, but the PS2 has trouble animating the Colossi. It's still a great ride, but it's rather marred by the lack of horsepower to do what they wanted.
I haven't seen it, but I've read that the PS2's version of Resident Evil 4 is the best of all three consoles. This surprised me, but I'll take it on faith. If it's true, it means that they are still figuring out ways to make the PS2 run faster, which is pretty cool. The major downside is that there must be, like, 12 guys in the world who can make that hardware sing to that level.
An easier-to-program architecture strikes me as a better bet, most of the time, for most gamers. 'Normal' programmers are in pretty good supply... truly brilliant ones are hard to find. An easy architecture means that most games will look good and play well. An arcane architecture like the PS2 will start to pay off late in its life, but for a long time, the games will probably be better on the consoles with simpler architectures.
The best comparison I can think of is the old Commodore Amiga versus Atari ST debates, way back when... the ST, being simpler, had good software sooner. The Amiga's much better architecture started paying off after a few years, and the software (particularly games) on that system ended up being much, much better. But for the first couple years, the ST looked stronger in many ways.
It strikes me, as a multi-console owner, that the smart thing to do is to buy the easy-to-program system early in the lifecycle, and the tough one near the end, when it's cheap. (assuming you're not a diehard that must own everything, at least.) It's not like a computer... it's not an investment that can pay you back. It's just a toy. You don't really CARE what the architecture is like...all you care about is the games.
As far as actual GAMING goes, the Revolution is likely to be the best out of the gate. The 360 will hit its stride a year or two out, as the programmers learn its medium-complex architecture. The PS3, most likely, won't truly develop for another year or two longer.
Ultimately: wait until there's a game you want, and then buy the console. It's about the GAMING, not about wanking over how "powerful" one's console is.
Remember, too, that the 360 is an actual, shipping product, though still hard to get. You can look at the games NOW and judge for yourself. The PS3 may be better. It's easy to compare the present reality of a shipping product with the possibilities of vapor hardware, and of course Sony would love for you to do that.... anything to keep you from buying a 360. But you can't look at the games on the PS3, can you?
I'm sure I'll end up with a PS3 eventually. I do not think, however, that it's likely to make the bed and do the dishes, and if it's as arcane as the PS2 was, it's not truly going to hit its stride until 2010 or so.
So why not wait and buy it when it's cheaper?