Analysts React to PS3 Delay

GameDailyBiz has a piece looking at some professional analyst opinion on what the PS3 delay means for Sony. From the article: "Merrill Lynch analyst Hitoshi Kuriyama cautioned, however, that we shouldn't take the global launch for granted as there are still many hurdles. '[Sony] still has a number of obstacles to surmount before it can achieve a simultaneous global launch of PS3 in November. We will need to keep close tabs on whether any further delays emerge because postponing the launch will worsen the company's competitive position,' he said in a research note."

Comments

This is an opening for Sony's competitors..

[Anonymous Coward]

Both of them - not just MS. So many here (and elsewhere) are concentrated on only the megacorporate Goliaths of this console competition that they forget about the David (the only real gaming company) toiling in the shadows.

While MS might have an opening in the US, where we like our games to truly spur the mind (boobies! blood! guns! teh Halo!!11!), Nintendo is the true competition in Japan - and they now have a chance at edging-out Sony on the launch schedule..

Good God, Let It Go Already!

[Anonymous Coward]

Good God, who gives a crap about polygons?! While you are sitting there staring at your spec sheet for your console, I am playing Zelda, Mario, Jak and Daxter, Metal Gear, Halo, Soul Caliber, and loads of other games that are fun. Why in the hell do people like you give so much weight to these numbers? True game fans appreciate the game for the game, not how it looks. I am sorry that you feel like you were betrayed by some of these game companies, to the point of bringing this crap up all the freakin' time, but judge the system by what it plays, not the MIPS it is capable of. If the games aren't fun and they promised fun, then bitch!

Re:Good God, Let It Go Already!

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Why in the hell do people like you give so much weight to these numbers?"

A lot of people treat game console purchases as investments. The rationale is similar to "I'll buy a $4,000 PC now because it'll 'last' longer." The theory runs like this: "the greater the specs, the more impressive the games will be towards the end of the system's life cycle. Towards the end of the cycle, the machine with the better specs is the one that's going to get the more ambitious titles." There is some data to support this. (Note: I'm not saying it's strong rationale, but I can see how some would see it this way.) Compare the SNES to the Genesis. Towards the end of both system's life cycles, the SNES had Donkey Kong Country and the Genesis had Vector man. Both were beautiful games, but DKC outshined VM. Saturn vs. Playstation? I think most of us know which clobbered the other. It would also be totally reasonable to say that the DC wouldn't have aged as gracefully as the PS2, GC, and the XBOX. (Amusingly, I don't think the N64 rocked the boat like it could have in this case...)

Frankly, all three systems are a gamble. Nobody is buying any of these systems knowing what will be coming down the line in the next 5 years. The best that can be done is to look at the system's potential. There is this fear that they'll buy the system, and it'll turn out to be a dud purchase. Ask anybody who's purchased a Jaguar. So what do you do? Well, specs, when assessed properly, are about the only tangibles we have. I have faith that Nintendo will create some excellent titles for the Revolution. But do I actually know that? Really, I don't. I do know, however, the type of processor the XBOX 360 has. I know how much RAM it has. I can look at that and make a mental estimation of what it'll be capable of. These are numbers I can work with. That sort of make sense?

In any event, I don't think specs alone are going to make or break these systems. All three are designed around 3D gaming. (as opposed to the Saturn vs. the Playstation, the Saturn was leaned too far towards 2D.) The artists are going to make a much bigger difference than the hardware. Take Resident Evil 4. Very impressive game. Despite the technical differences between the PS2 and the GameCube, it came out pretty much the same. I realize I'm taking the scenic route here, but I'm basically saying that I agree with you. Fuck polycounts, they don't matter anymore. I just hope that Nintendo's not stupid enough to develop the Rev with a big enough bottleneck to make the games feel watered down in comparison.

Durrrrrrrrrr- hurhurhur

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes. Just ignore all the marketing bullshit Sony spouted before because THIS TIME THEY'RE REALLY TELLING THE TRUTH. Like totally.