Slashdot Mirror
PlayStation 3 May Play Too Much
Businessweek has a piece looking at the PlayStation 3, worrying that Sony is confusing the consumer with all of the technology it's trying to work into the console. From the article: "Some question whether Sony is trying to cram too much into the new box. The PS3 is expected to cost $350 to $400. While it has the potential to be a megahit, Sony's message might get muddled in the process of going after too broad a market, says Deutsche Securities analyst Takashi Oya. 'It would be difficult to sell PS3 initially as anything other than a game machine,' Oya says. Sony declined to comment on such concerns."
Much like buying a child a shoe that is a half size bigger, the PS3 will grow into itself. There's no such thing as "too much" on a gaming console. The more you can do with it, the better.
I hate sigs.
Hmm... "It would be difficult to sell PS3 initially as anything other than a game machine" ?
So what if ? No, wait... better: does anybody even expect to buy it as anything else than a gaming rig in the first place ?
XBox360, between 300 and 400. Games. Plus some other stuff.
PS3, between 350 and 400. Games. Plus some other stuff.
No idea on Nintendo.
Barebones but decent PC (plus cheap monitor or TVout capable), between 400 and 600. Trivial stuff. Plus some older games.
Reality check for PS3 ? Checked.
People who buy the PS3 will buy it *primarily* for the games ANYWAY.
They MIGHT use it for something else too, but at a price tag comparable to any other decent alternative, what's the harm ?
If anything (*shock*), people who didn't plan on buying it for games might actually buy the console.
Will PS3 games sales plummet because of that ?
If you look at it from a games sold per unit of console sold, then yes, that might go down.
But as an absolute number of expected sales... I really, really doubt a significant decline, no matter what anybody else might say.
By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
People won't adopt it because it has too many features?
Who comes up with ideas like that. If anything more features will drive more sales. Don't need to buy a blu-ray player, the ps3 will do it, along with movies and music.
Both Sony and Microsoft are trying to put a media pc in our lounge rooms, and they're free to compete for my dollar.
I'll wait ... just like I did with PS1 and PS2 ... a few months after it's out you'll probably see it for under $200 at Video Game Exchange, Rewind, FuncoLand, or some other Re-Sale game store. $350-$400, are you kidding!?!?
I thought all those features were actually the interesting, intriguing and exciting part of the wait...
People know what a Playstation does... it plays games! If it does more than that, great. Don't underestimate the consumer! People are anticipating this release, and just because it does movies, internet, PVR (does it?), washes the dishes and takes the dog for a walk... well, that isn't going to change the fact that Gran Turismo 5 and Grant Theft Auto are going to be played on it--consumers won't forget that!
Starmen.net
This is a similar problem to one being argued over in the Defence industry. Many are saying that building in easy capability for expansion should be a priority for a platform rather than 'gold-plating' the original model with what seems good at the time, but is soon out of date. Leaving this room allows you the space to include new technlogies as they develop over the lifetime of the platform, giving it a longer life.
It seems to work on my PC, I've had it for years and the only original piece is the chassis and case, with the main beneficiary being the electronics companies who have made money out of selling me the upgrades, so why not on the PS3?
says Deutsche Securities analyst
This is how it works when you are an analyst: Make anything sound negative. Either it has too little features, or then it has too many. Never is anything just right, or well done.
That way, if it fails, you can say "See, I called it". If it succeeds, you say it did so in spite of those shortcomings. That's how it works.
I say cram as much stuff as you possibly can into it, just don't let the price go too high.
If you have the technology to be the latest and greatest, why not?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
As the saying goes - "Jack of all trades, master of none."
Sony needs to make sure that they really come through one some of the features they are offering with the PS3. If the PS2 is any indication, Sony may be in for some tough times ahead. While at the time the PS2 was a great option for a cheap way to get a DVD player, its DVD menu system is absolutely horrendous. Also consider that the Emotion Engine never even came within flying distance of living up to its hype and expectations (expectations which were created by Sony, and not the media, might I add).
There has been a TON that Sony has committed for the PS3, and have tried to one-up everything that Microsoft dedicated for the XBox 360, presumably to get consumers to hold off until the PS3 arrives, knowing that wallets for $400 consoles and $60 games are limited. My speculation is that maybe half actually ends up in the final console. This will no doubt be a disappointment for the consumers that were consciously waiting for the PS3 because of those features, but fortunately that market is more limited (even though they are also most likely to be the early adopters). However, if they actually are able to do the rest of these things well and come up with some good marketing, especially the Blu-Ray DVD features, Sony may do very well with the PS3. If not, they could be rolling on their belly pretty quickly.
A community-oriented lyrics site
As long as Sony don't shoot themselves in the head (and I wouldn't put it past them) I imagine the PS3 will be an excellent games system first and foremost and with luck an excellent multimedia jukebox. Of course Sony being Sony they'll promptly royally fuck things up by putting some petty restrictions into their software to stop it being as useful as it could be.
Well, we already know that the ps3 will cut the fat!
What is this, some really lame "In Soviet Russia" joke?
from tfa: If consumers buy the PS3 as a multimedia machine, they might not purchase as many video games...
since the PSP also plays music and movies, fewer people are buying games designed for it. In the PS2's initial
year on the market, players bought more than three games for each machine that was shipped. For the PSP, that
ratio slipped to 2 to 1.
I suspect that the reason for this was not the fact that the PSP can play music and movies, but the fact that
(and I'm bracing for the karma burn here) the PSP simply hasn't released enough quality games.
Sure, there are some good titles, but nowhere near enough of the quality and variety needed to really push the
PSP platform.
As long as the PS3 manages to maintain a game catalog akin to that of the PS2, it should do well. Having a slew
of additional features should not harm sales, as long as the games are there in force.
That is all.
Except that that is kinda of a cool phrase- We should work into casual conversation.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Chrysler announces it's latest offering of cars will not come with air conditioning or a back seat amongst other features. They are quoted as saying they want to focus on the "driving experience" only for now. They fear some potential buyers might be scared off by the superfluous features.
1. Playing PS2 games
2. Playing PS1 games
3. Watching Movies
Hopefully I will use my PS3 for 4 things
1. Playing PS3 games
2. Playing PS2 games
3. Playing PS1 games
4. Watching Movies
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
Badly written article != news.
Just a hint.
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
That's precisely the problem, though.
The more you cram in, the higher the price goes. That's just the way things are. Now, it looks likely that the Xbox 360 will be cheaper than the PS3, and the Revolution will probably be quite a lot cheaper. Given that, will the PS3's superior hardware be worth the extra cost?
In theory one could probably cram half a dozen Opterons and a pair of top-end SLI nVidia cards into a PS3's case... it would certainly be high-performance, but it would cost so much that nobody would buy it. Where's the sweet spot? We won't know for a while, but it's possible that Sony have overshot it somewhat.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Sure, why not! Why would you NOT want extra feautures?
