Slashdot Mirror
Mysteries of the Next-Gen Consoles Solved
Chris Morris, of CNN Money's Game Over column, has several final details on the next-gen consoles. He delves into availability, games, the new ads for both the Wii and the PS3 and (of course) "Who's going to win?" From the article: "For the past two generations, Sony has sold far more PlayStation units than its competitors have sold of their systems. Publishers, for their part, expect the field to be a lot more even over the next five years or so (which should be about the time you're asked to start focusing on the PS4, Xbox 720 and whatever funky name Nintendo comes up with next)."
The Xbox 640 ought to be enough for anybody.
Harkening back to the days of the Virtual Boy, Nintendo will release a truly immersive gaming experience. Having learned from past failure, there will be no more crazy red characters and major headaches, instead there will be full body-suits, making us all look like we are in Tron.
It might not be as crazy as it sounds. Especially in five years. Our next console, Virtual Wii. (Which almost sounds worse then Wii.)
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
Is there any definitive answer to how many games will launch with the PS3?
The good news is that about 100 games will be out at launch.
The bad news is that they're all Genji.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
"The PC (with M$ Windows I'm afraid...) is the best games machine!"
That's not true for everybody. If it were, the PC game market would have a lot more successes.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Allow me to post my 4-month old predictions so I can try to find and reference this post if I'm right and sweep it under the carpet if I'm wrong. End of 2009, in terms of number of consoles sold: 360 = 40% (has already built up momentum on both customer and developer sides) Wii = 35% (I think it will explode out of the gate) PS3 = 25% (Will have momentum issues (shortages guarantee this), but IMO will not age as quickly as the other consoles later on) Like the article, no definite winner. But there is significantly more $ spent on 360s than the other two.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
We all know that the next Nintendo console after the Wii will be named the Puu.
I mean, it's really obvious when you think about it...
Whoops. I hate walls of text so let me do this again.
/., I should indeed have clicked the preview button :( . . . but I don't see a reason to slow down at this point ;)
End of 2009, in terms of number of consoles sold:
360 = 40% (has already built up momentum on both customer and developer sides)
Wii = 35% (I think it will explode out of the gate)
PS3 = 25% (Will have momentum issues (shortages guarantee this), but IMO will not age as quickly as the other consoles later on)
Like the article, no definite winner. But there is significantly more $ spent on 360s than the other two.
You're right,
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
The article is not too bad, kind of simple, but not a bad sum of the situation. But check out the ineptitude of reporting in this CNN video report!
Terrible! They talks as though there is nothing else coming out, but what's worse is how they butcher Sony's Console details
They harp on $600 and don't even mention the $500 version
They state Sony says it's worth it because it plays DVDs and wirelessly connects to the internet (No mention of Blue-Ray, HD, or 1080i)
Although you can't see it in the video, the anchors on CNN went on about it further, ragging on the $600 price being something "They'd never pay for" even the weatherman joins in.
In short, CNN botched just about every position Sony has been trying to push about the PS3. CNN should talk with it's game/technology division more often. If this is the kind of knowledge the mainstreme consumer has about the PS3, it doesn't bode well...
Demented But Determined.
So that's why I haven't seen any Wii ads yet; apparently, the casual gamer doesn't start thinking about a console until it's out.
I have difficulty agreeing with this rationale, but then again, I'm not a casual gamer.
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
IBM
End of 2009:
PS3: 50%
Wii: 30%
360: 20%
As you are talking about 2009, all effects of Christmas shortages will be gone - if shortages caused problems that long the 360 would have troubles as well.
I personally feel like the Wii number is optimistic, but I can't logically see how it would be lower with the much lower cost of entry the Wii offers. However it will be squeezed by the 360 and PS3 really pushing HD gaming, which is why I also can't see it being higher.
The 360 is good but I don't see them really appealing to a broader market. Gears of War is awesome, but where is the 360 Katmari Damacy, or other fun puzzle games? Bejewled on Live is a good start but is too expensive.
