Slashdot Mirror
Redemption Still Possible For Sony?
Gamasutra reports on the slim chance that Sony may still be able to redeem itself from its poor showing at E3. In a new 'Analyze This' column, they ask a group of analysts how things are for Sony today. From the article: "In spite of the higher than expected price points, we still expect the PS3 to be in high demand from early adopters at launch. But Sony must put more effort into differentiating its games from those of rival platforms, both in terms of original compelling titles as well as overall quality. Otherwise, later adopters will not be persuaded that the PS3 has anything more to offer. Sony must clearly also address its relative weakness in online, where Microsoft has a substantial lead."
Which has to come first though? I say it's the people buying the system. Would PS2 have so many games today if there wasn't that initial craze for it? Will PS3 be anywhere near as popular initially as the PS2? From what I'm hearing there aren't a huge number of people who are interested in it at that price, but I could be wrong.
No. But for some reason people will still spend $600 on a console that has already been beaten when it hasn't even gone into full production yet.
High demand by people who buy stuff first? Who would of thought it! People who buy stuff first just to be first/cool/whatever will buy it early! Wow news there folks!
Sony's problem is they've just made a playstation Mark 3. Except the Mark 2 was a huge step up from the original, where as the third step is all but unnoticable as it is. Untill Sony break away from the "me too!" style and basic frame work of the PSX they'll stay in the same rut.
The 360 did the "me too!" thing and look where it is now. Does anyone even care any more?
I like muppets.
Dude - in what way was the PS2 a disappointment? And how can the PS3 be a disappointment when you haven't even touched one? It looks a bit expensive, and still in development, but it can't be disappointing until you've played some games on it, right?
I am behind the idea that Sony watched the Xbox360 launch and are reacting to the large ebay reseller market. Obviously fewer people will pay the higher price, so you hopefully match your output to demand. They also get a share of the money that in MS's case went to the Ebay crowd. The question though is if that strategy will fly with a similar console out there for less.
It is very likely that the very expensive blu-ray drive will drop in price rapidly as production ramps up. This should allow Sony to drop the price of the console.
It depends how may developers use the cell processor to its fullest extent and how
creative/fun the games are.
im going to reserve mine as soon as it's possible. $600 is nothing when it means that ill have 5+ years of awesome gameplay with it. rock on sony!
Maybe it was the lack of high quality games? A simple survey (From any given site) shows games 9.0 or better on the xbox and on the ps2 are comparable in numbers. While the PS2 had more games, they certainly didn't have more, better games.
Maybe it was the flop that was emotion engine, all the hype sure didn't help it.
Maybe it was the lack of reliability/quality?
Or maybe the lack of compatibility with DVDs?
"But Sony must put more effort into differentiating its games from those of rival platforms, both in terms of original compelling titles as well as overall quality."
So... EA won't be making any PS3 games?
Not really fair - everyone does it - a hit game has to have a sequel. If that sells well, yada yada. We're on Quake 4, Doom 3, but I never hear anyone complaining about id.
I think EA is going to try to change a bit, but I bet there's a whole shelf of Madden/NFS/NBA games on their way out for the PS3.
Some of Sony's products have been amazing, especially some of the commercial stuff. On the other hand, I have bought several pieces of overpriced junk from Sony. After a particularly useless pair of noise cancelling headphones, I'm not buying a PS3 just on principle. Add rootkits to that if I need more convincing.
Sony may be able to pull off what Microsoft wants to do which is make the game console a general purpose net surfing, email appliance. It hasn't worked yet but maybe someone will get it right yet; maybe Sony; but I'm not holding my breath.
Maybe the PS4 (yes I know it doesn't exist yet/ever) will redeem them but consumers have long memories and some of them hold grudges.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2634
I'm not going to bash the PS3 directly. I have not seen it in action, held the new controller, or had any other exposure that mainly occurred through E3.
However, no one can deny that there has been a lot of backlash. First and foremost, the pricepoint. Second, the heated argument that Sony may or may not have received inspiration for their new controller from Nintendo's remote.