I'd be clamoring for a $600 cell phone that plays music, watches video, manages my schedule, a 12" widescreen display... See my point here? Number one, we've tried the everything-to-everybody-devices before. They usually don't do that great.
Number two, it'll be hard to get the average non-gaming best buy shopper in the HDTV section to take notice of the PS3 over there in the 'kids' gaming section. They've got the PS3 name. Playstation = games. As of right now, Playstation != next gen HD movie content. It's possible, but they've got to get it out there.
Give my dad a reason to even LOOK at a ps3. He's a HD connoisseur like anybody else, but the thought of getting a PS3 wouldnt' even go through his mind.
Han shot first.
Yeah, so its hard to sell initially as anything but. IFF (if and only if) sony does a good job of making a media machine as well, then maybe we'll see some consumer saturation grow, create an emerging market. Otoh, a $400 media machine is very hard to justify. Unless you're comparing it to the extensible PC media center platform, in which case its a bargain, if limited to whatever shitty sony-centric drm-laden BS they turn it into. Frankly, I'll bite the bullet and point fingers now, Sony's going to have all the cards to do it right but the product isnt going to live up to expectations.
Myren
The Gamecube was specifically designed to do one thing very well: play games. (Whether or not you feel it has games worth playing is moot.)
The Revolution, similarly, is meant to play games and do very little else. Nintendo has said several times that they want to make GAME consoles, because people already have all that other stuff, and they can remain more focused this way.
There's nothing terrible about Sony's approach, but it MAY confuse some people. It certainly seems to be lifting the price.
Generally, if there's any decent advertising, (which you know there will be) the make or break component for a game system is the game catolog. I think that was Nintendo's flaw. Very little of their game catalog grew up even as their gamers grew up. They kept marketing to kids, who have less purchasing power than some of the other gaming age groups. They lost some of their big names developers for more mature audiences to Sony and Microsoft. So as long as Sony hasn't burned any bridges with their game developers, they should have the great catolog they've had with the past two systems and still be a major player.
It should cost $400 initially, because like XBOX 360, independent of store price that will be closer to the price people will find to buy it in the first days.
Better buying from a store and money going to Sony than creating havoc in the first days and paying much more to an intermediate guy.
When stocks raises, down the price to a more affordable level.
Sony's message might get muddled in the process of going after too broad a market
The company that dominated the last generation of consoles is releasing a new one. What more do most consumers care about? What more do they need to know?
If they are able to cram more into the box, a broader market isn't necesarrily a bad thing! Some will buy it for the games only. Some will buy it for the online capabilities WITH the games, and some will buy it simply for the online 'community' stuff alone. Plus, if their new portal has all the goodies it has been rumored to have, a whole new slew of people will start buying them that perhaps we haven't even thought of yet.
I for one will be getting one. I have been PC only (other than playing friends Xboxes and PS2s) since my N64 - and yet now I am for sure going to be standing there to pick my PS3 up on the first day. Count me as one example of how the gadgets inside will attract people. Whether everyone really knows what all the gadgets are, it won't take long for people in all types of genre to learn what they do. Soon those people will be wanting one too.
Just my $0.02 X^D
When i look for a DVD player i want it to play xvid, avi, jpegs and MP3s at least.... Yet when my mum looks she just wants it to play a DVD easily.
If sony can make it accessible to the customer, then the customer will buy it, if it also plays other formats, the customer will be more pleased when they randomly find this extra functionality. It will set the level of what consoles "should" supply as default and god help any which dont then fit this selection".
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
ALWAYS the problem has been that gamers outgrow the console. Especially in an age where 90% of console gamers also are familiar with PC gaming and hardware upgrading. There is essentially no limitations to what you can add/remove/change in a PC. Console gamers are growing to expect that level of adaptability.
This just in! 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.
This is in alotta ways like the iPod. In the beginning people only used them for music, but now they have alot more features. Do these other features make the iPods less popular? Nope. They're still selling like crazy. I bet alot of people upgrade their iPod for just the bigger hard drive, to fit more music on it.. the extra features are just, well... extra. The main feature of the ipod is to play music, it'll keep selling for that reason. The main job of the PS3 is to play games, it'll keep selling for that reason.
Someone's looking at the past through rose colored glasses. The NES had two bundles:
$249: NES Console 2 Controllers Light Gun R.O.B (Robotic Operating Buddy) Gyromite (R.O.B game) Duck Hunt Super Mario Bros.
$199 NES Console 2 Controllers Super Mario Bros.
Games cost anywhere from $59 to $79....and this was in 1985 Dollars! the Atari 2600 IIRC launched around $400 and sold like hotcakes. In comparison, the Xbox360 and the Ps3 are right in line with every other system launch that preceded them.
When you think about it... they keep adding all these media features... all these internet features... before you know it, you'll be typing papers on your "gaming console"
Essentially what they're doing is adding computer functionality to a gaming console. Sure, it would come in handy, but... a gaming console should just play games. Do I think it will kill the system? No. It will probably sell more becuase of the added features.
But they have to be careful how far they go... As long as you can still put a game into the system and have it automatically play, I don't see a big problem, but... they have to be careful how far they go. There's a reason console gaming is so popular, becuase it's easy to use, and becuase the games will work on all systems. (I think the latter is more important, and why I still think it was a mistake for Xbox360 to release a system with and without a hard drive... especially if games start coming out that require the hard drive)
I think what this article is trying to say is that the Battle for the Living Room is what Sony really wants to win, and the PS3 probably won't win it.
Consumers want a command center to stream audio and video, play games, connect to the interenet, etc. from the comfort of their easy chairs. At least we think that's what we want. Many attempts have been made to produce "one ring to rule them all", but no one has yet succeeded. Sony is trying to make the PS3 the hub by cramming in all these features, but the real challenge is not marketing but capability.
Is a solution on the horizon? Apple, are you listening?
Console gamers don't WANT their consoles to behave like PC's.
Console gamers want a system that will play the games they buy for it with none of the hassles "adaptability" brings, and they expect the games to look better over the lifetime of the console as they always have without buying any upgrades at all, adaptability be damned.
The question is, will I be able to use them the way I WANT to use them?
I will be able to play PS3 games.
Will I be able to play PS2 games I already own?
I will be able to watch DVDs.
Will I be able to watch DVDS from other countries?
I will be able to watch Blue-Ray DVDs.
Will I be able to watch Blue-Ray DVDs the way I want to watch them or the way the content industry wants me to watch them?
In a nutshell, the question isn't what it will enable me to do, the question is what will it keep me from doing.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
All Sony hardware will come with a Root Kit pre installed, so you can act as a node on a zombie Spam network without any activity on your part!
Just plug in, connect to the network and go!!!
As an added bonus, anyone who buys or hacks the Sony "vertical marketing module" will be able to access any in game contact information you've stored for online gaming! As a result, you'll be able to send v1argr@ popup ads to all your opponents and allies in on line MMPG games!