Also don't forget that both Sony and Nintendo this round offer the ability to play older games purchased online, which is going to be a big draw.
Basically the PS3 offers all of the advantages of online support that the 360 and Wii offer, along with the motion controller advancements the Wii offers all with the brand recognition of the Sony gaming system. That's why I still think it will be on top in terms of market share (especially by 2009).
I think the 360 should manage to keep a total number of systems sold lead for about another year.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
best != success
...and whatever funky name Nintendo comes up with next
Nintendo Yuu
If this is the kind of knowledge the mainstreme consumer has about the PS3, it doesn't bode well...
You're right. And it's Sony's fault. Sony has clearly not done enough to explain to the average consumer what the console can do. I think a story like that says more about how little people, so far, care about HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray, or even HDTV in general - which really calls further into question the wisdom of putting the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 (given all the problems I/we assume it has caused for pricing and production).
On the other hand, maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe Sony is only trying to sell to the hardcore gamers, and all of them/us know what's actually going on with the console (whether or not we approve of it is something else entirely).
I question the wisdom of this, certainly in relation to their obvious hopes for Blu-Ray penetration, but more importantly: are current PS2 owners primarily hardcore gamers? I was under the impression there were a lot of more casual PS2 purchases, but perhaps I'm wrong.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
As a former designer at a very large video game company that will remain unnamed so nobody comes after me with baseball bats for vaguely speaking in defiance of an NDA, I saw first-hand the nightmare that was PS3 development. We had a team assigned to 'port' one of our 360 titles to the PS3 for launch, and the porting process took almost as long as building the game did in the first place. As a non-developer, I don't know too many of the nuts-and-bolts of it, but I do know that the PS3's texture memory seems to be substantially more limited and/or volatile than Microsoft's and many of our game assets had to be retooled into lower bit-depths and smaller sizes to keep the system from crashing in areas where the 360 performed like a champ. New SDK's were released almost weekly right up until the bitter end of the PS3 'development period', many of these containing sweeping changes that required massive retooling of key aspects of the title, and nothing to do with the PS3 system, be it the OS, hardware, ever really seemed finalized or stable.
While I'm positive that these issues have been resolved (or at least, hopeful) -- I'm still going to wait quite a while before I even consider purchasing a new Sony box. With the massive amounts of hurdles developers have been jumping through to appease the flaky nature of this product launch, I don't expect to see very many quality games for this system for quite some time.
It's even Wiiner than the last one, and it's got the same great Wiiness you've come to love every night.
Haida Manga
You mean the castrated version that has no wifi so your psp can't talk to it? I mean, I don't have a PSP, because I got over being a sony fanboy, but I'd be pissed. Oh and it has a tiny hard drive. Fuck'em.
Most people watching CNN don't know what Blu-Ray or 1080i are and only have a vague idea as to what HD is. They don't want to confuse people. This is why these aren't selling points. No one (statistically speaking) gives a shit. They already have a DVD player, which supports a higher resolution than 95% of the televisions in the US, so they just want a game machine. A lot of them are parents who wish we'd just go the hell back to carts so they don't have to keep replacing scratched game discs.
So what you're saying is that you're all butt-hurt because some people on CNN who aren't even paid to review games say they'd never pay for it? Guess what? I wouldn't pay $600 for that fucking thing either.
I think that's an unfair representation of what's going on here. What's going on is that Sony is not properly communicating their message. These people are not highly informed games reviewers, right? They're just laymen (in this field) talking about some buzz. The buzz doesn't include anything on those things you wanted them to talk about, because again, no one gives a fuck about those features.
Aside from a few early-adopter types and the usual handful of trustafarians, people just want a machine that plays games. Do you really think the target market (which is ages like 15-24 or something) actually gives a shit about Blu-Ray? Again, it only matters if you have HD, and even then, it only matters if you feel that the quality of DVD Video is somehow lacking. Given that some significant percentage of people don't even have their HDTV configured to display HD, no one cares.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"best != success"
Potential != best.
