Slashdot Mirror
Ken Kutaragi's Famous Last Words
When we look back on this E3, I think one of the moments we're most clearly going to remember is the dead silence in the Sony press conference following the price announcement. Eurogamer and GameDaily has coverage of Phil Harrison's spin work, trying to recover from that moment, discussing how Sony is not ripping off Nintendo and Microsoft probably won't meet their 10 million units goal. More interestingly, they discuss an interview with Ken Kutaragi conducted by a Japanese website. From that piece: "SCEI president Ken Kutaragi has defended the PlayStation 3's high price tag once again, declaring that not only will consumers be prepared to pay the cost but that the console is 'probably too cheap.' In an interview with Japanese website IT Media, partially translated by IGN, Kutaragi said: 'This is the PS3 price. Expensive, cheap - we don't want you to think of it in terms of game machines ... For instance ... Is it not nonsense to compare the charge for dinner at the company cafeteria with dinner at a fine restaurant? It's a question of what you can do with that game machine. If you can have an amazing experience, we believe price is not a problem.'"
... I don't know about the rest of you, but I never, ever eat in really expensive restaurants. As good as the food may be, it's simply not worth the additional cost. Which is why I'll be getting a Wii and not the PS3.
Nyhetsankaret.com -- det bÃsta av Sveriges Nyhetssido
"Sony is not ripping off Nintendo", "Microsoft will not meet its goal" Where have I heard talk like that before? Oh yeah... Baghdad Bob.
In the last 120 days, the value of the dollar has gone from about 120 yen to under 110. If this trend continues, it could give the 360 a pretty decent home-field advantage. Granted, all components are made outside the US (and possibly outside of Japan), but demonimating the wealth in dollars is probably much easier than doing so in Yen.
You know, Ken, if the gaming press is saying that's probably too expensive, and a lot of hard-core gamers are looking at your price and honestly wondering if they can even afford it, maybe you should listen.
On the other hand, by E3 it was already too late to change course on that.
It's amazing how badly E3 went for Sony. I'd say Microsoft at least broke even, Nintendo scored in a big way, almost entirely at the expense of Sony, which lost big.
On Slashdot, digg, and other gaming sites I've been looking at, the Sony fanboy has overnight become an endangered species. That is what is really telling me Sony has a problem. If even the Retardusfuckwitis Internetus, a species Sony nearly owned last week, is defecting, you're gonna die.
In that case...waiter? Check please!
-------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
Bottom line, I probably will not buy the PS3 for a good long while. And don't even bring up that crippled "cheap" version...
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
IF you see the PS3 as more than a game console, and intend to use it as a Blue-Ray disc player and/or whatever other features Sony decides to add to it, then it might be worth it. From a purely gaming perspective, unless there is some game only on the PS3 you can't live without, it just ain't worth it.
If you can't beat them, embrace and extend them.
Or at least, that's what I'm getting out of the whole thing. We already knew the PS3 was going to be expensive to produce. The only question was how much Sony would charge for the machine.
Right... no one's ever seen next generation graphics before, or even various services via the network.
Seriously, I never had any intention of buying any of the next-gen consoles when they were released (that includes the Wii; by the time it comes out, I may finally get around to getting a DS :)), but the more I hear about the PS3, the more I realize I'm definitely not going to be buying any of the first-generation PS3s. Two versions, one an un-upgradable "cheap" version, weird controllers without force feedback, and the $500/$600 price tag all are making me that much more willing to wait for a PS3.
I'm more than willing to wait until the PSThwii gets released, with a single version that supports everything, and hopefully with wireless controllers that support force feedback. Oops, sorry, that's supposed to be "PSthree" in the style of the "PStwo" and "PSone" rereleases.
And to think, if anything, I'm a Sony fanboy...
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
... it was determined today that Ken Kutaragi has a stick thoroughly shoved up his ass. When asked is this was a flaw or intended, Kutaragi responded "Sony has no flaws," and that no matter what he is God and we should all bow down to him because he knows what is best.
Sony has done the worst possible thing, they built the Titanic of consoles. It is big, it is expensive, and it is going to sink. It tries to cator to everyone but ends up being something no one wanted.