The second argument is almost irrelevant. As a Nintendo fan myself, I will gladly say it. Whether the controller was "stolen" or not is a non-issue. Sony either had plans to use this controller beforehand, or they did not. If they did not, it will show in the game play -- extended game play that will most likely occurr after the purchase of a PS3.
Regarding the price, that alone has alienated a number of casual fans, such as myself. I own a PS2, but I never bought one outright. I bought mine used, around 2001, when the price tag was far lower. Price is a major factor for many consumers. Many times, it does not come down to "do I want the system with the hard drive, or the one without...", but rather "do I want the system, or do I want to make my car payment".
Additionally, the PS2 was a good investment in the long run as it had an established game library. When the XBox debuted, most of the games I had an interest in were already released, or being simultaneously released, for the PS2. I did not have to spend the additional $300+ on an Xbox, new controllers, memory cards, etc. Everything I wanted was already available on the PS2, therefore negating my desire (and in fact, need) for an Xbox.
Today, the roles are reversed. The Xbox 360 is available, stock is being supplied to retailers, and the game library is slowly but surely increasing.
I believe, in order to gain sure-footing in the market, the PS3 will need not only quality games, but exclusive ones. If the game is available on a system for $200 less, how is that going to encourage someone to spend that extra $200 to begin with? The XBox 360 may very well showcase the same titles as the PS3, but the 360 has already appeared in today's market, giving it some leverage, whereas many of Nintendo's titles will be exclusive their own console, presumably.
I do not believe that the PS3 will be a "failure". It will sell units. I already know of someone who said, with a shrug, "It's almost like a computer" and seemingly resigned himself to purchasing it. I do not believe that it will be a rampant success by any means.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
Are we talking about Sony redeeming themselves to normal consumers?
Or redeeming themselves to Slashdot?
Because they've got a good shot at the first one.
Speaking for my self: The lack of good multiplayer games (lack of 4 controller ports) and the shoddy hardware (I have personally owned 3 PS2's and several new controllers because they keep breaking). Now I did like some of the games on the PS2 so therefor it was worth owning, but I play it far far less than my Xbox(before it got stolen) and GameCube. Infact I haven't played it at all in almost 2 years(mine got stollen with my xbox but there is still one in our house and it never gets played). I still play my GameCube a few times a week. Our modded Xbox got a lot of play. I mostly used it for old SNES games, but now that we have some 360's nobody plays the old Xbox anymore.
For the PS3 the high price and the lack of any compelling games is killing it for me. I could care less about every game shown so far. The graphics don't look any better than the 360's from what I can tell and we already have 2 of those in the house so I doubt I will get a PS3.
Another thing he missed is the PSP. Do I even have to say anything about that? Atleast I've had good luck with the hardware thus far. It seems to be fairly good quality. I don't like how easy it is to scratch though.
... as it was with the PS2. Simple fundamentals ate getting in the way of any developer not in Sony's (or MS's) back pocket.
As a 3rd party developer, I can say that our high-end titles are being developed for all three platforms: PC, Xbox 360 and PS3. We're doing that out of necessity; "Next Gen" games are costing 8 figures+ ($10+ million) these days, much due to content.
Now, how many Xbox 360's are there out there? How many will there be when we ship? What about the PS3 installed base? A "Hit" game can sell to well under 5% (say 2-3%) of a given console's owners. 20 Million Xbox's? Sell 500k units (2.5% penetration) and that's a hit. Unless you're a Halo or Grand Theft auto, that's realisitc.
Now, the cost of developing for both next-gen consoles (360, PS3) is not that much more than developing for just one console (maybe low as 1.1~1.2x) , but you stand to sell a lot more in total. Using an engine such as Unreal 3? Not much more effort and you have a PC version too.