The PC is the most under-utilized game device out there.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
You mean the castrated version that has no wifi so your psp can't talk to it? I mean, I don't have a PSP, because I got over being a sony fanboy, but I'd be pissed. Oh and it has a tiny hard drive. Fuck'em.
Er, I doubt THAT many people care about linking a PSP to a PS3, and "tiny hard drive"? It's 20GB, the same size as in the 360, and 20GB more than the Wii has. How can you bash them on that?
The $500 machine should be enough for 90% of users (especially since it now has HDMI), but the anti-Sony folk don't want to admit it since then they can't throw "OMG SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS" around any longer.
The $500 machine should be enough for 90% of users
Unfortunately, it's only going to be 20% of production, so 63% of the 90% that could get by with the $500 box are going to have to get the $600 box or get nothing.
I've solved this problem in other posts by referring to the price of the PS3 as $580, the average of the two prices weighted by production volume.
HTH.
HAND.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
"In short, CNN botched just about every position Sony has been trying to push about the PS3. CNN should talk with it's game/technology division more often."
Okay why and who cares. CNN wasn't running an ad for the PS3.
It is Sony's job to get the word out.
However the reporters are 100 percent correct in there reporting.
$600 IS A LOT OF MONEY FOR A GAME CONSOLE! Right now I don't care about 1080i or blueray. I don't have a TV that supports 1080i and I am not getting one for a game console.
I don't care about Blueray. Nothing I really want to watch is available on Blueray. Not only that but I am going to wait until there is a shake out between Blueray and HD-DVD. If there is no shake out then I will buy a duel format player which the PS3 will never be.
I have gotten an XBox 360 yet but I am going to buy a Wii. For the money I will to take the risk that it will be great.
Here is Sony's nightmare in a nutshell.
Many people don't share Sony's opinion about the benefits of the PS3. It doesn't matter if Sony is right or wrong because it is the consumer that puts down the cash.
Many people are willing to plunk down the cash for a Wii.
Your right things don't bode well for Sony. And you know what? I am fine with that. It is just a company and I don't own any stock and they don't pay my bills.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
2006: MS obviously wins the remainder of 2006. However, X360 sales start to plummet after Christmas.
2007: By sometime in mid 2007, Nintendo takes the lead in total sales. PS3 sales start to pick up, despite the high price (I don't forsee a price drop until at least Christmas 2007). 360 sales drop to nearly nothing, with minor bumps whenever a AAA title is released (Forza, MassEffect, Blue Dragon).
2008: 360 sales are up somewhat, as its lower price tag, similar performance, and better internet gaming vs. PS3 are pointed out in a last ditch MS ad blitz. Wii sales rate slump somewhat (though units per month is well in excess of 360, and probably beats out PS3), due to the usual Nintendo pause after their first tier game batch is released (as at this point Metroid, Mario, Smash Bros, etc. will all have been released), and by repeated ad barrages by their competitors of last gen technology. PS3 sales increase at a slow but steady clip, surpassing 360 (but not Wii) sometime around midyear.
2009: 360 sales low and steady. Wii sales up slightly. PS3 continues their steadily increasing rate, overtaking total Wii sales by Christmas.
2010: Who knows. MS, with a number of flat divisions and Vista's successor still a half decade away, may look at the 360 history, of throwing money at top tier developers both western (Rockstar, Bioware) and eastern (Capcom, Mistwalker) with a year's headstart, for a last place finish, as a no-hope business option and leave the hardware market, attempting to sell off their online technology and/or next gen CPU design to a competitor.
Sony settles for a barely 1st place, although Blu-Ray wins out over HD-DVD.