Isn't that COOL?!?!?
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
That's not to say that more stuff is always better. Especially if it bloats the size, price, chance it will fail. No one want's to pay for features you don't use but saying it will "confuse" people can't possibly be the reason.
Any console cant offer too much. It was rightly pointed out that the consoles tend to grow into themselves. It wont be long before even the PS3 becomes outdated.
Your new playstation 3 add-on harddrive/toaster combo. The toaster features a custom version of ToasterLinux. But, thats not all. Your toaster will allow you to play GAMES from your toast cartridges.
I don't think there has ever been such tremendous fanboyism associated with a gaming console as there is with Sony. I think they could sell it at $700 and still outsell Microsoft's offering.
I'm not saying it's gonna be a bad box - it's probably going to be great, which the Playstation 2 NEVER was. I'm saying that worrying that their aim is too broad just seems a little silly. I'm also saying that many Sony fans will pay too much for their console just because it's Sony.
Yes I know that history is littered with failed console companies, and that todays leader is tomorrows gutter-dweller, but Sony has some kind of weird critical mass going in terms of market dominance and mindshare. Couple that with a general distrust of Microsoft, and the resulting scenario is such that I wouldn't worry about anything mentioned in the article.
Consumers don't want to be confused by products who do more than one thing. Just look at the abysmal PC market (including Macs). I mean, once people find out that these things surf the internet AND send e-mail AND play music AND play movies AND play games AND store/edit images AND let them store all the information they can think to store, they'll run screaming to the other side of the store and buy a notepad, ledger, calculator, typewriter, DVD player, WebTV console, CD player, and game console. These computer things will never catch on.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
When I purchased my PS2 I did so primarily to use it as a dvd player. Having all the living room devices in one box is very attractive to me. My only concern with PS3 is that it is highly likely Sony's PS3 DRM will be very aggressive and so limit the devices useability that its feature set will be largely crippled. .... DRM is the enemy.
as long as they work. Thats the biggest concern. The more complex you make an item, the more potential problems you introduce.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Sony stated that the PS3 will not have backwards compatability.
Many Bothans died to bring you this sig.
Does anyone remember the 3D0?
The only people complaining about a product having _too many_ features are the marketing droids that can't figure out a slogan.
"It washes the dishes AND plays GTA....wait that doesnt sound right"
The one thing they must do is make is so that all PS2 games will work on it. Mos PS-x games need to work as well. This was something they did well with PS2. PS2 game consoles are starting to wear out so of course when ours does I will buy a PS2, if it is truly compatible. If not, I will buy a PS2 somewhere because it is much cheaper.
The other features will become important over time and even desirable by adults. Only time will tell.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Some people refuse to get those DVD-VCR combos because they don't want to have to replace both if one breaks (besides, it seems the combos are often low quality). It'd be different if it really cost the same as buying a vcr alone (and similar quality). So that's what it will come down to. How high a quality are these extra components and how low a price will the overall system cost. I've heard from others who own PS2s that they didn't use it as a dvd player. It just wasn't as good as the dvd player they already owned. Not to mention they didn't want to wear down the drive so that it didn't play games anymore. So IF added dvd capability brought the cost up and didn't give any added benefits to the majority of people who bought it, then it was "too much". I actually don't think that was the case with the PS2 but it could quite possibly be true with some of the features of the PS3.
We've already had this technology for years in the form of an original Xbox with XBMC. It only costs 85$ to get a used Xbox nowadays. I'm not going to pay $400 for a device that does the same thing, only plays slightly better games. The question is why hasn't anyone released a console that does this out of the box? Why do we have to hack an Xbox to unlock its potential?
To many features? Think about it, even if the PS3 sells for $400, a Blue-ray DVD player sells now for $1400, trust me it's worth every penny.
does everything an iPod-with-video does, better, but lacks more HD space (4 versus 60)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Business Week says it. oh
okay so it must be right.
look an analyist said something!!! lets all pay attention!
Yeah, because I know I really hate when a product has more functionality than I expected when I bought it. Seriously - do people write stuff just to hear themselves type? (rhetorical question!)
It really seems like Ive seen that before. Except that Sony has extra cash to support the console, and 3DO didnt.
But am I the only person that would assume a higher probability of a marketing analyst being right than a bunch of assorted, anonymous, commenters when it comes to predicting the effects of a products attributes on sales? Nothing against the discussion, and not to call anybodys point here invalid (there have been some really insightful ones made), but this fella kinda studies these things for a living - he puts bread on the table by being right about this stuff with some measurable degree of consistency.
On the other hand, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about; it is entirely possible that he has no experience, or just draws his conclusions from throwing darts blindfolded at a "conclusion board" (a thing I just made up, consisting of a large round corkboard covered in possible analyses of a products performance)... I haven't seen the research he's done, and wouldn't be able to interpret it (any better than the average person) if I had...
I'm not sure whether you're just trolling or not. PC game sales have been in a steady decline over the past 5 years, while console games and sales have been doing the exact opposite- sales of console games totally eclipse PC games and the gap is only getting larger.
The PC and the console appeal to two totally different audiences. Neither one is going anywhere any time in the forseeable future, but the PC does not appeal to the kind of consumer that desires easy to use, plug and play gaming. It's great that all the "hardcore" players you know are migrating to PC- but its a fair bet that none of those gamers enjoy Racers, Fighters, Rhythm Games, JRPG's, Beat em ups, or any of the other genres that exist on consoles that the PC does terribly.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Sony stated that the PS3 will not have backwards compatability.
You're wrong.
From Wikipedia
Granted, it could be wrong, but it matches with the most recent stuff I've heard various other places.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
What the box will be capable of is one thing, how it will be marketed to consumers is yet another. Since it's not for sale right now, there's no marketing...so all conversation about the PS3 is either speculation or capability-driven.
Once the PS3 is ready for sale you'll see ads and press releases that are focused on 1-3 key selling points that will make it easy for consumers to decide on purchasing one.
If I had to guess those will be:
And bullet #3 is why this is all a bunch of garbage...just like "iPod-killer" articles. If the buying masses are predisposed to a brand (PlayStation) and/or they have made a significant time, money and emotional investment in something already (existing game libraries already purchased) there is only one logical choice to make.
From my experience: Analyst: a fiction writer who doesn't work in your industry
I wish people would stop buying these crappy little boxes. These consoles have really eroded the PC Gaming market. Why buy such a device when they are completly inferior to a PC (with a good 3D card) in every way.
If you have nothing better to do with your time than play games, then I guess you have nothing better to do with your money that waste it on a unit that can never be expanded or upgraded and is a deadend the moment you buy it. Your stuck shuffling CD/DVD removable media, which is prone to scratching and inferior to harddrives in every way, you can't download any games, you can't do any input into the unit short of a game keypad with a couple of buttons.