Now, about that $10 to $20 million we just spent? We better sell a lot of copies, or it was a mistake to make the game in the first place. Right now, it'll be a good while before there is an installed base of 10 million on either console, but yet our games are much more expensive to make than the previous generation. To recoup advances and hopefully turn a profit means getting it out to the largest audience possible.
Oh, and there's the little matter of Xbox 360 being out first, and having signifiantly better developer tools than Sony that has developers developing on Xbox 360 as first/primary, and then porting their games to PS3. Last generation it was different, but this time Xbox was available first, and Sony's efforts to catchup to Xbox's tool and documentation quality is more than lacking.
Awesome games.
No troubles with DVD's.
My only problem with it, is they didn't give it more ram.
They certainly had games that *I* liked. Dino Crisis, Parasite Eve, FF series, Onimusha, etc. Some of these were not PS2, obviously.
"Emotion Engine" was just a marketing hype, how was it a flop?
Quality - for every post that says that they have bought multiple broken PS2 units, I can show you another post where folks have had up to 5 broken xbox 360s. But, reliability in general, isn't about what one person sees, but what the overall rate is, and PS2's broken rate isn't that high, iirc.
What lack of compatibility with DVDs? I've never had any problems, and I've had my PS2 from day 1.
Is advertize the hell out of Metal Gear Solid 4. I know many who would pay $500 or $600 for that game, and I'm one of them.
PS2 was a disappointment.
PS3 was a disappointment.
SOE is a disappointment.
Three strikes, you're out. Not suspended.
Yeah it's disappointing to see how poorly Sony understands the origins of gaming. They really need to hire some old-school table-top/PnP gamers as consultants. The nerdier the better.
Actually, the entire board of directors should attend gen-con and dragoncon annually...that'll learn 'em.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
but I'm beginning to have my doubts about Zonk.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Sony is the new Micro$oft.
There's no way I'm buying one, not because it is good / bad / indifferent, not because it is cheap / expensive / reasonable but because the buggers tried to shaft us with that damn rootkit.
As it is, I'm not convinced I need to spend that much money on a console irrespective of who produced it so chalk me up as one of the angry apathetic.
(I have personally owned 3 PS2's and several new controllers because they keep breaking). Now I did like some of the games on the PS2 so therefor it was worth owning
Worth owning three fucking times despite poor build quality by the sounds of things. If you really weren't that impressed by it and nevertheless kept buying more of then when they broke then you're an addict. Seek help.
Sony must clearly also address its relative weakness in online, where Microsoft has a substantial lead.
The future of gaming is online multiplayer (not better graphics) because online multiplayer affects the core of gaming, which is gameplay. This is a big reason PC gaming isn't dead and the reason why any of the major consoles who don't make this leap will be left behind. Of course, this means way more than having an internet ready gaming console. The GameCube and PS2 are internet ready (though adapters are required). Microsoft has XBox live, which is more than internet connectivity, it is a online multiplayer/gaming community platform. What XBox live provides is an easy, well managed solution for developers who are looking for a console to make their online multiplayer games for. Even if Sony were to bring SOE to the PS3, it still falls short of providing any kind of method for third party developers to build online multiplayer games for the PS3. IMHO, for Sony to redeem the PS3, they need to not only bring SOE to the console (and fix the problems with SOE), but also allow third party developers access to its capabilities.
As my good friend Steve Ballamer once said. Developers, Developers, Developers.
Sony does not need to sell lots of PS3 units to get developers to make games. Sony has to ship a lot of development kits! Many games that are released later in the lifecycle are well into development before the console even ships. Most developers are already committed to the PS3 because they made all of their money from the PS2! They have already invested time, money, and people to learn the PS3 and make games for it. Switching gears isn't that easy especially when you've already spent $250,000 buying the dev kits for your team.
If it isn't blaringly obvious, the console industry doesn't work so that someone releases a console and after a couple of months the developers notice it. We wouldn't have any games for the first two years of a console's life if that were the case. That's half the entire life of the original Xbox.