The PS3 price really isn't that bad when you consider that games will only be $120 each.
SmR
This man is a genius! I've got to get me a piece of this...
I hereby announce that not only are the rest of you Slashdotters fully prepared to Paypal me ten bucks every time you get to read one of my fabulous posts, but I'm letting you all off easy by not demanding twenty.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
I was thinking of getting a 360 but didn't because I wasn't going to pay $400 for a console without games that I saw as must have (still none in my eyes, although there are games I want to play).
I probably would have bought a PS3 at $400.
There is no way I'm paying $600 for a console. When the non-crippled version is available for $400 I'll probably buy it. If I can get it used for $350 I'll buy it. I'm not paying $600 unless it comes with 5 games of my choice.
And let's forget that stupid "it's also a blu-ray player" argument. That's a great argument... for anyone who wants a blu-ray player. I don't want a blu-ray player. I don't care. I don't have a HDTV so it doesn't make a difference to me. It's like saying "buy a Sega-CD because it's also a LaserDisc player (I know it wasn't)". That's how useless it is to me (and I'm willing to bet most everyone).
When the PS2 came out the DVD player argument was actually quite good. DVD players were in demand and there was a very noticeable leap in quality over VHS, along with the convenience (no rewinding, better sound, random access, doesn't degrade with repeated playings, etc). The market was starving for DVDs so they were being bought. The ability to buy something that cost a little more than a DVD player that also played excellent games and PS1 games was a good one (not why I bought mine, but a good reason).
No one cares about Blu-Ray or HD-DVD except a few early adopters. For the rest of us, you're just asking us to buy a $600 toy (plus games at $70 or $80 a pop). No sale.
I thought MS's pricing was bad. MS is going to do very good this holiday season. All those people waiting for PS3s? Lots will buy a 360 and a couple of games instead (especially if there is a price drop or redesign, say the new 360 full version (not core) for $300 or so). The Wii will be under $300, with many rumors placing it at $150 or $200.
Billy wants a video-game system for Christmas. Do I buy him the one with Mario for $200, the one with Halo for $350, or the one with Warhawk for $600. Guess how many average american families will choose that last one.
Sony, you lead for 2 generations. Obviously, it's time for you to step aside for a while so you can look at your play book and get a clue. I hope Nintendo can put it out and get a big lead, but Sony is shooting themselves in the foot with a RPG.
The 3DO launched at $700 and could play Video CDs and do all these other things too. It died, pretty much completely due to the price (it could have been a good also-ran like the DC if the price was better). The CD-i was the same thing, and it cost $400 (when other consoles were $150-$200). It bombed too.
Sony: it was nice knowing you. Come back in a generation or two.
Go Nintendo!... and Microsoft's price suddenly looks sane and like a bargain.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Fortunately for Sony, the PS2 came out at a time when a lot of people still didn't have DVD players so Sony was somewhat vindicated by that. But Sony has a habit of overhyping and under-delivering (i.e. using cut scenes in product promos and passing them off as real graphics). I think that this round, the PS3 is going to have a tough sell since no one seems to really want to be an early adopter of Blu-Ray / HD-DVD.
I had high hopes for this latest round of next generation systems. I bought a 360, and while it's pretty impressive there still isn't a huge library of games, let alone decent ones, for it. I want to get a PS3 but I am not going to buy one right away if there aren't any decent launch titles (learned my lesson on the 360). I still think the Wii is too gimicky but I might be proven wrong. I want to actually play with one before I decide.
I am starting to wonder if we aren't about to have another video game crash. But maybe I'm being too melodramatic. Either that or Nintendo is about to make a triumphant return to the "good old days". Will be interesting to see...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Microsoft probably could have gotten away with charging $599 for the Xbox360 last Novemeber. Probabaly would have solved a bunch of the early problems with massive back-orders and bad press from not being able to supply enough units. Had they done that and waited for E3 to drop the price--I am thinking there would have been a second surge of XBox360s sales. BTW--of what use is HD-DVD/BlueRay? Why do I need it? Regular DVDs have been doing just fine. I can even make my own DVDs. Since gaining the ability to burn CDs and DVDs--I am going to be reluctant to adopt any technology where I have to depend on someone else to create my content. Is HD-DVD supposed to provide better games or higher quality movies?