Kids should be outside in the sunshine playing ball and tag and riding their bicycle. Not glued to a mind numbing tv screen engaging in simulated violence where their only input into the world is a 12 button controller.
Sony is trying to make the PS3 an all-in-one entertainment device, and this could ruin the PS3.
I don't need it to be a DVR, media server and game console as well as an outlet for online music and video sales.
The DVR feature will be a novelty as it won't integrate with Digital Cable networks allowing for seamless scheduling of HDTV content and digital channels. I rent a PVR from the cable company that allows me to record entire seasons of a show in High Def at the touch of a button, the PS3 won't be able to do that because the Cable companies are keeping digital cable proprietary. Even if the PS3 contains a cable card slot (sony is putting them in everything these days) I don't believe there is one cable company yet that is using Cable cards to allow access to proprietary information. The DVR feature of the PS3 will simply not be used.
While photo, music, and video playback in ANY device that has a CPU in it is a give in, do we really need ANOTHER device in the house that does it all? If you own a video iPod, you have it, most CD players support MP3 playback, most portable DVD players do it all as well, my PSP does. My DVD player supports DIVX movies, photo and music playback. My PC does it all and so does my Mac. Sony is going after a market already saturated by dozens of devices that builds these features in by default, simply because it is easy to implement. You need about $5 worth of electronics to support photos and music $10 to support video in todays consumer electronics. Like The PS2 DVD playback, when the market is already saturated with $30 DVD players, the feature simply won't be used as much as Sony thinks it would be.
Make the PS3 an excellent gaming device, period. If you can add DVR, media server, and other feature FREE OF CHARGE, then do so. But I would prever a $250 PS3 without a hard drive if it didn't support DVR or a media server features if it just played games well. I already have a dozen features which do it all, I don't need another when all I want is a gaming device.
This is why I am leaning towards the Nintendo Revolution as my next gen game console of choice. I like Nintendo's decision to make it all about the games. By offering novel game play features and extensive backlibrary support, I WILL stand in line to buy the Revolution. I will wait and see how the Xbox260 and PS3 fair.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
I remember hearing this same argument way back when the PS2 was coming out. "The PS2 is doing too much because it has a DVD player." Which, if I recall correctly, was why Nintendo didn't have a DVD player on the Gamecube.
Who really complains about too many features? So long as the price is good and it has all the neccesary basic features, added features are icing on the cake.
The PSP isn't as popular as any of it's game boy cousins, which only do 1 thing.
AFAIK, the recent Game Boys have wifi and can connect to the internet and do all sorts of things. And what about being backwards compatible? That's a bonus over the PSP. Besides, when it comes to portable systems, the key selling points are different than set-top boxes. Usually people only care about a limited set of functions. With the iPod, 4 buttons and I can get the job done without looking at it or even taking it out of my pocket, compared to a PDA. I don't have to learn gestures or worry about security or having personal information stolen if I lose my iPod. I don't need a combination cell phone/camera/mp3-player while I'm at the gym, so I got an iPod - plus the hype helped sell me on it. Which brings me to another important point.
Nintendo had the jump on Sony. Nintendo has had a portable system since I was like 10 years old. Sony *just* entered the market. UMD movies are only starting to appear in any quantities that matter now. Terrible comparison if you ask me.
When it comes to the PS3, I hope it will have a vast array of features. If it supported this, I'd love to use it for my DVR and cable box even, so I could have 1 controller and have more free space in my entertainment center to store other items.
Often, people would rather buy multiple devices that do one thing well than buy 1 item that does everything. Why do people own toasters when you can toast your bread in the oven?
Sure, everybody buys specialized products, but they also buy very generalized products. Again, your example is skewed. Who has a toaster oven, but no oven? An oven can do the same job as a toaster oven, it's just that the toaster oven happens to do it a little quicker and efficiently, but everybody still has ovens.
I plan on getting a PS3 and will revel in its efficent multifunctionality to the fullest, but I'll prefer more specialized things in my other rooms on my other TV's for the sake of cost and simplicity rather than buying 6 PS3s.
On a side note, when it comes to electronics, one of the major reasons serious consumers buy specialized things is because it's less of a replacement cost if something goes bad. If I have a DVR/VHS/surround receiver/amp combo unit for $500 and one of those features dies out of waranty, you are stuck spending $500 again. If it's separate components, you only have a minimal cost incurred.
But we're talking about a Sony game system, so there's 2 things that we can be sure of:
- It's going to be replaced by the PlayStation 4 in about 3-4 years, and
- The servos in the optical drive are going to wear out by that time, just like on so many PS1s and PS2s... ah, the beauty of planned obsolescence
Just my thoughts.
-@
Move all sig!
You mean my Playstation does more than play CD's? That's all I bought it for... The longstanding comparison/rivalry between the PC and the console in terms of gaming device has always boiled down to this difference: a computer is designed for expandability and upgradability, a console system is designed for compatibility. A quick Google search will give you countless cases of people needing technical support to get games to work on their pc, from the old days of DOS boot disks to DirectX upgrades to faster video cards and more RAM. My opinion: An average pc is a multifunctional device, a console is a gaming device. When you buy a console system, it should be able to handle every game that will ever be released for it without having to upgrade. Let a CD player play CD's, a telephone make phone calls, and a console gaming system play games. Anything they do extra should be an added feature, not a requirement. There are console gamers and there are pc gamers. To blur the lines between console systems and pc's would be taking away features that people prefer over the alternative. What console gamer wants to find out they can't play the latest video games because you need to buy the new Sony/Intel processor? If you want a flat price for a system that's guaranteed to work with the games released for it, you want a console. If you want to add to your system to make it compatible with mostly everything released, then you want a PC.
I remember hearing about this a couple years ago... never saw it released in the U.S., but it sounds like the idea (rightfully) didn't die...
PSX
PSX
Ramen
Go research the blu-ray DVDs and tell me you can get them for $50
If they let me use a keyboard and mouse to play FPS and RTS games on it, then I don't need a wintendo anymore.
It would be difficult to sell PS3 initially as anything other than a game machine
r sonsinterview.html it doesn't seem like they are in a rush to get out budget models because they claim early adaptors want über gear(they even claim sony's early $1000 DVD players outsold their $500 players).
That's a bold statement if i ever saw one. The PS3 vill probably be priced O($500), and judging from what I've read about the upcoming first generation Bluray movie players, they aren't going to be cheap. Pioneer's have a $1800 player set to debut around march, and judging from this interview http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ces2006/pa
anyhoo, back to the subject. I'm willing to bet good money that a ½-decent salesman will be able to sell a 500$ PS3 to people with HDTVs who want a HD alternative to their regular DVDs if the alternative movie-only players are x2 the price.
Convergence has to be done right in order not to suck. Just because it's done bad most of the time doesn't mean that convergence sucks. It's the way it's implemented.