Nintendo does not fare so well, however, as their next-gen telepathic control technology tests malfunction and cause the cetaceans to go into a berserker fury. Whales attack ocean shipping, and dolphins crawl onto land to bludgeon unsuspecting sunbathers. Okay, I don't really believe this, I think that Nintendo will happily take a very close second place.
Also: Note that the loss per console per company is not the whole story: If Nintendo makes 20 bucks on the system and 10 bucks per game, and Sony loses 100 on the system and makes 10 bucks per game, if you buy 20 games for the PS3 and only 7 games for the Wii, Sony came out ahead.
If I was Microsoft Id be lining up my coup de grace for Sony by planning to release the next next gen machine within 2 years. A substantial trade-in scheme for 360 owners, integrated dual format HD-DVD/Blu-Ray drive, whatever HD/Processor/graphic card that is available and provides backwards compatibility and a price point withing a few $100 of the PS3 when they launch and the deal should be sealed. Sony are literally BANKING on the PS3 being a long term success in order to recoup their development costs. If MS choses to puts the pressure on while Sony is so vulnerable its quite possible Sony will end up as the next Sega.
While I dont neccesarily consider the aove good for the industry I would consider it good business for the cash rich MS and a suitable reward for Sonys arrogance.
I second that. Great definition.
The 360's hard drive is also too small. Note that I do not own one, although I can afford one.
Yes, all two people who have HDMI but can't afford a $600 PS3 are really glad now.
$500 is still way too much. Frankly I think $300 is too much and have never purchased a console on launch day as a result. I think the most I've spent to date was $199, and I hate to spend THAT much on anything that's not trivially hackable. I got my Xbox used (refurb) for $129 and it was some of the best money I ever spent, but only because it's now running Xbox Media Center...
The fact is that I think that even $300 is too much, which is why the Wii is the only console I'm considering purchasing right now. If Microsoft would stop preventing us from running Linux, which would be a stupid move, then I'd buy a 360.
Ultimately it doesn't really matter to ME what the PS3 costs, because I'm done with those assholes at Sony for the foreseeable future - but lots of other people don't feel that way and $500 is too much for most of them and $600 is too much for even more of them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Comparing Sony's position now with their position six years ago isn't going to give any idicator on how a console will do. The PS1 and PS2 did so well because of the games. The Xbox was aimed at the hard core gamer, most of the games were bloods/guts style. ,br.The PS2 had it all so to speak with many games appealing to the hard core gamer, but not being afraid of pushing non standard games like the Dance mat ones, the singing one and that buzz off. Also games like GT, Tekken FF and GTA were all pick up and drop games which a beginner could pick up and enjoy. Those games appealed to girls and people who don't normally play games because they were simple and fun.
Nintendo aimed the Gamecube at the 'new market' and ended up producing a ton of strange and bizare games no one really cared for (excusing Super Smash Brothers) girls wern't engaged with the Gamecube games, hard core gamers saw the thing as stupid only really leaving the fanboys.
What do we see now?
Well The PS3 will have the same style of games coming up, which should appeal to the PS2 market, the Xbox360 is carying on with its blood and guts titles but is moving into the PS2 game market and well the Wii, well just the name suggests what sort of games we will see.
When I justify a console in my house a 'media station' will go a long way in supporting my arguement, just as argueing that a console we can both enjoy will. The PS3 price tag isn't the factor people make it out to be, its the Xbox360 games. If I can get a console which will support dance games, singing games and a few other titles (GTA anyone) then you can't justify the extra expense.
I realise a ton of Wii fanboys will start blasting me for this, but its the truth. Most people I know who aren't tech savey have seen the Xbox360 and been amazed at what it can do, but many of them have said "I'll wait for the PS3 cause that will be better" its a perception based on the PS2. If the Xbox360 can give the right games then it will win, in either case I'm not buying either console until I can get it with a game for £250.