You mean DualShake, not DualShock. "Dual" referred to the two analog sticks, which the DualShake has. "Shock" referred to the force feedback, which Sony removed from the DualShake.
According to Sony, this has nothing to do with their losing a patent case with Immersion Corporation and is because their motion sensing technology would be "confused" by the force feedback technology.
It's worth noting that the Wii controller will support rumble technology along with motion detection. Personally, I'm curious if the hastely-added "motion" technology wasn't the only reason force feedback was removed, and if it weren't also due to battery concerns, since the new controller is wireless. I have a feeling that the motion feedback was added for three reasons:
Although this is all wild speculation on my behalf.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
The PS3 is understandably expensive. Unfortunately that doesn't excuse the price. Sony decided to put the Blu-ray in, I'm guessing, not so much so that people would actually use it, but so they could make claims of supremacy over HD-DVD. I suspect the plan was, come a year or so from now, quote some high number of Blu-ray players in homes, most of which would be PS3's. Even though I doubt most of those PS3's would ever have had a high def movie in it, because there's still an overwhelming majority of the population who don't have an HDTV. It's one thing for people to have a player, it's another for them to actually use it. Microsoft had a better plan, offer options and upgrades. Start with a $300 system... add a hard drive... add a HD-DVD... add who knows what to come. Eventually you have a really expensive system, without a huge onetime outlay of cash, and without being forced into an all or nothing proposition. Then of course there's the controller. I won't claim the took the idea from Nintendo, but I think it was a bad idea. Nintendo was trying to simplify controls with motion sensing, whereas Sony decided to add it on top of an already complex button laden control scheme. I don't want to have to try to move the controller with my thumbs on both sticks and finger on the shoulder buttons. Even for someone whose been gaming since the 2600, and falls right into the target market, that's a bit much.
You simply cannot sell many consoles at that price. There will be the handful of rabid fanboys shelling that out, as always, but the majority of people will be waiting for a price drop. At least the Xbox bundles actually GOT you a bunch of stuff. You'll pay for the PS3 by itself what most of those bundles cost.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
But the way he's saying it makes it sound like he's doing us consumers a favor by selling it so "cheap." No one is going to think that $600 is a bargain because Sony is losing money.
"This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
You can subtract out the effect of the force feedback on acceleration fairly successfully, but not perfectly. It'd cause the controller to noticably drift, probably in a matter of seconds of force feedback, so that where a straight controller was driving the car straight a moment ago, now it's 5 degrees to the right. It'd add up fast. Expensive precision components might limit this to an acceptable degree but it'll be too expensive.
The reason Nintendo can "get away with" having force feedback in their controller is they have a second (and probably third and possibly fourth) point of reference in the sensor bar, so they can correct drift by referencing this other point (or points). (I don't have inside info, but the bar is presumably a bar because it has a position sensor on each end, or it'd be a "sensor button", and since accuracy is probably a big deal, I'd add one in the middle for another reference point; not as good as having a non-colinear reference point but still better than just 2; how much better would depend on a math analysis.) Or, more accurately, they never have drift problems because they don't have to try to trust the controller in the first place, just the sensor bar's assessment of the position and velocity, and the controller's report of acceleration.
So, my conclusion is Sony removed their rumble because it was far too late to add a sensor bar to their package, and so the only other choice was dropping force feedback. Their controllers will still need periodic re-zeroing, although clever programming and a bit of guesswork can minimize the need to do this explicitly. Still, it could have some tricky cases; if you've ever powered up your console while an analog stick wasn't centered, you've experienced this already. Make sure your new PS3 controllers are correctly horizontal when powering them up.
I really don't know what the fuss is about.
Sony will charge high prices for the initial release of the PS3 and they will sell them as fast as they can make them. After demand decreases at that price, they will adjust the price to match the competition.
They can do this because there are people that will pay the initial release price and be happy to do so. The XBOX 360 was arguably underpriced on release: how many were sold on ebay for prices way above the MSRP?