The big difference between Consoles and Computers nowadays is that the OS and core functions on one are on the hardware and are on volatile and modifiable storage on the other.
Build one size fits all device that doesn't suck and boots into the GUI in 3 seconds flat and you've got a sale on your hands. No matter how many features it's got.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I bought the PS2 for the feature of playing games and as a DVD player.
I held off on buying a DVD player because I knew the PS2 would have it. When the price came down I recommended my friends who didn't have a DVD player to buy a PS2...it only cost slightly more than a DVD player...plus...bonus, it plays games too.
I'd buy a PS3 except I paid about $1k to have my Xbox modded and it does more than I'll be able to take advantage of for a long time.
The only problem I see with the PS3 (and Xbox360) having 'too many features' is that in many cases these are -redundant- featuresets for certain users. If I already have a multifunction device (with which to watch videos, listen to MP3s, go online, download stuff, chat with people) I might have a harder time justifying the purchase of a PS3 if it costs a lot more simply -because- of all these added features. Since I do already have this multifunction device (a computer) it'll be hard to foot the likely large purchase price of the PS3. If a critical mass of unique PS3 games are released (games like Rez, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Disgaea, Katamari) and the price drops, it'll be a much more appealing purchase.
This is one of the reasons I'm looking forward to the Revolution, as it has very, very little feature overlap with anything I currently own, and the price will likely be very acceptable because it will do just one thing -- play games -- and games that are exclusive to the Revolution.
That said, a lot of people don't have a modern computer, and for them, the PS3/360 'many features' will be great.
To be frank, console games appeal to the generally non-technical. Everyone that I know that is into technology goes the PC route. I'm just speaking based on my experience. Not trying to troll... I just disagree based on the people that I know. Plus, consider how much easier and widespread PC software pirating/copying is than console pirating. I'm willing to bet that if you included PC pirate gamers the numbers would reverse.
This just in! 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.
I think they forgot that Sony has a GANG of people who are brand loyal. Also, Sony has always been first to release there console product before the holidays hit. They learned a leason from the Xbox though. This time they sat back for the Xbox 360. Let MS take the lead to see what the 360 has to offer and study how the market responds. Just you watch. Sony will have no probs at all. It'll be like Christmas but in April or when ever the heck they are gonna release PS3. I can't wait. Personally, I just want graphics, sounds and game play. All the extras involved are just......extras.
He makes a very important point about the nature of price, supply, and demand. If only people would understand that this applies to other commodities as well, we'd realize that there's no such thing as "price gouging." There is only "the price rises to market clearing levels." The secondary market for low-priced but 'rationed' consoles proves that.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Don't make me laugh now... the only company that would do something like that is Nintendo. The only thing they dominate is the handheld market and it's mostly because they've been the juggernaut there for twenty years or so and Sony has just entered teh market.
The ps2 was one of the cheapest consoles (err the last generation was) but even then it was $300. Most older consoles including the psone came near $400-$500.
This monster will be about the price of the higher end xbox and it will have more features. I never buy consoles @ launch but i'll be very damned happy to have a $200 dollar next gen console with a blu-ray hddvd player.
Hmmm... Pie...
There are a couple applications that PS3 will absolutely blaze at as a media center type machine, like decoding new formats and transcoding HD content. The PS3's 7 CELL processors will function as a much faster than realtime encoder for mpeg4 and any format in the forseeable future. DVR like functions and transcoding for portable device should become a much less painful affair.
Also picture the CELL behind sound processing for home theater. Audiophiles who are toying w/ DSPs know what I am talking about, they can be used to compensate for less than ideal room conditions, like excessive echoing from hard floors/walls and weird speaker placement, among other things. If PS3 integrated a microphone into a remote, it could automate many of these corrections. The same tech can also process sound in real time to make it sound plausible that it is coming from say, underwater, behind a thick steel plate, or inside a cave.
As far as games go, while programmers may have trouble parallelizing specific operations, there are many parallelizable events within a game environment. It will only be a matter of time till those CELLs are used for creative effects no other system can match. PS2 only had few titles like Kingdom Hearts that used it's emotion engine fully, but I have a hunch this time it will be different.
The CELL will also allow for some new control methods, as we've never had anything capable of analyzing raw sensor data at the rate PS3 will be able too. Couple video analysis with an accelerometer/gyro based controller and the possiblities really expand. How about an active EEG helmet so the PS3 can sense your fear?
Applications that used to cost an order of magnitude more because of the expensive, low volume DSPs used, as in RADAR, will be possible, because the sensors themselves don't represent much of the cost. Speaking of radio waves, I see no reason why the CELL couldn't function as the basis for a software radio, allowing it to analyze and emulate many wireless standards.
I wouldn't underestimate CELL, it can do many things that used to require specialized hardware to be built, with just software upgrades.
Ok. Let me get this strait.
It can run ps3 games, and play movies.
Aaaccckkk! My head is aching. How is that possible!
It can also run ps2 games? That can't be possible! They you have to have an entire PS2 bolted onto the box. I think my head is ablout to explode! This is getting too complicated.
OH NO! It can also play PS1 games. I'M SO CONFUSED! Does it play PS1 games, or does it play PS2 games, or does it play PS3 games, or does it play movies? It can't possibly do more than one of them! My head is about to explode!
It has a little light on the front when you turn it on! How can it possibly turn on a light, and play games? That is impossible! Nobody could possibly do that! That would almost be like a VCR (Very Confusing Red-lights) that did something other than blink 12:00!
No more, I beg of you! Keep that infernal monster away from me!
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
4 minutes load times??? Unacceptable.
from: http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/2100/could_the_p laystation
and purchase of the rights to the song "Am I Blue".
... I'm Blue I'm a dee double di ..."
Seriously, to get a comparable xBox360 with those features, you have to shell out the same amount of cash and then sign away your rights as well.
Or they could use the song "Blue" by um, the euro band where the lyrics are "... live in a blue house, with a blue window,
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
a large amount of xbox360's non-game hype has been involving its windows media center connectivity etc. ps3 is going to let you store photos, music, tv shows etc on its massive hard drive! yay!
XBMC has that covered, and then some. if you want to browse the internet, just install xbox-linux and use firefox
one of nintendo's big pitches has been the ability to play all those old games without having to blow on the cartridges, jiggle the game, and hold the reset button down, you can easily find ports of all your favorite emulators for the xbox, so that's covered.
and all that's going to cost you is 150 for the old box, 20-30 for a modchip.
But I'm not sure that this results in it being a better game machine.
For instance: GBA got backward compatibility, which is good. However, it's also tempting to blame the GBA's poor resolution and limited sound capabilities on the fact that, as a cost-cutting measure, backward compatibility was implemented with similar hardware.
As another example: The Commodore 64 was a great home gaming machine back in 1982-1984. It was also perhaps a decent productivity machine. Then the Commodore 128 came out and it had three goals: backward compatibility, better productivity features, and CP/M.