If the PS3 has a killer app you can bet it will sell for $600. These armchair analysts keep talking price, price, price. But if you look at the adjusted price this isn't all that much more than the original NES was back in the 80's. And the ps3 kicks the shit out of the NES as far as functionality. It's a gaming console, a media center, a personal PC (linux+internet). Which is pretty much what the analysists said. People always want a better deal, but in the end this is a culture of excess and totally misguided priorities. I have no doubt people will find a way to justify $600 despite being on public assistance and barely holding down a part time job. And the people that do have a decent job are no better. Making the equivalent income of a small city yet somehow finding a way to put themselves into debt.
I certainly think the PS3 is premature. Another year or two to perfect the technology and reduce the price would have given Sony a fantastic foundation for the future. Unfortunately Microsoft had to spoil their fun by distrupting the release cycle.
-Trillian
Just like the lowered the price on the PS after there were a lot of games produced, as their ROI started to look good? Oh wait, they didn't do that.
Yes they did. North American launch MSRP of the original PlayStation was 300 USD; by the time the PS2 came out, the PSOne was down to 50 USD.
From the US, this wave of critics and pessimism around the PS3 may look like realistic (which I doubt anyway).Sony blahblah is dead, Sony blahblah will block second-hand PS3 games, Sony blahblah puts poison in pirated games! I am not a Sony zealot, but honestly, stop this crappy FUD around the PS3, please!
From the rest of the world, PS3 gathers LOTS LOTS more expectation than Xbox360 will ever have. Have you seen the number of Xbox360 sold in Japan or even in Europe?? Xbox360 in Japan : 50000 units sold since its launch. 1242 sold this week. On the other, 20000 PS2 units (I really mean PStwo) were sold this single week! In the same week, 300000 Nintendo DS and 30000 PSP!
RIP Slashdot. I used to love you. dead account - but slashdot wont let me delete it.
PS2 was a disappointment for a number of reasons. The two main things for me were, I've had horrible experiences with the DVD player in both my and my friend's PS2, and that the remakes of PS1 games seemed to be much, much worse. My opinion, though. PS3 is overpriced. That's all I need. I'm not going to pay about as much as I'd pay for a PC just to game, and maybe watch some videos in a format I won't buy. SOE is a disappointment. I don't think this needs further detail.
"Everything worth innovating today will go to court tomorrow."
I think the point is not that the Wii is not a viable platform, but it's not going to be the same as developing for the other 3 platforms. The other 3 will most likely share quite a bit more code, as well as art assets. The Wii will not, simply because it won't be as powerful as the others. Porting to the Wii will be more like porting to last gen systems, in that you're probably removing a lot of features or in some case creating an almost entirely different game.
Again, that's not necessarily a problem for the Wii, because it's intended to be a completely different kind of game machine. Games will be simpler in some cases, in other cases they'll be using the Wii custom controls (which no other system will be able to use, including PS3), and most likely the games that use a huge budget and really stretch the limit of the system will be exclusives.
Point being, if you're writing to multiple platforms at once, the Ps3, 360, and PC can be dealt with at once with the same kind of cost the parent poster hinted at. If you add Wii to the mix, you're porting, and the only reason it's worth doing (because of the extra effort to downgrade) is to most likely take advantage of the Wii's unique features. If wii gets a lot of marketshare, that's exactly what will happen, but it's an additional cost and throws the 1.2x cost factor off kilter.
As a 3rd party developer, I can say that our high-end titles are being developed for all three platforms: PC, Xbox 360 and PS3.
Why did you leave the Wii off that list? I'm not trying to criticize; I'm seriously curious as to why you didn't include the Wii in that list, assuming it wasn't a gaff.
Do you (or your developer) not consider the Wii to be a contender? (Followup, if yes: Is it because it isn't as powerful as the other systems? Is it because of Nintendo's supposed "kiddie" image?)
Do you feel that the controller setup is too new to work with yet, and you need time to play with it and brainstorm (or see how it fares)? Do you find it hard to program for? Has Nintendo pissed you/your company off in some way?