Freaking about the price of the PS3 is meaningless, because the price is temporary, and will come down when it makes sense for it to do so. In the meantime, Sony will recoup their costs on a production line that is still scaling up to volume production, early adopters will voluntarily get screwed and appreciate the experience, and life will go on for everyone else.
Until then, I'll be playing games on my GameCube, PSP, and PS2, and will be generally chilling out. I suggest everyone else do the same.
-Nurf
---
It seems that everyone has taken the "probably too cheap" statement out of context. By reading the interview it is clear that Ken means that the console is probably too cheap because Sony expects it may not be able to keep up with demand at that price.
From Sony's last quarterly earnings report, it is clear that the company is spending massively on the development and launch of the PS3. By pricing the console as high as the market will bear, they can recoup some of that money.
In other words, it doesn't make sense to sell out of your console at a lower price point when you can make more from the same number of sales by pricing it higher.
What all this means is: Expect availability numbers to be low this November if the PS3 price is very high.
Personally, I don't care about Blue-Ray and I won't care for at least a couple of years (if it makes it at all). In the meantime, I'll be enjoying the Wii and the 360 this holiday season.
Jay Bibby reviews Flash and casual Web games at... http://jayisgames.com
It's my understanding, and I could certainly be wrong, that the sensor bar is only used for DPD functionality. Everything else is just accelerometers in the wiimote and nunchaku. I still haven't given much thought to how this works. My previous ideas, inspired by the Ars Technica article, are probably bunk. But I have heard that some games don't require the sensor bar, and that's enough to make me think that it's only needed for the DPD.
Direct Pointing Device. It's Nintendo's name for whatever technology they are using to make the wiimote function like a super sophisticated light-gun (think about how aiming weapons in Zelda and Metroid works. You point and shoot, it's not like the controller just acts as a mouse in free-look mode).
I'll be buying one. I think is just the fact that game consoles are being marketed to more gen x'ers and not starving college students and kids anymore.
Since when did operating systems become a religion?
You obviously don't live in California. Chez Panisse and the French Laundry don't have much of a dress code apart from "reasonable".
Wrenching the subject back to the topic at hand, if Kutaragi is telling people $600 is "too cheap", he's in for a nasty surprise come shopping season. Sony's already 5 million seats behind the curve compared with X360, their reputation sucks after the rootkit fiasco, and the PS3 is a pain in the ass to program by all accounts - that'll slow down game development, notwithstanding the guys from Japan treating the American division like stupid gaijin every time they jet over from Tokyo. I don't usually root for Microsoft, but Sony needs to be taken down a notch.
And the damn console isn't even a good value as a Blu-ray player: $600 for crippled HD resolution? No thanks.
Well, at least when you go on a date to an expensive restaurant you can usually get a blowjob out of the deal. It's been my experience that this is not the case when you take a date to McDonald's, regardless of how Happy the meal is. "It's been a really long time since I've had a Big Mac. Well, thanks. See ya."
"Look, Smithers! I'm Davy Crockett!"
the difference with the $1000 360 value packs is that you not only get the system, but a bunch of games and accessories as well.
--
Can you confirm your specs on the Wii from a source that hasn't been discredited as making shit up? The site that first gave those specs has made stuff up in the past and isn't considered reliable. Note that neither gamespot nor wikipedia speculate on the actual chips inside.
I think your parent was correct in saying on a 480p or less they'll look the same.
Both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are HD machines. EVERY game made for the 360 and (probably) every game made for the PS3 will be programmed around a 720p (1280x720) resolution or HIGHER. that means that AA, poly count, particle effects, etc. all have to be downgraded to a point where they can pump out those graphics at that high a resolution. Similarly for the games to look THAT good they have to crank up the texture resolution as well. If you're only using all that power on a 480p set a MASSIVE portion of those console's power is just sitting dormant. The graphics don't dynamically adapt to shift their optimization to a lower resolution. In the 360s case some games are actually rendering internally at 720p and downscaling the output.
on the other hand the Wii is expected to not run any higher then 480p (640x480) which means that it does NEED all the power to crank out stuff at a high resolution and the graphics can be optimized around a low 480p output.