The result was a machine with a mostly-unused second CPU, a second display system used for EGA-style computer monitors, and a mostly-compatible C64 mode, with not a single enhancement to the game machine functionality that had contributed so much to the C64's success.
I wouldn't say the analogy's perfect, but it reflects my concern that as more features are added to a gaming machine, it starts to lose its focus. In retrospect I'd have gladly given up PS2's (unreliable) DVD playback capability and its backward compatibility in exchange for things like four-player controller ports built in, or a little more muscle for actual playing of games.
---GEC
I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
Ok so people buy a $500 dollar ps3 to watch blue ray discs.To watch movies and all that other stuff. They throw out their vcrs,dvd players and the like. Now Sony's famous quality kicks in and their $500 dolalr appliance that they threw everything else out for breaks and they need to spend another $500 dolalrs for a new one? That wouldnt make sony look very good. People keep saying Nintendo is Taking a huge bet. Well Sony is taking an even bigger bet. They arent doing very well financially. If the PS3 flops it could mean the end of Sony not by money but byt brandname. The ps3 could tarnish the brand name of Sony. IF you were a parent and you saw a $150 dollar console that you could play, a $300 dolalr xbox 360 or a $500 dolalr ps3 wich one would you buy? One of the first two right? From what i see i would be able to buy a Rev and a 360 for the price of a ps3
Wow, I knoe you all are just trying to be smart asses, but it isn't that hard.
You and I may buy it as a Game console which can play Blu-Ray, Music, Video, Etc.
But they're also marketing it as a Blu-Ray player, which $400+ is too much for that alone.
And they're also marketing it as a Media Center, but definately isn't the best one.
And they're also marketing it as this, and as that, and as this, and it doesn't really have more than 1 niche.
MS realised that with the 360, in that extra features are nice, but people will still buy it to play games. Everything else is just another bell or whistle.
You must be new here.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Of course console games appeal to the non technical. The non technical comprise the VAST majority of the people out there. These people, the same ones that make madden and GTA the top selling games every year by a long shot, just want their games to work.
Reading slashdot all day with likeminded individuals its easy to lose sight of the fact that we (the technically minded) are vastly outnumbered. Piracy is more of a concern on PC's than consoles, but as of 2004 Console titles generated about 6.6 billion in sales vs 1.1 Billion on the PC. (source: NPD) Piracy is a problem but not enough to make a significant difference here.
The only reason I'd want all things in one box is if I was slimming down my possessions and living the lean, green life in a little house somewhere.
But that's not my goal. Like many folks, I already have a DVD player/home theater system for movies. I also have a PS2 and two computers that can play movies but I never use them for that. The DVD player can play CDs as well, so i got rid of my expired stereo system. I can also play CDs on my PS2, computers, iPod, and cars. MP3s? DVD player, iPod, cars, computers, TiVo, etc.
My point is that many people already have these things and throwing them into the PS3 is just going to jack the price. Honestly, $400 is a lot to pay for a game system packed with features when I already have 5-6 machines that can do the same already.
And there's this point. I prefer to move about during the day. Take a Saturday with no plans. I dont want to play games, watch TV, listen to music, order movies, and so on all while sitting in the same place. It's nice to move from place to place and get some variety. Rest your eyes, change the scene.
Like most everyone here, I don't find their statements confusing at all. In fact, even before many of these devices started integrating certain services in one device (game platform, DVR, browser, mail agent, etc.), I had already been pining for one. I say it's about time and right now I'd rather prefer a solution from Sony than Microsoft.
Agreed. Look at the Amiga CDTV, for instance. It was basically a games console + media center, but no one was remotely ready for it back in 1991.
The PS2 launch price was $299.99. It was never $400.
Exactly 2 things are responsible for the GameCube's less than stellar performance and Nintendo is NOT one of them.
1. 3rd parties simply _chose_ not to develop games in spite of all the reasons to do so. They weren't hard to port (afterall, PS2 and XBox shared) and they weren't of less ptential than if they'd been on XBox (it was a dead heat here but XBox was killed in Japan). Say it with me everyone: Everyone but EA was too stupid or too much of a prick to even acknowledge those of us who sided with Nintendo in spite of their bending over backwards for them. Really, what more do you want, you got optical media, you got network play, you got save cards, and you got every other innovation Nintendo's stuffed into their ultra-reliable machine?!
2. Consumers and "journalists" chose to spin everything against Nintendo. It's a cache22....Nintendo ends up a kiddy system becuase you say it's a kiddy system because it's a kiddy system because you say it's a kiddy system. Do something productive: BUY some games instead of moaning till we're sick of your fatalism. Journalists, Jesus, where do I even start? It's a fucking miracle we're even aware of a 3rd console cause I'll be damned if I ever see more than 2 or 3 pages devoted to it in a magazine. God help you if you want to know what's out on GameBoy these days.
I'm sorry, but to assume it'll cost between $350 and $400 seems a little ignorant. I'd expect it to launch for $500 most likely.
Go here for teh [sic] funny.
DRM will play a role as well. The trick is having a system that can be cracked, but make sure that it is a pain to do, so that joe six pack won't do it themselves. People often buy systems that they can get media from their friends on. While I don't know a single person that doesn't have at least one piece of "pirated" software on their Windows PC, The only PCs I have also seen very few with only "pirated" software.
You can't sell software if people don't have the hardware. You just have to make it difficult enough that a lot of people won't bother. That way you get market share and mind share, while at the same time keeping sales of your software up.
This may seem off topic but I feel it's very relevant.
(keep in mind the only console I own is an original grey box Nintendo "NES")
I've heard debates as to if it is worth it for Sony to include a Blue-Ray disk drive or not.
namely questioning the cost effectiveness and such.
One question I had when I heard that the xbox 360 was only including a regular DVD drive and not a HD-DVD or Blue-Ray drive is this:
"Next Gen Games" are higher quality (at least capable of being higher quality graphically speaking) because of CPU/GPU/memory/etc... upgrades. But if the storage medium is the same size how do they pack higher quality textures, more data onto the disk without sacrificing actual game content. (maybe a game that should have been 8 levels is now only 4, those 4 look great but still less playable content)
Sony seems to be resolving this issue by having blue-ray drives in their PS3's
I'm not trying to start a PS is better or xbox is better debate, but as someone who might think of upgrading to a "next gen" console. what's everyone's advice?
it seems I can't find an xbox360 any-ways, so should I just save my $$ for a PS3, or is the storage size of the disks going to be relatively inconsequential and xbo360 will be "good enough" supposing I can find one before the PS3 is released.
Either way I'd be buying new games since I don't own a PSx or a xbox.
what would be the best for a family situation as well, for a system that has fun games for all of us (kids and Adults).
I already have a DVR and a DVD player and all that other stuff. I just want the best games possible in a console.