Once they announce their price point for a non-crippled P3 is $499 USD/EU, that DRM has been removed, and they realize that they won't have 80 percent of market share like they did with the PS2.
The sooner they do this, the better off they'll be.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
1. Sony did not "stumble out of the gate" for the Playstation launch at E3. What happened with the Playstation one at E3 is the stuff of legend.
2. Microsoft had poor initial showings for the Xbox and the Xbox ended up losing Microsoft $7 billion dollars and remains a distant second to the PS2.
3. As far as I've been able to tell, E3 is the thing among the gamer market to decide what's hip as what's not. Even if he was right about the Xbox and Playstation, the facts wouldn't support this statement.
4. Even if gamers don't pay attention to E3, the muckity-mucks at places like EA, Activision and Ubisoft do, and Sony's stumble is going to have repercussions regarding the decisions they make regarding what titles they'll produce, what consoles they'll produce them for, and how much effort they'll put into a port. The PS3 went in one week from being the likely market leader to a likely failure, and past crimes of Sony against development houses (i.e., making the Playstation 2 & 3 difficult to develop for, thus cutting into developer's margins) are going to have a substantial effect on what games are available for it. And the gamers will pay attention to what's available for their systems.
I agree with PJ of Groklaw's comment... I gotta get into this "Analyst" business. You can know absolutely nothing, spew off about things, and people will pay you to do it. How lovely!
Look at what drewmca said - he got got it pretty close.
Basically, the Wii is seen as in a different group than PC/360/PS3. Different games, different audience and different content requirements, not to mention different levels of CPU and Graphics horsepower.
First off, the three platforms mentioned are the ones that are making use of the insanely high-def content with uber-normal maps and shader effects. It's a lot more expensive to make content at the Unreal 3 engine level than at the Wii level. Personally, I think Nintendo is freaking awsome for realizing that you don't need to have 2 artists and a programmer spend a week getting the specular sweat-drop effects working just right against the character's facial acne. That's where it seems like were going with the crazy levels of detail these days.
We do have plans for Wii and other (non next-gen) platforms, but it's best to approach them on their own terms and not try to force a 360/PS3 title onto them.
Sorry if I wasn't clear (and re-reading my post, I probably wasn't) but I completely agree with everything you're saying. I just wanted to stress that there are (or, at least, will be) four "new" systems (i.e. ones which will have new games coming out for the forseable future): PC, 360, and the yet-to-be-released Wii and PS3. My issue was the GP said something along the lines of "the three next gen consoles." Market success is as much an issue of mindshare as it is an issue of actual system power. I'd say the constant posts on Slashdot about the iPod not having $FEATURE_X while $PLAYER_Y does are an example of this sort of thing. For example, many publications put the GameCube behind the XBox and PS2 in terms of marketshare when, internationally, this really isn't true - XBox and GC are in the same ballpark, while both are quite a bit below the PS2. I know I'm fighting a losing battle, but I'd like to prevent that sort of thing for the 'next generation' of consoles. By leaving the Wii off (and by implying - intentionally or unintentionally - that no fourth system exists) it sends a message about the Wii's relationship to the 360, PS3, and computer.
Again, I don't think this was intentional on the part of the GP and I think he meant "the three most graphically powerful systems (PS3, 360, and PC)" rather than simply "the three next gen systems (PS3, 360, and PC)."
Just my two cents.
-Trillian
No prob. And as much as I usually end up sticking up for xbox against nonsensical anti-microsoft bashers, I feel your pain on the nintendo side. It's not just slashdot that does it, but also the mainstream media; they all refer to the supposed "failure" of the GC, when, as you put it, the marketshare numbers were not that far behind xbox (and were in fact much better in japan). I don't think it helps, though, when Nintendo themselves discuss the "failures" of the gamecube (a recent reggie article did just that). Your reasoning is exactly mine when I try to contradict asinine xbox bashing: if it's not true, then don't act like it's true, and don't expect that other people are so dumb as to not be able to differentiate when you're stating opinion versus fact. The "you" there was the general "you", and not you directly of course.