I forget who it was but one of the early 360 developer interviews the developer claimed that they would have 10 to 20 times the amount of graphics power to put towards the poly count, and other graphical effects if they only had to output in 480p. Considering there are a lot of games that look identical between the Xbox 1 and 360 when running in only 480p it's definitely feasible that at that resolution the Wii can compete...
Besides Nintendo is fantastic at that stuff, the GC was way underpowered compared to the Xbox 1 yet it had comparable graphics in a number of titles. Optimization is the key and from what I've heard Nintendo is the king of easy to program consoles. One PS2 game developer I spoke to claimed that his company prototypes all their games on the Gamecube and then ports to PS2, despite the fact that they don't even make GC games, it's THAT easy to program.
Collector's Edition
I'm completely willing to pay Sony's asking price for the PS3. People knew it was going to be expensive, and what do you know, it is expensive.
In Canada with our once devalued dollar, the PS2 would launch at $299 USD and we'd be paying $499 CDN for it. But thanks to the poor American dollars, and the rising Canadian dollar, as PS3 launched at $499 USD is now only $549 CDN. So really for Canadian, the PS3 isn't expensive at all. It's only $50 more than the PS2 was at launch!
The PS3's price hype has worked tripley against Sony:
1) It seems to have stifled the PS3's momentum
2) It has drawn attention away from a -completely- underwhelming showing of the Xbox 360. (In terms of future games, I'm very disappointed in what's coming out for the 360.)
3) Its taken attention away from PS3 games that at least truly appear to distance the PS3's technical abilities from the Xbox 360 (MGS4, Heavy Rain, Assassin's Creed, a handful of tech demos)
Ultimately though, I think people -want- the PS3. They're underwhelmed by the 360, and they want the PS3 to be spectacular. They've been waiting for it forever. It will be flying off the shelf when it launches whether Sony deserves it or not.
Where does 'crippled HD resolution' enter into it? I thought they were deleting the HDMI port from the cheaper PS3 to save on build costs. The A/V Multi Out is probably similar to the PS2 where you had a choice of composite or component video cables. With component, you can get full resolution (1080i) HDTV just like you can with HDMI, only difference is the signal may lose a tiny bit from not being 100% digital. Then again on most consumer display devices you'd never know the difference anyway.
Now, if you're one of the extremely few 1080p owners, then you may have a point.
you paid too much for the PS2.
Shouln't you be comparing the value of then Yen to the canadia dollar?
these prices are starting to hit PC prices. I can do a lot more with a PC then I can the console. They will need to come out with a lot of PS3 only titles that I really want, or I'll go with out.
If there are 10 must have games, the I'll consider it, but 600 bucks to play one or two game is not worth it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The only way this pricing strategy works is if Sony has calculated there will be enough buyers at the high price to allow component costs to decline. Sony has designed the system to have a long lifespan. Games look pretty good 6 months prior to launch, much better than many existing 360 games. Sony's strategy is to cater to the hardcore and rich for the 1st year to recoup its investment. Subsequent price drops will bring more into the fold. Lotsa people are still picking up PS2s and quality games are still being released for it. Bluray hasn't launched yet no one has really seen its features. Once HD really catches on by 2007/2008 the "I'll get the dual function machine" factor will kick in. Sony seems pretty confident that people are going to really *want* a PS3, and I for one think that will be the case. Just wait. Yes their press conference was a dud, surprising since they did what everyone asked, showed playable games and got rid of the batarang. No force feedback tho is a baad baaad move. I hope they fix it before launch.
The original statement was that if you watched a blu-ray movie (a big draw of the PS3), you're limited to 480p output unless you use an encrypted digital output (HDMI).
Sony about 6 weeks ago said that they would NOT enable that flag on their first run of blu-ray movies, and now we know why... but that doesn't mean that NON sony movies will not have that flag, and it also doesn't mean that sony won't switch it on later.
Basically by getting a non HDMI blu-ray player, you are limiting your ability to play blu-ray discs at HD resolution.