Lets see, it plays video games, PSP format videos, MP3 audio, and if you know the nessesary hoops to leap through, you can make your own videos, and download emulators to run everything from Atari 2600 games up through Gameboy Advance.
Most consumers who buy the PSP know of the games, movies and mp3 capabilities. Are they confused by it? Hardly.
So how does adding two extra features to the PS3 make things any different?
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Somewhere in Bentonville, Arkansas, in a little office along Wal-Mart's "corridor of doom", a very uncomfortable Microsoft VP is probably trying to keep Wal-Mart from cutting down their shelf space. Microsoft has already committed what Bentonville views as a major sin - not shipping on schedule. A Wal-Mart buyer is probably going to tell them to cut the price. And that's "tell", not "ask". That's how Wal-Mart works.
In general, consumer electronics priced below $200 sells well, but there's considerable price resistance above the $200 point. This is a basic truth in retail. All the previous consoles had to drop below $200 before they really sold well. We'll probably see that in this round.
The PS3 is not likely to launch successfully in the $400-$500 range. Nor is a $1000 Blu-ray player going to sell in volume. DVD players are at $29.95, after all. We'll see $200 within a year after launch. By which time flat-panel TVs will break $200, too.
Microsoft has quietly announced a modest price cut on the XBox 360 in Taiwan.
So, for 2007, look for the $199 XBox 360, the $199 PS3, the $199 Blu-ray player, and the $199 TV you can hang on the wall.
There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an idiot. This box is just far to much for the average consumer to understand. SONY has done a terrible job evangelizing the future of home entertainment to the average consumer.
Compare this to the XBox 360 which includes a Media Center Extender, which is a useless dependent feature unless you also own a Media Center PC. If it's entertainment that can be connected to and reasonably accessed from your television I think consumers will get it.
After the rootkit fiasco how can anyone trust this company? I will never do business with SONY again! They have never even admited they did anything wrong. Show your displeasure by voting with your pocket book.
The only hole in your argument is that $200 is *not* the magic price point for consoles. The Ps2 Launched at $299 and stayed that way, selling like mad, until May 2002 almost 2 YEARS later. It's all about the software and if compelling titles are available.
It seems like Sony have realised that Microsoft have stepped their game up with the Xbox360 and now they must bring their product up in equivalent, wanting to destroy the MS product in the marketplace like they did with the original Xbox. It looks like it will be much harder to have such dominance this time around for Sony, it will be interesting to see if they will be able to pull it off.
Business Voyeur
That's interesting, I bought my first DVD player (a Sony) around when the PS2 was released and I spent $250, and it was the most expensive one at the store.
When I had problems with it and had to replace it a few years later, I bought a PS2 but returned it the next day, the fan was too loud for me to enjoy movies with it.
Some people dont know gamers.. Most of us like to play games and will be able to do anything with any console they throw at us..
In fact, we've pushed consoles to what they were not made to do.. so why some people ps3 think it will do too much? Ignorance of the ignorant.
The PS2 had the advantage of launching during the dot-com boom. Note that after a while, the price was below $200, and there was no "mid life kicker" (a PS2.5, say) to push the price back up.
I'm a buy-side analyst (that is, someone who consumes the research of the "sell-side" analysts and decides where my firm should allocate money based on their and my own research) and I have to say that it doesn't really work like that. There are a few "gloom and doom" types who always seem negative on everything, but by and large most analysts are too positive.
/.
I would actually greatly prefer it if sell-side analysts were always saying things would fail for specific reasons. I generally find research to be much more valuable if it gives detailed arguments why a stock I'm interested might *not* work. If I'm interested, I probably already know why it might work. But people like to have their preconceptions confirmed, which is why most analysts are positive on everything. Sell-siders are compensated as much (usually more) based on client satisfaction as on actual prediction performance.
Now, some of these guys really don't know what they're talking about. But they usually do provide you with pretty good info, and they usually do have good access to management. Don't pay too much attention to their recommendations, which are disproportionately positive--but do pay attention to their arguments and data. Any given research report tends to have 1-3 "stories" that the analyst views as key to the future performance of the stock.
I don't directly cover Sony, but I do know that the performance of the PS3 is undoubtedly the #1 story in the coming years. The quote about "too many features" sounds like it might be taken out of context, but clearly that's *not* the main factor in whether the PS3 will succeed. The best research I've seen views the main factors in the PS3 story as (1) whether developers will find the 360 significantly preferable to the PS3 (the PS3 is getting a late start this time, and if it's too much more difficult to write for than the 360 then the games will be late or non-existent), and (2) whether Sony can get an online service comparable to Live up in a timely and affordable way.
Then there is that blu-ray gambit, and the fact that Sony is still recovering from the DRM music problem, and that there other divisions aren't very profitable and there might be infighting in corporate. With all that in mind, I don't see caution about Sony's stock as a bad thing.
But if you have any special insight into the PS3 before the demos, post it! I'm personally amazed that more IT (and in this case, Consumer Discretionary) analysts don't read
"Someone somewhere had to wear pants for the first time. The meek and indecisive do not change our world." -Montville
Sony are making their PlayStation 3 too good.
We must boycott Sony immediately for this outrage!
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
It might still, sometimes. But they have to disclose banking relationships now, as well as personal holdings and past recommendation performance. It really has gotten a lot better since the new regulations after the bubble burst and the I-banking scandals.
But you've got to consume research intelligently. Look at more than just the recommendation, and look in more than just one place, then use your brain to figure out what makes sense. And if you can't read a financial statement, you probably shouldn't even bother--index funds and ETFs are cheaper and give a better average return (after trading costs) anyway.
"Someone somewhere had to wear pants for the first time. The meek and indecisive do not change our world." -Montville
The console industry is not the PC industry. The Dot Com boom had nothing to do with the sales of the Ps2. Take a look at console sales over the past 10 years. its a steady incline- there is no "boom" or "bust" associated with the dot com bubble.
The cost of the console went down in price because production was refined to the point where they could produce the console at that cost and maintain a profit. The Emotion Engine and Graphics synthesizers were originally 2 separate chips, they scaled them down in size to reduce cost, then eventually engineered a single chip to do the work of both.
Crack open 5 random Ps2's produced anywhere from 2000-2005 and they'll all look different. The console was under constant revision to improve the manufacturing process and make it cheaper to make.
All consoles drop in price given a long enough timeline, without exception. There has NEVER been a playstation.5, an NES.5, A SNES.5, A Genesis.5 or any other console revision produced "to push the price back up" because the console industry does not work that way.
My point is that many people already have these things and throwing them into the PS3 is just going to jack the price. Honestly, $400 is a lot to pay for a game system packed with features when I already have 5-6 machines that can do the same already.
I must admit you make a very valid point. $400 for a game machine is a bit excessive. But you are talking to someone who is willing to fork over $400+ for a new video card when I get my tax returns. I am also planing to pick up the Xbox 360, when they become available again, and of course I will be getting a PS3 but I may just wait for the price to drop.