So what do you think abou the PS9?
I don't give a crap about sony's consoles, remember that rootkit the music division released three decades ago? I haven't touched a sony product ever since.
Once I got a sony blu-ray player for free, i went home and freaken pee'd on it.
Hmmm... Pie...
I've got to agree that based on history I am very cautious about the quality of the PS3 Blu-ray drives. I got a used PS2 to catch up on some of the exclusives I missed and to get a more reliable DVD player than the often-freezing software on my old Windows ME computer. After a few months, I went back to the more reliable ME computer.
Yes, it is entirely possible Sony learned their lesson here, and that the first Blu-ray player out of the gate will be perfectly reliable for years to come...but I am not going to believe it until I see it.
Can you show me posts where multiple people show they only ever bought one ps2, and it's always worked? You're only the second person I've ever met/heard of/talked to who's never had to replace their ps2. For me, that makes you 2 people out of about 275. Admittedly, that's othing considering over 100 million ps2 sold, but how disappointing a system is is determined by what the one person sees.
just some guy
Thanks for clearing that up.
:)
I just want to saw that I think it's awesome that third parties are planning to create Wii content seperately from PC/360/PS3 stuff. The Wii kind of sets itself up for that, but it would be too easy for companies to just push out the same stuff with a different button scheme and just include a "classic pad" with the game. Ports are still a-okay, just try to do a bit more than just mapping the same action to a different button.
I just wanted to stress that there are (or, at least, will be) four "new" systems (i.e. ones which will have new games coming out for the forseable future): PC, 360, and the yet-to-be-released Wii and PS3.
Not to be too pedantic, but there is also the DS, GBA, PSP, PS2 (still active development going on, probably for the next 4 years or so), browser (different environment than PC), Symbian J2ME Flash Lite BREW Pocket PC Mobile phone development, and the various arcade systems, amusement park attractions, etc. Possibly the XGP / 32X2 as well.
There is a lot of options out there. And as the market evolves, and consumer devices become more powerful, it looks like more and more will spring up.
The ______ Agenda
Not to mention that you can "port" a game to the "less powerful" (not by much, though) Revolution just by reducing texture size and polygon count, and that can be done by automated tools.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
It's sad that you've already eliminated the possibility that I (and others like me) would by your game, no matter how great it might turn out to be.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
i never had to replace my ps2. its been through the wringer, but plays games and dvds fine.
where are these 275 other people you claim bought multiple ps2s? there are people out there i am sure that have. however if you are going by internet survey, you obviously are counting dozens of microsoft "plants" as well. there are people that claim to have bought 5-8 ps2s. WTF?!?!? considering the ps2 isnt that old, surely the warranties would overlap.
personally my xbox has itermittent issues with games. new and old games... cant play half of the dvds i own... etc. i know that all xboxs are not like mine. i wont call all xboxs shoddy, just because many of the people i know have had a few problems. overall, every single issue the ps2 has had, the xbox suffered from just the same. this is a console that had a year to work out the kinks and learn from its competitor.
fact is, all consumer electronics have issues... thats why they come with warranties; and more importantly, thats why warranties expire.
Or he bought a new one, swapped serials and returned it. Twice.
Most gamers who have made Sony rich don't give a fuck about this bullshit. Why the fuck does the slashdot crowd think the eyes of the world turn to them for advice and guidance? Most gamers don't care about E3 and whether or not sony kissed media ass. Most gamers don't give a fuck about rootkits or DRM.
Will the high price of PS3 bring the platform down? Perhaps. but the rest of this is just pure bullshit according to 99% of sonys past or future customers.
All of this bickering and fucking bullshit that goes on here makes zero difference to the majority of the buying public. Stop acting like you have some great insight into the future of the company.
Why the fuck am I bothering? You guys are the same fucks who've been chanting that Linux is a MS killer for the last 10 years and still look at where we're at.