Not sure exactly what you mean by "hardcore" but if you're saying that Sony have two games consoles on sale, one aimed at the cheaper end of the market (the PS2) and one currently aimed at the expensive end of the market (the PS3) then yes, that's right. I'm sure the intention is that in time the PS3 will come down in price and eventually the PS2 be discontinued, as happened with PS2 and PS. If your theory is that the PS3 should be competing with the PS2 already then I doubt that would make a lot of sense.
"That all depends on whose PC you're talking about, now doesn't it?"
Yes. That's exactly my point.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Don't you mean Virtual On?
Not for social gaming. Games such as Gauntlet, Bomberman, Secret of Mana, Mario Party, and WarioWare can't easily be done in the PC's one-player-per-machine mindset. If they could, then why wouldn't store shelves show more games that can take advantage of four USB gamepads plugged into a USB hub?
Commercials for movies are the worst. It can be more than half a year between when the trailer comes out and when the movie becomes available for purchase on DVD, longer than that if you live outside the United States and Canada.
End of 2009, in terms of number of consoles sold:
Like the article, smells like weeners. But there is significantly more $ spent on PS3's anyways...
You're right,
I agree, and would go further and say that even if they were only aiming for a hardcore market, they'd be even more foolish. Hardcore gamers are important to any console, but if one ignores the mainstream market it'll fail just as fast. However, I don't think they're aiming at hardcore gamers, hardcore gamers aren't all about graphics and blood level, they're about real gameplay value; that's why I'm getting a Wii. Ultimatly, if the PS3 fails, it'll be because they were just plain greedy. They overextended themselves trying to capture both the HD format and the gaming market. Perhaps it'll become a nice object lesson for future generations.
As a side note, after re-reading my orginal post, it sounds whiny and fan-boyish. I was merely trying to make an observation about CNN and possibly what it means about public opinion. I'd like to make it clear now: I hate Sony, but I like to justify it through fair evidence =P
Demented But Determined.
I hope I'm not the only person who read "Chris Morris" as "Chuck Norris." God, the interwebs has scared me.
You are both forgetting that some may well buy consoles without having an HD set - HD is not a REQUIREMENT for buying the PS3 (or 360), it just enhances things (not withstanding small glitches like the Dead Rising text issue).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
(Even though no mention was made of Bill Gates)
Disclaimer: I'm a developer for a company that works almost exclusively on 360 games. So I guess there's the possibility of bias.
Just to clarify some of the issues brought up. Yes, the PS3 is more limited when it comes to texture memory. The reason is that you may only use 256MB for textures, whereas on the 360 you have the full 512MB to use as you please. If you want to use 50MB for the game logic (ie. the actual game data, pointers and such), 50MB for sound, and the rest for textures, on the 360 this is just fine, on the PS3 - no dice.
That means that certain titles look significantly worse on the PS3, Rainbow Six Vegas for example, due to having lower quality textures.
As for ease of development. Programming for the SPEs is a bitch. So what you really have with the PS3 isjust a single core CPU (compared to the 3 cores of the 360), unless your particular game happens to have some central feature which happens to map well on to the SPEs (this is not at all guaranteed!). This may lead to some gimmick games which make good use of the SPEs, but for general multi-platform games, they will probably run quite a bit worse on the PS3 because things in general just don't map very well to SPEs. Multithreading programming on the 360 is difficult as well, but at least you have three cores (and six threads, sort of) which are all symmetric.
What about the _real_ mystery: does the PS3 come with Linux as standard or not !?
Some day, some day...The Nintendo ON - so hottttttttttt.... better quality copies here.
...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
Actually, it's 19.5 more than the Wii has
Lets bring it to the point the first million units will sell regardless of price. But after that, if sony cannot bring down the pricepoint significantly they will be in deep trouble. No hardware sales = third party publishers will jump the ship over time. Sony could be in the same situation the cube has been for a while. Which means strong initial sales due to the fans, but the average joe simply does not buy it, therefore not a good third party support. At least the cube still had Nintendos strong lineup behind it, and one or two publishers who hold Nintendos candle no matter what.