I also agree that it would be stpid to watch DVDs and listen to CDs on the console when I have a perfectly good Home theater system, BUT if you look at Xbox, you were able to burn CDs onto the hard drive and use them as ingame soundtracks. THAT WAS FREAKING BRILLIANT. Also IMO all consoles should come equiped with network adapters, as more people are playing multiplayer games with others around the world.
My feeling is that I have a COMPUTER to do all the other crap. As well as get virus, spam, blue screen, lockup.
My game CONSOLE is just that. Put a disk in play game. Don't neeed to worry about anything else but just playing.
Easy concept. Stick with it or why not just by a computer?
my 2cents
Faster, Cheaper, Secure. Pick 2
Anyone who remembers clipping a wire inside the Apple ][+ to enable the upper-lower character set chip will recognize an issue here: Function drives form, even without the Bauhaus proselytizing to drive the point home. Just as Microsoft became the tail that wagged the IBM PC dog (and Apple churned out Apple /// and SOS for desktop publishing), some bright bunch of yahoos you never heard of is going to capture the game market because they build the stuff that plays the games. All games, every game ever written, now, then and tomorrow.
If China succeeds in re-educating Kim Jong Il, I could even bet on the North Koreans to do that little job. But it's going to be somebody.
``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
I don't see PC games, themselves, as being any more technically minded than console games. I don't play games for what system it's on, I play a game for the game itself. Sure, setting up a gaming PC may require more technical sophistication, but at the end of the day, all I see on PCs are fairly brainless games that are more based on reflexes and repetative tasks than intelligence, problem solving, and technical sophistication. Obviously, I'm generalizing, things like The Sims, Darwinia, and Sim City do require a lot of ongoing problem solving, but most of the time, when I think of PC games, I think of generic first person shooters, which, IMO are the least technically minded GAMES on the market.
I read an interesting psychology book, recently, called "Everything Bad for you is Good", which outlines the thinking patterns in various types of games. At one point, it outlines 5 minutes in the mind of someone playing Zelda: Wind Waker, and demonstrates that the game requires a fairly sophisticated level of problem solving. This is Wind Waker we're talking about, the game hailed by most "hardcore gamers" to be childsplay, just before they go off to their gaming PCs to blow things up in half-life.
I think we need to redefine what we mean by "hardcore gamers" and the "technically minded". I used to think of "hardcore gamers" as people who wanted to challange themselves to the latest, and most difficult games... now, I more associate it with the mindlessness of hardcore porn. Most console gamers I've ever known in my life were extremely intelligent, technically minded people, people who would rather spend their lives problem solving in a game, then trouble shooting a computer just to play the game!
I dunno, but I've heard the term "hardcore gamer" used to refer to a lot of different types of people.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
But extra features are not what hampers PSP adoption - it's system compromises that are made to work the features in (like a large form factor) that make it less desireable.
In the case of the PS3, form factor is not as much of an issue (as long as it's a reasonable size). Really cost will be the mian factor. As long as it doesn't cost too much, and meets the core need (play games) well, then even a lot of other extra features will not really hurt it - they may just be a slight waste of time for Sony.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I would think that removing the AC to get rid of some dead weight, thus improving the performance of the vehicle, would be considered similar to "adding more power."
People that are really into cars make a huge distinction between adding power (improving output of the engine) and improving performance (removing deadweight). They sound similar but are very different things.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I couldn't have said it better myself. It always pisses me off to hear people talk about Nintendo as kiddy games. I'm starting to associate "kiddy" with "fun", which is exactly what I expect from a good game. It's starting to feel like, "if you're having fun, you're just being immature"... isn't "to have fun" the whole point of gaming in the first place?
Let's look at the gaming industry in comparison to the film industry, of which there is a lot of parallel. The average XBox or PS2 game is pretty much on the level of a summer action blockbuster... not too intelligent, not too difficult to digest, fairly unsophisticated dialog, one dimensional characterisation. At best, you get something on the level of The Matrix, which, though for a considerable part of the population is deemed "intelligent", in the grand scheme is pretty simplistic.
The closest comparison I can draw from the average Nintendo game is Pixar or oldschool Disney. Sure, it's animated, it values innocence, but if you look underneith the innocent veniere, the average Pixar movie has a whole lot more depth and sophisticated than the average summer blockbuster. I mean, really, are people actually claiming that Stealth is more mature than Finding Nemo?
I've always associated Pixar and Nintendo with innocence with a sense of sophistication. The average summer blockbuster just serves to make pre-teens suddenly think they're mature because they're watching someone's head get split open. It's all an illusion. I'd say that the average Pixar film is FAR more mature than the average hollywood bluckbuster. In fact, if you look at the REAL demographics outlined by movie sales, the average age of a Pixar audience member is a lot older than the average age of a bluckbuster's audience (which comprises primarilly of teenagers).
Now, until we have games that parallel movies like Good Night & Good Luck or Capote, I wouldn't talk about sophistication and maturity OUTSIDE of the context of the Pixar-esque Nintendo genre. I'd like to see some real world stastics, but I'm going to guess that the average age of GTA players is around 13, and the average age of Zelda players is somewhere around 19. Innocence is looked down upon by the 11-17 year old crowd, which, unfortunately, makes up a substantial part of the gaming demographic.
Which, yeah, btw, when are we going to get a video game that's on the level of sophistication as a good indie movie?
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Offtopic... but:
"Are you out of you mind! My mom wanted to pick my wife! I wouldn't let my mom pick my clothes! Imagine my mom walking in with this girl:
(in a thick Indian accent) 'I know she's a little big now, but you'll grow into her!'"
...But there's one thing sony could do to annihilate the competition.
They killed the Saturn with one sentence : "It's 100$ cheaper".
They killed the competition with : "It plays DVDs".
Even though I deem it not feasible, they have been known to surprise people.
My greatest fear about their show at next E3, would be "IT PLAYS DIVX".
Fucking scary...
Gee, a games console that connects to the 'net and can be used as a stripped-down PC? Brilliant! It worked out so well before, after all.
The standalone BluRay players are predicted to cost upward of $1000. The PS3 will be less than half that. I'll bet you'll be seeing a lot of PS3s snatched up to be part of a home theater system by people who want the next-gen film experience on the cheap. Oh, and it can play games too.
Hey, that's why I'll be buying one.
LOL, I first saw between 300 and 400 as meaning the 360 fits between xbox 300 and xbox 400. My bad.
---
In spite of CUTTING EDGE technology, up till now ALL game boxs seems to fizzile from day of market entry.I'll believe it if holds audiance for year, yet so far odds are 0% console, 100% PC. Signed:PHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.
WINDOWS XP Service Pack -X- 396 mb. http://www.geocities.com/tsvondrashekmd/WASHINGTO