Take heed sony! the fucks of slashdot have predicted that you're going to lose big very soon, that translates into you may lose 3% of the market share to XBox in 2018.
Regardless of the weird programming model, 360, PS3, and most PC games in the future will be working to take advantage of multiple processors. Of course, with PCs, there will still be legacy systems to deal with, but there will be a lot more in common with up to date PCs (with hot shit nvidia cards) and the PS3 (and xbox360) than with the gamecube.
And as for programming models, what's weirder than a control scheme that no other system uses?
make that 276
/not buying a PS3
//already been burned once by sony
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Well more than 100 million users weren't disapointed in the PS2, and the gross tonnage of games bears that out (compared to - say - the Jaguar which had enough retruns to effectively put Atari-Trammel out of business).
Sometime in the next 6 years I'll be looking to upgrade my entertainment system to something 1080p capable - and then I would be disapointed if my console / movie player didn't make the grade. I used (and still use) my PS2 as my prime DVD player (I have having a stack of boxes piled around the TV among other arguments) and will be curious how Blue's debut compares to the 1st gen HDDVD players. The picture from HDDVD is so robust (given that it has the highest throughput of any HD format available) you can see film grain. The boot and load times are staggering however.
Between that and capacity, I'm looking to get a cheap HD player as much as a game box, and considering my (sluggish) mac-mini was the same price, I think the capablilities are a bargin.
And if Rockstar gives me full-on chainsaw enabled goodness in 1080i to 1080p - oh - I'll be quite happy. Quite happy indeed.
So you do care about the games shown so far. Because if you didn't care about them, you couldn't care less.
Damn, and I'm not even english!
I bought my PS2 when they first came out. Preordered at ToysRus.
...
... I've never had any console fail me.
Still works great with games, DVD's, online,
Same with my Dreamcast, PS1, Saturn, SNES, Genesis, NES, Master System,
"Sometime in the next 6 years I'll be looking to upgrade my entertainment system to something 1080p capable"
Six years! You'll be able to get an Infinium Phantom by then...
Also, don't forget that MS is on a four year console cycle. Xbox 3 is due in 2008.
Wait!
Let me get this straight!
You're the dumbfuck who wrote "Comments from an RTS programmer" recently???
A fucking PC RTS clown is lecturing people about console platform exclusives.
Go away dipshit, go back to cutting and pasting DirectX code! Can't stop laughing! RTS, console...yeah we're all waiting around for your crap
The most recent game I shipped was FPS game that shipped simultaneously on PC, Xbox and PS2. Did rather well too. Doesn't change the fact I wrote a lot of code for best-selling RTS games too.
%100 Price
The REAL problem with that 600$ price tag is that they have a LONG LONG LONG way to go down to hit 200$.
200$ is the pricepoint that every console has to eventually hit to REALLY push in units. The PS2 more than TRIPPLED market penetration when it hit that point. Its the reason they have over 100million units sold.
How long do you think its gonna take Sony to hit 200$ for a PS3....
Personally I think its gonna be a "Very long time"
And in the meantime all that has to happen is the Wii or XBox360 get to a 200$ pricepoint and launch games that people want.
That is Sony's problem. The Massmarket will definately wait (*the are used to it)...
but will the develoupers wait till Sony hits a 200$ price point for greater game sells...
will the 360/Wii have a "Killer App" AND a 200$ pricepoint in the meantime?
will 360/Wii pull greater penetration therefore atracting more devs and more games?
The Bluray concept is more like 3DO vs CD-ROM, it's nothing like Betamax vs VHS which I keep hearing. So long as players are made which support both Bluray and HDDVD (check your Asian Tigers they're already on the way) I could care less which way the wind blows on that one - maybe MS will be upset that in 4 years the PS3 can deliver a game on a single disc still while they have to package 5 of their DVD game discs (or maybe Sony will lose sales for including the expensive hardware).
I just want the best gaming experience and my goodness there are a lot of bigots spewing trash on here lately. Sony never had trouble with the number of developers willing to produce for their platform, no matter what bigoted views you might have. I'm thoroughly amused at all the fanboys running around trying to claim that MS has won the title, it's laughable at best.
Microsoft's Media Center Extension vis a vis the 360 is a miserable failure from my experience for anyone who has anything resembling a decent sized collection. The XBox Live Arcade now though, that's a huge success.
My two cents are this: when the XBox came out the ONLY reason most of us started playing it instead of our old PS2 was that in the situation where a game came out for both consoles the Xbox's hardware was better - the games had more powerful physics / reality engines and simply looked better. It was good enough to put up with the big hand crippling controller that the thing came out with even prior to the S controllers.
Now we have an upcoming release of the PS3 which if adjusted for inflation in 2006 $USD costs $50 less than the Atari 2600 did in 1978. Oh my goodness, it's so expensive it almost costs as much as the old Atari did when it was released! Pah, fanboys unite, shape of witless factless flaming Yeti!
The simple truth is that the PS3 is a 2 teraflop capable machine (the XBox 360 barely reaches 1TF), and many of the best games to come out for this generation of console will come from gaming companies that don't even exist today but will be released for both platforms. Ceterus Paribus that single statistic alone will allow the PS3 to overpower the Xbox 360 every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Clearly there's more to the competition than just computing capacity, such as gaming selection, cost to be online (what there's a COST? rofl, might as well be called AOL 360), and the quality of rendered images / framerate; but this is a resounding statistic that disappeared from Microsoft's published web stats the day Sony published the big 2TF (at least the last time I checked).
I'm not a bigot guys, I'm just tired of the preponderance of Xbox Bigots. If the XBox 360 somehow defies reality and provides better reality engines, graphics, playability, and game selection then I'll be playing the 360 for years to come. I just feel that many of you are missing the boat on this one and are lost in the hype. Sad, really, but hey if you're an XBox 360 Bigot go ahead and party, party like it's 1999, rock on with your bad self.
(a) within 6 years means sometime during the next 6 years - not after.
(b) the X360 isn't 1080p capable - so I'm not interested in getting one of those.
(c) You're a retard.
Retard? Not by the standards you set.
Lets read my post again, shall we:
"Also, don't forget that MS is on a four year console cycle. Xbox 3 is due in 2008."
I'm not suggesting you get a Xbox 360, I'm suggesting you get the next one. The one that comes out in two years. That you can't buy now. Get it?
Sure, if you decide you want to upgrade in that two-year window (late 2006-2008) when the PS3 is the only 1080p console then it's your only choice. But your post said six years. A long time in console lifecycles. For most of that time the console after the 360 will be out. Hell, by 2012 Atari could be making consoles again.
Have you understood this or were you born without the ability to comprehend? Just reply yes or no, I don't want to tax you.
I can think of no better way to make the point that the cell is a different sort of processor. Push it's strengths to the limits in ways other consoles can't touch.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
re:"I'm not suggesting you get a Xbox 360, I'm suggesting you get the next one."
(c) You're SUCH a retard.
Like I said.. There were a FEW games that made it worth it for me. The first one I purchased was for GT3 when that came out and I got the console used. That was my game. I was a GT whore.
How did you get modded insightful for this?
I still stand by what I said. The PS2 was my least played console. The lack of good multiplayer was a HUGE reason for this. The horrible build quality also put a bad taste in my mouth. I didn't ENJOY having to buy the stupid thing 3 times just to play the hand full of games that I really really really liked for it.
You got a problem with that?
Well I don't care what all the analysts are saying, as long as the Final Fantasy 7 sequels and Final Fantasy 13 are on PS3 thats the system I will be buying. Of course I probably won't be buying it until later on, but as long as the FF series are on PS, Xbox is no where in my mind.
Like rootkits. The issues keeping *me* away from Sony products are over things like their maliciousness with DRM. I guess I've stopped considering the consumer value proposition of the products themselves.
Pi Ran Out